Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest [Archive]

Thiebear

January-3rd-2006, 06:59 AM

All you need to know for WHY???? is in yellow.

Now lets ponder what would happen to said judge if he ordered someone to court to prove ALLAH was real. I'm guessing 1 less judge...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1967413,00.html#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=World

Prove Christ exists, judge orders priest
From Richard Owen in Rome

AN ITALIAN judge has ordered a priest to appear in court this month to prove that Jesus Christ existed.

The case against Father Enrico Righi has been brought in the town of Viterbo, north of Rome, by Luigi Cascioli, a retired agronomist who once studied for the priesthood but later became a militant atheist.

Signor Cascioli, author of a book called The Fable of Christ, began legal proceedings against Father Righi three years ago after the priest denounced Signor Cascioli in the parish newsletter for questioning Christ’s historical existence.

Yesterday Gaetano Mautone, a judge in Viterbo, set a preliminary hearing for the end of this month and ordered Father Righi to appear. The judge had earlier refused to take up the case, but was overruled last month by the Court of Appeal, which agreed that Signor Cascioli had a reasonable case for his accusation that Father Righi was “abusing popular credulity”.

Signor Cascioli’s contention — echoed in numerous atheist books and internet sites — is that there was no reliable evidence that Jesus lived and died in 1st-century Palestine apart from the Gospel accounts, which Christians took on faith. There is therefore no basis for Christianity, he claims.

Signor Cascioli’s one-man campaign came to a head at a court hearing last April when he lodged his accusations of “abuse of popular credulity” and “impersonation”, both offences under the Italian penal code. He argued that all claims for the existence of Jesus from sources other than the Bible stem from authors who lived “after the time of the hypothetical Jesus” and were therefore not reliable witnesses.

Signor Cascioli maintains that early Christian writers confused Jesus with John of Gamala, an anti-Roman Jewish insurgent in 1st-century Palestine. Church authorities were therefore guilty of “substitution of persons”.

The Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius mention a “Christus” or “Chrestus”, but were writing “well after the life of the purported Jesus” and were relying on hearsay.

Father Righi said there was overwhelming testimony to Christ’s existence in religious and secular texts. Millions had in any case believed in Christ as both man and Son of God for 2,000 years.

“If Cascioli does not see the sun in the sky at midday, he cannot sue me because I see it and he does not,” Father Righi said.

Signor Cascioli said that the Gospels themselves were full of inconsistencies and did not agree on the names of the 12 apostles. He said that he would withdraw his legal action if Father Righi came up with irrefutable proof of Christ’s existence by the end of the month.

The Vatican has so far declined to comment.

THE EVIDENCE

The Gospels say that Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary in Bethlehem, grew up in Nazareth, preached and performed miracles in Galilee and died on the Cross in Jerusalem

In his Antiquities of the Jews at the end of the 1st century, Josephus, the Jewish historian, refers to Jesus as “a wise man, a doer of wonderful works” who “drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles”

Muslims believe Jesus was a great prophet. Many Jewish theologians regard Jesus as an itinerant rabbi who popularised many of the beliefs of liberal Jews. Neither Muslims nor Jews believe he was the Messiah and Son of God

Tacitus, the Roman historian who lived from 55 to 120, mentions “Christus” in his Annals. In about 120 Suetonius, author of The Lives of the Caesars, says: “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, Emperor Claudius expelled them from Rome.”

please_remain_calm

January-3rd-2006, 07:09 AM

All you need to know is in yellow? So you are saying because the judge is an atheist this has no credibility?

codeorama

January-3rd-2006, 07:19 AM

Considering that Christ and Allah aren't really the same thing, I'm not sure what your point is?

Thiebear

January-3rd-2006, 07:25 AM

please_remain_calm

January-3rd-2006, 07:31 AM

I would have thought as he has been through the priests training he would have had better knowledge of the historical merits than most.

Its easy to pick on christianity, its also usually easy to pick on atheists, hence my reply.

It opens a can of worms for sure but there is never going to be a clear ruling when arguing against faith as people are going to believe what they want to no matter what the outcome of the trial is.

Taylor 36

January-3rd-2006, 07:35 AM

Prosperity

January-3rd-2006, 07:56 AM

Reply to post1:
No only someone that went from practicing to militant atheist... kinda like the ex-smoker that goes militant ex-smoking. AND its not about no credibility but as the REASON for why he brought the case to begin with.

Reply to Code: Was basically stating its easy to Pick on Christianity. I thought Jesus is considered the son of God and or God himself depending on who you talk to. And Allah is considered a God also. Being a practicing heathen I don't have a lot of knowledge on that though.

Islam is not big in Italy if you haven't noticed. If this case happened in Saudi Arabia (lol that wouldn't be one less judge it would be one less plaintiff) then you would have a point

It is easy to pick on Islam and Christianity in general, they make the biggest claims and they open themselves up to more logical contradictions, but somehow I don't think that is what you are referring to.

Why wouldn't you want people to read the rest of the article? "all you need to know, is what I think you ought to know" :rolleyes:

Prosperity

January-3rd-2006, 07:58 AM

Ah, how about the plantiff prove that Jesus did not exist is not the son of God. I mean, he seems to be the one with the problem, right? I know it is in Italy, and I'm ignorant on Italian law, but in the US, the burden of proof would be laid on the plantiff, not the defendant.

The defendant made the claim when he criticized the plaintiff. Seems like a libel/slander case. Notice the word *like* I don't know how Italian law works, and I doubt anyone here does either.

twa

January-3rd-2006, 08:00 AM

Proving Jesus existed should not be hard ,proving him the Christ takes faith.

Code ...Prove IT ;)

IE. I and my father are 1

Allah is God therefor? :laugh:

Maybe we are all off.

codeorama

January-3rd-2006, 08:23 AM

Reply to Code: Was basically stating its easy to Pick on Christianity. I thought Jesus is considered the son of God and or God himself depending on who you talk to. And Allah is considered a God also. Being a practicing heathen I don't have a lot of knowledge on that though.

I understand what you mean, however, 1st, Christianity is easily the most common religion, although, I'd argue that many who say they are "Christian" don't "qualify" based on the criteria of other "christians", but anyway, it's easy to pick on Christians because they are the majority, particularly in italy, where I"m sure there are an overabundance of Catholics.
I'd say this should be more of a story if it originated in the US.

Zguy28

January-3rd-2006, 02:29 PM

The proof is in the pudding as they say. The original Apostles of Christ wrote three of the Gospels

Matthew, Mark (dictated by Peter), and John. Luke used accounts from them as well. Later Christian writers, such as Iranaeus and Justin Martyr, drew most of their knowledge from disciples of the Apostles such as Polycarp firsthand.

My question to everyone who doubts the truth of the Gospels is this:

If the life, death, and Raising of Christ was a hoax or sham, such as the body being stolen instead of the Resurrection, why would the Apostles die excruciating deaths for their belief? Wouldn't they just run and it would die out?

All but one Apostle was violently killed, and that was John who was tossed into boiling oil, but survived unscathed and subsequently was exiled to Patmos where the Revelation was given to him.

The plaintiff should read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel.

codeorama

January-3rd-2006, 02:41 PM

Zguy28

January-3rd-2006, 02:56 PM

All of what you just posted is debatable. There is no historical proof that Matthew wrote Matthew etc... Why do you have to prove the body was stolen? Before you do that, you have to prove there was a body to be stolen.
Not trying debate if Jesus existed or not, I for one believe he did, however, you're kidding yourself if you think it's easily proven.

I figured on a response such as this. THats why I added the note at the end about the book Case for Christ. It's written by an investigative jouranlist who happened to be an atheist.

chomerics

January-3rd-2006, 03:01 PM

Proving Jesus existed should not be hard ,proving him the Christ takes faith.

Faith is not proof, faith is the ABSENCE of proof. Therfor, it would be very very difficult to prove that Jesus existed. If you use thinkgs such as the NT, then you have glaringly obvious flaws and contradictions to every physical law known to man. It would not stand up in a court of law.

BTW, I do believe that Jesus existed, just that he was not the son of god, but a great philosopher. His death was used as an uprising for christianity, and he was given "godly" status based on stories and fables passed down from man.

chomerics

January-3rd-2006, 03:02 PM

I figured on a response such as this. THats why I added the note at the end about the book Case for Christ. It's written by an investigative jouranlist who happened to be an atheist.

If I remember correctly, the "Case for Christ" was a thesis that he existed, not that he was the son of god, but I may be mistaken.

Thiebear

January-3rd-2006, 04:03 PM

But Chomerics..
Proving that he existed is all it takes... You don't have to PROVE he was the son of God or God or whatever variation thereof..

Signor Cascioli’s contention — echoed in numerous atheist books and internet sites — is that there was no reliable evidence that Jesus lived and died in 1st-century Palestine apart from the Gospel accounts, which Christians took on faith. There is therefore no basis for Christianity, he claims.

Larry

January-3rd-2006, 04:07 PM

All you need to know is in yellow? So you are saying because the judge is an atheist this has no credibility?

Um, I don't think the judge is an athiest. I think the plaintif is.

Although, what legal basis he has for the suit seems beyond my knowledge.

(And beyond my "care".)

DeanCollins

January-3rd-2006, 04:41 PM

I understand what you mean, however, 1st, Christianity is easily the most common religion, although, I'd argue that many who say they are "Christian" don't "qualify" based on the criteria of other "christians", but anyway, it's easy to pick on Christians because they are the majority, particularly in italy, where I"m sure there are an overabundance of Catholics.
I'd say this should be more of a story if it originated in the US.

Code are you saying that Catholics are not Christians because they are not
"born again"?

And what is "an Overabundance of Catholics" and yes I am a Catholic :redpunch: (misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=26#)

Cdowwe

January-3rd-2006, 09:02 PM

If all he had to do is prove Christ existed, he should just show him the bible. I mean theres the same amount of proof Christ existed as Plato IMO, yet people dont doubt he existed. It doesnt sound like the Judge is saying prove he was the son of God.

BTW, I dont know why, but this thread got me thinking about the remake of Miracle on 34th Street. Where the lawyer circles IN GOD WE TRUST on the dollar bill and the judge goes on saying how its all faith and stuff. Just rambling on about a movie....sorry.

codeorama

January-4th-2006, 06:29 AM

Code are you saying that Catholics are not Christians because they are not
"born again"?

And what is "an Overabundance of Catholics" and yes I am a Catholic :redpunch: (misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=26#)

I'm not saying that, But I can guarandamntee you that many "christians" feel that way.
Pat Robertson has said on his website and in public that methodists, presbetarians (sp?) and episcopalians (sp?) are all going to hell, they don't meet the "criteria" of being a christian.
I grew up in a baptist church and I know that that's how many of the people there felt.
Besides, I remember doing a poll a year or so ago asking about the definition of being a christian. It means different things to different people, but by definition, it's supposed to be the belief and acceptance of Jesus being the literal son of god that died for all of our sins. Not everyone thinks that is the sole definition. Specifically, I'm saying that out of the 70% or so of people in the US, that identify themselves as "christians" do not fit the definition.

codeorama

January-4th-2006, 06:33 AM

If all he had to do is prove Christ existed, he should just show him the bible.

So, does that mean Anakin Skywalker was real? I have the book...

I think the point is that while the Bible does exist, many of the accounts are not verifiable.
I don't think anyone is basing their salvation and hope for the afterlife on whether plato existed either.
In Plato's case, people read his works (did he write his own works? Because there is nothing documented from Jesus, everything is second hand) and use the info. IMO, that's where Jesus is important, not so much in believing in the fairytale, but understanding how he lived his life and the examples he was trying to establish, much of which goes completely over the head of the average right wing "christian".

Mr. S

January-4th-2006, 07:16 AM

rincewind

January-4th-2006, 07:29 AM

codeorama

January-4th-2006, 08:07 AM

This thread seems like it may become very interesting, I'm liking it already. One thing Code though is that the star wars books are known works of fiction, while the works of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle are documented by I believe Aristotle himself and by other people of the time.

Now with the case of the Bible, I agree, there is no verifiable evidence of some of the accounts.

However, isn't it the case that St. Peter's body is buried under the Vatican, or there are other relics all over like the Shroud of Turin, shouldnt these relics prove that Christ has existed?

Plato, Aristotle etc... wrote their own writings, Jesus didn't. Had Jesus written the bible or the new testament, it might be a little different, but much of the new testament is based on Paul's writings about Jesus, yet he never met him, all of Paul's info was second hand.
Also, much of what is in the bible IS historical, but may be exaggerated as the stories were passed on over time. The 4 gospels were not even written until 65 years or more after Jesus's death.
The Shroud of Turin has never been proven to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus, there's probably more evidence that it is not.

One of the best books I've ever read on the bible is "Asimov's Guide to the Bible".
Sure, he's an atheist, but read the book. He doesn't bash christianity, he looks at each book of the bible and points out how it aligns with history. It's very facinating.

Hootman

January-4th-2006, 08:59 AM

In a word BOTHERED!

G.A.C.O.L.B.

January-5th-2006, 07:48 PM

G.A.C.O.L.B.

January-5th-2006, 07:53 PM

However, isn't it the case that St. Peter's body is buried under the Vatican, or there are other relics all over like the Shroud of Turin, shouldnt these relics prove that Christ has existed?

I saw some special about the Shroud of Turin and they basically showed how such shrouds were common "touristish" item that were sold back then. Also something about Leonardo Da Vinci maybe made it. But anyway they used computers and put paint on peoples faces and they proved that it was painted on somehow.

Oh and I think they did testing on the cloth and showed that it wasn't 2000 years old but only like 500 years old. I saw this awhile ago so my numbers and such may be off but that was the gest of it.

prophet

January-5th-2006, 08:07 PM

to whomever prove He doesn't

case closed next question

G.A.C.O.L.B.

January-5th-2006, 08:13 PM

True or False

Jesus was all about help the poor and needy

chomerics

January-5th-2006, 08:31 PM

This thread seems like it may become very interesting, I'm liking it already. One thing Code though is that the star wars books are known works of fiction, while the works of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle are documented by I believe Aristotle himself and by other people of the time.

What if Star Wars was written 2000 years ago, how would you know it was a work of fiction?

However, isn't it the case that St. Peter's body is buried under the Vatican, or there are other relics all over like the Shroud of Turin, shouldnt these relics prove that Christ has existed

The Shroud of Turin was made in medival times. There have been a few religious sites to try and claim that the carbon-14 dating is innacurate because of a fire, but it has been done multiple times and the RCC has withdrawn their initial position I believe. As for St. Peter, he is supposedly buried beneath the Vatican, but how could anyone prove that it IS St. Peter?

BTW, the Shroud of Turin is thought in some circles to be the first photograph ever made. It is a negative image of a loin cloth, such as a photograph. Dan Brown claimes it was DaVinci, which I don't know, but I definately think it is a photograph. I remember watching a christian video of the Shroud where they proclaimed the reasons the carbon dating didn't exist, but that it was the image of Jesus. It was also a man wrapped in cloth. This could only be done with a dead person, and chemicals on his body and the cloth. Something alchemists of the day has access to.

chomerics

January-5th-2006, 08:32 PM

I saw some special about the Shroud of Turin and they basically showed how such shrouds were common "touristish" item that were sold back then. Also something about Leonardo Da Vinci maybe made it. But anyway they used computers and put paint on peoples faces and they proved that it was painted on somehow.

Oh and I think they did testing on the cloth and showed that it wasn't 2000 years old but only like 500 years old. I saw this awhile ago so my numbers and such may be off but that was the gest of it.

I think I saw the same documentary. In the one you saw, did they do a 3-D representation of the image on the Shroud?

NoCalMike

January-5th-2006, 08:33 PM

Why is this guy labeled a "militant" atheist, rather then just an atheist? Is he taking up arms and doing drive-bys at churches?

chomerics

January-5th-2006, 08:34 PM

to whomever prove He doesn't

case closed next question

prove the flying spaghetti monster (http://www.venganza.org/) doesn't exist. . .

case re-opened ;)

chomerics

January-5th-2006, 08:37 PM

Why is this guy labeled a "militant" atheist, rather then just an atheist? Is he taking up arms and doing drive-bys at churches?

For the same reason you see libral/socialist or leftist/Marxist. When you have no point, you need to resort to extreme innuendos and emotional writing to get people to agree with you.

It is the same reason why liberals DON'T write righty/fascist with every post. They believe their reasoning and judgement doesn't need to resort to sensationalistic modifiers, because they believe their position is the only true and just one.

NoCalMike

January-5th-2006, 08:42 PM

For the same reason you see libral/socialist or leftist/Marxist. When you have no point, you need to resort to extreme innuendos and emotional writing to get people to agree with you.

It is the same reason why liberals DON'T write righty/fascist with every post. They believe their reasoning and judgement doesn't need to resort to sensationalistic modifiers, because they believe their position is the only true and just one.

Good Points Chom - Cheers!! :cheers:

Smiley's "rootin"

January-5th-2006, 09:27 PM

As far as proving weather Christ existed or not will never be publicly proven . There would be no reason for faith, which I think is one of the things you may have to have to enter in to Heaven ? There are an awful lot of people in the free world that are convinced Christ did exist with no physical evidence, very few convinced with no physical evidence Christ never existed, that are willing to try to convince others he never did exist. Thank God !!!

zoony

January-5th-2006, 09:41 PM

BlueTalon

January-5th-2006, 10:22 PM

This is the most absurd example of a court getting involved in an area where it does not belong that I have ever heard. What is the judge supposed to do if he finds for the plaintiff, cancel Christianity? Abolish the (Catholic) Church in Italy? And if he finds for the defendent, does the plaintiff have to give up being an atheist?

Rediculous.

chomerics

January-5th-2006, 10:32 PM

This is the most absurd example of a court getting involved in an area where it does not belong that I have ever heard.
Rediculous.

Really??? Terry Schaivo anyone?

mistymjohnson

January-5th-2006, 10:42 PM

I happen to be a member of, work for, and take Holy Communion in a Baptist Church. I also happen to be extensively involved with a distinguished Missionary Outreach Program. Though I have studied many denominations and even Catholicism... I feel led to be where I am. However, I do not support the statement regarding "most" Baptist demonizing other denominations. However, what I have seen is, "most" Baptist standing up for what they believe.

They have a very cut and dry way of stating things, because they don't feel mincing words serves anyone's purpose. I can’t say that I agree with that completely… But then again, I can’t say that I agree with any one denomination 100%. What I will say about that statement is that, yes, ‘some’ Baptist leaders have taught their congregations that some other denominations will not be represented in Heaven based on whatever acts or beliefs they have. This is a VERY small number in comparison to the whole picture. And to be honest with you, to lump us all together is ignorant at best.

Anytime something goes wrong (not just in religion but in society as a whole), the first thing we do is point the finger and claim “Guilty by Association” – Now, if I were to jump on the bandwagon and start throwing around opinions regarding a whole based on a minority… I would have to say that it is my opinion the author of that post is a typical uninformed and ill-mannered bighead that doesn’t think before he speaks! (But I am not one for riding in or on a wagon).

I don't claim to be any one denomination or another... Though when asked where I attend services... I give an honest answer regarding my current involvement with a Baptist Church... However, when asked “who” or “what” am I… This is my answer:

I am a child of God, and an Heiress to the Kingdom of Heaven!
(Short, sweet, and to the point)

:helmet: Misty M. Johnson :helmet:

Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

January-5th-2006, 10:44 PM

Really??? Terry Schaivo anyone?

Come on, Mike.

Life and death situations, however you feel or believe on the issue are the proper purview of legal review. We may even disagree that the government should 'step in' but the setting of boundaries is not an insane idea.

But proving Jesus exists is ridiculous. Prove any abstract concept is 'real.'

zoony

January-5th-2006, 10:48 PM

mistymjohnson...

Again, it is personal experience... what I've experienced firsthand. No more, no less, just a fact.

Never said they were all that way, just all the ones I have encountered. And I stand by that statement strongly. Baptists have a severe superiority complex over other religions... ALL of the ones I have met and engaged in religious conversation. And if you note my location in my profile you will understand that I live in Baptist Country USA.

That said, my intent is not to incite or to offend, just to share personal experiences. I think you offered some very good insight though as to the root of the beliefs, however.

BlueTalon

January-5th-2006, 10:48 PM

Really??? Terry Schaivo anyone?I really don't think you intended that the way it came accross. (I'm guessing you would have meant Congress or some other body, not the court.)

But are you really, seriously comparing the level of absurdity between the Schiavo case and THIS? The Schiavo case was tragic. This is just absurd.

mistymjohnson

January-5th-2006, 11:04 PM

I am terribly sorry that you have had such experiences. How does that saying go again... "They give us a bad name?"

I promise that not all of us are like that, and I meant no personal attack on you. However, I too strongly defend my beliefs and experiences. (Nothing wrong with two spirited conversationalists!) Again, I do offer an apology for you having experienced the not so warm and compassionate people that seem to plague our denomination. (I use the term plague loosely - don't read anything into it). And regarding your living in the Bible belt... *smirks* I grew up in the Bible belt until mid-teens, and then again a couple of years in my late teens.

I do not pretend that what you are referring to is not there (you know what I mean)... As half (okay, more than half) of my family was rebellious hoodlums... there was a minority that we called the "Holy Rollers" (I don't call them that anymore since I wised up). But they were preachers, missionaries, and deacons - almost all Baptist. I did see part of the 'Holier than Thou' attitude, but noticed that it was mostly in the hierarchy of the churches... The congregation seemed to be on a much more stable foundation (called reality!) They were friendly, loving, kind, generous, and vibrant people. Some of my fondest moments as a child were when my parents sent me to church.

It is my hope that one day you will encounter such a people as I had that will alter your image of us as a whole.

:helmet: Misty M. Johnson :helmet:

prophet

January-5th-2006, 11:56 PM

prove the flying spaghetti monster (http://www.venganza.org/) doesn't exist. . .

case re-opened ;)

well i know by my increasing belly... that i ate him

case close, cemented shut, and thrown into the deepest volcano

:laugh:

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 01:07 AM

It is the same reason why liberals DON'T write righty/fascist with every post. They believe their reasoning and judgement doesn't need to resort to sensationalistic modifiers, because they believe their position is the only true and just one.

At the risk of getting off topic, I'll make just one comment. It's more than a little bit misguided (wrong? dangerous? any number of words fit here) to believe your position is the "only true and just one."

More to the point, I wasn't aware that the existence of Jesus as historical figure was up for debate.

Oh, and Thiebear (I believe you were the one who made the comment) Allah and God are one and the same.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:26 AM

just to clarify for people

These are what we call different Religions
Christianity
Islam
Buddhist
Judaism

There is only one Christianity
Catholic
Baptist
Pentecostals
Methodist
are all apart of Christianity
Baptist, Catholics, and Methodist are not different Religions.. They are different denominations

btw just like in every "Religions", Christian demoninations emphasize different points, but agree at the core of the religion. the Core: The Cross, Forgiveness, Virgin Birth, Resurrection

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:31 AM

[QUOTE=codeorama]
Pat Robertson has said on his website and in public that methodists, presbetarians (sp?) and episcopalians (sp?) are all going to hell, they don't meet the "criteria" of being a christian.
QUOTE]

I have to attack this...
Please post a reliable link to this? from a top news agency, or his link? because this reeks of 100% horse crap.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:34 AM

Oh, and Thiebear (I believe you were the one who made the comment) Allah and God are one and the same.

100% wrong.

The Christian God is not the same as Islam god allah.

first reason to debunk this:
Christian God: God, The Father, God, The Son, God, The Holy Spirit. 3 yet one.

Islam God. Not seen as a Father, or a son, neither does he have a son.

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 01:50 AM

100% wrong.

The Christian YHWH(God) is not the same as allah.

What I've always been told in religious studies classes is that Allah is simply the Arabic word for god and that as far as it's used by Muslims it's referring to the same entity as the Judeo-Christian God.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:56 AM

What I've always been told in religious studies classes is that Allah is simply the Arabic word for god and that as far as it's used by Muslims it's referring to the same entity as the Judeo-Christian God.

I'd go back to the religious studies class, and get my money ... because they lied to you.

Another common belief amoung Christians & Judaism is that Allah comes from ancient Sumerians Moon-god named "sin" for Semites. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters.

Do a google search for the info...

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 01:57 AM

I'd go back to the religious studies class, and get my money ... because they lied to you.

Another common belief amoung Christians & Judaism is that Allah comes from ancient Sumerians Moon-god named "sin" for Semites. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters.

Do a google search for the info...

Don't be offended if I don't take you at your word right away, but this is something I'll look into.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:01 AM

Don't be offended if I don't take you at your word right away, but this is something I'll look into.

Not offended... I'm not even saying that this is the reason to debunk the whole thing..., I can't tell you if that is right or not. I'm just saying whats out there, about it.

the real reason to debunk it is the first I gave you.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:02 AM

double post

twa

January-6th-2006, 06:02 AM

I'm not saying that, But I can guarandamntee you that many "christians" feel that way.
Pat Robertson has said on his website and in public that methodists, presbetarians (sp?) and episcopalians (sp?) are all going to hell, they don't meet the "criteria" of being a christian.
I grew up in a baptist church and I know that that's how many of the people there felt.
Besides, I remember doing a poll a year or so ago asking about the definition of being a christian. It means different things to different people, but by definition, it's supposed to be the belief and acceptance of Jesus being the literal son of god that died for all of our sins. Not everyone thinks that is the sole definition. Specifically, I'm saying that out of the 70% or so of people in the US, that identify themselves as "christians" do not fit the definition.

I was raised in a Baptist Church and I think what you are confusing is We do not believe ANY church membership saves you (even ours),it is a personal experience(recognizing sinfull condition,repenting,accepting Christ's sacrifice for us).

I think many confuse the Baptists rejection of church membership for salvation with denying other denominations can be (or are) saved.

Prosperity

January-6th-2006, 06:08 AM

I'd go back to the religious studies class, and get my money ... because they lied to you.

Another common belief amoung Christians & Judaism is that Allah comes from ancient Sumerians Moon-god named "sin" for Semites. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters.

Do a google search for the info...

Muslims BELIEVE it is the same God and that you guys just veered off the path.

Of course you believe something different, but it is part of their faith.

codeorama

January-6th-2006, 06:33 AM

I was raised in a Baptist Church and I think what you are confusing is We do not believe ANY church membership saves you (even ours),it is a personal experience(recognizing sinfull condition,repenting,accepting Christ's sacrifice for us).

I think many confuse the Baptists rejection of church membership for salvation with denying other denominations can be (or are) saved.

No, I totally understand that.
Here's my point, my uncle and aunt are methodist and I went to a methodist college. They don't "accept" christ in the same way that baptist and pentacostals do. I know this is over simplifying it, but they basically figure that if you go to church you are covered. Yes, I understand that for the most part, they believe that Jesus was the literal son of god, but they don't make the "born again" gesture. It's like catholics being cristened when they are a baby. That's not a decision a baby makes. They just have it done to them. The southern baptist church I grew up in does not recognize that as being "born again".

twa

January-6th-2006, 06:36 AM

Muslims BELIEVE it is the same God and that you guys just veered off the path.

Of course you believe something different, but it is part of their faith.

I believe Allah is the same God I worship as a christian and the jews worship as Yaweh or Elohim .

The differences are christians recognise Jesus as his son,while muslims consider him only a prophet and reject that he died as a sacrifice for our sins,much the same as the jews did not recognise him as the Messiah.

Prophet...you may not agree ,but there can be only ONE .

OR do you also claim the jews do not worship the same God as christians because they deny the Christ?

God the father is still God even if someone does not recognise the son :D

smartestmaninamerica

January-6th-2006, 06:37 AM

Well Jesus of Nazareth is a historical character written about by historians of the day, so his 'existence' should be pretty easy to prove. As easy as proving the existence of Buddha or Mohammed or any of those folks.

Proving that he is the Son of God, of course, would be more difficult as that is more of a matter of faith.

twa

January-6th-2006, 06:47 AM

No, I totally understand that.
Here's my point, my uncle and aunt are methodist and I went to a methodist college. They don't "accept" christ in the same way that baptist and pentacostals do. I know this is over simplifying it, but they basically figure that if you go to church you are covered. Yes, I understand that for the most part, they believe that Jesus was the literal son of god, but they don't make the "born again" gesture. It's like catholics being cristened when they are a baby. That's not a decision a baby makes. They just have it done to them. The southern baptist church I grew up in does not recognize that as being "born again".

That goes back to the personal experience ...We believe once you reach a age where you recognize right from wrong(age of accountability) they must be Saved (recognise nature,repent,accept Christ's sacrifice).

The Methodist I know call it confirmation I think.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 07:38 AM

I believe Allah is the same God I worship as a christian and the jews worship as Yaweh or Elohim .

The differences are christians recognise Jesus as his son,while muslims consider him only a prophet and reject that he died as a sacrifice for our sins,much the same as the jews did not recognise him as the Messiah.

Prophet...you may not agree ,but there can be only ONE .

OR do you also claim the jews do not worship the same God as christians because they deny the Christ?

God the father is still God even if someone does not recognise the son :D

Exactly. The Old Testament, Tora, and Koran are almost all the same. Same basic "stories", and cast of "characters". They all have their prophets. Christians just believe that Christ was the chosen one, and was the son of God.

As for proof of Jesus, the proof is in the Dead Sea scrolls. There are more then just the 4 Gospels. Those are just the accepted ones by the Catholic Church. There is the Gospel of Mary (yup, Mary Magdeline. I'm sure you will hear more about it after The DaVinci Code comes out in the theatres), there is the Gospel of Thomas, which was deemed heresy by the Catholic Church, and by some considered as close to the actual word of Jesus. My point is there are several documented things saying a man Jesus of Nazareth existed. A big main problem is that the Bible was written centuries after, and was translated from a dead language. So there are definitely issues with mis-interpretations.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 08:03 AM

Come on, Mike.

Life and death situations, however you feel or believe on the issue are the proper purview of legal review. We may even disagree that the government should 'step in' but the setting of boundaries is not an insane idea.

But proving Jesus exists is ridiculous. Prove any abstract concept is 'real.'

I don't disagree, but I also thought Congress passing a bill specifically for one person and forcing courts to see the issue, after it had all ready been tried been ad-nauseum was worse.

codeorama

January-6th-2006, 08:05 AM

A big main problem is that the Bible was written centuries after, and was translated from a dead language. So there are definitely issues with mis-interpretations.
Great post.
We all know that consistantly, over time, stories get exaggerated. There are countless tails of great heros and the "magical" story of Jesus is not all that unique. There are other stories of immaculate conceptions and great deeds etc... IMO, this was a means of lending credibility.

Thiebear

January-6th-2006, 08:06 AM

I don't disagree, but I also thought Congress passing a bill specifically for one person and forcing courts to see the issue, after it had all ready been tried been ad-nauseum was worse.

They just did it again for that silver medalist figure skater... I guess it depends on the issue on how outraged we get over a bill for one person on the democratic leadership side...

Soldiers that fight and get wounded for out Country? Wait in line.
Figure skater > front of the line.
Terri Schiavo > outrage...

But again, IF 3 billion people believe he was alive in one form or another, I think the Prove he existed is out of line in a courtroom...

prophet

January-6th-2006, 10:09 AM

codeorama

January-6th-2006, 10:13 AM

prophet

January-6th-2006, 10:13 AM

prophet

January-6th-2006, 10:17 AM

So you are saying there's more than one "god".

There is one God, The Christian God. There are many false gods...most likely demons who call themselves gods. This may not be popular but, yes I believe allah is one of them. Doesn't mean i hate or dislike a muslim, but I think they are greatly decieved... just like they think I am.

Some one can say the Big Dipper is god... does that mean I'm suppose to say its the Same so called god as the YHWH?

Its politicaly correctness to say allah, and the Christian God are they same.

p.s. code
are you going to answer my response to you from earlier?

codeorama

January-6th-2006, 11:10 AM

p.s. code
are you going to answer my response to you from earlier?
I must have missed it, I'll scan the thread when I get back to work.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 11:23 AM

[QUOTE=Xameil]Exactly. The Old Testament, Tora, and Koran are almost all the same. Same basic "stories", and cast of "characters". They all have their prophets. Christians just believe that Christ was the chosen one, and was the son of God.

QUOTE]
Please tell me how the Tora, & Koran are almost the same.
Give references please.

its like saying star wars & the terminator are the same moives.

All the teachings, and stories in all three came from the Dead Sea scrolls. All have the same people in them, and same basic premises. Last time I checked, Luke Skywalker was fighting Darth Vader, not a T-1000.

Mr. S

January-6th-2006, 11:29 AM

Yeh, I was thinking of the Regulus (the cloth that supposedly wiped Jesus' face while he was walking up the hill, and also has his image. I mixed the two up.

I was actually watching a show on the history channel today about some of the artifacts of the passion, and one thing they noted was that all these artifacts were lost, then surfaced again at least over 1,000 years later, if not more.

My friend told me this one, but has anyone heard there is a church in Scotland that may contain the holy grail (in terms of documents and artifacts) buried below, but that the church will not allow excavation due to damaging the church and unwanted press/tourism should something be found?

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 11:32 AM

Mr. S

January-6th-2006, 11:37 AM

The church that your friend talked about is also in The DaVinci Code. It's a replica of a MUCH older building.

i know of the church in the da vinci code with the 'rose line' and whatnot, he was saying it was a different one entirely, im not saying I believe him or anything.

With regards to the da vinci code church and 'rose line' i think that has been debunked.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 11:42 AM

They just did it again for that silver medalist figure skater... I guess it depends on the issue on how outraged we get over a bill for one person on the democratic leadership side...

Exactly my point, it isn't the "stupidist" thing our government has done by a long shot.

But again, IF 3 billion people believe he was alive in one form or another, I think the Prove he existed is out of line in a courtroom...

I never said it wasn't, but bear, please don't use majority as a justification for being right. Not only is it illogical, it is also one of the problems with society, and it has been since the advent of civilization. i could give countless examples, but I think you know where that would head ;)

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 11:48 AM

At the risk of getting off topic, I'll make just one comment. It's more than a little bit misguided (wrong? dangerous? any number of words fit here) to believe your position is the "only true and just one."

I never once stated that was how I think, but I put the reasoning down as to why it is done. Just as your side believes you are right, you always have to use modifiers, or sensationalistic adjectives to describe your opponents. Librals do not do that, for the most part, because they believe their argument will stand on the merits on the argument itself.

The post was not meant to mean that my position is the only true and just position, but to give a discription as to not only why they fail to use modifiers when describing the right, but also the thought process behind it.

More to the point, I wasn't aware that the existence of Jesus as historical figure was up for debate.

That is because in your circles, it is not. God is not up for debat in your eyes either, but there are others who look at the world differently. It doesn;t make either side right, but it also does not mean that he definately existed by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, and Thiebear (I believe you were the one who made the comment) Allah and God are one and the same.

Are they "one and the same" or are they "not the same"?

100% wrong.

The Christian God is not the same as Islam god allah.

Who is right prophet or dfitzo???

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 11:53 AM

There is one God, The Christian God. There are many false gods...most likely demons who call themselves gods. This may not be popular but, yes I believe allah is one of them. Doesn't mean i hate or dislike a muslim, but I think they are greatly decieved... just like they think I am.

And this is exactly why evangelicals should keep their nose out of politics.

It has nothing to do with christian or racial hatred, but when you view another race, or religion as inferior to yours, you are undermining the constitution.

You have every right to believe this, and the other side thinks the same, I agree. . . but the second policy starts getting made with this mindset ingrained into peoples heads, the seperation of church and state is blurred, as well as almost all the principals our founding fathers build this nation on.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:00 PM

[QUOTE=prophet]

All the teachings, and stories in all three came from the Dead Sea scrolls. All have the same people in them, and same basic premises. Last time I checked, Luke Skywalker was fighting Darth Vader, not a T-1000.
side step...

ummm the torah is in the old testament... so yes its the same. nothing is the koran is line by line the same thing.... it may mention certain people... but go to barnes and noble, and you can find other books that do this as well. They are completly different books.

If you think otherwise... "again"
show me something side by side in the koran & torah that says they are the same?

luke (good: the choosen one", Terminator boy (the choosen one), fighting evil, robots... ect ect... same theme

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:09 PM

And this is exactly why evangelicals should keep their nose out of politics.

It has nothing to do with christian or racial hatred, but when you view another race, or religion as inferior to yours, you are undermining the constitution. What a statement to make... You have elevated your "thinking & vaules" above everyone else's view. You take your belief system (ie your religion), and make it superier to everyone else's, and call it at the same time perfect politics. Do you understand how off base you are?

You have every right to believe this, and the other side thinks the same, I agree. . . but the second policy starts getting made with this mindset ingrained into peoples heads, the seperation of church and state is blurred, as well as almost all the principals our founding fathers build this nation on.
Do you mean like the a liberal hate against conservatives, and vise versa? This is a major bigoted statement by you.. You are saying what you believe is above what I believe, and therefore... people that have my belief have no place in politics... how communist is that?.... sound the hater siren.

You have "religion" wether you know it or not... its called your belief & value system. And you have elevated your "religious system" above all others... and you want that "religious" system in polotics and none other... are you wearing a arm band yet?

That is what separates you from me. I believe you can believe what you believe, and live how you want(within the law)... and have your hand in whatever politics you want... just like any people group should have. I thank God that "Christians will never" dominate American politics... just like I think God.. liberals or any other people group. Both would be disasterous

But I think... that with what you have said in your first sentence... people with type of elitist thinking should be put on a watch list... because it boarders on Hitlerism.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 12:18 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]
side step...

ummm the torah is in the old testament... so yes its the same. nothing is the koran is line by line the same thing.... it may mention certain people... but go to barnes and noble, and you can find other books that do this as well. They are completly different books.

If you think otherwise... "again"
show me something side by side in the koran & torah that says they are the same?

luke (good: the choosen one", Terminator boy (the choosen one), fighting evil, robots... ect ect... same theme

I never said they were exactly the same. I said they were alike. Same BASIC stories, and people, different interpretations. Kinda like Beuwolf, and Grendel.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:22 PM

[QUOTE=prophet]

I never said they were exactly the same. I said they were alike. Same BASIC stories, and people, different interpretations. Kinda like Beuwolf, and Grendel.

I see what you are saying... but seriously I can't think of one story in either that are the same... Just some of the same people referenced in two different ways.

They are completly different books.

twa

January-6th-2006, 12:24 PM

If they have differences how can they be the same? come on seriously.
We believe Jesus is God, islam says only a prophet... If we believe Jesus is God its not the same as allah.

YHWH is not the same as allah.

The early Allah before Mohamadism was and continues to be GOD.

The fact muslims(as well as the jews) do not recognise Jesus as the Messiah does not change God ;)

Many supposed christians doubt the virgin birth...does that change God? NO

You can certainly say it has a bearing on thier salvation,But thats another arguement. :laugh:

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 12:27 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]

I see what you are saying... but seriously I can't think of one story in either that are the same... Just some of the same people referenced in two different ways.

They are completly different books.

Well, then I must have been told completely wrong things by other people. But, from what I have read in certain little excerpts (and no I'm sorry I can't remembr specifics) they are similar in ways. But, I do know they all came from the same source. They all originated from the Dead Sea scrolls. And same characters and situations are similar are they not? Teachings of peace, are they different? What does the Koran say for Creation? Anything?

oh and here
http://www.answers.com/topic/similarities-between-the-bible-and-the-qur-an

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:33 PM

The early Allah before Mohamadism was and continues to be GOD.

The fact muslims(as well as the jews) do not recognise Jesus as the Messiah does not change God ;)

Many supposed christians doubt the virgin birth...does that change God? NO

You can certainly say it has a bearing on thier salvation,But thats another arguement. :laugh:
There is not a "true" christian that denies the virgin birth... just like there is not a true practicing jew or muslim.. that eats pork.

And the fact that you miss about Christianity is that Jesus is God. So therefore it would be different.

again I will ask the question... IF the Christian God is Father, Son, Sprirt... and islam does not belief Allah is this.... they are worship two different gods.

twa

January-6th-2006, 12:36 PM

Prophet ,do you agree they STARTED with the same God?(before Mohamed)

If so, THEY changed NOT God.

Jesus was (is)a aspect or form of God,but not seperate from the whole.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:38 PM

[QUOTE=prophet]

Well, then I must have been told completely wrong things by other people. But, from what I have read in certain little excerpts (and no I'm sorry I can't remembr specifics) they are similar in ways. But, I do know they all came from the same source. They all originated from the Dead Sea scrolls. And same characters and situations are similar are they not? Teachings of peace, are they different? What does the Koran say for Creation? Anything?

oh and here
http://www.answers.coopic/similarities-between-the-bible-and-the-qur-an

These were the books found in the dead sea scrolls.... none of them are in the koran
http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/library/scroll.htm

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 12:39 PM

There is not a "true" christian that denies the virgin birth... just like there is not a true practicing jew or muslim.. that eats pork.

And the fact that you miss about Christianity is that Jesus is God. So therefore it would be different.

again I will ask the question... IF the Christian God is Father, Son, Sprirt... and islam does not belief Allah is this.... they are worship two different gods.

umm actually the holy trinity is God is the father, son and holy spirit...not Jesus being God.
Jesus is the Son of God, not God himself.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 12:41 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]

These were the books found in the dead sea scrolls.... none of them are in the koran
http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/library/scroll.htm

click on the link. It shows the similarities between the two. Obvioiusly not word for word, but the stories are there. One example is Adam and Eve. Genesis of the bible, and also mentioned in the Koran. Maybe not as emphasized, but there none the less.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:46 PM

Prophet ,do you agree they STARTED with the same God?(before Mohamed)

No, they did not start the same... Most people in Judaism & Christians belief allah is derived from a pagan moon god that mohamed severed... see earlier post. Do a search there are plenty of information on the internet about it.

Their essential characters of each God are completely different is another reason.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 12:48 PM

umm actually the holy trinity is God is the father, son and holy spirit...not Jesus being God.
Jesus is the Son of God, not God himself.
Jesus is 100% God & 100% man

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 12:51 PM

Jesus is 100% God & 100% man

So then you believe that there are 2 Gods. That's Blasphemy. Jesus sits on the right side of God. Therefore by your reasoning, God sits next to himself. Also, he talked and prayed to himself. Interesting.

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 01:00 PM

The trininty means God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Three in one.

To say that Jesus is not God, is blasphemy.

Jesus sits on the right hand of the FATHER -- not God as you stated, Xameil.

If you can't fully crasp this concept, not to worry -- it's a mystery to all of humanity. ;)

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:01 PM

So then you believe that there are 2 Gods. That's Blasphemy. Jesus sits on the right side of God. Therefore by your reasoning, God sits next to himself. Also, he talked and prayed to himself. Interesting.
John 8:
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple,[a] going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

The Jewish picked up stones to stone Him, because He said he was I AM.

next
John 1
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

There it is in plain english... take it up with Jesus... because he said it.

How it all works I'm not sure... i probably can come up with some inferior theory... but for now I'll leave it to Him... because he is the only one that really knows...

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:08 PM

rincewind

January-6th-2006, 01:12 PM

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:13 PM

[QUOTE=rincewind]Don't know why everyone is arguing with Prophet - i mean going by his name evidently God talks directly to him, so he should know. (that's a joke - sorta)

QUOTE]

:laugh: :laugh:
I was thinking the same thing.

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 01:15 PM

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:21 PM

Or maybe we just don't understand the nature of our Creator, Xamiel?

And as a created being, can never truly understand it?

All of your perceptions are based on the things of which you are familiar. In the created world, creatures cannot have several beings in one being (without being somehow schizophrenic or possessed).

Obviously, Christianity's contention is that God is made up of three beings, that are simultaneously seperate, and simultaneously together.

If you go back to the base assumption -- the story of creation in Genesis -- that God the Father is the Creator and we His Creatures, it is very reasonable that we would not understand our Maker.

I completely agree with you here. No one on Earth can truely understand. That's why I find people who argue what they say is fact i have a problem with. It is known fact that the Bible was written years after the events took place. It is also a known fact that it was mis-translated in many ways. All I was saying was that Jesus is not the Creator. Jesus was the SON of God sent to us in mortal form. That doesn't make him God himself.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:23 PM

That was plain English?!?

All I could get out of that was that Jesus was WITH God...not God himself.

Also, you can find passages I'm sure where Jesus calls to his Father. His Father is God, so either he has a split personality, or God is a separate entity. So if God is a separate entity, and Jesus is God, then there are 2. Plus, the word of John is not the word of Jesus is it? So I'm sure there was a tad bit of artistic freedom in the writing.
John 1
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,

Is that hard to read?
Have you ever heard of the concept of an avatar? A phyisical embodiment of God. God used a phyisical form (Jesus)to relate to man.

Have you ever held an inner conversation with your conscience? Body, Soul, Spirit. that is what we are... your soul is your mind, will, emotions... your spirit is the eternal essesence of your being. And your body is a dirt suit. So when anybody considers his actions... his spirit - reflects(talks to) his soul.

Man is 3 in 1 . God is 3 in 1

Now that i'm offically classified as crazy....I hope that makes sense :laugh:

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:28 PM

Don't know why everyone is arguing with Prophet - i mean going by his name evidently God talks directly to him, so he should know. (that's a joke - sorta)

Prophet, my main problem is your attack against Chom and the way you compare him to Hitler, not a name that should be thrown around lightly. He only said that he feels the religious should stay out of politics (an extreme view of seperation of Church and State) and you compare him to a Genocidacial maniac? And this after you claim that Allah is a demon - nice.
for shock factor my friend...
but in reality how is it different...
One group can have a say in politics and push their "religious" system... yet my kind can't? Ask the holocaust surviver if he should of had a voice in politics in the 30's. He made a fascist statement.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:30 PM

John 1
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,

Is that hard to read?
Have you ever heard of the concept of an avatar? A phyisical embodiment of God. God used a phyisical form (Jesus)to relate to man.

Have you ever held an inner conversation with your conscience? Body, Soul, Spirit. that is what we are... your soul is your mind, will, emotions... your spirit is the eternal essesence of your being. And your body is a dirt suit. So when anybody considers his actions... his spirit - reflects(talks to) his soul.

Man is 3 in 1 . God is 3 in 1

Now that i'm offically classified as crazy....I hope that makes sense :laugh:

right God is 3 in 1. but not vice versa. God can speak through the mortal Jesus. Jesus does not speak through God. God SENT Jesus to us. Therefore Jesus is a different entity. Seriously, if you take the Bible word for word, you are nuts. It was commissioned by a Roman Emporer. That is how many centuries after? You look at the writings and see one thing, and show one example. If I had the time to I could quote you more that say Jesus is NOT God. The Bible contradicts itself all the time. This is because they are STORIES passed down from generation to generation. These are FACTS, not ramblings from someone standing in a pulpit asking for your money.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:34 PM

right God is 3 in 1. but not vice versa. God can speak through the mortal Jesus. Jesus does not speak through God. God SENT Jesus to us. Therefore Jesus is a different entity. Seriously, if you take the Bible word for word, you are nuts. It was commissioned by a Roman Emporer. That is how many centuries after? You look at the writings and see one thing, and show one example. If I had the time to I could quote you more that say Jesus is NOT God. The Bible contradicts itself all the time. This is because they are STORIES passed down from generation to generation. These are FACTS, not ramblings from someone standing in a pulpit asking for your money.
Oh my Gosh..
Please, Please, Please... Where are you getting this info? Where is one ounce of proof in any of your claims? Give me an actual "historical" proof or quote of this?

Roman Emporer? Which one was this? The one who was killing all the christians? :doh:

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:40 PM

Oh my Gosh..
Please, Please, Please... Where are you getting this info? Where is one ounce of proof in any of your claims? Give me an actual "historical" proof or quote of this?

Roman Emporer? Which one was this? The one who was killing all the christians? :doh:

My source is the Discovery Channel and History Channel. The Emporer was Constantine. He is also that changed it to the Holy Roman Empire, instead of just the Roman Empire.

I'm done with this. There is no way I'm going to agree with you, and you won't with me. You think that what you read is fact, I know it isn't. There is no proof of it. You obviously don't know enough about history, or are too closed minded to even consider other theories.

rincewind

January-6th-2006, 01:41 PM

for shock factor my friend...
but in reality how is it different...
One group can have a say in politics and push their "religious" system... yet my kind can't? Ask the holocaust surviver if he should of had a voice in politics in the 30's. He made a fascist statement.

How is it fascist? He simply said preaching and politics don't mix - i believe the founding fathers said the same thing. i didn't see him push any 'religious' system - a lack of religion is NOT a religion in of itself.

Point 2 - you are comparing modern American politics to those of Germany in the 30's? ummm..... apples and oranges are swirling in my mind.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:44 PM

How is it fascist? He simply said preaching and politics don't mix - i believe the founding fathers said the same thing. i didn't see him push any 'religious' system - a lack of religion is NOT a religion in of itself.

Point 2 - you are comparing modern American politics to those of Germany in the 30's? ummm..... apples and oranges are swirling in my mind.

"And this is exactly why evangelicals should keep their nose out of politics." why because of what they believe? So should liberals stay out of politics because they believe abortion is ok? So should conservetives stay out because they are against gay marriage? So evangelicals should stay out because they believe in God?... and thats not fascist?

actually go back and look at what he said... he didn't say preaching... He said people like me.

a "religion" can be considered again is anything you believe in and have values in.

it was a fascist statement

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:45 PM

prophet

January-6th-2006, 01:51 PM

Give it up. The door to that mind is locked. Although, I guess I wouldn't expect anything else from someone who is from a state that wants to ban cold beer being sold.

(how bout the dual thread tie-in :D )

So the door to my mind is locked... yet your min to your beliefs are not? Yet again.... another double standard.

.....

Destino

January-6th-2006, 01:53 PM

And this is exactly why evangelicals should keep their nose out of politics.

It has nothing to do with christian or racial hatred, but when you view another race, or religion as inferior to yours, you are undermining the constitution.

You have every right to believe this, and the other side thinks the same, I agree. . . but the second policy starts getting made with this mindset ingrained into peoples heads, the seperation of church and state is blurred, as well as almost all the principals our founding fathers build this nation on.
Chom I have to strongly disagree with you. Evangelicals are no different then any other group. They have their beliefs and voters are smart enough to know what they are. They have as much a right to be involved in their nations politics as you or I do.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 01:57 PM

So the door to my mind is locked... yet your min to your beliefs are not? Yet again.... another double standard.

.....

no my mind is not closed. Just give me facts. You show me where it is stated that Jesus is God, and a logical argument that will rebuff the inconsistencies, and I'll accept it.

rincewind

January-6th-2006, 01:57 PM

Chom I have to strongly disagree with you. Evangelicals are no different then any other group. They have their beliefs and voters are smart enough to know what they are. They have as much a right to be involved in their nations politics as you or I do.

See, now that is a rational arguement. No comparing him to a guy with a funny mustache who liked to order the death of people who dig on kosher.

Zguy28

January-6th-2006, 02:14 PM

Give it up. The door to that mind is locked. Obviously a puppet to the preachers...

And your not being a "puppet" to activist celebrities and such?

___________________________
http://www.wayofthemaster.com/ (http://wayofthemaster.com/)

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 02:18 PM

And your not being a "puppet" to activist celebrities and such?

___________________________
http://wayofthemaster.com/

Nope. what activist am I being a puppet to? I'm an Episcopal who as a scientist was curious, so I took it upon myslef to read, and watch educational/informational shows on this. So my opinions are fluid. Give me proof otherwise and I'll research for myself, and draw conclusions from that. So again who am I a puppet to? Reasonable thought maybe?

Zguy28

January-6th-2006, 02:26 PM

no my mind is not closed. Just give me facts. You show me where it is stated that Jesus is God, and a logical argument that will rebuff the inconsistencies, and I'll accept it.

Jesus claimed it about himself.

5 Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.7 “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.” John 14-5-7

25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.” John 10:25-30

I am glad to be a sheep!

_____________________

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/

Thiebear

January-6th-2006, 02:29 PM

There is one God, The Christian God. There are many false gods...most likely demons who call themselves gods. This may not be popular but, yes I believe allah is one of them. Doesn't mean i hate or dislike a muslim, but I think they are greatly decieved... just like they think I am.

Some one can say the Big Dipper is god... does that mean I'm suppose to say its the Same so called god as the YHWH?

Its politicaly correctness to say allah, and the Christian God are they same.

p.s. code
are you going to answer my response to you from earlier?

Whoa Whoa Whoa, lets not go throwing Zeus and Apollo and Aphrodite under the bus because your upset with Allah....

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 02:32 PM

Ya see, I interpret that as he is the door to God his Father. Not him being God himself.

OK, the last thing I and my father are one. Ok I can see where it is interpreted as Jesus is God. But I have a tough time when I only have 1 source saying it that way.

Also, he still differentiates between God the Father and himself. So it can be also interpreted that Jesus stated it that way for the simple man.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 02:33 PM

Whoa Whoa Whoa, lets not go throwing Zeus and Apollo and Aphrodite under the bus because your upset with Allah....

:D :laugh: :laugh:

oh don't open that can of worms :laugh:

Zguy28

January-6th-2006, 02:38 PM

...
OK, the last thing I and my father are one. Ok I can see where it is interpreted as Jesus is God. But I have a tough time when I only have 1 source saying it that way.

Also, he still differentiates between God the Father and himself. So it can be also interpreted that Jesus stated it that way for the simple man.

1 being, 3 distinct manifestations or persons. YHWH (Father), Yahshua(Jesus-Son), Holy Spirit.

Jesus being fully man and fully God is a mystery beyond feeble human comprehension. I don't pretend to understand it, I just take it on Faith. If I don't believe Christ is God fully, then my faith is worthless, my salt has lost it saltiness and is good for nothing but to be trampled underfoot.

And there is more than one source, He said His works testify, of which there were many.

Hope it makes sense!

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:40 PM

no my mind is not closed. Just give me facts. You show me where it is stated that Jesus is God, and a logical argument that will rebuff the inconsistencies, and I'll accept it.
you haven't rebuffed one thing I said, with anything... all the while making some "tim the toolman taylor" bizare references to some kind of history you heard from the history channel... i'm still waiting for one thing in print to give some proof to back all those statements about history....

Joe Sick

January-6th-2006, 02:41 PM

There it is in plain english... take it up with Jesus... because he said it.

How it all works I'm not sure... i probably can come up with some inferior theory... but for now I'll leave it to Him... because he is the only one that really knows...

Now, back to the topic at hand, PROVE IT!

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:43 PM

Now, back to the topic at hand, PROVE IT!

I'll make a deal... prove He doesn't... and i'll counter it...

yet no one will do this

Zguy28

January-6th-2006, 02:43 PM

Ya see, I interpret that as he is the door to God his Father. Not him being God himself....

He is the door. But it is faith in Him as fully God and in the forgiveness of sins through repentence that lead to eternal life.

http://www.needgod.com

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 02:44 PM

Now, back to the topic at hand, PROVE IT!

Prove any person in history actually existed.

Zguy28

January-6th-2006, 02:46 PM

I'll make a deal... prove He doesn't... and i'll counter it...

yet no one will do this

Good point! Prove that He didn't or doesn't exist.

If you can prove God doesn't exist, you must be God yourself.

I agree Prophet.

Destino

January-6th-2006, 02:47 PM

Prove any person in history actually existed.

Or more to the point - prove that someone that lived over 2000 years ago that was not a member of royalty or similar high status existed.

:)

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:48 PM

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:50 PM

Prove any person in history actually existed.
how do i know you exsist? how do you know i exsist? this could go round and round.

but yet again.. everyone whats the believe in God to proove he exsist... yet no one has yet to proove he doesn't exsist?

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 02:50 PM

1 being, 3 distinct manifestations or persons. YHWH (Father), Yahshua(Jesus-Son), Holy Spirit.

Jesus being fully man and fully God is a mystery beyond feeble human comprehension. I don't pretend to understand it, I just take it on Faith. If I don't believe Christ is God fully, then my faith is worthless, my salt has lost it saltiness and is good for nothing but to be trampled underfoot.

And there is more than one source, He said His works testify, of which there were many.

Hope it makes sense!

I agree God is a mystery beyond human understanding. I totally agree with you, so why is it the religious zealots think they understand it?

I still don't fully buy into your thoughts as Jesus is God. Yes, God is Jesus, but it's not vice versa. That's why Jesus sits on the right hand of the Father. Two separate entities. Kind of like King and Prince. God can speak through Jesus, but Jesus can not speak through God. It's not a two-way street. Jesus is a door to God. Can you at least see where I'm coming from with this?
We as people have no idea what is the actual truth, No one has any idea what Jesus actually said, or for that matter did.
I'm not going to get on my soap-box and flat out say you are wrong. My biggest problem is when people get on theirs and say that their OPINION is the absolute truth. That's where all my debating is coming from. You can stand there and say it is my opinion that Jesus is God, and I'll sit here and nod, and say well my opinion is he is a separate being. But for someone to stand there and say it is FACT, when you have no solid proof the actual person said it, I have a problem with that.

You have your faith in it which is great. Everyone needs to believe in something, even if your aetheist, you still believe in something. You believe there is nothing out there. But people who sit there and try and be self-righteous and say their belief is the only true belief...open a book, research and learn something.

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 02:51 PM

Or more to the point - prove that someone that lived over 2000 years ago that was not a member of royalty or similar high status existed.

:)

Exactamundo! :cheers:

Burgold

January-6th-2006, 02:51 PM

I'm hoping for a "Miracle on 34th Street" sort of ending. That would be pretty cool.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 02:57 PM

Or more to the point - prove that someone that lived over 2000 years ago that was not a member of royalty or similar high status existed.

:)

I can kindof understand someone who says Jesus is not God... but my God... How much writings does there have to be about the "Fact" a man named Jesus actually walked this earth 2000 years ago....

Take the bible out of the equation... there are tons of historical facts.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 02:57 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]I'm an Episcopal who as a scientist was curious, so I took it upon myslef to read, and watch educational/informational shows on this. QUOTE]

1. so are you a christian or you just go to an episcopal church?

2. do you believe everything you read against christianity, or that you watch on informational shows?

3. If you answered yes I am a christian, Do you hold what you watch higher than the bible?

Yes I am a Christian who goes to church. But I face the fact that the Bible was stories handed down from generation to generation. Stories get exagerrated. So, if you really want to know my belief, I do believe in the Holy Trinty, but I also don't think the Bible is the actual word. As I stated before, arguably the closest to the word of Jesus was the Gospel of St. Thomas, and it was deemed heresy by the Catholic Church.
So go ahead you have your beliefs, and I'll have mine. But neither yours or mine are infallible. You base yours on stories that have been proven to be mis-interpreted, and opinions handed down to you from a pulpit, and I'll base my beliefs on what I was told from a pulpit mixed in with my own research from supposed experts from the region, various religions, and historians.

Thiebear

January-6th-2006, 02:59 PM

I'm hoping for a "Miracle on 34th Street" sort of ending. That would be pretty cool.

You want a swing in your back yard?

codeorama

January-6th-2006, 02:59 PM

I can kindof understand someone who says Jesus is not God... but my God... How much writings does there have to be about the "Fact" a man named Jesus actually walked this earth 2000 years ago....

Take the bible out of the equation... there are tons of historical facts.

There's tons of books that talk about Apollo and Zeus and Prometheus etc...

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 03:07 PM

I agree God is a mystery beyond human understanding. I totally agree with you, so why is it the religious zealots think they understand it?

I still don't fully buy into your thoughts as Jesus is God. Yes, God is Jesus, but it's not vice versa. That's why Jesus sits on the right hand of the Father. Two separate entities. Kind of like King and Prince. God can speak through Jesus, but Jesus can not speak through God. It's not a two-way street. Jesus is a door to God. Can you at least see where I'm coming from with this?
We as people have no idea what is the actual truth, No one has any idea what Jesus actually said, or for that matter did.

I think you're actually on the right track, Xameil. Jesus is part of the 3 in 1. Therefore he is God (the closest way I think you could adequately explain it, is He is "part" of God).

And therefore, Jesus cannot speak for the Father. Or the Holy Spirit. Or at least didn't seem to in the Gospel accounts.

For instance, the Father commends Jesus from heaven in Matthew 3:16-17:
" 16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

and Jesus claims there are somethings He did not know, but the Father did like in Matthew 24:36:
"36"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father."

(in reference to the end of time)

I know there are more examples, but the bottomline -- I THINK you all might just be talking past each other.

Which I'm sure the doctrine of the Trinity has NEVER drawn dissent in the early church.... ;)

----------------

Now to the last bit of your statement, Xameil -- where you stated that "No one has any idea what Jesus actually said, or for that matter did."

If you don't believe in the historocity of the Gospels, you are exactly right. However, if you don't believe that Gospels are accurate, why would you believe in Jesus at all? Or any of the good things He did?

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 03:13 PM

Do you mean like the a liberal hate against conservatives, and vise versa? This is a major bigoted statement by you.. You are saying what you believe is above what I believe, and therefore... people that have my belief have no place in politics... how communist is that?.... sound the hater siren.

First, I don't "put myself above your beliefs", you are entitled to them, but they do not belong in politics, plain and simple. The reason is because you do not view other people as equal to yourself. That is so far COMPLETELY anti-constitutional it is astounding. I am calling you and your like out for not having a tolerant viewpoint, and for looking down at others, this type of mentality does not belong in politics. . . PERIOD!!!!

You have "religion" wether you know it or not... its called your belief & value system. And you have elevated your "religious system" above all others... and you want that "religious" system in polotics and none other... are you wearing a arm band yet?

No, I keep my religion to myself, and I do not put my religion before other people. I treat everyone equally, and I do not look down on someone for having a religion. I look at you the same way I look at Muslims, or Buddhists or the Flying Spaghetti Cult, I treat you ALL the same. You on the other hand do not. You put people who do not think like you BELOW you as a person. You yourself said that Muslims worship a false god, well that is calling them stupid right? You are saying that their religion guarentees them nothing in terms of an afterlife, because only YOUR god is the TRUE god. . . begotten not maid right?

What I am doing is calling your opinion bigoted. To furhter the point, I think your religion should stay the hell out of politics and our constitution. You can believe it as much as you want, that is your perrogative, but you have absolutely no right to place your religion before our country, and that is what is going on right now. If you don't think so, why don't you watch Pat Robertson and the 700 Club. Hell, just yesterday he said God was punishing Sharone because he gave land to infidels. He also stated that the town in Pennsylvania who voted for evolution would have to incur the wrath of god. That is a crock, it is a joke, and your religion should stay the hell out of politics plain and simple.

That is what separates you from me. I believe you can believe what you believe, and live how you want(within the law)... and have your hand in whatever politics you want... just like any people group should have. I thank God that "Christians will never" dominate American politics... just like I think God.. liberals or any other people group. Both would be disasterous

Where did I say that you can not "believe what you want to believe?" You have every right to do so, you also have every right to run for office, it is a free country, and I would never take away that right. What I am saying is that you should never be elected, because you would intermingle your religion WITH politics, it is part of you life, am I right? How could you NOT intermingle politics and religion? How could you NOT "misunderestimate" the threat of Muslim people? Or do you even care about it because you may think the "Rapture" is your responsibility to create. What if you think Jesus Christ will come at the breaking of the 7th seal, and you want to do everything in your power to make sure the second messiah comes again? Do I think this person belongs in politics? Hell no, but I would never take away his right to run. All I will do is expose his radical thoughts for all to see.

But I think... that with what you have said in your first sentence... people with type of elitist thinking should be put on a watch list... because it boarders on Hitlerism.

I'm the elitist??? Funny how you coin ME as an elitist huh. I mean where do I put ANY religion, class or race before me? I don't. In fact, it is YOU who is the elitist, it was YOU who stated that Muslims believe in a false god, and it was YOU who puts your beliefs above Muslims. Unfortunately, you won't even look at what I am saying, and comprehend why you are being an elitist. As for me, I don't put myself above anyone, I treat everyone the same, as I think Muslims who believe in the 72 virgins should not be in politics as well.

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 03:14 PM

Now to the last bit of your statement, Xameil -- where you stated that "No one has any idea what Jesus actually said, or for that matter did."

If you don't believe in the historocity of the Gospels, you are exactly right. However, if you don't believe that Gospels are accurate, why would you believe in Jesus at all? Or any of the good things He did?

Because it has been proven, or at least supported that the Gospels have been mis-translated. So, I do believe in Jesus, and what he stood for, but I don't think that the Gospels are 100% accurate, and therefore can not be read as black and white. I feel they are teachings to help guide us through life.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 03:14 PM

[QUOTE=prophet]

Yes I am a Christian who goes to church. But I face the fact that the Bible was stories handed down from generation to generation. Stories get exagerrated. So, if you really want to know my belief, I do believe in the Holy Trinty, but I also don't think the Bible is the actual word. As I stated before, arguably the closest to the word of Jesus was the Gospel of St. Thomas, and it was deemed heresy by the Catholic Church.
So go ahead you have your beliefs, and I'll have mine. But neither yours or mine are infallible. You base yours on stories that have been proven to be mis-interpreted, and opinions handed down to you from a pulpit, and I'll base my beliefs on what I was told from a pulpit mixed in with my own research from supposed experts from the region, various religions, and historians.
oh ok... let me get this straight. You are the only one on earth that has done any type of research, and oh btw your research is infallable. The book of "thomas" is perfect, and you are next in line to be god?

ok I think I've got it now.

We do not serve the same God.

Burgold

January-6th-2006, 03:15 PM

No, but remember how they proved Santa real in court. I don't know what the parallel would be... maybe get all the water fountains to project wine for a day?

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 03:20 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]
oh ok... let me get this straight. You are the only one on earth that has done any type of research, and oh btw your research is infallable. The book of "thomas" is perfect, and you are next in line to be god?

ok I think I've got it now.

We do not serve the same God.

You are so ignorant it makes me laugh. You read one thing and make it fit your argument.
I never said the Gospel according to St. Thomas was perfect. I just said that it was supposedly the closest to the word of Jesus (since he and Thomas were so close). And it is no secret that the Vatican deemed it heresy. The Gospel was "bad for business". I'll keep it simple for you. It stated that you didn't need to goto a church to worship God. He exists everywhere.

And with your attitude, I wouldn't want to serve your God, obviously he preaches stupidity.

Oh yeah, and I never said I was the only one who did any research. I just said you haven't done much.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 03:23 PM

First, I don't "put myself above your beliefs", you are entitled to them, but they do not belong in politics, plain and simple. The reason is because you do not view other people as equal to yourself. That is so far COMPLETELY anti-constitutional it is astounding. I am calling you and your like out for not having a tolerant viewpoint, and for looking down at others, this type of mentality does not belong in politics. . . PERIOD!!!!

No, I keep my religion to myself, and I do not put my religion before other people. I treat everyone equally, and I do not look down on someone for having a religion. I look at you the same way I look at Muslims, or Buddhists or the Flying Spaghetti Cult, I treat you ALL the same. You on the other hand do not. You put people who do not think like you BELOW you as a person. You yourself said that Muslims worship a false god, well that is calling them stupid right? You are saying that their religion guarentees them nothing in terms of an afterlife, because only YOUR god is the TRUE god. . . begotten not maid right?

What I am doing is calling your opinion bigoted. To furhter the point, I think your religion should stay the hell out of politics and our constitution. You can believe it as much as you want, that is your perrogative, but you have absolutely no right to place your religion before our country, and that is what is going on right now. If you don't think so, why don't you watch Pat Robertson and the 700 Club. Hell, just yesterday he said God was punishing Sharone because he gave land to infidels. He also stated that the town in Pennsylvania who voted for evolution would have to incur the wrath of god. That is a crock, it is a joke, and your religion should stay the hell out of politics plain and simple.

Where did I say that you can not "believe what you want to believe?" You have every right to do so, you also have every right to run for office, it is a free country, and I would never take away that right. What I am saying is that you should never be elected, because you would intermingle your religion WITH politics, it is part of you life, am I right? How could you NOT intermingle politics and religion? How could you NOT "misunderestimate" the threat of Muslim people? Or do you even care about it because you may think the "Rapture" is your responsibility to create. What if you think Jesus Christ will come at the breaking of the 7th seal, and you want to do everything in your power to make sure the second messiah comes again? Do I think this person belongs in politics? Hell no, but I would never take away his right to run. All I will do is expose his radical thoughts for all to see.

I'm the elitist??? Funny how you coin ME as an elitist huh. I mean where do I put ANY religion, class or race before me? I don't. In fact, it is YOU who is the elitist, it was YOU who stated that Muslims believe in a false god, and it was YOU who puts your beliefs above Muslims. Unfortunately, you won't even look at what I am saying, and comprehend why you are being an elitist. As for me, I don't put myself above anyone, I treat everyone the same, as I think Muslims who believe in the 72 virgins should not be in politics as well.

Yet you deny the fact that your belief system about politics is your "religion". Yet its ok for you to believe the way you do... and allow it to effect your "political decisions. Yet its ok for you to say a person of "faith" should never be elected. That is fascism.
If I was elected, and everyone knew my beliefs... why else would I get elected in the first place unless the majority felt that way? Why do people get elected... because people agree with what they believe.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 03:26 PM

[QUOTE=prophet]

You are so ignorant it makes me laugh. You read one thing and make it fit your argument.
I never said the Gospel according to St. Thomas was perfect. I just said that it was supposedly the closest to the word of Jesus (since he and Thomas were so close). And it is no secret that the Vatican deemed it heresy. The Gospel was "bad for business". I'll keep it simple for you. It stated that you didn't need to goto a church to worship God. He exists everywhere.

And with your attitude, I wouldn't want to serve your God, obviously he preaches stupidity.

Oh yeah, and I never said I was the only one who did any research. I just said you haven't done much.
:doh:

First thomas was not the closest to Jesus... actually read the bible, and find out... John was.

and do you even read what you write? YOU JUST SAID YOU DIDN'T DO ANY OF THE RESEARCH... YET your previous post says this

Originally Posted by Xameil "and I'll base my beliefs on what I was told from a pulpit mixed in with my own research from supposed experts from the region, various religions, and historians."

I see why you are confused...

i can not respond to you again... I think i'm actually getting dumber by the second every time you post some hairball thought. :rolleyes:

Stick27

January-6th-2006, 03:26 PM

well why would you say that your a christian But dont believe the word of God to be the Bible ?

Thiebear

January-6th-2006, 03:28 PM

No, I keep my religion to myself, and I do not put my religion before other people. I treat everyone equally, and I do not look down on someone for having a religion.

WRONG! you have said many times in signature and word that people that believe in God are intellectually dishonest at best and mental in some cases.

You don't believe in God just as I am currently at... Lets not throw false statements up there unless you not only went from the Patriots back to the skins and from no God to God at the same time....

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 03:28 PM

Because it has been proven, or at least supported that the Gospels have been mis-translated. So, I do believe in Jesus, and what he stood for, but I don't think that the Gospels are 100% accurate, and therefore can not be read as black and white. I feel they are teachings to help guide us through life.

Of course, I'm sure I could ask you for a proof of a mis-translated passage from the Gospel -- and you could find an opinion somewhere to that effect -- and I could in turn rebut that opinion with an additional opinion -- ad nauseum. ;) I vote to skip all the googling on this particular issue.

In the end, you've either got to either believe that the Gospels have been passed down as accurate accounts of the life of Christ -- or have been somehow compromised over time. I can certainly understand the belief that they have been compromised. It's hard to believe (though I do) that the account of Christ's life, as presented by four eye witnesses, have been passed along for two millenia without any significant corruption.

But if you feel that way, why would you give credance to any of it?

Regardless, I appreciate your candor on this topic, Xameil. :cheers:

Predicto

January-6th-2006, 03:29 PM

Prophet, maybe this is a problem of definition.

How about: You and other Christians are worshiping the one and only God. Muslims may be attempting to worship the same one God, but they are getting it all wrong, because they were mislead by Muhammed.

Muslims certainly believe they are worshipping the same God that spoke to Abraham. It is the most fundamental tenant of their religion.

Stick27

January-6th-2006, 03:30 PM

well all I can see from that is 3 I's,it isn't about us But what Christ Did on the Cross for all of us !

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 03:33 PM

Of course, I'm sure I could ask you for a proof of a mis-translated passage from the Gospel -- and you could find an opinion somewhere to that effect -- and I could in turn rebut that opinion with an additional opinion -- ad nauseum. ;) I vote to skip all the googling on this particular issue.

In the end, you've either got to either believe that the Gospels have been passed down as accurate accounts of the life of Christ -- or have been somehow compromised over time. I can certainly understand the belief that they have been compromised. It's hard to believe (though I do) that the account of Christ's life, as presented by four eye witnesses, have been passed along for two millenia without any significant corruption.

But if you feel that way, why would you give credance to any of it?

Regardless, I appreciate your candor on this topic, Xameil. :cheers:

Agreed. I always enjoy an educated discussion. :cheers:

prophet

January-6th-2006, 03:38 PM

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 04:20 PM

Whoa, back the truck way up, Chom.

I never once stated that was how I think, but I put the reasoning down as to why it is done. Just as your side believes you are right, you always have to use modifiers, or sensationalistic adjectives to describe your opponents. Librals do not do that, for the most part, because they believe their argument will stand on the merits on the argument itself.

The post was not meant to mean that my position is the only true and just position, but to give a discription as to not only why they fail to use modifiers when describing the right, but also the thought process behind it.

Apparently I misunderstood your post, but let's look at it again:

For the same reason you see libral/socialist or leftist/Marxist. When you have no point, you need to resort to extreme innuendos and emotional writing to get people to agree with you.

It is the same reason why liberals DON'T write righty/fascist with every post. They believe their reasoning and judgement doesn't need to resort to sensationalistic modifiers, because they believe their position is the only true and just one.

In particular, look at the bolded section. Who can "they" possibly be referring to other than liberals? It sure looks to me like liberals "believe their position is the only true and just one." (Your words, not mine.) If that isn't what you meant, I'm willing to leave it at that. Let's continue...

That is because in your circles, it is not. God is not up for debat in your eyes either, but there are others who look at the world differently. It doesn;t make either side right, but it also does not mean that he definately existed by any stretch of the imagination.

In my circles? What circles are those, exactly? You've made the wild assumption that not only do I hold monotheistic beliefs, but they're fairly closed-minded Christian ones as well. False on both accounts. I suppose you could categorize me as "agnostic," but I don't really like the term.

Either way, there wasn't supposed to be any religious undertone to my post at all, which is why I stressed historical figure. As far as I knew it was pretty widely accepted by the archaeological and historical communities that a person named Jesus lived in the Middle East in the first century A.D. That was all I was saying.

Prosperity

January-6th-2006, 04:41 PM

Whoa, back the truck way up, Chom.

Apparently I misunderstood your post, but let's look at it again:

In particular, look at the bolded section. Who can "they" possibly be referring to other than liberals? It sure looks to me like liberals "believe their position is the only true and just one." (Your words, not mine.) If that isn't what you meant, I'm willing to leave it at that. Let's continue...

In my circles? What circles are those, exactly? You've made the wild assumption that not only do I hold monotheistic beliefs, but they're fairly closed-minded Christian ones as well. False on both accounts. I suppose you could categorize me as "agnostic," but I don't really like the term.

Either way, there wasn't supposed to be any religious undertone to my post at all, which is why I stressed historical figure. As far as I knew it was pretty widely accepted by the archaeological and historical communities that a person named Jesus lived in the Middle East in the first century A.D. That was all I was saying.

You are an agnostic that doesn't have logical proof for God but hopes/has faith that there is some other force out there that gives purpose to existance. Am I correct or way off?

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 04:53 PM

You are an agnostic that doesn't have logical proof for God but hopes/has faith that there is some other force out there that gives purpose to existance. Am I correct or way off?

I'd say you're closer to way off than you are to correct. I don't think there has to be a supernatural presence for existence to have meaning or purpose necessarily. I don't believe the human race is the focus of the universe, and I doubt any sentient race is. (For that matter, it seems highly probable that we're not the only intelligent life in the universe, but that's a discussion for a whole different thread.)

I also think that whether you want to explain it with science or religion, the genesis of the universe is baffling, to put it mildly.

To put things succinctly, I'm willing to recognize that there's more I don't know than I do know. For the time being, I'm comfortable with that.

Drockvb

January-6th-2006, 05:20 PM

Doesn't the Judge acknowledge Christs existance every time he writes or reads a date. Example Jan. 6 2006. 2006=A.D. Meaning A.D. started on Christs' birthday.

Destino

January-6th-2006, 06:15 PM

I can kindof understand someone who says Jesus is not God... but my God... How much writings does there have to be about the "Fact" a man named Jesus actually walked this earth 2000 years ago....

Take the bible out of the equation... there are tons of historical facts.You miss the point completely and it also seems you don't know what side of this debate I fall on.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 06:35 PM

Chom I have to strongly disagree with you. Evangelicals are no different then any other group. They have their beliefs and voters are smart enough to know what they are. They have as much a right to be involved in their nations politics as you or I do.

I have no problem with evangelicals getting involved in politics as long as they view ALL religions equally. Prophet obviously has an inferior view of Muslims, as do most evangelicals. It is their reasoning process, and bringing religous superiority INTO politics is wrong. I personally have no issue with evangelicals, or Muslims, or Jews, or Shinto's etc etc, but what I DO have a problem with is looking inferiorly to others simply because of their religious views.

Here, let me explain it like this. Prophet believes that Muslims are stupid. Why do I believe Prophet thinks Muslims are stupid? Because he believes that his god is the only god, and everyone else is worshiping false prophets (and no, the irony doesn't escape me). Now, would you think someone who spends their entire life worshiping a false god smart? The inference is there for all to see, and it is how prejudiced feelings are born. It is always based on one group of society believing the other group is wrong in their beliefs. This kind ot thought belongs nowhere in politics, and this is why the founding fathers wanted to keep the church seperate from the state. It is a fundamental rule of good government IMO.

Now, that is not saying that evangelicals or any other religion can not get into politics, but if they do, they have to put our conuntries laws before their own beliefs. That is something I'm not sure many of them are willing to do.

twa

January-6th-2006, 06:44 PM

:laugh: Chom, you're hopeless

You do not see the elitism in your own views.

At least I acknowlege I think I am superior to most of you ;)

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 06:56 PM

Yet you deny the fact that your belief system about politics is your "religion". Yet its ok for you to believe the way you do... and allow it to effect your "political decisions. Yet its ok for you to say a person of "faith" should never be elected. That is fascism.

Re-read what I said, I am talking about people who put their faith BOFORE the country. I have stated this ad-nauseum, but you chose to ignore the point.

Here is the reason you chose to ignore it, because you would have to agree with what I said. It is much easier for you to look at your own image without questoning what beliefs you have should be modified, or even to question the fact that you think Muslims are inferior to you because they "worship a false god. . . probably a demon". It is not the religion that I have a problem with, it is the INTOLERANCE bred in the religion where the problem lies, and the fact that evangelicals would put their religion before their country.

My thoughts have to do with putting my COUNTRY first, not a religous belief, or diety, but a document. The Constitution of the United States of America is what should be followed, and your beliefs keep you from following that document. Looking down on another religion, and considering their religion not equal to yours is not the intent of the law, nor was it in the minds of our founding fathers.

If I was elected, and everyone knew my beliefs... why else would I get elected in the first place unless the majority felt that way? Why do people get elected... because people agree with what they believe.

The majority is not always right, hell, they elected Bush last election :doh: You also make a gynormous mistake to think people would elect you SOLELY based on your religion, which is completely false in it's premise. People vote for many different reasons, and just because you recieve a majority does not mean they ALL voted for you because of your religion.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 06:57 PM

:laugh: Chom, you're hopeless

You do not see the elitism in your own views.

At least I acknowlege I think I am superior to most of you ;)

So show me WHERE I am elitist. Give me a specific example, and show me how what I am thinking is elitist. Is it because I want to put the Constitution before religion? That is not elitist, unless you think our founding fathers made an elitist document.

twa

January-6th-2006, 08:28 PM

So show me WHERE I am elitist. Give me a specific example, and show me how what I am thinking is elitist. Is it because I want to put the Constitution before religion? That is not elitist, unless you think our founding fathers made an elitist document.

I will let your posts speak for me ;)

You don't think the founding fathers were elitist?

They were good men ,but come on ,you surely know your history better than that.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 08:46 PM

WRONG! you have said many times in signature and word that people that believe in God are intellectually dishonest at best and mental in some cases.

You don't believe in God just as I am currently at... Lets not throw false statements up there unless you not only went from the Patriots back to the skins and from no God to God at the same time....

What, Nitzche? "Is man one of God's biggest blunders, or is God one of man's biggest blunders?" . . . How does this go against what I am saying? Because I don't believe in something intangible does not mean I look down on people because of religion. You mey THINK that I do, but I do not. My parents are religious, as is my entire family, I don't look down on them, I chose not to believe in the same things.

If you want to call me out, then at least bring a post to the table, and one with context so we can discuss it. . . but the Nitzche quote has nothing to do with superiority, or is it intolerant. It is philosophical, and it makes you think, that is why I used it.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 08:50 PM

I will let your posts speak for me ;)

You don't think the founding fathers were elitist?

They were good men ,but come on ,you surely know your history better than that.

Actually, I do. That's why placed the focus on the Constitution itself, and not the men who created it. ;)

prophet

January-6th-2006, 09:10 PM

So show me WHERE I am elitist. Give me a specific example, and show me how what I am thinking is elitist. Is it because I want to put the Constitution before religion? That is not elitist, unless you think our founding fathers made an elitist document.

Everything you stand for IS YOUR "RELIGION" comerics. Its ok to bring your biased belief system into politics, and change whatever law or challenge any part of the consituitoin that seems to fit your belief system. I should have the same right to take what I believe into any situation.

One thing you may not know, about God's word is... as a christian I am instructed to
1 Peter 2:
13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men

As a Christian I am told to follow the law of the land. Since we live in a democracy.. I also have the right to do whatever is within the law (just like you) and pursue whatever avenue that I feel is right. Name any key issue.. you will choose your side, and I will be on oneside or the other on it. I have the right to be on whatever side I feel is right, and pursue the correct avenues to have things altered.

1 Peter 2:17
17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.

You may say what does this have to do with it? "honor the king" He is speaking of nero. Nero one of the most cruelist individuals in the history of chrisitiandom. Who slaughtered thousands of christians, and crazy laws against them... yet Paul says honor him, and his rule as king? Why... Because God has placed in him in that place of leadership to start with. For what reason... I don't always know, but I take it for what it is.

Just another piece to throw in... This means... how Clinton was treated was wrong. I do not believe he should have been dishonored world wide even in his moment of weekness... because as our leader he should have been given respect as a leader. Same goes for Bush he should garner from the liberals respect & honor regardless... because he is the "leader" of the country.

Lastly, I also know this is not my time as a Christian on this earth. And the only thing I can do to bring about my time is to "watch & pray". So if I was in a leadership position here in America. There is no choice I could make as a leader that would make the "return" of Jesus happen. The only thing I can do is pray... This is what i'm commissioned to do. This is the only thing I can do to bring about "the coming".

Do I hate muslim.. nope. I hate no man... I believe what I believe is right just like you.

HOF44

January-6th-2006, 09:47 PM

Everything you stand for IS YOUR "RELIGION" comerics. Its ok to bring your biased belief system into politics, and change whatever law or challenge any part of the consituitoin that seems to fit your belief system. I should have the same right to take what I believe into any situation.

One thing you may not know, about God's word is... as a christian I am instructed to
1 Peter 2:
13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men

As a Christian I am told to follow the law of the land. Since we live in a democracy.. I also have the right to do whatever is within the law (just like you) and pursue whatever avenue that I feel is right. Name any key issue.. you will choose your side, and I will be on oneside or the other on it. I have the right to be on whatever side I feel is right, and pursue the correct avenues to have things altered.

1 Peter 2:17
17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.

You may say what does this have to do with it? "honor the king" He is speaking of nero. Nero one of the most cruelist individuals in the history of chrisitiandom. Who slaughtered thousands of christians, and crazy laws against them... yet Paul says honor him, and his rule as king? Why... Because God has placed in him in that place of leadership to start with. For what reason... I don't always know, but I take it for what it is.

Just another piece to throw in... This means... how Clinton was treated was wrong. I do not believe he should have been dishonored world wide even in his moment of weekness... because as our leader he should have been given respect as a leader. Same goes for Bush he should garner from the liberals respect & honor regardless... because he is the "leader" of the country.

Lastly, I also know this is not my time as a Christian on this earth. And the only thing I can do to bring about my time is to "watch & pray". So if I was in a leadership position here in America. There is no choice I could make as a leader that would make the "return" of Jesus happen. The only thing I can do is pray... This is what i'm commissioned to do. This is the only thing I can do to bring about "the coming".

Do I hate muslim.. nope. I hate no man... I believe what I believe is right just like you.

A "belief" is not necessarily a religion here is a definition of religion.

Religion—sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system—is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices and institutions associated with such belief. In its broadest sense some have defined it as the sum total of answers given to explain humankind's relationship with the universe. In the course of the development of religion, it has taken a huge number of forms in various cultures and individuals. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion (http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=2&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion)

There a lots of sources to get definitions for the wqrd but all contain a belief in the supernatural. I haven't heard chom argue for the supernatural in his posts. Political beliefs are not necessarily a "religion".

jpillian

January-6th-2006, 09:52 PM

Here is the reason you chose to ignore it, because you would have to agree with what I said. It is much easier for you to look at your own image without questoning what beliefs you have should be modified, or even to question the fact that you think Muslims are inferior to you because they "worship a false god. . . probably a demon". It is not the religion that I have a problem with, it is the INTOLERANCE bred in the religion where the problem lies, and the fact that evangelicals would put their religion before their country.

My thoughts have to do with putting my COUNTRY first, not a religous belief, or diety, but a document. The Constitution of the United States of America is what should be followed, and your beliefs keep you from following that document. Looking down on another religion, and considering their religion not equal to yours is not the intent of the law, nor was it in the minds of our founding fathers.

Chom, don't you think that just about EVERY religion believes they are the only right belief and all others are wrong? Shoot even athiests believe that.

That's exactly what a belief is: "Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something".

If you believe something is the truth, you can't very well give equal credence to others' beliefs that something else is the truth. Especially when, the very nature of the truth makes it impossible for it to be true, if another truth is also truth. (perhaps I should use a thesaurus nex time... :laugh: )

I can certainly agree with the sentiment of leaving each man to choose his own beliefs and live his own life without persecution as a result. But I think that anyone who doesn't acknowledge that he holds his own perspective of the truth higher than the perspective of an unbeliever -- is probably trying to sell you something.

And I'm not buying it.

prophet

January-6th-2006, 09:56 PM

A "belief" is not necessarily a religion here is a definition of religion.

Religion—sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system—is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices and institutions associated with such belief. In its broadest sense some have defined it as the sum total of answers given to explain humankind's relationship with the universe. In the course of the development of religion, it has taken a huge number of forms in various cultures and individuals. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion (http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=2&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion)

There a lots of sources to get definitions for the wqrd but all contain a belief in the supernatural. I haven't heard chom argue for the supernatural in his posts. Political beliefs are not necessarily a "religion".

I am not talking about the supernatural in this converstaion with chom.

HOF44

January-6th-2006, 10:02 PM

I am not talking about the supernatural in this converstaion with chom.

Originally Posted by prophet
Everything you stand for IS YOUR "RELIGION" comerics. Its ok to bring your biased belief system into politics, and change whatever law or challenge any part of the consituitoin that seems to fit your belief system. I should have the same right to take what I believe into any situation.

You just said it was his "religion" if you are discussing religion you are discussing the supernatural.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 10:56 PM

In my circles? What circles are those, exactly? You've made the wild assumption that not only do I hold monotheistic beliefs, but they're fairly closed-minded Christian ones as well. False on both accounts. I suppose you could categorize me as "agnostic," but I don't really like the term.

When I initially wrote that passage, I thought it was prophet I was replying to, not you. Sorry about that, it's because both of you have the same avitar. When I went back and edited the post, I missed the assumption part. Point noted.

Either way, there wasn't supposed to be any religious undertone to my post at all, which is why I stressed historical figure. As far as I knew it was pretty widely accepted by the archaeological and historical communities that a person named Jesus lived in the Middle East in the first century A.D. That was all I was saying.

Sorry about the confusion, like I said before I thought initially I was replying to prophet, but when I re-read the post, I saw that it was you, and I edited. the last part. I probably should have just edited the entire thing.

As for this part. . .

In particular, look at the bolded section. Who can "they" possibly be referring to other than liberals? It sure looks to me like liberals "believe their position is the only true and just one." (Your words, not mine.) If that isn't what you meant, I'm willing to leave it at that. Let's continue...

I do believe that is how a lot of liberals think, but I do not think that way. The question was asked as to why use the sensationalistic adjective, and I replied my thoughts on the manner. I have a pretty good bead on the liberals of the world, and I do know how a lot of them think, I don't agree with a lot of their ideas, but I believe I know where they are coming from.

dfitzo53

January-6th-2006, 11:14 PM

When I initially wrote that passage, I thought it was prophet I was replying to, not you. Sorry about that, it's because both of you have the same avitar. When I went back and edited the post, I missed the assumption part. Point noted.

Sorry about the confusion, like I said before I thought initially I was replying to prophet, but when I re-read the post, I saw that it was you, and I edited. the last part. I probably should have just edited the entire thing.

As for this part. . .

I do believe that is how a lot of liberals think, but I do not think that way. The question was asked as to why use the sensationalistic adjective, and I replied my thoughts on the manner. I have a pretty good bead on the liberals of the world, and I do know how a lot of them think, I don't agree with a lot of their ideas, but I believe I know where they are coming from.

Clears a lot of things up. Thanks. Probably got a little too defensive there.

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 11:26 PM

Chom, don't you think that just about EVERY religion believes they are the only right belief and all others are wrong? Shoot even athiests believe that.

That's exactly what a belief is: "Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something".

If you believe something is the truth, you can't very well give equal credence to others' beliefs that something else is the truth. Especially when, the very nature of the truth makes it impossible for it to be true, if another truth is also truth. (perhaps I should use a thesaurus nex time... :laugh: )

I can certainly agree with the sentiment of leaving each man to choose his own beliefs and live his own life without persecution as a result. But I think that anyone who doesn't acknowledge that he holds his own perspective of the truth higher than the perspective of an unbeliever -- is probably trying to sell you something.

And I'm not buying it.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree. I just want to make sure their religous beliefs stay the hell away from our government!!!

chomerics

January-6th-2006, 11:27 PM

Clears a lot of things up. Thanks. Probably got a little too defensive there.

Not at all, I always come across as abrasive, but that is just my ummm . . . style :whoknows:

prophet

January-6th-2006, 11:31 PM

I understand what you are saying, and I agree. I just want to make sure their religous beliefs stay the hell away from our government!!!

Then what you believe about how things should be should stay away from goverment as well... otherwise its a double standard

Xameil

January-6th-2006, 11:53 PM

[QUOTE=Xameil]
:doh:

First thomas was not the closest to Jesus... actually read the bible, and find out... John was.

and do you even read what you write? YOU JUST SAID YOU DIDN'T DO ANY OF THE RESEARCH... YET your previous post says this

Originally Posted by Xameil "and I'll base my beliefs on what I was told from a pulpit mixed in with my own research from supposed experts from the region, various religions, and historians."

I see why you are confused...

i can not respond to you again... I think i'm actually getting dumber by the second every time you post some hairball thought. :rolleyes:

wrong again. I read the Bible, and John was not the closest sorry. And funny you should say that. I felt I was getting dumber reading your idiotic closed minded bible thumping posts. And of course you can't respond...your IQ is WAY too low. ;)

spanishomelette

January-7th-2006, 02:28 AM

The "beloved disciple" was closest to Jesus (if that was his real name..no real proof). Although he must have been pretty fond of Lazarus too considering.:)

Love the Gospel of Thomas..He probably was pretty close to him seeing as how he was his "twin" ;)

chomerics

January-7th-2006, 10:43 AM

Then what you believe about how things should be should stay away from goverment as well... otherwise its a double standard

is our Constitution a double standard? Because I believe in our constitution it is not a double standard, you just fail to see it. I don't know how to explain it any more clearly to you, but this has never been about religion, but religion AND politics. Because I think they should be kept away from each other isn't a double standard, it is what our country is BASED ON!!!!

Because I believe in our Constitution, and I think it should be followed is now a double standard in your eyes. . . yet extoling your version of reality, looking down on other religions, not treating them as equals is A-OK in your book. Hell, you have every right to think like that, but you should not be runnig in politics, because you would be contradicting the constitution. The reason you run for office is to UPHOLD the constitution, not to eliminate it.

Thiebear

January-7th-2006, 12:08 PM

Religion and Politics has NEVER been about seperations..
It's ALWAYS been about all inclusive.

Cdowwe

January-7th-2006, 01:12 PM

IMO religion should be allowed in politics. I wonder why an Atheist has never been elected to high office in this country. Because people do care about religion in their politics.

chomerics

January-8th-2006, 11:35 AM

IMO religion should be allowed in politics. I wonder why an Atheist has never been elected to high office in this country. Because people do care about religion in their politics.

Your opinion would be wrong according to the founding fathers, and our Constitution. Just so you understand this, you are saying you don't believe our Constitution was right, and that we should change one of the basic tenents of it.

chomerics

January-8th-2006, 11:39 AM

Religion and Politics has NEVER been about seperations..
It's ALWAYS been about all inclusive.

That is what made the constitution so different Bear, and that is why it is the greatest document ever written in the history of society. Our founding fathers recognized the foils of previous societies, and went outside of popular opinion to change it. They saw the downfall of the melding of both religion and poitics, and tried to keep them away from each other. It is the seperation of church and state that makes us different, and great. It is also how we have survived as a society for over 200+ years and thrived. What you are seeing now is what the founding fathers tried to avoid. They knew 200+ years ago what the problems were with government, and they were right.

Thiebear

January-8th-2006, 11:48 AM

That is what made the constitution so different Bear, and that is why it is the greatest document ever written in the history of society. Our founding fathers recognized the foils of previous societies, and went outside of popular opinion to change it. They saw the downfall of the melding of both religion and poitics, and tried to keep them away from each other. It is the seperation of church and state that makes us different, and great. It is also how we have survived as a society for over 200+ years and thrived. What you are seeing now is what the founding fathers tried to avoid. They knew 200+ years ago what the problems were with government, and they were right.

Wrong Again! you cant agree and then disagree...
The Constitution in its own words are not about the seperation of church and state.. Lets try this again. It about not having a State sponsored Church/Religion. NOT, lets repeat this again NOT about complete seperation of church and state.. but you keep trying..

twa

January-8th-2006, 11:48 AM

The seperation was to be between church and State,not politics or everyday life. No official state religion or a requirement for worship or faith.

Jeffersons writings clearly show this was not to punish religion ,but to protect the freedom of it.

Drockvb

January-8th-2006, 12:10 PM

I don't think our founding fathers would have raised their children to be athiests.

Cdowwe

January-8th-2006, 02:12 PM

Your opinion would be wrong according to the founding fathers, and our Constitution. Just so you understand this, you are saying you don't believe our Constitution was right, and that we should change one of the basic tenents of it.

Chom, according to you...you dont believe in the founding fathers...so why even bring them into it. All you believe in is the Constitution. Further, I DO believe in teh Constitution...I just dont interpret it like you. Just because I interpret it in a different way does NOT mean I am wrong. I agree with Thiebear... in that it means no state sponsored religion.

Are you saying you dont think we should change the Constitution ever?

dfitzo53

January-8th-2006, 03:48 PM

That is what made the constitution so different Bear, and that is why it is the greatest document ever written in the history of society. Our founding fathers recognized the foils of previous societies, and went outside of popular opinion to change it. They saw the downfall of the melding of both religion and poitics, and tried to keep them away from each other. It is the seperation of church and state that makes us different, and great. It is also how we have survived as a society for over 200+ years and thrived. What you are seeing now is what the founding fathers tried to avoid. They knew 200+ years ago what the problems were with government, and they were right.

If I'm not mistaken, all the Constitution says on the subject is "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion."

chomerics

January-8th-2006, 07:54 PM

Here is what the constitution says. . .

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Make no law RESPECTING an establishment of religion, which could be interperted as not giving taxpayer money to a single religion, ie faith based initiatives.

And TWA, you are 100% right, and it is EXACTLY what I believe. Jefferson wanted EQUALITY for ALL religions, but this is not what we have right now. If you go back to how this discussion got started, it was from Prophet saying "Muslims worship a false god, probably a deamon." (paraphrasing).

I agree with Jefferson, and I agree with the first amendment. I have said before if you could hold office while not using religion before the law, then that would be OK with me, but Prophet would not do that, as well as most evangelicals. This is why they should NOT be in politics. Your duty as a politician is to protect and promote the constitution (I know it is a simple definition) and placing religion before the Constitution is wrong. Giving federal money to churches is wrong, and any interaction between church and state is wrong. It is not what Jefferson wanted, and he was not a man who viewed government as an outlet for religious funding. Unfortunately, it IS part of the republican party now, and it is the downfall of the party. People are just to slow to realize this, but they will see it in a few years. History is not going to look good at this time period, and you have the intermelding of faith and politics to thanks for it.

twa

January-8th-2006, 10:49 PM

Chom ,where is your condemnation for the Dems that campain in churches?

It has to work both ways...including the Rev. Jackson ;)

IMO the clergy and churches should avoid politics,but the membership is duty bound as citizens to participate.

Thiebear

January-9th-2006, 05:41 AM

Prophet has the right to say Muslims pray to the wrong God as Harry Belafonte has a right to say Bush is the worst terrorist on Earth. This has nothing to do with the Bill of Rights or Congress or anything else.

IF its o.k. for David Duke and Senator Bird why is it not o.k. for people of Religion?
Anyone can run for office as long as they don't break the law once they get in...

I'm still not quite getting your argument? Your saying that anyone who is Orthodox in their beliefs are not eligible to run? Only Agnostic or Atheist or slightly non-practicing religious types are allowed to run?

No Roman Catholics?
No Muslims
No Orthodox Jews
No Evangelical
No Holy Rollers
Must be easy to say that as an agnostic/atheist.. and someone that wants to run.
Would make it easier for me to run against you though ;)

Zguy28

January-9th-2006, 07:58 AM

Here is what the constitution says. . .

Make no law RESPECTING an establishment of religion, which could be interperted as not giving taxpayer money to a single religion, ie faith based initiatives.

And TWA, you are 100% right, and it is EXACTLY what I believe. Jefferson wanted EQUALITY for ALL religions, but this is not what we have right now. If you go back to how this discussion got started, it was from Prophet saying "Muslims worship a false god, probably a deamon." (paraphrasing).

I agree with Jefferson, and I agree with the first amendment. I have said before if you could hold office while not using religion before the law, then that would be OK with me, but Prophet would not do that, as well as most evangelicals. This is why they should NOT be in politics. Your duty as a politician is to protect and promote the constitution (I know it is a simple definition) and placing religion before the Constitution is wrong. Giving federal money to churches is wrong, and any interaction between church and state is wrong. It is not what Jefferson wanted, and he was not a man who viewed government as an outlet for religious funding. Unfortunately, it IS part of the republican party now, and it is the downfall of the party. People are just to slow to realize this, but they will see it in a few years. History is not going to look good at this time period, and you have the intermelding of faith and politics to thanks for it.

You can say all you want about how this group or that group shouldn't be in politics because of their beliefs, (which is a form of fascism btw) but until the majority decides otherwise you're going to have to live with it.

Definition of Fascism (paraphrase): The most notable characteristic of a fascist country is the separation and persecution or denial of equality to a specific segment of the population based upon superficial qualities or belief systems.

Tell me if this doesn't sum up your attitude/belief toward those pesky evangelicals?