ARCHIVE: I believe religion to be obsolete
- Thread starter prodigal
- Start date
Ecumenicist
New member
Wrong, Chrisitanity is founded on hope, the hope of
resurrection.
As far as Aimiel goes, sometimes he's reasonable, sometimes
not (unlike myself, for example, always reasonable
)
Originally posted by Dave Miller
Wrong, Chrisitanity is founded on hope, the hope of
resurrection.
As far as Aimiel goes, sometimes he's reasonable, sometimes
not (unlike myself, for example, always reasonable
...a resurrection required to save you from getting tortured for eternity by a loving, merciful deity. Yes, I remember.
I didn't address two people, Rolf Ernst and Lighthouse. Sorry, I'll getcha right now.
(Rolf Ernst
Prodigal--A man "can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven."
Sooo--you think that the resurrection of a man who said in advance that He would be raised up is foolishness, huh? That is what you are up against. Christ's resurrection proves that you are the one who is foolish. Not only did he raise Lazarus who had been dead four days, but He said that the hour was coming in which all who were in the graves would hear His voice and come forth.
That includes you and, by the way, He is the one who has been appointed to be your judge. Scoff while you can! The triumphing of the wicked is short!!)
Okay, Rolf, you can't prove a word of what you just said. An old book says that it's true. Old books also say that storks deliver babies to their waiting mothers and that there are pots of gold at the ends of rainbows. You can't go through life acting as though unprovable stories are true, and you can't go through life insulting everyone who doesn't believe them by saying a god that you can't prove to exist is going to judge me for sin that I don't believe in. The story of Jesus is a great, inspirational story at best, but to pass it off as truth is foolishness. An old book says that Jesus raised the dead after four days and he himself came back to life after three. An old book. To speak of it as though it were indisputable truth is just madness, Rolf. Until you can prove that anything in that book happened, stop quoting it as though all of these fantastical stories happened.
One more way to look at it:
I can prove that people cannot come back from the dead.
You can't prove that Jesus or Lazarus did.
The only source for your story of zombies is a book, an amalgamation of different books collected over the past two millenia, put together by people you don't know, under the instruction of a holy spirit you can't see, feel, hear, taste, or touch.
You pass off that which cannot be proven to have happened as fact.
That is wrong, and it's a common flaw among people of your religion. Don't get me wrong Rolf, you can believe whatever you want, just don't expect everyone else to believe it. Rolf, what you believe is far fetched, impossible and non-sensical. Pardon me for not believing it just because a 2,000 year old book says it's true.
You're also very rude. You and Aimiel both.
Lighthouse
(Yes, I believe in hell. And it is seperation from God. But that is not what we are saved from. We are saved from ourselves)
That's a disgustingly low opinion of yourself, and frankly I think we're pretty darned seperated from god as it is. You might be able to trick yourself into thinking he's spoken to you, and your mind can make you see things if you really want to, but I would say you're already living in your definition of hell.
(We are made dead to sin)
Your definition of sin is 2,000 years old, probably a lot older than that actually... get with the times. The age of Pisces (the fish/Jesus) is over. The age of aquarius has begun. I don't believe things unless they can be demonstrated to me, and astrology is far more demonstrable than christian folklore.
(And it seems you have met some people who don't know the meaning of sin. Sin is transgression of the law, and apart form the law there is no transgression. And those who are in Christ are not under the law. They are under grace.)
Now you're knocking my friends? Is that it? The law? Your law is 2,000 years old. Things are slightly different now than when the bible was written. Things change, christians hate to admit it, and it might eventually be their downfall, but your system of religion is just too old to conceivably sustain itself for too much longer.
(Being good is not good enough.)
How do you argue with someone like this? Oh yeah, don't tell me, let me guess Aimiel, there is no arguing with it because it's the truth and I can't handle it?
(There is nothing we can do to be good enough, because none of us are righteous, without Him. And when one knows the truth it makes them free.)
Your definition of righteousness is also 2,000 years old. Mine is my own and it's quite current. I don't have a book to base it on, just my own perception of reality. I have seen the truth, when I stepped back from religion to look at it from the outside. I feel more born again now without it than when I had it. Oh and again, what's with your lack of self-confidence? Maybe you're a weak person, Lighthouse, maybe you're just plain old weak. Your little story about your porn addiction makes perfect sense. You couldn't stop yourself. If you're weak enough to stare at naked ladies for hours on end than maybe you're weak enough to be taken for a ride by a religion that has succesfully perpetuated itself for 2,000 years. There is defintely something to religion, like I said, I believe in god, and quite some time ago there probably was the need for religion. Just not anymore. The human race has grown past it. If I have than so can anyone else. Lighthouse, you're probably just a really weak person who needs answers. Religion can give answers, so it satiates an inherent desire in humans. You need religion. Not necessarily god, just a system to enslave yourself to because you're too weak to make it on your own.
I'm not that weak. If I want to look at naked ladies, I just do it. Shrug. I don't blame you for needing to be a christian, just like I don't blame you for looking at porn. You're a guy, naked ladies can be kinda cool. Don't beat yourself up because you follow your natural instincts, don't cut yourself off from everything that makes you human and then call it dirty sin. It's both degrading and insulting to myself and others that disagree.
Listen, all I want is for Aimiel to admit that he can't prove what he believes and though he is free to believe it, he's not free to pass it off as truth without proof. Lighthouse, I like reading your posts.
(Rolf Ernst
Prodigal--A man "can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven."
Sooo--you think that the resurrection of a man who said in advance that He would be raised up is foolishness, huh? That is what you are up against. Christ's resurrection proves that you are the one who is foolish. Not only did he raise Lazarus who had been dead four days, but He said that the hour was coming in which all who were in the graves would hear His voice and come forth.
That includes you and, by the way, He is the one who has been appointed to be your judge. Scoff while you can! The triumphing of the wicked is short!!)
Okay, Rolf, you can't prove a word of what you just said. An old book says that it's true. Old books also say that storks deliver babies to their waiting mothers and that there are pots of gold at the ends of rainbows. You can't go through life acting as though unprovable stories are true, and you can't go through life insulting everyone who doesn't believe them by saying a god that you can't prove to exist is going to judge me for sin that I don't believe in. The story of Jesus is a great, inspirational story at best, but to pass it off as truth is foolishness. An old book says that Jesus raised the dead after four days and he himself came back to life after three. An old book. To speak of it as though it were indisputable truth is just madness, Rolf. Until you can prove that anything in that book happened, stop quoting it as though all of these fantastical stories happened.
One more way to look at it:
I can prove that people cannot come back from the dead.
You can't prove that Jesus or Lazarus did.
The only source for your story of zombies is a book, an amalgamation of different books collected over the past two millenia, put together by people you don't know, under the instruction of a holy spirit you can't see, feel, hear, taste, or touch.
You pass off that which cannot be proven to have happened as fact.
That is wrong, and it's a common flaw among people of your religion. Don't get me wrong Rolf, you can believe whatever you want, just don't expect everyone else to believe it. Rolf, what you believe is far fetched, impossible and non-sensical. Pardon me for not believing it just because a 2,000 year old book says it's true.
You're also very rude. You and Aimiel both.
Lighthouse
(Yes, I believe in hell. And it is seperation from God. But that is not what we are saved from. We are saved from ourselves)
That's a disgustingly low opinion of yourself, and frankly I think we're pretty darned seperated from god as it is. You might be able to trick yourself into thinking he's spoken to you, and your mind can make you see things if you really want to, but I would say you're already living in your definition of hell.
(We are made dead to sin)
Your definition of sin is 2,000 years old, probably a lot older than that actually... get with the times. The age of Pisces (the fish/Jesus) is over. The age of aquarius has begun. I don't believe things unless they can be demonstrated to me, and astrology is far more demonstrable than christian folklore.
(And it seems you have met some people who don't know the meaning of sin. Sin is transgression of the law, and apart form the law there is no transgression. And those who are in Christ are not under the law. They are under grace.)
Now you're knocking my friends? Is that it? The law? Your law is 2,000 years old. Things are slightly different now than when the bible was written. Things change, christians hate to admit it, and it might eventually be their downfall, but your system of religion is just too old to conceivably sustain itself for too much longer.
(Being good is not good enough.)
How do you argue with someone like this? Oh yeah, don't tell me, let me guess Aimiel, there is no arguing with it because it's the truth and I can't handle it?
(There is nothing we can do to be good enough, because none of us are righteous, without Him. And when one knows the truth it makes them free.)
Your definition of righteousness is also 2,000 years old. Mine is my own and it's quite current. I don't have a book to base it on, just my own perception of reality. I have seen the truth, when I stepped back from religion to look at it from the outside. I feel more born again now without it than when I had it. Oh and again, what's with your lack of self-confidence? Maybe you're a weak person, Lighthouse, maybe you're just plain old weak. Your little story about your porn addiction makes perfect sense. You couldn't stop yourself. If you're weak enough to stare at naked ladies for hours on end than maybe you're weak enough to be taken for a ride by a religion that has succesfully perpetuated itself for 2,000 years. There is defintely something to religion, like I said, I believe in god, and quite some time ago there probably was the need for religion. Just not anymore. The human race has grown past it. If I have than so can anyone else. Lighthouse, you're probably just a really weak person who needs answers. Religion can give answers, so it satiates an inherent desire in humans. You need religion. Not necessarily god, just a system to enslave yourself to because you're too weak to make it on your own.
I'm not that weak. If I want to look at naked ladies, I just do it. Shrug. I don't blame you for needing to be a christian, just like I don't blame you for looking at porn. You're a guy, naked ladies can be kinda cool. Don't beat yourself up because you follow your natural instincts, don't cut yourself off from everything that makes you human and then call it dirty sin. It's both degrading and insulting to myself and others that disagree.
Listen, all I want is for Aimiel to admit that he can't prove what he believes and though he is free to believe it, he's not free to pass it off as truth without proof. Lighthouse, I like reading your posts.
Oh gimme a break, Aimiel. Not happening to agree with whatever cobbled, cut and paste, man-made concept of God that you happen to rubberstamp does not mean I deny the existence of a Supreme Being. Great Spirit, God, master clockmaker, puppet master, whatever, I think SOMETHING is out there greater than ourselves. So quit telling me what I happen to believe. Get a clue. This arrogance of Christians who somehow know exactly what non-Christians believe is extremely annoying.
Ecumenicist
New member
That's not everyone's take on it, and its not scripturally
consistant. To hold that view requires ignoring alot of Scripture,
not to mention ignoring the Holy Spirit...
Sure. This is another thing Christians can't seem to agree on, even with the Holy Spirit talking to all of them. What a freakin' joke: all the splinter groups and sects within the church all listen to the Holy Spirit, all right. And he tells them all to march to the beat of a different drummer. Hilarious.
Ecumenicist
New member
Know a tree by the fruit it bears. The good fruits are peace,
kindness, love patience...
Christ made it pretty clear. Its pretty easy to discern what
comes from the HS vs what comes from elsewhere based on
this.
No joke...
Aimiel
Well-known member
If that were the case, God would want nothing to do with us.
God is not a delusion, but many have deluded themselves into believing that He is on their side when they don't actually have a single clue. That is why we are supposed to submit to authority, and to examine ourselves.
Ecumenicist
New member
I know. And I don't blame you.
I've dedicated my life to sharing the message that God loves
us unconditionally, and invites us into a real relationship so
that we may know this, and in this find real and lasting peace.
Dave
