The

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Lord Bane, Oct 28, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. IellaWessiriNRI Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2001
    star 4
    cydonia, I apologize for offending you. I just figured that was probably what you believe. But please accept my apology...

    And as for taking every poster on... I admit, I am argumentative by nature. If I see something I disagree with, I'll most likely try and point out why I disagree with it. If I agree with what someone says, I'm certainly not going to argue. [face_plain]
  2. Doright Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 1999
    star 5
    "I'm curious as to how Christians (and people of other faiths) can interpret these moments to prove the existence of "their" God. When you were touched, how did you know it was Yaweh rather than Ahura Mazda, or even something else that humans haven't even imagined yet"

    I am not sure how to phrase this response so forgive me if I babble a bit....


    I will be the first to admit I do not know everything about God. He is God. I am only a man. I do not even have a chance of understanding everything about God. There could be things I think I understand that are actually different from what I think. If someone believes something different than me that is fine. It is not my place to judge. I see that as something between them and God. If asked I will state my opinion and that's all. I also try to be a good example for others and live up the example set by Christ.

    The teachings of Christ match what I feel to be true. It just makes sense to me. I am at odds with a lot of Christians about things in the Old testament. Just in the manner they are interpreted in. However I see that as a minor thing compared to trying to live by the example set by Jesus. When I get to heaven and God says.. [big voice]"You know Doug you where wrong about Evolution. It really happened this way........"[/big voice] After slapping my head and saying "DOH!" I will say "cool let me see" I really do not think I will be sent to hell because I think God spent more than 24 human hours on the heavens and the Earth.

    I interpret things differently than some. Mostly because I feel that we do not have all the answers and it's arrogant for us to claim we do. God left something?s for us to figure out on or own. That (I believe) is why the Old Testament is so vague and the stories are so abridged.

    I also believe that when I am praying to God I am also praying to the same being that a Jewish person prays to when they pray to G-d. I also believe that is the same Being that a Muslim Person prays to when they Pray to Allah. Buddhists strive for inner peace and enlightenment.. I do not see that as a bad or Evil thing. The Creator is the Creator....no matter what you want to call him.

    People interpret God's work in their life in different ways. That I believe is the central reason in this world for so many religions. I think they all have truth to them.... At least in some way. It all depends on how you feel about the teachings of each one and what an individual feels.

    It is my belief that Jesus came to earth to set and example and to show us the best way to do things. Also I think he wanted to let us know that we are forgiven when we fall short of his example.

    I do not think that means you have to be Christian to be saved but I do think in the End you will be judged in a way that is consistent with the teachings of Christ no matter what religion you choose to follow. He told us the way is through him and I believe that.

    So in summery for this topic..... God is God.. it's up to you what you want to call him (or her if that is what you believe). Just because someone call's him something different then I do doesn't mean he isn't there. It all comes down to what makes sense to you.

  3. Hatshepsut Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Thanks, Doright. I think everyone on this board can appreciate the kindness and thoughtfulness that went into your response. :)
  4. Force of Nature Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 1999
    star 3
    IellaWessiriNRI, I wouldn't dignify my view of life by calling it a 'philosophy' but I'll take your word for it. :) I know I'm the one who blethered "Off the top of my head, I'd say that the purpose of living is living"; sorry, I'm not very good at taking myself seriously. What I believe isn't exactly "We live just to live"; it's "We just live".

    Now, back on topic ?

    Thank you very much for providing a straight answer to my question; no-one else ever has. I don't see why anyone would tell you your point of view is retarded. The thread's entitled 'The "God" Question' after all; and I specifically asked for someone to explain the religious significance of "purpose". Surely a believer's much better qualified to do that than a non-believer and that's why I asked the question here; I don't know many believers IRL. Thanks again for setting out your answer so clearly.


    Doright, thanks to you, too. I enjoyed reading your well considered post and admirably clear explanation of your beliefs.
  5. Darth Geist Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 1999
    star 5
  6. Forward_Deploy Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2001
    star 1
    Right, Lord Bane. Let me get out my handy-dandy, all-purpose Acme guidebook of Philisophical Questions that can be Answered in 100 Trillion Lines or Less. Then I'll flip through the other titles in my office that include nailbiters such as String-Theory for Dummies, Quantum Gravity at a Glance, Life in Outer Space: The Condensed Edition, and other enjoyable yet painfully brainstraining question.
  7. Doright Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 1999
    star 5
  8. Naberrie Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2000
    First, let me say to Doright, WOW... I don't think I've ever seen an interpretation of religion that close to my own :)

    Just something I wanted to put out there... It is something I read in a phliosophy class once that is supposed to prove God's existence. Forgive me if this has already been posted.

    God is defined in most religions to be the most perfect being possible.

    Let A equal an existant God, or the case thereof
    Let B equal a nonexistant God, or the case thereof

    Assuming perfection requires omnipotence, Case A would meet this criteria. By virtue of his lack of existence, God in case B would not be omnipotent, and therefore would not be perfect.

    Since God A is perfect, and God B is not, and since the definition of God requires perfection, the God in case A is the reality.

    Since God in case A is reality, and since God exists in case A,

    Therefore God must exist.

    QED.

    Any thoughts on this?
  9. Ender Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 1998
    star 6
    I'd call it circular logic. Your premise is the same as the conclusion you wish to reach.

    You say a perfect god is described by many religions thus he exists?

    Most of these perfect beings that religions describe like to be worshiped. They sound more like flawed humans to me.
  10. cydonia Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2001
    star 5
    And loving them sometimes isn't enough. Sometimes they test you just to see how you'll react. God's name is "Jealous" after all.
  11. Doright Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 1999
    star 5
    Maybe life is suppose to be a test. When raising a kids you have to let them figure things out and test them a bit. You cannot do everything for them.
  12. cydonia Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2001
    star 5
    That's a good point, but i would never put my children in a situation where they would have to prove they loved me just to satisfy my own ego.
  13. Doright Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 1999
    star 5
    I personally do not think it is his Ego. It is for us.

    Maybe we need to find that love for God in order to find eternal peace after we pass on. Finding love for God helps us find peace in our lives as we trudge along and it helps us stand up to some of the Evils in this world.

    I Believe it is for us, not him, that those things are asked of us.
  14. Wildwookiee Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 14, 2001
    star 4
    Sorry that I haven't posted in some time...I have been VERY busy. Now, I haven't read through the 200 some odd posts that have occured since my last post, but I would like to rebut DoRights argument on God being EVERY god.

    First point- God is not schizophrenic. Throughout time, these religions- Judism, Islam, Christianity (protastant) and Catholosism have ALL battled each other and killed for what they think is right. Why would God, leading his people from both walks of life, have them murder each other in his name?

    Second point- Jesus is not just an example of how to live. Jesus is the sacrifice to end all sacrifices. If Jesus is so important to God's plan, then why is he not mentioned in many other religions. I know that he is in Islam, as the second most important 'prophet' next to Mohammed...but still, he is not given the name of God. These differences have caused wars, murder, and all sorts of bad things throughout history.

    It does sound good though, to say that EVERYONE is right...but I'm afraid that it can't be. The law of non-contradiction states that if you and I disagree, Either I'm right or you are Right...both of us can not be wrong. You are very astute to pick up on the fact that none of us, with our human understanding, could ever even comprehend the magnitude of God's existance, nor his plan for our little lifes.

    Ender, I belive that I was to find the Babylonian text that mentioned the name of Jesus...well here it is, and one of the quotes...
    "It is taught: On Passover Eve they hanged Yeshu ... because he has practised magic and led Israel astray. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 43a )"
    The name Yeshu is translated of course in to Yeshua..[Joshua] which is the name Jesus.

    I also never said that Josephus called Jesus the Messiah...but he admitted to th man's existance.
    I have more sources, other than the Bible, that outline that a Man named Jesus, walked the Earth from around 3 B.C- 30 A.D. (give or take 5 years) and he was Cruxified for both his religious crimes, and his political crimes. I was just trying to prove the existence of Jesus...not that he was the son of God...which I will try to organize later.

    one last thing. A while back, someone mentioned that all these sources were word of mouth. Well, EVERYTHING to these people was world of mouth. They were an Arual people. Their history and religion was passed down, generation by generation. They had a great ability to remember verbatim things that were taught. Yes, the New Testament was probably written from aural sources, but so were many other traditions. Also, don't forget that the Bible not only mentions dates and times, but is also VERY accurate with other sources, dating the same events at the same time. Someone also mentioned a council, where their were books thrown out of the canon. That was actually decided three years earlier, at they Synod of Hippo, but they had to bring back all the Bishops to vote on 2 Peter, 3 John, and Revelation. The other New Testament Apocryphal books that you mentioned were thrown out becase either A. they weren't complete, B. They were not usefull for teaching or History, or C. The heritics liked them. I assure you, I do not believe that I have all the awnsers, nor do I think that I will ever understand the intricacies of the Bible, but I do believe it, and I believe in the God by which it was inspired...who is who he says he is.
  15. imzadi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 4
    The Bible was the first instance of 'canon' being implemented. Several books were simply left out because they did not fit with the religious leaders views of the time. This is one reason why the Bible cannot be considered definitive in my opinion. If these books were so incompatable that they were left out, who's to say what they contained?
  16. Ender Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 1998
    star 6
    "Talmud: Amazingly some Christians use brief portions of the Talmud, (a collection of Jewish civil a religious law, including commentaries on the Torah), as evidence for Jesus. They claim that Yeshu (a common name in Jewish literature) in the Talmud refers to Jesus. However, this Jesus, according to Gerald Massey actually depicts a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia at least a century before the alleged Christian Jesus. [Massey] Regardless of how one interprets this, the Palestinian Talmud got written between the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud between the 3rd and 6th century C.E., at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion! At best it can only serve as controversial Christian and pagan legend; it cannot possibly serve as evidence for a historical Jesus.

    As you can see, apologist Christians embarrass themselves when they unwittingly or deceptively violate the rules of historiography by using after-the-event writings as evidence for the event itself. Not one of these writers gives a source or backs up his claims with evidential material about Jesus. Although we can provide numerous reasons why the non-Christian sources prove spurious, and argue endlessly about them, we can cut to the chase by simply looking at the dates of the documents and the birth dates of the authors. It doesn't matter what these people wrote about Jesus, an author who writes after the alleged happening and gives no detectable sources for his material can only give example of hearsay. All of the post writings about Jesus could easily have come from the beliefs and stories from Christian believers themselves."



    Jesus wasn't hanged either.

  17. Doright Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 10, 1999
    star 5
    "Why would God, leading his people from both walks of life, have them murder each other in his name? "


    It wasn't God who was leading those people. It was Evil leaders perverting religion to use as a tool in there own personal power agendas. You can see an example of this in any morning paper these days.



  18. IellaWessiriNRI Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2001
    star 4
    imzadi:
    If these books were so incompatable that they were left out, who's to say what they contained?

    Say you are compiling a math book. You look at the material that can potentially be put into this book. First off, you're not going to put a whole lot of information that isn't math into this book; if it's completely not related to math, it's not going into a math book, right? Second, if there is any information that contains errors, you're not going to put incorrect information into the book and confuse the students. Why is it, then, that the Council of Nicea would put passages containing erroneous or unnecessary information in the Bible?


    Ender:
    Jesus wasn't hanged either.

    He hung on the cross.
  19. cydonia Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2001
    star 5
    And if it says something like "But Math isn't the answer!" you can bet it will be taken out.

    The Gospel of Thomas is a good example.
  20. Naberrie Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2000
    Pardon my ignorance... What is the gospel of Thomas?
  21. IellaWessiriNRI Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2001
    star 4
    And if it says something like "But Math isn't the answer!" you can bet it will be taken out.

    Right. Because it contradicts the whole point of the book. Is there a reason it shouldn't be taken out?

    And what is the obsession with the Gospel of Thomas?
  22. cydonia Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2001
    star 5
    What's your obsession with the Bible? Are you some kind of bible weirdo??

    Don't ask insulting questions just to be mean.

    The gospel of thomas is a book that belongs in the bible. It was thrown out by all the well meaning, spiritually pure, 100% heart in the right place people Iella was discussing earlier. Some think it is the earliest written gospel, but it's gnostic because it was feared by others in the church-wait i mean because they were acting on behalf of God's will.

    Read it for yourself and ask why perhaps the church leaders may have been nervous:

    http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html
  23. IellaWessiriNRI Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2001
    star 4
    You know, what really amazes me is that you refuse to accept the credibility of the four gospels contained in the Bible, yet you somehow give the Gospel of Thomas credibility. Is it only because it contradicts the Christian faith that you accept it? Isn't that kind of biased?

    The Council of Nicea had many, many manuscripts that they considered as part of the Bible. Those who didn't meet God's standard were discarded.
  24. imzadi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 4
    You know, what really amazes me is that you refuse to accept the credibility of the four gospels contained in the Bible, yet you somehow give the Gospel of Thomas credibility.

    I don't think cydonia is doing this at all, please you excuse me if you are cydonia. She (?) is simply pointing out what was left out and how it appears to oppose many of the rest of the Bible.

    The Council of Nicea had many, many manuscripts that they considered as part of the Bible. Those who didn't meet God's standard were discarded.

    They could definitively say what God's standard was? What He wanted to be included? Their humanity didn't play any part what so ever in what they included?

    As for the Maths book example, Math is a science. Math is the same the world over, in India 1+1=2, the same as every where else in the world. There are no differing opinions on this.

    Religion is made up by belief and interpretation, with thousands of variations. What right does anyone have to say what God wishes? To exclude writings that are of religious value, because they are inconsistant with what YOU (not you personally, but those who did this) believe, to ultimately shape an entire religion how YOU wish?

    THEY shaped the Bible by what THEY thought God wanted. Who's to say they didn't mangle the message entirely or even ever so slightly?
  25. cydonia Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2001
    star 5
    "The Council of Nicea had many, many manuscripts that they considered as part of the Bible. Those who didn't meet God's standard were discarded. "

    Extra triple doubledecker LOL. God was overlooking their shoulder the whole time. "How bout this God?" "Umm....nope. Put the evil stamp on it."

    The four gospels, plus Thomas, are very interesting taken together. Because they all contradict each other. For some unknown reason, you think i created that concept on my own. Not true. I've read them, read things about them, re-read them. If you look at everything open mindedly, at the very least it makes a much more interesting story. You should try it sometime.

    (Cydonia's a boy, imzadi, but you were right about everything else.)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.