Originally posted by amannionthere is a difference between your dump and religion. your dump doesnt change anyone's lives. religions is an enormous part of everyone's lives, whether they believe it or not.
Why?
Why is this a truth, and why does truth have to be significant?
I just took a big dump. That's truth, but it isn't particularly significant.
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomIt changes my life, but let's not go there - enough about my dumps.
there is a difference between your dump and religion. your dump doesnt change anyone's lives. religions is an enormous part of everyone's lives, whether they believe it or not.
You were talking about truth not religion. As some one who professes to have turned to agnosticism I would've thought you'd recognise that there's a pretty major difference between the two.
Or do you think religion IS truth?
Originally posted by amannioni meant the truth of religion sorry. not truth or religion. but when it comes to the truth about a particular religion it could affect everyone.
It changes my life, but let's not go there - enough about my dumps.
You were talking about truth not religion. As some one who professes to have turned to agnosticism I would've thought you'd recognise that there's a pretty major difference between the two.
Or do you think religion IS truth?
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomYeah true, but only if the religious 'truth' is true.
i meant the truth of religion sorry. not truth or religion. but when it comes to the truth about a particular religion it could affect everyone.
If say 'Jesus rose from the dead on the third day' is true, then yes, that's pretty damn significant. But only if it's true.
If it isn't true as I would contend, then at best it's some kind of allegory and at worst it's a fairy story.
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomIf what no1marauder is the only reason for such a conclusion then it is a simply ludicrous conclusion. Does anyone honestly believe that the morning star (a bright star in the morning sky, is it a planet?) is actually Jesus or Lucifer or both? If the Bible said "Jesus is the King of Kings" and in another book 1000years apart said "Solomon is the King of Kings" would you believe that Solomon was Jesus? Or would you accept the obvious, that it is not a specific and unique title but a poetic description? If you told your girlfriend "you are my Sun and my Moon" then told your child that he is a "rising Sun" are you saying that they are the same person?
i have once heard a theory that in the bible, jesus is lucifer. idk where this conclusion has come from but if anyone knows how this may be possible, it is very interesting to me and i would like to be informed.
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwYour own link, as biased as it is, refutes your claim that Mormons believe Jesus = Lucifer.
http://www.carm.org/lds/compare.htm
This is just one source. This doctrine which the Mormons teach is well documented.
I quote:
Jesus is the literal spirit-brother of Lucifer, a creation.
You read links about as well as you read the Bible.
1 edit
I don't even believe that Jesus and Lucifer are real.
EDIT: And don't change the subject. This thread is about the idea that Jesus is Lucifer, not whether they're brothers. You said it was Mormon doctrine that Jesus and Lucifer are the same entity, and we're still waiting for some link that backs up the claim you made.
Originally posted by darthmixSo I made a mistake. I must have been reading too fast. So forget it. I did.
I don't even believe that Jesus and Lucifer are real.
EDIT: And don't change the subject. This thread is about the idea that Jesus is Lucifer, not whether they're brothers. You said it was Mormon doctrine that Jesus and Lucifer are the same entity, and we're still waiting for some link that backs up the claim you made.