Spirituality Forum Symbol

Originally posted by Nemesio
If I say a tree is beautiful, am I praising it as I praise
God's Holy Name?

Thus, I can find Islam beautiful without believing in any
of its tenets.

You need to go talk to your minister or something. Your
willingness to let your anger pervert my words is consuming
you.

Nemesio

A tree makes no claims. Allah does. By calling him beautiful, you agree with him and thus cannot be Christian.

Originally posted by Nemesio
More anger and more bigotry.

Did you know that Buddha made many of the same
claims that Jesus did, but centuries earlier? Does that
invalidate Jesus?

We are back to miracles, I see. Joseph Smith is said
to have done miracles. Why is he a false prophet?

I know: because you believe he is. Again,
opinion, not fact.

Nemesio

Satan can proform false miracles to you know.

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I've heard this before... is there any way you can expand on this idea? I've heard the Jesus defined the church as a person, not a building of worship.

I've also heard that Jesus never wanted religion to be as organized as it has become. I guess he can't really say much about the Bible, since he never got a chance to read about it on this Earth... but what do you know of Jesus that might contradict what is said in the Bible?

T

The traditional story is that the whole christian theology existed at the time of Jesus and that he passed this on to the apostles who recorded it for future generations. But this conception is false. Very little of what is currently in the bible existed during Jesus' lifetime, and much that did exist was not included in the bible. What's more, much of the bible is pseudonymous, which means that many of the various parts were not written by the apostles to which they are ascribed. Instead, they were written by other, lesser, people who attributed them to various apostles to give them more credence. Most of Paul's writings appear to be original, but much of the rest is pseudonymous.

It's not that the contents of the bible were around during Jesus' lifetime, but were simply not written down until much later. Quite the contrary. Much of what is in the bible did not exist during Jesus' lifetime and was invented much later. The fact is that the christians wrote their own history. So naturally they wrote it in a way so as to make it seem that it had originated in a unified matter, and was a case of the apostles merely writing down what Jesus had told them. They altered their own history to justify their particular theology. But the actual fact was that as various doctrinal questions arose, biblical writings were created to give credence to certain variations of christianity and then were attributed to one apostle or another. This happened generally from around the time of Jesus' death until around 150 CE. By then the current christian theology seems to have been more or less fully developed. Of course, the bible itself wasn't codified until much later, after the Council of Nicaea.

So, yes, what Jesus preached in his lifetime has very little to do with what passes for christianity today.

Originally posted by rwingett
The traditional story is that the whole christian theology existed at the time of Jesus and that he passed this on to the apostles who recorded it for future generations. But this conception is false. Very little of what is currently in the bible existed during Jesus' lifetime, and much that did exist was not included in the bible. What's more, much of th ...[text shortened]... sus preached in his lifetime has very little to do with what passes for christianity today.

I'm sorry, but I'm sure he wanted more than your opinion. Because it was the unanimous testimony of the early Church that those people authored their books, so why should he accept your opinion over the early Church's (the entire Christian faith)?

And why, in your theory would they attribute Luke to Luke rather than Paul? Why attribute Mark to Mark rather than Peter?

Wouldn't naming them Paul and Peter have afforded them more respect at the time?

Originally posted by Darfius
Since Revelations was written by 96 AD at the latest.

I'm going to assume that you left out a digit in the number, just as you added a letter to the title.

Originally posted by Darfius
Experiencing God's goodness and experience God Himself should never be compared.

Let's quit the dancing, do you believe Jesus is your Lord and that He rose from the dead in the literal sense?

Yes, Jesus is my Lord. However, you ask me if I accept his ressurection in a literal sense. Sometimes I do and sometimes I wonder. Even if I do not, I personally find that his life and teachings give me purpose and meaning. There are many things that I cannot explain and as you can tell I do not get into arguments with atheists on the site simply because I do not have to. I very much enjoy their friendship and company and hopefully it is mutual. I also realize that these are internet relationships and not "church" as such. I make a place for more formal expressions of my faith, but also count friendships here as a blessing no matter who they come from.

Originally posted by Darfius
I'm sorry, but I'm sure he wanted more than your opinion. Because it was the unanimous testimony of the early Church that those people authored their books, so why should he accept your opinion over the early Church's (the entire Christian faith)?

And why, in your [b]theory would they attribute Luke to Luke rather than Paul? Why attribute Mark to ...[text shortened]... than Peter?

Wouldn't naming them Paul and Peter have afforded them more respect at the time?[/b]

What books do you read in the field of religion? Just curious as to your background in the field of knowledge in this area.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
God told me it's Ms. Pac-Man's shaved vagina. How's that for spiritual.

Zah?

Originally posted by Darfius
The fact that you called Islam beautiful testifies to your ineligibility as a Christian. No false god is beautiful to a Christian.

Yes, I know I swore off the religion debates and left in a huff. Seems like just yesterday…Oh, it was just yesterday! 😕 I must be addicted….

I want to see if I can put this “Allah is a false God” stuff to bed, just for the sake of accuracy.

“Allah” is the Arabic word for God, just as the words El, Elah and Eloah (plural, Elohim) are the Hebrew words. (Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are all Semitic languages.) The Qur’an says that that one God is the same God that Abraham worshipped, rejecting the idols of his community.

Now, if you want to argue that the Muslims “falsify” things about God, that is one thing. To claim that Allah is a different God (or that Muslims think so) is simply an error.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, Jesus is my Lord. However, you ask me if I accept his ressurection in a literal sense. Sometimes I do and sometimes I wonder. Even if I do not, I personally find that his life and teachings give me purpose and meaning. There are many things that I cannot explain and as you can tell I do not get into arguments with atheists on the site simply bec ...[text shortened]... essions of my faith, but also count friendships here as a blessing no matter who they come from.

Sometimes you do and sometimes you do not? Please do not be offended, but the Bible doesn't leave wiggle room for "sometimes." And how can you claim to be their friend and yet not care that if they maintain their beliefs they will be going to hell according your beliefs?

Originally posted by kirksey957
What books do you read in the field of religion? Just curious as to your background in the field of knowledge in this area.

I would answer this if it was relevant. If you do not believe me, feel free to do research. I will, however, make the claim that most scholars, even liberal, believe the book of Revelation was written in 96 at the latest, along with the books of John.

Originally posted by vistesd
Yes, I know I swore off the religion debates and left in a huff. Seems like just yesterday…Oh, it was just yesterday! 😕 I must be addicted….

I want to see if I can put this “Allah is a false God” stuff to bed, just for the sake of accuracy.

“Allah” is the Arabic word for God, just as the words El, Elah and Eloah (plural, Elohim) are the He ...[text shortened]... thing. To claim that Allah is a different God (or that Muslims think so) is simply an error.

I do not argue that Muslims think they worship the same God, but I do openly state that the god they worship is not mine.

Originally posted by Darfius
Sometimes you do and sometimes you do not? Please do not be offended, but the Bible doesn't leave wiggle room for "sometimes." And how can you claim to be their friend and yet not care that if they maintain their beliefs they will be going to hell according your beliefs?

Well, the answer to that may be best left up to them if they choose to respond. Notice how I am not engaging in an argument and I accept your opinion as your opinion. I will offer the same courtesy to you that I offer to my atheist friends.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Well, the answer to that may be best left up to them if they choose to respond. Notice how I am not engaging in an argument and I accept your opinion as your opinion. I will offer the same courtesy to you that I offer to my atheist friends.

I don't argue for the sake of arguing. I argue so that I feel justified in calling them friends.

Originally posted by Darfius
I would answer this if it was relevant. If you do not believe me, feel free to do research. I will, however, make the claim that most scholars, even liberal, believe the book of Revelation was written in 96 at the latest, along with the books of John.

I think you misunderstood my intent. I was not interested in arguing the date of a book in the Bible. I think where we get our opinions is important and relevent because I think it is a good idea to be well-read. That's all. I was going to suggest an interesting book to you that in many ways mirrors some of the dialogue in these forums yet at a scholastic level. Genesis by Bill Moyers.