No offence intended

[Pugwash]

It may be by force an elite dialogue, but at least it's better than some religious dictator handing you a glass of poisoned Kool-Aid telling you to drink up, or uh, else.

True, but it's not very in keeping with the very premise of Christianity. It's a fatal flaw, in fact. The very ambiguity of the whole thing shows either a stupid god or a careless god.

No, I just don't buy it. The more I studied religion and the history of Christianity, the more I realised that it's nothing but a hoax perpetuated to control the gullible.

Pope, infallible, right? Surely, if there were a God, and he were in charge, Pope Alexander VI (Roderic Borja) would have been struck down, but instead, he was quite happy to let him carry on, to the point of his debasing the entire papacy to a joke.

All popes after him are not allowed to say "Alex Six? He was a c0ck" because to do so undermines their post.

How anyone can blindly take what the religion has been distilled to as gospel is something I don't really understand. If you're going to believe something that big, surely it pays to do a little research first.

[Pugwash]

Because it's not like war or history. It's not about winning. It's about belief.

"Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,"

Not about winning, eh?

[pabra]

Simply because as soon as you accept the premise of Christianity, you either believe the lot or you don't. If you choose to disagree with the first council of Nicaea's hatchet job and prefer to follow an earlier version based on what's available, you're picking and choosing, but it's against God's will because Emperor Constantine I was acting as an instrument of God (even though he was a Sun worshipper, go figure) in striking out controversial passages.

The Nicene Creed was put forward by Constantine I to unify the Christians under one bible and did so as the first great picker and chooser.

The Bible isn't a holy book, it's a heretic emperor's pet project.

I mean the whole point of the first council of Nicaea was to vote on whether or not Jesus was his own dad. A vote. Just think about it.

Of course it isn't a holy book per se, it contains other books. It is not really to be viewed as 'law book' either. That would be a pain in the ass, Moses supports divorce and Jesus revokes that 'law'. To achieve such a view on a book, filled with laws/rules, we'd have to have jizzy writing a book of rules, and calling it christianity. Returning to the bible, most of the books do not claim to be, or even contain, the word of god. Sharp contrast to the Quuran there. And nor did they before those changes. Or after as James's bible differs a bit doesn't it. So the premises become quite strange. Especially given the lack of fixation to the bible that eg. the Cath. church has in contrast to the Protestant one. Are the last ones more christian than the former ones? I mean, they still try to cling to the uniting factors that were given by ... a sun worshipper. Are the cats christian at all? I'm still trying to understand the premise here. One that I've heard is to accept Jesus as/was god. Are there more?

[Victoria]

True, but it's not very in keeping with the very premise of Christianity. It's a fatal flaw, in fact. The very ambiguity of the whole thing shows either a stupid god or a careless god.

Not really. It just shows we cannot grasp the enormity of God, and His wishes to lead a righteous life. The fault lies in Man, and always has done.

No, I just don't buy it. The more I studied religion and the history of Christianity, the more I realised that it's nothing but a hoax perpetuated to control the gullible.

Okay, that's cool.

I mean, I dislike evangelical people. I don't mean Christian Evangelicals, I mean evangelical people who are so convinced of their absolute grasp of truth, that it comes as some kind of affront to have people around them not share their convictions.

In turn, they spend hours trying to convince people to think like them, because what they believe is superior to that person's beliefs.

Nope, that's not me, never has been, never will be.

I do notice a lot of Atheists are like that, though certainly I'm happy that I suspect you're not one of them.

You just don't like the bunk of religion, and that's fine with me.

Pope, infallible, right? Surely, if there were a God, and he were in charge, Pope Alexander VI (Roderic Borja) would have been struck down, but instead, he was quite happy to let him carry on, to the point of his debasing the entire papacy to a joke.

Yes, Rodrigo Borgia was a pip, wasn't he? Any man who could have that kind of offspring (including the much-maligned Lucrezia) must've been some kind of Pope.

But I don't blame religion for the faults of man.

This is why I have absolutely nothing against Islam, just because some nutters use it as their fulcrum to spread violence around the world.

All popes after him are not allowed to say "Alex Six? He was a c0ck" because to do so undermines their post.

No, few people who share any position of power are willing to stick their neck out and say such things.

How anyone can blindly take what the religion has been distilled to as gospel is something I don't really understand. If you're going to believe something that big, surely it pays to do a little research first.

Research is a modern impulse, if not idea.

It's based on the scientific method where you observe what you see, and make determinations based on those observations.

Belief is something quite different. Until recently, I didn't think people could change once they never had it.

That is, until my medical doctor father had a heart attack, was pronounced clinically dead, came back to us, and discovered that hey, maybe this Atheism thingie he always believed in wasn't the bees knees after all.

But that's his journey, not yours, and not others. I wish you well in yours.

Night night, Puggy.

[pabra]

Research is a modern impulse, if not idea.

It's based on the scientific method where you observe what you see, and make determinations based on those observations.

The essence of the discussion actually; the essence of our era, a predominant world view, and what distinguishes it from the past ones.

Will write something about this when I have more time

[FxrAndy]

Wow i thought is was just a funny film but it opened a can of worms!

[Pugwash]

Wow i thought is was just a funny film but it opened a can of worms!

Good comedy makes us ask questions.

[guanaco]

It's weird how some people criticize religious people for trying to convert others when they spend so much time trying to convince others themselves there isn't a higher power up there, a.k.a. God.

I just say 'go with the flow', don't try to turn somebody into something they aren't, however, if they do annoy you with their propaganda after you politely told them you're not interested then [censored] slap them!

[castlemaine]

Damn. Now that I have been told there is no God I guess I should ask another question that may dispel another childhood myth.........................................who is taking the bites out of the cookies and carrots I leave out on Christmas eve????? Be gentle.

[castlemaine]

Oh damn, I resurrected an old thread.

Edited December 8, 2007 by castlemaine

[guanaco]

Damn. Now that I have been told there is no God I guess I should ask another question that may dispel another childhood myth.........................................who is taking the bites out of the cookies and carrots I leave out on Christmas eve????? Be gentle.

Barbra Streisand *shivers*

Edited December 10, 2007 by guanaco