Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
It's refreshing that you acknowledge that your conclusions are based on your theology, and your personal study of history. I respect that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
It's refreshing that you acknowledge that your conclusions are based on your theology, and your personal study of history. I respect that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRC
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
Excuse me, but I think you're still missing my point, which is that we don't really know what Jesus himself claimed to be. All we have is a record created by people who had a vested interest in promoting him, not as just a prophet and teacher, but as the Son of God. I think he was probably much more modest about his mission than they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
Why thank you my friend... I think it is important to always know that when it comes to faith, we are all just giving our opinions... there is no "proof" as in the sciences, but I still think we should all search for truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
One of the reasons I never put anyone, or anything, between me and a personal relationship with the God that I understand, is people tend to screw it up, with their opinions, and agendas. I try to keep it real simple.
Lets be honest, EVERYONE THINKS THEIR RIGHT.
Very true Tal, very true. You're right. ;) A greenie for you. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
It isn't just the three monotheistic faiths I meant,but I did emphasise on them.I do believe that monotheism was the origin of polytheism.
If one was to compare even the polythesitic faiths like Hinduism,their basic belief is a single Deity with many manifestations.Their scripture is considered one of the oldest.
Their basic beliefs according to their scriptures speak of a Single Deity,just like the Karan tribe of Burma(links at the end of my answer to articles on monotheism & polytheism)
-------------------------
I have taken these verses of the Gita from different resources and if there be any mistakes, please correct them (I would higly appreciate it)
“He who is free from delusion, and knows me as the supreme Reality, knows all that can be known. Therefore he adores me with his whole heart.” (Bhagavad Gita 15:19)
“There are two kinds of personality in this world, the mortal and the immortal. The personality of all creatures is mortal. The personality of God is said to be immortal. It is the same for ever.” (Bhagavad Gita 15:16)
“A man of faith, absorbed in faith, his senses controlled, attains knowledge, and, knowledge attained, quickly finds supreme peace. But the ignorant man, who is without faith, goes doubting to destruction. For the doubting self there is neither this world, nor the next, nor joy.”
- Bhagavad Gita 4.39-40
"If men thought of God as much as they think of the world, who would not attain liberation (moksha)." - Maitri Upanishad 6.24.
“May God come and reside in our hearts;
May our body be the temple of God.
May He feed freely upon the harvest of our actions as the cows graze in the pasture.
May we reap the harvest of our life and dedicate all at His feet,
May we ever remain His true servants.”
- Rig Veda 1.91.13
“May the bounteous fire divine, consume them with his fiercely glowing sharp jaws like flames, who disregard the commandments and steadfast laws of most venerable and sagacious Lord.
(Rigveda 4:5:4)
“Praise Him who is the matchless and alone.”(Hymns of Rigveda - Rigveda, VI, 45-16
“He who knows Me as the unborn, as the beginning-less, as the Supreme Lord of all the Worlds.”
(Bhagvad Gita 10:3)
----------------------------------------------
Regarding Jesus(alaihi salaam)-
My belief is that he was very special,chosen by the Almighty. His teachings would be similar to the older revelations because he was sent to confirm what had come before and to emphasise and guide those who may have gone astray in their monotheism.
And yes I do believe in his descent into this world sometime in the future.
Lunatic,Liar or any other degrading terms would not be part of a description I would use for either Moses(alaihi salaam) or Jesus(alaihi salaam) or for that matter any of the Prophets/Messengers mentioned in the Bible or Torah.
I apologise to any who may feel offended,which is not my intention,just stating my beliefs.
Regarding Jewish beliefs,I have a thread on the Judaism board and I have found that my faith has so many similarities to theirs,it has to have come from the same source as all other previous revelations.
From Monotheism to Polytheism
MONOTHEISM
Lunatic,Liar or any other degrading terms would not be part of a description I would use for either Moses(alaihi salaam) or Jesus(alaihi salaam) or for that matter any of the Prophets/Messengers mentioned in the Bible or Torah.
Then that means you believe their claims :D
:) What claims?Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
That Jesus, Moses and the Prophets/messengers WERE who they said they were.
Yes I do believe they were special,just not divine or demi gods.
Then you believe what they claim which means you do not see them as liars, lunatics or nutcases.
The way all the persons you have mentioned have made such a big mark in the lives of people, and history itself, even to this day, is to profound to ignore. Special definitely, divine??
There is a very big world out here and every culture on earth has practically the same story of deities and traditions, some even earlier than the region most claim to be the home of their beliefs.
Man is good for one thing though, when he disagrees, he takes his self across the street, starts yet another religion, and blast those that disagree with him, sadly that's all our history's, as humans.
Exact reason why I believe it is man tampering that led to different religions when in fact the message was the same each time.. One Almighty.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Every culture having similar stories can't be coincidence,obviously a messenger sent from the divine will have similar signs and/or characteristics,which people of later generations since the Messenger passed away may have added to or subtracted from the original.
So what is right? What is true?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
My thoughts on this, it matters not what one believes but how one lives their life. If God exists, if there is an almighty God then as long as you are good, kind, caring, understanding, excepting of others flaws, and aware of your own, then it doesn't matter if you believe, or what you believe.
If there is a heaven, then do your really have to spend your life worshipping in order to be let in? Isn't being a good human being the most important thing?
I have no desire for "religion", no need to hear mans views on my beliefs.
I understand why people congregate to Church, I understand the sense of belonging, the desire to be with like minded people. But I do not know one person who feels the same way I do. Is anyone out there like me? I'm sure there is, but I haven't met them. If I do would I start a religion to preach my beliefs? No. It's still my opinion, and just because others share that opinion, that doesn't mean we're right.
I guess none of us will know until we die, and unfortunately we cannot share what is real with anyone after that.
I continue in my beliefs, not because I think I'm right, but because what I believe works for me and my family.
From what I can see everybody seems to be sort of hard wired to believe what they believe and you have to take it from there. The Bible has several verses that say if you seek God and draw closer to him he will draw closer to you and open your eyes and heart so that is all you really can do.
Interesting. May I ask WHY you believe that? Human history tells us that polytheism was with us most of our history, and that all present monotheistic religions appeared somewhere between 2000 BC to 632 AD - so much later. So polytheism is at the origin of monotheism.Quote:
Originally Posted by firmbeliever
Note that Hinduism may be the oldest organized religion, but Paganism as a polytheistic religion reaches as far back as Paleolithic times : 30,000 BC.
:rolleyes:
·
Crede,
Sorry but I have to say it is simply belief.
I am still looking around to explain my idea,but it seems most historical data is incomplete in the sense that the first man and his habits seem to be a bit of guess work as far his religious beliefs go.
EDIT:::
I am still reading articles like these.
Apologetics Press - Monotheism and the Origin of Religion
I have no doubt about my beliefs. Just cannot explain in scientific/historical terms how monotheism came before Polytheism or any other form of worship.
No problem at all. You are free to believe whatever suits you, as far as I am concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by firmbeliever
Note that the age of Paganism (some 30.000 years) carries historical and logical support, except of course from those who believe that the entire universe is not older than the creationist claimed 6300 years !
;)
·
The way I figure it at the beginning of the human race
According to the Bible
Adam and Eve KNEW God
The Jew's were the first and original
Then later in Genesis it talks about occult and pagan religions
And it also talks about the gentiles but does not state any religion
Of course that is the way I see it and therefore it is my belief and therefore it is based on my assumption and not OSE
Weren't there others mentioned in the Bible after Adam before Moses and Jesus(peace be upon them all)?
There probably were but I was covering the ones I know are mentioned in the Bible.
It would be interesting to learn the history/origins of others that started in OT times and when they came into being.
How long did Adam and Eve lived in the Garden? They were eating from the Tree of Life, so it could have been a long time--time enough that God populated the Land of Nod.
It's all mere stories written by man that want people to believe that it IS God's word. I have a hard time believing that what any of the Bible says is actual truth. My reason for this is because it is the ONLY form of these "stories" It has nothing to back it up.
Go with the flow, Handyman, go with the flow!Quote:
Originally Posted by Handyman2007
Originally Posted by Handyman2007
It's all mere stories written by man that want people to believe that it IS God's word.
Josh McDowell and other archeologists and many scientists have set out to prove God is just a story and ended up writing books on what convinced them they were wrong.
Does anyone pat any attentions to the facts of science concerning primitive man and the development of such? If you take the Bible literally especially Genesis, it would have you believe that man just suddenly appeared on Earth and was educated and civilized. This is not scientifically accurate or true. Man evolved over millions and millions of years, That HAS been proven.
Has it been proven that even if man developed/evolved physically that that does not necessarily mean they did not have full mental abilities.
Even if man evolved over millions and millions of years would it be reasonable that possibly the Bible starts where man finally was evolved?
Have you ever studied just how primitive man really was thousands of years ago?
How do you explain the pyramids if man was not advanced to some degree?
How are ancient batteries and light bulbs and modern technology explained if man was so primitive in his thinking Yahoo! Search - Web Search
No, actually the bible proves that man was created.
With all respect Chuck :Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
WHAT is that proof?
WHERE do I find that proof?
Or is what you refer to subjective belief "proof"?
:)
·
Isn't it possible to believe in both God and science creating this world?
That's what I believe. Nope, no proof, just what I believe. Science does explain the beginning more realistically. The bibles version, although a nice belief, is a bit far fetched, don't you think?
I could spend the rest of my life trying to accept the bibles version, but it makes no sense. It baffles the mind, therefore isn't it realistic to think that science was involved?
I don't know, science isn't something I'm good at. You could explain till your where blue in the face, it's my worst subject. But the little I do know, well it sounds more realistic to me than God creating something from nothing in 6 days. The complexities of everything in this world, well, it's pretty far fetched.
Not putting down anyone's beliefs, just stating my own, and poorly at that, for that I apologize.
My belief is in both God and science, hand in hand.
I figure it this way God USED science to create the universe. Science is the atoms, molecules,
etc... that God created to create.
The Bible says that God used the things which are not seen to create the things that are seen.
The problem Christians have with science is the evolution of man starting as a one cell and evolving to human form 'or however it goes'. Also the age of the earth but with the gap theory that most Christians do not believe in it makes sense how the earth could be billions of years old.
Science did and does not "create" anything. All science basically does is explain things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
The basis of all science is OSE, Objective Supported Evidence. That knowledge can than be used in other processes and theories.
(Religious) Belief at the other hand makes claims, claims that are not supported with OSE. And any format of discussion on basis of objective supported evidence is strongly discouraged.
But I got your point, alty !
:)
·
Sorry everyone, as I said, science is not a subject I know well. Thanks for your answers NoHelp and Cred.
I guess what I mean to say is that I do believe in Evolution, because of the proof, although admittedly I have not done allot of research regarding evolution, the little I do know and understand leads me to believe.
I do believe that God had a hand in it all, but that is only a belief, perhaps even just a hope.
I'd love to do more research on it, but science is a difficult subject for me, something I cannot get my head around. Trust me, I've tried.
I'm a visual person, my strong points are art, and all the things associated with it, writing, building, painting, etc. Things that require sceintific knowledge, now that I finally have an interest I fear I'm too old to truly grasp most of it. You can't teach an old dog new tricks. ;)
Am I making any sense? I don't know how to convey what I believe, sorry for that.
I really appreciate everyone's input to this discussion. My beliefs are still firm, but I have learned allot more of everyone else's beliefs and why or why not they believe what they do. That's a good thing. :)
Same here AltyQuote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
NoHelp, you don't seem scientifically challenged. ;):)
Evolution is not scientific proof but theory. Theory is an explanation of what they think could have happen but it is not truth. Scientific theory is always changing and on going...
James Van Praagh : Medium, or Conman?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesushelper76
Hello Joe ! Not really ! That statement is a creationist's claim.
Evolution is not just a theory, but a Scientific Theory.
The Evolution Theory provides a view on how the first cell developed into all life on earth today and does that as accurate as possible.
The evidence and validity of any scientific finding is tested and peer retested, and frequently updated to increase its OSE level.
That is in stark contrast to any religious suggestion, which normally is beyond any questioning, and is never backed up by any objective supported evidence (OSE).
So :
Evolution is a Scientific Theory backed up by OSE, and is to be considered as near factual as possible, although not 100 % on all parts. That is for many reasons impossible.
A theory is an explanation of what people think could be correct, but it is not yet proved.
A Scientific Theory is as near as possible to what you call the truth, and is always checked and rechecked again to ensure that the OSE level keeps increasing.
·
LINK : 15 answers to creationists
·
:rolleyes:
·
Looks to me like JH was saying scientific theory but just didn't state it with both words proof and theory... he DID say scientific theory in the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesushelper76
JH quoted James Van Praagh, but that conman was wrong there!Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
A Scientific Theory is not always changing. That is simply not true.
Any scientific finding is tested and peer retested, and frequently updated to increase its OSE level. The higher it's OSE level gets, the smaller the changes will become.
Even Einstein's finding on relativity did not put Newton's gravity theory upside down, but amended it to get closer to the reality.
:rolleyes:
Hmmmm : I liked Tweety more than your current graphic !
:rolleyes:
·
Well when I get around to changing it I will have to look Tweety up.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 PM. |