Ted;1490809 wrote: It seems to me we are heading towards a religionless Christianity. Christianity like Judaism was meant to be a way of life and not a belief system.
Belief systems and ways of life are mutual and should not be separated.
Is God Real?
Is God Real?
It was not in the first 3-4 centuries CE. During the first 3-4 centuries CE Christianity was not about a belief but about following in the footsteps of Jesus. (Borg, Crossan. Spong, Ehrman and a host of others)
Is God Real?
Ted;1490821 wrote: It was not in the first 3-4 centuries CE. During the first 3-4 centuries CE Christianity was not about a belief but about following in the footsteps of Jesus. (Borg, Crossan. Spong, Ehrman and a host of others)
Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus?
Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus?
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1490825 wrote: Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus?
That's a no-brainer for a start off. A Hindu or a Sikh may have very strong beliefs, yet they don't follow Jesus whatsoever.
I am totally Anti-Religious, yet I have my own belief in morality. I have even been told by a friend, who happens to be a Lay Preacher, that I live a life closer to that of the true intent of Christian teaching than 99.9% of Christians. I've never really been sure whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. My only 'belief' is in that of Sociological Values which are what I believe were probably the intent behind the original stories behind the Jesus character (be he fictional, or loosely based on some original ideology, be it by a single individual or a group of ideologists). There is nothing wrong with the ideology behind it. The problems arise when it becomes attributed to some imaginary God creature & claims of magic tricks, and being the only way to some mythical afterlife. I live what I hope to be a good life, not because I see it as being some sort of bribe to get my reward when I'm dead, but because I believe it to be the right thing to do. I don't believe in any afterlife. I don't believe in any Gods. That doesn't mean I don't have a belief in morals, and that has absolutely NOTHING to do with following Jesus, and I find it insulting that you should suggest that I do.
That's a no-brainer for a start off. A Hindu or a Sikh may have very strong beliefs, yet they don't follow Jesus whatsoever.
I am totally Anti-Religious, yet I have my own belief in morality. I have even been told by a friend, who happens to be a Lay Preacher, that I live a life closer to that of the true intent of Christian teaching than 99.9% of Christians. I've never really been sure whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. My only 'belief' is in that of Sociological Values which are what I believe were probably the intent behind the original stories behind the Jesus character (be he fictional, or loosely based on some original ideology, be it by a single individual or a group of ideologists). There is nothing wrong with the ideology behind it. The problems arise when it becomes attributed to some imaginary God creature & claims of magic tricks, and being the only way to some mythical afterlife. I live what I hope to be a good life, not because I see it as being some sort of bribe to get my reward when I'm dead, but because I believe it to be the right thing to do. I don't believe in any afterlife. I don't believe in any Gods. That doesn't mean I don't have a belief in morals, and that has absolutely NOTHING to do with following Jesus, and I find it insulting that you should suggest that I do.
Is God Real?
[QUOTE=FourPart;1490861 I don't believe in any afterlife. I don't believe in any Gods. That doesn't mean I don't have a belief in morals, and that has absolutely NOTHING to do with following Jesus, and I find it insulting that you should suggest that I do.
Show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus, or that you have no morals. Produce me saying either;
this I got to see.
Show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus, or that you have no morals. Produce me saying either;
this I got to see.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1490868 wrote: Show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus, or that you have no morals. Produce me saying either;
this I got to see.
Although I appreciate your immediately preceding quote ("Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus? ") was directed to a Christian / Non Christian situation, this is not the first time I have pulled you up on being insulting by accusing the reason for my being anti-religious as being "because 'God' wants me to be that way". I live my live in what I hope to be a good way because that is the way I want me to be, not because of the notion that some Sky Spirit decides he wants me to be. That does not imply that I have no free will of my own, it is an outright statement of it. I follow the same teachings of pacifism that Jesus is said to have followed - but I emphasise - that they are teaching that he is said to have followed - not ones that he created. Therefore, because I may follow the same path that Jesus is said to have followed, apart from the obvious linear timeline context, I am not a follower of Jesus.
I could be wrong, but as I understand what Ted was saying is that in the early days of "Christianity", it was not so much a Religious Dogma, rather than a Political Manifesto - much as Tony Benn who followed a particular line of Socialism, subsequently resulted anyone who also followed that line being tagged as "Bennite". He was not the first to have such a belief - nor will he be the last. He just appears to be the first to have had that way of thinking named after him. Therefore, because I agree with the original "Christian" (for want of a name) 'Manifesto' you are essentially saying that I am a follower of Jesus when, in actual fact, Jesus was probably just someone else who followed that same manifesto.
Furthermore, I didn't say that you denied I had morals. That was merely a statement that I do not need a God in order to have them. I don't even like using the term "Christ", as opposed to "Jesus", as the word itself elevates the person to that of a Messiah - much as in the current objection to using "IS" instead of "Daesh". Indeed, there are many similarities between "Christianity" & Daesh. Both have a history of declaring their murderous lust for power to be in the name of a peaceful & loving God.
this I got to see.
Although I appreciate your immediately preceding quote ("Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus? ") was directed to a Christian / Non Christian situation, this is not the first time I have pulled you up on being insulting by accusing the reason for my being anti-religious as being "because 'God' wants me to be that way". I live my live in what I hope to be a good way because that is the way I want me to be, not because of the notion that some Sky Spirit decides he wants me to be. That does not imply that I have no free will of my own, it is an outright statement of it. I follow the same teachings of pacifism that Jesus is said to have followed - but I emphasise - that they are teaching that he is said to have followed - not ones that he created. Therefore, because I may follow the same path that Jesus is said to have followed, apart from the obvious linear timeline context, I am not a follower of Jesus.
I could be wrong, but as I understand what Ted was saying is that in the early days of "Christianity", it was not so much a Religious Dogma, rather than a Political Manifesto - much as Tony Benn who followed a particular line of Socialism, subsequently resulted anyone who also followed that line being tagged as "Bennite". He was not the first to have such a belief - nor will he be the last. He just appears to be the first to have had that way of thinking named after him. Therefore, because I agree with the original "Christian" (for want of a name) 'Manifesto' you are essentially saying that I am a follower of Jesus when, in actual fact, Jesus was probably just someone else who followed that same manifesto.
Furthermore, I didn't say that you denied I had morals. That was merely a statement that I do not need a God in order to have them. I don't even like using the term "Christ", as opposed to "Jesus", as the word itself elevates the person to that of a Messiah - much as in the current objection to using "IS" instead of "Daesh". Indeed, there are many similarities between "Christianity" & Daesh. Both have a history of declaring their murderous lust for power to be in the name of a peaceful & loving God.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1490873 wrote: Although I appreciate your immediately preceding quote ("Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus? ") was directed to a Christian / Non Christian situation, this is not the first time I have pulled you up on being insulting by accusing the reason for my being anti-religious as being "because 'God' wants me to be that way". I live my live in what I hope to be a good way because that is the way I want me to be, not because of the notion that some Sky Spirit decides he wants me to be. That does not imply that I have no free will of my own, it is an outright statement of it. I follow the same teachings of pacifism that Jesus is said to have followed - but I emphasise - that they are teaching that he is said to have followed - not ones that he created. Therefore, because I may follow the same path that Jesus is said to have followed, apart from the obvious linear timeline context, I am not a follower of Jesus.
I could be wrong, but as I understand what Ted was saying is that in the early days of "Christianity", it was not so much a Religious Dogma, rather than a Political Manifesto - much as Tony Benn who followed a particular line of Socialism, subsequently resulted anyone who also followed that line being tagged as "Bennite". He was not the first to have such a belief - nor will he be the last. He just appears to be the first to have had that way of thinking named after him. Therefore, because I agree with the original "Christian" (for want of a name) 'Manifesto' you are essentially saying that I am a follower of Jesus when, in actual fact, Jesus was probably just someone else who followed that same manifesto.
Furthermore, I didn't say that you denied I had morals. That was merely a statement that I do not need a God in order to have them. I don't even like using the term "Christ", as opposed to "Jesus", as the word itself elevates the person to that of a Messiah - much as in the current objection to using "IS" instead of "Daesh". Indeed, there are many similarities between "Christianity" & Daesh. Both have a history of declaring their murderous lust for power to be in the name of a peaceful & loving God.
I ask a second time, show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus and have no morals.
I could be wrong, but as I understand what Ted was saying is that in the early days of "Christianity", it was not so much a Religious Dogma, rather than a Political Manifesto - much as Tony Benn who followed a particular line of Socialism, subsequently resulted anyone who also followed that line being tagged as "Bennite". He was not the first to have such a belief - nor will he be the last. He just appears to be the first to have had that way of thinking named after him. Therefore, because I agree with the original "Christian" (for want of a name) 'Manifesto' you are essentially saying that I am a follower of Jesus when, in actual fact, Jesus was probably just someone else who followed that same manifesto.
Furthermore, I didn't say that you denied I had morals. That was merely a statement that I do not need a God in order to have them. I don't even like using the term "Christ", as opposed to "Jesus", as the word itself elevates the person to that of a Messiah - much as in the current objection to using "IS" instead of "Daesh". Indeed, there are many similarities between "Christianity" & Daesh. Both have a history of declaring their murderous lust for power to be in the name of a peaceful & loving God.
I ask a second time, show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus and have no morals.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1490887 wrote: I ask a second time, show me where I suggested that you follow Jesus and have no morals.
I thought I had explained in my previous post. If you need it in simpler terms so that you can understand, I'll try to summarise it a little more.
Your response to Ted's comment about 'Christianity' being a philosophy, rather than a belief.
Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus?
This implies that there is no difference to following the philosophy than to following Jesus. Ergo, as I follow the philosophy you are accusing me of following Jesus.
As for the part about saying I didn't have morals - where did I say that you said I didn't? I merely said that I didn't need a God to have them.
I also pointed out that you have previously insulted me by accusing me of being anti-religious because that is how God wants me to be, thus accusing me of having no will of my own.
Simple enough for your little brain to comprehend?
I thought I had explained in my previous post. If you need it in simpler terms so that you can understand, I'll try to summarise it a little more.
Your response to Ted's comment about 'Christianity' being a philosophy, rather than a belief.
Explain to me how you separate belief from following Jesus?
This implies that there is no difference to following the philosophy than to following Jesus. Ergo, as I follow the philosophy you are accusing me of following Jesus.
As for the part about saying I didn't have morals - where did I say that you said I didn't? I merely said that I didn't need a God to have them.
I also pointed out that you have previously insulted me by accusing me of being anti-religious because that is how God wants me to be, thus accusing me of having no will of my own.
Simple enough for your little brain to comprehend?
Is God Real?
FourPart;1490892 wrote:
Simple enough for your little brain to comprehend?
You complain that I have insulted you, then you insult me. I hold no interest in insulting debate.
Simple enough for your little brain to comprehend?
You complain that I have insulted you, then you insult me. I hold no interest in insulting debate.
Is God Real?
Yawn, good lord, I've been yawning all day. Good night and may your god go with you.
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
Is God Real?
Fuzzy;1490924 wrote: Yawn, good lord, I've been yawning all day. Good night and may your god go with you.
Good night and the time FOR God being with me has not come yet.
Good night and the time FOR God being with me has not come yet.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1490926 wrote: Good night and the time FOR God being with me has not come yet.
Sorry, my mistake. I thought god was with you most of the time. I mean, when he's not flat out saving people from floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamies, bush fires, domestic violence, car crashes, etc etc.
Sorry, my mistake. I thought god was with you most of the time. I mean, when he's not flat out saving people from floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamies, bush fires, domestic violence, car crashes, etc etc.
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
Is God Real?
Fuzzy;1490972 wrote: Sorry, my mistake. I thought god was with you most of the time. I mean, when he's not flat out saving people from floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamies, bush fires, domestic violence, car crashes, etc etc.
I understand you sense the need to be sarcastic , but such is your way of communicating. I do not know God and I do not have his spirit. I also think the whole world is in that same condition; and I believe it is our destiny to know him; all of us.
I can hardly wait to know him; I think that will be quite something.
I understand you sense the need to be sarcastic , but such is your way of communicating. I do not know God and I do not have his spirit. I also think the whole world is in that same condition; and I believe it is our destiny to know him; all of us.
I can hardly wait to know him; I think that will be quite something.
Is God Real?
Is God real? What are the odds that he exist? Here's an interesting scientist that says the odds are 67% that God exist;
Odds on that God exists, says scientist | Education | The Guardian
Yet more odds;
https://irrco.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/ ... existence/
Odds on that God exists, says scientist | Education | The Guardian
Yet more odds;
https://irrco.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/ ... existence/
Is God Real?
To paraphrase - "Lies, Damned Lies & Religious Statistics".
Basically, statistics can be used to prove or disprove an identical set of circumstances. Both links take the starting point to be 50:50 - the Binary view that God exists or he doesn't. However, the first one goes on to take the existence of miracles into account. Surely this alone requires outright evidence, rather than simply being accepted as a contributing factor? Furthermore, the statistics can in so way be considered as unbiased as the person who put them together admits that he is already 95% certain of the existence of a God, which means that even unconciously the figures would be interpreted towards the direction he wants to see them. Even totally random probabilities can be calculated in different ways - such as with the example of the dice. Theoretically, each successive throw has exactly the same odds of throwing a 6 - ie 6:1. However, in reality, no matter what the maths may be, the chances of eventually throwing a 6 constantly increases. 2 different probability outcomes from the same set of circumstances. Much as, in theory, the probability of the lottery numbers coming up as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is exactly the same as any other combination.
Basically, statistics can be used to prove or disprove an identical set of circumstances. Both links take the starting point to be 50:50 - the Binary view that God exists or he doesn't. However, the first one goes on to take the existence of miracles into account. Surely this alone requires outright evidence, rather than simply being accepted as a contributing factor? Furthermore, the statistics can in so way be considered as unbiased as the person who put them together admits that he is already 95% certain of the existence of a God, which means that even unconciously the figures would be interpreted towards the direction he wants to see them. Even totally random probabilities can be calculated in different ways - such as with the example of the dice. Theoretically, each successive throw has exactly the same odds of throwing a 6 - ie 6:1. However, in reality, no matter what the maths may be, the chances of eventually throwing a 6 constantly increases. 2 different probability outcomes from the same set of circumstances. Much as, in theory, the probability of the lottery numbers coming up as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is exactly the same as any other combination.
Is God Real?
Is it logical to believe in God? Just realistically looking at it without prejudice;
Faith or Reason? A Logical Explanation for God, Part 1 - Steve Elwart - Koinonia House
Faith or Reason? A Logical Explanation for God, Part 1 - Steve Elwart - Koinonia House
Is God Real?
The article started off so well with perfectly balanced reasonable statements - that is, until it reached the part "Why Believe In God?". To say it takes as much faith not to believe in a God than to believe is ridiculous. It's like saying that when you look at an empty glass it takes just as much faith to believe the glass is empty as to believe it's full. Note, this is not a Half Empty - Half Full thing - this glass is empty.
Is God Real?
Is God real? Has he grown more real in our human history, or not? Oh he definitely has.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491146 wrote: Is God real? Has he grown more real in our human history, or not? Oh he definitely has.
More real? In what way? Where is the physical evidence for that? "Real", regardless of how much, requires physical existence. Where is this physical existence?
More real? In what way? Where is the physical evidence for that? "Real", regardless of how much, requires physical existence. Where is this physical existence?
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491157 wrote: More real? In what way? Where is the physical evidence for that? "Real", regardless of how much, requires physical existence. Where is this physical existence?
I suggest you review the biblical archaeology thread; that is one of the ways God has become more real. The bible represents God, and we have more biblical archaeology than we ever have. We have more scientist who believe in God than we ever have had. More biblical prophecy has been fulfilled than ever has been before. These are just a few of the ways.
I suggest you review the biblical archaeology thread; that is one of the ways God has become more real. The bible represents God, and we have more biblical archaeology than we ever have. We have more scientist who believe in God than we ever have had. More biblical prophecy has been fulfilled than ever has been before. These are just a few of the ways.
Is God Real?
The 'Biblical' Archaeology is physical evidence of people - at best, people who believed in a God. It is not any evidence of the existence of an actual God.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491160 wrote: The 'Biblical' Archaeology is physical evidence of people - at best, people who believed in a God. It is not any evidence of the existence of an actual God.
No, its evidence of people, places and things- events in history.
No, its evidence of people, places and things- events in history.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491169 wrote: No, its evidence of people, places and things- events in history.
Which is what I said. It's not evidence of a God.
Which is what I said. It's not evidence of a God.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491192 wrote: Which is what I said. It's not evidence of a God.
Its all just evidence you have not graduated to. Its been a gold mine to me.
Its all just evidence you have not graduated to. Its been a gold mine to me.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491193 wrote: Its all just evidence you have not graduated to. Its been a gold mine to me.
You have said yourself that it's evidence of people - not evidence of a God. I could say I have found a light bulb. Therefore that is evidence of the sea. The two are totally unrelated.
You have said yourself that it's evidence of people - not evidence of a God. I could say I have found a light bulb. Therefore that is evidence of the sea. The two are totally unrelated.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491203 wrote: You have said yourself that it's evidence of people - not evidence of a God. I could say I have found a light bulb. Therefore that is evidence of the sea. The two are totally unrelated.
You could say you found a light bulb; again you resort to using myths to help prove your points; I am not using myths. Why do you continually need mythically set up senarios to help you communicate your beliefs?
You could say you found a light bulb; again you resort to using myths to help prove your points; I am not using myths. Why do you continually need mythically set up senarios to help you communicate your beliefs?
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491210 wrote: You could say you found a light bulb; again you resort to using myths to help prove your points; I am not using myths. Why do you continually need mythically set up senarios to help you communicate your beliefs?
It is a Metaphor - Not a Myth. Spot the difference...
Myth [mith]
Synonyms
Examples
Word Origin
noun
1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. stories or matter of this kind:
realm of myth.
3. any invented story, idea, or concept:
His account of the event is pure myth.
4. an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
5. an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.
Metaphor
[met-uh-fawr, -fer]
Examples
Word Origin
noun
1. a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God..
Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def 1).
2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.
It is a Metaphor - Not a Myth. Spot the difference...
Myth [mith]
Synonyms
Examples
Word Origin
noun
1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. stories or matter of this kind:
realm of myth.
3. any invented story, idea, or concept:
His account of the event is pure myth.
4. an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
5. an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.
Metaphor
[met-uh-fawr, -fer]
Examples
Word Origin
noun
1. a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God..
Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def 1).
2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491217 wrote: It is a Metaphor - Not a Myth. Spot the difference...
Metaphors, Myths, you seem to always use both when you communicate with me, I would rather you use facts. It would make this more real if you graduate to facts.
Metaphors, Myths, you seem to always use both when you communicate with me, I would rather you use facts. It would make this more real if you graduate to facts.
Is God Real?
I used facts. You didn't seem to understand them.
Fact: Archaeology proves the existence of people & their cultures.
Fact: Archaeology proves a primitive belief in a God.
Fact: Archaeology does not prove the existence of a God.
I have already stated these facts. You have already agreed with them, but still continue to argue that in some way 'Biblical' Archaeology proves the existence of a God. Now you come up with some facts of where there is any Archaeological evidence of the existence of a God, as opposed to a God Figure (which is man-made).
Fact: Archaeology proves the existence of people & their cultures.
Fact: Archaeology proves a primitive belief in a God.
Fact: Archaeology does not prove the existence of a God.
I have already stated these facts. You have already agreed with them, but still continue to argue that in some way 'Biblical' Archaeology proves the existence of a God. Now you come up with some facts of where there is any Archaeological evidence of the existence of a God, as opposed to a God Figure (which is man-made).
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491220 wrote: I used facts. You didn't seem to understand them.
Fact: Archaeology proves the existence of people & their cultures.
Fact: Archaeology proves a primitive belief in a God.
Fact: Archaeology does not prove the existence of a God.
I have already stated these facts. You have already agreed with them, but still continue to argue that in some way 'Biblical' Archaeology proves the existence of a God. Now you come up with some facts of where there is any Archaeological evidence of the existence of a God, as opposed to a God Figure (which is man-made).
There is no evidence for God now, that does not include the involvement of men. We are involved in this, and cannot be excluded from it; yet! We need the archaeology, its all we have now that can be considered material evidence. Humans constructed altars to worship their gods; we have some of the altars, but no pictures of the gods. We have no pictures of primordial humans, but we have the archaeology that they existed. We have no pictures of Jesus, but we have the archaeology and the written history of him from many historical writers. It is what it is; we have what we have.
Fact: Archaeology proves the existence of people & their cultures.
Fact: Archaeology proves a primitive belief in a God.
Fact: Archaeology does not prove the existence of a God.
I have already stated these facts. You have already agreed with them, but still continue to argue that in some way 'Biblical' Archaeology proves the existence of a God. Now you come up with some facts of where there is any Archaeological evidence of the existence of a God, as opposed to a God Figure (which is man-made).
There is no evidence for God now, that does not include the involvement of men. We are involved in this, and cannot be excluded from it; yet! We need the archaeology, its all we have now that can be considered material evidence. Humans constructed altars to worship their gods; we have some of the altars, but no pictures of the gods. We have no pictures of primordial humans, but we have the archaeology that they existed. We have no pictures of Jesus, but we have the archaeology and the written history of him from many historical writers. It is what it is; we have what we have.
Is God Real?
That is using the presumption that God was responsible for the existence of man. There is no evidence for this other than the existence of man. That does not prove responsibility. A sink hole does not prove the existence of a giant bunny rabbit.
Is God Real?
I would suggest Bart Ehrman's book "Did Jesus Exist"
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491233 wrote: That is using the presumption that God was responsible for the existence of man. There is no evidence for this other than the existence of man. That does not prove responsibility. A sink hole does not prove the existence of a giant bunny rabbit.
Why you like using myths to support your views is strange.
Why you like using myths to support your views is strange.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491248 wrote: Why you like using myths to support your views is strange.
I've already told you to check the difference between myth & a metaphor.
I've already told you to check the difference between myth & a metaphor.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491249 wrote: I've already told you to check the difference between myth & a metaphor.
Yes, I know, but Metaphors can be used in a mythical fashion. You know that I believe God is real, but if I stood on your side for a few seconds, and say that God is a myth, I would have to also say he is the greatest myth ever conceived, the strongest myth by comparison to any other, the longest lasting, the most examined myth, the most effective myth, the most detailed myth ever, the most mounting myth- because its still growing, the most emotional myth, the most studied myth, one could say the most real myth;
The most written about myth
The most contriversal myth
The most multi cultural myth
The most used myth in the movie industry
It would be the " Richest myth by far", producing all kinds of money in various kinds of ways
The most fought over myth
No other myth would be even near as to how many groups and organizations it started
The most political myth
Even IF God was a myth, he still would be extra ordinary!
Yes, I know, but Metaphors can be used in a mythical fashion. You know that I believe God is real, but if I stood on your side for a few seconds, and say that God is a myth, I would have to also say he is the greatest myth ever conceived, the strongest myth by comparison to any other, the longest lasting, the most examined myth, the most effective myth, the most detailed myth ever, the most mounting myth- because its still growing, the most emotional myth, the most studied myth, one could say the most real myth;
The most written about myth
The most contriversal myth
The most multi cultural myth
The most used myth in the movie industry
It would be the " Richest myth by far", producing all kinds of money in various kinds of ways
The most fought over myth
No other myth would be even near as to how many groups and organizations it started
The most political myth
Even IF God was a myth, he still would be extra ordinary!
Is God Real?
But a myth nonetheless.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491264 wrote: But a myth nonetheless.
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491264 wrote: But a myth nonetheless.
I do think religion and mythology has definitely intermingled at many crossroads in history, but I also think human history is simply the unfolding of God's will. But we cannot overlook humans, matter, archaeology, science and nature in examining if God is real, because all those things are part of the only clues we have. We certainly can exclude myths.
In example, the simple equation that design is proof of a designer carries a lot of weight. I mean its simply true. The incredible expanse of our universe, trillions of millions of stars and planets, clusters of matter in endless space; I see design written all over it! Something so large and wonderful, I will never accept that it all just climbed out of nowhere and just designed itself.
I do think religion and mythology has definitely intermingled at many crossroads in history, but I also think human history is simply the unfolding of God's will. But we cannot overlook humans, matter, archaeology, science and nature in examining if God is real, because all those things are part of the only clues we have. We certainly can exclude myths.
In example, the simple equation that design is proof of a designer carries a lot of weight. I mean its simply true. The incredible expanse of our universe, trillions of millions of stars and planets, clusters of matter in endless space; I see design written all over it! Something so large and wonderful, I will never accept that it all just climbed out of nowhere and just designed itself.
Is God Real?
Why should something have to have been designed? Does a snowflake have to be designed? Does an atom have to be designed? Does a molecule have to be designed? If not, and you can accept these elemental keystones as basic physical occurences, then how complex does one of these natural occurences need to be before you claim it has to be designed?
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491268 wrote: Why should something have to have been designed? Does a snowflake have to be designed? Does an atom have to be designed? Does a molecule have to be designed? If not, and you can accept these elemental keystones as basic physical occurences, then how complex does one of these natural occurences need to be before you claim it has to be designed?
That's like supposing that nothing need have been designed. For example, does a car need to have been designed? Could it not have designed itself? A house, a building, a gun, an airplane; is it reasonable to suggest the possibility that these things did not require a designer? No, that would be unreasonable, and I think even more unreasonable to assume that things FAR more complex did not need a designer.
The human body, and all its unique inner componants; animal life, insect life, yes the atom, or all the things at the atomic level; genes, plants, fish; I mean my goodness, the evidence of a designer is literally everywhere! And the designer had to have had a conscious mind and incredible power; which leads to evidence of a God in existence.
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
That's like supposing that nothing need have been designed. For example, does a car need to have been designed? Could it not have designed itself? A house, a building, a gun, an airplane; is it reasonable to suggest the possibility that these things did not require a designer? No, that would be unreasonable, and I think even more unreasonable to assume that things FAR more complex did not need a designer.
The human body, and all its unique inner componants; animal life, insect life, yes the atom, or all the things at the atomic level; genes, plants, fish; I mean my goodness, the evidence of a designer is literally everywhere! And the designer had to have had a conscious mind and incredible power; which leads to evidence of a God in existence.
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
Is God Real?
It's merely a case of the age old answer for everything. If you don't understand it, God did it. For example, plagues etc. would be seen as a sign of God's wrath (there's no shortage of such examples in the Bible). In modern days we understand that plagues are brought about by bacteria & viruses, mainly due to squalid living conditions & lack of sanitation.
Is God Real?
In example, the simple equation that design is proof of a designer carries a lot of weight. I mean its simply true. The incredible expanse of our universe, trillions of millions of stars and planets, clusters of matter in endless space; I see design written all over it! Something so large and wonderful, I will never accept that it all just climbed out of nowhere and just designed itself.
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
Who or what designed the designer? All you can say with any certain ty is that you don't know the answer.
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
Just because you choose to believe it is real does not make it so. I look at tghenb world around me and the notion that "god" did all this I find ridiculous - a myth made up by tghose who cannot grasop the coincept that we just don't knowe. If itself no harm but then those who choose to believ in god create a whole universe of beliefs that they then feel they can foist on us all.
If you are so convinced goid exists why do you conatntly seek resurance from othars that it is so?
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
Who or what designed the designer? All you can say with any certain ty is that you don't know the answer.
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
Just because you choose to believe it is real does not make it so. I look at tghenb world around me and the notion that "god" did all this I find ridiculous - a myth made up by tghose who cannot grasop the coincept that we just don't knowe. If itself no harm but then those who choose to believ in god create a whole universe of beliefs that they then feel they can foist on us all.
If you are so convinced goid exists why do you conatntly seek resurance from othars that it is so?
Is God Real?
gmc;1491273 wrote: Who or what designed the designer? All you can say with any certain ty is that you don't know the answer. Quote
God designed himself.
Quote;
Just because you choose to believe it is real does not make it so. I look at tghenb world around me and the notion that "god" did all this I find ridiculous - a myth made up by tghose who cannot grasop the coincept that we just don't knowe. If itself no harm but then those who choose to believ in god create a whole universe of beliefs that they then feel they can foist on us all.
If you are so convinced goid exists why do you conatntly seek resurance from othars that it is so?
I don't seek reassurance from anyone that God exist, and you can't show me doing that anywhere in these archives!
God designed himself.
Quote;
Just because you choose to believe it is real does not make it so. I look at tghenb world around me and the notion that "god" did all this I find ridiculous - a myth made up by tghose who cannot grasop the coincept that we just don't knowe. If itself no harm but then those who choose to believ in god create a whole universe of beliefs that they then feel they can foist on us all.
If you are so convinced goid exists why do you conatntly seek resurance from othars that it is so?
I don't seek reassurance from anyone that God exist, and you can't show me doing that anywhere in these archives!
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491270 wrote: It's merely a case of the age old answer for everything. If you don't understand it, God did it. For example, plagues etc. would be seen as a sign of God's wrath (there's no shortage of such examples in the Bible). In modern days we understand that plagues are brought about by bacteria & viruses, mainly due to squalid living conditions & lack of sanitation.
Well there actually are " 3 did its"; man did it, God did it, or it did itself.
I think God did it.
Well there actually are " 3 did its"; man did it, God did it, or it did itself.
I think God did it.
Is God Real?
Or it just is & always was.
As GMC said, "Who designed God". The reply "God designed himself" is not an acceptable answer. It's just clutching at straws in a vain attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
As GMC said, "Who designed God". The reply "God designed himself" is not an acceptable answer. It's just clutching at straws in a vain attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Is God Real?
FourPart;1491280 wrote: Or it just is & always was.
As GMC said, "Who designed God". The reply "God designed himself" is not an acceptable answer. It's just clutching at straws in a vain attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Excuse me for a moment fourpart, I want to give a few biblical principles for believers and those who may wonder why I said God created parts of himself. God was speaking to Job and describing things to him that he had done and will do, so pick up on that in Job 40: 10, " Deck thyself with majesty and excellency; array THYSELF with glory and beauty." These are actually things God did to himself, which is very interesting.
Again in Psalms 93:1, "The Lord reigneth , he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, where he has " Girded himself." Here God actually is increasing his own strength, and again creating more of a majestic image for himself. God actually adding to himself; which is a stunning thing to consider.
While you are in Psalms 93, look at verse 2. If anyone ever asks you where God came from, here is the answer; " Thy throne is established of old; you are from everlasting!" God came from eternity. That's where he is from.
As GMC said, "Who designed God". The reply "God designed himself" is not an acceptable answer. It's just clutching at straws in a vain attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Excuse me for a moment fourpart, I want to give a few biblical principles for believers and those who may wonder why I said God created parts of himself. God was speaking to Job and describing things to him that he had done and will do, so pick up on that in Job 40: 10, " Deck thyself with majesty and excellency; array THYSELF with glory and beauty." These are actually things God did to himself, which is very interesting.
Again in Psalms 93:1, "The Lord reigneth , he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, where he has " Girded himself." Here God actually is increasing his own strength, and again creating more of a majestic image for himself. God actually adding to himself; which is a stunning thing to consider.
While you are in Psalms 93, look at verse 2. If anyone ever asks you where God came from, here is the answer; " Thy throne is established of old; you are from everlasting!" God came from eternity. That's where he is from.
Is God Real?
That has the same sort of logic as (Q) "Why?" (A) "Because I said so".
All you have described is the ravings of an egoist.
All you have described is the ravings of an egoist.
Is God Real?
Mickiel;1491275 wrote: I don't seek reassurance from anyone that God exist, and you can't show me doing that anywhere in these archives!
Every thread you start you are either talking to yourself while completely ignoring anything anyone else might have to say on the matter stamping your metaphorical foot and resorting to the prennial I know it's probably made up (religion or the bgiod myth that is) but I believe it anyway
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
No it's not you can look at all the evidence see how it all comes together the how and why we can speculate on but to conclude god must have done it is a leap only the religious can make for some reason you need the reassurance that there is a god and keep wnting to get others to agree ith you. Why? if you are so sure does it matter what other believe?
Is God Real
No. If he was you wouldn't need to ask the question if he is real why is he/she hiding.
Excuse me for a moment fourpart, I want to give a few biblical principles for believers and those who may wonder why I said God created parts of himself. God was speaking to Job and describing things to him that he had done and will do, so pick up on that in Job 40: 10, " Deck thyself with majesty and excellency; array THYSELF with glory and beauty." These are actually things God did to himself, which is very interesting.
What possible relevance does the bible have? It is not proof of god it's collection of myths with some histiorical facts that can be confirmed that's all it is.
Every thread you start you are either talking to yourself while completely ignoring anything anyone else might have to say on the matter stamping your metaphorical foot and resorting to the prennial I know it's probably made up (religion or the bgiod myth that is) but I believe it anyway
A myth in your view, a reality in mine.
Now to remove this God designer, and then explain how these things came to be, one must believe that life created itself, matter created itself, and that these things developed an " Inner ability to create, construct and build on themselves over time." But did so in a manner that also created some level of unity to accomidate themselves with each other in an incredible fusion of reality. So land had to develop itself first, then water developed itself and joined the land. Then fish created themselves in an incredible variety and used the water to exist in. In my view, that is FAR more demanding to believe than a designer.
No it's not you can look at all the evidence see how it all comes together the how and why we can speculate on but to conclude god must have done it is a leap only the religious can make for some reason you need the reassurance that there is a god and keep wnting to get others to agree ith you. Why? if you are so sure does it matter what other believe?
Is God Real
No. If he was you wouldn't need to ask the question if he is real why is he/she hiding.
Excuse me for a moment fourpart, I want to give a few biblical principles for believers and those who may wonder why I said God created parts of himself. God was speaking to Job and describing things to him that he had done and will do, so pick up on that in Job 40: 10, " Deck thyself with majesty and excellency; array THYSELF with glory and beauty." These are actually things God did to himself, which is very interesting.
What possible relevance does the bible have? It is not proof of god it's collection of myths with some histiorical facts that can be confirmed that's all it is.
Is God Real?
[QUOTE=gmc;1491285]Every thread you start you are either talking to yourself while completely ignoring anything anyone else might have to say on the matter stamping your metaphorical foot and resorting to the prennial I know it's probably made up (religion or the bgiod myth that is) but I believe it anyway Quote:
I respond to everyone who responds to me , your allegation that I completely ignore everyone is simply false, which reveals a need on your part to use that kind of method when dealing with me; I hold no such need to accuse you; I don't need that in my communications.
No it's not you can look at all the evidence see how it all comes together the how and why we can speculate on but to conclude god must have done it is a leap only the religious can make for some reason you need the reassurance that there is a god and keep wnting to get others to agree ith you. Why? if you are so sure does it matter what other believe?
QUOTE]
I do not write to fish for agreement, I write to express myself , because I have nothing better to do. I really believe what I express. I am not religious, and I have made that leap you mention. Stop limiting that leap to just religious people, there are many of us who see in religion just what you do.
I respond to everyone who responds to me , your allegation that I completely ignore everyone is simply false, which reveals a need on your part to use that kind of method when dealing with me; I hold no such need to accuse you; I don't need that in my communications.
No it's not you can look at all the evidence see how it all comes together the how and why we can speculate on but to conclude god must have done it is a leap only the religious can make for some reason you need the reassurance that there is a god and keep wnting to get others to agree ith you. Why? if you are so sure does it matter what other believe?
QUOTE]
I do not write to fish for agreement, I write to express myself , because I have nothing better to do. I really believe what I express. I am not religious, and I have made that leap you mention. Stop limiting that leap to just religious people, there are many of us who see in religion just what you do.
Is God Real?
I do not write to fish for agreement, I write to express myself , because I have nothing better to do. I really believe what I express. I am not religious, and I have made that leap you mention. Stop limiting that leap to just religious people, there are many of us who see in religion just what you do.
re·li·gious (rÄ*-lÄ*j²É™s)
adj.
1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.
2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion: a religious text.
3. Extremely scrupulous or conscientious: religious devotion to duty.
n. pl. religious
A member of a monastic order, especially a nun or monk.
mirriam webster
Full Definition of religious
1
: relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity
2
: of, relating to, or devoted to religious beliefs or observances
3
a : scrupulously and conscientiously faithful b : fervent, zealous
Playing with semantics are we - you're spiritual but not religious? To believe in god requires a leap of faith over the hurdles of logic and reason not to mention not reading the bible in it's entirety or looking in to the histiry of who wrote it amd why. I read the bible as a teenager it's what started to puit put me off religion in the first place.
The existence of the bible does not prove god exists. If you don't believe in any religion why are you quoting the christian bible as an authority for anything.
re·li·gious (rÄ*-lÄ*j²É™s)
adj.
1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.
2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion: a religious text.
3. Extremely scrupulous or conscientious: religious devotion to duty.
n. pl. religious
A member of a monastic order, especially a nun or monk.
mirriam webster
Full Definition of religious
1
: relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity
2
: of, relating to, or devoted to religious beliefs or observances
3
a : scrupulously and conscientiously faithful b : fervent, zealous
Playing with semantics are we - you're spiritual but not religious? To believe in god requires a leap of faith over the hurdles of logic and reason not to mention not reading the bible in it's entirety or looking in to the histiry of who wrote it amd why. I read the bible as a teenager it's what started to puit put me off religion in the first place.
The existence of the bible does not prove god exists. If you don't believe in any religion why are you quoting the christian bible as an authority for anything.