Religion

Talk about current events, entertainment, technology or anything not related to soccer
Post Reply
NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJlRjk6j ... -fresh+div
a weird video i got, that was a recommendation for my youtube account
I think the question is kinda strange:

You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven

Why take the risk of being wrong considering the consequence?

But on a side-note:

A Q for Nat (not trying to catch you out just curious)
Whats your image of god?

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post

NBP, that's just a quote that's been around for ages, I personally agree with it for the most part (not 100% but the general meaning)
You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven
Not really, what if Christianity isn't the right religion? Or maybe your practicing it wrong still earning a ticket to hell. The only way to prevent going to hell 100% (if you believe in hell) would be to practice every religion every possible way, which would at the same time send you to hell, so no matter what the odds of you going to heaven are like 1/1000 if you look at the big picture. After all no one knows how picky god is...


I heard a satanist (idk if he'd actually be considered a satanist) on the radio talking about his beliefs and thought it was interesting. He basically said that he takes the whole bible as metaphorical at that God was basically a metaphor for "What is god" acording to the bible and that Satan was a metaphor for the "sins" and he believes it was directly made to control people, or some sh*t. But basically he was saying that by believing in God your depriving yourself of human nature, so why would the all powerful God make it human nature to sin. Basically he said he embraces stuff like envy, greed, lust, etc. which tbh everyone does...he basically said he's just honest with himself..

just something interesting


"Speaking of morality, the truth is that the human brain exist for the purpose of lying, because it is ONLY through deception that the weak can prevail over the stronger and fitter." -expert

iwannagopro
EF Flying Dutchman
Posts: 2801
Joined: 23 Jul 2006, 19:39
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post

NewBornProdigy wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJlRjk6j ... -fresh+div
a weird video i got, that was a recommendation for my youtube account
I think the question is kinda strange:

You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven

Why take the risk of being wrong considering the consequence?

But on a side-note:

A Q for Nat (not trying to catch you out just curious)
Whats your image of god?
That's just Pascal's wager in simplified form. Dumb youtubers trying to take credit from Mr Blaise.

While Pascal's wager certainly makes some good points in terms of probability... I wouldn't follow it. I don't think there is a god, therefore I'm not about to believe in one just in case. I don't believe in things that I don't believe in, it's as simple as that.

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post

iwannagopro wrote:
NewBornProdigy wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJlRjk6j ... -fresh+div
a weird video i got, that was a recommendation for my youtube account
I think the question is kinda strange:

You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven

Why take the risk of being wrong considering the consequence?

But on a side-note:

A Q for Nat (not trying to catch you out just curious)
Whats your image of god?
That's just Pascal's wager in simplified form. Dumb youtubers trying to take credit from Mr Blaise.

While Pascal's wager certainly makes some good points in terms of probability... I wouldn't follow it. I don't think there is a god, therefore I'm not about to believe in one just in case. I don't believe in things that I don't believe in, it's as simple as that.
On top of that if you were a all powerful god and someone appeared at your heavens gate and "hey, let me in, I've be Christian all my life just in case" would you let them in? That whole arguement isn't really effective once real logic is put into place, but then either is Christianity

iwannagopro
EF Flying Dutchman
Posts: 2801
Joined: 23 Jul 2006, 19:39
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post

2brown347 wrote:
iwannagopro wrote:
NewBornProdigy wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJlRjk6j ... -fresh+div
a weird video i got, that was a recommendation for my youtube account
I think the question is kinda strange:

You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven

Why take the risk of being wrong considering the consequence?

But on a side-note:

A Q for Nat (not trying to catch you out just curious)
Whats your image of god?
That's just Pascal's wager in simplified form. Dumb youtubers trying to take credit from Mr Blaise.

While Pascal's wager certainly makes some good points in terms of probability... I wouldn't follow it. I don't think there is a god, therefore I'm not about to believe in one just in case. I don't believe in things that I don't believe in, it's as simple as that.
On top of that if you were a all powerful god and someone appeared at your heavens gate and "hey, let me in, I've be Christian all my life just in case" would you let them in? That whole arguement isn't really effective once real logic is put into place, but then either is Christianity
Yes... when Pascal created it, I think he was thinking of it in a purely probability mindset. One can't force herself to believe, that's the problem. From a mathematics point of view, however, it holds up quite nicely.

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post

iwannagopro wrote:
2brown347 wrote:
iwannagopro wrote: That's just Pascal's wager in simplified form. Dumb youtubers trying to take credit from Mr Blaise.

While Pascal's wager certainly makes some good points in terms of probability... I wouldn't follow it. I don't think there is a god, therefore I'm not about to believe in one just in case. I don't believe in things that I don't believe in, it's as simple as that.
On top of that if you were a all powerful god and someone appeared at your heavens gate and "hey, let me in, I've be Christian all my life just in case" would you let them in? That whole arguement isn't really effective once real logic is put into place, but then either is Christianity
Yes... when Pascal created it, I think he was thinking of it in a purely probability mindset. One can't force herself to believe, that's the problem. From a mathematics point of view, however, it holds up quite nicely.
From the mathematical point of view I kinda find it weak personally. I'm admitily not an expert on Pascal's theory or whatever, but from what NBP posted it's not that simple when it comes to religion. Religion isn't black and white.

There's:
Baha'i Faith
Buddhism
Christianity (there are 34,000 separate Christian groups)
- ex.
The Amish
The Brethren
Catholic Church (Roman Catholic)
Children of God
Christadelphians
Christian Science
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Community of Christ
Eastern Orthodox churches
The Family
The Brethren
Gnosticism
Jehovah's Witnesses
LDS Restorationists
Messianic Judaism
Mormons
Orthodox churches
The Process
Progressive Christianity
Quakers
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Roman Catholic Church
Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Society of Friends
Two by Twos
Unification Church
Unitarian-Universalism
United Pentecostal Church International
Unity Church in Canada
Unity School of Christianity
Urantia Book
Worldwide Church of God
The Way International
*note: these are just a few, and many contradict each other and according to many you aren't getting to heaven if your not following them

Confucianism
Hinduism
Islam
Jainism
Judaism
Shinto
Sikhism
Taoism Vodun
Caodaism
Damanhur Community
Druze
Eckankar
Elian Gonzalez religious movement
Gnosticism
Gypsies
Ifa
Lukumi
Macumba
Mowahhidoon
Native American Spirituality
Zoroastrianism
Atheism
Agnosticism
Humanism
WICCA
Aum Shinri Kyo
Heaven's Gate
Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God
The People's Temple
Solar Temple
House of Yahweh

* I tried to give a good varity of religions, but I've barelly scratched the surface of all the religions, branches, and belief systems out there...

So who's to say anyone is more right in all honesty. Maybe the members of heaven's gate did catch that comet to heaven, who honestly knows? It's not black and white, it hits every color of the spectrum and that's where NBP post
You have 2 possibilities, As a christian and as an Athiest

1) You die, you rot in the ground... so does the Christian
2) You die, you rot in hell... the Christian goes to heaven

Why take the risk of being wrong considering the consequence?
fails IMO


some more food for thought, considering the religion which has a small chance of getting you into heaven.

Lets say your a good Christian, and go to church for 2 hours a week everyweek, starting at age 12. If you live to be 80 you've spent approximately 320 days in church. That means by not going to Church I gain almost a year more then you in free time for more life experiences even if we live the exact same amount of time.

soccer11
Admin
Posts: 4870
Joined: 24 Feb 2005, 23:40
Location: Michigan, USA

Post

i must say, since I've been at college I haven't gone to church because my parents can't make me here, and I've got a lot accomplished in that time i would normally be spending in church. it feels like i'm actually having a normal and productive sunday
Image

Croatianblood1
Veteran Member
Posts: 2958
Joined: 25 May 2005, 21:36
Location: New York, USA

Post

soccer11 wrote:i must say, since I've been at college I haven't gone to church because my parents can't make me here, and I've got a lot accomplished in that time i would normally be spending in church. it feels like i'm actually having a normal and productive sunday
I fell asleep during the homily at Mass yesterday. I realized that I could be at home sleeping instead of waking up for 10 AM mass after working till midnight the night before. The priest always talks about how its important to stay attentive in Mass but its too boring. I feel like I'm just going through the motions. I find myself just staring at the clock, waiting for it to all end.
Image

soccer11
Admin
Posts: 4870
Joined: 24 Feb 2005, 23:40
Location: Michigan, USA

Post

Croatianblood1 wrote:
soccer11 wrote:i must say, since I've been at college I haven't gone to church because my parents can't make me here, and I've got a lot accomplished in that time i would normally be spending in church. it feels like i'm actually having a normal and productive sunday
I fell asleep during the homily at Mass yesterday. I realized that I could be at home sleeping instead of waking up for 10 AM mass after working till midnight the night before. The priest always talks about how its important to stay attentive in Mass but its too boring. I feel like I'm just going through the motions. I find myself just staring at the clock, waiting for it to all end.
I had been feeling that way for the last 5 years I've gone to church. Here's the way I see it. I sleep more, so I'm more alert during the day, which means when I do homework and study it's better quality which means I'll get better grades and do better in life.
Image

Croatianblood1
Veteran Member
Posts: 2958
Joined: 25 May 2005, 21:36
Location: New York, USA

Post

soccer11 wrote:
Croatianblood1 wrote:
soccer11 wrote:i must say, since I've been at college I haven't gone to church because my parents can't make me here, and I've got a lot accomplished in that time i would normally be spending in church. it feels like i'm actually having a normal and productive sunday
I fell asleep during the homily at Mass yesterday. I realized that I could be at home sleeping instead of waking up for 10 AM mass after working till midnight the night before. The priest always talks about how its important to stay attentive in Mass but its too boring. I feel like I'm just going through the motions. I find myself just staring at the clock, waiting for it to all end.
I had been feeling that way for the last 5 years I've gone to church. Here's the way I see it. I sleep more, so I'm more alert during the day, which means when I do homework and study it's better quality which means I'll get better grades and do better in life.
Yeah I understand what you're saying. But for me its not so much waking up early as boredom during Mass that is the problem for me. I usually wake up around 9 AM so its not too much of a problem for me its just that Mass seems more and more like a burden for me. I try to pay attention but its the same thing over and over every Sunday. Its too mundane and it puts me to sleep. My parents are the ones who stress going to Mass every Sunday so really its their decision.
Image

barcahooligan
Veteran Member
Posts: 1143
Joined: 16 Jul 2007, 14:58

Post

lol.......yeah i feel the same way, the sundays i just wanna sleep in and forget about church my parents give me the whole "its your soul, not mine" speech or "you cant spend one hour at church, once a week?".........i stare out into space during the homilies, its always some different story about being kind or forgiving one another.......... :roll:
Image
sig by 2brown347

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post

(an interesting theory posted by XxLloydxX on Ultimate-guitar.com)
The most trusted historical source of information we have on Roman history of the time (the reign of Tiberius) is a Roman historian and member of the senate called Tacitus, and Tacitus confirms that a person known as Christus who had a large following of people called Christians was indeed put to death by the Romans.
As for the resurrection, well obviously the Romans didn't know what Jesus looked like because they needed Judas to identify him, all it would take is for Judas to identify the wrong guy (probably a loyal follower and volunteer) and someone else dies in Jesus' place. A guy with long hair and a beard who has been beaten to a pulp would look pretty much like any other guy with long hair and a beard who's been beaten to a pulp.
A couple of days later Jesus is seen alive and walking about and everyone says he's risen from the dead.

DouDou
Senior Member
Posts: 181
Joined: 18 May 2006, 02:27
Location: New Jersey, United Sates

Post

(an interesting theory posted by XxLloydxX on Ultimate-guitar.com)

Quote:
The most trusted historical source of information we have on Roman history of the time (the reign of Tiberius) is a Roman historian and member of the senate called Tacitus, and Tacitus confirms that a person known as Christus who had a large following of people called Christians was indeed put to death by the Romans.
As for the resurrection, well obviously the Romans didn't know what Jesus looked like because they needed Judas to identify him, all it would take is for Judas to identify the wrong guy (probably a loyal follower and volunteer) and someone else dies in Jesus' place. A guy with long hair and a beard who has been beaten to a pulp would look pretty much like any other guy with long hair and a beard who's been beaten to a pulp.
A couple of days later Jesus is seen alive and walking about and everyone says he's risen from the dead.
Well people come up with different "theories" to explain the resurrection of Jesus. Well this explanation is erroneous because it was not the Romans that wanted to put Jesus to death, the elders of Israel (The Sanhedrin) that instigated the trial against Jesus... The other historically false piece of information in that quote is that the followers of Jesus were called Christians during the lifetime of Jesus this actually totally wrong because the term Christians was not used until 30 years after the death of Jesus.

People who deny the resurrection of Jesus overlook the fact, that the first Christians who lived in 1st century AD were people who saw Jesus and were eyewitnesses to all his life. Most of these people were persecuted, and put to death by Romans/Jews... Would you travel on foot for thousands of miles, be persecuted and die to preach a belief that you know is fabricated???!!!
Image

Nat_H
Veteran Member
Posts: 1559
Joined: 11 Jun 2008, 18:03

Post

2brown347 wrote:(an interesting theory posted by XxLloydxX on Ultimate-guitar.com)
The most trusted historical source of information we have on Roman history of the time (the reign of Tiberius) is a Roman historian and member of the senate called Tacitus, and Tacitus confirms that a person known as Christus who had a large following of people called Christians was indeed put to death by the Romans.
As for the resurrection, well obviously the Romans didn't know what Jesus looked like because they needed Judas to identify him, all it would take is for Judas to identify the wrong guy (probably a loyal follower and volunteer) and someone else dies in Jesus' place. A guy with long hair and a beard who has been beaten to a pulp would look pretty much like any other guy with long hair and a beard who's been beaten to a pulp.
A couple of days later Jesus is seen alive and walking about and everyone says he's risen from the dead.
That doesn't work for the reasons DouDou stated, as well as the fact that people (friends and enemies) watched Jesus die. They knew who he was. Sorry, but the crucifixion of Jesus is a historical fact. Even Tacitus' report confirms this.

It's pretty illogical to support this theory because you're assuming that the Biblical account (which, lets face it, is our most detailed one) is partially correct and partially incorrect but you are using it as the basis for your theory. For example, you are believing the Biblical account of Judas betraying Jesus. You are using this information to support your theory. But then the Bible gives us this:

When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood."
"What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."
So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.


It is pretty clear that Judas betrayed Jesus into the hands of the Jews. Do you assume that part of Matthew's account is truth in order to disprove the entire reliability of the account? It seems to be a theory based solely on evidence you are trying to disprove. Illogical?

Also, note that if Matthew had contradicted himself, then yes that would discredit the accuracy of his account. But this is not the case.
DouDou wrote: People who deny the resurrection of Jesus overlook the fact, that the first Christians who lived in 1st century AD were people who saw Jesus and were eyewitnesses to all his life. Most of these people were persecuted, and put to death by Romans/Jews... Would you travel on foot for thousands of miles, be persecuted and die to preach a belief that you know is fabricated???!!!
Too true

NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

People who deny the resurrection of Jesus overlook the fact, that the first Christians who lived in 1st century AD were people who saw Jesus and were eyewitnesses to all his life. Most of these people were persecuted, and put to death by Romans/Jews... Would you travel on foot for thousands of miles, be persecuted and die to preach a belief that you know is fabricated???!!!
But on the other hand, a group can easily be tricked into beleiving in a false hope
People always work better in a group, with the right people behind a cause,people can do anything... hope conquers all
And if that group has a common goal and core beleifs it could litteraly drill the will of its followers into true beleif, total sacrifice and bring them through everything

Hitler took over a broken germany... Turned them into a confident, proud and strong supernation... all because he instilled a common beleif of a united and all powerful Germany, only problem was all his other beleifs

-Just using that as example that Jesus could indeed have been a very clever preacher, who got a following, preached his Idea of perfect morals, decent living and spiritual saviour and let their 'faith' 'loyalty' and 'drive' to take them through all possible times and situations
Mabye the whole bible is just a parable that jesus has his philosiphy wrote in
-Or he could have been a divine being, preaching words of a divine upper power... which rung such truth in those who followed, they gave up their lives for it

.......It depends more on what you want to beleive in, if you have a strong faith you will obviously choose the second scenario, cause from our evidence, jesus was real, jesus did die, jesus did have followers and jesus did start a religion... but the rest is a matter of trust or a guessing game

Post Reply