by ocular_razor » Fri Aug 26, 2011 7:50 am
i found it interesting the amount of critiquing of the one post that took place. i think i am going to continue the trend.
firstly, if all ya know just ain't so, well? of all the things that people can be absolutely sure is misleading and brainwashing and undermines humanity, number one on the list is religion. rarely is it ever a pagan religion either. does that make someone knowledgeable? crossing possibilities off the list?
on with it.
someone said religion was the number one of mind control. what about money? try livin without money and see how many days you get. is our existence not based entirely on money? sure, ya can say necessity negates mind control. does that make it any less existant though?
arbie wun also said that the bible blatantly ignores many of god's creatures, then went on to list civilizations that were established a thousand years after revelations was written in 90ad. the vikings were, what was it, 900s? i'm a little shaky on history. mayans and aztecs, what was it, 1200-1400s? also if i'm not mistaken, what was asia considered way back when? because paul talks about spreading the gospel through to even asia. but most of the geography of the canon takes place around israel. i liked your reference to dinosaur fossils, since it was omitted the book must be false right? i suppose since the bible makes no mention of nuclear fusion but we see and feel the sun's energy then it must be false? no mention of the gulf stream, the bible doesn't talk about it and since we've got a gulf stream it must be false right?
arbie my relatives were nazi youths and they were certainly told that the concentration camps were allied propoganda. and why not believe it? it's cause they were finally able to have money again that they wouldn't believe anything negative against their country. their country that had been scattered for hundreds of years and where the middle ages wars were never ending. the point here is money blinds.
money blinds not religion.
most of the critiquers of the op seem to pride themselves on their reasoning ability, yet a couple automatically associate renaissance painters paintings of god with how people picture god.
i do apologize i can't remember all the usernames but it took a while to read them all in the first place.
but, continuing with my criticizing of your reasoning ability since you get off on doing so to others. i have my qualms about the catholic church as they are the bank of the world. they also added to the canon that they originally canonized. there is a lot more i will omit and it is important to remember all the different sects to churches and to not say one is interchangeable with another.
ginasmith you speak of omnipotence. i would bet that you would agree with the statement that 'god is all' so that you can use somebody else's circular logic to give you a false sense of superiority. but the statement 'god is all' is false. now, do you really know why this is? because that implies god is a liar. a cheat. evil. it's a matter of semantics that everyone can brush up on. but this is what happens when a finite mind attempts at something that no agreement can be made whether it is defined or not, and what it is defined as.
but the bible gives us a glimpse as to who god is. first on the top of my head i think it's first timothy we are told god does not lie. but in regards to the glimpse, someone said the old testament god is different from the new testament. to that i say this: the old testament was about the covenant with abraham, about god's chosen people. it was about the 'old way' of things. but his decendents would count as many as the sand on the beach. and we find out in the new testament that the old law was not to be abolished, but fulfilled. where in the new testament does it say god is no longer a jealous god? or any of that stuff you said? perhaps, that was an assumption on your part? and what about revelations? that sounds pretty 'old-testamenty' to me.
some have said it is only a collection of stories, the bible. and it is. but they're all connected. not because they're within the same bindings. but because they all talk about the same stinkin thing. salvation. to have salvation means to be within destruction. are we not in destruction? through the covenant with abraham, through his bloodline a kinsman redeemer was sent. we are told we've been cursed, and also 'cursed is the man who hangs on a tree'. in ruth we are told more about kinsman redeemers, the closest blood relative can buy someone out of debt if they are willing and if they are able. well this one guy called 'god with us' came along, took on the curse and bought our debt. this 'collection of stories' spans what, about 2000 years? they might be a collection, but they are all connected.
i can only assume all of the western theological experts who are telling people to go to school actually understand what they are reading, and not just going through the motions just to be able to tell people how awesome they are.
and who was it that said belief in god doesn't heal amputees? someone did that i don't feel like goin back and findin the name. so, do you only see something as truth only if it's to your physical advantage? my guess is: yes. but yea, that faith probably won't sprout you a new leg. but that is an incredibly selfish mindset from someone proclaiming to be such an enlightened individual.
News
Site map
SitemapIndex
RSS Feed