| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/12/2007 09:41:38 AM · #376 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Some of the posts here read as though some posters believe the reason the "word" has spread is due to man's greed at controlling his fellow man, his ignorance to blindly follow what the leaders of his day said, and of course that evil empire "the Church" for lying to the world for these last 2000 years. (even with one of the greatest libraries ever assembled of known original works - at the Vatican). |
Some argue that it is because religious ideas have evolved to be good at spreading themselves - poorer fitted religious notions have died out, more well adapted (in terms of protecting themselves, being more immune to questioning or demonstratable proof etc) strains thrive and spread.
Consider if someone publically said they believed that the man in the moon existed and lived on green cheese. They'd be ridiculed.
Now consider if someone describe their belief in any common, wide spread religion. Their views are given special treatment, typically respected if not agreed with etc. Why does that special treatment exist, for equally unprovable assertions, that happen to have a relgious basis ? Have religious ideas culturally evolved to protect themselves from questioning ? There's certainly a lot of pressure in that direction.
and no, I'm not saying any particular belief in any particular god or God is the same as saying the moon is made of green cheese, so lets not go down that particular rat hole.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 09:57:21 AM · #377 |
Originally posted by yanko:
...wouldn't the fact that his message, which has spread so far and so wide and has reverberated so strongly with so many people throughout history that, that alone constitutes a miracle in it's own right? |
If the stories were true, I would call it a miracle that the message hasn't ever spread to more than a minority of the population AND that more of scripture wasn't written down when the events supposedly took place. You might equally call the spread of Islam a miracle of Muhammad. This message wasn't spread on any large scale like good news- it was spread at the point of a gun. Having most of your population wiped out by the diseases and weapons of an invader is a very compelling argument that their god is stronger than yours.
Far more people used to believe the earth was flat, yet they came around pretty quickly after the days of Columbus and Magellan (this was still before the printing press). Christianity has had four times as long to gain acceptance, and yet even the most devout can't agree amongst themselves what that message is. :-/
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 09:58:50 AM · #378 |
I don't believe in this thread. :P
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:12:05 AM · #379 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Christianity has had four times as long to gain acceptance, and yet even the most devout can't agree amongst themselves what that message is. :-/ |
Is it the message of Christ [the Messiah] (his death, burial, resurection) that is not agreed upon or the application of scriptural writings (read OT/NT) applied to mankind and used to justify all manner of greed?
I suggest it is the latter, not the former.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:25:58 AM · #380 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
Some of the posts here read as though some posters believe the reason the "word" has spread is due to man's greed at controlling his fellow man, his ignorance to blindly follow what the leaders of his day said, and of course that evil empire "the Church" for lying to the world for these last 2000 years. (even with one of the greatest libraries ever assembled of known original works - at the Vatican). |
Some argue that it is because religious ideas have evolved to be good at spreading themselves - poorer fitted religious notions have died out, more well adapted (in terms of protecting themselves, being more immune to questioning or demonstratable proof etc) strains thrive and spread.
Consider if someone publically said they believed that the man in the moon existed and lived on green cheese. They'd be ridiculed.
Now consider if someone describe their belief in any common, wide spread religion. Their views are given special treatment, typically respected if not agreed with etc. Why does that special treatment exist, for equally unprovable assertions, that happen to have a relgious basis ? Have religious ideas culturally evolved to protect themselves from questioning ? There's certainly a lot of pressure in that direction.
and no, I'm not saying any particular belief in any particular god or God is the same as saying the moon is made of green cheese, so lets not go down that particular rat hole. |
I understand your point.
To sum it up plainly for me, I keep seeing "coincidences". Coincidences in archeology, coincidences in science, coincidences in literature, coincidences in events. Too many for me to discard scripture as purely fictional literature. I have personally witnessed the power of prayer. I read where apparent incurable illnesses just disappear, with no medical/scientific explaination. There are some who really honestly conclude that "events" are a coincidental action. That is fine for them. For me, it requires at the very least an open review.
It seems (to me) that it is also coincidental that at the 1st coming of Christ there was a common language (lay greek) and a road system built by the Roman's, both of which allowed for the spread of the "word". At this time, 2000 years later, the world has another common language - english and another road system (the internet) by which to spread the "word". Some would think this is only coincidence. I might see this coincidence and wonder if it might not preclude the 2nd coming as the 1st series precluded the 1st coming. Proof? Not hardly. Just coincidence.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:30:34 AM · #381 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Is it the message of Christ [the Messiah] (his death, burial, resurection) that is not agreed upon |
okay, say what the message of Christ is and we'll see if anybody disagrees. I already disagree with the emphasis of your parenthetical remark. |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:33:38 AM · #382 |
Originally posted by Flash:
It seems (to me) that it is also coincidental that at the 1st coming of Christ there was a common language (lay greek) and a road system built by the Roman's, both of which allowed for the spread of the "word". |
Coincidence? How about this: the common language, road system (and other factors leading to cosmopolitanism) created a new religion, not vice versa. Christ just happened to be a hot property at the time. Christ won out simply because somebody's got to. That has nothing to do with coincidence. |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:35:49 AM · #383 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Flash:
Is it the message of Christ [the Messiah] (his death, burial, resurection) that is not agreed upon |
okay, say what the message of Christ is and we'll see if anybody disagrees. I already disagree with the emphasis of your parenthetical remark. |
To place this into context; scalvert posted that christianity cannot even agree as to what the message is. I requested a clarification, defining what I believe the Christian message is (death, burial, resurection) of Christ. That is the "Good News".
If you are asking me for my definition of the Christian message, I have already given it. If you are asking me for something else, then please clarify.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:48:36 AM · #384 |
Originally posted by Flash:
It seems (to me) that it is also coincidental that at the 1st coming of Christ there was a common language (lay greek) and a road system built by the Roman's, both of which allowed for the spread of the "word". At this time, 2000 years later, the world has another common language - english and another road system (the internet) by which to spread the "word". Some would think this is only coincidence. I might see this coincidence and wonder if it might not preclude the 2nd coming as the 1st series precluded the 1st coming. Proof? Not hardly. Just coincidence. |
I think you mean "be a precursor to", and not "preclude". You are making a leap capable only of a believer who does not respect the most likely, logical reasons for events. The road system and the "common tongue" facilitated the spread of this particular meme. It was not a supernatural harbinger of it. |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:49:36 AM · #385 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Flash:
It seems (to me) that it is also coincidental that at the 1st coming of Christ there was a common language (lay greek) and a road system built by the Roman's, both of which allowed for the spread of the "word". |
Coincidence? How about this: the common language, road system (and other factors leading to cosmopolitanism) created a new religion, not vice versa. Christ just happened to be a hot property at the time. Christ won out simply because somebody's got to. That has nothing to do with coincidence. |
Speaking of coincidences; why have the Israelites/Jews been so scorned throughout history? Why do 3 of the world's religion's all claim the Temple Mount as "Holy" ground? Is it because they have all been misled by the powerful lying secretive evil "church"?
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:54:40 AM · #386 |
Originally posted by Flash:
... why have the Israelites/Jews been so scorned throughout history? Why do 3 of the world's religion's all claim the Temple Mount as "Holy" ground? |
What's your point? Why are Canadian aborginals treated like third-world citizens in this country? Why is the site at Petroglyphs Provincial Park in my province one of the holiest sites for many nations and cultures of aboriginals? |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:55:13 AM · #387 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
It seems (to me) that it is also coincidental that at the 1st coming of Christ there was a common language (lay greek) and a road system built by the Roman's, both of which allowed for the spread of the "word". At this time, 2000 years later, the world has another common language - english and another road system (the internet) by which to spread the "word". Some would think this is only coincidence. I might see this coincidence and wonder if it might not preclude the 2nd coming as the 1st series precluded the 1st coming. Proof? Not hardly. Just coincidence. |
I think you mean "be a precursor to", and not "preclude". You are making a leap capable only of a believer who does not respect the most likely, logical reasons for events. The road system and the "common tongue" facilitated the spread of this particular meme. It was not a supernatural harbinger of it. |
I believe you are correct in your correction. Regarding my "leap", I must say that I do respect logical reasons for events. I weigh them and give them due consideration. I also though, recognize coincidences, and when many many many coincidences show themselves, then I must weigh that as well. The circumstantial evidence, if you will.
As a prosecutor, I would always prefer a slam dunk, open shut case. Unfortunately, that evidence is not always available. Even if it were available, the jury STILL might acquit.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 10:59:32 AM · #388 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Regarding my "leap", I must say that I do respect logical reasons for events. I weigh them and give them due consideration. |
You just default to supernatural speculation when logic, reason, and facts don't fit your interpretion of events.
Originally posted by Flash:
As a prosecutor, I would always prefer a slam dunk, open shut case. Unfortunately, that evidence is not always available. |
Does that mean you invent evidence to suit your view of the case? (That might explain a lot to these people. |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:03:02 AM · #389 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
... why have the Israelites/Jews been so scorned throughout history? Why do 3 of the world's religion's all claim the Temple Mount as "Holy" ground? |
What's your point? Why are Canadian aborginals treated like third-world citizens in this country? Why is the site at Petroglyphs Provincial Park in my province one of the holiest sites for many nations and cultures of aboriginals? |
Are you claiming that the aboriginals of your province had a 2nd world war fought during the time of an intentional extermination effort (as the Jews did)? Or that they are under constant threat of attack from their neighbors? Or were conquered and enslaved for centuries? Are you claiming that the combined total of all believers of Judiasm, Christianity, and Islam is equatable to the number of believers that regard the Petroglyphs as holy ground?
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:05:00 AM · #390 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
As a prosecutor, I would always prefer a slam dunk, open shut case. Unfortunately, that evidence is not always available. |
Does that mean you invent evidence to suit your view of the case? (That might explain a lot to these people. |
Please do not put words where they are not. If you are implying that I invent evidence, then you should have a basis for that claim. I do not regard this as humor.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:08:57 AM · #391 |
Originally posted by Flash:
If you are asking me for my definition of the Christian message, I have already given it. If you are asking me for something else, then please clarify. |
interestingly enough, if you put 'the main message of Christianity' in to google, you get quite a few different takes - the meek shall inherit the earth, love your brother and various other statements - along with the more main stream death for sins/resurrection good news.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:10:49 AM · #392 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
If you are asking me for my definition of the Christian message, I have already given it. If you are asking me for something else, then please clarify. |
interestingly enough, if you put 'the main message of Christianity' in to google, you get quite a few different takes - the meek shall inherit the earth, love your brother and various other statements - along with the more main stream death for sins/resurrection good news. |
Good thing "google" is not regarded as the "word of God".
;-)
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:16:25 AM · #393 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Flash:
If you are asking me for my definition of the Christian message, I have already given it. If you are asking me for something else, then please clarify. |
interestingly enough, if you put 'the main message of Christianity' in to google, you get quite a few different takes - the meek shall inherit the earth, love your brother and various other statements - along with the more main stream death for sins/resurrection good news. |
Good thing "google" is not regarded as the "word of God".
;-) |
true ;)
Though the question was what would the devout say the message of Christianity was, not what would God say it was.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:32:11 AM · #394 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Are you claiming that the aboriginals of your province had a 2nd world war fought during the time of an intentional extermination effort (as the Jews did)? Or that they are under constant threat of attack from their neighbors? Or were conquered and enslaved for centuries? |
Are you claiming that the suffering of one group is more important than the suffering of another group?
Originally posted by Flash:
Are you claiming that the combined total of all believers of Judiasm, Christianity, and Islam is equatable to the number of believers that regard the Petroglyphs as holy ground? |
Are you claiming that one type of belief with many adherents is more important than another type of belief with many adherents? Are you claiming that it's numbers that define the veracity of a religion? |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:33:25 AM · #395 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
As a prosecutor, I would always prefer a slam dunk, open shut case. Unfortunately, that evidence is not always available. |
Does that mean you invent evidence to suit your view of the case? (That might explain a lot to these people. |
Please do not put words where they are not. If you are implying that I invent evidence, then you should have a basis for that claim. I do not regard this as humor. |
It wasn't meant as humour. It was meant to point out to you that inventing evidence in lieu of facts is never good. Good to have found your hot button though. ;-) |
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:57:43 AM · #396 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Flash:
Are you claiming that the aboriginals of your province had a 2nd world war fought during the time of an intentional extermination effort (as the Jews did)? Or that they are under constant threat of attack from their neighbors? Or were conquered and enslaved for centuries? |
Are you claiming that the suffering of one group is more important than the suffering of another group?
Originally posted by Flash:
Are you claiming that the combined total of all believers of Judiasm, Christianity, and Islam is equatable to the number of believers that regard the Petroglyphs as holy ground? |
Are you claiming that one type of belief with many adherents is more important than another type of belief with many adherents? Are you claiming that it's numbers that define the veracity of a religion? |
I am not claiming that one group is less important than another. I am claiming that the historical notations of the near constant attack on the Jews must be for a reason. A reason that is defined as the result of being "God's chosen", in scripture. Whether they are, or whether they are not, has nothing to do with my point, which is much of the world, for centuries and centuries, has a dislike for them. A dislike that must have a reason, a reason that coincidentally matches references in scripture. Does that prove it. No - as I stated plainly - it is just ANOTHER coincidence.
It is not about the numbers specifically, however one must consider the totality of the evidence. The fact that 3 world religions, including millions of people over thousands of years, all regard the same location to be primarily relevant to their SEPARATE religions, a coincidence that should not be ignored.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 11:59:34 AM · #397 |
Someone was asking why the Jews were persecuted for so long?
Well, from a religious perspective, they started as the first great Monotheistic religion, and came into immediate and extreme conflict with the prevailing polytheism of ancient times. Then the Jews gave us Jesus, and His followers begat Christianity, which basically tells us that Jesus was the Messiah predicted by Jewish holy writ.
Then Christianity became the dominant religion, and THEY started persecuting Jews because they refused to accept that Jesus (who, remember, was himself a Jew) was the Son of God and the Messiah. So basically the Jews got hammered both coming and going, so to speak.
From a more secular standpoint, the Jews had the misfortune of being among the most learned people of their time, and their learning gave them a great deal of power, and they were resented for this. Because they had no state per se, they perfected "portable" skills (money lending, medicine, etc) and made themselves indispensable to the powers that be. And when you make yourself indispensable to people with more power than you, you make them paranoid.
This is all a gross oversimplification, and I am aware of that, so please don't hammer on me OK? :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 12:02:44 PM · #398 |
Originally posted by Flash:
It is not about the numbers specifically, however one must consider the totality of the evidence. The fact that 3 world religions, including millions of people over thousands of years, all regard the same location to be primarily relevant to their SEPARATE religions, a coincidence that should not be ignored. |
It's not a coincidence; Judaism, Christianity, and the Muslims all trace their origins back to the same ancient peoples and traditions. The Muslims are the youngest of the three, and they actually share prophets witht he Jews and the Christians.
R.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 12:04:12 PM · #399 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Though the question was what would the devout say the message of Christianity was, not what would God say it was. |
Seems I was brought up on a heretical bible. Might explain a lot.
//www.wayoflife.org/articles/tev.htm
|
|
|
|
12/12/2007 12:06:03 PM · #400 |
Originally posted by Flash:
I am claiming that the historical notations of the near constant attack on the Jews must be for a reason....a reason that coincidentally matches references in scripture. |
Robert's explanation is perfect to address this. It doesn't require coincidence, or supernatural explanations of any kind.
Originally posted by Flash:
It is not about the numbers specifically, however one must consider the totality of the evidence. The fact that 3 world religions, including millions of people over thousands of years, all regard the same location to be primarily relevant to their SEPARATE religions, a coincidence that should not be ignored. |
It has nothing to do with coincidence or the supernatural, and everything to do with historical relevance. Also recall that Islam is not "thousands of years old", and neither is Christianity for all intents and purposes. That leaves Judaism, with all the historical and cultural implications that its holy sites had on the region. The sites are holy not because of supernatural reasons, but because of social and political ones. |
|
