Do you belive in god?

[hypo]

Certainly it is mans fault, in the name of religion.


I'm not religious and whilst I have my opinions and might joke, i would certainly not argue seriously or deride religious references/feelings.

One of my favorite sayings, although not from religious reference is; 'there but for the grace of god go I'.

What came first morals or religion?

The chicken or the egg?

I believe that for man morals came first.

From this he manufactured religion to police values in a way that forced/cajoled man to police his own behavior in a way that perhaps external laws and forces couldn't.

Whether your religion makes you a good person or your own morals make you a good person, does it matter?

I have found that most of my own values are in accordance with religious people but I have no religion.

[Freedom.Finally]

Hypo, I don't have a religion, either.

Religion is man's effort to become acceptable to God by his own goodness and works/efforts.

Unfortunately, you are correct in one thing.  Man, under the guise of serving God, has, and continues to, perpetrate inhumanity towards others.

So, I do agree that religion is a bad thing.

God is not religious, only man is.

Regarding morals... Morality comes from God, else all morals are relative.  And if all morals are relative, then there is no "right and wrong."
We've already covered the folly of this theory in another thread.

What I have found is that the more spiritual a person becomes, the less religious they tend to be.

[hypo]

I am spiritual, in terms of the fact I have my own values/morals which I hold dear above my own personal situation.

+ I have been to the edge and back, i nearly died in 1991 and ive had a lot more bad times besides.

'there but for the grace of god go I'.

I'm one of these assholes who cares, 'I get it right 90% of the time'.

I'd love it if my general message was taken/understood and advocated....but?

I don't like being critisised but I'll bare it, i've suffered worse..

[Freedom.Finally]

I am spiritual, in terms of the fact I have my own values/morals which I hold dear above my own personal situation.

This means that you are a god unto yourself.  You have your own values/morals.  This means that you look to yourself as the ultimate guide to right and wrong. This, as we've previously covered, is what the Bible condemns as "every man doing that which is right in his own eyes" (emphasis added).

[UKgyne]

I have no time for religion - especially organised religion - and I vowed never to reply again to any of these endless threads on it, but.........

FF is there any part of the Bible that you don't agree with or accept?   Is there anything that even you accept the Bible is wrong about?  Are there any parts that you think are described metaphorically yet have been interpreted as literally?  Anything that you aren't prepared to defend before I point them out?  Etc etc.

I ask because the ridiculous questions posed to Laura Schlessinger you dismissed with something along the lines of "the Old Testament is rubbish and can't be believed", and any other critical points about the Bible you always seem to be able to justify somehow.  

When I know what you think about how the Bible has been interpreted over the years I'll have a go at pointing out some of the thousands of inconsistencies, cruelties, absurdities and other enjoyable gems that us skeptics like to have a good laugh over.  



Mike

[Freedom.Finally]

UK, thanks for chiming in on this endless topic  

Regarding the Dr. Laura letter.  I didn't side-step that.  I answered it plainly and truthfully for all to see.  I'll do so again if you want to point out a specific portion you are concerned about.

I have never declared to be the definitive authority on the Scriptures.  But, I do know, from study and experience, that the word of God is sound in it's original writing.
This means that I do not agree with many portions in the english translations, as they often differ with one another, but the words themselves, in the original languages, are sound.

For instance, I can go to the NIV and point out many errors of omission that they have committed.

Anyways, I don't know everything there is to know about the Bible, but I will try and address whatever "inconsistencies" you bring up.

If you want to go to the SAB website and copy and paste some scoffer materials then please feel free.

The bottom line is this.  That book, of which you are so quick to criticize, has completely changed my life as well as millions around the world.  Jesus Christ contintues to change lives each and every day.

The Bible has successfully predicted the very world we live in today.  And, this was done thousands of years ago.

The Bible is a book of predictive prophecy (which I've covered before).  As a matter of fact, when you asked me about a future prophecy that we could see looming on the horizon, but hadn't yet come to pass, I gave you a crystal-clear example.  But, in textbook scoffer form, you dismissed it as nonsense.  Any unbiased reader of that post made the connection.  But, since you have already made up your mind on the matter you will dismiss it out of hand.

And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Truly I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. Mark 6:11

It isn't my job to "defend the Bible."

How do you "defend" a lion?  You don't.  You just let him out of the cage.

The same is true with the word of God.  You, and you only, will be responsible for what you did with Jesus Christ.  You can receive Him or reject Him.  It is your choice.  God has given you free-agency.

But unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. -- Luke 13:3

[Screwgyne]

You never run out do you Gruff?

[UKgyne]

Regarding the Dr. Laura letter.  I didn't side-step that.  I answered it plainly and truthfully for all to see.

You said:  "We do not live under the theocratic system that Israel did.  Therefore, the context on all of that is lost.  We were discussing homosexuality in another thread, and I demonstrated from the New Testament how it is wrong. Old Testament laws had a specific purpose and context.  This is called dispensationalism"

Well I'm no theologian but your answer sounds like a complete cop-out.  Or are you saying that the Old Testament as a whole should be ignored if it disagrees with current morality and etiquette?

And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Truly I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. Mark 6:11

But unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. -- Luke 13:3

Well I'm in trouble then...........

[Freedom.Finally]

Gruff, it isn't the "church" (and by your reference I assume you mean the apostate Roman Catholic Church) that saves.  It is CHRIST that saves.  He, he only, is the keeper of eternal life.

He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. -- 1 John 5:12

If you have any serious questions I'll be more than happy to answer them.  But, I'll no longer respond to nonsense such as that.

Gruff, as much as we've disagreed on this issue, we have found some common ground on other issues.  Let's agree to disagree on this issue.  But, I hope that you will spend as much time investigating the truths of the Bible as you have spent on other subjects of which you seem quite knowledgeable.

Added:

Gruff, I've decided to add this text to adequately answer your statement.
It is true, that there are organizations, such as the RCC, that permit virtually anything to be done as long as one "confesses" and does "penance."  This is not biblical.
Let me state that it isn't an organization, or any type of church attendance, or any outward works that we do that can ever merit salvation.
Salvation is a free gift of God.  It cannot be earned.
But, the person who has been truly converted (saved) will not continue to do things that are contrary to the spirit of God.

If we say that we have fellowship with Him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.  -- 1 John 1:16

Also,

Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor abusers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. -- 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

So, salvation is something that has happened inside of someone, it isn't something that they play out externally.  
People's external behavior is merely an indication as to where they are in their heart.  This is why Jesus said,

You shall know them by their fruits... Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruits, nor can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that does not bring forth good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you shall know them. -- Matthew 7:16-20

Jesus is using the metaphor of "trees" and "fruits" to represent "peoples" and "behaviors."

What people do externally is how one can judge where they are at internally.

[Freedom.Finally]

Well I'm no theologian but your answer sounds like a complete cop-out.  Or are you saying that the Old Testament as a whole should be ignored if it disagrees with current morality and etiquette?

No, UK, what I am saying is that those laws applied to a certain people in a certain time.
It would be like a long lost SS stormtrooper from Nazi Germany showing up in America and trying to beat a Jewish American for "not wearing his star on his arm."  That Jewish person could tell him to take a hike because that law did not apply to him as an American.  Context is the issue.  There are certain areas in the OT that were directed at the nation of Israel.  And again, there are certain principles that we can gleam from those laws.

Well I'm in trouble then...........

I'm more than willing to answer legitimate questions on the matter (and for the sake of argument I found this to be a completely legitimate question that you have just posed), but I don't want to engage any longer is foolish discourse.

[Daniel_981]

Do I believe in god or the bible?  No...

Did anyone see the show Penn & Teller: Bullshit about god and the bible?  Well, if you did then that’s pretty much how I feel about it. They nailed exactly how Ive felt about this subject for quite a while now.

Me = Atheist.

< tangent >
At the same time I have no reason to care if another person believes in god or whatever. I do care about the bible pushers; the ones that go out of their way to let you know that they believe. A good example from just yesterday at lunch: My mother, my boyfriend and me were out to lunch and we were talking about religion. We got into talking about what each other believes in and the server was hearing a lot of what we said. My mom is pretty religious, but I'm not and said it. No big deal to my mom, but long story short, on my way out the server said "god bless you." Now was that really necessary?  She knew how I felt about it yet she still went out of her way to tell me that. That irritates me. I will never get in anyone's way of seeking god or religion. I expect that religious or god believers don't get in my way and push their belief or religion onto me. < /tangent >

That is all  

[fizzy]

Err - just curious - how old is the old testament? I mean I know Christ was around 2000 years ago - but the human's been around for far longer - atleast there were civilizations in 4000 B.C. - Indus Valley, Egyptian etc - so a majority of the people who kicked the bucket are in hell I assume ?

[headheldhigh01]

fizzy, less than 2000 bc (though some place the post-adam etymologies back toward 5-6000 bc). abraham if i remember rightly starts in around 1500 bc or so.  judaism has no such issues, christianity pretty much equates general faith in God back then with its modern criteria today.  

unrelatedly, if ff sees this post again, it'd be interesting to see him focus in specifically, on that dr laura business, on gruff's original point, which is if you void the original hebrew law, how do you distinguish between things held as still legitimate (say the 10 commandments) vs the rest (stoning for cursing parents, levirate marriage of widowed sister in law, testes-injured men can't be priests, etc), since it becomes essentially an arbitrary choice, which was the original point behind that letter.    

daniel, you'll have to fill me in on the penn and teller business, don't know what that is.  

[Erifcitats]

i belive that there is a god i think the majority of the bible is a bunch of bullshit and is either not true at all or exagerated greatly. im not sure as to weather i belive jesus was gods son or not i question my self with the issue all the time. i go to church every sunday mainly because my mom makes me.

[GyneakidUK]

OM