The 2nd Great Christian Argument

It makes sense. I'm arguing semantics right now. Faith stems from the individual. It is neither man made, or god made. It is made from ourselves.
 
alcyone said:
It makes sense. I'm arguing semantics right now. Faith stems from the individual. It is neither man made, or god made. It is made from ourselves.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. It all boils down to semantics, doesn't it? Heh. To further my argument, religion is MAN MADE, because each religion is basically the word of god interpreted by one man or some men. You're not accepting God, persay, you're merely accepting someone else's version of god.

As for Christianity, isn't it simply the deification of Christ? I think the fundamental flaw with Christian religion is that they've made Christ the god, and removed God from it completely. I don't think that was Christ's intention at all. He said only through ME can you see the kingdom of heaven...but when you accept that he pretty much only spoke in parables, that can be taken several ways. I take it to mean, live as he lived.
 
MyPetZombie said:
I would like to bring up 2 things that have been touched upon here. The first is Faith. By my definition, faith is simply, belief in the unprovable. Science is full of unprovable theorums that nevertheless are held to be true. E=mc2, for instance.
Click to expand...

E=mc2 is pretty provable. Science typically doesn't hold any theories as fact without a lot of supporting evidence. Sure, science is full of theories, but only a handful are believed to be true...ones that have passed sufficient testing and have sufficient proof.

Religion/spirituality, on the other hand, is untested and has little to no proof.

MyPetZombie said:
Metaphysics is rampant with them; the slit theory, Schroedinger's cat. We accept these theorums to be true because there is enough evidence to support the fact that, if they COULD be proven, the hypothesis would be the end result. To me, Faith in the divine is no different.
Click to expand...

You're confusing "knowledge" with "paradox." Schroedinger's cat is a paradox and suggests further research must be conducted as our knowledge of quantum physics is incomplete. I'm not entirely knowledgeable on quantum physics nor this particular experiment (although I know what you're talking about, and I know it's a paradox), so I'm not going to go too much into this.

Metaphysics isn't the proper word for what you're describing btw. :p

Faith in supernatural entities is very different from what we're talking about. The paradox above is from observable principles and the like...faith is from completely unobserved entities that we have no evidence to warrant belief in.


MyPetZombie said:
However, I think it's very important to differentiate between organised religion (in this case, Christianity, ie, Protestantism and Catholicism) and the Divine. One thing that hasn't been touched on in this discussion, probably because it is an argument against one religious sect, is that it's RELIGION that can be considered dangerous, NOT Faith.
Click to expand...

No, FAITH is dangerous...as well as religion. Faith is the belief in something that one has not enough justification for believing. You have no good reason to believe it...you just (seemingly randomly...but we know it's probably psychological in origin as we're raised around it, etc) do. That's dangerous and honestly delusional. If I, with no proof, believed that the CIA was watching me, it could easily lead to paranoia. If someone told me I've never seen them and so have no good reason to believe they're watching me, I'd just respond with, "Well, it's just that you can't see them because they're so good at hiding!" (like theists claim you can't see God because he's non-material). It's a belief that is psychologically damaging, and can't be proven to be false.




Will respond more later...gtg.
 
Last edited:
Faith, to the Christian, is having faith in The Son - in the outcome and life of our actions and of every event. Other religions may focus upon the son. But what makes Christianity unique is that The Son does not develop dependent upon our own strength or power, but by God. And The Son was tortured and killed - but was raised again. That notion of the son, of the outcome, is foolishness to psychiatrists, to Islamic people and the like.

They believe in the force of their religion. But who wants to believe in a religion? (Are we not INFJs?) Have faith in The Son.

With regards to fear of God:

BY FEAR OF GOD

By fear of God I watch my back.
The love of God I never lack
but that is just because I do.
The shameless won’t. My God. Thank you!

ilovechristmas.gif
 
crap...quantum mechanics...you're right, Duty. My bad. Agraphia strikes again.

Awe, you seem to put psychiatrists and Islamists all in the BAD category. Rather dangerous. I see no evidence supporting your claims in the Bible.

And do not even presume to assume that just because we're infj's we agree with your stand on religion and christianity.
 
AWEllingsen said:
Faith, to the Christian, is having faith in The Son - in the outcome and life of our actions and of every event. Other religions may focus upon the son. But what makes Christianity unique is that The Son does not develop dependent upon our own strength or power, but by God. And The Son was tortured and killed - but was raised again. That notion of the son, of the outcome, is foolishness to psychiatrists, to Islamic people and the like.

They believe in the force of their religion. But who wants to believe in a religion? (Are we not INFJs?) Have faith in The Son.

With regards to fear of God:

BY FEAR OF GOD

By fear of God I watch my back.
The love of God I never lack
but that is just because I do.
The shameless won’t. My God. Thank you!

ilovechristmas.gif
Click to expand...

Outcomes...Son....Poetry?....

You are speaking in abstracts. Bring it back to Earth. What outcome? Psychrity and psychology isn't interested in God, Christ or religion EXCEPT in terms of how it affects the behavior of humans. What is your issue with the science of behaviors?

By the Son I assume you mean Christ. Is insisting on calling Jesus The Son somehow lessen your intimidation factor? As on some internal level people generally aren't afraid of their progeny (aka sons...as in the ones given birth to). Are you using a semantic slip of the tongue in order to ease your own internal fear of your Deities?

As a poet (and I perused your website) you are accustomed to speaking in the abstract. As I gathered most of your readers are like minded so the meaning of your poetry resonates with them so that you don't have to explain your deeper meanings.

However, you need to be able to elucidate yourself outside of your poetic realm. To filter and translate into terms we can understand. Or at least you have to bring yourself into a resonance close enough to the rest of us so that we can take the steps to understand you better. And understand what you mean and what message you are passing on.

Your poetry was pleasent, however you didn't answer the questions. Or even attempt to answer my questions. Why do you consider fear to be compatible with your relationship to God? You cannot filter this kind of thing through the Christ. Because through Him you are also also connected to God. So if you fear God, to some degree you should be fearing Christ, by that logic.
 
The Son

alcyone said:
... So if you fear God, to some degree you should be fearing Christ, by that logic.
Click to expand...

I fear The good Lord. If I met Jesus in person I would not look him into his eyes. He was tortured and died for me. I hope I am worthy.

With respect to The Son there is only this to state again: The Son is the meaning of life. Jesus is Gods intention with man, and every thing we do will come to life in The Son. The Son will justify and The Son will condemn. The Son is synonymous with the consequences.

:angel:
 
AWEllingsen said:
I fear The good Lord. If I met Jesus in person I would not look him into his eyes. He was tortured and died for me. I hope I am worthy.

With respect to The Son there is only this to state again: The Son is the meaning of life. Jesus is Gods intention with man, and every thing we do will come to life in The Son. The Son will justify and The Son will condemn. The Son is synonymous with the consequences.

:angel:
Click to expand...

If you couldn't look Him in the eyes, then I guess you have not been living your life in accordance with his intentions. You have made yourself unworthy.

WHY do you fear the GOOD Lord? IF He is Good, you shouldn't have to fear him.

Considering what happened to Jesus according to the Bible, if your God intends that with Mankind then that doesn't sound to me like a very good deity. Or good intentions for that matter.

Where do you get that The Son is synonymous with the 'consequences'? It is by the examples set by how Jesus lived his life that a Christian is supposed to Emulate...whilst keeping the word of the Lord sacred. Condemnation is brought on yourself based on comparison of your lifes deeds to the template laid out based on Jesus' life.


============================================
INFJ moment.....
Damn it! I'm not even a Christian and I'm trying to argue for one!
What is happening to me!.....
 
alcyone said:
Where do you get that The Son is synonymous with the 'consequences'? It is by the examples set by how Jesus lived his life that a Christian is supposed to Emulate...whilst keeping the word of the Lord sacred. Condemnation is brought on yourself based on comparison of your lifes deeds to the template laid out based on Jesus' life.
Click to expand...

And Jesus died so that the sinner could live ... That is the example of Christ. Which one will do only if acting by faith - in the outcome.

:smile:
 
AWEllingsen said:
What are you implying?
Click to expand...

If it needs to be spelled out...

Are you going to counter the positions stated in the original post with something other than sophisty, allusion, and proselytizing?

Give us your ideas, the supporting facts, historical data etc.

Something WE can check into. The academic avenues we can explore.

In short. We want information.... If you want to change our minds, you will have to appeal to it from with a scholarly approach.
 
I think I prefer the debate on the semantics of faith to listening to AWEllingsen masturbating himself with the New Testament. :mpick:

But who knows, maybe he will surprise me.
 
alcyone said:
... Give us your ideas, the supporting facts, historical data etc.

Something WE can check into. The academic avenues we can explore
Click to expand...

♥ " ... For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. ..." ♥ (I Corinthians 1:22-24)

:smile:
 
AWEllingsen said:
♥ " ... For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. ..." ♥ (I Corinthians 1:22-24)

:smile:
Click to expand...

Nope, figured as much.
 
Biblical references do not count as the book is interprative, some of its accounts were transposed years after the events...years in which the stories no doubt grew and were embellished....as opposed to say the Art of War by Sun Tsu..... Or a reference from the writings of an ancient historian. The Bible was suborned by the Institutions and editied and twisted as such to increase the power of said Institutions over the masses.

It's accuracy and factulness are suspect to say the least.

It is therefore not a verifiable source of information. Next source please.
 
:mno:

Alcyone. Give it up. He is a troll by definition.

"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion."

He has proven he has no interest in the topic of discussion, only provoking emotional reactions and derailing this thread.

Pray for him, don't feed him. :ml:
 
Last edited:
I suppose....I keep hoping someone will provide me with an avenue of study that is based on archaeological relevation.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top