Posted on 09/07/2001 6:44:52 AM PDT by marshmallow
Philosophers have been contemplating the meaning of truth for thousands of years. No one has come up with one over-riding truth that all people can agree on. Even the "Golden Rule" is spit on by some. Would some of the Holy Rollers present on FR really want someone else coming into their homes and telling them how to live their lives? Of course not. All religions require some kind of personal faith. After all that is what religions are about, your faith in what it all means and what the ultimate end is. My faith makes a certain sense to me. After looking at all the others, and their adherents, I decided I'd study up on the religion of my fore-fathers. It strikes a cord within me somewhere that "feels right". The system of honor, no fear of death, personal responsiblity, importance of the family, honesty, and courage is built in to the religious beliefs. As for a yardstick for measuring truth, I try to use the Golden Rule for most situations. "An it harm none" can be a good delimiter as well, although some confuse "doing no harm" with not defending yourself. That is wrong because you are then allowing the harm to be done to yourself against your will.
I really wandered around their didn't I? I hope I mangaed to get something across. ;-)
Many times. Fortunately, the vast majority of texts agree with each other, even when there's been no interaction with the holders of other texts of the same type. For some of the books, there are fragments as early as the first century.
However, the earliest texts were written almost a generation after the fact. As has been pointed out, grapevine type oral traditions are notorious for changes to the original story. Also, both books of the Bible were translated from other languages. The errors alone from that have never been questioned. "Pepsi gives you life" translated into chinese and back again turns into "Pepsi brings your ancestors back from the grave."
Try reading the Good news Bible, and then the KJV. Tell me that something doesn't get lost in the translation.
You're implying that the book of Thomas was part of the Bible to begin with, and was taken out. It wasn't.
No. It was a gospel rejected by men. Click here. These are supposedly Christs own words. The scroll itself dates as early as any of the other original manuscripts. However, it doesn't exactly fit Church docturine now does it? This is more of a threat to the church as an institution, than it is to Christianity.
Why would you think I have any interest in doing that?
Most people of strong faith, feel that others that believe differently are "bad". "Wrong". "Sinners". "Evil". They will tell you that you MUST be saved, some will even take it as far as death threats. While I didn't mean to imply that you were such a person, I have been blind sided by a few here on FR that would rather try and wish me ill, than pray that I have a change of heart.
Sorry this rambles a bit. I'm really not that eloquent and I feel I'm leaving literally pages of discussion out.
It doesn't matter if people agree with it, it just has to be true. For a long time, no one at all thought there was any such place as Pluto. The planet still existed. (You might bring up the controversy over whether Pluto is in fact a planet, but that doesn't effect that fact that Pluto is there. "Planet" is a somewhat arbitrary classification, and you could change it by getting a bunch of scientists to agree. What scientists can't change is the fact that there's a lump of rock circling the Sun in tandem with another lump of rock.)
What I got, for the most part, is that your beliefs fulfill your own personal needs, and that's enough for you. In that case, we're going about this in different ways altogether. A religion is useless to me unless it gives me accurate information about the world external to me. From what you said, it may not matter to you whether or not there's a being out there named Odin. I do care if there's such a person as Jesus.
"Pepsi gives you life" translated into chinese and back again turns into "Pepsi brings your ancestors back from the grave."
That's using certain types of computer programs to do the translating. The Bible has been translated into English by humans, who can tell what the original actually meant.
Try reading the Good news Bible, and then the KJV. Tell me that something doesn't get lost in the translation.
The KJV is the correct one.
I mentioned manuscripts that all agreed with each other. The text contained in those manuscripts is called the Textus Receptus. Two scholars around the last turn of the century decided(based on no evidence I've seen) that the TR was wrong. They then set about to reconstruct what the "original" said based on the handful of deviating texts. Unfortunately for them, on the points where they deviated from the TR their texts agreed with the TR as often as they agreed with each other. Their text is popular with publishers because it's shorter, and for the most part the KJV is the only translation from the Textus Receptus around. They're still wrong, though. There was no manuscript anywhere in the world that agreed with their version until they wrote it, but there were many manuscripts agreeing with each other going as far back we have manuscripts. Quotations from the Bible by early Christian writters are always TR.
Most people of strong faith, feel that others that believe differently are "bad". "Wrong". "Sinners". "Evil".
Guilty as charged. I think you're wrong in the sense that your beliefs are factually incorrect, and I think everyone(which would include you) is bad, evil, and a sinner(hence the need for a savior).
That doesn't mean I want to do anything to you.
In yours you got a God nukin' cities, burnin' people in lakes of fire, people commin' back from the dead, an burnin' bushes.
I can easily say that my Gods exist and yours don't. You could assert the reverse. However, neither of us can prove a damn thing. Neither of us will know for sure until we die.
I got mine, you got yours, let's agree to disagree an' maybe someday I'll buy you a beer. ;-)
Ah, but they don't really mean it. Because if many were really allowed to "do what thou wilt", they'd find out the home addresses of alphabet soup agents, and .....well I'm not a prognosticator, just a logical analyst.
So what they really mean is "do what we wilt", but definitely not what "thou wilt".
BTW, love your 'kit' poster.
Yours are factually incorrect because there aren't giants, valkyries, and so one, but there is a God who nukes cities and people will come back from the dead.
I can easily say that my Gods exist and yours don't. You could assert the reverse. However, neither of us can prove a damn thing.
I can prove it, and I'd hoped you would ask me to do so.
I got mine, you got yours, let's agree to disagree an' maybe someday I'll buy you a beer. ;-)
But disagreeing, and going into the reasons why, is so much fun. (That's part of the reason I'm here.) Beer's fun too, of course.
Under those conditions, Christianity couldn't have even begun unless something like the events in the Gospel had happened. The fact of Christianity's existense proves that a man claiming to be the Messiah arrived in Jerusalem, got in trouble with the authorities, and was executed.
Do you agree so far?
You do if you're going to keep posting the same trite lines.
It is you, not me that finds the need to disrupt a religious thread - as if you are missing something.
The author of this poorly written diatribe attacks the fundamental promise of the First Amendment by asserting that while all religions are equal, some are more equal than others.
I am missing the logic in this. And if left unchallenged, that kind of thinking will leave us all missing our individual rights.
Let go your hate, Storm. We are not your enemies.
Never said you were. Follow me around some more and you'll see that we atheists are not what you think - not all of us. And you might see that not all who claim to be Christians really share your values.
But I don't post on the Sabbath. ;^)
Since the Sabbath is Saturday, you might be correct this time.
Yo, Robinson... what the f%ck? What'd I do that deserved to have a reply pulled?
Tell me. I really want to know. You have my E-mail address. Clue me in. This is the first time I remember ever having a post pulled. What'd I do?
But back to what we were discussing, why don't you agree? You've gotta give me more to work with than that!
As you can see, there is still plenty of room for debate over whether or not ANY of the events in the NT actually took place.
I'm not impressed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.