h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

people who discard religion as wrong are wrong - there may or may not be truth in it, which cannot be determined from a strictly philosophiocal point of view.

people who say 'all christians believe the bible is truth' are also wrong - many are moderate christians weho see the bible as a book with some guidelines in and a lot of rubbish and a lot of contextual and hostorical chaff to be got through. those christians who say that the bible is true in its entirety are very wrong. and have the wrong end of the stick.

Yes, quite interesting thread. Personally, I am quite strongly of the belief that religion's primary raison d'etre is political, regardless of whatever the motivation of its (human) creators.

RE: post 66

"Christ is not god."

Whoa, major point here. Christ is God, the Son. He could not have atoned for the sins of the world and therefore have been "the conduit to salvation" if he wasn't. There's no point in believing in him if he is not God.

RE: post 81

The bible IS true in its entirety. "All Scripture is God-breathed." 2 Timothy 3:16 The consequence of this: Scripture is infallible, since God is perfect. And it does say "ALL."

I know that this is a major point, so I'm ready for a debate here.

RE: post 57

Objective: "of or having to do with a known or perceived object, as distinguished from something existing only in the mind of the subject, or person thinking."

God: The "I AM WHO I AM" or "I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE." The one who was and is and is to come.

The whole point here is that God is, and that doesn't need explanation.

You dislike the fact that I refer to the Bible, which is the Word of God, written by men divinely inspired. How else could so many who did not know each other write about God and always make him out to be the same as the others? To what do you appeal to make your arguments, besides your own beliefs?

"Invisible qualities" means uncommunicated properties, i.e. those aspects of God which he did not give also to man when he created man in his image. Invisible meaning not seen on earth. Besides, you're using the word 'seen' equivocally: it can mean more than just "perceiving with your eyes," you know.

Rome existed two thousand years ago; do you not believe in it? You have committed the fallacy of chronological snobbery.

We are all Gods children. Just as Christ.

Children?....or parts of the same thing?

Sometimes I think Children was used because the truth was either unacceptable to most people or the words simply don't exist to explain the reality.

Most Scientists will admit the Universe had a beginning.
If so what is so hard about admitting that it also had a creator?

Just look around you...
Does anyone here SERIOUSLY think that all this happened by accident.
The evidence for creation is right under our noses all the time.
shagbark

alec.

oh no.

the point is that just cos the bible says it is true, and i know it fdoes, doesnt make it true.

what if i claim to be the messiah? who is there to say im not? if i wrote it down and called it scripture that doesnt make it true does it.

the bible has many contradictions and wrongnesses in. pi = 3, it says at one point. the gospels dont agree with each othe r(jesus attacks the temple at the end in matthew mark and luke, but he does it at the start of john)

some of it is true, but not all of it

especially as we have a letter (from eusebious) from about the 3rd century AD which says that at that time Paul's letters were not the word of God, but merely the word of a good man. thus, if the canon has not always been considered canon, how can it all be definitionally true?

my own view is that cos everything has a cause, the universe must have a cause too - we dont know what it is. it may, or may not be a God. but if it is a God, he does not intervene.

Well, you've succeeded, and it looks as if both sides of the argument have been presented. I think, personally, that religion is different for everyone (even if they both go to the same church) because it implies faith in something, and faith means taking a leap into the unknown and, therefore, into your own soul. To have faith in God, you have to have faith in you first. It wouldnt make sense to believe in God and think you're helpless.

Personally, I'm comfortable with God where He/She/It/They forgive mistakes and teach people to be better. From me that's important. But, I'm not up for saying that unbelievers go to hell or anything. I think belief has to come from each individual, and we're all different.

Also, a good book that really puts "real" (unquestionable) belief into perspective is called ARENA, by Karan Hancock. It really makes you understand what is asked by christianity. Basically, trust and paience, and both can be good. Or they can be your downfall.

Anna *mystified by what mayhem religion can cause*

"Does anyone here SERIOUSLY think that all this happened by accident."

Yes, I do. The word "accident" misleads slightly though, things weren't just jumbled up and hey presto! we get the universe. If you replace "happened by accident" with "evolved" (not in the strict biological sense of course) that is more the way things seem to have happened.

Isn't it strange alec, that the evidence that you cite as being for creation is also my evidence against it? From my point of view, the only difference is that I have come to the conclusion from what I have learnt and experienced and you seem to have come to your conclusion despite what you have learnt.

I honestly don't see the need for a creator. He is obsolete.

Ste

but that doesnt mean there isnt a creator. concede that, at least.

RE: post 90

Well... I am not interested in arguing with other Christians. I do not believe that it is possible to be a Christian mentally if you don't believe that the Bible is absolutely true, but I see that you know quite a lot about the history of the Bible that I don't, so you may understand something that I don't. I doubt that very much, but shall we agree to disagree, and will you pray about it?



No-one knows the exact value of pi. When I say that the Bible is absolutely true, that does not mean that I read it differently than any other piece of literature. Context, syntax, grammar, translation, and the culture of the writers must all be taken into account. Taking all those into account does not make any part of the Bible untrue! The Bible includes poetry, prophecy, history, biography, and many other forms of literature, all of which should be read as literature. It would be stupid to treat it otherwise. Again, reading it as literature still does not make any of it untrue.



There are two possible explanations for this: 1. There were two separate cleansings, one at the beginning of his ministry, the other at the end. There are different details in both accounts that support this theory. 2. There was only one cleansing, but John placed it at the beginning of his narrative for theological reasons. John is not one of the synoptic gospels, you know.



How is it that you are putting this man's words ahead of Paul's? Paul said that he had been given "surpassingly great revelations." If God can divinely inspire Scripture, he can make sure that the canon is complete, with no excess or omission.

If you put more study into the supposed "contradictions and wrongnesses" in the Bible, you would find that no-one has ever been able to prove the Bible wrong. It is interesting that your name rebukes those of little faith. I would encourage you to heed your own warning.

The last bit was a personal opinion so I would only concede a slim, tiny chance that there is one, sneakily hiding away in the dark corners of the holes in our understanding of the universe. But the fact there is no need for a creator to explain everything doesn't *strictly* mean that there isn't one, yes, but it isn't looking too likely now is it?

Ste

RE: post 92

That is a very dangerous outlook to take. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." In another place, we are warned not to be fooled by the spirit of this age, but to be filled with the Holy Spirit. The spirit of this age is precisely the one that you profess, a subjectivism that says to each his own. True, a relationship with God means knowing him personally, but those who know him all know the same God, and know him to be just the same as all the others who know him.

Another good book that puts "real belief into perspective" is the Bible. You either believe or you don't. End of story.

And you're right about religion. "Religion" is a crutch, a thing of this world, like politics or science. Knowing Christ is what is important, and that is what makes Christianity different from all other "religions:" it is a friendship, not a practice, or in other words, not a "religion."

RE: post 296

Not to you, perhaps. To others of us, it is impossible for it to be otherwise.

Sorry, that last should have been RE: post 96

"Christianity different from all other "religions:" it is a friendship, not a practice, or in other words, not a "religion." "

Try telling that to the Jews, Moors and all the others that Christians have put to the sword in the name of Christ. With friends like those, who needs enemies, right?

And as for quoting the Bible to justify the authenticity of the Bible, well, that's the most moronic (and Mormonic, hehehe) thing I've ever heard. Did thEntity work in Enron's Accounting and Compliance department, perhaps?

And as for pointing to the world around and using that as justification for a creator, well, the nastiest thing on this planet is man, so if we are made in His image, God, as they say, help us!

And what makes you right? Don't you ever get the sensation that you've been brainwashed since birth, or become addicted to a drug?