Another Big Big Thread of Religious Discussion

[Bob The Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ZAKtheGeek

You didn't say anything about repentance before. You just said belief.

Sorry, this is just another mistake to add to the long list of errors I've made in this thread. I don't know, this forum is some sort of self-inflicted pain that I for some reason can't rid myself of.

[sophomore]

OK, since this is a limited thread, and reading through its entirety is both daunting and tangential, could someone give a basic overview of how the current argument has developed?

The way it looks now, the situation is such that we're dealing with a contemporary western (post-Great Awakening) view of Christian theology, and why we disagree with or proponent that understanding.

Have there been any proponents of the orthodoxy understandings, etc?

And would there be a way to set up a basic breakdown on the first page so this would be easier to manage? I notice Fifth has the first post, are you willing to attempt such a thing? I mean, established threads are good and all, but jumping in ain't exactly the easiest thing to do. I responded to an unanswered post from three pages back which looked to me like a shot in the dark, but basic traces would be nice to know about beforehand (in case it wasn't, etc.)

[Frostatine]

basically this is an argument with no point, no sides, and no end.

[P-Sleazy]

Actually, I would grade this as an arguement with an infinitesmial amount of points, sides, and ends. But thats religion for you isn't it? Each viewpoint brings a different belief into the mix.

[Elminster_Amaur]

The Bible specifically states that a good life won't get you in to heaven on it's own.

Please show me where Jesus said this. No one else, it must be red-lettered text. If it's not red-lettered, then I'm not accepting it, because the only person who could possibly interpret what Jesus meant was Jesus. Even red lettered text is dubious, since most of it was written from memory, but if quotes and red letters are used, then the writers tried their best at not altering it. Anything more is from their viewpoint, and I have reason to doubt two of the four who actually chronicled Jesus' life (Mathew, Mark, Luke and John) did anything more than copy from one of the others.

Edit:

If you take a literal interpretation of Revelation, Heaven is supposed to have a set of laws of physics and thermodynamics completely different from our own. Also, it's made by God, so of course all of these things are possible. I hate how I keep being called ignorant though.

Also, why would you take anything from Revelation literal? Do you seriously think that four angels are going to release the winds at the "four corners of the earth"? I mean, the Earth is round. It doesn't have corners. A giant dragon and a third of the stars in the sky are going to fall? I'm pretty damn sure that all of Revelation is metaphorical. And like I said, anything made by God could not contain his entirety. He's not a physical being. He is completely Spirit, and in all places at all times, which means that if he did contain himself at any one place in any of his creations, HE WOULD DRAIN THE LIFE OF THE OTHERS AT ALL TIMES AND PLACES. What don't you get about Him being all things? The nature of omnipresence excludes the ability to exist in a singular place. You can meet the Deity or the Avatar, but never can you see the true Creator in a physical plane of existence.

And an aside, I never called you ignorant.

[Sir Pinkleton]

Originally Posted by Elminster_Amaur

Also, why would you take anything from Revelation literal? Do you seriously think that four angels are going to release the winds at the "four corners of the earth"? I mean, the Earth is round. It doesn't have corners. A giant dragon and a third of the stars in the sky are going to fall? I'm pretty damn sure that all of Revelation is metaphorical. And like I said, anything made by God could not contain his entirety. He's not a physical being. He is completely Spirit, and in all places at all times, which means that if he did contain himself at any one place in any of his creations, HE WOULD DRAIN THE LIFE OF THE OTHERS AT ALL TIMES AND PLACES. What don't you get about Him being all things? The nature of omnipresence excludes the ability to exist in a singular place. You can meet the Deity or the Avatar, but never can you see the true Creator in a physical plane of existence.

I think what he meant was that it's god, so he can do whatever-the-hell he wants, including warping reality/physics.
Barring that, maybe it's not so much that you meet the actually person God, but that you can hear him clearly or something like that, which would be practically the same thing I'd imagine.

[ZAKtheGeek]

Originally Posted by Elminster

Also, why would you take anything from Revelation literal? Do you seriously think that four angels are going to release the winds at the "four corners of the earth"? I mean, the Earth is round. It doesn't have corners. A giant dragon and a third of the stars in the sky are going to fall? I'm pretty damn sure that all of Revelation is metaphorical.

A virgin birth? A resurrection and ascension into "heaven?" I'm pretty sure Jesus is metaphorical.

[POS Industries]

Originally Posted by ZAKtheGeek

A virgin birth? A resurrection and ascension into "heaven?" I'm pretty sure Jesus is metaphorical.

Not that I believe either of those things happened, but that's a pretty poor comparison. Asexual reproduction, reanimation of the dead, and moving from one plane of existence to another aren't necessarily impossible (though highly improbable) whereas the Earth doesn't have corners and stars can't fall from the sky because they are actually giant flaming nuclear gas balls millions of lightyears away.

There's a difference between tall tales (virgin birth, resurrection) and poetic license (crazy shit in Revelations). That is, if we're going with "poetic license" in this case, as it would seem to me that the more applicable term is "drug trip".

[ZAKtheGeek]

I don't know, it seems equally factual to me that the earth is round and that people don't come back to life many hours after having been crucified.

[Demetrius]

Please show me where Jesus said this. No one else, it must be red-lettered text. If it's not red-lettered, then I'm not accepting it, because the only person who could possibly interpret what Jesus meant was Jesus. Even red lettered text is dubious, since most of it was written from memory, but if quotes and red letters are used, then the writers tried their best at not altering it. Anything more is from their viewpoint, and I have reason to doubt two of the four who actually chronicled Jesus' life (Mathew, Mark, Luke and John) did anything more than copy from one of the others.

Answering...

Originally Posted by John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.