Does Anyone Else Find That Communication...
Family & Relationships0 min ago
Which is the one True Religion?
No what we happen to believe, the truth is the truth regardless of belief. There are so many different religions to choose from, and if any of them are right it can only be one of them. All the others are wrong. If I have chosen the wrong one, does that make me a bad person? Does it mean I could go to Hell even if I'm a good person?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Aonz. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Squirrel, re blue shift : The universe doesn't have a centre as such, it is essentially uniform, so every part is moving away from every other part. Thats why you see we only see red-shift. A good analogy is a balloon with biro points marked on it - as it expands every point moves away from every other point. (and not even a mention of religion )
-- answer removed --
Sorry Squirrel, but I have one more question for you. My understanding is that evolution can be summed up as the survival of the fittest. If that is true, why would some animals put themselves in harms way to protect their offspring? Why would they care if their offspring survived? I believe God created this instinct in animals - and man. He says - fill the earth and subdue it.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Wow, it appears I touched a nerve with this question :)
As I have already said a truth is a truth, it doesn't require that you believe it is true to be so. Our perception, however, is how we as individuals, translate that reality into information that we can use in order to relate to the external world. In other words, we all have our own personal version of the universe that we carry around in our heads. We are, each of us, in our perception of the world, both unique and totally alone.
Hey Ewood27. I am Christian (so this is just MY belief) but when the Lord Jesus died he went into the eternity realms (where you go when you die) and forgave and taught all those people who had lived and died before he had come to the earth. Afterward, he ascended into heaven. That's my belief anyway.
Waldomcfroog-I know people are always saying 'how could God have created the earth in six days? that must be a myth' perhaps God's idea of a day is longer than our idea of a day. perhaps his 'day' is thousands of years. (a theory) also, nobody really knows how long it took the earth to be formed, right? I mean, there is no proof, no one was there...(I am probably going to have to eat those words later or something because I KNOW some scientist has miraculously explained that question too)
"Consistency: This is a quote from David Guzik, "How could God "hate" Esau?"
Well, it's not really relevant what a commentator said. The Bible uses the word hate to define God's feelings towards Esau and is therefore in contradiction with other statements in that self same document. If you insist on using the bible as proof for various things having happened, you must accept the bible, not someone else's interpretation of it, when it contradicts itself.
Genealogies. Your point is non-sensical. It seeks, in the same manner of conspiracy theories, to fit bend reality to fit a pre-determined conclusion - in this case, that Jesus is decended from David. The arguement given in the link seems to work, but is not logical. If genealogy is traced via a particular kinship line, then that is how it is traced, whether that line is matrilineal, patrilineal or something else. It is not conceivable that two accounts written within a relatively few years of each other, by men from the same culture would use such radically different genealogies, yet fail to identify their use of a non-standard methodology. It makes no sense, given the document is supposed to be accecssible to every person, rather than an educated class.
I don't know enough about the use of the word grave, and there are certainly mistranslations throughout the bible - Mary being a virgin being the key one, whereas the original word merely meant young unmarried woman (specifically 'maiden') - so I'll accept it, but it's not the only confusion on the issue of raising from the dead by any imagination.
Squirrel addressed your point about evolution quite adequately, so no point in me mentioning more at the mo.
In your discussion of the creation, you simply prove that you understand the 6 days to be metaphorical.
Well, it's not really relevant what a commentator said. The Bible uses the word hate to define God's feelings towards Esau and is therefore in contradiction with other statements in that self same document. If you insist on using the bible as proof for various things having happened, you must accept the bible, not someone else's interpretation of it, when it contradicts itself.
Genealogies. Your point is non-sensical. It seeks, in the same manner of conspiracy theories, to fit bend reality to fit a pre-determined conclusion - in this case, that Jesus is decended from David. The arguement given in the link seems to work, but is not logical. If genealogy is traced via a particular kinship line, then that is how it is traced, whether that line is matrilineal, patrilineal or something else. It is not conceivable that two accounts written within a relatively few years of each other, by men from the same culture would use such radically different genealogies, yet fail to identify their use of a non-standard methodology. It makes no sense, given the document is supposed to be accecssible to every person, rather than an educated class.
I don't know enough about the use of the word grave, and there are certainly mistranslations throughout the bible - Mary being a virgin being the key one, whereas the original word merely meant young unmarried woman (specifically 'maiden') - so I'll accept it, but it's not the only confusion on the issue of raising from the dead by any imagination.
Squirrel addressed your point about evolution quite adequately, so no point in me mentioning more at the mo.
In your discussion of the creation, you simply prove that you understand the 6 days to be metaphorical.
"I know people are always saying 'how could God have created the earth in six days? that must be a myth' perhaps God's idea of a day is longer than our idea of a day. perhaps his 'day' is thousands of years. "
I agree entirely. I used to say the same thing back when I *did* bash the bible, but fundamentalist christians would argue, 'Aaaah, no; how stupid is that? The bible is completely true, every word of it, and God really did make the world in just six days - yes, days, as in 24 hours. How thick are you to even think otherwise? Aaah!' I would argue the t*ss that it is a metaphor designed to convey God's power and authorship and they would say that I didn't understand the fact that the bible was completely literal. In this instance, I'm not arguing the existance of God (though I am an athiest) merely the idiocy of a fundamentalist approach. Especially when, as discussed in another answer, the bible is full of mistranslations (both actual and potential).
I agree entirely. I used to say the same thing back when I *did* bash the bible, but fundamentalist christians would argue, 'Aaaah, no; how stupid is that? The bible is completely true, every word of it, and God really did make the world in just six days - yes, days, as in 24 hours. How thick are you to even think otherwise? Aaah!' I would argue the t*ss that it is a metaphor designed to convey God's power and authorship and they would say that I didn't understand the fact that the bible was completely literal. In this instance, I'm not arguing the existance of God (though I am an athiest) merely the idiocy of a fundamentalist approach. Especially when, as discussed in another answer, the bible is full of mistranslations (both actual and potential).
Sorry for not posting on this thread (when it was active) all of a sudden - I got caught by that "Next 11 of 31" thing. As I am linking to this topic, I might as well link from it as well. If you feel like reading a small novel today, may I suggest putting it away and reading the God-related topics on the Answerbank instead? It may grant you eternal happiness, you never know, and I'm sure (should they read this) that those who have posted would like to know if anyone has changed their beliefs as a result of reading.
� http://new.theanswerbank.co.uk/DisplayAnswers.go?q
uestion_id=29053&category_id=18&index=0
� http://new.theanswerbank.co.uk/DisplayAnswers.go?q
uestion_id=28506&category_id=18&index=6
� http://new.theanswerbank.co.uk/DisplayAnswers.go?q
uestion_id=29053&category_id=18&index=0
� http://new.theanswerbank.co.uk/DisplayAnswers.go?q
uestion_id=28506&category_id=18&index=6
