Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, and God

“That's my definition because that's what the Bible's definition is of Christian. One who puts their faith in Jesus/Lord.

A Christian is one who follows Christ. Christ said the we have to rely on God, not of our own works/desires/temptations...

If you want to somehow spin that into some non-existent form of Christianity, one that is based on ... nothing ... then we could play those word games all day.

What is the meaning of "is", or any other word for that matter.

A little common sense is in order when communicating with others. Making up new definitions for words on the fly will only fuel your incorrect beliefs, but will bring you no closer to the truth.”

“i disagree.

you are judging my soul's destination based on your absolute belief in a book.

you believe that that the bible is HIS WORD.

I believe that the bible is a book written by MEN, 2000+/- years ago, translated and transcribed for 1500+/- years by other MEN BY HAND.

When God give's his word to me I listen, in the mean time i'll consider Man's word (the bible) to have some decent ideas and guidlines about how to treat my fellow man, but that's all and i'll hestitate to ever judge anyone elses beliefs (except for those that judge me unfairly)”

“you are judging my soul's destination based on your absolute belief in a book. - sacco

But I don't know if you will come to know God before your death, so I make no attempt to try to determine if you are saved or not. Like I said, your characterization of Christians comes from left field. I've had this conversation with many Christians from many denominations and I call tell you that Christians don't pretend to know somebody's fate.

A simple case in point is the thief on the cross.

Except for whack-jobs, which I think for sake of discussion we can ignore, Christians don't pretend to pre-judge somebody's fate. Only God knows their fate.”

“"If you want to somehow spin that into some non-existent form of Christianity, one that is based on ... nothing ... then we could play those word games all day."

You can play the word games for eternity, I've had enough of arguing with a brick.

Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and God walk into a bar................”

“Um, MarkO, the "playing of word games" was done by you. That's why I brought it up. I was suggesting we NOT play word games. Sorry if that was hard for you to understand.”

“and for those that fail to conform to your beliefs (that stem from a 2000+/- yr old book written by men) than your determination is that they'll all burn in hell.

nice.

gee, and i'm the judgemental one for picking on christians.”

“Yes you are sacco, and I guess I'll see ya in hell.”

“it completly escapes me how folks can base their lives, their relationships, their interactions with others, their world view on a work of fiction:

"Your complaint should be against God's Word, the Bible. That is the source of your insecurity about your future.”


Completely escapes me.”

“Ah go to hell lee! :)”

“marko, we can chill with gandhi and buddha.”

“nigal, what religion are you anyway?”

“Sarge ---


When you look at Tom Cruise . ... and listen to him (if you do either, at all), what do you think???


Do you think . . ."Wow. Nice guy, but how mistaken could he be??? He is basing his whole world view on some craziness dreamt up by a has-been sci-fi writer (L. Ron Hubbard).

Do you think "What a poor, deluded guy. he has got it all wrong. Basign his life on pure fiction and myth."


{cue the punch line)

Cause there ain' no difference between Christianity and the Bible, Ilsam and the Koran; Judiasm and the Torah, Roman./Greek mythology and bullfinch . .. .



Its all the same. People seeking answers and turning the their particularly choice of mythological scripture.


What empirical reason does a christian have for believing that his new testatment is any better than L Ron Hubbards stuff???


NONE. Zero. Zippo.


You can't use "THE WORD OF GOD" to prove the existence of god.

that is simply illogical.



It is a leap of FAITH>


And once you take that leap my friend . . .you are no different than any Jew, any Muslim, and Buddist or any Scientologist. YOu believe in the unknowable . . .and are simply hoping that your brand of mythology is the right one.”

““nigal, what religion are you anyway?”

Amish Scientologist of the Mountain Assembly. LOL!

I'm B'nai Noach.”

“"marko, we can chill with gandhi and buddha.”
sacco
12:24:20 PM
7/20/05

Great, I can do some of my barbequed chicken thighs.

Do you suppose El Diablo uses propane or charcoal??”

“mmmmmmm el diablo style barbequed chicken thighs urrggghhhh”

“nigal, i thought you said before that you are not jewish?

is there a difference?”

““nigal, i thought you said before that you are not jewish?

is there a difference?”

Yes there is. The whole Torah is for the Jew. Part of it for the Gentiles. The Jews have 10 laws with 613 commands or Mitzvah and the Gentiles have 7 laws with 66 commands or Mitzvah.”

“lee -

My email signature includes a quote from Hubbard:

"The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion."

The Bible makes no such claims. Hubbard is a phoney, by his own admission.

Jews believe in God, as well as Christians, but they don't believe in Christ is the Lord, so they actually take less "leaps of faith" than Christians. In that way they are different. They read the prophesies, but they didn't believe their own Bible when it came to fruition. In that way, they are faithless. So, we don't take the same leap of faith.

Muslims believe a book written by a man who decided to re-write the Bible because he thought that you shouldn't believe a book written by man. I don't think you can compare that leap of faith to Christianity.

Buddism was created by a man who was taught the Bible in a way that poor foundation of the OT. It was created not as a religion, but as a self-help methodology. It wasn't until later that it was considered a religion, only becuase it resembles religion on the surface. It's no more of a leap of faith than yoga or banging on drums in a circle with men in the woods. It's not even really a religion.

Your assumption that a Christian leap of faith is less meaningful than any other leap of faith you take on a daily basis is ridiculous. Take science for example. The list is endless, but science in practice is based on faith. It requires faith in math, faith in perception, faith in predictive modeling. My Christian faith began on a much lesser "leap of faith" than science. I came to know God when I was reading physics book about the origins on the Universe. I was reading authors such as Ferris, Gribbin, Dewdney, Hawking, and Guth. It was their over-reliance on faith, in a system that demands escape from faith, and their disregard for probablity, that led to my being saved.

Also, your assumption that I believe the unknowable is false.”

“nigal,
ah.

ok.”

“My Christian faith began on a much lesser "leap of faith" than science.

now that's funny!”

““nigal,
ah.

ok.”

Maybe just call it Judaism for Gentiles? Actually the B'nia Noach code is older than Judaism itself.”

“have you always been b'nia noach ?”

“I know it's funny Mutt. It's funny in your cartoon reality. Everything is funny in cartoon reality. Regardless, it's fact.”

“No, Sarge, it's not, but thanks for playing. You seem like a bright guy, but you're hopelessly deluded by your religious beliefs. Pity!
last edited: 7/20/05 1:33:15 PM”

“Mutt, if you think that multiple-universe theory is not based on extreme leaps of faith, you're the one that is hopelessly deluded.

(by the way - I do believe the universe is billions of years old - there is nothing specific in the Bible to negate that)”

“Ah, so you're using theoretical physics as the basis of your claim. Heh. Might as well let you keep digging.”

“Um, Mutt - I hate to break this to you, but ALL science dealing with our origins IS theoretical.”

““have you always been b'nia noach ?”

No, I was a devout christian for nearly a decade before studying Judaism, finding my place in the world and leaving christianity.”

“You'll be back. You'll discover the hypocricy of writing God as "G-d", as if God is some kind of idiot and didn't know what you meant.”

“Non sequitur, Sarge. You compared your religious faith with "science" in general:

My Christian faith began on a much lesser "leap of faith" than science.

Now you're trying to backpeddal - rather unsuccessfully I might add - and fatuously move the goalposts, so to speak, to the extremes of theoretical physics.

It's rather obvious you're new to this Internet debate thingy - like I said, better to watch yourself dig your hole. No effort required on my part.”

“what if this was the Easter bunny???



”

“Mutt, I came to faith by reading science and noticing the faith required to subscribe to it.

That is not a debate. That is a fact.

Whether or not you think that's a good reason is up for debate, but the fact that it happened is fact.

Speaking of being new to this Internet "debate thingy" ...

Maybe you should learn to distinguish between debatable concepts and factual concepts.”

“One more time for you Mutt -

My belief in God is based on facts I accumulated.

Much of origin-science is based on faith.

Your premise that my religion is based on faith, therefore it's as worthless as other philosophies/religions, is non sequitur, as your demonstrate in your own post to me where you believed I was giving a relative comparison of my faith to science.

You dug your own hole Mutt.
last edited: 7/20/05 1:59:42 PM”

“Facts is facts, huh?”

“Mutt, I came to faith by reading science and noticing the faith required to subscribe to it.

Now we're back to science in general.

That is not a debate. That is a fact.

You put forth at least two arguments: that you acquired faith in a child-god by reading science; that it takes a lot more faith to believe in science than your child-god. You want to attribute my critique of the second to the first. Nice debate ploy, but you're clearly demonstrating that you're intellecually dishonest.

I'll be generous and suggest that it was your poor writing style that has you doing these silly gymnastics. You certainly need to learn to clearly state what you mean. Debate 101!”

“Your premise that my religion is based on faith, therefore it's as worthless as other philosophies/religions,

What's this?!?! A strawman from the king of strawmans??!??!?!

God, I love these gotchas. You're making it too easy, though. I don't want to get too bored with this. :-)”

“Yes MarkO. It's a fact that that led to my determination about God. To baby it up for you since you phrased it as a question - It can be a fact that one's opinion is their opinion. My opinion is my opinion, that's a fact. You might not agree with my opinion, but it still is my opinion. The time and way I derived that opinion was a specific event. That event is fact.”

“Now we're back to science in general.

Um, no. I gave you the specific science I was referencing. The science of origins. Did you forget already? Do I need to repeat myself for you each time a topic comes back up? Let me know so I can adjust the conversation to match your memory abilities.

You put forth at least two arguments: that you acquired faith in a child-god by reading science; that it takes a lot more faith to believe in science than your child-god. You want to attribute my critique of the second to the first. Nice debate ploy, but you're clearly demonstrating that you're intellecually dishonest.

Well, if you read what I said instead of your inaccurate paraphrase, you'd realize the true intellecually (sic) dishonest one.

I'll be generous and suggest that it was your poor writing style that has you doing these silly gymnastics. You certainly need to learn to clearly state what you mean. Debate 101!

I'll be generous and reexamine all previously made points for you as I write since you cannot remember them too well. Will that help? Remembering what was said is ... Debate 101!

What's this?!?! A strawman from the king of strawmans??!??!?!

You got me there. Looks like we both have the same problem. I was thinking of lee's post. I'm an idiot.”

“I like your style Mutt.

Gotta go play house. ie - hardware store

Thanks!
last edited: 7/20/05 2:24:16 PM”

“" As a non-Christian, you rely on yourself and your own desires. As a Christian, you must put your faith in God. That's unselfish, by definition.”
Sarge
12:03:14 PM
7/20/05

I dunno - if you believe that faith in God is the only way to getto heaven and avoid burning in hell for ever, you don't need to be unselfish to do everything possible to acheive and embrace that faith.

(I'll add: If you believed God was all powerful and could send you to heaven and hell, but that God was not good, true courage and unselfishness might be to accept damnation to do what you could to oppose God, whereas cowardice and selfishness would lead you to embrace and praise God.)”

“Um, no. I gave you the specific science I was referencing. The science of origins. Did you forget already? Do I need to repeat myself for you each time a topic comes back up? Let me know so I can adjust the conversation to match your memory abilities.

Actually, when you create an item of contention (in this case the scope of science you're referencing) through a risible sophomoric writing style, then it seems elementary to be specific from there on, rather than continuing to use inconsistent, loosey-goosey terminology. Rather liberal/lefty of you to deny this basic responsibility and put it on me! Heh.

Well, if you read what I said instead of your inaccurate paraphrase, you'd realize the true intellecually (sic) dishonest one.

LOL - deny and hope nobody goes back to check. You're going to have to do better than that to get off the ropes:

that it takes a lot more faith to believe in science than your child-god. refers to Your assumption that a Christian leap of faith is less meaningful than any other leap of faith you take on a daily basis is ridiculous. Take science for example. The list is endless, but science in practice is based on faith. It requires faith in math, faith in perception, faith in predictive modeling. My Christian faith began on a much lesser "leap of faith" than science.

You see, there I don't just make an assertion and pray that nobody looks up exactly what was said. I provide clear evidence that you're dishonest. And to think that you could've avoided all this humiliation by just admitting you made a mistake.

I love it - keep it coming Sarge. I live to grind people like you into the mud.”

“Gotta go play house. ie - hardware store

Now it looks like I've run you off, too scared to stay and own up to your mistakes. Taking your ball and running home crying!!! hahahhohohohohahaha!!

Okay, now I'm just funnin' with you.”

“Mud Wrestling, cool!!”

“I dunno - if you believe that faith in God is the only way to getto heaven and avoid burning in hell for ever, you don't need to be unselfish to do everything possible to acheive and embrace that faith. - pedxing

That's assuming that's your basis for faith. That certainly was not my basis for faith. I don't know of ANY Christian personally who came to faith in God because of fear of burning in hell or wanting to get to Heaven. I've heard dozens and dozens of testimonies, and NONE ... NONE ... of them have come to faith for that reason.

PS - I just asked my wife who came from another area (geographic and denominational). She also has never heard of a Christian becoming a Christian for those reason. I asked if she's even heard of one example. She said "no". I didn't provide the context of my question, so she didn't know how answering would benefit my discussion. I think your premise is absurd.
last edited: 7/20/05 3:18:33 PM”

“Actually, when you create an item of contention (in this case the scope of science you're referencing) through a risible sophomoric writing style - Mutt

So you think the following is a "risible sophomoric writing style" - Not specific enough for you Mutt?

I came to know God when I was reading physics book about the origins on the Universe.”

“I will let you and Mutt debate semantics. I will let him try to pin you down, as I did in the Schiavo thread. I've been through that headache and don't need it again.


I will respond with my own personal observation regarding the "leap of faith" needed to believe in the current scientific thought regarding the origins of the universe.


Here's the punch line:


I agree with you.


I do NOT think that science has even scratched the surface of answering these sorts of questions. Nor do I think it will in my lifetime, or my childrens, or for generations after that.

I believe that with each tentative shakey scientific answer, thousands of more questions will be generated.


And you know what . . . I'm okay with that.

I am perfectly comfortable not knowing.

I feel absolutley no need to either a) create a fiction or b) subscribe to someone else's fiction (organized religion) for my internal peace and well being.

What strikes me about organized religion, and all of the rules (think about Jewish eating habits, Catholic dogma etc) . . .is that it is all made up by . . . MAN. It is all a way for man to be comfortable, to gain peace.

I truly believe that, in terms of worth, value, substance of belief systems, that there is no difference between what you believe and what a radical islamic terrorist with bombs strapped to his chest believes.

He believes that by following his fiction he will go to heaven, sit at the right hand of god and have 77 virgins.

You believe that by following your fiction, you will get the same (well . .without the virgins (you should consider upgrading your package)).


Both belief systems are a construct of man . ..neither has any fundemental logical superiority over the other.


Now . .. in general terms I would rather see you get on the bus than him. But both of you are wedded to a fiction.


And you know what .. . that is fine. If it stops you from killing you neighbor . ..great. Its unfortunate that some religions espouse killing your neighbor (as, of course, Christianity has over the centurities . ..it just happens to be in a peaceful period right now . . .well . . .except stupid george bush . ..who thinks he is one of the crusaders of yore . ..smiting the enemy. What a f-ing dope).”

“ I don't think I didn't say the New Testament doesn't say that you have to be a Christian to get to Heaven

i need a chalkboard to diagram that one”

“alright, so the dont and the didnt cancel each other out.

youre left with

the New Testament doesn't say that you have to be a Christian to get to Heaven

interesting”

“by the way - I do believe the universe is billions of years old - there is nothing specific in the Bible to negate that)”
Sarge

what about the earth. do you believe its 5 billion or 5 thousand years old? what about man (poof) from dust or man from ape-like creatures?”

“I will let him try to pin you down, as I did in the Schiavo thread.

Pin me down how? By disagreeing that he didn't commit adultry? That was my argument. I thought you said "I will let you and Mutt debate semantics."

Both belief systems are a construct of man . ..neither has any fundemental logical superiority over the other.

I fully realize that's what you believe. I happen to have personal experience, as do others, that that isn't true. You don't have that experience. Someday you might, you might not.

Its unfortunate that some religions espouse killing your neighbor

The Bible specifically preaches against that. It's written plain as day. Every Christian sins. You seem to think that by looking at a specific group of sinners who claim to be sinners that somehow negates the worth of Christianity? If you can show that people who call themselves Christian are Christian, and that the Bible says that Christians are sinless, you might have something there other than the non sequitur.”