My Religion can talk in circles better than your Religion

[Arikay]

Person 1: My religion X says your religion is satanic, Evil and false.
See, ::Quotes scripture from X's holy book.::
And I believe it because my religion is the truth.

Person 2: My religion Y says your religion is satanic, Evil and false.
See, ::Quotes scripture from Y's holy book.::
And I believe it because my religion is the truth.

Person 1: Is not, because my religion is the true religion.

Person 2: Is too, Because my religion is the true religion.

Person 1: Your religion is evil.

Person 2: No, your religion is evil.

Person 1:

Person 2:


Who is right? And does anyone care?
Does anyone really think this convinces anyone beyond the choir?

 

[Crispie]

Who is right? Well, obviously your talking about Christians, now go dig up some facts on archealogical and scientific facts, and fulfilled prophecys, and then you realize some of the reasons why we arent so blind faithed as people may think.

 

[ravenwolf]

i think she was trying to make a point on what is so common in these threads

 

[Arikay]

I have, and neither helps christianity. Matter of fact, depending on the christian group, it can hurt them.

As far as prophecies go, I would recomend looking up WinAce's (I believe it was him) GA thread about prophecies.

Who is right? Well, obviously your talking about Christians, now go dig up some facts on archealogical and scientific facts, and fulfilled prophecys, and then you realize some of the reasons why we arent so blind faithed as people may think.

 

[RoboMastodon]

Who is right? Well, obviously your talking about Christians, now go dig up some facts on archealogical and scientific facts, and fulfilled prophecys, and then you realize some of the reasons why we arent so blind faithed as people may think.

There is very little historical evidence for Christ all there are is one vague contemporary reference and a bunch of reference post-ex-facto none earlier than 150 A.D. If you want to talk about scientific, hmm, a man dies and is resurrected 3 days later. Does that sound like science to you? Last time I checked there were no scientific articles published in journals regarding the nature of Christ's resurrection. Unless you are talking about "creation science" which in that case don't even bother replying becasue I'm not (see Creation and Evolution forum for all the refutations of creationism you need).

 

[Zen_Woof]

Person 1: My religion X says your religion is satanic, Evil and false.
See, ::Quotes scripture from X's holy book.::
And I believe it because my religion is the truth.

Person 2: My religion Y says your religion is satanic, Evil and false.
See, ::Quotes scripture from Y's holy book.::
And I believe it because my religion is the truth.

Person 1: Is not, because my religion is the true religion.

Person 2: Is too, Because my religion is the true religion.

Person 1: Your religion is evil.

Person 2: No, your religion is evil.

Person 1:

Person 2:

Very true in many cases, Arikay. Although there are times when peole actually listen to each other and learn from each other too.

With metta,
ZW

 

[AquaDrake]

Well put, Arikay. I've been a lurker on this board and have seen many a thread like that. Would that more people either listened or bothered to do a little research. Or maybe they should just stay quiet if they aren't interested in learning about or listening to what the other has to say?

 

[shawn_h76]

There is very little historical evidence for Christ all there are is one vague contemporary reference and a bunch of reference post-ex-facto none earlier than 150 A.D. If you want to talk about scientific, hmm, a man dies and is resurrected 3 days later. Does that sound like science to you? Last time I checked there were no scientific articles published in journals regarding the nature of Christ's resurrection. Unless you are talking about "creation science" which in that case don't even bother replying becasue I'm not (see Creation and Evolution forum for all the refutations of creationism you need).

Jesus has the power to lay down his life, and has the power to take it up again.

Look into your historical texts, there is proof that there was and is a Jesus.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/087975429X/104-6129810-8023100?v=glance

 

[RoboMastodon]

Jesus has the power to lay down his life, and has the power to take it up again.

How is this in any way scientific?

Look into your historical texts, there is proof that there was and is a Jesus.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/087975429X/104-6129810-8023100?v=glance

Great source you got there. Let's look at the back cover shall we!

In this thoroughly researched study, G.A. Wells has squarely faced the question whether a man named Jesus lived, preached, healed, and died in Palestine during the early years of the first century of the Christian era or indeed any time.
Building on the biblical studies of Christian theologieans. Dr. Wells soberly demonstrates that we have no reliable eyewitnesses to the events depicted in the New Testament. he publicizes a fact known to theological scholars but little-known in the average Christian congregation: that the order of books of the New Testament is not an accurate chronological arrangement: indeed that Paul, who never saw Jesus, wrote his epistles to early Christian congregations before the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, and John were written.
It may come as a great surprise to Christians and other monotheist, to agnostics, atheists, and humanists alike, that "the earliest references to the historical Jesus were so vague that it is not necessary to hold that he ever existed: the rise of the Christian can, from undoubtedly historical antecedent, be explained quite well without him: and reasons can be given to show why from about A.D 50 or 80, Christians began to suppose that he had lived in Palestine about fifty years earlier.
...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/087...236-6429760?_encoding=UTF8&p=S00Q#reader-link