Christianity ruins families.

[Ming]

Of course the purpose of an off topic forum is to discuss differences in opinions. People who come here should not whine about people expressing their believes/opinions over and over again.

But when it is hate speech and bigotry...

I have no problem if people want to believe in Jesus, Thor, Budda, A single holy god with many names, Aliens, Moses, Odin, Zeus, Santa, the Tooth Fairy or whatever... but when those beliefs lead to infringing on the rights of others, they can cram it! Just because some religion thinks they are above the law, doesn't make it so. They are subject to the same laws of the land as everybody else... no matter what myth they believe in.

[rah]

As long as they recognize that it's just an opinion. I have a problem when people state something as fact when it can't be proved.

[Robert]

I think we more or less agree.
BTW both Jesus and Peter told their followers to stop it when people did not want to listen. Jesus said that you should remove the dust from your feet and move on, Peter said that no christian should be hated because he's getting involved with other's affairs all the time.

Unfortunately christians are oftenly hated because of doing exactly that

Of course the purpose of an off topic forum is to discuss differences in opinions. People who come here should not whine about people expressing their believes/opinions over and over again.

[rah]

In the end though, the decision is yours. I'm not supposed to empty your beer can against your will, unless I have proof. and you're right, I have no proof, thus I should go no further then warn you. Maybe twice, but then let it go. I think that counts for all that have faith (or have faith that there's nothing). Don't continue to push people into believes that you can't even proof.

Amen
If I drink the beer and don't die. Please STFU.

And for me that the same as when I tell someone "no thank you"

[Ming]

Sure... as can be seen from MANY posters here, people believe that they are right and everybody else is wrong In many cases, it is simply pure ego, since there is no proof or support for some of the beliefs.

Don't continue to push people into believes that you can't even proof.

While I might have said it differently, that is the point I'm trying to make. "SOME" people seem to want to do just that, with absolutly no proof... discounting everybodies else's beliefs, with nothing to back up theirs but simple faith. Faith is a wonderful thing, but it varies by person. People have faith in different things. And NOBODY can really claim they have MORE or less faith than somebody else simply because that person doesn't believe like they do. It's very possible that the person does have more Faith, but just in something else.

I'm sure most people would like to think that their religion is the true religion... but face it, there are many different relgions out there... and each have their own strong supporters and believers... THEY ALL HAVE STRONG FAITH IN WHAT THEY BELIEVE. They all have some kind of sacred texts... Some myth of creation... Some golded rule... Some myth of an after life... most have pomp and ceremony... traditions, and strong beliefs. The problem is, they can't all be right... and none of them can really argue that fact since there is NO PROOF to support any of them, and they all simply rely on FAITH.

So as much as they try to argue they are the true faith, every religion is in the exact same position, and can argue the same...

[Robert]

I agree with you that faith is personal. (that's why I deliberately placed all those IMHOs and "personally"s in my post)

I disagree that you can't have the opinion that yours is the 'best'. I doubt it's wise to express yourself that way though.

Your main mistake, imho, is that you believe that the believer 'owns' his own belief. If I build a car myself, and claim that my car is the best, then it can be a matter of ego. If a muslim believes that Islam is the best, then that has nothing to do with his ego. He is following an opinion / vision on life, that was not made by him. He just believes it's right.

Not to mention of course that people always have the right to believe that stuff they prefer is better for others. Especially if it's about life or death (in your opinion). If John believes that people who drive red cars will die in a crash, and he really believes it, then he would be a cruel criminal if he would not try to warn red-car drivers. If I believe that your beer is poisioned, and I'm sitting next to you, I would be evil if I would not warn you.

In the end though, the decision is yours. I'm not supposed to empty your beer can against your will, unless I have proof. and you're right, I have no proof, thus I should go no further then warn you. Maybe twice, but then let it go. I think that counts for all that have faith (or have faith that there's nothing). Don't continue to push people into believes that you can't even proof.

[Ming]

It's also the message the myths try to tell.
I personally believe that the main message of christianity is sane, and more important: is in line with my own experiences. (ie. who I am, what I do, what I can't, etc.)

Thanks for actually agreeing with my point. Even you realize it's JUST a personal belief. You have done a great job describing why it's a good personal belief for you. OUTSTANDING. But other people have reasons for believing what they believe, and their reasons are probably as good if not better than yours.

Ultimately, there is NO PROOF for any religion, or lack of belief in a "god". And because of this, it has to come down to faith or personal beliefs. And everybody is different! To make a claim that your belief is better, or faith is stronger than anybody else is simply pure ego, and can NOT be supported.

[Robert]

How do you know it was tied to the crucifixion?

No reason to doubt Helena? Finding a piece of wood 3 centuries after the crucifixion? why would the Romans even have kept just another cross? How would she know it's the real cross? There are a zillion reasons to doubt it.

[Ben Kenobi]

This is not about the veneration of the cross, it's about the crucifixion of Christ.
Some believe that friday might have been a day for fasting and praying during the first 3 centuries of christianity, but not connected to the crucifixion.

That's rather silly. Yes, it was a day of fasting and prayer, but it's always been tied to the crucifixion, just as holy thursday has been tied to the last supper.

As for Helena finding the true cross, I see no reason to doubt the account.

[DaShi]

The Bible is terrible literature. The characters are poorly developed with outlandish origin stories and the plot is filled with holes and lacks continuity. Then there are the Psalms tacked on. Worse than Bumblebutt's LotR songs.

Of course, if you base you beliefs on crap literature, you aren't but a few steps from Scientology.

[Robert]

No, that's why my official response was in the first line of my post.

[DaShi]

Does it matter?

[Robert]

The characters make it trustworthy, the message makes it worthy to follow / worship God.

BTW, as far as I know, Dostoyevsky was a christian himself
Next time use an atheistic author (or did he write Crime and Punishment in his atheistic years? Too lazy to look it up)

[DaShi]

So are the characters in the Crime and Punishment but I don't see you worshiping Dostoyevsky.

[Robert]

So you believe in your Myths, and they believe in theirs... What makes your myth any better than theirs? They probably think your myth is not as good as theirs. And none of you have any proof either way. It all comes down to faith.

It's not just the myths. It's also the message the myths try to tell.
I personally believe that the main message of christianity is sane, and more important: is in line with my own experiences. (ie. who I am, what I do, what I can't, etc.)

As I said earlier in this thread, the story of the original sin, in example, has imho a very strong message and analyzation of the 'human problem'. Apart from the question if this really happened or is only a parable is less important to me then the message. I think it's a very keen observation for such an old text.

Another example could be the way the main characters in the Bible are displayed. All are fallable people who make huge mistakes. That's not in line with how simular stories from those times tell about kings and their main characters. The Bible has in general a pretty realistic view on people, imho. King David, Moses, Salomon, they all have moments of huge weakness. They're all are portrayed as sinners. Despite their huge achievements it is shown that they are also selfish, careless, caring about their image, etc. We're not talking about 'normal' kings in the Bible, like Achab or Jerobeam. No, David, Salomon and Moses, the key persons of the Bible.

But in the end it's only the message that can convince me. Is it a good one or is it bollocks.