Religion encourages ignorance? - Page 18

Derbonic · 04-30-2008, 01:06 PM

In my opinion you are both lost in a desert for years, when the desert can be crossed in just a few days hike. You both obviously know a lot about the bible and its origins and language, but neither of you seem to be able to think outside of your religous upbringing and research. I proudly admit I have almost no knowlege of the bible , Christianinty , Paganism, or any religion other than what I hear from people around me. I am open to new idea's but always exersize my "devils advocate" and try to understand things from as many angles as I can. I have never seen a reason to express my Opinions and Faiths as Truth's or Facts even to myself. That would be dishonest. It would undermine what it means to have an opinion or faith. One should neither assume that the bible is the infalable word of God nor think they have figured out what the "real" meaning behind those words is. The healthy choice is to continue to explore, evaluate, and WONDER. Just when you think you have it figured out and it all seems to make sense, flip it upside down and embrace the unique challenges that surface. Be who you want the people around you to be. Honest.

xexon · 04-30-2008, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

Alright folks
If you want to accept Xexon as an all knowing expert based solely on his experience, go right ahead. I happen to live in the real world, and not in the world of mysticism, and smoke and mirrors.

In my real world, if someone comes to my office looking for a job, claiming he has the qualifications for that job, I have to see proof. If a candidate claims to have the education required, I need him/her to produce evidence to substantiate their claim. A diploma, transcripts, something...

If experience is the basis for a person's claim, I need names of previous employeers, references, something... I really don't believe our business practices are that unique and diverse from others in the real world.

X has made claims that he cannot validate with any authority other than his word. Simply because he said so. Ok, if that is sufficient for you, jump on the bandwagon. I wonder how long it will be until your personal experiences and revelations will be declared null and void (just as mine have been) by someone who claims to have truer and higher enlightenment based completely on their word?

Many of you have asked me "Well, Abel, what proof do you have? A two thousand year old book? Give me a break!" Yeah, that is my proof. And what do you have...? At least I have something tangible, something real I believe in and that I can hold to. Critize me if you want, but I am secure, safe, and confident in my faith.

X, I must point out the major difference between you and Jesus. He is God and you are not. He actually gave evidence of this in His miracles. He walked on water, healed the deaf, healed the blind, raised the dead, even Himself from the dead. You have no proof of your godliness, other than your word.

I know, I know, you will attempt to put some kind of mystical spin on His miracles. "They are metaphores of the inward being..." "They are symbolic of the power hidden within every individual..." Blah, blah, blah... Yuk!

Keep blowing smoke up other's rear end if you want. Your false claims of knowing Jesus and His true purpose, based only on what you think makes you look more foolish than you probably are. Good luck with that.

Eastern thought would say you DON"T live in the real world, but one of your own soul's creation based upon likes and dislikes of the mind. The world of duality. A place where God has been torn down the middle.

This world, is an acid trip of illusion. People are so high on sensory input, they have forsaken their true omniscience in exchange for being a half blind beggar at their own table. They're addicts, and they need help to break the cycle.

I don't need to produce proof of any kind. It is up to you to see what I say or not, according to your abilities to do so. I've already spoken on the nature of miracles. You can be a base atheist and still do miracles. They're not products of a spiritual nature.

I don't wish to give you the impression that I'm a hard person. I was once much like yourself. Raised in a small country baptist church in Alabama many years ago. I'm very familar with how you think and reason. I've been where you are now. There are multitudes of people around you, just like you.

Where I am now, is atop a hill with a magnifcent view compared to where I was. People down in the valley might think I'm strange, as I shout down at what I see from up here.

Rather than think me strange, why not come up and have a look for yourself?

No faith required. Just start walking.

What I see, you can see.

x

Abel · 04-30-2008, 01:17 PM

Og
Well, my point concerning Adam, would be that the Jewish creation story was around for 900 years before buddha spoke of his aham. Seems to me buddha might have stolen the story from Moses. I looked at the wikipedia link you posted and still did not see anything relating to anyone named Aham.

The link I posted in reference to the 18 similarities between Christ and buddha was to show how easily they could be dismissed. I couldn't actually find anything to verify the claims you made. (Such as each being tempted 3 times by Satan).

BTW, nice back-peddling job to cover your blunder concerning buddha's and Christ's virgin birth in which you flatly state: "They are both "virgin born." They are both adaptations of existing religions (i.e. judaism and hinduism)." Then you change it to a view not widely held by buddhists. Santa Claus is a good parallel to buddhism though.

When I said "close but no cigar" I was refering to your attempt to impress me with your knowledge. It seems that your post in response to mine is entirely full of inconsistencies and flip-flops.

AB517 · 04-30-2008, 01:20 PM

[quote=Abel;28475]GX

QUOTE]

Abel,

It is the theology of the Holy Spirit; it fuels the internal flame that it is us all.
You may think it contrary to the bible but it is inline with Jesus. The only way to the father is through me. One interpretation is that He meant the flame. Through the flame in him, it is the same flame in you, me, and us all. We are one flame in the eyes of God, one fire that can burn as bright as the noon day sun if we allow it.

I can only offer myself as a data point for you. It is like seeing a color that no one is taught but when someone is describing it to you, both of you quickly realize that you both saw the same color. Xexon speaks of the Holy Spirit, Karma, Nirvana, Chi, and the like.
He speaks of them for you and me. Jesus is alive, in him, you, me, and everybody else. Do not let the book be an anchor, use it as a step stool. I had to through every thing I thought to be true away to realize this myself.

Your Devils best trick is to convince you that you are separate and that you do not have the power of the Holy Spirit in you. Your devil can only block the light of the flame; you can step over him and see yourself as you really are as easily as you step up onto a street side curb.

There no heresy in allowing the flame of the Holy Spirit to burn brightly in you as a beacon for the other children of earth.

Og · 04-30-2008, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

Og
Well, my point concerning Adam, would be that the Jewish creation story was around for 900 years before buddha spoke of his aham. Seems to me buddha might have stolen the story from Moses. I looked at the wikipedia link you posted and still did not see anything relating to anyone named Aham.

Again, you miss my point. I was not referring to Buddha here. I was talking about the attitudes of the respective cultures towards their relationship to all of creation. You can follow my link to my quote from Joseph Campbell who was a scholar of comparative religion and could read sanskrit amongst other languages. I recommend you follow through with his work if you really want to see the exact texts. The point of the wiki link was to show that the book that campbell referenced well pre-dated buddha and christ.

Quote:

The link I posted in reference to the 18 similarities between Christ and buddha was to show how easily they could be dismissed. I couldn't actually find anything to verify the claims you made. (Such as each being tempted 3 times by Satan).

I agree that those 18 similarities could easily dismissed. Again, an irrelevancy to my claims.

To reference your specific question about the temptations of the buddha, the story says that under the bodhi tree, buddha (before he was buddha) was tempted by Kama, Mara, and Dharma. These are desire, fear, and social duty. Again, the three temptations are mapped into the social context of the respective religions. Maara is "fear".. kama is "desire" (i.e. kama sutra). Etc. You're welcome to look this stuff up for yourself.

All of the statues of Buddha in earth touching posture are of the moment where Buddha defeated all temptations just as christ did.

Quote:

BTW, nice back-peddling job to cover your blunder concerning buddha's and Christ's virgin birth in which you flatly state: "They are both "virgin born." They are both adaptations of existing religions (i.e. judaism and hinduism)." Then you change it to a view not widely held by buddhists. Santa Claus is a good parallel to buddhism though.

No no. I said that it wouldn't be turned into dogma by buddhists. I did not say that it wasn't a widely available buddhist myth. There's no backpedaling here. The point of the virgin birth is not that buddha was actually born of a virgin (he was not, and buddhists don't believe that he was). It is a metaphor for his teachings and is widely used to convey the teachings of the buddha.

Christopher Hitchens frequently misuses this virgin birth story when he renounces the eastern religions in his misguided assault on religion.

Quote:

When I said "close but no cigar" I was refering to your attempt to impress me with your knowledge. It seems that your post in response to mine is entirely full of inconsistencies and flip-flops.

Again, you are wrong. I hope the above clarifies my stance.

GX · 04-30-2008, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

GX
I don't know what different books you are talking about. Both passages came out of my one Bible.

I refer to the book of peter and the book of matthew out of the same bible as did my passage about the lords prayer. The bible is made of many books.

Quote:

I, too, grow weary of sparing with you. It is obvious neither will submit to the other. So be it. As I have said many times, I am not trying to convert, or save anyone. I am not here to "win". I am simply attempting to tell the truth as a Christian. Accept it, or reject it. It's up to you. I'll still sleep good tonight either way.

I didnt grow weary of sparring with you, I just see 2 people pulling quotes from the bible to support their own unique interpretation as a pointless spiritual exercise and offered an example to illustrate that. I also illustrated the fact that one could successfully pull 2 entirely different interpretations out of the same book. As a result, you are not "simply attempting to tell the truth as a christian" as you seem to believe.
1) You are offering up your own unique interpretation of christianity based on your own unique interpretation of the bible.
2) You are accusing X of smoke and mirrors without any tangible refutation.
3) You are not offering any "tangible ideas". You are merely claiming biblical infallibility and using quotes from that bible to back your claims which is a non sequitir

Im challenging you to address the 3 points above which you have thus failed miserably to do. If you are at a loss to address those points and give up. That is your choice.

Quote:

If you want accept X as an expert based on ...something, go right ahead. His views are contrary to Bible and I have pointed them out. I am not satisified that he provided the justification to make his claims, but hey, if you want to jump up on the Xpress train and ride it out, good luck with that

I had to laugh when reading this. Og showed you what X is based on but you refuse to consider it and looked the other way. I cant help that. I am no slave to any one person, ideology or religion but I will listen and pick and choose the ideas to live by that feel right for me.

My point in debating with you is to point out what and how you believe and the inconsistencies in those beliefs so the casual reader learns to think instead of getting caught up in the fear mongering religious point of view you wish to fanatically present that I feel many people are "trapped" in. Especially, when you attack ideas I agree with as "smoke and mirrors". Again if you wish to hang it up when the going gets tough for you by offering these silly platitudes, that is your choice. I am content in having made my case.

Abel · 04-30-2008, 02:32 PM

Ok GX
1) For starters, my interpretation of the Bible is not uniquely mine. It is one that is shared by millions of Christians world wide. I personally know literally hundreds of Christians who hold to these same beliefs. They are beliefs that have been handed down from the early church fathers. They are beliefs that have been affirmed in my life by God: John 15:26 "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me"

2) When I asked X upon what authority he based his views, he was unable to do that. He said it came from within. He put mystic twists on his beliefs (if he has beliefs, I'm not sure). Hence: Smoke and Mirrors. I can open my Bible and read God's message to me. My Bible is real, I can hold it, I can read it. It is tangible. X has nothing.

3) The only tangible evidence I can offer you, to prove what I believe, is for you to open your heart and invite Jesus in. Concrete evidence will be obtained only after you receive Him by faith. It would be much easier if I could take something in my hands and show you the proof you desire, but I can't. John 20:29 "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

I have answered your challenge as best as I can. Accept it, reject it, laugh at it, ponder it, hold it or drop it. It is up to you. That is now my challenge to you. Either way, my conscience is clear.

Og · 04-30-2008, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

2) When I asked X upon what authority he based his views, he was unable to do that. He said it came from within. He put mystic twists on his beliefs (if he has beliefs, I'm not sure). Hence: Smoke and Mirrors. I can open my Bible and read God's message to me. My Bible is real, I can hold it, I can read it. It is tangible. X has nothing.

You utterly missunderstand his stance. This is not surprising.

Quote:

3) The only tangible evidence I can offer you, to prove what I believe, is for you to open your heart and invite Jesus in. Concrete evidence will be obtained only after you receive Him by faith. It would be much easier if I could take something in my hands and show you the proof you desire, but I can't. John 20:29 "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

I have answered your challenge as best as I can. Accept it, reject it, laugh at it, ponder it, hold it or drop it. It is up to you. That is now my challenge to you. Either way, my conscience is clear.

The irony of this post is amazing. You make the SAME request to GX as X did of you. You say "walk the walk and come see what I see up here on this hill top."

You state that X is in a laughable position and then you place yourself directly in that position....

Og · 04-30-2008, 02:40 PM

I'll clarify:

Quote:

Originally Posted by X

Where I am now, is atop a hill with a magnifcent view compared to where I was. People down in the valley might think I'm strange, as I shout down at what I see from up here.

Rather than think me strange, why not come up and have a look for yourself?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

The only tangible evidence I can offer you, to prove what I believe, is for you to open your heart and invite Jesus in. Concrete evidence will be obtained only after you receive Him by faith.

How are these statements different? I can think of a few, but not in the manner in which Abel was assaulting X's response.

shadowind · 04-30-2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

Ok GX

3) The only tangible evidence I can offer you, to prove what I believe, is for you to open your heart and invite Jesus in. Concrete evidence will be obtained only after you receive Him by faith. It would be much easier if I could take something in my hands and show you the proof you desire, but I can't. John 20:29 "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

Quote:

Originally Posted by xexon

Where I am now, is atop a hill with a magnifcent view compared to where I was. People down in the valley might think I'm strange, as I shout down at what I see from up here.

Rather than think me strange, why not come up and have a look for yourself?

What I see, you can see.

x

see any similaritys?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abel

Ok GX

2) When I asked X upon what authority he based his views, he was unable to do that. He said it came from within. He put mystic twists on his beliefs (if he has beliefs, I'm not sure). Hence: Smoke and Mirrors. I can open my Bible and read God's message to me. My Bible is real, I can hold it, I can read it. It is tangible. X has nothing.

the words are not the concept
the concept is not the object
the object is not the word
words are ink, they are a pattern that string together ideas that other wise wouldn't be associated perhaps. the bible might be tangible, but the message is not.