If you're religious

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: cronos

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: cronos
no. there is one true God.

ask the Cylons if you don't believe me :|

It doesn't like to be called that.

silly me. silly, silly me.

Oh snap, it's my evil twin brother, cronos.
We meet again! :shocked:

Why do you think you're the good twin?

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: barfo
How do you justify the millions of people that don't have a chance for salvation, just because they weren't born in a place where they would be taught to worship your god?

Is it god's fault that all these people are condemning themselves? or is it the humanity for not embracing your religion without question? or maybe it's their own fault for not embracing the foreign true faith, despite what their parents and grandparents taught them?

I have a better question. Why don't people ask religious questions on message boards for religion?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: jonks
did you bother scrolling down to the reference list? Horus was being worshipped for a thousand years when jesus was born. His worshippers recognized his birthday as Dec 25, his dad was Joseph, and he raised Lazarus from the dead. Selective list my ass. And if you take the bible at its word, then you have a lot of chutzpah claiming that something about Horus was made up.

THe bible was writen hundreds of years later from a combination of whole cloth fabrication, previous messianic legends, and word of mouth generations separated from any possibly actual events along the lines of "the romans crucified some guy who thought he was god or something"

Reference list is secondary. Those aren't the religious texts of the Egyptians, those are other website and books which I would have to obtain and check. Once of those websites, an About.com reference page, even says:

Encyclopedia Mythica article on Horus. Stephanie Cass says, "The name "Horus" is a general catchall for multiple deities.... In all the Horus deities the traits of kingship, sky and solar symbology, and victory reoccur. As the prototype of the earthly king, there were as many Horus gods as there were rulers of Egypt, if not more."

You could assemble a George Washington prototype from the stories of various leaders that came before him, but that doesn't mean the actual story of him was inspired by the others.

Your list is selective. Since you are using a secondary source, I will, too. THe following info is from Wikipedia.

"Horus was also said to be a war god and a hunter's god; since he was associated with the falcon. Thus he became a symbol of majesty and power as well as the model of the pharaohs.[6] The pharaohs were said to be Horus in human form."

Doesn't sound like Jesus.

"By the Nineteenth dynasty, the enmity between Set and Horus, in which Horus had ripped off one of Set's testicles, was represented as a separate tale. According to Papyrus Chester-Beatty I, Set is depicted as trying to prove his dominance by seducing Horus and then having intercourse with him."

Doesn't sound like Jesus.

"Horus is recorded in Egyptian hieroglyphs as ?r.w and is reconstructed to have been pronounced *?aru, meaning "Falcon". As a description it has also typically been thought of as having the meaning "the distant one" or "one who is above, over"[2] By Coptic times, the name became Hor. It was adopted into Greek as ???? Horos. The original name also survives in later Egyptian names such as Har-Si-Ese literally "Horus, son of Isis"."

Doesn't sound like Jesus.

You can't even compare the two, because there is a record of who Jesus said He was, there is a unified and consistent account with multiple witness accounts of who he was found in the Bible. Even if you reject the Bible as mythology, it's consistent, unlike texts concerning Horus. Which is why, again, I ask you what are the primary sources for the Horus mythology.

If I may backpedal slightly, I'd only heard the Horus/Jesus thing recently and thought it was substantiated. I'm no Egyptian religious scholar. In some quick searching I've discovered that this theory is advanced by the psychonutballer Zeitgeist folks, which I have to say gives me considerable pause. But the issue has piqued my interest so I'll dig a little more when I've got some spare time.

If I might, I'll concede (ATOT first?) that I may have been hasty.

Disclaimer: the Horus Concession (TM) does not apply to the contention that the committe who authored the bible may not lay claim to any superior sense of historical accuracy wrt life and times of jesus

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: barfo
I'm not claiming to be better than god,and I agree he'd see things more clearly. The problem is, which religion is the true one? cause all of them preach different things.
I was raised a catholic, should I just abide by it and brace myself in case Allah turns out to be the real god and I realize I'm doomed when I die?

"Allah" literally means "God", so the name you use doesn't really matter -- it should only be a name which matters to you. Same goes for "Jesus" and "Mohammad" -- according to Islam, they're both messengers of God.

You create the problem by assuming that the religions are strictly and mutually exclusive, while not even Islam in its core does that. Sure, the versions of Islam or Christianity preached by the local clergy may be hotly mutually exclusive, but this only shows that the clergy don't know what they're talking about in such cases.

God is not the God of the Jews or the God of the Hindus, etc., alone, but He is both the God of the Jews and the God of the Hindus. It's not a difficult concept once you give up the mutually exclusive premise.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Madwand1
You create the problem by assuming that the religions are strictly and mutually exclusive, while not even Islam in its core does that. Sure, the versions of Islam or Christianity preached by the local clergy may be hotly mutually exclusive, but this only shows that the clergy don't know what they're talking about in such cases.

eh? Islam teachs Jesus wasn't divine which is really the only main thing you need to believe to be christian. How is that not mutually exclusive?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Madwand1
You create the problem by assuming that the religions are strictly and mutually exclusive, while not even Islam in its core does that. Sure, the versions of Islam or Christianity preached by the local clergy may be hotly mutually exclusive, but this only shows that the clergy don't know what they're talking about in such cases.

eh? Islam teachs Jesus wasn't divine which is really the only main thing you need to believe to be christian. How is that not mutually exclusive?

So does Judaism and Christians extend certain respect to them as Muslems do to Christians(and Jews). All 3 Believe in the Basic same "God" and the latter 2 draw upon Judaism at their core. The end Practice in all 3 is very different and usually exhibits exclusivity, but the central diety is the same.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
This thread can go no where good, and will probably get locked. Given that, here is something completely irreverent.

You know how some people see Jesus in a mildew stain, grilled ham&cheese, tree bark, etc.? Well, some may see counter-measures smoke, but I see... could it be?!?

His Noodly Appendages!!!

Damn straight it is. This discussion greatly displeases him, denoted by the fact he is wearing his angry eyes!

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Crono
If God is a supreme being, then He has the right to do whatever He pleases, and what is right/wrong is dependent on Him, not on you.

Wow, that religion sucks. Count me out.

 

[FDF12389]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: evident
this shit is getting old. every fucking day theres another flamebait thread that gets 100 posts in an hour

P&N really needs to become P&R.

Politics Religion and News?
PoRN? I think that might uncessarily excite and disappoint some AnandTech members.

I dont venture into P&N, but I see news articles in Off topic all the time so why not just move "N" to off topic, making P&R.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: barfo
I'm not claiming to be better than god,and I agree he'd see things more clearly. The problem is, which religion is the true one? cause all of them preach different things.
I was raised a catholic, should I just abide by it and brace myself in case Allah turns out to be the real god and I realize I'm doomed when I die?

"Allah" literally means "God", so the name you use doesn't really matter -- it should only be a name which matters to you. Same goes for "Jesus" and "Mohammad" -- according to Islam, they're both messengers of God.

You create the problem by assuming that the religions are strictly and mutually exclusive, while not even Islam in its core does that. Sure, the versions of Islam or Christianity preached by the local clergy may be hotly mutually exclusive, but this only shows that the clergy don't know what they're talking about in such cases.

God is not the God of the Jews or the God of the Hindus, etc., alone, but He is both the God of the Jews and the God of the Hindus. It's not a difficult concept once you give up the mutually exclusive premise.

You are not answering the question.

If there is a single god, then it is obviously everyone's despite whatever religion they practice, and whether that practice be a mistake or not. The question is, if there is ONLY ONE GOD, which religion is right, and what happens to all the people who devoted their lives to the wrong ones?

I think all of the answers are going to be speculative. Several of the religious texts themselves, especially the less tolerant like, Islam and Christianity are pretty unforgiving, though some interpreters will say otherwise. i.e it's going to depend on who you ask. If you ask me, I just LOL and say there is no hell but I wish there was just for the religious.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
If there is a single god, then it is obviously everyone's despite whatever religion they practice, and whether that practice be a mistake or not. The question is, if there is ONLY ONE GOD, which religion is right, and what happens to all the people who devoted their lives to the wrong ones?

This was settled I thought?

http://rutube.ru/tracks/1076199.html

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
1. All people have sinned. Therefore, all people deserve hell as a result.
2. Only those whom God chooses to save does he save. We don't deserve it. See #1.

/facepalm

And therein lies the reason I'll never believe in Christianity and/or any other religion with feelings like that. I simply cannot accept a religion that relegates all non-members to "eternal punishment" of some variety or other.

I got in a lot of trouble as a kid when I started asking questions just like the OP. Raised in a firmly "Fundie" family, parents believe the Bible is the literal truth directly narrated to humans by God. Even though it was edited for content numerous times over the centuries by the Church (tailored to suit their current needs and keep the masses subservient & paying their tithe) and translated who knows how many times - yet they believe God has kept it strictly intact.


I like chocolate chip WAFFLES!!!

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
You are not answering the question.

If there is a single god, then it is obviously everyone's despite whatever religion they practice, and whether that practice be a mistake or not. The question is, if there is ONLY ONE GOD, which religion is right, and what happens to all the people who devoted their lives to the wrong ones?

You missed my point, which is that it's not the case that a single religion is entirely right and all the rest are entirely wrong, but that all are right and wrong in parts, and that the one common God is the same God that's referred to in all those religions, to various degrees of accuracy and embellishment over time, in various contexts, points of view, and times.

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: videogames101
Guys, he's trying to point out flaws in the idea of an "all-loving god", but the fact is, all religions are inconsistent, and we could rant about these inconsistencies for hours, and it would never convince a single religious nut to think rationally.

Or possibly it could present many different viewpoints and have an honest frank discussion on man, his history and desire to quest for truth and reach to the "heavens".

A religious rational man understands this and seeks to understand what he cannot with some spiritual guidance to form a basis of his understanding.

Ignorance is such a powerful tool of fools.

Prove to me I need spiritual guidance to discover something.

Man wants to reach a place that doesn't exist, what is ignorant about that? Your making a positive claim that a "heavens" exist, so unless your going back that statement of positive existence up, gtfo.

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
You are not answering the question.

If there is a single god, then it is obviously everyone's despite whatever religion they practice, and whether that practice be a mistake or not. The question is, if there is ONLY ONE GOD, which religion is right, and what happens to all the people who devoted their lives to the wrong ones?

You missed my point, which is that it's not the case that a single religion is entirely right and all the rest are entirely wrong, but that all are right and wrong in parts, and that the one common God is the same God that's referred to in all those religions, to various degrees of accuracy and embellishment over time, in various contexts, points of view, and times.

Evidence for such a claim? Anyways, your not answering the question in the context that he's asking, instead your modifying the question and then giving an answer, which isn't the point of this thread.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
You are not answering the question.

If there is a single god, then it is obviously everyone's despite whatever religion they practice, and whether that practice be a mistake or not. The question is, if there is ONLY ONE GOD, which religion is right, and what happens to all the people who devoted their lives to the wrong ones?

You missed my point, which is that it's not the case that a single religion is entirely right and all the rest are entirely wrong, but that all are right and wrong in parts, and that the one common God is the same God that's referred to in all those religions, to various degrees of accuracy and embellishment over time, in various contexts, points of view, and times.

You simply can't know that. It's just what you think must be true to reconcile a major deficiency in religion with your own modern-day, and thus heretofore unparalleled, moral structure. While you maintain your death-grip on the idea that after it all religion in some form must be true you force your mind to perform all manner of mental acrobatics to maintain that world-view. Of course this is just my opinion, but it seems to fit my observations.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: barfo

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: spidey07
You don't know much about religion. They all have their different means of salvation or enlightenment.

rule #1, don't respond to an obvious troll thread with what could be considered a thought out reply.

How am I an obvious troll? :roll:

Your name is barfo.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: videogames101
Evidence for such a claim? Anyways, your not answering the question in the context that he's asking, instead your modifying the question and then giving an answer, which isn't the point of this thread.

There's lots of evidence, including obvious commonalities and explicit references among religions, and some of this view is implicit in a respectful regard of a single universal God.

My answer is also a fair answer in that in this view, the OP created the problem by assuming the opposite, as you are. "Are you still beating your wife, yes/no"? doesn't deserve a response strictly in the form that the question is asked, and mine similarly doesn't conform to the strictures of the question by rejecting the presumed exclusivity among religions.

The OP's question was already leaning towards this view when it questioned how one religion could be entirely right while all others are doomed. The question has within it the answer, that something's gone wrong with this perspective.

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: videogames101
Evidence for such a claim? Anyways, your not answering the question in the context that he's asking, instead your modifying the question and then giving an answer, which isn't the point of this thread.

There's lots of evidence, including obvious commonalities and explicit references among religions, and some of this view is implicit in a respectful regard of a single universal God.

My answer is also a fair answer in that in this view, the OP created the problem by assuming the opposite, as you are. "Are you still beating your wife, yes/no"? doesn't deserve a response strictly in the form that the question is asked, and mine similarly doesn't conform to the strictures of the question by rejecting the presumed exclusivity among religions.

The OP's question was already leaning towards this view when it questioned how one religion could be entirely right while all others are doomed. The question has within it the answer, that something's gone wrong with this perspective.

The evidence you just mentioned only makes it more clear that humans came up with religion, because the components of religion all tie back to the first chance humans got to come up with it, ancient sumeria and india.


Also, the question had the qualifier "if you are religious", which i assume meant, "if your religious and follow this dogma"

 

[oiprocs]

Originally posted by: ruu
Facepalm. Wtf? If OP wants serious replies, take it to P&N. Christ.

You're dumb. Religion is neither politics nor news.

Unfortunately, there is no other place for the issue but OT. Unless they made a religion forum. Which they won't.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee
You simply can't know that. It's just what you think must be true to reconcile a major deficiency in religion with your own modern-day, and thus heretofore unparalleled, moral structure. While you maintain your death-grip on the idea that after it all religion in some form must be true you force your mind to perform all manner of mental acrobatics to maintain that world-view. Of course this is just my opinion, but it seems to fit my observations.

Unfortunately, you don't actually have enough knowledge of my perspective to form such a opinion reliably. So what you're saying amounts to just what you accuse me of -- a guess.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: videogames101
The evidence you just mentioned only makes it more clear that humans came up with religion, because the components of religion all tie back to the first chance humans got to come up with it, ancient sumeria and india.

Also, the question had the qualifier "if you are religious", which i assume meant, "if your religious and follow this dogma"

If funny how you take the commonality of religions, and use that for purposes to discredit them all, and discount what else this might mean, and impose the dogma that you reject in religion onto others.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee
You simply can't know that. It's just what you think must be true to reconcile a major deficiency in religion with your own modern-day, and thus heretofore unparalleled, moral structure. While you maintain your death-grip on the idea that after it all religion in some form must be true you force your mind to perform all manner of mental acrobatics to maintain that world-view. Of course this is just my opinion, but it seems to fit my observations.

Unfortunately, you don't actually have enough knowledge of my perspective to form such a opinion reliably. So what you're saying amounts to just what you accuse me of -- a guess.

Well I'm also including people who share your opinion in a broad sense, but it IS a guess I'll readily admit. I'm just saying that I have more to go on than your posts alone. *shrug*

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: jonks
Islam teachs Jesus wasn't divine which is really the only main thing you need to believe to be christian. How is that not mutually exclusive?

Jesus taught that God superseded religion, and some of them accepted and became followers.

Islam taught that God supersedes everything, in part as a response to the glorification of Jesus the man, to the extent that its own prophet was considered just a man, albeit a good man. If we're to give full credence to this view, then I'd suppose that a random poster could at the next moment become Rasool! The historical texts of Islam are however clear that not everything revealed by Muhammad was revealed to the public.

"The secret Heart-Ravisher has been exposed!
I have found traces of his footsteps all around.

If He is not God, He is one sent by God.

O musician of my soul,
play His song
play His song with every breath."

Rumi, trans. Jonathan Star