The Truth of Christianity vs. All Other Belief Systems

[Hokulele]

There's a term that gets used a lot to describe some sort of great person who will come along and save people out of their less than ideal situation they are in. That term is messiah. Well Christianity has the Messiah. That's also where the christ part of Christianity comes from. The word christ can be thought of as the Greek version of messiah. It was understood by the Jews of Jesus' day that the promised one would be someone who already existed with God and was known as the Word.

And Buddhism has the Buddha who learned for himself the truth of existence. Simply follow the path of the Buddha, and suffering will cease.


Ethnikos, do you see why your argument is not very convincing?

 

[Shalamar]

As a Catholic, I'm offended at the claims that I'm not really Christian. When it is THEM who follow false teachings, having fallen from the one, true faith, Catholicism. Come back to the faith, and ye, you will be saved.

As a Dark Lord of the Sith, I'll just Force Choke people who disagree with me.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Originally is the key word. Who wrote the very first text? People. What sort of people? Godly people. Why did they write something? They were inspired by God to write. Did God have a specific purpose for these things, or messages that were being written? To instruct His people.

Sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense at all.

You yourself stated that "Practicaly everything around you, touched by man, is false, in one way or another."

Now, people have written the Bible. So it is touched by them, and thus false. Now keep in mind that God is supposed to be "the creator". That leads to some questions regarding your statement.

First, why did he need to use/manipulate people to have them write "his words"? If he can do what he is claimed he can do, then he could have simply made these texts plop into existance out of nowhere. Like, lets say, into the surface of some mountains.

Then, why does he need to instruct people at all? He is supposed to have created them in the first place. So he could have made them with the "instructions" build in. Did he forget that, or what?

It's always fun to see how the believers build arguments that contain so many fallacies.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: Forgot this point:

We have something that is a remnant of something very ancient that was deemed by enough people as being important, that it has been preserved as a written document, not some old clay tablets dug out from tons of earth.

Wrong. It was not preserved. You may want to read up the definition of preserved. What we have is a book that was edited, changed and manipulated again and again over time.

 

[Simon39759]

There's a term that gets used a lot to describe some sort of great person who will come along and save people out of their less than ideal situation they are in. That term is messiah. Well Christianity has the Messiah. That's also where the christ part of Christianity comes from. The word christ can be thought of as the Greek version of messiah. It was understood by the Jews of Jesus' day that the promised one would be someone who already existed with God and was known as the Word.

... Nope.
This was not the definition of Messiah. The messiah was just a character hand-picked by God to do his work.
The Jews considered that there had been several Messiah in history, including several Pagan ones, that were considered human in every aspects.

The Messiah they were expecting at the time, as far as we know, would have been a Jewish revolutionary similar to the Maccabees.

The fact that he was a man does not negate that, as in the messianic expectations, he was sent from God. So, Jesus had a familiarity with God, and an actual sort of position and status in the heavenly scheme of things. This gave him an opening to go and assume another position based on his competency in the other assignments he had been given. There is a difference between the earlier assignment that he had before he became incarnate, and the ones on Earth and whatever he was to do after leaving Earth. Before being a man, Jesus was God. To be technical, he was the visible aspect of the unseeable glorious God. He was for all intents and purposes, God, as far as anyone could tell, except for someone like Lucifer who was a covering cherub and could, in a manner of speaking, see behind the curtain of Oz. Lucifer, thou he could tell there was something that to him did not seem right, could not understand that even though the Word was, in a manner of speaking, a representation of God, that did not make him not God.

A very good Christian interpretation. But you mention the 'Messianic expectations', and the Jewish messianic tradition was different and did not include all these. It came in the Christian traditions and post-date Jesus' life.

The superiority of Christianity is in that we have someone like ourselves, who is our brother and friend, in heaven, as God.

But; only Christianity believes that you have such a man.
In other word: Christianity is superior, for those who already are Christians which is fine and dandy, but a bit circular.

 

[temporalillusion]

Originally is the key word. Who wrote the very first text? People. What sort of people? Godly people. Why did they write something? They were inspired by God to write. Did God have a specific purpose for these things, or messages that were being written? To instruct His people. Will God allow his word to be made void? No.

Why not? God didn't do anything special with the tree in the garden to protect people from themselves. God didn't do anything special to help people protect themselves to prevent a global flood. Why would God all of a sudden violate free will and supernaturally preserve the scripture?

The reality is that out of 5700+ fragments of Greek NT manuscripts, no two agree with each other.

They had to be copied as old texts wore out or deteriorated.

There was more than one set, each individual group of early Christians would have commissioned copies of the books they thought most important. It's not like today where books are cheap.

And for every copy, changes were introduced since it's impossible to make a perfect copy by hand. And since those copies were all geographically separated, and were very expensive, it's not like they would just check them with each other every so often to see what changes were made.

So over time most Christians wouldn't even know which copies were closer to the originals.

So now there's whole areas of scholarship dedicated to try to reconstruct the originals.

So if god has been trying to keep his word together since the early Christian church, he's not doing a very good job.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I love you.

ditto

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Why not? God didn't do anything special with the tree in the garden to protect people from themselves. God didn't do anything special to help people protect themselves to prevent a global flood. Why would God all of a sudden violate free will and supernaturally preserve the scripture?

The reality is that out of 5700+ fragments of Greek NT manuscripts, no two agree with each other.



There was more than one set, each individual group of early Christians would have commissioned copies of the books they thought most important. It's not like today where books are cheap.

And for every copy, changes were introduced since it's impossible to make a perfect copy by hand. And since those copies were all geographically separated, and were very expensive, it's not like they would just check them with each other every so often to see what changes were made.

So over time most Christians wouldn't even know which copies were closer to the originals.

So now there's whole areas of scholarship dedicated to try to reconstruct the originals.

So if god has been trying to keep his word together since the early Christian church, he's not doing a very good job.

Another, similar example, would be the associated works of Aristotle. Due to handcopying, there are similarities and differences in every manuscript currently available (the original is, unfortunately, lost to time). Researchers have been able to use the differences to trace when each copy was made, by whom, and attempt to correct for those discrepancies - however, it is still not 100% correct (and this research has been going on for generations). The same is true of the bible. Hell, go down to your local book store, pick up any two bibles and see if the translations are word-for-word. I guarantee the NKJV and KJV and NAS are not the same.

Here's a great example from Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea:"

Take the first 3 words of Moby Dick:

Call me Ishmael

Now, insert a single grammatical error/change/interpretation:

Call me, Ishmael

And suddenly there's a completely different interpretation of the opening of the entire story (and one that is likely to be later change/reinterpreted into something else).

 

[Ethnikos]

You are aware that Christianity has a single root, and that every variation in existence today comes from that root? And you are aware that, for example, protestantism is just a branch of catholicism, whereas the latter is the direct predecessor, which happens to be still in existence, of the former?

It doesn't. That's the thing. They killed all the real people. Look at the "saints" they call the "fathers" of the church, after the pro-Athanasian anti-Arians got their power back. They mostly have an ancestry that goes back to pagans. I mean from former student to mentor, them to that persons mentor, then to that person's mentor. None of them can be traced back to the true Apostles. It is a terrible hoax perpetrated on mankind that they can trace an unbroken chain of knowledge back to the Apostles, and thus claim to have a marvelous heritage of legitimacy. It's a lie. The people who could trace their heritage of learning to the apostles were branded heretics and killed. Simple as that. What we have now is as satanic as anything imaginable at its core that dupes the unlearned masses.

So, you basically belong to an offspring of that satanic occult society.

No, an offshoot of the people who found the Bible and once they learned the true Gospel would rather die than give it up.

 

[Shalamar]

It doesn't. That's the thing. They killed all the real people. Look at the "saints" they call the "fathers" of the church, after the pro-Athanasian anti-Arians got their power back. They mostly have an ancestry that goes back to pagans. I mean from former student to mentor, them to that persons mentor, then to that person's mentor. None of them can be traced back to the true Apostles. It is a terrible hoax perpetrated on mankind that they can trace an unbroken chain of knowledge back to the Apostles, and thus claim to have a marvelous heritage of legitimacy. It's a lie. The people who could trace their heritage of learning to the apostles were branded heretics and killed. Simple as that. What we have now is as satanic as anything imaginable at its core that dupes the unlearned masses.
No, an offshoot of the people who found the Bible and once they learned the true Gospel would rather die than give it up.

Hooray! I seem to be part of a Satanic cult!

Don't like a religion? Worried that others may go to a different one? Call YOUR religion the 'one true faith' and all others 'Satanic Cults'! That'll show 'em!

 

[paximperium]

No, an offshoot of the people who found the Bible and once they learned the true Gospel would rather die than give it up.

No an offshoot with NO claims to the "people who found the Bible" and NO claims to the "true gospels" except you say so. Your cult has a more pathetic heritage than Islam.

 

[Simon39759]

It doesn't. That's the thing. They killed all the real people. Look at the "saints" they call the "fathers" of the church, after the pro-Athanasian anti-Arians got their power back. They mostly have an ancestry that goes back to pagans. I mean from former student to mentor, them to that persons mentor, then to that person's mentor. None of them can be traced back to the true Apostles. It is a terrible hoax perpetrated on mankind that they can trace an unbroken chain of knowledge back to the Apostles, and thus claim to have a marvelous heritage of legitimacy. It's a lie. The people who could trace their heritage of learning to the apostles were branded heretics and killed. Simple as that. What we have now is as satanic as anything imaginable at its core that dupes the unlearned masses.
No, an offshoot of the people who found the Bible and once they learned the true Gospel would rather die than give it up.

But... If that happened, that happened centuries before whatever schism you emerged from.
You do realize that?

Henri the VIII was 16th century.
That's one thousand and five hundred years of Roman Catholicism separating the schism from the apostles.
The tradition you come from is an offshoot of Catholicism. The Gospels you read is the product of more than fifty generations worth of transcription by Roman Catholic monks.

How could they be learned a 'truer gospels' than the one from the Roman church?

 

[Christian Klippel]

It doesn't. That's the thing.

Have you even bothered to take a look at the WP article? Have you seen the graphic "A schematic of Christian denominational taxonomy." there?

Do you want to deny that it started at one point, that the great schism happened around the 11th century, where the catholic branch started? And are you denying that around the 16th century there was reformation, that resulted in a split and created, for example, protestantism as a direct offspring?

Your arguments to defend your particular strain of a cult against the others sharing the same basis are very weak, i think.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: Simon39759 beat me to it.

 

[Elizabeth I]

And they tell everyone to call the Pope the holy father, he's a sinner like everyone else and Jesus forbid people to call anyone Father but God.

Gosh, what should we call our male parents, then? You don't ever think about what you write, do you?

I know I come across a bit arrogant to some but this is not my intent. (and I'm in good company as Jesus was misinterpretted [sic] often but he knew what he was talking about just the same.) All I can say is God has given me insight in a powerful way because he took me out of a lot of spiritual deception in my own past. The gift he has given me I need to share with others so hopefully they will grow in their knowledge and understanding of God better too.

Wow. The arrogance is almost paralytically stunning. The irony is...

Pergatory

[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/Pergatory.jpg[/qimg]

TOO funny!

 

[jmcvann]

Individuals who happen to have been born into the Catholic Church are Christian despite being a member. It is possible to have true piety despite being among people affilieted with something that is nothing more that an occultic society masquerading as being holy, but is actually satanic in nature.

I do not want a mill-stone on my neck, so I will not offend Catholics by claiming they are not Christians.

Well...that didn't take long. Just how heavy IS that mill-stone?

 

[Ethnikos]

Well...that didn't take long. Just how heavy IS that mill-stone?

I do not mean the ordinary church goer.
I get this stuff from listening to people like the late Father Malachi Martin, who was a Jesuit for 25 years. He was concerned about the church being infiltrated by evil people who were in it for power. Those are the type of people I mean.
It's not just the Catholic church any more. All the churches have been infiltrated, just like we have agents of change in all the governments and media and large corporations and at the head key industries. The change is not for the good but to destroy traditional values.

 

[Ethnikos]

Have you even bothered to take a look at the WP article? Have you seen the graphic "A schematic of Christian denominational taxonomy." there?

I've seen that before.

Do you want to deny that it started at one point, that the great schism happened around the 11th century, where the catholic branch started? And are you denying that around the 16th century there was reformation, that resulted in a split and created, for example, protestantism as a direct offspring?

the schism was with the Eastern Church and not of too much concern to me.
Offspring? The Bible was put in print, ok? get it? stuff happened. a lot of stuff. So?

Your arguments to defend your particular strain of a cult against the others sharing the same basis are very weak, i think.

Not. The other way around. everything is dead and useless. idolitry abounds. everyone is going to hell. you have a split? a schism? an offshoot? damnation!
They all lost it. the witness' bodys lie dead in the street and the world celebrates their demise.

 

[Simon39759]

I do not mean the ordinary church goer.
I get this stuff from listening to people like the late Father Malachi Martin, who was a Jesuit for 25 years. He was concerned about the church being infiltrated by evil people who were in it for power. Those are the type of people I mean. It's not just the Catholic church any more. All the churches have been infiltrated, just like we have agents of change in all the governments and media and large corporations and at the head key industries. The change is not for the good but to destroy traditional values.

You mean, a conspiracy?

Who do you suppose is behind it? The New World Order? Satan?
And... I have to ask... do you have any evidence?

 

[Ethnikos]

And Buddhism has the Buddha who learned for himself the truth of existence. Simply follow the path of the Buddha, and suffering will cease.

Your existence could cease, which may appeal to someone with a death wish.

from Christian Klippel:
. . .can never answer that question, because the only religion you really know about is your own. You have little to no insight into other religions.

Looks like I am not qualified, according to this, to make a comparison.

Ethnikos, do you see why your argument is not very convincing?

Yes, to most people. If I could be persuasive, I would be doing good.

Staring Death in the eye! This is what happened to my current room mate's brother "D" (for the purpose of this story). This started when D was drinking at the bar, and he and his buddy went out in the parking lot. The buddy got into a fight with some dude. Just when D went to try to break it up, the dude's girlfriend was pulling out a saturday night special. Instead of hitting the buddy, as she had intended, she nailed D dead center of his chest.
A little bit hard to get the details out of him as to the exact chain of events. He was on life support for like two weeks which sounds strange to me that after that long he would ever recover. He first went to Hell, where he met Death who was looking at him. Very scary looking like a demon from a movie. Death is very cruel and horrifying and dark. D says Death has a sting. It is crushing to the soul, to where it makes part of you want to give up.
Another part of himself wanted to live and was searching for a way to hang on to life. Then he was in the presence of light and he was in heaven, and felt good and it was peaceful and loving. He saw Jesus and Jesus talked to him. He made D feel like there was a purpose to life, that it is meaningful, and that Jesus wanted D to live.

So, here you go. There's the answer. The brother, D, shows up, and I get this story. Jesus wants you to live. Not self annihilate, like Buddha wants you to. Life has meaning and a purpose. So says Jesus, from someone who met Jesus under "drastic" (to quote D) circumstances.

 

[Ethnikos]

The tradition you come from is an offshoot of Catholicism. The Gospels you read is the product of more than fifty generations worth of transcription by Roman Catholic monks.

There were monks that took it as an act of piety to be very careful about handling the scriptures and had a very high degree of integrity. They operated without interference from the hierarchy, since it was not their intent to ever have their work published for the masses. The Bible would not have been ready to be printed, when the printing process was advanced enough to print a Bible, if not for these monks.

How could they be learned a 'truer gospels' than the one from the Roman church?

By reading the words of Jesus for yourself out of a Bible translated into your own language.

 

[Hokulele]

Your existence could cease, which may appeal to someone with a death wish.

Death wish? You apparently know nothing about Buddhism.