LogFAQs > #876889264

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	There is literally no reason NOT to believe in God.
Sabram 04/09/17 11:56:55 PM #75:	Dash_Harber posted... au_gold posted... This is one of the reasons I don't follow a particular faith. Religions instill their own interpretations of God and His teachings to their followers so many of them don't bother to read and interpret the Bible themselves. That is fine, but what makes the Abrahamic God any better than Brahman or Odin? More importantly, and to the point, believing in God just to hedge your bets isn't going to get you any rewards because you are essentially lying to a god. au_gold posted... One thing that is for certain is that Jesus existed on Earth. Everything surrounding that fact is subject to interpretation. That is sort of the point, though. Jesus existed, sure. But his mere existence doesn't prove the validity of Christianity. Even other religions admit he existed, but without his miracles and divine heritage, he is pretty much just another historical religious founder. To illustrate, one of my favourite books is Romance of the Three Kingdoms. All the characters in the novel existed and are heavily documented. All historians pretty much agree that guys like Guan Yu, Cao Cao, and Sun Ce existed and battled it out in medieval China. However, that doesn't mean the book's description is accurate; in fact, a large amount of the novel's events and narratives are based on Operas and other works of cultural fiction. For example, I know Dian Wei existed and worked for the warlord/prime minister Cao Cao; but I don't believe that he broke his sword on an attacking soldier during an attack and then grabbed two dead soldiers and used them to bludgeon the rest of the invaders to death as makeshift meat-clubs. Or, another example, I know that the entire events of the warring states period came about because warlords distrusted the court eunuchs who held a large amount of power; but I don't believe that their downfall was foretold by a feathered snake dragon showing up and having a seat on the Emperor's throne. I love your example, and I want to build on it. Let's say, that the actual events of the time in the Warring States period is the truth, and the complete truth, since they actually happened. let's equate that to the creation of the world. We then get into the plays and operas about that time period. Those would be created after the actual event, likely hundreds on years after. Since the Warring States period took place between 453-221 BC let's assume the earliest plays were written and took place between 170 BC and 1 AD. We then jump to the publication of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms book, which was first published in the 14th century, which would be in the 1300s. This is about the same time when John Wycliffe translated the old and New Testament into English for the first time, an occurrence that was still, by that time, discouraged heavily by the church. Now, considering how many different tellings, revisions, and controversy revolved around the written bible, it stands to reason that many of the events in it would be told incorrectly. In fact, considering that the New Testament was written at approximately the same time as the earliest plays and operas about the Warring States period, any interpretation of those events, or the writings of them from that time that is done now would likely be woefully inaccurate. In other words, any interpretation of the original events that led to the writing of the bible now, would basically be as valid as saying the Dynasty Warriors games are an accurate representation of the Warring States period, although even worse, due to some of the earliest events in the Old Testament having happened (as they were accounted in writing) thousands of years before even Moses. --- Finally completed the Platinum for Hyperdimension Neptunia Re;Birth 1 on Vita. PSN: Sabram - NNID: Lord.Sabram <cite>Sabram posted [p:876889264] in There is l... [t:75211791]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote><cite>au_gold posted...</cite> <quote>This is one of the reasons I don't follow a particular faith. Religions instill their own interpretations of God and His teachings to their followers so many of them don't bother to read and interpret the Bible themselves.</quote> That is fine, but what makes the Abrahamic God any better than Brahman or Odin? More importantly, and to the point, believing in God just to hedge your bets isn't going to get you any rewards because you are essentially lying to a god. <cite>au_gold posted...</cite> <quote> One thing that is for certain is that Jesus existed on Earth. Everything surrounding that fact is subject to interpretation.</quote> That is sort of the point, though. Jesus existed, sure. But his mere existence doesn't prove the validity of Christianity. Even other religions admit he existed, but without his miracles and divine heritage, he is pretty much just another historical religious founder. To illustrate, one of my favourite books is Romance of the Three Kingdoms. All the characters in the novel existed and are heavily documented. All historians pretty much agree that guys like Guan Yu, Cao Cao, and Sun Ce existed and battled it out in medieval China. However, that doesn't mean the book's description is accurate; in fact, a large amount of the novel's events and narratives are based on Operas and other works of cultural fiction. For example, I know Dian Wei existed and worked for the warlord/prime minister Cao Cao; but I don't believe that he broke his sword on an attacking soldier during an attack and then grabbed two dead soldiers and used them to bludgeon the rest of the invaders to death as makeshift meat-clubs. Or, another example, I know that the entire events of the warring states period came about because warlords distrusted the court eunuchs who held a large amount of power; but I don't believe that their downfall was foretold by a feathered snake dragon showing up and having a seat on the Emperor's throne.</quote> I love your example, and I want to build on it. Let's say, that the actual events of the time in the Warring States period is the truth, and the complete truth, since they actually happened. let's equate that to the creation of the world. We then get into the plays and operas about that time period. Those would be created after the actual event, likely hundreds on years after. Since the Warring States period took place between 453-221 BC let's assume the earliest plays were written and took place between 170 BC and 1 AD. We then jump to the publication of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms book, which was first published in the 14th century, which would be in the 1300s. This is about the same time when John Wycliffe translated the old and New Testament into English for the first time, an occurrence that was still, by that time, discouraged heavily by the church. Now, considering how many different tellings, revisions, and controversy revolved around the written bible, it stands to reason that many of the events in it would be told incorrectly. In fact, considering that the New Testament was written at approximately the same time as the earliest plays and operas about the Warring States period, any interpretation of those events, or the writings of them from that time that is done now would likely be woefully inaccurate. In other words, any interpretation of the original events that led to the writing of the bible now, would basically be as valid as saying the Dynasty Warriors games are an accurate representation of the Warring States period, although even worse, due to some of the earliest events in the Old Testament having happened (as they were accounted in writing) thousands of years before even Moses. --- Finally completed the Platinum for Hyperdimension Neptunia Re;Birth 1 on Vita. PSN: Sabram - NNID: Lord.Sabram</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1