I would say that this statement is self defeating. If this statement is true, then it is “Absolutely True” in all cases which automatically proves that the premise of the statement is false.
I like Bob Crowley’s answer on this. No religion leads to God, God draws us toward him and “religion” aid us in that journey.
And who or what - might I ask - defines for the non-church goer just what constitutes a “good person”?
Perhaps, but then you don’t have to go to a therapist for councilling either. You can jsut go straight to yourself. There are reasons and benefits to going to confession that far outstrip the simple act of listing off your sins. There is counciling and advise and self reflection and helpful penence
But we should not keep our minds so open that our brains fall out.
All the above statements are falsehoods. They cause untold scandal, sin, and misery.
Though it is understandable that one can be angered by one’s experiences with the Church or Churches or those of church membership. But one must consider no matter what, God’s people are God’s people and guess what; God Loves His people no matter what. Just read the prophets of the OT. It is only the Lord God that has the right to judge His people.
Agree. A person with red-green colour blindness, a person with ordinary trichromat sight and a person with tetrachromat sight will disagree on the colour of something. We can never know the “real” world, all we can know is what our brains get incoming along our sensory nerves.
Disagree. Most religions lead towards (though maybe not “to”) the goal, which should not be called “God”. Some religions definitely do not. For example extreme Calvinism and any religion requiring human or animal sacrifice lead away from the goal.
Agree. Insert synagogue/church/temple/mosque/gurdwara etc. as appropriate.
Irrelevant. This is specific to Christianity; there is no concept of sin in Buddhism. With no concept of sin there is no forgiveness of sin either. You cannot escape the consequences of your actions.
Partly agree. Reasonable discussion is good. Unreasonable discussion is a waste of time.
This first claim is a pseudo-intellectual piece of clap-trap. If it’s true, then it’s also simultaneously false, and so are the rest of the “claims” that follow.
There is no evidence that there are any gods or that any faith is “better” or “worse” than another.
There is no evidence that there’s a “need” to go to church or to be a good person. People who like going to church will go to church, and people who like being “good” will be good, and people who don’t will not.
No evidence that there are gods, no evidence that there are sins, and no evidence that there is a need to confess anything to anyone.
Strictly speaking, this isn’t a claim about the world around us, but a value statement. Generally, I happen to agree that questioning authority is a positive thing, as we must always be prepared to change our positions on questions when presented with evidence.
The source of the colour exists, regardless of what the two people might think. This means there is, in truth, an existent reality, independent of the two human witnesses.
Some birds and bees can see in the ultra violet. Colour is not an absolute but is imputed by us onto a narrow part of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is a function of the way our eyes and our nervous systems are built. Why is your sense of colour to be taken as more absolute than that of a bee or a tetrachromat? A bee can see in polarized light - is that an absolute reality of is that a function of a bee’s optical and nervous systems?
since God Himself has revealed the contrary and made His will known on all these matters my advice would be listen to Him, not the person who constructed these claims for their own reasons.
“Our internal model of reality is not reality.”
Bob Crowley
There certainly appears to be one. However we can never know that reality. The reality a dog senses has far more olfactory detail than the reality we sense. The reality a hawk sees has far more optical detail than the reality we see.
But the perception is not the reality so what actually gets to our brain is not reality but the imperfect perception. We mistake the model of reality that we build in our brain for the actual external reality. That is an error. Our model is built on the basis of incomplete and imperfect sense data and so can never be completely accurate. It works well for many purposes, but it is still only an imperfect internal model and is not the actual external reality.
That is a case where the internal model is badly out of step with the external reality. It is far more common for people to mistake their internal model for external reality.
Agreed, though I think we will draw different conclusions from that distinction. External reality may well exist, but we can never know it and we can never construct a completely accurate internal model of it.
Come now, that could just as easily be an argument that Christianity is simply less accepting of other religions, more narrow-minded.
does 2+2=5 for this person? of course not, what they mean is that what they believe may be different than what you do, but that doesnt change what the truth actually is.
no other religions lead to G-d. no other religion has the Messianic Prophecies that prove Christ is the Son of G-d. Jesus said that no man comes to the Father except by me. the mathematics of Messianic Prophecies verify that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. thereofre there is no other way to G-d.
no its not, G-d is quite clear on the requirements, feeling like youre a good person is not enough. in fact it cannot be
then why did Jesus tell the Apostles to go forth and forgive sins?
dissent is disobediance, new ideas dont mean anything, all the ideas that mattered are at least 2000 years old.
