Y
yankee_doodle
Guest
no, it’s the same thing it’s always been. Paranoid, ignorant theists.
- Status
J
josie_L
Guest
Good night and God bless Yankee. :hug1:
J
josie_L
Guest
They are not necessarily paranoid and/or ignorant, some have valid reasons for their mistrust. Just out of curiousity but who do you mistrust the most (in respect to groups)?
Y
yankee_doodle
Guest
I suppose criminals and drug addicts are the only “group” of people who validly warrant categorical distrust.
J
josie_L
Guest
So you don’t mistrust theists?
Z
Zundrah
Guest
Well’th, I iz British, thou cann’t get mor British than that!I’m from Louisiana. You can’t get much more south than that.
…tea and scone, anyone?
H
humble_maid
Guest
Hello Zundrah,Well’th, I iz British, thou cann’t get mor British than that!
…tea and scone, anyone?
Can you please tell me what are the differences between catholicism and the methodist religion; and what do you mean by we all have catholic souls? Do you take the eucharist at your church and what significance does it have?
I hope you don’t feel like I’m prying but you mentionned it so I would like to know what drives the soul to catholicism. By the way I am a catholic only more so now than I ever was.
H
humble_maid
Guest
The Catholic churches offers catechism classes perhaps you can inquire about the adult courses; nonetheless there is much useful information on this site; please feel free to use the Catholic Encyclopedia website newadvent.org/
Just type in your subject or word in the search box and you get instant information.
We will pray for you. You yourself must pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and truth; be patient and trusting and most of all honest with your intention before the Almighty. He will give you what you need.
I highly recommend that you procure a bible. ex. The New English Bible (it contains the apocrypha and other books that some protestant bibles do not necessarily include). It has exemplary notes to add greater insight to the scriptures.
As for your comment on a single religion forcing its views on society, the pope’s duty is to minister to his flock which of course belongs to Jesus. He is bound to tell all catholics what their position is in certain matters; he neither obliges you nor condemns you so long as it is not a direct attack on the church. We have Free Will to do as we please but we should abide by God’s will if we want to remain in His Grace and that of the church.
As your spirituality heightens you will get a keener sense on God’s Will. You will not feel guilt or reticence to abide in Him even if it doesn’t rhyme with the liberal world; examine if you will this verse in the bible 1 Corinthians 6:12-20.
One more thing, nothing is impossible with the Lord Jesus. Ask anything in His name with sincerity,yearning and piety and you will receive it. Nothing is to good to be true; even the eternal happiness of the afterlife. May we always feel this way and believe.
J
josie_L
Guest
First of all the dogma of the immaculate conception is refering to Mary (not Jesus) as in she was conceived without original sin, furthermore, although a virgin (most were I would suppose) when she was impregnated she remained so in perpetuity. Moreover, the mythologies of which you speak whether Sumerian, Egyptian, Roman or Greek revolved around fictional characters whereas Jesus actually existed. We have several secular sources outside of the Bible that conform to the accounts written in the gospels. I’ll give you an example of what I mean by quoting from Gary Habermas a noted biblical scholar using Tacitus as a source: garyhabermas.com/books/hi…ljesus.htm#ch9
**Tacitus. Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 55 120 A.D.) was a Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over a half dozen Roman emperors. He has been called the “greatest historian” of ancient Rome, an individual generally acknowledged among scholars for his moral “integrity and essential goodness.”(1)
Tacitus is best known for two works — the Annals and the Histories. The former is thought to have included eighteen books and the latter to have included twelve, for a total of thirty.(2) The Annals cover the period from Augustus’ death in 14 A.D. to that of Nero in 68 A.D., while the Histories begin after Nero’s death and proceed to that of Domitian in 96 A.D.
Tacitus recorded at least one reference to Christ and two to early Christianity, one in each of his major works. The most important one is that found in the Annals, written about 115 A.D. The following was recounted concerning the great fire in Rome during the reign of Nero:
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.
Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.(3)
From this report we can learn several facts, both explicit and implicit, concerning Christ and the Christians who lived in Rome in the 60s A.D. Chronologically, we may ascertain the following information.
(1) Christians were named for their founder, Christus (from the Latin), (2) who was put to death by the Roman procurator Pontius Pilatus (also Latin), (3) during the reign of emperor Tiberius (14 37 A.D.). (4) His death ended the “superstition” for a short time, (5) but it broke out again, (6) especially in Judaea, where the teaching had its origin.
(7) His followers carried his doctrine to Rome. (8) When the great fire destroyed a large part of the city during the reign of Nero (54 68 A.D.), the emperor placed the blame on the Christians who lived in Rome. (9) Tacitus reports that this group was hated for their abominations. (10) These Christians were arrested after pleading guilty, (11) and many were convicted for “hatred for mankind.” (12) They were mocked and (13) then tortured, including being “nailed to crosses” or burnt to death. (14) Because of these actions, the people had compassion on the Christians. (15) Tacitus therefore concluded that such punishments were not for the public good but were simply “to glut one man’s cruelty.”(4)
Several facts here are of interest. As F. F. Bruce has noted, Tacitus had to receive his information from some source and this may have been an official record. It may even have been contained in one of Pilate’s reports to the emperor, to which Tacitus would probably have had access because of his standing with the government.(5) Of course, we cannot be sure at this point, but a couple of early writers do claim to know the contents of such a report, as we will perceive later. **
to be continued. . .
J
josie_L
Guest
**Also of interest is the historical context for Jesus’ death, as he is linked with both Pilate and Tiberius. Additionally, J. N. D. Anderson sees implications in Tacitus’ quote concerning Jesus’ resurrection.
It is scarcely fanciful to suggest that when he adds that “A most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out” he is bearing indirect and unconscious testimony to the conviction of the early church that the Christ who had been crucified had rise from the grave.(6)
Although we must be careful not to press this implication too far, the possibility remains that Tacitus may have indirectly referred to the Christians’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection, since his teachings “again broke out” after his death.
Also interesting is the mode of torture employed against the early Christians. Besides burning, a number were crucified by being “nailed to crosses.” Not only is this the method used with Jesus, but tradition reports that Nero was responsible for crucifying Peter as well, but upside down. The compassion aroused in the Roman people is also noteworthy.**
It is scarcely fanciful to suggest that when he adds that “A most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out” he is bearing indirect and unconscious testimony to the conviction of the early church that the Christ who had been crucified had rise from the grave.(6)
Although we must be careful not to press this implication too far, the possibility remains that Tacitus may have indirectly referred to the Christians’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection, since his teachings “again broke out” after his death.
Also interesting is the mode of torture employed against the early Christians. Besides burning, a number were crucified by being “nailed to crosses.” Not only is this the method used with Jesus, but tradition reports that Nero was responsible for crucifying Peter as well, but upside down. The compassion aroused in the Roman people is also noteworthy.**
A
Agripa
Guest
Forgive me if this has been discussed, but let us be sure to differentiate between agnostics and atheists. I am an agnostic, though not terribly strict in that sense. I acknowledge the existance of God as a creative force beyond all human comprehension. Though I tend to think as we learn more and more of the universe, we will have glimpses into God, or at least God’s machinations.
I really only have a gut feeling God exists simply because rationally I cannot accept the material universe simply came about by chance (I think that is where we agnostics differ from the atheists.)
I also think as an agnostic that whatever God is, its more likely an ultimate or primal force which is somewhat reflected in Christian and Jewish teachings, though I would tend to a more singular, monotheistic view of God as perhaps a modern Jew might. (I definately don’t think God is split into three beings in One God. To me, that’s a theological cheat that lets you satisfy the human urge towards polytheism wrapped in a shallow pretence of monotheism.)
I would suppose we come to this particular sight for various reasons: Many of us are ex Catholics and like to cross swords with ferverent Catholics as a way to challange, upset or at least shake up those who may be smug in their beleif systems. Others may come here to test theories, ideas, what not. Others may be seeking to convert, but are looking for a good argument to support a conversion or a return as the case may be.
However, I will remind everyone the site is open to all who participate and who don’t get too offensive, so it seems you are stuck with us. Does it upset believers that we are here? I come here because I like a good debate on occasion.
I really only have a gut feeling God exists simply because rationally I cannot accept the material universe simply came about by chance (I think that is where we agnostics differ from the atheists.)
I also think as an agnostic that whatever God is, its more likely an ultimate or primal force which is somewhat reflected in Christian and Jewish teachings, though I would tend to a more singular, monotheistic view of God as perhaps a modern Jew might. (I definately don’t think God is split into three beings in One God. To me, that’s a theological cheat that lets you satisfy the human urge towards polytheism wrapped in a shallow pretence of monotheism.)
I would suppose we come to this particular sight for various reasons: Many of us are ex Catholics and like to cross swords with ferverent Catholics as a way to challange, upset or at least shake up those who may be smug in their beleif systems. Others may come here to test theories, ideas, what not. Others may be seeking to convert, but are looking for a good argument to support a conversion or a return as the case may be.
However, I will remind everyone the site is open to all who participate and who don’t get too offensive, so it seems you are stuck with us. Does it upset believers that we are here? I come here because I like a good debate on occasion.
J
josie_L
Guest
Well, yes you’re right in that the Sumerians believed in a myth, but here’s something that caught my eye while reading up on them:
It is not surprising that the religious beliefs of the Sumerians changed during the long period of their history. According to British archaeologist Archibald Sayce:[17]
In historical Babylonia the gods were conceived of in the form of man. Man was created in the image of God because the gods themselves were men. But the conception cannot be traced back further than the age when the Sumerians and Semites came into contact with one another. In pre-Semitic Sumer there are no anthropomorphic gods. We hear, instead, of the zi or ‘spirit’, a word properly signifying ‘life’ which manifested itself in the power of motion. All things that moved were possessed of life, and there was accordingly a ‘life’ or ‘spirit’ of the water as well as of man or beast. … Sumerian theology, in fact, was still on the level of animism… Vestiges of the old animism can still be detected even in the later cult: by the side of the human gods an Assyrian prayer invokes the mountains, the rivers and the winds, and from time to time we come across a worship of deified towns. It was the town itself that was divine, not the deity to whom its chief temple was dedicated. So, again, the god or goddess continued to be symbolized by some sacred animal or object whose figure appears upon seals and boundary-stones…
With the advent of the Semite all is changed. The gods have become men and women with intensified powers and the gift of immortality, but in all other respects they live and act like the men and women of this nether world. … The Semitic god of Babylon was ‘lord of gods’ and men, of heaven and earth; Assur of Assyria was ‘king of the gods’ and lord of ‘the heavenly hosts’.
It was natural that, corresponding with this lord of the heavenly hosts, there should be a lord of the hosts of earth, and that as the divine king was clothed in the attributes of man, the human king should take upon him the divine nature. Like the Pharaohs of Egypt or the emperors of Rome, the early kings of Semitic Babylonia were deified. And the deification took place during their life-time, in fact, so far as we can judge, upon their accession to the throne. In the eyes of their subjects they were incarnate deities, and in their inscriptions they give themselves the title of god.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer
So do you see how the religious beliefs of the Sumerians have changed? Yet the Jews have maintained the same scriptures/traditions for more than 3 millenia and the Catholic/Christians likewise.
A
Agripa
Guest
But who can know what God’s will is? Is it not man in the end who defines God’s will to his own ends and in an effort to control others? How can we accept that God’s will only comes from a single collection of books written over time, most lately about 1700 years, by superstitious people who thrived in a era of myths and legends?The Catholic churches offers catechism classes perhaps you can inquire about the adult courses; nonetheless there is much useful information on this site; please feel free to use the Catholic Encyclopedia website newadvent.org/
Just type in your subject or word in the search box and you get instant information.
We will pray for you. You yourself must pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and truth; be patient and trusting and most of all honest with your intention before the Almighty. He will give you what you need.
I highly recommend that you procure a bible. ex. The New English Bible (it contains the apocrypha and other books that some protestant bibles do not necessarily include). It has exemplary notes to add greater insight to the scriptures.
As for your comment on a single religion forcing its views on society, the pope’s duty is to minister to his flock which of course belongs to Jesus. He is bound to tell all catholics what their position is in certain matters; he neither obliges you nor condemns you so long as it is not a direct attack on the church. We have Free Will to do as we please but we should abide by God’s will if we want to remain in His Grace and that of the church.
As your spirituality heightens you will get a keener sense on God’s Will. You will not feel guilt or reticence to abide in Him even if it doesn’t rhyme with the liberal world; examine if you will this verse in the bible 1 Corinthians 6:12-20.
One more thing, nothing is impossible with the Lord Jesus. Ask anything in His name with sincerity,yearning and piety and you will receive it. Nothing is to good to be true; even the eternal happiness of the afterlife. May we always feel this way and believe.
A
Agripa
Guest
Actually, Christian and Jewish beleifs and traditions have certainly changed over the millenia. The very first Jews often offered human sacrifice to God. Over time, that practice gave way to sacrificing first born animals and later, under the Christian paradigm, Gods’ first born became the eternal sacrifice.
There are two accounts in the bible, - the Abraham / Issac story which we are taught and the other one we are not taught, about the OT warrior who promises to kill the first creature that comes to him as a way of thanking God after a successful battle. Sadly, its his daughter who comes to him upn his arrival home. Although he allows her time to mourn her virginity (I would too!) he still kills her. These are savage stories from a savage time and obviously religion has evolved since then, although its still steeped in the whole blood / sacrifice theme.
J
josie_L
Guest
Well, you already mentioned that you believe in some kind of God why don’t you then pray to Him? I would suggest something along these lines “I am searching for truth help me to find it”. God will answer.
Y
yankee_doodle
Guest
But these facts have no probative value. It remains true that Sumerian mythology formed the basis for many of the stories we see in the Old Testament, including both the flood and creation account. BTW the “Semites” the article mentions are the peoples we would today call Arabs (although Jews are, as I’m sure you’re aware, an offshoot of this group).
The fact remains that virtually the entire bible (new testament included) finds its roots in earlier pagan myth. That the original innovators of these myths eventually changed their beliefs is irrelevent to the point at issue.
J
josie_L
Guest
Jewish scripture as remained the same for many a millenia, furthermore their beliefs have not changed in that they still believe in one God, still looking for the Messiah to come, still God’s chosen people, still circumcizing, still celebrating passover . . . (sacrifices are no longer possible as the temple in Jerusalem is destroyed) etc. Catholics likewise have retained the same Sacred Traditions and Scripture since it’s inception (Christ is the fulfilment of the promises in the OT).
J
josie_L
Guest
There are biblical scholars who make it a practice to study and analyze scripture, if there was any truth or value to what you say we would have had an overwhelmingly large pool of biblical scholars telling us so. We are not a mythically based religion, Jesus existed, in fact, historically, we have proof for the existence of other figures in the NT with a precision lacking in religions based on mythology. And you have not proven that Judaism is a myth just because of some loose similarities to other religions, and if a flood did occur on a large scale don’t you think it would be mentioned by more than one people/culture? Remember the Jews were recording salvation history. Moreover, the Sumerians believed that the Universe was flat with a tin dome over it, how is that reflective of Judaic scripture and creation?
4
4elise
Guest
I’m very glad you are here! I’ve said before that when given the opportunity to examine our faith it should help us feel confirmed and joyful - help us articulate better why we feel called to be part of this faith community… so I’m glad you are here and I may need your help too in understanding better those who have either turned away — so thanks for engaging us!Forgive me if this has been discussed, but let us be sure to differentiate between agnostics and atheists. I am an agnostic, though not terribly strict in that sense. I acknowledge the existance of God as a creative force beyond all human comprehension. Though I tend to think as we learn more and more of the universe, we will have glimpses into God, or at least God’s machinations.
I really only have a gut feeling God exists simply because rationally I cannot accept the material universe simply came about by chance (I think that is where we agnostics differ from the atheists.)
I also think as an agnostic that whatever God is, its more likely an ultimate or primal force which is somewhat reflected in Christian and Jewish teachings, though I would tend to a more singular, monotheistic view of God as perhaps a modern Jew might. (I definately don’t think God is split into three beings in One God. To me, that’s a theological cheat that lets you satisfy the human urge towards polytheism wrapped in a shallow pretence of monotheism.)
I would suppose we come to this particular sight for various reasons: Many of us are ex Catholics and like to cross swords with ferverent Catholics as a way to challange, upset or at least shake up those who may be smug in their beleif systems. Others may come here to test theories, ideas, what not. Others may be seeking to convert, but are looking for a good argument to support a conversion or a return as the case may be.
However, I will remind everyone the site is open to all who participate and who don’t get too offensive, so it seems you are stuck with us. Does it upset believers that we are here? I come here because I like a good debate on occasion.
Y
yankee_doodle
Guest
The pre-Judaic Sumerian flood story asserted the gods intended to destroy life on earth through a flood, and a goddess warned the hero character; instructing him to built a giant ship and house living creatures in it (to prevent their extinction). Humans were created out of clay. Of course humans first inhabited a paradise, where there was no sickness, death, or strife; and women didn’t have labor pains.
faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/SumerianMyth.htm
This site gives a decent cursory snapshot of Sumerian mythology. It is real evidence showing a significant likelihood that Judaism was merely an offshoot of this mythology, sort of like Mormonism is to Christianity.
Imagine, assuming there was an Abraham (or a central figure who started this folklore), he may have been a story teller much like Joseph Smith was. A small tribe of people who either lived in or were exposed to Sumerian civilization, who either were or became nomadic, and developed a tribe identity (and this folklore, which probably began as a hybrid of Sumerian mythology, developed over centuries to eventually become the Judaism we know today).
This is certainly far more plausible than wild far fetched stories like fish swallowing men (and the guy surviving), men acting as a conduit for a god – turning rivers into blood and dividing seas, angels visiting virgin women to tell them they were impregnated by a spirit of a deity, god-men rising from the dead, and all the rest of it.
- Status