This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
Okay, i'ma bow out. I still don't really understand why we can't settle on 'you believe this, I believe that, we don't agree, let's get on anyway and support the palace.' You're all kind of being dicks to me, which is unnecessary. Just because we don't believe the same thing. It's not on, really.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
Okay, i'ma bow out. I still don't really understand why we can't settle on 'you believe this, I believe that, we don't agree, let's get on anyway and support the palace.' You're all kind of being dicks to me, which is unnecessary. Just because we don't believe the same thing. It's not on, really. You can believe what you like. Just don't expect to be given preferential treatment just because you are religious. I don't do reverence.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
You can believe what you like. Just don't expect to be given preferential treatment just because you are religious. I don't do reverence. You don't do a lot of things, by the sounds of it. Friendly, acceptance and open mindedness, to name a few. And I'm not sure at what point I asked for preferential treatment? You're putting words in my mouth. Anyway, let's leave it at that.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
You don't do a lot of things, by the sounds of it. Friendly, acceptance and open mindedness, to name a few. And I'm not sure at what point I asked for preferential treatment? You're putting words in my mouth. Anyway, let's leave it at that. But you don't do you. Open-mindedness only stretches so far. Should I also believe in the tooth fairy? Or Father Christmas?
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
But you don't do you. Open-mindedness only stretches so far. Should I also believe in the tooth fairy? Or Father Christmas? No, of course not. They're completely fictitious, mad-mad ideas created largely for children's entertainment. Christianity on the other hand is based on historical fact. Jesus existed. There's more proof of that than William Shakespear existed. Scholars and experts, for the most part, all accept that. He was a real historical figure. Likewise, they're largely unanimous about the fact he via died via crucifixion on a cross. So the question then becomes...was he just some dude that said a lot of stuff but didn't follow through...or is he who he says he is...that being, the son of God. I (and millions of others, for varying reasons) choose to believe that he is who he said he was. And lots (including you and millions of others) don't. Which is absolutely fine. I have no issue with that. What I have a slight issue with, is professing to be the former on here (which I was only doing in response do an original post anyway) and being ridiculed and mocked for it (mentally insecure / God botherer type comments). They're just not needed. (Yeah, sorry, I didn't leave it at that, did I. Oops) Edited by sprites (20 Jun 2018 6.44am)
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Park Road ![]() |
|
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
No, of course not. They're completely fictitious, mad-mad ideas created largely for children's entertainment. Christianity on the other hand is based on historical fact. Jesus existed. There's more proof of that than William Shakespear existed. Scholars and experts, for the most part, all accept that. He was a real historical figure. Likewise, they're largely unanimous about the fact he via died via crucifixion on a cross. So the question then becomes...was he just some dude that said a lot of stuff but didn't follow through...or is he who he says he is...that being, the son of God. I (and millions of others, for varying reasons) choose to believe that he is who he said he was. And lots (including you and millions of others) don't. Which is absolutely fine. I have no issue with that. What I have a slight issue with, is professing to be the former on here (which I was only doing in response do an original post anyway) and being ridiculed and mocked for it (mentally insecure / God botherer type comments). They're just not needed. (Yeah, sorry, I didn't leave it at that, did I. Oops) Edited by sprites (20 Jun 2018 6.44am) Just like a child would. However, kids grow out of believing in tooth fairies and papa noel..yet a man from over 2000 years ago - like so many before and after him claims to be a son of a God, and you believe it?? Edited by Park Road (20 Jun 2018 7.38am)
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
Park Road ![]() |
|
---|---|
This is a partial list of notable people who have been claimed, either by themselves or by their followers, in some way to be the reincarnation or incarnation of Jesus, or the Second Coming of Christ. Do you believe them? If not, why not? Kondratiy Selivanov (c. 1730s–1832), the founder and leader of the Skoptsy sect in the Russian Empire.[1]Ann Lee (1736–1784), the founder and leader of the Shakers. Lee's followers referred to her as "Mother", believing that she was the female incarnation of Christ on Earth.[2] John Nichols Thom (1799–183 Haile Selassie I (1892–1975) did not claim to be Jesus and disapproved of claims that he was Jesus, but the Rastafari movement, which emerged in Jamaica during the 1930s, believes he is the Second Coming. He embodied this when he became Emperor of Ethiopia in 1930, perceived as confirmation of the return of the Messiah in the prophetic Book of Revelation 5:5 in the New Testament, who is also expected to return a second time to initiate the apocalyptic day of judgment. He is also called Jah Ras Tafari, and is often considered to be alive by Rastafari movement members.[14]Lou de Palingboer (1898–196
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
No, of course not. They're completely fictitious, mad-mad ideas created largely for children's entertainment. Christianity on the other hand is based on historical fact. Jesus existed. There's more proof of that than William Shakespear existed. This simply isn't true. We have six signatures of Shakespeare on legal documents, detailed in the link below. We have the birth and death records of Shakespeare. His will. We have other records like the birth records of his children....but there's a limit to how much time I'll spend on this. Outside of the Gospels, none of which are written in Jesus's lifetime we only have patchy and short mentions of Jesus....or probably who is meant o be Jesus by independent sources. No reliable birth date, no reliable death date. No records written by him at all. So sorry, there is much more reliable evidence that Shakespeare existed. Originally posted by sprites
Scholars and experts, for the most part, all accept that. He was a real historical figure. Likewise, they're largely unanimous about the fact he via died via crucifixion on a cross. 'largely unanimous'? that's a paradoxical statement right there. I know of two noted scholars who don't accept he existed (Dr Robert Carrier and Dr Robert Price) and this is only a partial interest area for me. Here is a debate by scholars on whether Jesus existed. A far more accurate summary of many scholars on this would be the description.....probably. However, there is no strong evidence. Originally posted by sprites
So the question then becomes...was he just some dude that said a lot of stuff but didn't follow through...or is he who he says he is...that being, the son of God. I (and millions of others, for varying reasons) choose to believe that he is who he said he was. And lots (including you and millions of others) don't. Which is absolutely fine. I have no issue with that. What I have a slight issue with, is professing to be the former on here (which I was only doing in response do an original post anyway) and being ridiculed and mocked for it (mentally insecure / God botherer type comments). They're just not needed. (Yeah, sorry, I didn't leave it at that, did I. Oops) Edited by sprites (20 Jun 2018 6.44am) Well, I kind of agree that what you believe is your business. The only problem for me is the reality that this belief system gets passed onto children. So essentially it's the passing of stories as fact onto minors. That was done onto me and for various reasons many of those children never go onto seriously question these ideas. Still, this is no worse than any other religion....but it's still not ideal in our modern age. There are a few other practical problems with religion like the activities of activists and their political interference but none of these are probably your interest area so it would be over the top to detail them here. As for you not liking the fact that you get ridiculed.....Well, you trust in a story that's been told to you that there is no way for you to test. I hardly think you can complain if others find that incredulous and should shut up about it. Still, you say it's a slight issue so fair enough...perhaps the ridicule is sometimes aggressive or deliberately insulting and again that's not ideal. There are a lot of good people within religion trying to do positive things. Though this is a whole topic itself. However, a lot of people do feel angry about religion in general for various reasons so we have to take that into account as well.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by sprites
No, of course not. They're completely fictitious, mad-mad ideas created largely for children's entertainment. Christianity on the other hand is based on historical fact. Jesus existed. There's more proof of that than William Shakespear existed. Scholars and experts, for the most part, all accept that. He was a real historical figure. Likewise, they're largely unanimous about the fact he via died via crucifixion on a cross. So the question then becomes...was he just some dude that said a lot of stuff but didn't follow through...or is he who he says he is...that being, the son of God. I (and millions of others, for varying reasons) choose to believe that he is who he said he was. And lots (including you and millions of others) don't. Which is absolutely fine. I have no issue with that. What I have a slight issue with, is professing to be the former on here (which I was only doing in response do an original post anyway) and being ridiculed and mocked for it (mentally insecure / God botherer type comments). They're just not needed. (Yeah, sorry, I didn't leave it at that, did I. Oops) Edited by sprites (20 Jun 2018 6.44am) When you start making accurate statements,I will bother to answer them.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Some of the borderline trolling of believers on this thread is a bit OTT. However, if an omnipotent ultra-being is responsible for willing the entire universe into existence, I'm pretty confident that it wasn't Christos The Rabble-rouser (read your classics) who did it.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle
Some of the borderline trolling of believers on this thread is a bit OTT. However, if an omnipotent ultra-being is responsible for willing the entire universe into existence, I'm pretty confident that it wasn't Christos The Rabble-rouser (read your classics) who did it. I hope not, he seems like a reasonable guy. Just chewing the fat. I certainly hopes he doesn't take offence. The more I learn about the the quantum eraser experiments the more evidence there appears to be for a kind of determinism operating in the universe. Which was a bit of a turn up for me. So while I completely reject the 'personal god' keeping score on how many times you choked the chicken this week....it certainly leaves the door open for something.....or not...it's peeping through a doorkey into a dark expanse and trying to understand what you see.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I hope not, he seems like a reasonable guy. Just chewing the fat. I certainly hopes he doesn't take offence. The more I learn about the the quantum eraser experiments the more evidence there appears to be for a kind of determinism operating in the universe. Which was a bit of a turn up for me. So while I completely reject the 'personal god' keeping score on how many times you choked the chicken this week....it certainly leaves the door open for something.....or not...it's peeping through a doorkey into a dark expanse and trying to understand what you see.
What do you mean by detirminism? Nature appears to have determinism. A series of random chances will appear that way given enough time.
|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.