What And Why You Believe please write logical posts.

[l337 Nurse Pedestrian 0]

Well i'm not joining your debate. But here's my answer to "what and Why you believe"Well I don't believe in any religon. Since there is more gods in other religons, then God can be easily cancelled out. Like other gods.So yeah..l

[thatguycalledrob 0]

Well, the point is that you can never prove anything, but you CAN disprove at least some things.  The issue with stating that the bible, or any other religious text is true is that as soon as you do that, any discrepancy acts as at least a partial disproof.  How partial or absolute the disproof is depends on the extent to which the faith/religion rests on that truth being necessary.  If faith rests on something being infallible (like the pope at one time) then as soon as a mistake is made things fall apart.

 

As for word for word vs. phrase for phrase translations, word for word is less accurate in some ways.  For instance, if one were to translate the phrase 'the jig is up' from english to some other language word for word, then it would come out saying that there was a floating saw.  This is, to say the least, innaccurate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with you to some extent, I think. The word infallible does describe what you were saying, but it describes a person or being that does things. The bible does not do anything or change. A new version may arrise, more sources may be found, but the bible cannot be described by the word infallible. sorry, i'm kind annoying when it comes to words.

 

So in stead, I will use the phrase 'God-backed and unbreakable truth' which I'm taking from here. In which case, yes, this is an essential truth to Christian beleif. While, I would not say faith rests on it, I would say that it is a basis for faith. Faith at it's most simplest can simply be described as trust. If I lend you a hammer with the faith that you'll bring it back to me, then I trust you will bring it back to me. This faith does not rest on anything, but it probably has a basis or two like, 'I think most people who borrow hammers return them', 'I think you're a reliable person', etc. Now, if someone were to tell me, "I heard mtf constantly makes promises and doesn't keep them". I may or may lose some trust in you. I would more likely investigate the situation.

 

Now, with all that said, I beleive that the bible's status of 'God-backed and unbreakable truth' is a basis for my faith. And, the fact that I form the basis for my life, the way I conduct myself, and many of my beleifs from the bible, as I take it to be God's word, then that forces me to rely heavily on the previous statement. Now, if someone should find problems with passages, or interpretations I have then things don't 'fall apart'. Because, I have faith that what God said is true, maybe translators got it a little off, but rarely these are the "contradictions" they find anything critical, and the reasoning is usually found later, usually by someone simply reading the text around the passage.

 

Oh, and as far as the translation thing goes. It kind of depends, yes in general phrase-phrase is good, especially when establishing the context, but usually the bible scholars out there will tell you that the more word-for-word, the more closer to the original greek you go, the more accurate the translation.

 

I refer to those people who have at least received the sacrament of baptism and maybe the sacrament of confirmation, etc. at some time in their lives as non practicing Christians. It's important to differentiate this point because can a person who hasn't been baptized called him/herself a christian?

However, I do agree with you that one must incorporate their beliefs into their lives, therefore, living by what they believe. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally, I agree with you. I find Acts 2 to be fairly plain as far as baptism doctrine is concerned. The sad, and somewhat funny, state is that many - most US, in fact - call themselves christian - can they? well, the word is originally an insult (see Acts 11:26), so in a sense people can call themselves whatever they want to. But, the meaning of it then was reffering to Chist's disciples - 'followers of Christ', it was a term Jews used to mock them. But, the first century Christians had a way about them, where they almost seemed to enjoy persecution, as it reassured them of their faith. The word only appears three times in the whole bible (many translations also use it in their section headings, but still only 3 times). So, personally, I beleive one should only call themselves a 'Christian' if it describes who they are, and the way they live as 'one who follows Christ' - not 'one who heard some bible growing up, and you know, basically, thinks there's a a Jesus up there and stuff'.

[egbert 0]

I believe that god created the world, that he sent his son to save us, and that he'll come again. (everything the bible says).Why?Because nothing has ever been done that convinces me that it is not true. The values that are held by this seem to be the best and the most beneficial for everyone. The Ten Commandments are a good example, I think they are moral and are in everyone's best interests. Everything seems to makes sense, too. Many other religions (like ancient native american) seem to have a story of 'the great flood'. This fits in with noah's ark, which all our ancestors sprouted from, so naturally all people would remember and record this. I believe it is historically accurate as well. Everything fits in.This is why I believe what I do.

[hast-webben 0]

Hi,I wont call me for a atheist person, but more like an heathen person. As an pure Nordic (Scandinavian) would I decleare my true spirit to the Norse mythology and the Norse gods, as for me does it gives more than an reason to belive. For me is it a part of my culture legacy, and I even have dokumentation of conections to the old Vikings. They wasn't only babarians, but they also had an very beutyful spirit of questions about life and death, and for all that womens who might read these words did the norse mytology content huge respect for the female, or said in other words that the female sex was more stronger then when it is todays christian culture. And here in my part of the world was the christianity used to get the women and the regular people down.So my answer to what I'm belive in can I declare that I'm Asa beliver, and I could had wroten alot more about this issue, but I would like to discuss it here if any should be interested.In the name of ValhalCheers!Jens

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

The Ten Commandments are a good example, I think they are moral and are in everyone's best interests. Everything seems to makes sense, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

hmm, the 1st one says 'thou shalt not have other gods before me..or make graven images'...moral and in everyones best interest? Tell that to those persecuted for believing differently through the years, as it is this passage (among others) that was used for justification.

 

Or, 'thou shalt not take the lords name in vain'. Frankly, this is at most annoying to people. Not #2 material for a list of 10 things you shouldn't do in life. At least its better than #1.

 

Then there is #3, 'Keep the Sabbath.....' Also, not really dealing with morality. Though perhaps everyone's best interest, since we all need a break. It seems a bit of a strange way of saying that though (though, honestly, it does say other things as well, but the following comment applies to those as well). Why not say 'take a break once a week, to be with others and enjoy community' Much more to the point. In fact, a lot of this stuff could be much more to the point, and a lot less 'Rawr! GOD! RAWR!.

 

As for the others, they are pretty generic. I don't think you need a diety to know that its not nice, polite, or moral to kill another person. I have never believed, but that always struck me as sort of obvious. Same for, the 'don't steal' and 'don't lie' and 'don't commit adultery' type of things.

 

I believe that god created the world, that he sent his son to save us, and that he'll come again. (everything the bible says).

Why?

Because nothing has ever been done that convinces me that it is not true.

Why should you believe that holy book/religion over any other? Because you were raised with it? Fine, but that only counts till you are say...18, at which point you should learn to think for yourself. If you have other, more compelling reasons, that would be nice (not saying you don't, just that I can't tell from your post and it strikes me as unlikely. I could be wrong).

 

There are many holy books, and many prophets, and many religions. Most of them say similar things.

 

The point is, you shouldn't start with saying something is true and then looking for something to disprove it (especially when most religions make claims that simply are outside the realm of proof/disproof). You should demand that a religion prove itself not only better than the others, but in some definitive way.

 

To simplify: A lot of whats in religions probably strikes you as BS, and vice versa. I think its long past time to create a BS test and make em all pass.

[webguide 0]

For me, I don't believe in god, for the simple reason that I don't see any reason too. . There is no proof, it is a thoery. I am one of the growing number of people that believe two hands working do more than a thousand clasped in prayer and would not spend my time contemplating if any one of the thousand or so religions is true.

[wedjarl 0]

Somehow, despite of all the negative steps pushed by atheists and pagans, and anti-Christ skeptics to disprove everything written on it, I still believe that the Bible, the basic foundation of Christian faith, holds the most reliable contents compared to other scriptures of other denominations.

Before science unfolds discoveries about human health, the Bible teached us what foods to eat and what should we avoid eating. It teached us not to eat so much meat but rather to eat vegetables. Later Science found out that eating so meat is the primary cause of heart attacks and high blood pressure. Science discovered too the unaccountable benefits of fruits and vegetables to human health. The Bible warns us about taking much sweets or having so many sexual partners. Later Science discovered ailments accompanied with it, diabetes, and AIDS.

The Bible is supported by concrete archeological evidences. It's not a compilation of tattle tales, stories and hearsays. As a matter of fact, it even accounts more information about certain kingdoms and empires, more than history books and archeology do. For years, archeologist tried to disprove several issues about history in the Bible, like the existence of "King Sargon", and the existence "Coin of Ceasar". They claimed that, such king and coin didn't exist, basing on the artifacts they have discovered, but..

For many years, skeptics insisted that the biblical writer must be mistaken. After all, many inscriptions and archaeological finds from the Assyrian empire had been found, yet not a single one of them mentioned Sargon of Isaiah 20.
But in 1843, French archaeologist Paul Emile Botta dealt the deathblow to this argument. Acting on information he had received about the small village of Khorsabad, Iraq, Botta began excavating the site and uncovered the palace of King Sargon. The magnificent palace complex occupied some 25 acres. Inside the palace, Botta uncovered reception halls with their winged animals, sculptures, bas-reliefs and many other artifacts with inscriptions everywhere. All of these gave a peculiar insight into the advanced level of art that existed in ancient Assria. Not the least among those inscriptions was a particularly revealing inscription discussing his actions against Ashdod, the very city mentioned in Isaiah 20:1.

When archeologists discovered a silver denarius bearing the head of Tiberius Caesar, it was found out that the coin was put in circulation about 15 A.D. This is consistent with Tiberius period of rule as emperor, which began in 14 A.D. and it brings added support to the record stating that John the Baptist's ministry commenced in the 15th year of Tiberius or 29 A.D. We can read this in the writings of Luke in 3:1-2: =====
Other scientific experiments were made to attest this discovery. In the late 1980's, two internationally respected Italian scholars from the University of Turin, Professor Luigi Baima Bollone, a medical examiner and Professor Nello Balossino, an expert in computer-enhanced technology were able to establish that the coin was minted in the reign of Emperor Tiberius corresponding to 29 A.D. in our system of dating.

I have been reading all of those anti-Christ sites like http://www.atheists.org/ or http://wichm.home.xs4all.nl/christmyth.html, but personally they are unreliable for me, they disprove the Bibles contexts word for word, phrase by phrase, without considering cultures and traditions and the "real" understanding of the whole books itself, and how and the way it was translated. Plus the fact that, they don't have any hard evidence to disprove the Bibles authenticity in terms of historical accounts and archeology. They have desperately tried for years to disprove its authenticity in historical accounts, but they end up taking the bitterness of their own medicine. They could disprove archeological, historical accounts and backgrounds of books of other religious denominations but not the Bible as I have observe...the simple reason why I belive in it...Archeology is there to attest its authenticity.

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

[webguide 0]

wedjarl, you say that nobody can disprove the Christian faith, well wouldn't the same thing apply to every other faith. Every faith believes their correct and everybody else is wrong. Certainly Christian's don't have any more evidence for their religion then the jews or the buddists. I personally don't understand why other atheists create these sites to disprove beliefs, there's no need. The world is based on survival of the fittest, lower lifespans are directly linked with higher belief. Thats why the "sinful" nations of the world are doing so much better the religous ruled countries.

[wedjarl 0]

Well not really about Christian faith...but the Bible, I have read doctrines of other faiths, but they failed to show me concrete evidences about the authenticity of the basis of their books etc. So in response to the topic posted I posted what I believe and why. As what you have said, every faith believes they're correct, including those who "do not have faith."

[iGuest 3]

The Bible has the highest level of credibility of all of the religious texts because in the Old Testament it chronicles much of history that noone in the world would dispute, as well as the fact that not one single shred of prophecy in the Bible has come back false

[webguide 0]

I don't see anything that amazing about chronicling history, it's something every civilisation in the world has done, many of which started long before the Christians.As for the prophecies, can you give me an example?

[Shogi 0]

My stance on religion is that, yes its possible there is a god, but I'm not going to base my opinion on what other humans have written, no matter how many agree, humans are human and we lie. this kinda puts me in the agnostic category.On top of that, organized religion is fundamentally flawed because in essence, we are still believing what someone else tells us to. I'd say at least the majority of christians go to church out of habit or fear of hell. not because they want to. I believe each person needs to find their own path and that no path is right or wrong. this kinda makes me more buddhist with the belief in many paths to "heaven".Also, I choose to believe that no religion has the right to damn other people to hell for not following it. good people should be rewarded no matter what, and any god that believes otherwise is no god worth following.Ultimatly, I could care less about what religion is right, what day to fast etc, because I believe in just living a good life. And god had better have a sense of humor and a playstation, or im gonna have a bone to pick with him.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Well not really about Christian faith...but the Bible,  I have read doctrines of other faiths, but they failed to show me concrete evidences about the authenticity of the basis of their books etc. So in response to the topic posted I posted what I believe and why. As what you have said, every faith believes they're correct, including those who "do not have faith."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think what people are failing to do is distinguish between the historical account of events and the interpretation of those events recorded in semi-historical writings such as the bible.

 

It should come as no surprise that the bible records accurate historical information, as it was not only a religious record but also a historical record. Thus, like all such historical records, it is about as accurate as anything else.

 

On the other hand, that history is shown through the lens of the culture recording it. Thus, when something happens, the ancient Hebrews wrote that God caused it.

They can be right about something happening, but wrong about why.

 

For instance, take the Epic of Gilgamesh, another ancient bit of writing. The events recorded in the epic have historical counterparts, despite the epic being nowhere near as well preserved as the bible. Does that mean that the gods and such of the ancient summerians are real? No, it doesn't.

[webguide 0]

I totally agree. The same events in history are recorded by many cultures, each of which attributes it to their own god. Not that I blame them, they only created a theory from the knowledge they had. Not just with gods but with many of the things they saw. For example most of the people on earth, thought the world was flat because of the limits of what they could see. We now have far less limits on our knowledge, thats why such a small percentage of people in the west truly have faith.

[Shogi 0]

I gave up on reading the bible a logn time ago because Essentially when you get down to it, it's still a book put together by a group of people trying construct their own image of god, and then telling others to follow it. which is utter bull. Not only that, they change and remove any part of any gospel or whole gospels based on what they deem "realative" or "important"its all freakin religious politics.