01-11-2011, 11:20 PM
Dear Raphael,
You seem like an honest guy that would like to hold the truth regardless of the price. The problem i have with your writings is mostly that of definition. For example, you seem to say there is no God. Now, that all depends on definition. i for myself don't ask the question of God first, but the question of origin. Even if the big bang is just an endlessly repeating event, and there would be an infinite nuber of dimensions, this all still demands for an origin. Possibly trillions to the magnitute of trillions of years ago, but there was an origin. The fact that this origin produced physical laws, undeniable orders in the elements, and allowed for the development of complex organisms demands that i would call that origin superior to the result, as everything originated from it.
At the moment oforigin, one is moved to conclude, all things that exist were included in that origin. Just as time, space and matter only came into existence at the moment of the big bang. Just as these were undefinable until this moment, the origin of all things was even less definable (in fact not definable by any concept) at the first moment of its existence. Now, however that origin was like, that origin, to me, is God. The existence of all things is also proof of an origin (as well as an end). Naturally, this is expressed in the Bible. You may also realize i do not believe in the trinity.
So, if you ask a physician or a philosopher to define the origin of all things, that origin is what i refer to as "God". That there is intelligence and order in that origin is clearly expressed by the result of that origin.
Also, who is to say that we need clear, logically and eternally reproducible proof for God's existance? i have a load of prooffor his existence, but that proof is not transferrableto anyone else. This is the way God deals with people. He reveals himself to them that please him. He does thisnot only by emotions, but also by supernatural acts. But he does not wish to necessarily make this public allthe time. He controls the information about it.
Then you talk about religion. Religion is all about liturgy, and a set order of behaviour regardless of circumstances. Jesus preached the exact opposite. He wanted our morals to be adjusted to the situation, always having in mind that it is our duty to be the best we can. The other meaning of religion is a belief in supernatural.
You also compare a number of "religions" to each other. i am a bit preoccupied hearing true christians thrown into the pot with islam and others. Usually a religion is limited most by its founders. You will see the ugly misconceptions of them shine through even thousands of years afterwards. Often times, religion is also self-correcting (e.g. many muslims do not believe in killing though it is a clear and eternal commandment). The eastern "religions" you mentionned are truly superior to most other religions, but, as you said yourself, those are not religions at all. They are philosophies. The Tao te Ching, which i have read at least 3 times myself, you say, contains more wisodm than the Bible, but almost every thought in it is contained in the Bible (mostly Proverbs and Ecclesiasties, often times a little more practical in expression), written even 300 years before the Tao. Many people don't realize the depth of the Bible because they read bad translations like the KJV (i recommend AMP for daily reading).
i myself study the theories and logic of buddhism, taoism (minus the fables and superstitions), and i find almost all contained in the Bible.
Then your conclusions about history are just wrong. Interestingly, every single "proof" that has been brought forth to disproof the bible 200 years ago has been disproven today (take the Hittites for example, which was THE major argument against the Bible in 18th century). Same thing is happening all the time. Also, if you want to know how the first church came into existence and how it conducted, read the book of acts. If you would know how "theologians" and "historians" come up with their conclusions they so firmy express, you would get vomit cramps for the rest of your life. Basically all they do is proclaim their funny ideas they had while reading fiction. If you present some real arguments based on logic and data, they will just refer to their title and claim to be the ultimate authority of truth. Trust me, i experienced it first hand.
This is the vast majority of those "scientists" (One example is the prestigious "Jesus Seminar", now whoever calls that scolarship must be an idiot. it would be safer to play poker and let the winner decide what is truth). Ask yourself, why did all these christians die for their faith, if it was as undefined, unimportant and fluffy as you say it was? They died for it because they were convinced to the depth of their heart that it is the perfect truth they die for. That is the first church. Trust me, you did not find it yet. It is also still alive today. Make no mistake about it.
Then i am unertain of what exactly you understand as a fundamental christian. i don't think you are referring to the original (classic) definition.
Also you said there was no evidence for Christ's existence. That also is a refuted claim that no scientist holds any longer, as they had to abandon their position under the pressure of too much evidence.
And yes, modern fundamentalism (if i understand what you mean by that) ruins lifes, as well as legalism, over-protection, and a lot of other things. But Jesus was no fundie, and he did not discriminate sinners. The only people he discriminated were those that claimed to be holy/religios/knowledgeable/better/pure, but were not. Hypocrites. That's all. This originates from his interest in truth. Hypocrites are contrary to truth.
If you measure truth by relative success of nations, you are clearly using the wrong measurement. Allnations are wrong and corrupt. Just as all people are.
So, i am not looking for an argument, but these, among other things, are some of the things that are a matter of definition and that you can't just deny.
Answer me one question though: Lived to the very extreme and in full originality, which faith/philosophy/religion/... is best for
1) A person itself
2) The close social environment of that person
3) All persons that come in contact with that person
4) The rest of the world
To me, the true and uncorrupted christian faith is far superior to all other candidates. That is the reason i became a christian. My faith does not limit me in any way, but it encourages me to do the best i can, and to love others, and to produce peace.
Jesus is an authoritative God. In fact, he is the only truly authoritative God i have ever heard of. All fieldsof science that touch upon the human himself agree that the very most healthy setting for a human is an authorative one. Look it up, get a book about raising kids or about helping psychologically ill people. Or about being an effective prison guard, or company boss, or or or. They always end up at the same conclusion. Authoritative treatment. It is simply what we are.
That is Jesus. He demands all we can give, but he also gives as much as we can take.
You seem like an honest guy that would like to hold the truth regardless of the price. The problem i have with your writings is mostly that of definition. For example, you seem to say there is no God. Now, that all depends on definition. i for myself don't ask the question of God first, but the question of origin. Even if the big bang is just an endlessly repeating event, and there would be an infinite nuber of dimensions, this all still demands for an origin. Possibly trillions to the magnitute of trillions of years ago, but there was an origin. The fact that this origin produced physical laws, undeniable orders in the elements, and allowed for the development of complex organisms demands that i would call that origin superior to the result, as everything originated from it.
At the moment oforigin, one is moved to conclude, all things that exist were included in that origin. Just as time, space and matter only came into existence at the moment of the big bang. Just as these were undefinable until this moment, the origin of all things was even less definable (in fact not definable by any concept) at the first moment of its existence. Now, however that origin was like, that origin, to me, is God. The existence of all things is also proof of an origin (as well as an end). Naturally, this is expressed in the Bible. You may also realize i do not believe in the trinity.
So, if you ask a physician or a philosopher to define the origin of all things, that origin is what i refer to as "God". That there is intelligence and order in that origin is clearly expressed by the result of that origin.
Also, who is to say that we need clear, logically and eternally reproducible proof for God's existance? i have a load of prooffor his existence, but that proof is not transferrableto anyone else. This is the way God deals with people. He reveals himself to them that please him. He does thisnot only by emotions, but also by supernatural acts. But he does not wish to necessarily make this public allthe time. He controls the information about it.
Then you talk about religion. Religion is all about liturgy, and a set order of behaviour regardless of circumstances. Jesus preached the exact opposite. He wanted our morals to be adjusted to the situation, always having in mind that it is our duty to be the best we can. The other meaning of religion is a belief in supernatural.
You also compare a number of "religions" to each other. i am a bit preoccupied hearing true christians thrown into the pot with islam and others. Usually a religion is limited most by its founders. You will see the ugly misconceptions of them shine through even thousands of years afterwards. Often times, religion is also self-correcting (e.g. many muslims do not believe in killing though it is a clear and eternal commandment). The eastern "religions" you mentionned are truly superior to most other religions, but, as you said yourself, those are not religions at all. They are philosophies. The Tao te Ching, which i have read at least 3 times myself, you say, contains more wisodm than the Bible, but almost every thought in it is contained in the Bible (mostly Proverbs and Ecclesiasties, often times a little more practical in expression), written even 300 years before the Tao. Many people don't realize the depth of the Bible because they read bad translations like the KJV (i recommend AMP for daily reading).
i myself study the theories and logic of buddhism, taoism (minus the fables and superstitions), and i find almost all contained in the Bible.
Then your conclusions about history are just wrong. Interestingly, every single "proof" that has been brought forth to disproof the bible 200 years ago has been disproven today (take the Hittites for example, which was THE major argument against the Bible in 18th century). Same thing is happening all the time. Also, if you want to know how the first church came into existence and how it conducted, read the book of acts. If you would know how "theologians" and "historians" come up with their conclusions they so firmy express, you would get vomit cramps for the rest of your life. Basically all they do is proclaim their funny ideas they had while reading fiction. If you present some real arguments based on logic and data, they will just refer to their title and claim to be the ultimate authority of truth. Trust me, i experienced it first hand.
This is the vast majority of those "scientists" (One example is the prestigious "Jesus Seminar", now whoever calls that scolarship must be an idiot. it would be safer to play poker and let the winner decide what is truth). Ask yourself, why did all these christians die for their faith, if it was as undefined, unimportant and fluffy as you say it was? They died for it because they were convinced to the depth of their heart that it is the perfect truth they die for. That is the first church. Trust me, you did not find it yet. It is also still alive today. Make no mistake about it.
Then i am unertain of what exactly you understand as a fundamental christian. i don't think you are referring to the original (classic) definition.
Also you said there was no evidence for Christ's existence. That also is a refuted claim that no scientist holds any longer, as they had to abandon their position under the pressure of too much evidence.
And yes, modern fundamentalism (if i understand what you mean by that) ruins lifes, as well as legalism, over-protection, and a lot of other things. But Jesus was no fundie, and he did not discriminate sinners. The only people he discriminated were those that claimed to be holy/religios/knowledgeable/better/pure, but were not. Hypocrites. That's all. This originates from his interest in truth. Hypocrites are contrary to truth.
If you measure truth by relative success of nations, you are clearly using the wrong measurement. Allnations are wrong and corrupt. Just as all people are.
So, i am not looking for an argument, but these, among other things, are some of the things that are a matter of definition and that you can't just deny.
Answer me one question though: Lived to the very extreme and in full originality, which faith/philosophy/religion/... is best for
1) A person itself
2) The close social environment of that person
3) All persons that come in contact with that person
4) The rest of the world
To me, the true and uncorrupted christian faith is far superior to all other candidates. That is the reason i became a christian. My faith does not limit me in any way, but it encourages me to do the best i can, and to love others, and to produce peace.
Jesus is an authoritative God. In fact, he is the only truly authoritative God i have ever heard of. All fieldsof science that touch upon the human himself agree that the very most healthy setting for a human is an authorative one. Look it up, get a book about raising kids or about helping psychologically ill people. Or about being an effective prison guard, or company boss, or or or. They always end up at the same conclusion. Authoritative treatment. It is simply what we are.
That is Jesus. He demands all we can give, but he also gives as much as we can take.
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.