and you believe this?

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Maybe chessartist shouldn't lecture you, but his inquiry into the whole "Jesus- being- God -thing" is apt. APT!!

Well, chessartist did not present any inquiry; he was completely surprised by the idea, as if the doctrine of the Trinity were unknown to him. The issue is not whether the Trinity is wrong or wrong -- rather, it is the fact that mainst ...[text shortened]... ny Christians who believe that commitment to a Trinitarian God is necessary for salvation.[/b]

what is there to be surprised about about the doctrine of the trinity...it's as made up as your god is. of course i know what your belief of the trinity is. my point is it's another concept to baffle simple minds into thinking there is a god who wants people to worship out of fear.
I guess you're in awe of this concept of the trinity. show me something other than your fear of god and his punishment.
in reality fear is your only god

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Christianity was never based on the pagan belifef of the trinity and up to this day you have never proved that it was believed, thought of or taught by Jesus, the apostles or by anyone in the Bible.

I am not satisfied with your pagan explanation for the doctrine of the Trinity. You know nothing of classical history and your bizarro theories have n ...[text shortened]... e intellectual scruples to be worthy of any conversation. You are both blinded by idiotic dogma.[/b]

And I'm not arguing with you either and if you can't see the evidence of the origin of many trinity beliefs from Babylon and Egypt then that's your missfortune.. So are you admitting that the early christians knew nothing of the trinity but it was later divinely made know to the Catholic forefathers?

Originally posted by Agerg
Oh golly, you're going to be so sorry for messing with gearies when God lovingly condemns you to the raging, never ending fires of hell for challenging his learned opinion of your IQ level for not believing in Him and His holy book written (through the divine guidance of his words) by ancient humans. 😲

What's in store for you makes me very disappointed 🙁

Sorry, but find half a dozen examples in the spirituality debates where there is anything like a charitable view of Christianity on the part of non believers. is it right to take the view that you can insult those with a faith with reference to "poisons", but when we take the same approach and make light of your views you throw up the moral indignation line?.

If faith means nothing to you then pass on by, as a final comment, tell me whether the world would or not be a better place if everyone folllowed the 10 commandments? Straight answer yes or no. Faith and a belief in the creator and his doctrine is the salvation of the world.

Originally posted by gearies
Sorry, but find half a dozen examples in the spirituality debates where there is anything like a charitable view of Christianity on the part of non believers. is it right to take the view that you can insult those with a faith with reference to "poisons", but when we take the same approach and make light of your views you throw up the moral indignation line ...[text shortened]... yes or no. Faith and a belief in the creator and his doctrine is the salvation of the world.

You're confusing apathy towards religions and unquestioning belief in such with apathy towards followers of those religions; and so your sweeping statement about the intellect of non-believers is unwarranted.
I challenge you to show me some posts by the usual crowd of atheists in this forum (ie: those who have been around for a while) which strongly imply believers are stupid or dimwitted, etc... by virtue of their faith in God.
(Note: saying a person is misguided or they present irrational arguments etc.. is not the same as calling a person stupid. The former is a statement about a proposition(s) they hold to be true and defend/advance, the latter is a general statement about their intellect)

Your final question is a loaded question and neither a simple yes or no is an answer I'd care to submit. Some of the commandments are followed by people independently of holybooks, and work well as a "rule of thumb" (though there may be exceptions where it can be argued the greater good is achieved by breaking them). I certainly don't think the world would be a better place if we humans never failed to the truth. The first four commandments have no value to me whatsoever.

Originally posted by gearies
Sorry, but find half a dozen examples in the spirituality debates where there is anything like a charitable view of Christianity on the part of non believers.

You can start with this thread. I (an atheist) defended Catholicism on the very first page.

If faith means nothing to you then pass on by, as a final comment, tell me whether the world would or not be a better place if everyone followed the 10 commandments?
The world would probably be a better place. We would all be deluding ourselves though with about half of them, and the most important ones are not unique to Christianity but are simply obvious necessary rules for society in general.

Faith and a belief in the creator and his doctrine is the salvation of the world.
How does that follow from the answer to the question? Believers are no better at following the 10 commandment than atheists.

Originally posted by gearies
...tell me whether the world would or not be a better place if everyone folllowed the 10 commandments? Straight answer yes or no...

No. The first four of them are just nonsense. Five is arguable. Six, well, ok I'll give you that. Seven... well, mostly I guess. Eight, sometimes flouting it is morally necessary. Nine, as with eight, disregarding it can be a moral necessity. Ten is a pipe-dream.

Originally posted by galveston75
And I'm not arguing with you either and if you can't see the evidence of the origin of many trinity beliefs from Babylon and Egypt then that's your missfortune.. So are you admitting that the early christians knew nothing of the trinity but it was later divinely made know to the Catholic forefathers?

And I'm not arguing with you either and if you can't see the evidence of the origin of many trinity beliefs from Babylon and Egypt then that's your missfortune..

What you have provided is not constitutive of evidence. I do not accept random websites as authoritative which lack peer-review and whose authors are not qualified.

So are you admitting that the early christians knew nothing of the trinity but it was later divinely made know to the Catholic forefathers?

No. We have been over this before. If you have failed to understand, this simply reflects your own cogntive deficincies. I have little patience to explain this again (mind you, I have not actually been discussing what Catholics believe. The doctrine of the Trinity is accepted by the whole of mainstream Christianity.)

Originally posted by Agerg
You're confusing apathy towards religions and unquestioning belief in such with apathy towards followers of those religions; and so your sweeping statement about the intellect of non-believers is unwarranted.
I challenge you to show me some posts by the usual crowd of atheists in this forum (ie: those who have been around for a while) which strongly imply bel ...[text shortened]... mans never failed to the truth. The first four commandments have no value to me whatsoever.

So if the 4 first commandments are of no interest to you why bother commenting on a spirituality forum?, certainly you are never going to turn a believer from their religon.

Note I use the word religon, if you check back through the various threads in this area you will see numerous snide remarks aimed at those who share a faith, personally I cannot be bothered expressing views on matters I have no interest in, I don't give a toss as to who will win the next Grand Prix, who your next major will be etc, I know what I believe and it's pretty damm good. Why do those who you describe as apathetic manage to summon enough energy to comment, I always thought apathy meant you could not care?

Get real it's not apathy that is being displayed on numerous posts on this forum by atheists towards believers, in England it's called taking the P!ss!.

So when the roles are reversed people throw up their hands in horror and feigned insult.

Originally posted by gearies
So if the 4 first commandments are of no interest to you why bother commenting on a spirituality forum?, certainly you are never going to turn a believer from their religon.

Note I use the word religon, if you check back through the various threads in this area you will see numerous snide remarks aimed at those who share a faith, personally I cannot be

So when the roles are reversed people throw up their hands in horror and feigned insult.

Yeah, apathy was an incredibly crap choice of word actually given I wanted to mean something else, I was tired.

I don't think most of us explicitly take the piss, more we try to show their beliefs are untenable.
It is not socially acceptable to take the p!ss out of people who believe in talking snakes and a 6000 year old earth in the way it is socially acceptable to take the p!ss out of "alien abductees".

Originally posted by gearies


Note I use the word religon, if you check back through the various threads in this area you will see numerous snide remarks aimed at those who share a faith, personally I cannot be bothered expressing views on matters I have no interest in, I don't give a toss as to who will win the next Grand Prix, who your next major will be etc, I know what I believe and ...[text shortened]...

So when the roles are reversed people throw up their hands in horror and feigned insult.[/b]

So if the 4 first commandments are of no interest to you why bother commenting on a spirituality forum?, certainly you are never going to turn a believer from their religon.

This forum is about spirituality mate, not Yahweh-worship, which is all the first four relate to.

Why do you comment? I can't imagine you will ever gain a convert with an attitude like yours.

Personally I'm here because I find the subject of SPIRITUALITY interesting, although I do find some of those people who blindly and without question swallow a doctrine and consider themselves to be spiritual in consequence to be rather tiresome at times.

I assume the rest of your post is aimed at someone else.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
No. The first four of them are just nonsense. Five is arguable. Six, well, ok I'll give you that. Seven... well, mostly I guess. Eight, sometimes flouting it is morally necessary. Nine, as with eight, disregarding it can be a moral necessity. Ten is a pipe-dream.

It would appear that the majority of the world agrees with ya. So look at the mess they have created in this prevailing opinion.

Originally posted by whodey
It would appear that the majority of the world agrees with ya. So look at the mess they have created in this prevailing opinion.

To my mind the world would be in a lot less of a mess if there were no organised religions creating the illusion of superiority in their adherents.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]And I'm not arguing with you either and if you can't see the evidence of the origin of many trinity beliefs from Babylon and Egypt then that's your missfortune..

What you have provided is not constitutive of evidence. I do not accept random websites as authoritative which lack peer-review and whose authors are not qualified.

So are you admi ...[text shortened]... i] believe. The doctrine of the Trinity is accepted by the whole of mainstream Christianity.)

""As I have been at pains to explain, however, Christians do not believe that Christ or the Apostles explicitly taught any such doctrine. Nor do they believe that it was taught by the Jews (Jesus Christ, after all, is supposed to be the ultimate prophet.)""

Hummm? I believe that this is what your saying here..Is it not?????????
The point here is that is was not taught by them ever.
And any trinity of any form has it's roots from Babylon and Egypt wether you personally don't see or even read the facts.

PS...Just because a majority of a human population believes in something does not mean they are correct...Right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_deity

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Shamash

http://www.crystalinks.com/sumergods1a.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/538274/Shamash

http://mikeblume.com/pagantr.htm

Originally posted by twhitehead
You can start with this thread. I (an atheist) defended Catholicism on the very first page.

[b]If faith means nothing to you then pass on by, as a final comment, tell me whether the world would or not be a better place if everyone followed the 10 commandments?
The world would probably be a better place. We would all be deluding ourselves though wi ...[text shortened]... e answer to the question? Believers are no better at following the 10 commandment than atheists.[/b]

what about all of the other religions that you haven't even tried to talk about. people killing one another simply because of faith. and you don't think religion poisons every thing! the only good thing, if there is one, about religion it at least keeps MOST people in check from killing one another because they don't want to go to hell or whatever place of punishment they think exists. people are so sure they're the only ones who know the truth and keep pushing it on others and if you don't believe their way they think you're going to hell.
"hell" from the greek and hebrew, which the bible was originally written, means grave. so we all are going to hell (a grave) when we die not a place of punishment, fire and devils.

here's another example. the jews are blamed for killing jesus (think about the nazi's and all of the groups today and their hate). well it was roman law that put jesus to death, the jews had zero power back then. they were already under the roman's heal. you had no right if you were ruled by the romans

Originally posted by chessartist
you had no right if you were ruled by the romans

Generally I agree with you in this thread, but this point is not correct. Roman rule generally benefited the subject peoples and they were, again generally, fully aware of this. Roman rule was almost always a better deal for most people than the alternative, both in rights and opportunities.

edit - And in fact, the Roman authorities really didn't want to kill Jesus at all. My understanding is that they were pressed into it by the Sanhedrin - the Jewish authorities.