Religion... Why?
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
but belief in a deity is still the generally-accepted normal state
In America, yes. But it's mostly lip service and blind tradition. In Australia, it's not the case, people say what they think.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why do you believe in "god" (Or other deity)?
I am not sure. I believed from a small child, but the reason I continued to believe into adult hood, was that I was told that the Bible specifies how to become a Christian, and that it involves proof from God. Having proven that to be true in my life, no matter how I feel, I can't deny my experience, and so I believe in God.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why do you follow your particular religion?
Because my belief in God is tied to my experience of what the Bible says, I believe what the Bible says, and so I seek to do it.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Is it because of upbringing or habit, or do you really believe it?
LOL - I wonder how many people will say upbringing or habit, I doubt many people would admit this, even to themselves. I was brought up Lutheran, but I certainly don't agree with the Lutheran church today. My mother, who is a lapsed Lutheran, has never believed what I believe, and argued with me about it many times. So, I guess I've found my own path, insofar as my upbringing is concerned. I'd like to think my faith informs every aspect of my life, although I know too well I don't always live up to it, I certainly try.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
How much of your religion's teachings do you actually believe?
I don't think in terms of my 'religion'. I do believe the things my church preaches, and am actively involved in preaching at my church. But, at the end of the day, I'd leave the organisation I belong to, if I felt they did not live up to what the Bible says. I believe everything the Bible tells me, with the caveat that I also understand how the Bible is written, so that I understand the place of hte Old Testament and who it was written to ( usually when I say that, someone who knows nothing of the Bible starts reminding me of the requirements given to Israel in the Old Testament, and asks me why I don't follow them )
Ian Shlasko wrote:
NOTE: I'm not trying to convert anyone to/from
Christian Graus wrote:
Because my belief in God is tied to my experience of what the Bible says, I believe what the Bible says, and so I seek to do it.
Thank you, that is what I was trying to say.
-
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she believes that all living things (including plants etc) are made up of a soul 3 other things (can't remember what they were, I was trying not to laugh),
Weird - the Bible doesn't say anything like that. Sounds like the church she goes to is insane.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she's against other religions
Well, interestingly, if I believe in Jesus, it's kind of impossible for me to believe in Mohommed. The modern call for tolerance is really a call for athiesm. I'd defend anyone's right to believe what they want to, I am all for freedom of religion. But if that freedom exists, it means those people are free to explain their beliefs to me, and I am free to discuss mine with them.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she believes the Earth was created a short while ago - 6 thousand years or something?
Funny, the bible doesn't say that, either.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
To me Religion gives people who don't/can't understand a reason to be alive.
Funny, that was also my conclusion about the Lutheran Church. It's often true, I think. Especially when it's wrong. When there's no power in it, blind hope is all that's left, really.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
(Sorry if this offends anyone - I'm not having a dig, or looking to pick a fight - this is just what I think on the subject).
*grin* anyone who is scared of being offended should have run at the sight of the first post.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, interestingly, if I believe in Jesus, it's kind of impossible for me to believe in Mohommed. The modern call for tolerance is really a call for athiesm. I'd defend anyone's right to believe what they want to, I am all for freedom of religion. But if that freedom exists, it means those people are free to explain their beliefs to me, and I am free to discuss mine with them.
Not totally true. Muslims believe in Jesus. He is considered a prophet and an important one. And at least one religion has been demolished by christianity and wants some tolerance. Paganism has had most of its major holidays usurped and is still regaining its feet.
Christian Graus wrote:
1.21 Gigawatts wrote: she believes the Earth was created a short while ago - 6 thousand years or something? Funny, the bible doesn't say that, either.
It sort of does. Adam + Eve = year 0. Bible has ages for a lot of generations. They just added the ages and came up with a general timeline. (Not saying I agree, but I read about this from some folks) In any case you have some good points.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, interestingly, if I believe in Jesus, it's kind of impossible for me to believe in Mohommed. The modern call for tolerance is really a call for athiesm. I'd defend anyone's right to believe what they want to, I am all for freedom of religion. But if that freedom exists, it means those people are free to explain their beliefs to me, and I am free to discuss mine with them.
Not totally true. Muslims believe in Jesus. He is considered a prophet and an important one. And at least one religion has been demolished by christianity and wants some tolerance. Paganism has had most of its major holidays usurped and is still regaining its feet.
Christian Graus wrote:
1.21 Gigawatts wrote: she believes the Earth was created a short while ago - 6 thousand years or something? Funny, the bible doesn't say that, either.
It sort of does. Adam + Eve = year 0. Bible has ages for a lot of generations. They just added the ages and came up with a general timeline. (Not saying I agree, but I read about this from some folks) In any case you have some good points.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
. Muslims believe in Jesus.
No, they do not. They believe the New Testament is made up, which means they attach a man of their own invention to the name of Jesus, without any written record to refer to.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
He is considered a prophet and an important one
And yet, they do not believe that anything He said was accurately recorded, which obviously means they never seek to do anything that He said.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
And at least one religion has been demolished by christianity and wants some tolerance. Paganism has had most of its major holidays usurped and is still regaining its feet.
ROTFL !!! So you don't have Halloween where you are ? In any case, this may be true, certainly a form of christendom ( but nothing close to what the bible says ) has been the state religion in places, which has caused things like the crusades, and the oppression of many for their beliefs. No argument from me.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
It sort of does. Adam + Eve = year 0.
Well, the thing is that the bible does not say that. The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve happened the day after Genesis 1. In fact, it says there were other people on the earth, and does not say how long they had been there. It's 6,000 years since Adam and Eve, that is true. But, it's not 6,000 years since creation, nor is it clear, at least to me, that Gen 1 is not an allegory on some levels.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Yes, I believe in God. You can't run away from the fact that humans will always gravitate toward a power greater than them, and will always have a faith based belief system. Whether you are a dangerous climate cultist, Luciferian, or a Christian, you have a faith based belief system.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Whether you are a dangerous climate cultist
Why does that make them dangerous?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Luciferian
I would think that's just as dangerous
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Christian
As a collective, Christians have probably done more damage to make them warrant the title dangerous over Luciferians and climate cultists more combined. And I don't think climate cultists are really a religion. I don't even think there is such a thing as a climate cultist.
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
-
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she believes that all living things (including plants etc) are made up of a soul 3 other things (can't remember what they were, I was trying not to laugh),
Weird - the Bible doesn't say anything like that. Sounds like the church she goes to is insane.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she's against other religions
Well, interestingly, if I believe in Jesus, it's kind of impossible for me to believe in Mohommed. The modern call for tolerance is really a call for athiesm. I'd defend anyone's right to believe what they want to, I am all for freedom of religion. But if that freedom exists, it means those people are free to explain their beliefs to me, and I am free to discuss mine with them.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
she believes the Earth was created a short while ago - 6 thousand years or something?
Funny, the bible doesn't say that, either.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
To me Religion gives people who don't/can't understand a reason to be alive.
Funny, that was also my conclusion about the Lutheran Church. It's often true, I think. Especially when it's wrong. When there's no power in it, blind hope is all that's left, really.
1.21 Gigawatts wrote:
(Sorry if this offends anyone - I'm not having a dig, or looking to pick a fight - this is just what I think on the subject).
*grin* anyone who is scared of being offended should have run at the sight of the first post.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
but belief in a deity is still the generally-accepted normal state
In America, yes. But it's mostly lip service and blind tradition. In Australia, it's not the case, people say what they think.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why do you believe in "god" (Or other deity)?
I am not sure. I believed from a small child, but the reason I continued to believe into adult hood, was that I was told that the Bible specifies how to become a Christian, and that it involves proof from God. Having proven that to be true in my life, no matter how I feel, I can't deny my experience, and so I believe in God.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why do you follow your particular religion?
Because my belief in God is tied to my experience of what the Bible says, I believe what the Bible says, and so I seek to do it.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Is it because of upbringing or habit, or do you really believe it?
LOL - I wonder how many people will say upbringing or habit, I doubt many people would admit this, even to themselves. I was brought up Lutheran, but I certainly don't agree with the Lutheran church today. My mother, who is a lapsed Lutheran, has never believed what I believe, and argued with me about it many times. So, I guess I've found my own path, insofar as my upbringing is concerned. I'd like to think my faith informs every aspect of my life, although I know too well I don't always live up to it, I certainly try.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
How much of your religion's teachings do you actually believe?
I don't think in terms of my 'religion'. I do believe the things my church preaches, and am actively involved in preaching at my church. But, at the end of the day, I'd leave the organisation I belong to, if I felt they did not live up to what the Bible says. I believe everything the Bible tells me, with the caveat that I also understand how the Bible is written, so that I understand the place of hte Old Testament and who it was written to ( usually when I say that, someone who knows nothing of the Bible starts reminding me of the requirements given to Israel in the Old Testament, and asks me why I don't follow them )
Ian Shlasko wrote:
NOTE: I'm not trying to convert anyone to/from
Interesting read, Christian. I had a feeling you'd weigh in on this topic, and it's good to hear a different perspective.
Christian Graus wrote:
I believe everything the Bible tells me, with the caveat that I also understand how the Bible is written, so that I understand the place of hte Old Testament and who it was written to
Do you think of the Bible as a historically-accurate text, or just as stories to instruct and guide? I'm obviously no expert on it, but I've heard plenty of people talk about passage X contradicting Y, and things of that sort.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Whether you are a dangerous climate cultist
Why does that make them dangerous?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Luciferian
I would think that's just as dangerous
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Christian
As a collective, Christians have probably done more damage to make them warrant the title dangerous over Luciferians and climate cultists more combined. And I don't think climate cultists are really a religion. I don't even think there is such a thing as a climate cultist.
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
EliottA wrote:
Why does that make them dangerous?
They believe that humans are a virus that is infecting the earth, so humans must be eliminated.
EliottA wrote:
I would think that's just as dangerous
It is.
EliottA wrote:
As a collective, Christians have probably done more damage to make them warrant the title dangerous over Luciferians and climate cultists more combined.
People in power using religion as a tool of control and manipulation have done a lot of damage. The Christain belief system is not the issue, as it is with climate cultists and lucifarians.
EliottA wrote:
And I don't think climate cultists are really a religion.
It is a faith based belief system, led by pied pipers.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
Funny thing is, the bible doesn't say a lot of things, such as descriptions of the nativity scene people are complaining about above. Rather interesting to find out how many common beliefs have absolutely no basis in the holy text they're credited to.
Distind wrote:
Funny thing is, the bible doesn't say a lot of things, such as descriptions of the nativity scene people are complaining about above.
True.
Distind wrote:
Rather interesting to find out how many common beliefs have absolutely no basis in the holy text they're credited to.
Well, it's a good way of seperating people who believe the bible, and people who believe the traditions of their youth.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
ragnaroknrol wrote:
. Muslims believe in Jesus.
No, they do not. They believe the New Testament is made up, which means they attach a man of their own invention to the name of Jesus, without any written record to refer to.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
He is considered a prophet and an important one
And yet, they do not believe that anything He said was accurately recorded, which obviously means they never seek to do anything that He said.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
And at least one religion has been demolished by christianity and wants some tolerance. Paganism has had most of its major holidays usurped and is still regaining its feet.
ROTFL !!! So you don't have Halloween where you are ? In any case, this may be true, certainly a form of christendom ( but nothing close to what the bible says ) has been the state religion in places, which has caused things like the crusades, and the oppression of many for their beliefs. No argument from me.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
It sort of does. Adam + Eve = year 0.
Well, the thing is that the bible does not say that. The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve happened the day after Genesis 1. In fact, it says there were other people on the earth, and does not say how long they had been there. It's 6,000 years since Adam and Eve, that is true. But, it's not 6,000 years since creation, nor is it clear, at least to me, that Gen 1 is not an allegory on some levels.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
And yet, they do not believe that anything He said was accurately recorded, which obviously means they never seek to do anything that He said.
I don't particularly care. Just saying he is believed in by Muslims. The few I know speak highly of him.
Christian Graus wrote:
ROTFL !!! So you don't have Halloween where you are ? In any case, this may be true, certainly a form of christendom ( but nothing close to what the bible says ) has been the state religion in places, which has caused things like the crusades, and the oppression of many for their beliefs. No argument from me.
Yule = xmas. Imbolc = Groundhog's day (Candle mass) Ostara = easter Beltane = May Day Litha,Lammas, and Mabon are all left out. Samhain = Halloween (All Saint's Day being the next day) Christianity did a great job of incorporating a lot of Pagan Holidays.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, the thing is that the bible does not say that. The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve happened the day after Genesis 1. In fact, it says there were other people on the earth, and does not say how long they had been there. It's 6,000 years since Adam and Eve, that is true. But, it's not 6,000 years since creation, nor is it clear, at least to me, that Gen 1 is not an allegory on some levels.
Hey, preaching to the choir. Genesis 1 and 2 directly contradict one another. I was just letting you know how they came about that figure. :)
-
Interesting read, Christian. I had a feeling you'd weigh in on this topic, and it's good to hear a different perspective.
Christian Graus wrote:
I believe everything the Bible tells me, with the caveat that I also understand how the Bible is written, so that I understand the place of hte Old Testament and who it was written to
Do you think of the Bible as a historically-accurate text, or just as stories to instruct and guide? I'm obviously no expert on it, but I've heard plenty of people talk about passage X contradicting Y, and things of that sort.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Do you think of the Bible as a historically-accurate text, or just as stories to instruct and guide?
Well, I think most people don't really argue that it's historically accurate ( that is, if you remove the bits where God does stuff ), on the basis that it was written by people who were around when the events occured. I think that parts of it are allegorical, but I don't believe that it's the intention of the authors that we make excuses and explain away the things that it says God did. I believe that Jesus healed people, that He rose from the dead, that Mary was a virgin until after Jesus was born, etc.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
I'm obviously no expert on it, but I've heard plenty of people talk about passage X contradicting Y, and things of that sort.
This is an interesting truism. The Bible is fundamentally about God, and His dealings with man. The Bible does not contradict itself on this front. The Bible is not written to be scientifically accurate, it's written to be understood by uneducated people thousands of years ago. In that context, it is surprisingly scientifically accurate, however, that is not it's purpose. If one book says there were 2000 people at an event, and another says 1500, I don't see that as a contradiction, I see it as two authors estimates, or perhaps a translation error through the years. The only thing that I believe God is going to preserve in the Bible, is the message that He intended it to have. I have never seen a claim of contradiction that holds water on that front. It's just something people take for granted because they heard it, without any proof.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
And yet, they do not believe that anything He said was accurately recorded, which obviously means they never seek to do anything that He said.
I don't particularly care. Just saying he is believed in by Muslims. The few I know speak highly of him.
Christian Graus wrote:
ROTFL !!! So you don't have Halloween where you are ? In any case, this may be true, certainly a form of christendom ( but nothing close to what the bible says ) has been the state religion in places, which has caused things like the crusades, and the oppression of many for their beliefs. No argument from me.
Yule = xmas. Imbolc = Groundhog's day (Candle mass) Ostara = easter Beltane = May Day Litha,Lammas, and Mabon are all left out. Samhain = Halloween (All Saint's Day being the next day) Christianity did a great job of incorporating a lot of Pagan Holidays.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, the thing is that the bible does not say that. The Bible does not say that Adam and Eve happened the day after Genesis 1. In fact, it says there were other people on the earth, and does not say how long they had been there. It's 6,000 years since Adam and Eve, that is true. But, it's not 6,000 years since creation, nor is it clear, at least to me, that Gen 1 is not an allegory on some levels.
Hey, preaching to the choir. Genesis 1 and 2 directly contradict one another. I was just letting you know how they came about that figure. :)
ragnaroknrol wrote:
I don't particularly care. Just saying he is believed in by Muslims. The few I know speak highly of him.
If I speak highly of you, by name, but say that you're a molestor of children, do I speak of you at all, or just attach your name to someone else ? I mean, if you don't care, don't say it, but believe me, Muslims have no faith in Jesus Christ.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Christianity did a great job of incorporating a lot of Pagan Holidays.
No, the Romans did, and they subverted Christianity at least as much as Paganism.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Genesis 1 and 2 directly contradict one another.
Where ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Distind wrote:
Funny thing is, the bible doesn't say a lot of things, such as descriptions of the nativity scene people are complaining about above.
True.
Distind wrote:
Rather interesting to find out how many common beliefs have absolutely no basis in the holy text they're credited to.
Well, it's a good way of seperating people who believe the bible, and people who believe the traditions of their youth.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
EliottA wrote:
Why does that make them dangerous?
They believe that humans are a virus that is infecting the earth, so humans must be eliminated.
EliottA wrote:
I would think that's just as dangerous
It is.
EliottA wrote:
As a collective, Christians have probably done more damage to make them warrant the title dangerous over Luciferians and climate cultists more combined.
People in power using religion as a tool of control and manipulation have done a lot of damage. The Christain belief system is not the issue, as it is with climate cultists and lucifarians.
EliottA wrote:
And I don't think climate cultists are really a religion.
It is a faith based belief system, led by pied pipers.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
It is a faith based belief system, led by pied pipers.
You can't be that diluted that you believe that, can you?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
They believe that humans are a virus that is infecting the earth, so humans must be eliminated.
Do 'they' have a website where they say this? Surely every major cult / religion has a website that explains their ideals, and I'm curious to see which source backs up what you claim?
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
-
ragnaroknrol wrote:
I don't particularly care. Just saying he is believed in by Muslims. The few I know speak highly of him.
If I speak highly of you, by name, but say that you're a molestor of children, do I speak of you at all, or just attach your name to someone else ? I mean, if you don't care, don't say it, but believe me, Muslims have no faith in Jesus Christ.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Christianity did a great job of incorporating a lot of Pagan Holidays.
No, the Romans did, and they subverted Christianity at least as much as Paganism.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Genesis 1 and 2 directly contradict one another.
Where ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Where ?
Genesis 1: God created animals day 5, man day 6. Genesis 2: God creates Adam (first man) Adam is bored, God makes him companions whom he names (animals) but they are not good enough. God makes Eve. So animals were before or after man? The fact that Adam had 2 sons, 1 kills the other and is cursed to wander among the tribes of people that hate him always makes me wonder "where'd they come from? Adam was the first man, this is 1 of his 2 kids, so who are they?"
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, it's a good way of seperating people who believe the bible, and people who believe the traditions of their youth.
Very true, but telling them that can get a tad ugly.
Well, you know, whatever people believe, I don't think it's ever helpful to attack people. It's good to discuss things and present your point of view, but if you do it disrespectfully, why would anyone listen to what you have to say ? I'm not scared to tell people that Xmas is not in the Bible, but I don't think I go to hell for eating some pudding and accepting gifts. It's just a human tradition, it doesn't hurt anyone, it's just not part of my faith. If people get defensive when you try to tell them something calmly, then that's perhaps a reflection on the nature of their beliefs. People who are scared to have their believes challenged, obviously don't hold them very strongly.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Where ?
Genesis 1: God created animals day 5, man day 6. Genesis 2: God creates Adam (first man) Adam is bored, God makes him companions whom he names (animals) but they are not good enough. God makes Eve. So animals were before or after man? The fact that Adam had 2 sons, 1 kills the other and is cursed to wander among the tribes of people that hate him always makes me wonder "where'd they come from? Adam was the first man, this is 1 of his 2 kids, so who are they?"
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Genesis 1: God created animals day 5, man day 6. Genesis 2: God creates Adam (first man) Adam is bored, God makes him companions whom he names (animals) but they are not good enough. God makes Eve.
Well, the animal question is an interesting point, I'd not heard that. But, where does the Bible say Adam was the first man ? He was the first man that God dealt with, the start of Israel.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
The fact that Adam had 2 sons, 1 kills the other and is cursed to wander among the tribes of people that hate him always makes me wonder "where'd they come from? Adam was the first man, this is 1 of his 2 kids, so who are they?"
See, there is your issue. The Bible does NOT say Adam was the first man, and in fact, this is one of the passages I'd refer to, to prove that this tradition is wrong. There were other people around, as you rightly point out. Adam was not the first man, nor was Adam created just after Gen 1. I'd assume that as Adam was in an area cut off from other people, that God introduced animals to that area, and Adam named them.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Genesis 1: God created animals day 5, man day 6. Genesis 2: God creates Adam (first man) Adam is bored, God makes him companions whom he names (animals) but they are not good enough. God makes Eve.
Well, the animal question is an interesting point, I'd not heard that. But, where does the Bible say Adam was the first man ? He was the first man that God dealt with, the start of Israel.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
The fact that Adam had 2 sons, 1 kills the other and is cursed to wander among the tribes of people that hate him always makes me wonder "where'd they come from? Adam was the first man, this is 1 of his 2 kids, so who are they?"
See, there is your issue. The Bible does NOT say Adam was the first man, and in fact, this is one of the passages I'd refer to, to prove that this tradition is wrong. There were other people around, as you rightly point out. Adam was not the first man, nor was Adam created just after Gen 1. I'd assume that as Adam was in an area cut off from other people, that God introduced animals to that area, and Adam named them.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Look up Adam on (GASP) Wikipedia. Great bit of info. Mirrors what you say. Thing is, literalists aren't exactly the best people to argue with. And a whole lot of people thumping Bibles are literalists. Most Catholics are literalists in regards to the New Testament but traditionalists with the Old. (Figure the stories are allegories.) I was brought up Catholic. That changed after I realized they only cared about controlling me, not about listening to me at all.
-
Well, you know, whatever people believe, I don't think it's ever helpful to attack people. It's good to discuss things and present your point of view, but if you do it disrespectfully, why would anyone listen to what you have to say ? I'm not scared to tell people that Xmas is not in the Bible, but I don't think I go to hell for eating some pudding and accepting gifts. It's just a human tradition, it doesn't hurt anyone, it's just not part of my faith. If people get defensive when you try to tell them something calmly, then that's perhaps a reflection on the nature of their beliefs. People who are scared to have their believes challenged, obviously don't hold them very strongly.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
I agree, generally I only start pinning down someone's beliefs and showing them the failing of their rhetoric when they claim I should be subject to it. I more enjoy seeing what the general concept floating around the public is, finding out the reality of something, and comparing them.
-
Well, you know, whatever people believe, I don't think it's ever helpful to attack people. It's good to discuss things and present your point of view, but if you do it disrespectfully, why would anyone listen to what you have to say ? I'm not scared to tell people that Xmas is not in the Bible, but I don't think I go to hell for eating some pudding and accepting gifts. It's just a human tradition, it doesn't hurt anyone, it's just not part of my faith. If people get defensive when you try to tell them something calmly, then that's perhaps a reflection on the nature of their beliefs. People who are scared to have their believes challenged, obviously don't hold them very strongly.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
People who are scared to have their believes challenged, obviously don't hold them very strongly.
Or they cling to them desperately in the hope that they are not wrong and there is some meaning to an otherwise meaningless life. ;)
-
Look up Adam on (GASP) Wikipedia. Great bit of info. Mirrors what you say. Thing is, literalists aren't exactly the best people to argue with. And a whole lot of people thumping Bibles are literalists. Most Catholics are literalists in regards to the New Testament but traditionalists with the Old. (Figure the stories are allegories.) I was brought up Catholic. That changed after I realized they only cared about controlling me, not about listening to me at all.
See - the whole thing always comes down to the Romans....
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.