Christianity

#Christianity

This tag does not yet have a description

Total topics: 15

I like to pick somebody's brain on this.
Somebody that's well versed or has a good understanding on the trinity doctrine.

I just have some questions. The way I titled this I put in that order intentionally.

Everybody that knows a thing or two real well about this, participate.


Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
69 8
This forum is meant to continue the interruptive discussion left off in the forum "Everything about Buddhism," specifically between me and Mr.BrotherD.Thomas.

I would normally post my positive environment guideline below, but since none of the mods are concerned with enforcing site policies for Mr.BrotherD.Thomas (https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9913-everything-about-buddhism), I can only ask each person is not the root of negativity.



Let me sum this up:

You fail to reconcile your belief with God's direct words from Micah 6:4, rather than choosing to believe in all God's words.

You refuse to admit 2 Peter 1:1 could be interpreted literally as one God who is also Jesus, or two beings, God as God and Jesus as Saviour.

You refuse to admit 2 Peter 1:20 could be interpreted literally as using the word "interpretation" to describe the "origin," or the "reading" of prophecies.

You fail to present any evidence that the 1611 KJV Bible is the closest to God's words, begging the question why?
Side note: God didn't speak in English, so it's an interpretation, which you quote from to paradoxically prove interpretation invalid.

You refuse to provide evidence for a God given dictionary in which to interpret his words, since words lack inherent meaning.
Side note: Failing to use a God given dictionary necessitates a human dictionary to interpret meaning, then quoting said interpretation with human dictionary paradoxically claiming all interpretations invalid, which includes your arguments source.

Finally, you have the audacity to ask me to reply to your comment #49, which bears no question mark, necessitating my interpretation of your words to respond.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
106 14
I've been watching a meeting about UFOs held by the NASA a while back and it certainly made me meditate on the implications of the extraterrestrial life confirmation for religions in the near future, specially for christianity which is the dominant religion in the western society.

The NASA didn't confirmed anything yet but they promised to investigate more so to give a convincing explanation for that phenomenon, even though we all know that alien life is almost a reality from every point of view. As a matter of fact, the Vatican has already been ahead of the curve in discussing about the subject, maybe knowing that it would have deep implications on the number of  church $$$ memberships $$$.

As to the way this discovery would impact on christianity, it's well known that there are lot of biblical passages that suggest the participation of extraterrestrial beings in the jewish history in which they are confused with angels and even with God. For example, according to the bible the prophet Elijah was taken to heaven by a "chariot of fire", but who knows if this wasn't a chariot but an alien aircraft or UFO as we know it today and Elijah was in fact abducted?

So, most of the nonsensical stories in the bible could be explained by the intervention of an alien civilization in the fate of the earth. It's also said that aliens are actually more evolved human beings that did put the human seed in this planet and once in a while they come over to see how we're getting on. Being said that, there is no need of religions.

What do you think? Is Christianity in danger?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
45 14
Firstable, I would like to remark I'm not a believer nor an atheist, but an agnostic, and as such I am open minded to any teaching that really makes sense. You all might understand then why I criticize christianity so fiercely, because it doesnt make sense at all nowadays. So, having that cleared up, let's get down to business.

According to the latest research, Christianity is severely on the decline as it is depicted in the following link.

On the other side, new age movement seems to be gaining more followers around the world thanks to the internet and of course to christian flaws and nonsense found in the bible. By the way, the new age movement is not a religion but a set of beliefs based on eastern religions like budhism or hinduism, which teach stuff like meditation, yoga, karma, reincarnation, and the like. If you check the following link, you'll see these beliefs are embraced by believers as well as non-believers, which is very telling.

As far as I'm concerned, these new age beliefs make more sense than christianity. In fact, I think some of these beliefs do make sense of christianity itself since it has been theorized that Jesus went to the middle east to learn about spirituality. So, what there is in the new testament -and perhaps the OT as well- is very likely a misinterpretation of what Jesus really taught to their disciples.



Then, I ask: Do you think christianity is going to be displaced by this movement or this movement is going to reshape christianity so it gets more sensical?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
92 12
XX

XY

stop. just stop and think, very very hard.

Which is the default you as a creator would generate in chromosomes?

XX same, nothing new needs to be invented, this being can reproduce automatically via its womb or equivalent and needs no additional being to handle its dualistic chromosomal nature.

XY... competes hardcore to get to reproduce with XX, serves to be disposable meatshield during war and at other times puts in the work hunting and gathering. Can't feel orgasm nearly as deep and well as XX can. Organ is blatantly designed for entry to XX's organ but the reverse is not at all the case, it was built around bearing a child and exit strategy.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmm

which was made for which?

try detectives, let's get it going!!!!!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
24 8
- First of all, anybody I used to know still lurking around here?

- It seems nobody wants to debate me despite my soliciting efforts... I've been away a couple of years, & I've already noticed a huge change of attitudes. Regardless, this is a debate website, so let's get debating. I am Muslim, cultivated in an Islamic Tradition, my primary interest for debate. I realize most here have an aversion towards debating Islam related topics, maybe this post will make it a little bit more compelling. Although I'm interested in debating any Islam related topics (religion, theology, history, law, philosophy...etc), this is an initial list of ideas:

General:
God Is (God, as defined in the Islamic tradition of course)
Islam is true / Muhammed (pbuh) is a true prophet
The Quran is faithfully preserved
The Quran is a true revelation
Islam is a religion of peace
The Hadith tradition is genuine

Christianity vs. Islam:
Tawhid vs. Trinity
Quran vs. Bible preservation
Quran vs. NT preservation
Truth of Quran vs. Bible
Quranic stories vs. Biblical stories
Quranic prophets vs. Biblical prophets
Free Will in Islam vs. Christianity
Salvation in Islam vs. Christianity
Worldview in Islam vs. Christianity
Women's rights in Islam vs. Christianity
Human rights in Islam vs. Christianity
History of Muslims vs. Christians
Science in relation to Islam vs. Christianity
Islamic conquests vs. Christian conquests

Secularism vs. Islam:
Islamic state vs. Secular state
Freedom of religion in Islam vs. Secularism
Islamic education vs. Secular education
Islamic ethics vs. Secular ethics
Islamic history vs. Secular history
Human rights in Islam vs. Secularism
Women's rights in Islam vs. Secularism
Islamic conquests vs. Secular conquests

Hard challenges (for me):
The Quran is better preserved than any other book in history
Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is the best attested to person in history
Islamic penal law is superior to Secular penal law
History in Islamic tradition is superior to History in the Western tradition
The origin of Common Law is primarily Islamic Law
Eastern Christianity is superior to Western Christianity
The Hijab is a religious duty in all abrahamic religions
The zionist cause of Israel is culpable
Atheism is unattainable 
Darwinian Evolution is more literature than science
Subsaharan Africa adopted civilization before White Europe (non-Mediterranean)
Nicholas Copernicus is a plagerist
Classical Physics is primarily an Islamic invention
The Arab race is the most influential race in history
Democracy is a terrible government system
Erdogan vs. any current European leader
The Islamic world will surpass the Western world by 2050
The Belt & Road project is good
China will surpass the Western world by 2040
The world order will go back to its pre-Western dominion by 2070
China has already surpassed the US
The Chinese communist state is superior to the Western democratic state

- I might think of more to add later... Lemme know if you'd like to chip in, I am open to new topics as well. 
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
205 21
Three corners, all-seeing eye in the middle.

God is the illuminati leader whom is also the devil.

OT God becomes Satan.

Lucifer becomes Jesus, not Satan yet he is Satan via Trinity.

Holy Ghost becomes Allah.

This is how and why there were three iterations. It explains every plothole including the problem of evil since the god has three personalities.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
23 7
RELIGION POLL #1: What is the best argument for/against the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, and why?

Feel free to discuss below. I have been doing a lot of research into the matter recently. 
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
140 21
I welcome people of many perspectives to post their view on this thread's title.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
30 11
When horrific acts are done by people who claimed, carried out traditions and see/saw themselves as members of a religion, often what is done by the politically correct media is to sympathise with the religious group and encourage peace by denouncing those people away from being considered genuine members of the religious group.

This goes for literally any incident or scandal you can think of, I am not just talking about the horrific acts that make the headlines.

The reason this strikes me as somewhat worrying is that while this is done, it then begins to highlight a hypocrisy when we see that people can define themselves, readily and happily, as members of religions we sometimes really resent those who do actually do it just to be part of the group. What I am saying is that let's say you're a person who wants to blend in with your very Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Buddhist etc family, if not friendship circle as well, you'd probably just say you're a member of that religion right? As long as you didn't do anything too scandalous or let's say you weren't caught, you'd be deemed a genuine member of that religion and anyone who would say 'wait no, that's just a poser' would instead get the backlash. What, then, actually qualifies someone as a genuine member of the religion?

To make it very clear what I am saying and the contradiction happening, I will explain it as an either/or statement.

Either
The evil people who know their holy scriptures off by heart and understand their religion's history very well are incorrectly being denounced as 'fake Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus etc'
Or
The not-so-evil posers who use religion to either blend in or get some kind of societal privilege are not actually posers, since the only real disqualifying factor appears to be how troublesome it would be to admit you're an adhering member of that religion.

The further thing to ask is whether it's morally correct and appropriate for people to 'raise their child into a religion' when we don't know which religion is the actual true one, right?

The very fact that entire families are commonly all of the same faith, if they're not atheist, isn't a coincidence and it is a reflection on religion being nothing more than a social construct. Even more disturbing is the fact that things like circumcision and animal abuse involved with many Islamic, Satanic and Wiccan sacrificial festivals are actually completely contradictory since we should be disqualifying them as they're justifying mutilation in the name of their religion. We actually did this with Muslims who endorsed (and a select minority still endorse) female circumcision, as well as many other examples such as what Christians used to do to suspected 'witches'. Similarly, Saudi Arabia has recently begun to cave into international pressure to move away from the strictly sexist elements of its Sharia Law, legalising women to drive and compete in the Olympics. Women are made to be pure subjects of men in the Qur'an, although it's true to say that in Islamic history there have been fierce female empresses and in Pakistan and Afghanistan in particular there have been female politicians who actively have been in charge of taming and handling negotiations with the Taliban.

The problem is that I am not exactly saying that it would be politically wise to be honest when a member of a religion does a very evil act. It's a very appropriate lie to suddenly say 'no they are nothing like what our religion stands for and are 100% fake' but that person probably knew more about the religion and lived more devout in terms of the traditions and lifestyle than most posers who call themselves 'casual followers' or 'modern, progressive' variants of their religion. The thing is, at what stage is religion nothing more than a fancy name to associate your 'group' or 'clique' with? What truly qualifies or disqualifies a genuine Muslim for example? It can't just be whether they're evil or not.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
45 10
Well, that should be incendiary enough to get a discussion going on between Christians.

Basically I want you to put forth one argument as to why you believe the above to be false, and we'll try to flesh it out in an adversarial but fraternal manner.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
124 11
Suppose that when the Romans started persecuting the Christians, they actually managed to eliminate every single Christian and their ideology. How would history evolve from there? 
A few things off the top of my head.

The schism between East and West Roman Empire would not have occurred, or at least, not for the same reason. 


Europe would be primarily a polytheistic culture adopting new gods to its panteon as it encountered other religions.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
18 10
Some people might ask why I have such a fascination with death and aging. I’m really not sure myself. All I can tell you is that it has always been there.I think it comes from just being more aware of my fear than others.Once we become aware of death, and it’s seeming inevitability, we form one of four coping mechanisms. The 4 copes are as follows;

1. Believing in a  religion and hoping that, the religion will lead to everlasting lifespan
2. Seeking to be immortalized through our works, by becoming famous, making millions or getting involved in politics and other similar things to make us larger than life.
3. Seeking the fountain of youth. These are the type of people trying to literally hunt for a magic fountain, use alchemy or pursue the philosopher’s stone.
4. Having children.These are the people who think of their kids as an extension of themselves and are seeking immortality through reproduction.

Some of us don’t think we are using copes, but we are. These people are those who have no fear of death. Anyone who has no fear of death has psychologically minimized what it is. They describe it as going to sleep, or say it is just like before you are born. They’ll reassure you that death is nothing to be scared of, or that it doesn’t hurt (As if it matters)

Death is real, and it is not going to sleep. It is not “being in nothingness”. What it is, is seizing to exist. When you die, you stop existing at all.Anything you did is pointless because your world has ended.

If I don’t use copes, you might ask what I do actually do.

First, I know that life has lost all meaning if you just end up dead anyway. Even if you try to rationalize it as having been good because you helped somebody, it is pointless. The person you helped will die also, and they will be lost to the sands of time.

There are only 2 correct responses to the fact we know we will stop existing at some point. The first rational response is to just give up. It most likely is true that we will fail to cheat death. No other generation has done so, before us though many have tried. When you give up, you go the hedonistic route. Enjoy every moment to it’s fullness. Screw the future, in the future we are dead.

The second response is the more heroic one, which is to actively fight the prospect of death. To hold off on the hope that we can one day do the impossible and cheat death, and in fact by taking the more heroic route, we actually increase our chances of beating death.

I encourage all of you to take the heroic route. Watch my posts, do what I tell you todo, but using your own judgment. I have a debate with rationalmadman where I give diet advice. Take the advice I give. Soon I will give advice on what to do in terms of activism and even provide you with solid career advice to help me end aging.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
64 8
It seems there is multiple users here who have a mental illness, who are very vocal Christian's or spiritual in some other respect. 
 
I am not referring to mental illness such as depression, but ones where there are some clear problems with grasping reality. Should religious institutions be required to provide free psychological evaluations to new converts, to see if it was an honest conversion or just the result of some disorder that causes delusions?

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
84 14