Simplyme

Are you reading these books to try to understand them or to try and refute there view?

Do you read them with an open mind? (common sense)

Kapyong

Gday,

To get an idea whether Nazism was a good thing - read "Mein Kampf".

To learn whether Scientology is correct - read "Dianetics".

To understand whether Islam is true - read the Koran.

archeologist - everyone knows you're a faithful believer - please stop preaching - you aren't in church now buddy.


K.

gurugeorge

"God said?" No, my friend YOU SAY that "God said". From my point of view, hearing your words, "God said", you must understand that even if I thought there were a God, I would still have to ensure (indeed it would be my duty to ensure) that he did actually say THOSE words, and that I'm not just following some made-up crap purporting to be in God's name.

Here am I, faced with a bunch of different religions, all clamouring to be the word of God, all claiming to have their own true "God said"s. Even if I think there is a God, how am I to decide which of these claimants actually has the hot-line?

Anybody can write a book with the sentence "everything in this book is true", the mere presence of that phrase on ink and paper doesn't mean that everything in the book is true. And even if that book were revered and handed down for generations, it STILL wouldn't mean that everything in the book is true.

You believe ONLY that which has evidence and argument on its side, you don't trust anything.

You are essentially trusting that "God said", and that "everything in this book is true" (the Bible), that trust is the source of your all-or-nothing belief, and your support of the Bible, and your justification of its contents. You've made a bet on the way the world is, on the way the Universe is, etc.

That's not how rationalists and freethinkers think. They would never trust a bit of writing in that way, they would test the claims. Of course there's no concievable test for "God said", but "everything in this book is true" can and has been tested, and the Bible has been found wanting.

I myself, when I was a small child and was introduced to Roman Catholic catechism, smelt something fishy in the whole religious thing even at a very young age. It's not that I was predisposed against it - indeed I did believe in God, and sometimes prayed; at that age, you take things as they come, and you have little reason to doubt what your parents tell you about such things - but I just starting thinking about the bits of Bible stuff we were getting taught, and thinking it made no sense. For example, I knew (it was evident to me, on first-hand evidence) that my mother was a redoubtable woman, fully the equal of my father, so when I heard the story about Adam's rib it made me uncomfortable. "Hmm, somebody's trying to convince me that women are inferior; but I know they're not. Something's not right here." Then the solution struck me: "this isn't from God, this is from people." I just kept thinking about it from there. Apart from that, I liked the Bible as a story (I later had a wonderful child's illustrated Bible), and thought there were other bits in it that were true (like some - though again, not all - of the moral teachings).

So you're up against people like me, who from a very young age found reason to reject parts of the Bible as nonsense, based on personal experience of the Bible not jibing with reality. Your attempts to insinuate that really, deep down inside, we're troubled by doubts about our unbelief is just so far off the mark it's ludicrous. You're projecting onto us how it would be like for you, if you now had doubts about the Bible. Of course it would trouble you, and you might well rationalise things in the way you accuse us of rationalising. But you're mistaken if you think most rationalists and freethinkers here are even remotely troubled by their unbelief. Even for ex-religionist rationalists and freethinkers, by the time they get to talking about this stuff on forums, all that's done and dusted.

mountainman

Therefore make sure you avoid the 4th century.
Stay in the 1st and 2nd and 3rd centuries.
Swear alliegance to the integrity of Eusebius.
Good luck!

mountainman

Eusebius Truly Gruesome Fairy Tales - Compendium Yarns that all Good Christians Should Suffer the Reading Of.

This martyr of Christ, however, was strengthened both in body and soul like adamant, and stood up even more firmly in his confidence upon his God. And when the governor asked him many questions, he gave him no further answer than this--that he was a Christian: and he questioned him again as to whose son he was, and whence he came and where he dwelt; but he made no other reply than that he was the servant of Christ. For this cause therefore the fury of the governor became more fierce, and he thundered forth the more in his rage, on account of the indomitable speech of the martyr, giving command that his feet should be wrapped up in cotton that had been dipped in oil, and then be set on fire. So the officers of the judge did what he commanded them. And the martyr was hung up at a great height, in order that, by this dreadful spectacle, he might strike terror into all those who were looking on, while at the same time they tore his sides and ribs with combs, till he became one mass of swelling all over, and the appearance of his countenance was completely changed, [p. 17.] And for a long time his feet were burning in a sharp fire, so that the flesh of his feet, as it was consumed, dropped like melted wax, and the fire burnt into his very bones like dry reeds. But at the same time, although he |16 was in great suffering from what befel him, he became, by his patience, like one who had no pain, for he had within, for a helper, that God who dwelt within him; and he appeared evidently to all like the sun : and in consequence of the great courage of this martyr of Christ many Christians also were assembled together to behold him, and stood up with much open confidence; and he, with a loud voice and distinct words, made his confession for the testimony of God, publishing by this his valour the hidden power of Jesus, that He is ever near to those who themselves draw near to Him.

archaeologist

Your post is the point I am trying to make. You do not believe in God so how would you be able to grasp His words to His followers? You cannot accept much of what he says so why would anyone read your book on christianity when you do not know what christianity really is nor understands it?

The Bible tells us that we need the Holy Spirit to grasp whatis taught, and that is true. You all prove it so.

Oh I understand them but that doesn't make them right. One has to consider the source and as for an open mind, remember that believers do their soul searching prior to making the choice to believe,. We do not have to keep on doing it everytime a secular person authors a new book with supposedly 'new evidence'. We know the truth and do not have to keep searching for it.

I am not preaching but remember this, I am not going to come form your viewpoint. I am going to post according to God's ways and my belief in Him. If i did anything different, you would then charge me with hypocrisy and dismiss everything I say.

I am certainly not going to support your lack of belief and i am not going to follow secular instructions. How else would you hear the turth if i did not speak from God's vantage point?

archaeologist

First off, I am not 'saying', The Bible already said it. Second, I didn't translate the words they were in English long before I was born.

#1 Do they present the same gospel as jesus and the disciples brought? if not, then dismiss them.
#2 When were their religious writings authored? were they edited or altered in any way?
#3 Do they use the Bible and their ideas? If so, then dismiss them.
#4 Ask the Holy Spirit to help you, He will lead preople to the truth
#5 Basically every cult incorporates arts of the Bible into their beliefs, if the Bible was false, why would they include such words? All that would do is destroy their credibility.
#6 No scientific or archaeological discovery has proven the Bible untrue or false. itis the theories, the conjecture, the hypothesis, the opinionof scientists and archaeologist, etc., which claim theyhave found such evidence but n a closer inspection the scientist or archaeologist, etc. were the ones to make the error.

I forget the reference but the Bible says to test God's words. See for yourself that it is true. You have nothing to lose if you do.

1 Cor. 13 tells us that if we love someone we believe what they say. so if i didn't trust & believe God's word, then obviously I would be saying I didn't love Him. Christianity is about faith and it is faith that pleases God,so you would never get all the physical evidence you seek for that would destroy what pleases God. we get enough physical evidence to strengthen our faith but not so much where we lose it.

You need to remember that the requirement is not to do things the rationalist/freethnkers way, it has to be done God's way. I have yet to see the Bible 'found wanting' usually there is an error onthe part of the FT/Rs and it is due to their lack of faith and belief in God.

Therein lies your problem, you were sent to a RC Church, you would not get christianity from the majority of them or their hiearchy.

First off, read Gen. 2:23 and you will see no one made woman inferior. but their has to be a hiearchy and that hiearchy does not mean that woman are inferior, their role is different, that's all.

So you are rejecting God,Jesus and the Bible based upon childish understanding without asking for clarification and learning? (at least you didn't indicate that you asked anyone for help there)

I am not projecting anything but see what you are actually doing.

spamandham

Good decisions are made by reading *exclusively* objective sources. If you want to better understand the cult mindset, then sure, read the religious propaganda as well, but this is neither necessary nor useful toward the understanding of history.

Tigers!

If I may be so bold as to answer the question -
"How does one tell the difference between the subconscious commitments of writers with neutral intentions, let alone of writers who want to manipulate you."?

Tigers!

Is it ok to read non-religious propaganda as well?