shakerz:

This is for recognize or any other so-called Intelligent Chritian why is that your concept of God, of the trinity, of the redemption, of the resurrection and original sin mimic the believes of Mithriasism? Really, look at the history of the Midterrean religion and the similarities, such as Mithra having 12 deciples or that he was part of the trinity, that he came to wipe the sin of mankind or that he died on the cross, it is endless.

By logic of induction.

You can only come to this conlusion

1. After the religion of Pualine Christianity became the state religion of Rome, it is plausible that the mixture of paganistic religions and the religion of Abrhaham became interwined. Evidence can be seen by the christian holidays that all have pagan roots, the discoveries of mithra burial and religions places which were destroyed by Christian. If you read the reports of the early church fathers who were worred about mithra to the point that the called them the people in the cave. If you go back into older christian, like jewish christian, like the ebionites the faith and the conception of God begins to resemble Jewish and Islamic views of God. The quran was indeed right, the bible has been corrupted. Look at the history of the textual variants, the hundreds of manuscripts errors and the political envrioment sorrounding the work of the scribes. Look at the faulty counsils dictating the idea of God hundreds of years after Jesus ascended or the manuscripts, the many aprochayi writing that were once cannons but later got rejected.


Its sad that posters like recognize is defending the notion of a God dying or a trinity when these concepts have rooted in paganistic religions notions.

Here is what Judaisism and Islam and the way of all the prophets view God.

1. God is one. Not three, not two, not one, not indivisible as if he is some kind of pie.
2. God is unique. Unique in the perfect sense, that his attributes are not like his creation in any sense. If you can point to something that may resemble God in the least, like a tree or man, then that is not God. Notions of God becoming Man seem to have rooted in more paganistic cultures, those different from monotheism.
3. God is Self-Sufficient---he does not rely on others, he does not sleep like we do or eat as we do, he is unique in that sense. He does not pray to others, he is the ever-living.
4. God is not in everything--he is distinct from his creation in that he does not abide in it. You cannot find god apart of your toilet. Rather Gods knowledge is everywhere, we say God is close to you, we say he is nearby in knowledge of proximity.
5. God Does Not Die--He is ever living, ever existing and so on.

These very attributes are the very reason we worship him, and that we say none is worthy of worship. Really, a god who is killed by a handful of men, who cannot forgive, who resembles his creation, who is not unique in the perfect sense, who puts a barbarious doctrine of original sin on the innocent, is he worthy of Worship? rEALLY? Is he worthy of praise?Ask yourself and be honest. Most people will be hardpressed disagreeing with the conception of God that i posted above, it is sound and natural


Lastly God is all wise and in a certain way does not do irrational things.God has power over all things but there are certain things he has a limit on. God cannot for example be self-sufficient, otherwise he would not be God. God cannot lie since we know he is honest, he cannot be injust or not forgiving since these are his attributes.

the crux of the matter is that Jews and Muslim see God in a more honorable way, and the christians whether you like it or not, degrade God. Can  you imagine God on the last day telling all the Muslims on the last day to go to hell because they saw him as self-sufficient or they refused to believe in him dying because they said God is the one who never dies and it befits his majesty or that they disbeleived the original sin because they saw God as being forgiven and not allowing people to suffer at the hands of what two people ate. I doubt a God could be just and say, listen muslims, you should have believed that i died at the hands of a few roman soldiers because i sent myself to be killed and rise to myself so i can forgive you guys or that why did you pray five times a day and say God is great or that he has no partners in his dominion and raise me to such a status when you could have believed that I, God, the greatest to have existed, was born and entered the world through the birth canal of a 12 year old virign?

Gosh, just coming across this guy for the first time, and i am deeply impressed. This is depth of both quality reasoning and true historical knowledge.

Oya, Christian Soldiers - Noetic and Davidylan, try this guy for size.

_{I am rating him at least ten times better than you both in all respects.}

I'm deeply struggling for the sake of deep sight to see the "sense" in the quoted post. One comes blabbing stuffs like "God is one", "God is self sufficient", "He is not found in everything", "God has hairy balls and bla bla". . . .like a god appeared to him and said, "Shakerz, shake before me on your prayer mat and behold my hairy testicles for I am one self sufficient God"

Ask the dude how he knew all this and he'll squirm 'I read it in my holy book'. . . I'm again struggling to see the difference between he and noetic/davidylan who both read about god in their book too.

This is just another lame attempt at "my religion is better than yours" banter. Notice how he happily associated judaism with islam yet no prizes for guessing this mohammedan is for the extermination of jews and levelling of isreal. I agree with Pastor AIO, Religion does indeed make you Stoopid.

BTW, who is this shakerz dude, neva heard of him.

never heard of him either

tudor i am not an atheist as you are and as such i have no problems with anybody believing in God. My problem is with ridiculuous dogma, and as far as that goes, christianity takes the piss with dogma such as - jesus is God, the trinity, or accept the death on the cross or burn in hell.

This is where the shakerz dude scores better cos he reasons stuff out and attempts to buttress his points with history. Go check out his posts.

By the way your bit on "God's hairy balls" was criminally irreverent. Had me in stitches though!

Tudór:

I'm deeply struggling for the sake of deep sight to see the "sense" in the quoted post. One comes blabbing stuffs like "God is one", "God is self sufficient", "He is not found in everything", "God has hairy balls and bla bla". . . .like a god appeared to him and said, "Shakerz, shake before me on your prayer mat and behold my hairy testicles for I am one self sufficient God"

Ask the dude how he knew all this and he'll squirm 'I read it in my holy book'. . . I'm again struggling to see the difference between he and noetic/davidylan who both read about god in their book too.

This is just another lame attempt at "my religion is better than yours" banter. Notice how he happily associated judaism with islam yet no prizes for guessing this mohammedan is for the extermination of jews and levelling of isreal. I agree with Pastor AIO, Religion does indeed make you Stoopid.

You're deeply not finding any worth of not because you havent even given the argument any real worth of measurement. The historical argument of the corruption of the bible is not mine, nor is originally sourced in Muslim plomics, rather it is born out of western scholarship. For instance books such as Misquoting Jesus by Bart D Ehrman are only the most recent textual criticism, but we know scholars have literary torn the credability of the bible dating back to 1600 century and since then have produced hundreds and hundreds of literature on the subject. Muslims generally do not have scholars in this field(i dont think one exist) so most of the sources have humanistic scholars or seculars in the field.
The logic of induction i made is entirely plausible especially when you consider that moving back in time in Christian History;the religion itself becomes less and less what Modern Christian is, but rather a more simple Jewish version of Christianity. It is not suprising that groups like the Ebonites, the Nazarenes(or onez), and varios gnostic views who once held dominance in the near east believed more or less that Jesus was the mesiah, a man who had come to fullfill the law of Moses and did not die on the cross. When Paul version of Christian began to spread and become endorses and after the plight and disappearance of the Gnostic groups, certain christian began to realize that during this developing period the faith has indeed been changed:
"Indeed, when in 160 Bishop Melito of Sardis went to Judea to discover what had become of the legendary Jerusalem Church, to his dismay he found not the descendants of the apostles, but instead a small group of [, ] Christians, who called themselves the Ebionites or 'Poor Men', [who] had their own Gospel of the Ebionites and also a Gospel of the Hebrews, a Gospel of the Twelve Apostles and a Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these gospels differed significantly from the gospels of the New Testament.”-"Jesus Mysteries" by Freke & Gandy
Here is an excerpt from a ducumentary on the history of the bible. An interesting note is made about the discovery of an earlier bible found in Palestine; tell me if this what you believe?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJyytNd4g-Q
But i dont want to go into biblical history because you can read the literture.
". Notice how he happily associated judaism with islam yet no prizes for guessing this mohammedan is for the extermination of jews and levelling of isreal."
I dont want to generalize but one of the common mistakes of Athiest or even agnostics is that they begin to generalize whole statement, or make silly assertions that are not supported by the text. Why do you pose to be this intelligent guy who scattered the truth and sees anyone who believes in a religion as stupid yet you say thins like this? Really, Mohammed said to Kill Jews and level Israel? Besides your logical fallacy of ad hominem attacks and filthy language, i will take solace in trying to explain this you clearly. You will be better for the experience i soppose.
1. Most of the Quran's exhortation are suprisingly about the Jewish people, their history and the prophets who have been sent to them.
"Children of Israel! call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others. (Surah 2:47 repeated in 2:122)
Remember Moses said to his people: "O my people! Call in remembrance the favour of Allah unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave you what He had not given to any other among the peoples.(Surah 5:21)
We did deliver aforetime the Children of Israel from humiliating Punishment, Inflicted by Pharaoh, for he was arrogant (even) among inordinate transgressors. And We chose them aforetime above the nations, knowingly, (Surah 44:30-32)"
2. The Quran or in any authentic Ahadeeth where Prophet Mohammed makes it a religious requirement to kill Jews or level Israel. I find that statement affront to logic, i dont even know where to begin. Here is the verse revealed that should settle this notion and by the way i quickly searched through anti-islamic webpages and they dont even claim this.
"and He does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with anyone who has not fought you for your faith or driven you out of your homes: God loves the just."
Even more, In Islam Jews and Christian can still enter Christianity "“The [Muslim] believers, the Jews, the Christians, and the Sabians – all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good – will have their rewards with their Lord. No fear for them, nor will they grieve”"
Your last point is a bit moot because some of the attributes of God, also called Monotheism, can be found in many religions, such as in the beghaveda, in Buddihism, even in the religions of natives. But more importantly those characteristics are the religion of Abraham and differ from the modern conception of how Christian now view God-

Asalamu Alekum brother you are highly welcome,jazakAllahu kairan

shakerz:


You're deeply not finding any worth of not because you havent even given the argument any real worth of measurement. The historical argument of the corruption of the bible is not mine, nor is originally sourced in Muslim plomics, rather it is born out of western scholarship. For instance books such as  Misquoting Jesus by Bart D Ehrman are only the most recent textual criticism, but we know scholars have literary torn the credability of the bible dating back to 1600 century and since then have produced hundreds and hundreds of literature on the subject. Muslims generally do not have scholars in this field(i dont think one exist) so most of the sources have humanistic scholars or seculars in the field.
The logic of induction i made is entirely plausible especially when you consider that moving back in time in Christian History;the religion itself becomes less and less what Modern Christian is, but rather a more simple Jewish version of Christianity. It is not suprising that groups like the Ebonites, the Nazarenes(or onez),  and varios gnostic views who once held dominance in the near east believed more or less that Jesus was the mesiah, a man who had come to fullfill the law of Moses and did not die on the cross. When Paul version of Christian began to spread and become endorses and after the plight and disappearance of the Gnostic groups, certain christian began to realize that during this developing period the faith has indeed been changed:
"Indeed, when in 160 Bishop Melito of Sardis went to Judea to discover what had become of the legendary Jerusalem Church, to his dismay he found not the descendants of the apostles, but instead a small group of [, ] Christians, who called themselves the Ebionites or 'Poor Men', [who] had their own Gospel of the Ebionites and also a Gospel of the Hebrews, a Gospel of the Twelve Apostles and a Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these gospels differed significantly from the gospels of the New Testament.”-"Jesus Mysteries" by Freke & Gandy
Here is an excerpt from a ducumentary on the history of the bible. An interesting note is made about the discovery of an earlier bible found in Palestine; tell me if this what you believe?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJyytNd4g-Q
But i dont want to go into biblical history because you can read the literture.
". Notice how he happily associated judaism with islam yet no prizes for guessing this mohammedan is for the extermination of jews and levelling of isreal."
I dont want to generalize but one of the common mistakes of Athiest or even agnostics is that they begin to generalize whole statement, or make silly assertions that are not supported by the text. Why do you pose to be this intelligent guy who scattered the truth and sees anyone who believes in a religion as stupid yet you say thins like this? Really, Mohammed said to Kill Jews and level Israel? Besides your logical fallacy of ad hominem attacks and filthy language, i will take solace in trying to explain this you clearly. You will be better for the experience i soppose.
1. Most of the Quran's exhortation are suprisingly about the Jewish people, their history and the prophets who have been sent to them.
"Children of Israel! call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others. (Surah 2:47 repeated in 2:122)
Remember Moses said to his people: "O my people! Call in remembrance the favour of Allah unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave you what He had not given to any other among the peoples.(Surah 5:21)
We did deliver aforetime the Children of Israel from humiliating Punishment, Inflicted by Pharaoh, for he was arrogant (even) among inordinate transgressors. And We chose them aforetime above the nations, knowingly, (Surah 44:30-32)"
2. The Quran or in any authentic Ahadeeth where Prophet Mohammed makes it a religious requirement to kill Jews or level Israel. I find that statement affront to logic, i dont even know where to begin. Here is the verse revealed that should settle this notion and by the way i quickly searched through anti-islamic webpages and they dont even claim this.
"and He does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with anyone who has not fought you for your faith or driven you out of your homes: God loves the just."
Even more, In Islam Jews and Christian can still enter Christianity "“The [Muslim] believers, the Jews, the Christians, and the Sabians – all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good – will have their rewards with their Lord. No fear for them, nor will they grieve”"
Your last point is a bit moot because some of the attributes of God, also called Monotheism, can be found in many religions, such as in the beghaveda, in Buddihism, even in the religions of natives. But more importantly those characteristics are the religion of Abraham and differ from the modern conception of how Christian now view God-

1)The Nazarenes believed Jesus is the son of God. They also believed in the virgin birth, and that he is the Messiah. They differed from Pauline theology in that Paul did not insist Gentiles practice the purity laws and circumcision and all that stuff. Besides that their theologies were very similar.

2) The didache (The document discussed in that video) is not scripture, and was never intended as such. It was a manual used to teach new converts, and was constantly edited and updated by the community that used it. It was never a candidate for canonization, because it wasn't that kind of document to  begin with. The church has always been public about it. THEY DISCOVERED IT (I think in some old Church library in Palestine), PUBLICIZED IT, AND STORE IT FOR FUKCS SAKE. . ,In the mid 1st century christians were being accused of cannibalism and the consequences were often severe. They didn't go around flaunting that they were eating body and drinking blood. Orthodox Jews, and later Nero, one of the most notorious emperors for persecuting christinas was using the early christians as an excuse for his fukc-ups. He said their 'rituals" were offending the gods and started turning the masses against the christian community. They were watching them like hawks so they had to be very secretive.

3) There were several early movements that developed around the memory of Jesus, and the ebionites are just one, if they can even be called that. They were a sect that had broken off from traditional judaism before Jesus arrived on the scene, and a few of them followed the teachings of Jesus. Just like a lot of other Jews some accepted him as the messiah and some did not. That some Jews did not accept Jesus as divine is hardly news, some of them DID. That u disagree with them and accept some fairy tale about an angel hangin out with warrior/paedophile/prophet/dictator Muhammed in a cave, does not make your faith any more valid than theirs. 



You are just spewing the common-place  anti-christian propaganda in your silly "my God is better that yours" campaign that u are trying to disguise as critical engagement of the information u present. . U obviously know very little about the stuff u are posting. Lying ass muslim. Just like the rest of them.

And YES!! Mohammed did persecute the Jews at Medina. He tried to appease them to accept his crack-pot religion by adopting their kiblah, they refused him, he vexed and switched it to the Kaaba. He saw them as a threat to his establishment and he persecuted them and eventually expelled them. And as soon as he died Islam started to break up into different groups with different theologies, with ambitious "Caliphs" as custodians. Besides the founding theologies, Islam and Christianity have somewhat identical histories. Before u come here with your propaganda u need to look in the fukn mirror.

Incisive my black ass. Elaborate prose is nothing but that. You can't sprinkle sugar on a piece of shit and convince people that it tastes good.

Now this thread has me in stitches, My God is better than your God, and tudor LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL ROTFLMAO, oya let us wait and see where this will end up

Baba Krayfishola una well done oh me I am done with stooopid threads like this comparing dogma to dogma.

Tudór:

I'm deeply struggling for the sake of deep sight to see the "sense" in the quoted post.

This is just another lame attempt at "my religion is better than yours" banter. Notice how he happily associated judaism with islam yet no prizes for guessing this mohammedan is for the extermination of jews and levelling of isreal. I agree with Pastor AIO, Religion does indeed make you Stoopid.

It doesn't take much sense to have seen through the shakerz chap; I just was "struggling" like Tudor to make out how Deep Sight could have been so captivated by shakerz propaganda. But just to show that several others can read between the lines, at least Krayola's response captures it in a nutshell:

Krayola:

You are just spewing the common-place  anti-christian propaganda in your silly "my God is better that yours" campaign that u are trying to disguise as critical engagement of the information u present. . U obviously know very little about the stuff u are posting. Lying ass muslim. Just like the rest of them.

There.
But this one had me in sticthes. .

Incisive my black ass. Elaborate prose is nothing but that. You can't sprinkle sugar on a piece of shit and convince people that it tastes good.

I dont believe religion makes u stupid! Do u want 2 call dat pastor dat bought a jet a stupid man? NO!
Actually, there are 2 sides 2 d story!
For some christains, religion is just anoda way of maintaining sanity in dis wicked world, like an anchor! While making some cool bucks!

For some muslims, eg! Osama! Religion is just anoda reason to play with matches, then graduate 2 grenades, & eventually ICBMs, nuclear warheads, etc!

No! religion is not stupid! It is a willing & workable tool, d most potent & effective weapon since d bow & arrow, was invented!

donjon:

I dont believe religion makes u stupid! Do u want 2 call dat pastor dat bought a jet a stupid man? NO!
Actually, there are 2 sides 2 d story!
For some christains, religion is just anoda way of maintaining sanity in dis wicked world, like an anchor! While making some cool bucks!

For some muslims, eg! Osama! Religion is just anoda reason to play with matches, then graduate 2 grenades, & eventually ICBMs, nuclear warheads, etc!

No! religion is not stupid! It is a willing & workable tool, d most potent & effective weapon since d bow & arrow, was invented!

Whateva . . . My delusion is better than yours.

Mr pastor, the guy had said the truth. You are a disgrace to ur church, imagine a pastor like you being pessimistic about faith

'O you assembly of jinn and mankind 'Didn't messengers amongst you come to you, reciting My (GOD) verses and warning you of the meeting of this Day of yours (Day of Reckoning) ?' They will say,'We bear witness against ourselves' it was the life of this world that deceived them. And they will bear witness against themselves that they were disbelievers (kafirun)' Quran 6:130

Abuzola:

Mr pastor, the guy had said the truth. You are a disgrace to your church, imagine a pastor like you being pessimistic about faith

'O you assembly of jinn and mankind 'Didn't messengers amongst you come to you, reciting My (GOD) verses and warning you of the meeting of this Day of yours (Day of Reckoning) ?' They will say,'We bear witness against ourselves' it was the life of this world that deceived them. And they will bear witness against themselves that they were disbelievers (kafirun)' Quran 6:130

My delusion is still better than yours.

Whatever your fantasy is, doesn't bother me

Abuzola:

Whatever your fantasy is, doesn't bother me

hmmmm. . . I need a fantasy that will bother you then. How about God came to me last night in a dream and told me to steal all your property, have my delicious way with your wives, and exterminate you. If that doesn't bother you, please give me time to go away and think up a fantasy that will surely bother you.

I am rather dissapointed at the responses on this thread. Particularly in my good friends the atheists.

It seems to me that the motley gang of Nairaland atheists are so far gone in the ecstasy of their brilliant realization that God does not exist that rather than settle down to digest reason and logic, once they hear the word "God" in any adversarial discussion, they begin to circle above like vultures, dumping faeces on the argument by stating - "What God!!!" "Bullshit!" "This is only - 'my God is better than yours!"

With every respect, i expected much better from Pastor AIO and Krayola IN PARTICULAR. Tudor is not new to random insults, so no worries there. Chrisbenegor, i understand always pops in, drops his "i'm not impressed line" with a strain of biting sarcasm and jets off again.

Pastor AIO and Krayola (both not atheist), the reasons i said i expected better from you guys are simple -

1. This is not an argument about the existence of God

2. It is not an argument about which God is better than another God

3. It is a discourse between persons who already believe in the Abrahamic God

4. It seeks to point out dogma within the Abrahamic worldview which must perforce be seen as ridiculous dogma

Without a shadow of a doubt, on the question of Dogma, i can fearlessly state that Christian Dogma[b] is by far the most outlandish[/b]. And it is fair for any person to point that out. Because xtianity is the only religion that -

1. Declares its founder (Jesus) to be God, equal with God, and the only begotten son of God (as though the rest of us are sons of the devil)

2. Declares a trinity of a supposedly monotheistic God

3. Declares salvation through the murder of its founder (Jesus) etc.

There is nothinmg wrong in any person pointing out the fallacies of such dogma within an Abrahamic context, to which Jews, Christians and muslims all belong.

If you will notice the shakerz dude has not actually sought to discredit christianity at all - he has rather stated that the purer forms of Christianity have been corrupted through the ages to what we have now. Tell me, how is that untrue? You ALL know that to be true, so where the hell did you all get off screaming that he is only saying "my God is better than yours". . . I hope you can see how disastrously dissapointing that line was from ALL of you and i also hope it makes it clear that your atheism has blinded you to basic sense in some respects because ALL you could see within his write-up was "my God is better than yours" even when the dude went far enough to make it clear that his feeling is that there has been corruption of the original teachings and not that the original teachings were wrong!

Guys, please do better than being so sectarian yourselves.

I am sorry to disappoint. I must admit that from the outset I never took this thread seriously. Perhaps it is because you are relatively new on nairaland but xtian/muslim/atheist debates have been thrashed out over and over again ad nauseum and I have to doff my hat to you all that can do it over and over again without getting tired but as for me, I get terribly distracted when trying to read through them.

I only joined because I saw that someone mentioned the thread about religion making you stoopid which I had started. Perhaps the proper thing was for me not to have contributed anything to the thread in the first place.

@ deepsight. You may need to look up what the word dogma means.

dog·mat·ic (dôg-māt'ĭk, dŏg-)
adj.
Relating to, characteristic of, or resulting from dogma.

Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.

Christian dogma is outlandish? What about deist dogma? How is accepting arguments that have been exposed as fallacious nonsense for over a millenium rational? How is accepting that as TRUTH un-dogmatic? How is accepting a representation of history, that shows up thousands of years after the fact (Mohammed's retelling of the story of Abraham's botched sacrifice of his son etc), coupled with other claims of encounters and communication with supernatural beings, and declaring it as divine revelation to be followed and defended to the ends of the earth, undogmatic?

I'm not sure what brand your dogma-o-meter is, but dogma is dogma. You have a right to believe it but none is superior to the other. U need to get off your high horse. I've met lots of undogmatic Christians and muslims alike, and none of them sound like any of you theists of this forum. If we were all thinking rationally our debates wouldn't sound anything like they did. People would have actual rational arguments, and not all these abstract theological arguments that doesn't mean much to anybody outside the "worldview" being debated. 


Regardless of what your post might be intended to communicate, or what shakerz intended to communicate, he/she came here and presented inaccurate claims in an effort to ridicule christianity. I couldn't care less what his/her conception of God is, the data presented in incorrect (I'm trying to be polite here). So when someone comes around with poorly researched stuff and starts calling people unintelligent, they deserve, IMO, to be exposed for the pathetic fundamentalists that they are.

Krayola:

@ deepsight. You may need to look up what the word dogma means.

dog·mat·ic (dôg-māt'ĭk, dŏg-)
adj.
Relating to, characteristic of, or resulting from dogma.

Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.

Christian dogma is outlandish? What about deist dogma? How is accepting arguments that have been exposed as fallacious nonsense for over a millenium rational? How is accepting that as TRUTH un-dogmatic? How is accepting a representation of history, that shows up thousands of years after the fact (Mohammed's retelling of the story of Abraham's botched sacrifice of his son etc), coupled with other claims of encounters and communication with supernatural beings, and declaring it as divine revelation to be followed and defended to the ends of the earth, undogmatic?

I'm not sure what brand your dogma-o-meter is, but dogma is dogma. You have a right to believe it but none is superior to the other. U need to get off your high horse. I've met lots of undogmatic Christians and muslims alike, and none of them sound like any of you theists of this forum. If we were all thinking rationally our debates wouldn't sound anything like they did. People would have actual rational arguments, and not all these abstract theological arguments that doesn't mean much to anybody outside the "worldview" being debated. 


Regardless of what your post might be intended to communicate, or what shakerz intended to communicate, he/she came here and presented inaccurate claims in an effort to ridicule christianity. I couldn't care less what his/her conception of God is, the data presented in incorrect (I'm trying to be polite here). So when someone comes around with poorly researched stuff and starts calling people unintelligent, they deserve, IMO, to be exposed for the pathetic fundamentalists that they are. 

What are you talking about? I think chopping the moon in half with the palm of my hand is an absolutely normal non outlandish thing to do. And similar things have been done since. Even Jimi Hendrix chopped down a mountain with the palm of his hand.

I stand up next to a mountain
and chop it down with the edge of my hand
pick up the pieces and
make and Island,
I might just raise a little sand.

Cos I'm a voodoo chile, voodoo chile baby
God knows I'm a voodoo chile.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85zp1zVVDAQ

haha.

^^^^So Krayola, the long and short of it is that ONCE a person accepts belief in God. . .

He is already subscibing to dogma AND THUS -

CANNOT any longer point out stuff within any religious dogma that do not make sense? ? ?

Are you sure you are not being sectarian in a partisan fashion? Because all i hear you doing is screaming "blue-murder-islam-is-hoary-as-well!" That hardly addresses the issues, and reminds one of the way tribalists argue.

Deep Sight:

^^^^So Krayola, the long and short of it is that ONCE a person accepts belief in God. . .

He is already subscibing to dogma AND THUS -

CANNOT any longer point out stuff within any religious dogma that do not make sense? ? ?

Are you sure you are not being sectarian in a partisan fashion? Because all i hear you doing is screaming "blue-murder-islam-is-hoary-as-well!" That hardly addresses the issues, and reminds one of the way tribalists argue.

It isn't really about God for me. As I've said several times i have met several religionists whose understanding of their faith makes perfect sense to me. . .and i'm as skeptical as they come. It is about countering one dogma with another.

Belief in GOD isn't dogma. Asserting it as a superior belief to any other unfalsifiable belief IS DOGMA. They are all based on fantastic claims, and not the product of any rational or logical process. Critical thought did not lead to the belief, the belief was already there, then attempts at arguments to back them up came after. If logic, or even science, pre-dated religion, I doubt religion would have had a snow-balls chance of survival in hell. It's mostly because religion was so deep in the collective consciousness that it thrives on.

I am very pleased you accept that belief in God by itself is not dogma.

We are looking at[b] the Abrahamic Religions.[/b]

It is a fair thing you say: that ALL of them contain some fantastic claims.

But if i may borrow from George Orwell, "All claims are fantastic, but some claims are more fantastic than others!"

For example: the Claim: "Almighty God (or his envoy, such as the Angel Gabriel) appeared to Mohammed, and recited the Quoran to him" - is unquestionably a fantastic claim.

But far more fantastic is the claim that Jesus the Jewish Carpenter is God himself, and should be worshipped as such.

You know very well i have oft criticized the Prophet Mohammad, and so i am not holding brief for him, or for Islam, when i state that Christian Dogma is far and above the most outlandish Dogma there is. Think about the Holy Trinity for example. Or the remission of sins through the death on the cross? You will not find such fabulous dogma in the quoran (although you will find irritating and primitive injunctions similar to those in the Old Testament).

Shakerz is unquestionably deeply partisan - he has made this clear. But i insist that he is within his rights to point out extreme dogma among the Abrahamic sub-set, especially as he does so rationally, and limits his agrression to what he perceives as "corrupted" and not the idea of christianity in principle.

Krayola:
It's mostly because religion was so deep in the collective consciousness that it thrives on.

Now, that's kinda dogmatic don't you think.

Pastor AIO:

Now, that's kinda dogmatic don't you think.

haha. How so?

Deep Sight:

I am very pleased you accept that belief in God by itself is not dogma.

We are looking at[b] the Abrahamic Religions.[/b]

It is a fair thing you say: that ALL of them contain some fantastic claims.

But if i may borrow from George Orwell, "All claims are fantastic, but some claims are more fantastic than others!"

For example: the Claim: "Almighty God (or his envoy, such as the Angel Gabriel) appeared to Mohammed, and recited the Quoran to him" - is unquestionably a fantastic claim.

But far more fantastic is the claim that Jesus the Jewish Carpenter is God himself, and should be worshipped as such.

You know very well i have oft criticized the Prophet Mohammad, and so i am not holding brief for him, or for Islam, when i state that Christian Dogma is far and above the most outlandish Dogma there is. Think about the Holy Trinity for example. Or the remission of sins through the death on the cross? You will not find such fabulous dogma in the quoran (although you will find irritating and primitive injunctions similar to those in the Old Testament).

Shakerz is unquestionably deeply partisan - he has made this clear. But i insist that he is within his rights to point out extreme dogma among the Abrahamic sub-set, especially as he does so rationally, and limits his agrression to what he perceives as "corrupted" and not the idea of christianity in principle.

Ok. . .someone comes and tells you that he saw a rabbit driving a race car at the tracks, and another says he saw a duck riding a motorcycle, which one is more plausible in your opinion? To an outsider, that is what a theological debate e.g ones about what God is, one or three, transcendent or immanent, bla bla bla, sounds like. If you believe in stuff like that, then IMO you should let people that believe whatever else they believe just be.

All these claims that one religion has been "corrupted" are bullshit. They have all gone through changes, and none is identical to the faith that Abraham, or even Moses, is believed to have founded, . So, depending on your vantage point, they are all corrupted. What this boils down to, IMO, is people who believe the dogma they like is superior, or "purer" than another dogma. In my world that is cartoon talk

I would rather have davidylan be the judge in my trail than deep sight, mostly always sugar on shit lol

Chrisbenogor:

I would rather have davidylan be the judge in my trail than deep sight, mostly always sugar on shit lol

Your Choice. But its interesting how you've always dropped these scathing remarks without ever providing a cogent line of reasoning to rebutt what has been asserted. Typical. I guess i am coming to see and understand your pattern. It's not very impressive, Chris.

P.S - Davidylan (Phd.) na very harsh Judge o!

Pastor AIO:

Now, that's kinda dogmatic don't you think.

Krayola:

haha. How so?

The statement wasn't backed by evidence or argument. you just laid it out on the table as an authoritative statement.

Deep Sight:

Your Choice. But its interesting how you've always dropped these scathing remarks without ever providing a cogent line of reasoning to rebutt what has been asserted. Typical. I guess i am coming to see and understand your pattern. It's not very impressive, Chris.

P.S - Davidylan (Phd.) na very harsh Judge o!

I call it the sniper approach. The lack of argument makes it hard to take anything of value from the posts.

Pastor AIO:

The statement wasn't backed by evidence or argument. you just laid it out on the table as an authoritative statement.

haha. touche

. ok. IN MY OPINION, that is a main reason why religion has thrived. It is debatable, and u're welcome to debate it.

lol this thread is comedy.

you guys better not chase alhaji shakerz away