What makes Christianity beleivable?

G

Gramtorn

New Member
Ok, i beleive that the world was created 2500 years ago. We are an alien experiment on artificial intellegence and bio technology, records were created, ruins, archaelogy and an abudance of other things to see how we would react with them and how fast we would evolve to tackle our environment. Religion was also introduced to see how long it would hold on, and how long people would beleive something, which in essencse has equal proof of existence as the fairy tale "little red riding hood". They've experimented on some of us, creating things unexplainable at certain points in history to see how we would react.

Basically what im saying is, why is the christian ideology, the bible, everything more likely to be true, than this little story i just made up. What's to say the bible was written as a vast collection of stories, all purposely fictional in the middle ages? Their only purpose to entertain, but became muddled and eventually thought true in the confusion of the time. What makes you think that isn't true either?

Seeing that there are so many other religions out there, what makes Christianity "superior" and more likely than the rest?


Theres quite a few questions there, see how many you can answer.
 
on wehter this was made in the middle ages is false, we have proven records that show that like the dead sea scrolls were written in the correct era. and alot more information can be found on that kind of stuff, but my resources (library, chhurch library, etc.) doesnt have much of that stuff so i cant find much about it, but u might have more resources availible. and are u truly a realian? thats kinda cool in a way since ive never known one. and really only christianity says its supperior, no other religeon will say that. and assuming we are right in having a One True God, then all else is false. now for me i see other religeons as peopel who have gone astray. i watched a video called "mystic iran" and it showed different religeons of iran that are practiced. one of them had all these people chanting and getting into an extacy of excitment.... alot of the people to me it seemed had demons. thats my personal view. also the new ageys beleive in the spirit world and what not, to christians the spirit world is demons and angels, no others since people who have died are either in heaven or hell so they really cant be anywhere cuz if ur in hell well ur stuck there and have gnashing of teeth and whatnot. heaven well y would u leave a place of perfect happyness and hangin out with God?
 
What makes you think all religions are based off of christianity ( as this is what I beleive you are saying)? Wouldn't it make more sense if they were all based off of Islam as it claims to be older?
 
when did i say that all religeons are based on christianity?? i put in on how I as a christian view other religeons such as new agey, and the mystic iran sutff. srry if im not clear on alot of stuff, im still working on being articulate >_< .
 
" now for me i see other religeons as peopel who have gone astray."

this sounds to me as if you're saying people of other religions are people who were christians but went astray, ie formed a slightly different form of christianty.

"and are u truly a realian?"

Im sorry but im not familiar with this term
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]this sounds to me as if you're saying people of other religions are people who were christians but went astray, ie formed a slightly different form of christianty.
Click to expand...
technically we are all decendents from Adam and Eve, all have gone different paths. Adam and Eve worshiped God, over the years, people have gone astray in worshiping others.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] "and are u truly a realian?"
Click to expand...
a realian believes that we were genetically engineered by alians from a distant planet. also the leader of that religeon is working with scientists on clone projects.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]which in essencse has equal proof of existence as the fairy tale "little red riding hood"
Click to expand...
well, the oldest book known to man is the Bible. Is there another religion that has a living God? Modern archeology does not collaborate little red riding hood, and I'm sure the origins of the fable can be found.
Basically what im saying is, why is the christian ideology, the bible, everything more likely to be true, than this little story i just made up.
Essentially you just replaced God with Aliens, and threw in some evolution and ruin twists. I think its important to have a historical backing of your belief, which the hypothetical alien belief lacks. If you were going to write a fictional history today, and intend it to be passed off as fact 200 years from now, what would you do?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]i beleive that the world was created 2500 years ago
Click to expand...

For me, if you want to pass fable as fact you better be able to:

a: Be accurate with known history.
b: Be accurate with history that has yet to be collaborated.
c: Be accurate with a future history yet to happen.

I can't think of another religion or faith on the face of this planet that can even claim to 2 of the above, nevermind all three like Christianity.

Christianity forces everybody to believe it amongst cricism and ridicule or disregard it amongst all the mounting evidence for it. There is more evidence for Christianity then there is for Hitler. Yet we believe Hitler existed.
 
Oh my Gods, the Hyperbole is piling up so fast it's making me nauseous!

Look, I know you're all really excited and comitted to your religion, but this incessant attacking of other people's beliefs really has to STOP if you're all EVER to be taken seriously in the wider religious community.

Christians have to accept that the major religions are ALL fragmenting - as Communications and Transit technology make the world smaller and smaller, and allow interested parties to share information more and more easily. These turgid, dead, monolithic theocracies are DOOMED and are being replaced by smaller, more focused groups that cater to peoples beliefs and needs more precisely.

In the Dark Ages people really had no choice as to the religion they held - you were either a Christian or you weren't. The old church used persecution to keep people from adhering too openly to the "weren't" philosophy - which meant the apathetic sort became "luke warm" Christians and the angry independent types became Satanists.

These days, of course, if your religious life is unfulfilling you have MANY choices. Christianity HAS to outgrow the two extremes of Schoolyard Bullying and senile ignorance of the changes that have taken place in the world since the 1800's - or else it has to accept it's inevitable transition to an extreme orthodox cult.

I can produce you a whole wing of books that are consistent with known history - they're called HISTORY BOOKS. The early part of the bible is a tribal history of the Israelites - mass exported to a culture that doesn't share that history. I would be incredibly surprised if it DIDN'T contain some nuggets of historical fact that the wider world didn't know about. Why I - a Northern European - am expected to be particularly interested in the sandy histories of a bunch of goat herders who are completely unrelated to my ancestors is quite another matter.

I can also produce you a number of books that are probably (I say probably because by definition you can't be sure about these things) also part of your second group. Take the hieroglyphs written by the Egyptians on their tombs - they contain reams of historical fact that we can't confirm from other sources yet, or that we haven't deciphered yet. There are similar glyphs that pertain to the Incan and Mayan cultures. There are many OTHER examples too.

There's a pile of works that CLAIM to be consistent with future history as yet unhappened. Literally everything with the word "Prophecy" in it. On the face of it, I don't think they are more or less fantastic than Revelation is. Honestly - read through it again.

I have no ridicule for someone who believes that Christianity is true. I have every criticism for someone who chooses to ignore the tide of historical inevitability - just about every "proof" that is found is trumpeted by people like Peon, whilst its eventual discrediting is not even marked with a murmur. I bet you guys still beleive in the Turin shroud and that burial casket that's supposed to belong to Jesus's brother? I bet you still think that there's an Ark to be found on mount Arrarat. I bet you still think there was a worldwide flood to the depth of the highest mountain (go on, look at the height of Everest and then calculate how much water would be needed, where it came from and where it went back to afterwards!)

You can tell me how you have a personal relationship with God, and how you have faith in his works and the teachings of the bible. But you guys need to stop telling me how everything in the bible has been proved to be true, and how science is a charade designed by Satan to obsfucate the truth of gospel.
 
i personally think science is a gift from God, and like many things from God was perverted by Satan.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]There's a pile of works that CLAIM to be consistent with future history as yet unhappened. Literally everything with the word "Prophecy" in it. On the face of it, I don't think they are more or less fantastic than Revelation is.
Click to expand...
Theres a lot more prophecy than Revelation. Isiah 7 & Isiah 14:24-32 prophecizes(sp?) the fall of Assyria, Isiah 13- The destruction of Babylon. Isiah 15- Moab will fall. Is 17 -Damascus would fall. Isreal would not fall(of course)- Is 10:20 Is 19 says Egypt will go through a lot a crap, but wouldn't fall And theres more. This was all written while these were established territories. Saying Babylon would fall, is like someone prophesying the destruction of the USA. It was the most powerful empire. Theres prophecy about Jesus scattered through Isaih that came true, and Jesus life is historical fact.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] just about every "proof" that is found is trumpeted by people like Peon, whilst its eventual discrediting is not even marked with a murmur. I bet you guys still beleive in the Turin shroud and that burial casket that's supposed to belong to Jesus's brother? I bet you still think that there's an Ark to be found on mount Arrarat. I bet you still think there was a worldwide flood to the depth of the highest mountain (go on, look at the height of Everest and then calculate how much water would be needed, where it came from and where it went back to afterwards!)
Click to expand...
As far as the ark, I'm sure you heard about the huge wooden box found in Turkey, some believe is the ark, others, don't think so. Reguardless, I believe if God created the earth, that he can move some water around, I believe He did Miracles, and I believe he rose from the dead. Of course there is no way of these things can be "proven" now (who knows, maybe they can), but lack of "proof" never discredits anything. Its only when you provide "proof" against the Bible, that it is discredited.
 
hmm....a few things to note here.

why on earth would there STILL be a record of the ark? Don't you think it would've been chopped up for firewood or houses? or even still, it's been around 4000 years. unless it fossilized really quickly, it would've rotted, it was just wood after all.


on the flood. don't you think a massive worldwide flood would change how the earth looks?
 
I can write a story with real people and real places that is purely fictional. The events described in the Bible cannot be corroborated by saying, "well look, these people and places really existed." And as far as prophecies go - how can you be certain that these things weren't written after the fact?

The biggest problem I see with a fundamentalist Christian view is that you go into everything with a mindset that says the Bible is completely true and infallible. Then, when you see something in the Bible that doesn't make sense, you go "well, it can't possibly mean what it appears to say because that wouldn't be right." So then you go ahead and give it a new meaning that coincides with what is currently known. And this same kind of thought process is involved in deciding what is literal and what is supposed to be a metaphor. You can make anything fit. The thing to consider is that the Bible was written by people long ago, and they didn't have today's people in mind when they wrote it. They wrote it for their contemporaries, so when you make a judgement about what a particular passage means you should be considering what people back then took it to mean. And when you do that, it is pretty clear that the Bible is a collection of bogus "facts."
 
In regards to Noah's ark. This is not from scripture just a documentary I saw on it. Two mountain climbers were in the mountains in Turkey, they somehow stumbled across a large wooden structure. They believe could possibly be Noah's ark. To answer a couple of the questions asked.

It probably has been left undisturbed because it is so high up in a remote mountain.

It probably has not rotted because it is so cold in the mountains that the frozen water has probably preserved it.

Now the question is why hasn't anyone gone up to verify if it is the ark, because Turkey won't let anyone. Due to religous or political reasons. If they found a large sea faring vessel made out of wood not native to the region. Built to the exact specifications found in Genesis. I think wood offset the balance of choice and faith.
 
There have been a few groups of hikers who have claimed to have found a large wooden structure on that mountain - but their claims have never been verifiable. In addition the Catholic Church was offered permission to come and find the ark by the Turkish government - and turned down the opportunity. I guess they're a little frightened by what they would or wouldn't find...

A Worldwide flood would cause the extinction of ALL life on this planet. All marine life because of the pollution of the oceans and the disruption of the currents. All land based life through drowning. All plant life.

Think about what's involved - the sheer volume of water for a start. Where did that water come from? (was it the melting of the polar ice caps? Would THAT even be enough water? The bible says that it rained - which is merely a recycling of the water already in the ocean.) Where did it go back to? (Did the polar caps refreeze? What got the water all the way back over there?)

The innundation legends are a result of the fracturing of two isthmuses - the one keeping the Atlantic out of the Mediteranean, and the one keeping the Mediterranean out of the Black Sea. Both areas are key to the early Middle Eastern civilisations, and would be events that would be remembered. They are generally introduced as having happened "in the time of my fathers father" which is longhand for "a long time ago".

Regarding the fall of Babylon - it's not unusual at all that the bible would have prophecy relating to this. Babylon fell about four or five times during its existence as a distinct nation - in much the same way that Egypt did. In exactly the same way as the Middle Eastern Islamic states are foretelling the destruction and humbling of the USA, the thirdworld nations in the Middle East then were predicting the fall of Egypt and Babylon.

In addition, please check your history. The New Kingdom in Egypt came to an end, and their civilisation has fallen. The people in power now are NOT the same people that were in power then - they are Arabs. The same goes for Israel - Israel fell, and the country that is now Israel was settled by European Jews - the nation of Israel had ceased to exist.
 
listen anyone can twist the bible to their own beliefs. heck Deuteronomy 32:39 ...there is no god ... . i mean sheesh it can used to any person will believe. but to accurately understand the Bible is to have faith in a book that has proven to alot of people as being infallible. as for phraphocies, reasearch has show it that the books of the bible were written long before the said events.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ] can write a story with real people and real places that is purely fictional. The events described in the Bible cannot be corroborated by saying, "well look, these people and places really existed." And as far as prophecies go - how can you be certain that these things weren't written after the fact?
Click to expand...
go ahead, publish a book, use real people, but a fictional story. Make it so that people take it as fact, or take it as fact 70 years from now. no one would buy it, no one would pass it off as fact...
 
How about the tale of King Arthur?

Here you have a book written by a Frenchman that has now made it almost impossible to seperate the fact from the fiction - so much so that you have one group of people who think Morte D'Arthur is totally fact and another group who think it is totally fiction.

The truth is that we don't know an enormous amount about the historical Arthur - just that he existed and won a great war against the Saxons. Oh and that the Christian church apparently hated him with a fiery passion and called him "The Enemy of God".

Eon
 
don't confuse the Roman catholics with the christian church... I too don't know anything about king arthur or read anything about it. The difference between the Bible and the arthur book could be that the Bible contains 4 separate books that agree with eachother, while the arthur book is just one? not sure, thats a speculation not knowing anything about the arthur recordings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top