Thanks!


It's not just that you're excluding people. At this point, saying "I believe in X" is like rolling the dice. Whatever God you're putting your faith in is basically on level ground with any other in terms of their chances for existing and none of them are 100%. Some are actually more ridiculous than others (*cough*Scientologists*cough*Mormons*cough*).


As much as I might want to play it off like I don't want to change how people think, that would be a flat-out lie. I'm simply tired of people saying things blindly, like "there is no God!" or "God exists and mine is the right one!" (not that you do).

The truth is, neither side knows, they just have some evidence pointing one way or the other but they're about as sure of the point as they are about the moon landing. Or maybe less so, because at the very least, you can see pictures of the moon landing but my point here is: you weren't there and you have to rely on the word of others. This applies to all historical events that you weren't there to witness. There are always going to be people that say "no, that's not how it happened. that's not the real story." and you're going to have what's written in the history books, which is generally accepted as truth. But do you really believe everything in history books is 100% accurate?

As for the moon landing, there are very valid points for either side. We were in a race to get to the moon and what's less expensive, actually going to the moon or pretending you did in a movie? Exactly.

Now what do I believe? I'm pretty sure we went but that's not the point. No matter what I believe, it doesn't change the fact that there's no way to me to verify and I can't ever be 100% sure. Just. Not. Possible. (Without. A. Time. Machine.)


Again, I don't think it's possible for someone to be 100% intelligently convinced either way. This is why I'm agnostic and not an atheist. Unless someone can prove one way or the other that God exists, I'm staying right here on this fence. I might regret it later .. or I might not.

ARGH I AM SO PISSED!  i just spent an hour typing a response and my computer decided to close the freaking tab.  arghhhhh!!!


anyhow.
i will TRYYYY to do this again...and i'll try to restrain my hostility.  damn computer. ARGH.


scott:  it's liberating to know someone understands where i'm coming from on this; i'm terrible at organising my thoughts, and the fact that you seem to completely get it means a lot to me. (=

see?  get out of my freaking head!!!!!   lmao 


i could also use some halls at the moment *coughcelebutante-style-kabbalahcough*.


the 'roll of the dice' is a great analogy.  i don't know how anyone can truly say they feel 100% about the bible (/qur'an/torah/book of mormon ); even in -recent- history, certain things are being called into question, so it seems nearly impossible to me that something written so long ago wouldn't have even the slightest hint of error.

because of the fact that there are no living witnesses, it makes it that much harder to believe every aspect.

my trepidation with selection also involves this 'dice roll,' and i do not want to be resigned to one particular religion:
-because i am pushed or scared into it;
-due to laziness and/or apathy ('eh, i'll just go with ____ because it's easiest.');
-that i do not truly feel comfortable with.

and finally, a phrase that comes to mind:
History books aren't written by the poor.  or the powerless.



there are a few of these prophecies that i feel should be axed from the list - or at least given less weight (explanations to follow; these are from the second link melanie posted):

birth -
1 born of the seed of a woman
(don't we all get here that way?)

nature -
12 he shall be called lord
18 anointed by the spirit
19 his zeal for god
(jesus has to be the saviour for christianity to work, so of course these would have to come true)

crucifixion -
33 accused by false witnesses (reminds me of the salem witchcraft trials)
34 silent before accusers (shows his humility, which enhances his image)
35 - 39 (it's a crucifixion, so these again would seem obvious)
43 hated without cause (everyone or everything that is hated is so by some reason, even if it's a bad one.  i can't imagine anyone truthfully saying, 'i hate John Doe..but i honestly don't know why!  i can't think of a single reason!')
45 & 46 (typical behaviour for spectators of convicted offenders)
48 became very thirsty (i surely would've, too)
50 his forsaken cry (again, an obvious reaction)

resurrection -
57 - 60 (again, of course these would happen; if they hadn't, jesus wouldn't be the saviour.  and how can humans possibly begin to prove He ascended to and sat beside God?)

(source: http://www.bible.ca/b-prophecy-60.htm)

exactly.
it's in the bible, which means it's true because god wrote the bible and the bible is about god and god wrote the bible and and anddddd



sorry it's so long, hehe
and thank you, all, for your thoughtful responses to my last posts.  (=  [big hug!]

Correctly fulfilled according to the BIBLE. I could write a book of a bunch of stuff that never happened, but claim it's all true because it's in the book.
But this book is not about stuff that never happened; history testifies to the veracity of the Bible (see http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4227397/k.3E5B/Archaeology_and_the_New_Testament.htm and http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4227395/k.3D9E/Archaeology_and_the_Old_Testament.htm). And no, Scott, we can't prove 100% that anything in history actually happened; maybe history started when you were born and all those uphill-both-ways-in-the-snow-and-barefoot stories your parents told you were made up because they poofed into existence when you were born. But most of us don't wait for 100% proof to believe something. Then it wouldn't be believing; it would be knowing. And the only one who can actually know something is God, because he's the only one in total control of all the variables. The rest of us are just believing various things about reality based on our past experience. For instance, you believe the chair you're sitting on will hold you because you've sat on it before and it hasn't undergone any extreme changes since the last time you sat on it. But do you know 100% before you sit down that it's going to hold you up? No, because at any moment something could go wrong--perhaps it's a chair from Wal-Mart and the workmanship leaves something to be desired, or perhaps an earthquake will hit and the chair will tip over, or perhaps someone is lurking in the shadows and will pull the chair out from under you when you go to sit down. You're 99.99% sure that these things won't happen, but you can't know for certain; all you can do is believe. So I concede that you can't prove God's existence 100%, but at some point you have to look at the evidence in his favor and make the leap to faith. And the Bible says that the only way you can make that leap of faith is if God gives you that faith--so you need to be praying for it. You said earlier that you wouldn't pray because you're agnostic. I don't follow that logic. I can understand how someone who's atheist would feel it's stupid to pray to a God they believe doesn't exist, but if you're just not sure he exists, praying is just like playing the lottery. Probably nothing will happen but it's worth a shot. And it doesn't have to be a fancy prayer, just something like, "God, I don't know if you exist, but if you do, I'm searching with all my heart for you and you promised I would find you. Hold true to your promise and open my heart to believe. Amen."

Does faith come so easily to people? I'm not sure.
There's a number of reasons why people believe, a number of reasons why people don't.
I don't seek to change nonbelievers because I believe that the most important thing is to be a good person FIRST.

Heh, Jesus is mentioned in the British miniseries 'I, Claudius' towards the end of Claudius' reign. It's a rather amusing exchange. It has to do with one of Claudius' oldest and closest friends, Herod Agrippa, declaring himself the Messiah and urging rebellion against Rome. The governor of Judea remarks to Claudius that they had a similar problem with a 'Joshua bar Joseph' awhile back. Claudius asks, 'Oh? What happened to him?'
'We crucified him of course.'
'Oh, okay. Very good.'
Don't know why, but that scene cracks me up.

i'm going to take this in parts and hope to Dog the tab doesn't disappear on me again, or i might break something. 



(=  i certainly feel that way.



this may have been more directed toward melanie, but i'm going to throw in my hat anyhow:

i think jesus rising from the dead really is just a matter of belief at this point, as anyone who would possibly know has been long deceased.  however, let's say it did happen: then the burden of proof comes on whether it was by divine intervention.

there are documented cases* of people coming back to life after having been declared clinically dead; if this was considered an ability unique to jesus, why would it happen since with others?

^{*http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm96204.html
http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/05/23/medical-miracle-woman-wakes-after-heart-stops-tubes-pulled/
http://werribee.yourguide.com.au/news/local/news/general/jonathan-defies-odds-boy-declared-clinically-dead-makes-remarkable-recovery/783102.aspx}



i shudder to think what false impressions future generations might get about bush.  even if the world is lead to believe 1000 years from now that he was a great president, it still doesn't change the facts; however, the likelihood of that happening is great enough to make me question religious texts further.  all we have to go on is a bunch of societally-favoured/affluent dead men's telephone-words...and, if lucky, some archaeological evidence to support it.

at least we do have wikipedia; i hope the opportunity for objectivity remains eternal from here on out.


when it comes to religion, i have a really hard time believing information that comes from clearly biased websites.  i still look it over, but it leaves such a bad taste; i've noticed this a lot from christian (& even down to the denominational) websites.  it seems that truth and facts are dismissed in order to present beliefs under that sort of guise, and it feels too much like a brain-washing attempt (and worse, condescension) to non-believers whilst eliciting great 'huzzah!'s from the already-converted.
the tone of such things really bothers me because it's almost as if it's for 'jesus-club' members only, and any outsider has to put up with this sort of attitude that screams 'listen to us, damn it, because we're right!  and you're a bloody idiot if you don't see it.'

i half expect to see little chuckles ('ah-hahahaha!') in the margin.



have you ever seen monty python's life of brian?
'always look on the briiiiiight siiiide of life!'   



i have to agree with scott's assessment of this one.  & jesus avoiding his crucifixion would've come across as cowardly and dishonest (the latter because he'd be, in effect, denouncing his prior claims - which means one of his stories  is false); this would've completely ruined (negated, even) the progress he'd made up 'til that point, which would've ended christianity right there...until they found a new son of God with which to start over.



some of my reluctance to believe in the christian god is due to this very thing: i've already prayed in this manner and have yet to see something that would convince me enough to believe fully.  if the promise is held true, it will have to be something strong enough to do so.
i will try it again, though, as it's been awhile (i'm game!  hehe) and i will be sure to keep you lot updated if anything happens (or doesn't). 


finally, a small addition of my own to the topic:
people have, throughout the years, claimed to have had sightings and/or dreams involving Jesus, angels, Mary, any number of visions directly relating to christianity.
what about people practising other religions or having other beliefs who've claimed to have had visions of their own?


sorry this has turned out to be so long; hope i've not put you all to sleep. 

That's odd because you've been arguing just fine on the individual points. Give yourself more credit than that.


Right, I get that you'd like me to believe but at the same time, I'd like you to see the logical flaws that I see in it. Or to at least be aware when approaching your religion that you never really had a point in your life where you didn't know about Christ and then found the religion and had a logical reason for choosing -that- religion over any other. At least, that's pretty much how my life went. Not sure how yours did but like most Christians I've known, I'm sure it was similar. Please let me know if I'm mistaken.

In any case, thanks for responding to the point that I made regarding your not responding to any of my points. Much appreciated.

there are documented cases* of people coming back to life after having been declared clinically dead; if this was considered an ability unique to jesus, why would it happen since with others?
Fascinating stories! I'd add to that list, 90 Minutes in Heaven by Don Piper. Even more fascinating is your point that resurrection doesn't prove divinity. The only argument I can come up with is that Jesus predicted his death and resurrection; these others are just proof for modern times that people CAN come back from the dead. Also, when Jesus came back, he came back in his spiritual body--sometimes people recognized him and sometimes people didn't. These other people came back only to die again later. Unfortunately I can't prove any of what I'm saying until I can verify the reliability of the Bible. But that's my explanation.
Speaking of conjecture,
what about people practising other religions or having other beliefs who've claimed to have had visions of their own?
I believe that demons are responsible for these other visions. Again, no proof, but that's what I believe. As I said before, I believe demons are responsible for coming up with parodies of the one true religion.
it took me just under forever to type that reply, not to mention throwing in a new question at the bottom, and yet i still get nothin'?
if you want me to hang back whilst the two of you 'duke it out', let me know.
Tongue
Sorry it took so long for a response. Yesterday was awful for thinking--the kids were asking a million favors and I couldn't hear myself think. I tried all morning to write something intelligible after my apology but finally I just gave up.