quote:

---

Originally written by Formerly I:

On the former topic: Poor English people... Well, it's your own fault for raping countries of their resources and installing puppet dictators. (Then again, it's not like we in the US didn't do it either).

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Lady Davida:

quote:

---

Originally written by Formerly I:

On the former topic: Poor English people... Well, it's your own fault for raping countries of their resources and installing puppet dictators. (Then again, it's not like we in the US didn't do it either).

Right, blame it on the victims. How insensitive.

On religion in general: It's quite regrettable that people can get tied up in this sort of scam. There is no evidence that any religion is valid. Sure, miracles can happen, but I'm just of the opinion that they were simple luck.

You're as welcome to your opinion as religious people are to ours. There certainly is evidence that religion is valid - the question is not whether it's there, but whether it's enough.

If religon was truly rational, people would think things through before going out to slaughter people in the name of a God who, if they're reading their religious text right, expressly told them not to kill. Or who told them not to drink, and then had them perform a ritual based on it.

If you were truly rational you'd know that a) most people do think things through first and b) the majority of us don't agree with the actions and opinions of the few you have chosen to represent the rest of us. From what you've said you seem to pin more violent intentions on religion than are actually rooted in it. You are right to wish for more open-mindedness among the religious, of course, but remember, improvement begins at home.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Mister Maoben:

IThat said, any religion not following the teachings of the Bible and inventing their own little version, such as the Koran, is human-invented and not acceptable to Christians.

---

quote:

---

[b]True good translations of the Bible generally make what it is trying to say easier to understand by a certain group of people but do not purposely alter the main points presented.

---

quote:

---

Jesus was not just a prophet, but God in the human form.

---

quote:

---

Mohammed was the guy who decided to make his own Bible and therefore his new religion. Therefore, Jesus is God and God's Son at the same time. As already mentions, there is two elements of the Trinity.

---

quote:

---

That said, any religion not following the teachings of the Bible and inventing their own little version, such as the Koran, is human-invented and not acceptable to Christians.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Formerly I:

On the former topic: Poor English people... Well, it's your own fault for raping countries of their resources and installing puppet dictators. (Then again, it's not like we in the US didn't do it either).

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Thuryl:

quote:

---

Originally written by Mister Maoben:

Praying to saints is outrageous. They can't help you. What's so hard about just praying to God himself?

---

Technically, you don't pray to the saints; you ask the saints to pray for you. They're holier than you, so the idea is that their prayers will count more than yours would.

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Drakefyre:
Muslims and Jews can say equally insulting things to Christians and be just as correct. By 'not acceptable,' what do you mean? Aren't you taught to be loving and accepting of all God's children?

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Drew:
I thought they were the teachings of Jesus. Are we getting a little idolatrous here, Ben?

The teachings of the Bible include the teachings of Jesus.

Anyone of any faith can make the same claims about Christianity. Militant Jews, for example, could loudly assert that Jesus was a false messiah, and that there's no proof he rose again. Where does that put you?

In a position to point out that the Bible itself says that Jesus is the Messiah.

The Bible has also proven to be an incredibly mutable document over the years, and many, many people had a hand in it. When its most recent incarnation was being debated (by men), there was a lot of controversy as to whether the letters of Paul (which are now pretty widely thought not to have all been written by the same person) should even be included. Likewise, the Coptic Gospel of Thomas was in and out, in and out, until finally it was decided (again, by men) not to be included. Did you know about this? Or are you afraid to pull back the layers of the onion too far? If it's the truth, it can't hurt you, right?

I think the books to be included in the Bible were chosen according to the amount of applicable content they contained. For example, if the four gospels had been essentially alike, only one or two would have been included, but each gospel, while talking in the same time period, has its own unique stories and content.

I'm not sure exactly why some books were excluded, but I'm of the disposition that those not included were more of a waste of paper to publish, if you can see what I mean.

---

In simple terms, all three faiths worship the same god, because all three faiths recognize their god as the God of Abraham. That there are so many divisions and sects in each faith just goes to show how imperfect all of them are.

To anyone who believes that his particular version is absolute, and all the rest of us are on a path to hell: how convenient that the absolute truth was right next door to you growing up!

You have a point there, and there are many different forms of Christianity with different requirements and traditions. However, I think many churches get so caught up in these traditions that they lose sight of what Christianity is all about: the only way to get to heaven is to accept Jesus and be made holy by him.

---