Which Religion is the One True Religion?

snood wrote:

maporsche wrote:
snood wrote:
Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.

Well, Snood, I don't know for sure if you are a follower of the Theory of Christianity, but if you are "discussing" absolute truths as told by the bible and the bible is said to be infallable and the word of god, and you can find a situation where murder would be justified, then doesn't that pretty much sum up the point that the bible cannot be a reference for absolute morality? Is there a need to discuss rape when the point has already been proven.

I was asking simple questions to flushd. I was asking them in the words I chose, and in the context I chose. When someone wants to talk about "absolute truth" in the context of the "Theory of Christianity", or if someone wants to engage you or anyone else on the infallibility of the bible, then you take them up on it at that time.

So again, flushd-
You gave me a good scenario in which you would see murder as not wrong. Can you do the same for rape?

Snood, it was me you were responding too above, not flushd.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Actually, Maporsche...in fairness to Snood...I think it should be noted that he is not actually "defending absolute morals." Fact is, Snood seldom defends anything...and even more seldom ever takes a postion on anything other than sniping at people who do have the guts to take positions.

Snood is just asking questions so that he can find fault with responses.

Snood, if this is the truth, and you never actually take a side on an issue, or at the very least you won't reveal your side of an issue, then I do not want to further this conversation. I prefer to make a point with my time and not simply "talk".

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.

Oh sure...I can.

As per the god of the Bible...it is allowed and moral when it occurs after the defeat of an enemy. There are several biblical passages that show this to be the case.

Thanks for asking.

0 Replies

Snood said:

<<<Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.>>>

Personally? Okay, I will try snood, since you asked.
Take murder as the example: A situation where the law does not make sense. This is all hypothetical, okay. My life is endangered, or a loved one, and I kill to save my skin or anothers. The law classifies it as murder: I did it in order to survive.

Rape as an example: Much trickier, to say this personally. However, hypothetically, let's say as an example prison. Rape is common, because human beings are put in animal-like conditions. Is the rape morally wrong, absolutely? Or, is the act of rape morally neutral considering the conditions?

Again, difficult to give hypothetical yet personal answers and examples. Feel free to help me improve on this. Smile

0 Replies

flushd wrote:

Snood said:

<<<Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.>>>

Personally? Okay, I will try snood, since you asked.
Take murder as the example: A situation where the law does not make sense. This is all hypothetical, okay. My life is endangered, or a loved one, and I kill to save my skin or anothers. The law classifies it as murder: I did it in order to survive.

Rape as an example: Much trickier, to say this personally. However, hypothetically, let's say as an example prison. Rape is common, because human beings are put in animal-like conditions. Is the rape morally wrong, absolutely? Or, is the act of rape morally neutral considering the conditions?

Again, difficult to give hypothetical yet personal answers and examples. Feel free to help me improve on this.

You are a good person, Flushed, to deal with the question as asked. Fact is, the question as asked has precious little to do with the question actually being debated here....which actually goes to the question of whether there are absolutes in this area.

The fact that any one person may feel that any particular activity is always wrong...does not impact on that. How any one person feels (or can justify) any of these things simply doesn't matter

In any case, the trick here, Flushed, is in figuring out what is meant by "wrong."

In nature...male animals often take female animals at will...obviously with some concessions made to females that bite and claw.

If "wrong" is dertermined by what is effective in allowing modern society to function reasonably and safely...then rape will, it seems, "always" be considered wrong.

If "right and wrong" are determined by a standard of what some god will or will not permit...or what will or will not offend some god...

...then rape will very often be condoned.

The god of the Bible, for instance, condones rape under certain circumstances.

0 Replies

Is slavery always "wrong?"

Not according to the god of the Bible.

0 Replies

flushd wrote:

Again, difficult to give hypothetical yet personal answers and examples. Feel free to help me improve on this.

Here is an illustration that shows lawfulness can vary drastically from one state to another. Although there is a significant age difference between these two, and had it been my daughter I would have probably wanted to shoot the SOB, it is not hard to imagine a pair of sixteen year olds. Should one be anymore guilty than the other?

Quote:

Newborn is evidence in statutory-rape case of mom, 14

Jodi Wilgoren
New York Times
Aug. 30, 2005 12:00 AM

FALLS CITY, Neb. - On Sunday evening, Matthew Koso tipped 3 ounces of formula into his 4-day-old daughter's mouth, then hoisted her atop his shoulder in hope of a burp. This morning, he is to be arraigned on charges for which the newborn is the state's prime piece of evidence.

Matthew Koso is 22. The baby's mother, Crystal, is 14. He is charged with statutory rape, even though they were wed with their parents' blessing in May, crossing into Kansas because their own state prohibits unions of people younger than 17.

Complete story here.

0 Replies

flushd wrote:

Snood said:

<<<Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.>>>

Personally? Okay, I will try snood, since you asked.
Take murder as the example: A situation where the law does not make sense. This is all hypothetical, okay. My life is endangered, or a loved one, and I kill to save my skin or anothers. The law classifies it as murder: I did it in order to survive.

Rape as an example: Much trickier, to say this personally. However, hypothetically, let's say as an example prison. Rape is common, because human beings are put in animal-like conditions. Is the rape morally wrong, absolutely? Or, is the act of rape morally neutral considering the conditions?

Again, difficult to give hypothetical yet personal answers and examples. Feel free to help me improve on this.

I think killing in self defense is considered legal, therefore not murder.

Rape is morally wrong. How could you possibly justify it? Because you're in prison; the "everybody's doing it" defense? Please.

Pedophilia as well. No moral justification for it is possible. I am appalled that any would even try to excuse it.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

flushd wrote:
Snood said:

<<<Just for S & Gs, flushd -

It's not hard for me to imagine a scenario where I could kill unlawfully and feel justified. But there are other examples that are a little dicier. Can you describe for me any situation in which you could find that rape, for instance, would not be wrong? Thanks for answering - I'm really just in "exchange of thought" mode.>>>

Personally? Okay, I will try snood, since you asked.
Take murder as the example: A situation where the law does not make sense. This is all hypothetical, okay. My life is endangered, or a loved one, and I kill to save my skin or anothers. The law classifies it as murder: I did it in order to survive.

Rape as an example: Much trickier, to say this personally. However, hypothetically, let's say as an example prison. Rape is common, because human beings are put in animal-like conditions. Is the rape morally wrong, absolutely? Or, is the act of rape morally neutral considering the conditions?

Again, difficult to give hypothetical yet personal answers and examples. Feel free to help me improve on this.

I think killing in self defense is considered legal, therefore not murder.

Rape is morally wrong. How could you possibly justify it?

Your god has no trouble justifying it....and does.

Quote:

Pedophilia as well. No moral justification for it is possible. I am appalled that any would even try to excuse it.

Your god has no trouble justifying it....and does.

0 Replies

So, what was Lot doin' in the cave with his daughters again? Oh yeah, i forgot . . . it was all their fault, and he slept right through it . . .

0 Replies

is it true that back in the day, protestant priests tried to justify slavery in the southern american states openly ??

0 Replies

They certainly did, and they had ample scriptural evidence to support the claim. In fact, Southerners became increasingly religiously-oriented as the war progressed and their fortunes declined.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

They certainly did, and they had ample scriptural evidence to support the claim. In fact, Southerners became increasingly religiously-oriented as the war progressed and their fortunes declined.

Indeed!

Here are a few passages used by "the religious" to justify slavery"

"Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you BUY them from among the neighboring nations. You may also BUY them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slaves YOU MAY OWN AS CHATTELS, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, MAKING THEM PERPETUAL SLAVES. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen." Leviticus 25:44ff

"All under the yoke of slavery must regard their masters as worthy of full respect...Those slaves whose masters are brothers in the faith must not take liberties with them on that account. they must perform their tasks even more faithfully, since those who will profit from their work are believers and beloved brothers." 1 Timothy 6:1ff

"To slaves I say, obey your human masters perfectly, not with the purpose of attracting attention and pleasing men, but in all sincerity and our of reverence for the Lord." Colossians 3:22

"You slave owners, deal justly and fairly with your slaves..." Colossians 4:1

"Slaves are to be submissive to their masters. They should try to please them in every way, not contradicting them nor stealing from them, but expressing a constant fidelity by their conduct, so as to adorn in every way possible the doctrine of God our Savior." Titus 2:9

"The general rule is that each one should lead the life the Lord has assigned him, continuing as he was when the Lord called him...Were you a slave when your call came? Give it no thought. Even supposing you could go free, you would be better off making the most of your slavery...." 1 Corinthians 7:17ff

In the Epistle, Philemon, Paul returns a slave (Onesimus) to his master (Philemon) and tells Philemon that although he (Paul) feels he has the right to command Philemon to free Onesimus, he would not do that, but would instead appeal to Philemon to do it on his own.

0 Replies

to
Since I am new here I may as well respond directly to the first post.

I believe in my religion strongly, I would have to disagree with your view of "Betting your soul." It is my belief that those who seek truth will be brought one way or another to Christianity.

There are a lot of skeptics, misinterpretations, and rumors as with all religion around Christianity. We are not (Or not supposed to be) judgemental. A true church won't look down upon you for petty things such as not giving in the offering, or not raising your hands into the air. Christianity is joyful, and has changed my life. It also is very simple, the bottom line moral of the bible is that God loves you and that you will be filled with the Holy spirit who will lead you and change your life just by calling on the name of the lord Jesus to be your savior. (And baptizing into the spirit. "Born again")

While these words are fancy, I can personally testify them for being true. Ever since I became a Christian (And I did so on my own, not because of how I was raised.) The Spirit has done great works, I change for the better every single day. All I have to do is prey for ANYTHING in Jesus' name and it will be granted. That is unconditional love! (If you are curious ..Read the book of John in the Bible.)

You ask should you bet your soul that this is the correct religion. I believe with all my heart it is, not because of what people told me but because of what I've seen for myself. It is through God's grace that our sins are forgiven, and we can spend eternity with him. I know this because everything I have read from the bible holds true. It is up to you to read it and decide, not simply listen to me.

The question following is about hell. It is hard to say this without triggering the skeptics, but yes those who refuse to believe that Jesus is the son of God will be thrown with Satan into the lake of fire.

Your final question is about truth. The bible in itself has stood the test of time, has no faults in its historical accuracy and its prophecies came true. The bible was written over hundreds of years by people not even in the same generation. This is NOT coincidence, it was the working of God.

You may be wondering why Christians of today are not heard of as being much different from the rest of the world. The bible also covers this in writings that were made centuries ago. In Revelations (The last book in the bible, which is the final prophecy which has yet to be fully completed) it talks of the seven churches which represent the seven blocks of time in our current age. We are currently in Laodicea (The final period before the end times. This can be found in Rev. 3 : 14-22) It states that the churches have become lukewarm and are no longer excited about the gift of Christ. This is why now of all times we need to stand up and praise the Lord, not much time remains.

Well there you go.

0 Replies

"End times" were predicted many times in the past from translations in the bible. Unless humanity destroys this planet first, end times wiil never come.

0 Replies

Re: to
Welcome to A2K, Gestalt.

Allow me to agree with at least part of your last post.

I agree that...

Gestalt wrote:

Christianity....is very simple...

Hope you become a regular...and that we get better acquainted.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

"End times" were predicted many times in the past from translations in the bible. Unless humanity destroys this planet first, end times wiil never come.

One of the predictions:

1This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

2That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

0 Replies

You are really into the literal reading of the Noah story aren't you real life?

0 Replies

There's no rational way to judge ancients for the institution(s) of slavery.

In ancient Athens, the cops were more often than not Scythian slaves; they were walking around armed, and the ordinary Athenians weren't, at least that's the way I read it.

The only possible way that makes sense is if being an Athenian slave was so far above being a Scythian that it wasn't even worth talking about.

0 Replies

220 End Times so far according to the following link: http://www.bible.ca/pre-date-setters.htm

0 Replies

Which Religion is the One True Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know