Which Religion is the One True Religion?

Frank Apisa wrote:

Well, moron, he also could have not put them in the position he did....or he could have simply forgiven them for a fairly benign act....or he could have forgiven them because they did not even know there was such a thing as disobedience....and they did not know the difference between good and evil. Or he could have punished them and not the entire goddam rest of mankind.

Frank; You have so many words in your post, a moron the likes of me can hardly keep up. What amazes me is how I, a complete dullard, can possibly understand something that escapes your magnificent intellect:

Adam and Eve were created as perfect moral agents. Their perfect consciences prevented them from stealing, for example, or committing any other sins that may have come into their minds. There was only one sin they could commit. Their eating of the fruit was more than just a dietary indiscretion. It represented their choice to decide for themselves what was good and what was bad.

These folks were mentally perfect, Frank. I know this may come as a surprise both to you and to the readers of this thread, but they were even smarter than you.

They knew what they were doing. Like you, Satan, another smart fellow, believed that God would have to either forgive them or execute them on the spot. Either course would have meant God would have to abandon his purpose. God's name, Jehovah, means 'he who causes to become'. So, this rebellion was more than just a speed bump in history. It has called into question God's right to be God.

Apparently, up until now, you are in agreement with the naysayers.

neologist - I'll again point out what has been mentioned: Adam and Eve could not have had knowledge of good and evil before they ate from the tree that granted that knowledge... making them not morally perfect.

Treat Eden as man's revelation of conscience whereby he is forced to deal the moral consequences of right from wrong once he has learned them, but do not insist that this actually occurred. If you're going to play logic games with this story, you realize that ironically Adam and Eve could not have committed an evil before they knew what evil was, making them not responsible for their actions prior to eating from the tree -- the act of eating from the tree reflected its own immorality on itself as both the source of sin and the object of action regarding which that sin was committed. Thus, eating from the tree was not in-of-itself an evil, but only the revelation of man to what is evil. Man is condemned to be free, the ejection from the idyllic Eden marking the transformation of man from his innocence into maturity - a Fall into the knowledge of evil in reality out of a pure life, though it had been pure only because of ignorance. Spell check used on quote for clarity.

Thalion, Excellent point; but logic is a loose canon of religion. They use historical incidence to show how the bible predicted future events, but they ignore the fact that any comic book could predict future events that will eventually transpire - given enough time and interpretations.

Yes, true, logic is generally not an integral part of most people's take on religion. The lack or perverted use of it has led to the fanatacism that is such a popular reason stated for its abolition. I and a few others are trying to bring both together, in the same way that music can be described through theory, existing simultaneously with that beautiful sense of art that it music's primary emphasis: that is, one does not aim for the theory, but its application, though this does not diminish the very theory that lays at its foundation, be it known or otherwise. Truth, goodness, and beauty are not separable. These stories are superficially false, but at the same time one must realize that though they are stories in their object, their material concern, they also portray a perception of reality. They sound absurd, but they also might contain a certain degree of truth, of theory, if you will, beneath them. It bothers me when people adhere only to this superficiality: the story is absurd or the story actually occcured, without regard to meaning or the logic behind it - the abstract sybiology. There is an obvious meaning beyond the material when John states "In the beginning there was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God", the depiction of the driving force of the world, the Logos. This is in stark contrast with the violence of the Old Testament, which is why I feel perhaps justified when Christians do not pay attention to certain aspects. The Bible is believed to be divinely inspired, not dictated, which if anything means that a certain perception of reality, not a statement of events that occured, lays at its core. As such, some parts cannot be ratified with the whole - viz. the stoning of children. But one can not help but realize that underneath that whole is a view that can be logically validated through philosophy. It is to that which I try to strive and usually refer to here. Literal acception and adamant denial seem limited to me.

Well, the history and archaeology with which I am familiar holds that following its destruction in 689BCE, Babylon was rebuilt, achieving it greates size, glory and splendor during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, 605 to 538 BCE. It remained a thriving metropolis and center of influence though 330 BCE, at which time Alexander the Great captured the then-still-magnificent-rich-and-powerful city (along with considerable treasure among which was enumerated and accounted gold, silver, jewels, incense, perfumes, precious woods, abd assorted works of art) intending to make it the capital of his empire.

However, following Alexander's death not long thereafter, among things associated with the matter of contesting his succession was the founding of the city of Seleucia, and the establishment there of the captial of the eponymous Seleucid Empire. With transfer of administrative and key commercial functions to Seleucia, Babylon's population and fortunes withered in favor of the new capital, and as time passed, other factors further reduced the status of the city, but the city remained inhabited to some small extent for nearly another millenium, finally being abandonded in the 7th century of the current era. I don't see any corroboration of Isaiah there.

Frank wrote:

The idea of the need for a human sacrifice to propitiate a god should have gone into the dumpster long before this.

Comment:
The sacrifice was not to appease some barbaric God...

...again Frank you seem to constantly be on the wrong side of the issue... like your hatred of the biblical God is blinding your ability to even be fair...

Yes, some biblical believers are so zealous to find God that they will believe anything. Meekness can be disturbed my many external forces... I see that with you too... but in reverse and tilted... you are zealous to nullify the biblical God to such an extent that you are unable to even consider reasonably that you may be wrong...

...... even well intended ignorance is still travesty...

Jesus Christ's sacrifice was for me and you...

...although he may not have known this at the time of his death... Yet, the mystery was revealed to Paul and the church was a result of this metamorphism of the human spirit.

You seem to forget that God did not kill Jesus Christ...

Yet somehow in your mind you have probably even twisted this... Had the world only accepted Christ then God would have brought paradise to the earth on that very day.

Yet the world in rejection of the groom committing murder inadvertently is saved by it's own evil. So bad people fall on their own swords and still live but only by the grace of God... So watch the pen you have Frank it is very sharp...

It is this message that took the Catholic church out of the dark ages... why were they called dark ages?

Because the message of the scriptures was lost to the world at the time and a form of Babylonian Christianity had taken dominance... The true Christian message and scripture was not published and people were in the dark about their spiritual rights..

You are in the dark ages too Frank... Yet you are not being held by some pope... You stand in total fear of this God ...

....that you have imagined that the only solitude you have these days are when you have successfully shut him out...

The last place that people looked was the Bible for truth...

Suddenly then at the reformation the Bible began to make sense to the monks... And years of tyranny led to revolution and even more bloodshed.. It was the written words of the Bible that brought about the reformation and the world is still trying to get back to that "simple" message of the first century Christians.

Protestantism is not about "speaking out"... Martin Luther in so much said said that devils speak out too... It was not about the right of the common person to cause revolution... It was about the Bible's ability to provide truth...

Martin Luther was not for speaking out even though he is remembered as being outspoken. He was out spoken because he had the authority of the scriptures. This was why he could not recant because he knew that what he had said and written he was (for the most part) quoting from the Bible.

This was what brought religious freedom to the world. Though the movement was in it's infancy and today still had a ways to go it was all a result of the very words of freedom that have been overlooked by people like you, but these words of emancipation are still in the Bible and have been for 2000 years...

John 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

neologist wrote:

I personally believe we are living in the time of God's judgement. That being said, I am well aware of the countless dates proffered in the past by well meaning believers (and not a few charlatans). When suffering, as many do, it is tempting to forget that Jesus himself did not know when that time would come.

Oh?

Luke 21:12-36 "I tell you truly, that there are some of those standing right here who will never taste death before they see the kingdom of God. And there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on earth an anxious mass of people in confusion over the roar of the sea and the tides, with people dying of fear and apprehension about what's coming over the world. Yes, the powers of heaven will be shaken. And then the will see the Son of Man on a cloud with power and great glory. When these things start to happen, look up and raise your heads, because your redemption is approaching. When you see these tings happening, you know the kingdom of God is close. I assure you that this generation will not pass away till it all happens."

I don't know about you but to me that's a fairly specific timeline on when all of this is supposed to happen. Not only is a specific time frame given, but a very specific account of exactly what is supposed to happen is given. So where exactly in the bible does it say Jesus "does not know" when this will happen. And if it is in there wouldn't that be contradictory to what he is saying here?

Rex, the bottle you're rubbing has no genie in it

maporsche - I personally accept gay marriage. I see nothing wrong with the establishment of a loving relationship. I believe stem-cell research, insofar as it makes possible the saving and bettering of human life, is just. And I do not have much of a problem with first trimester abortions. At this point, I do not believe that the embryo has acheived self-consciousness, and if you are going to argue for the potentiality of life, then you are forced to make every unconceived egg a murder as well. I realize that these views are in stark contrast with the Bible, which I suppose was your point in asking me.