Which Religion is the One True Religion?

My Oh My! What have we been up to? I leave for a few hours and come back to page after page of new posts. You know How I hate to read!

The fate of the worlds religions is outlined in the bible book of Revelation, chapters 17 and 18. Interesting reading.

0 Replies

GODWIN"S LAW, Frank - its a constant.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

GODWIN"S LAW, Frank - its a constant.

:wink:

0 Replies

I was having a lot of fun with this thread. Crying or Very sad

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Well real life we all have a bear to cross but in the end, my not having been born would be a small price to pay for a universe without the arrogant violence bigotry and banal ignorance of the past 1000's of years perpetuated by the sons/daughters of Abraham. I'm not quite arrogant enough to think I was needed on this earth ...

That's where we disagree. I think you are.

0 Replies

Well I am arrogant to no small a degree but not arrogant/stupid enough to become a christian. I do know that the universe is bigger than I am, christians however, seem to need to have "souls/gods/egos" bigger than the universe, perhaps the biggest arrogance of all for they use it to justify their heinous treatment of their home (earth) and all its inhabitants.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

real life wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
dyslexia wrote:
Well, I surely can't speak for Frank in this matter, but yes indeed I do adocate a religious cleansing of the universe, (as we know it) and the sooner the better., My motto is "the only good son/daughter of Abraham is one that is now in heaven and not on earth."

You spoke for me quite well, Dys.

We can hope they will grow up...but that does not seem to be the way things will go. All-out war on religion is the only solution that seems practical. And I hope we engage in it soon.

I cannot say that I am surprised. You defended your position with the same rationale that Hitler used in killing the Jews, i.e. it was for the good of the species.

Oh, why do people with nothing relevant to say on issues like this have to trot out ole Hitler. He's dead and burned.

I wouldn't have brought Hitler up if you hadn't been so adamant in using his arguments.

--You are the one who didn't want to consider things "right" or "wrong".

--You are the one who argued murder was illegal only because it caused "disorder" in society.

--You are the one who wanted morality based only on what someone thought was for the "good for the species."

You have fought hard to keep Hitler's legacy and philosophy alive, Frank. Why are you backing away now?

If you cannot stand the heat, Frank, then do not light the match.

--You are the one who has consistently argued that something "must be done" about the folks who dare to disagree with your philosophy.

--You are the one who presumes omniscience, telling everybody what can and can't be known.

--You are the "champion of free speech" who wants to see those who disagree with you shackled.

Take a look in the mirror, my friend. This is you.

The resemblance between what you advocate and what the major tyrants of the 20th century (Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Hussein, Amin) have practiced in undeniable.

I advocate none of those positions. They are all yours.

Don't like it? Do something about it.

0 Replies

Yeah, but real, didn't Hitler have some twisted view of religion where he thought he was going to bring about the thousand year reign of Christ foretold in Revelation? Isn't that what the so - called Third Reich was all about? He hobnobbed with religious leaders to get the support of the unions so he could control the country. Then he relied on their complicity in the 'final solution.' Knowing what Frank thinks of religion, do you seriously think he would do any of that?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Yeah, but real, didn't Hitler have some twisted view of religion where he thought he was going to bring about the thousand year reign of Christ foretold in Revelation? Isn't that what the so - called Third Reich was all about? He hobnobbed with religious leaders to get the support of the unions so he could control the country. Then he relied on their complicity in the 'final solution.' Knowing what Frank thinks of religion, do you seriously think he would do any of that?

Whatever it may be that motivates Frank, if it has the same philosophical basis as Hitler, it cannot but produce the same results.

Frank has a twisted view of religion as well. Nirvana on earth awaits him if only he can rid the world of the religious folks.

Perhaps he can be persuaded to work legitimately to gain the ends he desires. Perhaps we should encourage he and Dys to run for office.

How 'bout Apisa Dyslexia '08 ?

They'd make Howard Dean look like a narcoleptic.

0 Replies

The problem for Germany was that Hitler was a medium (Germany is a highly mediumistic country). Hitler was controlled in this way. He also patted children on the head, his friends liked him, no doubt, but when the obsession took place, when he was talking to the multitudes, he became a ranting, powerful, obsessed, hollow shell who galvanized Germany, Japan and Italy to link together across the world as the Axis powers. Through that triangle the forces of evil manifested.

So Hitler was involved - as an agent for the forces of evil and also by his own innate evil: it is evil to want to dominate the world for 1,000 years, which is what he envisaged for the Third Reich. Not to mention the gas chambers.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Well I am arrogant to no small a degree but not arrogant/stupid enough to become a christian. I do know that the universe is bigger than I am, christians however, seem to need to have "souls/gods/egos" bigger than the universe, perhaps the biggest arrogance of all for they use it to justify their heinous treatment of their home (earth) and all its inhabitants.

Lumping"souls/gods/egos" together is so appropriate, especially the ego part, and "bigger than the universe" fits the Christian image well. I don't know how Jesus thought, or the early Christians for that matter, but when the later Christians separated the religion from nature and imposed the religion atop of nature (became supernatural), it was all down hill from there. As Alan Watts said, "The Christians didn't know what to do with Jesus, so they kicked him upstairs.s" (Made the religion supernatural.) Now we've got fruitcakes like Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, and yes, G. W. Bush making the whole Christian shebang look like a pile of cr*p. So, maybe it is, or maybe they're just looking through cr*p-colored lenses.

I thank my father for not indoctrinating me with this nonsense. To me, spirituality arises from nature, and not the other way around.

0 Replies

Nature is the best preacher,life the best teacher...

0 Replies

aleksandar--

"Standing on the bare ground,--my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space,--all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball. I am nothing. I see all. The currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God. The name of the nearest friend sounds then foreign or accidental. To be brothers, to be acquaintances,--master or servent, is then a trifle and a disturbance. I am the lover of uncontained and immortal beauty. In the wilderness, I find something more dear and connate than in streets or villages. In the tranquil landscape, and especially in the distant line of the horizon, man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature." --Emerson - "Nature"

Interesting idea the Transcendentalists had, although I don't quite agree with them. The view is correct insofar as God does not lie outside of what is--nothing can exist outside of the universe if the universe is all truth, or all that is in itself or for itself.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
Well real life we all have a bear to cross but in the end, my not having been born would be a small price to pay for a universe without the arrogant violence bigotry and banal ignorance of the past 1000's of years perpetuated by the sons/daughters of Abraham. I'm not quite arrogant enough to think I was needed on this earth ...

That's where we disagree. I think you are.

dyslexia wrote:

Well I am arrogant to no small a degree......

I think you are needed on this earth.

0 Replies

Thalion wrote:

aleksandar--

"Standing on the bare ground,--my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space,--all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball. I am nothing. I see all. The currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God. The name of the nearest friend sounds then foreign or accidental. To be brothers, to be acquaintances,--master or servent, is then a trifle and a disturbance. I am the lover of uncontained and immortal beauty. In the wilderness, I find something more dear and connate than in streets or villages. In the tranquil landscape, and especially in the distant line of the horizon, man beholds somewhat as beautiful as his own nature." --Emerson - "Nature"

Interesting idea the Transcendentalists had, although I don't quite agree with them. The view is correct insofar as God does not lie outside of what is--nothing can exist outside of the universe if the universe is all truth, or all that is in itself or for itself.

I believe that God is within the better part of creation but God is also a part outside of creation, (so we do not worship creation but the creator of it) so God is still to remain autonomous... God is the "creator" because he created creation but God is also an unseen part of creation like an artist is part of their art and their art part of them.

0 Replies

Frank

Are you saying that you think it better that we just throw our hands up in the air and say we do not know God so that is that. Don't you maybe think it more sensible to lay down a basic personal guideline as to at least what God is not?

Can any crazy lunatic that comes along say that God is so and so then according to your non-doctrine they could possibly be right because you do not know? Your "religion" does not permit you to assume someone else does "not" know even if it is the Easter Bunny. Because you cannot even guess... you have nothing whatsoever to "compare" any solid moral/spiritual ideas or issues. Your God could be moral or immoral. You like to have your freedom without any conscience.

I tend to think that non-thought like that is dangerous.

It is sometimes easier to define what God is not than to try and define what God is...

For instance God is not a murderer.

God is not a human.

God is not evil.

God is not chaos.

God is not powerless

Frank because you cannot make even a civilized "guess" about God... you only encourage others to leave the world open to one who will make incorrect guesses and decisions about God. One who may convince the weak and because they themselves do not have a solid spiritual model to compare either they may not be able to distinguish the truth or may accept a lie.

Like lies that humans can be Gods... and they can rule over other humans... They can be evil and still command power... They can "create" chaos and murder at will all in the name of God... Will you stand back and permit it because you have no "justification" to argue because you yourself do not "know" God at all?

Don't you think it might be prudent to at least have some idea of what God is not? If you know what God is not isn't that the same as knowing God? You cannot even tell me that God is "not" the God of the Bible... you would just be guessing.

You negate yourself and others who may need more than a simple I don't know..

0 Replies

shiyacic aleksandar wrote:

The problem for Germany was that Hitler was a medium (Germany is a highly mediumistic country). Hitler was controlled in this way.

Yes, he was definitely heavily into the Occult (what nowadays is misnamed "New Age," when in fact, it's as old as Babylon); but the Allies, when they found volume after volume of that stuff in his lair, simply counted it as rubbish and got rid of it.

As for Germany being highly mediumistic, wwwwell, I would say that their problem roots more in their rejection of the one true God and His Word in the middle of the 19th century (the so-called "Higher Criticism," which should more properly be termed "The Lower Criticism," since it issues from the Pits of Hell). ROMANS 1:18ff was graphically illustrated in Germany from '33-45. The German scholars still do not recognize that the ultimate root of the Nazi calamity was spiritual, and that the political/social/economic factors were merely symptoms of the spiritual malaise.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Frank

Are you saying that you think it better that we just throw our hands up in the air and say we do not know God so that is that.

No need for the drama of throwing one's hands up into the air.

Just be honest. It is not all that hard...no matter what you religious types think. Just be honest.

I do not know the true nature of REALITY....so I do not know if there is a God involved....just as I do not know if there are no gods involved.

What is so hard about that?

Quote:

Don't you maybe think it more sensible to lay down a basic personal guideline as to at least what God is not?

No I do not....because in order to do that, I would have to pretend to know stuff I simply do not know. You religious folks apparently have no trouble doing all that pretending.

Quote:

Can any crazy lunatic that comes along say that God is so and so then according to your non-doctrine they could possibly be right because you do not know?

Obviously any guess about the unknown might be correct.

Quote:

Your "religion"...

I do not have a religion. I leave that to fools.

Quote:

...does not permit you to assume someone else does "not" know even if it is the Easter Bunny. Because you cannot even guess... you have nothing whatsoever to "compare" any solid moral/spiritual ideas or issues. Your God could be moral or immoral. You like to have your freedom without any conscience.

This is frenzied bullshyt.

I do not know if there is a God...I do not know if there are no gods....I do not have enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess.

I suspect neither do you....but I also suspect you are in such terror of the barbaric cartoon god of the Bible that you cannot acknowledge that.

Quote:

I tend to think that non-thought like that is dangerous.

Yeah...look at all the wars and killing that have occurred due to agnostic thinking....he said sarcastically.

Get real, Rex.

Quote:

It is sometimes easier to define what God is not than to try and define what God is...

No it isn't...but I know you will try to do it anyway.

Quote:

For instance God is not a murderer.

Well the god of the Bible certainly is a murderer...so I guess you are in agreement with me that the god of the Bible is not the right answer to "What is the true nature of reality?"

Quote:

God is not a human.

How do you know that?

Quote:

God is not evil.

Well the god of the Bible certainly is evil...so I guess you are in agreement with me that the god of the Bible is not the right answer to "What is the true nature of reality?"

Quote:

Frank because you cannot make even a civilized "guess" about God... you only encourage others to leave the world open to one who will make incorrect guesses and decisions about God.

No I don't, Rex. But you religious folks do.

You encourage them to suppose one CAN know if there is a God...and what that God is like.

So other people simply guess differently about the gods....and you folks are not logically able to argue against them. We agnostics can always argue that it seems highly unlikely that they know what they are talking about....just as we argue that it seems highly unlikely that you do.

Quote:

Don't you think it might be prudent to at least have some idea of what God is not?

No...because this is only the desparation move of someone who cannot acknowledge that he/she does not know if there is a God or not....and even if there is, that they do not know what the god is like or what the god expects (if anything) of humans.

Quote:

If you know what God is not isn't that the same as knowing God? You cannot even tell me that God is "not" the God of the Bible... you would just be guessing.

I absolutely AM guessing when I say I am guessing that the god of the Bible is an absurd, cartoonish myth. But I feel comfortable making that guess....because I have plenty of unambiguous evidence upon which to make that guess.

Quote:

You negate yourself and others who may need more than a simple I don't know..

Stop being so afraid, Rex....and maybe you won't NEED more than the truth.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Frank

Are you saying that you think it better that we just throw our hands up in the air and say we do not know God so that is that.

No need for the drama of throwing one's hands up into the air.

Just be honest. It is not all that hard...no matter what you religious types think. Just be honest.

I do not know the true nature of REALITY....so I do not know if there is a God involved....just as I do not know if there are no gods involved.

What is so hard about that?

Frank, You say "you don't know the true nature of reality" then you reject the God of the Bible... Isn't that bit contradictory?

Quote:
Don't you maybe think it more sensible to lay down a basic personal guideline as to at least what God is not?

No I do not....because in order to do that, I would have to pretend to know stuff I simply do not know. You religious folks apparently have no trouble doing all that pretending.

Frank you don't pretend? You pretend to know the the God of the Bible is a barbarian, cartoon, Easter bunny. But you cannot for one minute consider that the biblical God may be the one true God. Isn't that a bit unfair for an agnostic? Isn't it a bit unfair to just assume the Easter bunny is not real and the Aztecs were wonderfully humane people worshiping the true God too? How can you even speculate if you premise all of your ideas with the thought that one cannot know? You reject some religions... which shows a secretive selective process going on inside your crisscross wired brain that does discern spirits and weigh them as to their strength.

Quote:
Can any crazy lunatic that comes along say that God is so and so then according to your non-doctrine they could possibly be right because you do not know?

Obviously any guess about the unknown might be correct.

Yes, this is the exact warped thinking I am trying to get you to see. You have no standard to compare an erroneous view of God with a virtuous view of God. You utopian world would be that no one ever think of God... Well Frank just because you close your eyes does not mean everyone else wants to. You only open your eyes to insult the God of the Bible anyway. You are certainly not a purist when it comes to agnosticism because you evidently have an axe to grind. Your lopsided distain of a God that you claim cannot be known is rather hypocritical. You cannot have the tools of knowing if your reject them. You are using the same "tools" to reject God that the biblical believer is using to profess.

Quote:
Your "religion"...

I do not have a religion. I leave that to fools.

If you have set yourself up in opposition to the biblical God (which I think you misinterpret) then you most certainly do have a religion. Now if you opposed canned foods or ball games on Thursdays I might agree with you... Your distain for the biblical God is a religion in itself. So join the fools you are their patron saint....

Quote:
...does not permit you to assume someone else does "not" know even if it is the Easter Bunny. Because you cannot even guess... you have nothing whatsoever to "compare" any solid moral/spiritual ideas or issues. Your God could be moral or immoral. You like to have your freedom without any conscience.

This is frenzied bullshyt.

I do not know if there is a God...I do not know if there are no gods....I do not have enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess.

I suspect neither do you....but I also suspect you are in such terror of the barbaric cartoon god of the Bible that you cannot acknowledge that.

I do not oppose the God of the Bible I do not misinterpret his motivations. I see the perfect being within. How could that be a source of fear? Yet you on the other hand have magnified any perceived faults of this Biblical God and allowed them to usurp the truth "within" the Bible. Opposing a true God could be a source of anxiety. You do oppose God don't you Frank? Setting up a constitution that God cannot be known is like closing your eyes and trying to see, not listening and expecting to hear, touching but not feeling...

Quote:
I tend to think that non-thought like that is dangerous.

Yeah...look at all the wars and killing that have occurred due to agnostic thinking....he said sarcastically.

Get real, Rex.

The problem is there are not enough real people. They take the bible and twist it and there are not enough people to stand up for it's true meaning... Maybe they are too busy in their little corner doubting spiritual truth because of some silly ideology like, God is dead.

Quote:
It is sometimes easier to define what God is not than to try and define what God is...

No it isn't...but I know you will try to do it anyway.

Quote:
For instance God is not a murderer.

Well the god of the Bible certainly is a murderer...so I guess you are in agreement with me that the god of the Bible is not the right answer to "What is the true nature of reality?"

The God of the Bible is not a murderer but the creator of life. You do adopt your own religion but it is flawed.

Quote:
God is not a human.

How do you know that?

Believe me, I know...

Quote:
God is not evil.

Well the god of the Bible certainly is evil...so I guess you are in agreement with me that the god of the Bible is not the right answer to "What is the true nature of reality?"

How can we ever be in agreement Frank if you can have no position? It seems you only want to stop others from guessing.

Quote:
Frank because you cannot make even a civilized "guess" about God... you only encourage others to leave the world open to one who will make incorrect guesses and decisions about God.

No I don't, Rex. But you religious folks do.

You encourage them to suppose one CAN know if there is a God...and what that God is like.

So other people simply guess differently about the gods....and you folks are not logically able to argue against them. We agnostics can always argue that it seems highly unlikely that they know what they are talking about....just as we argue that it seems highly unlikely that you do.

Again you agnostics want to stifle spiritual identity to manipulate the vacuum. Like socialism... everyone can live a mediocre life and we will constantly propound that the God of the Bible is a barbarian and cartoon and so and so... And we are also so sure the "dabul" did not make you do anything... That is simply agnosticism with an agenda.

Quote:
Don't you think it might be prudent to at least have some idea of what God is not?

No...because this is only the desparation move of someone who cannot acknowledge that he/she does not know if there is a God or not....and even if there is, that they do not know what the god is like or what the god expects (if anything) of humans.

You seem to know what the biblical God is... cartoon, barbarian etc...... why is it improper for someone to know what the God of the Bible is?

Quote:
If you know what God is not isn't that the same as knowing God? You cannot even tell me that God is "not" the God of the Bible... you would just be guessing.

I absolutely AM guessing when I say I am guessing that the god of the Bible is an absurd, cartoonish myth. But I feel comfortable making that guess....because I have plenty of unambiguous evidence upon which to make that guess.

You have "evidence" to prove something against God? And you got it from the Bible... you sound like you are doing the same thing as your counterparts... The purpose of truth is to know that the physical world provides is only a glimpse of the spiritual world. You cannot always base truth on what is seen but what is unseen.

Quote:
You negate yourself and others who may need more than a simple I don't know..

Stop being so afraid, Rex....and maybe you won't NEED more than the truth.

No one needs "more" than the truth but I do not "reject" truth out of some self made stipulation that spiritual truth cannot be perceived.

0 Replies

None so blind as thjose who will not see. Bringing a confirmed religionist, particularly an Abrahamic, to reason is less likely than bringing a long-term junkie to a life of responsibility and abstinence from intoxicants.

0 Replies

Which Religion is the One True Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know