If you don't have a Chrismas tree or any other "mingled" customs and traditions, that doesn't make you any less Christian. For never in the bible, Jesus commanded us to buy a Chrismas tree, and at December 25th, be merry and joyful. You can do extra, but that doesn't mean it's obligated for all Christians. Christianity did not "mish-mash" concepts from other religions.

@Aqua

Where does your faith come from? Did your parents take you to church as a child and you just liked the idea? Thought it sounded plausible and decided to live your life by it?

Or did you have some kind of divine experience that makes you believe?

@ Devilnis. I'm sure there were other religions that stated the world is gonna end. Christian believes this too, but that doesn't mean we stole their religion. Other religions contain prophets, Christianity also contains prophets, doesn't mean we stole this concept. Same with other issues. As for virgin Mary, that accroding to the bible, was a historical fact. Chrismas tree is completely unrelated to Christianity. Jesus never said anything about it, if Catholics add excess customs and traditions, good for them. But Christianity itself did not mix factors from other religions. In fact, God specificly told us not to copy how other people worship their god (throughout the Old tastament).

@Lykus, When I was a child, my whole family are atheists. However, due to occasional invitations, I went to church occasionally, but thought church as boring. (i mean, listening to an old guy speak for hours without understanding a word he just said). However, as I grew up, somehow, my Mother got converted, and I was quite surprised, as she grew up atheist for 40 years. Thus, i returned to church due to pressure from my mother. As now i'm no longer a young boy, I can actually understand what the pastors are speaking. I guess my mother prays for me everyday, and God answered her prayers. I thought of the sermons, and eventually, I started accepting them, believing. I guess you can call this a divine experience. Yes, I like the idea, thought it sounded plausible, and so decided to live my life by it.

Aquaholic, check this site out:

http://pocm.info/getting_started_pocm.html

It has a wealth of information on what exactly Christianity borrowed from other religions. Does this mean that I can prove that Christ didn't turn water into wine and rise from the dead after martyring himself to expiate the sins of worldy men? No, it does not - Agnostics would never claim to be able to prove that one way or the other, and they would say the exact same thing about the Big Bang.

But the facts of religious concepts migrating from one religion to another, including to and from Christianity, are clear. Look at Rastafarianism, Voudun, and Mormonism for recent examples of cults that borrowed from and expanded upon older religions and then turned into relatively major religions in their own right. There are all sorts of ways to argue for and against the correctness of Christianity, and I've heard them all, but denying facts that are as clear-cut as "The earth is not flat" and "the earch circles the sun" is not the best way to start. :)

I agree with devilnis, Christianity was and is the most successful religion on the planet because of its ability to assimilate cultural customs. It is the religion of compromise. Even today you could ask 100 Irish Catholics the specific points of their beliefs and you would get close to if not 100 different answers. Catholicism seems to just leave people to figure out the details themselves except for a few notables i.e. abortion, contraception. And even when these things are brought up, they cause hassle for the church and many catholics disagree with the church's position on them.

@RvW: I think at this point your argument seems more suited to a conspiracy theories forum :P

@Aqua: The bible is not Christ's word, the new testament is. There is no Christ in the old testament.

Also, I'd love hear your Mother's reasons for joining the church. Genuinely, I would, that sort of thing doesn't seem to happen often and I'd love to gain an insight into it.

@Ace Windu:

It is not intended as conspiracy theory, it's intended as "science cannot either prove or disprove religion". The rather over-the-top comparison is just to illustrate the point.
While religion might seem rather at odds with science, technically they're pretty orthogonal [1] (well, from science to religion at least; it's not exactly rare for religion to intrude upon science's territory and get it wrong). For instance, science cannot proof evolution happened, it can only determine that's what it looks like (and, from here on out, that's how it will work). But it's possible to be an evolution researcher and still believe the Christian creation story (unlikely, but nevertheless possible), you just have to believe god created all the animals as though they evolved.

[1] Yes, I know that "orthogonal" cannot be a one-way relation, but I hope you get my point anyway. :)

You can call me stupid, but I am a christian. I have an explanation for my beliefs, (see second page on "Stop posting on other religion thread" if you even care). **If I am a christian what do I have to lose, I die and there is no haven and I didn't have sex with 100 people because of my religion. If I die and there is a heaven and I spent my life insulting and cursing God and Christians and didn't care, and I do go to Hell and have a miserable life there, I just messed up**.And I can't find an explanation against Judaism and Christianity, except some guy got bored and wrote a book, but there were actualy witnesses in the bible, unlike in Greek religion where some people created the world and all these great events happened before the world started and nothing happened after. And my opinion on Hindu is the Arians were trying to contain the Indians and give them hope so they wouldn't rebel. My explanation on Arab is that it was created much later than other religions, isn't it odd for one to spring out after most other explanations. **Not saying other religions are wrong, that's just my opinion.** And for death, everyone has to die some time, and if you already have excepted Christ, like many people in africa, then what is the difference going to heaven sooner. I wont *force* anyone to believe my beliefs, I just want to make sense out of my religion

@Tomahawk, We'll said. Thank you

CHRISTIANS ARE GIVEN A BAD REP. commonly, as you can see from lyukus . When you look at history, your grandparents x4 were most likely christians. But as other religions came and went, and in the 1950s people turned to object lust, Christianity went, mainly because when people prayed " GOD I NEED A NEW SOFA" it got unaswered. But lets think about this. A guy who is has some money says he will give you something if you need it for the greater good of the neighboorhood. You ask for cash to buy beer, should you get the beer just because you asked? No, and God works similarly, for the good of his people and to spread his religion. If he is the maker of people, and more supreme then people what makes you think we are entitled to get everything you want, otherwise the first person wouldve ask to rule the world and live for eternity, and we would still be under his rule. God will ANSWER to your prayers almost everytime, it may not be the way you wanted it, but he will answer. The SECOND WAY WE GET A BAD REP IS MEDIA. Whenever a muslim gets killed its on CNN, whenever there are gay rights problems, its on CNN, but CHRISTIANS get killed everyday ( but live in heaven)daily by muslims, and its never on CNN. The wars in the middle east are to EXTERMINATE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS, and the media covers it up by using them as wars for nations and angainst evil regimes. When a christian radicalist (WHO DONT KNOW CHRISTIANITY, and usually are fueled by thoughts of RACIAL SUPREMACY INSTEAD) commits a crime, somehow its a christian's fault.

THE THIRD WAY WE GET A BAD REP IS GOVERNMENT PROPOGANDA. You dont see signs saying Christians are evil and kill christians around your town, or a government trying to disprove Christianity in Senate meetings, do you? **bold** Schools are the hunting grounds of Christians **bold** Sciences goal is to disprove Christianity in school. In Earth and space class you learn that some how a clump of DUST made life. You learn all the nebulas are made by some explosion. In life science you learn the meaning of a species is to reproduce to create another generation DO WE LIVE TO DIE? In world cultures you learn of the many different religions and why they were made, as a "Symbol of hope" an "occupation" people compare christianity to other religions making people think they are actually similar. The three courses missions is to explain that religion is stupid and the evolution theory is fact.

All debates on religion are stemming from the root question of: Does God actually exist? After all, if God exists then it is certainly plausible that the Bible is a valid book which contains information from God. (The secondary debate as to whether or not the Bible is a legitimate holy scripture can only exist on the premise that God does in fact exist. Since, there can be no such thing as a holy scripture if there is no God.)

Well then, let's examine our possibilities.

If we assume that God exists, then there is a perfectly logical explanation to absolutely everything. Whether that explanation is based on the Bible, or on the fact that an all powerful diety could cause, create, or do whatever it wanted to (if one sought to discredit the Bible, this remains a resolution under our assumption). However seemingly incomprehendable certain actions or realites may be, under the second explanation, there is still a plausible conclusion to the matter.

If we assume that there is no God, there are an innumerable number of inexplicable realities in our lives. How did the universe come into existence? There is no solid explanation that can be proven, only theories. And, at that, there is no real consensus on any single theory. Why DOES suffering exist and what is the purpose of humanity? Without any greater existence than humanity itself, there is no logical purpose for humanity. Since, if we act for the purpose of ourselves, we eventually die, and if we act for the purpose of our friends, family, or fellow human beings, they too will eventually die. If the purpose of humanity is inevitably and entirely vanishing, is that any purpose at all? And what is the purpose of having the capability of logical and rational thought?

If there is no God, or higher being, then everything must have a purpose and everything must have an answer (whether currently known or unknown.) However, every answer leads to another question. Every purpose is continually greater than the one before it, and there is no end in sight. There are only two possibilities which can end the cycle of questions: 1) is that there is no answer, or that the answer or cannot be known. An answer which is unacceptable if there is an answer or purpose to everything. 2) is that there is a highest purpose which has been determined. In which case, the entity which has decided this highest purpose for humanity must be greater than humanity, and is effectually a god of sorts.

To accept the rationality that there is indeed a purpose, or an answer which is not possible to be known, then it must be concluded that there is a higher entity than human beings, a god of sorts (or God,) that is the creator of a purpose, or of an answer which is incapable of being known by humans.

Basically, if you assume that there is a God, then it is a theory that proves itself, in fact it is impossible to prove otherwise (under this assumption.) And if you assume that there is no God, then in the end you prove that there is infact a higher entity, which at the very least has the characteristics of a god.

This argument is tailored to the very baseline roots of dissension. I realize that there are other valid arguments with differing levels of discussion which have branched off from these roots and are aimed at the nature of God, the results of a godly existence, the validity of the Bible, etc. etc. etc. However, such discussion is not the purpose of my statements, and require an entirely seperate discussion.
Still, I would venture to say that using branches (religious practices and whether or not they actually associate with a religion, or similar such discussion) as premises with which one argue a root issue (the existence of God, or lack there of) is an invalid approach to an issue which does not properly follow the rules of logic.

Hinduism is an excuse that was made a couple of thousand years ago by the Aryans to manipulate the Indians to becoming slaves of Aryan " Priests" and "warriors." My evidence is hinduism popped up right during the aryan invasion of india. How could a couple of thousand beat millions? Become "religious messengers" to the indians. Tell them only aryans can be priests and warriors, the top classes, because " they know the Gods best" truly to keep racial purity, and to conquer the indians without a single death.
Islam beleive it or not, started out as a group of people worshipping a meteor. Should you beleive a meteor worshipper is intelligent? In AD 500 a clever trickster, Mohammed,shared a story with the muslims that sounds a lot similar to the things in a bible made about 1500 years ago. T
Greek and Roman Mythology have no witnesses, as both of the above have no credible witnesses, but unlike others, were created by some bored guy who started making stories, that were accidently picked up as religion, or made by some guy who wanted to fool a whole nation. Roman religion was a copy of Greek religiong, written in Latin.
Buddhism was made in a protest angainst hinduism, because one man saw the truth behind buddhism, and realized it was made to fool his people. Buddha was not to be worshipped, according to his ideas, but his ideas a way of life.
Jewdaism is a halfway part of christianity.
Science says we're all created by dust that somehow formed of nothing and somehow exploded from nothing somehow making life. Love to hear how that works out in a science experiment. It says we somehow were changed from ape to caveman to person, and that for over 25million years humans were so stupid they didnt know how to read, write, record or communicate.
Your left with christianity and atheism, a religion that says lets just live life. If I was an atheist my motto would be " Whose gonna judge us with we make 20 ladies pregnant." Christianity makes sense, and has credible witnesses, and was even recorded in fragments of roman history.

Wow... tomahawk and reddawg.... you two are perfect examples of the clueless ignorant Christian.

You're not even worth the time it would take to pick apart your posts and disprove almost every point you made.



Honestly, sometimes I wish that I could just live and be content with such a limited understanding of the world

@ reddawgs98 You dont see signs saying Christians are evil and kill christians around your town, or a government trying to disprove Christianity in Senate meetings, do you?

Actually, in some countries, you WILL see these actions. Not in most of the countries, but in some.

And well said reddawgs98.

@Devilnis
the site you gave extracted some context and concepts about the bible and gave proof that these context and concepts are found in other religious text long before Christianity was formed. Most of these are extracted from the new tastament, and aimed at Jesus.

In order to proceed to my defense, you have to understand there are three parts to the Christian God, father, son, and holy spirit, and they are one and only GOD. Also, God is static, he never changes. Jesus didn't come to the world to change things, but to fulfil the commandments and the old testament (Romans:4). Jesus never brought any new ideas about God. (if you want further explanation, read the bible, and you will understand). This is why nothing in the Old Tastament can be contradicted in the New Tastament. They are the same God. Most of the actions of Jesus was prophesized in the Old Tastament, thus, Jesus healed the blind, born of a mortal woman and etc were to fulfil the prophesies. Now the Jews believed in the Old Tastament long before most of the religions and myths mensioned on the site even existed, thus, it may rather seem to me, that other religions borrowed prophesies from the old tastament instead of the other way around. "Christianity is based on the claim that the historical Jesus of Nazareth was also the supernatural Christ, the Saviour. This claim is in turn based on Jewish understandings of the meaning of the Hebrew term Messiah, which, like the Greek "Christ", means "anointed". " (wikipedia). The difference between jews and Christians is that Jews are still waiting for that messiah or christ to arrive, while Christians believes Jesus is that one.

The site also mensioned some Egyptian myth/religion, which may be comparable with the old tastament in date. That can be largely contributed by events listed in Genesis and Exodus. If you read it, you will understand why Egyptian myth/religion is so much similar with Christianity and Judaism.

@ Acewindu
Jesus is the Christian God, he, the Father and the Holy Spirit are one. Thus, the God in the Old and New Testaments are the same. Therefore, the complete bible is in fact the word of Christ, both old and new. (please note, that there is a branch(s), I think the Jehovah's witnesses, of Christianity that disagree with this, but I wrote according to Protestant beliefs)

Also, I agree with you that if you ask about Catholics about their belifs, you might get 100 differnt answers. Just like you can describe an elephant using 100 differnt adjectives. Certain issues can be compromised I agree. HOwever, the core issue cannot be compromised, like if you deny Jesus Christ as your saviour, then you cannot possibly be christian or catholic.

The core difference between Muslim and Christianity (based on my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong) is that Muslim denies Jesus's death. The Father God is the same (pretty much qu'ran and the old tastament is identical), but with differnt names. Muslims consider Mohammed to be the centre prophet, and in ways take up the position Jesus takes in Christianity.

|> Sciences goal is to disprove Christianity in school.

The goal of science is to figure out how the world works. Such a hostile attitude is not very fruitful.

|> In Earth and space class you learn that some how a clump of DUST made life.

How is that less plausible than life being created by god? After all, at least we know for sure dust exists...

|> In life science you learn the meaning of a species is to reproduce to create another generation DO WE LIVE TO DIE?

That's a rather pessimistic way of looking at it. I prefer "the goal of any life form is to continue the existence of the species".

---

|> If we assume that there is no God, there are an innumerable number of inexplicable realities in our lives. How did the universe come into existence? There is no solid explanation that can be proven, only theories. And, at that, there is no real consensus on any single theory.

Just because something cannot be proven does not make it untrue. Take (the existence of) god for example...
Also, it seems you have an issue with "how did the universe come into existence". If you cannot accept the fact that science currently hasn't got the vaguest clue what happened before the big bang (*if* that actually is how the universe began) and think it's a much nicer explanation to have god create the universe, then I have a question for you: where did god come from?

|> Without any greater existence than humanity itself, there is no logical purpose for humanity. Since, if we act for the purpose of ourselves, we eventually die, and if we act for the purpose of our friends, family, or fellow human beings, they too will eventually die. If the purpose of humanity is inevitably and entirely vanishing, is that any purpose at all? And what is the purpose of having the capability of logical and rational thought?

So essentially your answer to the question "why do you believe in god?" is "to give my life meaning"? Fair enough, good answer.
I am wondering though what makes you so sure there even is a purpose; how do you know? Also, it's not just about our friends and family, it's about our children (well, in the grand scheme of things; I bet there's a bunch of people here who don't have children yet). The circle of life: everyone takes care of their children, their grandchildren, if medical technology advances a little more, their great-grandchildren. But they in turn they care of *their* children, so indirectly, we're taking care of the entire future of the whole human race!
The purpose of having logical and rational thought might very well be to figure out how this world works (yes, that means science). And we'd better hurry, because in the grand (and I really mean *grand*) scheme of things, our purpose on this world might be to figure out how to get off of it; current estimates give us four billion year (give or take a couple hundred million) before the sun burns out and we don't want to watch it happen from Earth. So, we'll have to relocate all of humanity (and preferably the flora and fauna too) to somewhere else. Called it the second Noah's Ark if you will, but if you want a purpose, that should be a nice one.

@ Tacticus - an example of a group that gives Christianity a bad name would be the West Baptist Church, who keep holding signs that say "God hates f@gs" etc.

Kanuck made me watch forum.
Here my first and the latest post.
SUNNI ISLAM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Tillich

http://urlybits.com/2012/01/god-hates-figs-2/

Click for awesome!