So what's the RIGHT answer?

[Anonymous]

Treat others as you wish to be treated and forget the supernatural stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can talk about what makes sense to us now. Then we'll find out after death.

OP, if you aren't among the curious, then don't read these threads. Spend your time talking about Kim K's butt on the books/celebrities forum. Easy.

I'm curious as to how otherwise rational adults can so strongly believe in any of this especially when they're quick to discredit other versions of "the truth" eerily similar to their own.

Real or not, at least you can see Kim K's butt and it doesn't ask for blind allegiance.

Does it make you feel superior to make absolutist statements of your own on an anonymous forum? I hope so, because otherwise your posts are rather pointless.

If my comments are so upsetting, ask yourself why? I agree the delivery is blunt but I'm trying to make a point. I don't feel superior, I feel sane.

Are you the poster who always writes, "I upset you! I know I upset you!"? Because you're funny. As in, we're laughing at you for thinking that you've ever said anything original, and for your pathetic need to feel your trolling had an impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can talk about what makes sense to us now. Then we'll find out after death.

OP, if you aren't among the curious, then don't read these threads. Spend your time talking about Kim K's butt on the books/celebrities forum. Easy.

I'm curious as to how otherwise rational adults can so strongly believe in any of this especially when they're quick to discredit other versions of "the truth" eerily similar to their own.

Real or not, at least you can see Kim K's butt and it doesn't ask for blind allegiance.

No I'm not.

Would Jesus laugh at the trolls?

Does it make you feel superior to make absolutist statements of your own on an anonymous forum? I hope so, because otherwise your posts are rather pointless.

If my comments are so upsetting, ask yourself why? I agree the delivery is blunt but I'm trying to make a point. I don't feel superior, I feel sane.

Are you the poster who always writes, "I upset you! I know I upset you!"? Because you're funny. As in, we're laughing at you for thinking that you've ever said anything original, and for your pathetic need to feel your trolling had an impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can talk about what makes sense to us now. Then we'll find out after death.

OP, if you aren't among the curious, then don't read these threads. Spend your time talking about Kim K's butt on the books/celebrities forum. Easy.

I'm curious as to how otherwise rational adults can so strongly believe in any of this especially when they're quick to discredit other versions of "the truth" eerily similar to their own.

Real or not, at least you can see Kim K's butt and it doesn't ask for blind allegiance.

Who is "we"? You and all your internet friends?

Does it make you feel superior to make absolutist statements of your own on an anonymous forum? I hope so, because otherwise your posts are rather pointless.

If my comments are so upsetting, ask yourself why? I agree the delivery is blunt but I'm trying to make a point. I don't feel superior, I feel sane.

Are you the poster who always writes, "I upset you! I know I upset you!"? Because you're funny. As in, we're laughing at you for thinking that you've ever said anything original, and for your pathetic need to feel your trolling had an impact.

[Anonymous]

How about the fact that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, appeared again to many and then ascended into Heaven? Diety there is rather convincing to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about the fact that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, appeared again to many and then ascended into Heaven? Diety there is rather convincing to me.

The "fact"? Really - they can't even prove he existed! There are no mentions of him in the chronicles of the time, except as the Nazarene. There are more mentions of his brother than of him. Paul never even met him, and was disciplined by the church founded by the brother of the Nazarene. Are you kidding? Fact - I think not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about the fact that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, appeared again to many and then ascended into Heaven? Diety there is rather convincing to me.

The "fact"? Really - they can't even prove he existed! There are no mentions of him in the chronicles of the time, except as the Nazarene. There are more mentions of his brother than of him. Paul never even met him, and was disciplined by the church founded by the brother of the Nazarene. Are you kidding? Fact - I think not.

Well, considering all the ways people now misrepresent Christ, I think there's a very plausible reason that there are no other contemporary accounts of Christ. I suppose you'd accept proof of Jesus existing if there were "chronicles of the time" that said he was just a guy and didn't care about whether you sinned or worshipped God in truth. The Gospel accounts present a clear picture of Christ as the Son of God, God Himself, and the Savior of mankind. I think a God who cared that much about you and me and everyone else would make sure that the accounts we have all agree on who He was. We have four very detailed accounts of the life of Christ. I'm sure it would be nice to produce a gravesite or something, but we can't do that because of the Resurrection and the Ascension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

Half-man, half-bird moon gods or whatever are not the same as real, actual people, about whom there is a historical record. Please try actually reading the Bible. You'll see that it is very specific in its dates and geography. To call it "mythology" is absurd and willfully ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about the fact that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, appeared again to many and then ascended into Heaven? Diety there is rather convincing to me.

The "fact"? Really - they can't even prove he existed! There are no mentions of him in the chronicles of the time, except as the Nazarene. There are more mentions of his brother than of him. Paul never even met him, and was disciplined by the church founded by the brother of the Nazarene. Are you kidding? Fact - I think not.

Actually, Paul did meet Christ. Read Acts 9.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

Half-man, half-bird moon gods or whatever are not the same as real, actual people, about whom there is a historical record. Please try actually reading the Bible. You'll see that it is very specific in its dates and geography. To call it "mythology" is absurd and willfully ignorant.

A virgin birth to a god is *not* absurd? And not mythology? LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

Half-man, half-bird moon gods or whatever are not the same as real, actual people, about whom there is a historical record. Please try actually reading the Bible. You'll see that it is very specific in its dates and geography. To call it "mythology" is absurd and willfully ignorant.

A virgin birth to a god is *not* absurd? And not mythology? LOL.

Matthew 1 and Luke 3 fully recount in great detail the exact lineage of Christ on both Mary's side and Joseph's side. The book of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) foretells the virgin birth 800 years before the fact. Matthew 2 recounts the people of Bethlehem being fully aware of the prophecies of Christ's birth from the Scriptures (what is now the Old Testament). Isaiah 53, also hundreds of years in advance, clearly foretells the crucifixion. The Old Testament is filled with both prophecies and foreshadowings of Christ. You may choose not to believe who Christ is, but this is very much different from mythology.

[Anonymous]

Jesus' resurrection was witnessed by many (Paul later estimated over 500), many of whom later died for their belief because they would not recant what they saw. If you put 500 people on a witness stand in a modern trial and they all identified the same guy as Jesus, and that he rose from the dead, then it would be considered the truth and a fact based on today's standards. Many scholars do believe in a historical Jesus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

Half-man, half-bird moon gods or whatever are not the same as real, actual people, about whom there is a historical record. Please try actually reading the Bible. You'll see that it is very specific in its dates and geography. To call it "mythology" is absurd and willfully ignorant.

A virgin birth to a god is *not* absurd? And not mythology? LOL.

Matthew 1 and Luke 3 fully recount in great detail the exact lineage of Christ on both Mary's side and Joseph's side. The book of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) foretells the virgin birth 800 years before the fact. Matthew 2 recounts the people of Bethlehem being fully aware of the prophecies of Christ's birth from the Scriptures (what is now the Old Testament). Isaiah 53, also hundreds of years in advance, clearly foretells the crucifixion. The Old Testament is filled with both prophecies and foreshadowings of Christ. You may choose not to believe who Christ is, but this is very much different from mythology.

I stand by my common. That people decipher some kind of difference between Biblical "prophecies" and Greco-Roman ones (or Mayan, or Zorastrian, or any other one for that matter, or the Biblical copying) is amazing. Just amazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how in pretty much every religion, God didn't have daughters, didn't make women prophets, or reveal prophecies to them. Hmmm...

I think Zeus had daughters, but no one believes in him anymore. I wonder when people stopped believing in the Greek gods. how did it happen? How long did it take?

It's fascinating to me how people look at Greek mythology, and easily dismiss it as BS, but somehow put more credibility in the Abrahamic mythologies. How is it any different??

Half-man, half-bird moon gods or whatever are not the same as real, actual people, about whom there is a historical record. Please try actually reading the Bible. You'll see that it is very specific in its dates and geography. To call it "mythology" is absurd and willfully ignorant.

A virgin birth to a god is *not* absurd? And not mythology? LOL.

Matthew 1 and Luke 3 fully recount in great detail the exact lineage of Christ on both Mary's side and Joseph's side. The book of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) foretells the virgin birth 800 years before the fact. Matthew 2 recounts the people of Bethlehem being fully aware of the prophecies of Christ's birth from the Scriptures (what is now the Old Testament). Isaiah 53, also hundreds of years in advance, clearly foretells the crucifixion. The Old Testament is filled with both prophecies and foreshadowings of Christ. You may choose not to believe who Christ is, but this is very much different from mythology.

I stand by my common. That people decipher some kind of difference between Biblical "prophecies" and Greco-Roman ones (or Mayan, or Zorastrian, or any other one for that matter, or the Biblical copying) is amazing. Just amazing.

Biblical prophecies come true. That would be the difference.