Why is it always the Hebrew god?

[Richard]

Why do Christians always try to deny/dispute science when it comes to the 'evolution v creation' stuff, yet never seem to consider that it could be the work of some other deity. How is Christianity 'the truth' when there is just as much evidence (or lack thereof) to justify the world being the work of the Taoist gods, for example? It is always assumed that anything unexplainable is either a) an unstudied natural phenomen or hoax/mistaken identy, or b) an miracle of 'God'. Who's to say it isn't a miracle of Vishna, or Ahura Mazda....?

[Ahiga]

A big topic.

One of the arguements for atheists and agnostics (Fence sitters unite! ) is that it seems so absurd that one religion of millions could be correct and thusly nullify millions of other people, and their dozens of other faiths.

There are plenty of means to explain it, if looked upon by a less provincially-minded Person of any of those religions. Their deity could have been interprited around the world in different ways, especially since some of the core beliefs (At least to my knowledge, those of Zorasterism, Islam, Judaism and Christianity) all resemble one another. I recall the Simpsons making fun of the Christian Novels "Left behind" and in a movie of their paraody which Homer and his kid's watch, a Buddhist Monk is lamenting during the Rapture that he thought "All religions were a path to the one god" or something along those lines.

They say it is not a miracle of Vishna or Ahura Mazda because obviously, they do not believe in those beings. To them, Ahura Mazda may be a misinterprited (In their eyes, at least) notion of their God, just as Islam might see Allah as the correct notion of the Christian "God". They wouldnt' say Vishna, because to the untrained eye, Hinduism is Polytheistic (As I recall, its not, per se. I think all their 'gods' derivate from a Brahma or Brahman, which makes it somewhat Monotheistic). Regardless of why, they simply say it's a Miracle of Christ or Christianity's view of God because that is their own provincial view.

You could perhaps compare their belief that Christianity is the 'correct' religion with just about any other religion, because the most of them do follow in the same idea. I guess it's like different scientists trying to dispute their theories on life beyond earth. With no solid proof, it really relies upon your own feelings and interpritations of the subject. A large amount of Christians believe theirs is the right religion, as I'm sure Hindu's or Buddhists or Muslims might. We're just amidst a large number of them (Most of us, at least), so we are witness to their belief the most.

[imb39]

A big topic.

One of the arguements for atheists and agnostics (Fence sitters unite! ) is that it seems so absurd that one religion of millions could be correct and thusly nullify millions of other people, and their dozens of other faiths.

Christians have already come to terms with this. This is what matters, from their standpoint.

There are plenty of means to explain it, if looked upon by a less provincially-minded Person of any of those religions. Their deity could have been interprited around the world in different ways, especially since some of the core beliefs (At least to my knowledge, those of Zorasterism, Islam, Judaism and Christianity) all resemble one another. I recall the Simpsons making fun of the Christian Novels "Left behind" and in a movie of their paraody which Homer and his kid's watch, a Buddhist Monk is lamenting during the Rapture that he thought "All religions were a path to the one god" or something along those lines.

They say it is not a miracle of Vishna or Ahura Mazda because obviously, they do not believe in those beings. To them, Ahura Mazda may be a misinterprited (In their eyes, at least) notion of their God, just as Islam might see Allah as the correct notion of the Christian "God". They wouldnt' say Vishna, because to the untrained eye, Hinduism is Polytheistic (As I recall, its not, per se. I think all their 'gods' derivate from a Brahma or Brahman, which makes it somewhat Monotheistic). Regardless of why, they simply say it's a Miracle of Christ or Christianity's view of God because that is their own provincial view.

You could perhaps compare their belief that Christianity is the 'correct' religion with just about any other religion, because the most of them do follow in the same idea. I guess it's like different scientists trying to dispute their theories on life beyond earth. With no solid proof, it really relies upon your own feelings and interpritations of the subject. A large amount of Christians believe theirs is the right religion, as I'm sure Hindu's or Buddhists or Muslims might. We're just amidst a large number of them (Most of us, at least), so we are witness to their belief the most.

From the Christian point of view, I was involved in a debate that hung on similar issues. This was one of my replies...

Again, you must look at the Bible for your wisdom. Acts 14:15 -16 says,

“Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to the living God, who made the sky and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them; who in the generations gone by allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways.”

This shows us that (with the exception of the Jews) the lack of knowledge of God is punishment itself from God. The lack of knowledge of God, therefore, is not a sin in of itself – and so cannot be punished as such. This is the opinion put forward by St. Thomas; perhaps, you question that, sir?

I ought to point out that I was in character.

For Civs who might want to read the debate (I enjoyed it), it's in the Symposium, here.

[O'brien the Protector]

becuase they belive in christainity. The main part of being a christian is beliving in christ and only christ ( with the expetion of his dad, his spirit, and depending on the sect, him as bread). they dont belive that toasist gods exist, or any other god but their own ( thats what faith and belief mean). Unless im missing something this seems rather obvious.

[danzig]

Yeah gotta agree I dont get the point of the question, they believe in Christianity and its belief system so why would they believe it was 'another' diety? You are also generalizing because quite a few christians dont 'fight science' and believe in evolution, its just some loud obnixous types that do that.

[Richard]

I was meaning those ones=). Sorry I am just tired today, the question probably is kinda dumb lol. I suppose from a Christian point of view it makes sense not to believe in anoy other deity. I was coming from the non-religious point of view saying that 'why should this one religion be correct and all the other be false' I suppose. But yeah case closed lol.

[Turbo]

Why do Christians always try to deny/dispute science when it comes to the 'evolution v creation' stuff, yet never seem to consider that it could be the work of some other deity. How is Christianity 'the truth' when there is just as much evidence (or lack thereof) to justify the world being the work of the Taoist gods, for example? It is always assumed that anything unexplainable is either a) an unstudied natural phenomen or hoax/mistaken identy, or b) an miracle of 'God'. Who's to say it isn't a miracle of Vishna, or Ahura Mazda....?

Richard,

We wouldn't be Christians if we attributed a miracle to some other deity.

Why do we Christians have to sacrifice our beliefs just because an imperfect science frequently contridicts itself with laws that are routinely broken by miracles or other unexplained phenomena? Why do we Christians have to accept that some other deity other than Christ may be performing acts that we believe are attributable to Christ and God?

The point I am making is that Christians also have the right of individual choice to believe in Christ. However, there is tremendous bias and bigotry that exists out there that attempts to ridicule anything that we as Christians say. How about giving us the basic right of freedom of belief and expression?

[Kanaric]

Why do we Christians have to sacrifice our beliefs just because an imperfect science frequently contridicts itself with laws that are routinely broken by miracles or other unexplained phenomena?

Imperfect science? What is that supposed to mean?

I could prove more things in science than you could prove in religion. Sorry but something you can offer no proof of what so ever is the definition of imperfect. In science I can prove many, many things.

The point I am making is that Christians also have the right of individual choice to believe in Christ.

No, if you dont believe in Christ you are simply NOT a Christian.

However, there is tremendous bias and bigotry that exists out there that attempts to ridicule anything that we as Christians say.

Because they do that with everything everyone else says? Look at what you say about science, for example.

Only manufactured bigotry exists. Any group that control probably 80% or MORE of a country they life in and claims to be "persecuted" are seriously using that as some kind of a propoganda tool, lies thats all it is.

I get highly annoyed when Christians claim this non stop when the the GREAT majority of the US is IN FACT Christian. Just different degrees of how they take their beliefs. Like i'd be a low tier christian, I believe in god went to church consntantly and go occasionally now, etc. I dont see any of this made up BS persecution people talk about.

edit: If anyone is being persecuted its scientists and science, with people making up conspiracy theories, misconceptions, etc about things they never bothered to look up or even READ.

[Turbo]

The Hebrew God is the same yet a different God from the one Christianity worships. Christianity believes in the Holy Trinity - the father (God), the son (Christ), and the Holy Ghost.

[GambleFish]

Imperfect science? What is that supposed to mean?

I could prove more things in science than you could prove in religion. Sorry but something you can offer no proof of what so ever is the definition of imperfect. In science I can prove many, many things.


No, if you dont believe in Christ you are simply NOT a Christian.



Because they do that with everything everyone else says? Look at what you say about science, for example.

Only manufactured bigotry exists. Any group that control probably 80% or MORE of a country they life in and claims to be "persecuted" are seriously using that as some kind of a propoganda tool, lies thats all it is.

I get highly annoyed when Christians claim this non stop when the the GREAT majority of the US is IN FACT Christian. Just different degrees of how they take their beliefs. Like i'd be a low tier christian, I believe in god went to church consntantly and go occasionally now, etc. I dont see any of this made up BS persecution people talk about.

edit: If anyone is being persecuted its scientists and science, with people making up conspiracy theories, misconceptions, etc about things they never bothered to look up or even READ.

Nobody replied to this post, but it was one of the best ones, IMO.

I say evolution can't prove everything, but creation can't prove anything. That about sums it up for moi.

I personnally am not religious for a few reasons, but one of the biggest is that most members of a religion say that only their religion is right, and knock off billions of other people. It's all so ridiculous.

[Fedaiken]

Why did you only just quote other people Turbo?

What was your point?

[Turbo]

Why did you only just quote other people Turbo?

What was your point?

I was trying to figure out how to correctly quote. I was hoping no one would notice. I finally got it right.

[Atheist Peace]

Why do Christians always try to deny/dispute science when it comes to the 'evolution v creation' stuff, yet never seem to consider that it could be the work of some other deity. How is Christianity 'the truth' when there is just as much evidence (or lack thereof) to justify the world being the work of the Taoist gods, for example? It is always assumed that anything unexplainable is either a) an unstudied natural phenomen or hoax/mistaken identy, or b) an miracle of 'God'. Who's to say it isn't a miracle of Vishna, or Ahura Mazda....?

Because they're ignorant and naive. Religious people somehow think that they can justify believing in one god rather than another. If one god exists, every god ever created does too, every single thing that anyone has claimed to exist, and has the same amount of proof (none), must exist if one such thing exists.

[Turbo]

Because they're ignorant and naive. Religious people somehow think that they can justify believing in one god rather than another. If one god exists, every god ever created does too, every single thing that anyone has claimed to exist, and has the same amount of proof (none), must exist if one such thing exists.

So you are the defining person for what is ignorant and naive. Because religion and Christianity are beliefs that are not to your liking, you think it shows intelligence to label the religious 'ignorant' and 'naive'. It would ofcourse have nothing to do with the fact that you are an atheist, would it?

[Ahiga]

So you are the defining person for what is ignorant and naive. Because religion and Christianity are beliefs that are not to your liking, you think it shows intelligence to label the religious 'ignorant' and 'naive'. It would ofcourse have nothing to do with the fact that you are an atheist, would it?

It doesn't matter if hes an atheist or not. Any religion that seems to believe that their religion is the only correct one, and that they have the answers which all others do not is what is ignorant and naive, not the belief in religion itself.

I'd let him answer though.

[Atheist Peace]

So you are the defining person for what is ignorant and naive. Because religion and Christianity are beliefs that are not to your liking, you think it shows intelligence to label the religious 'ignorant' and 'naive'. It would ofcourse have nothing to do with the fact that you are an atheist, would it?

I'm saying that most religious people (like you, probably) are ignorant (meaning "Unaware or uninformed." according to the dictionary) of the fact that all religions are rationally equal, and if one believes in one of them, they must logically believe in all of them.

[Turbo]

I'm saying that most religious people (like you, probably) are ignorant (meaning "Unaware or uninformed." according to the dictionary) of the fact that all religions are rationally equal, and if one believes in one of them, they must logically believe in all of them.

Sorry my friend but it doesn't work that way. You are trying to logically explain religious views which are grounded in faith. Belief is an experience, and faith is trust in that experience. It is hard to explain to someone who has a closed mind to the subject, but it is more of a revelation and a certain knowledge that doesn't require rational explanation or logical thought. Think of it in terms of rationalizing your love for your child. Using your analogy you must love all other children as much as you love your own.

[Kscott]

Because they're ignorant and naive. Religious people somehow think that they can justify believing in one god rather than another. If one god exists, every god ever created does too, every single thing that anyone has claimed to exist, and has the same amount of proof (none), must exist if one such thing exists.

No, I could claim I have an enourmous Penis, and I have a tiny penis. You have no evidence to which one is true, however, they both arent true..

You logic is flawed.

[Bwaho]

Is your issue with Jews in general or the fact that the Jews were chosen as God's people? No reason you should be troubled if it is just a case of brainwashing as you say.

supremacists are not the best thing is this world. Personally I don't think there is a master race so I don't like when people advertise themselves as such. And I have reason to be troubled since people believe in it.

[Søren]

I'm saying that most religious people (like you, probably) are ignorant (meaning "Unaware or uninformed." according to the dictionary) of the fact that all religions are rationally equal, and if one believes in one of them, they must logically believe in all of them.

That's a rather odd leap in logic.

To assume that you first have to take as your premise that all religions are false, in which case, yes, correct, all will be false.

However, if one of them happens to be true, then your premise that all of them are false goes out of the window, so you can't logiclly continue to apply your hypothesis that al religions would then be true.