Cosmic Theories and Philosophies

[Cosmos]

Quote'd from some other site, found it interesting <.<

 

According to The Bible ... The Bible does not discuss not eating meat.

Not eating meat on Friday's during Lent, and not eating between meals on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday are symbolic measures that were created by the Catholic Church.

Now, why can we not eat meat, but we can eat fish? I have been researching this, and from what I have determined thus far, is that this dates back to when the Catholic Church owned many ports in the Mediterrian Sea, and they got a cut of the money from people eating fish. Therefore, if "you eat any meat besides fish on Fridays (because pre Vatican II, it was on ALL Fridays, not just during Lent) it will be a sin" would raise money for the Church. Now, like I said, I am still researching this part, but the first two paragraphs of this are established fact (well, as well established as anything involving religion is ... there's a reason it's called FAITH)

 

yahooooooooo

[Meiscool-2]

 

according to the bible what meat are u alowed to eat on good friday?

Sorry, but I just laughed my *** off when I noticed that that was the title of the topic.

Why did I laugh? Speling erors.

[Cosmos]

errors... <.<

I laughed too, <.<;;

[DragonBlaze]

Originally posted by Drace

quote:

Originally posted by DragonBlaze quote: Well as Drace pointed out, it's supposed to be guideline, not a way to live. Prove it. As it has been pointed out here before, the bible is mainly about interpreatations. I think the bible is more than just a guideline. You can't prove that it was just a guideline just as I cannot prove that it was more than that.

No, it is not. It is NOT more than a guideline. The bible is a guideline just as the Koran and those of the other religions. They´re a way of life in which you can take example of, not live life like. That would be foolish.

Prove it. That is your own personal opinion. Its subjective, you have NOTHING to back that up. If you don't want to believe its nothing besides a guideline, thats fine, but don't bash my religeon because of your own opinon.

 

You impose to much on hard facts and nothing on interperation.

Again, any laws not made through the commandments are laws purposed and interperated by the church.

Thats true to a point, some law outside of the ten commandments are for the most part clear, and some are a little foggy. I looked at the reasoning behind the interpretations, and I agree with them. Whos to say those interpretations are wrong? I'm not a catholic, and I don't believe in a lot of the rules and such that they have, I don't believe Mary was holy, I don't believe that we have to confess our sins to a preacher, and theres a lot of other things I don't agree with.

Just because a church, who dedicates themselves to study a bible, interprets something written in the bible as a sin, is it automatically not a sin because they interpreted it as such?

[Meiscool-2]

Originally posted by DragonBlaze
Just because a church, who dedicates themselves to study a bible, interprets something written in the bible as a sin, is it automatically not a sin because they interpreted it as such?

Thankyou for proving my point. People (the church) say/s it's a sin. God has yet to confirm if it's a sin or not. In the moral values of people, it's a sin, but we don't know as far as the moral values of God.

Hence meaning, it doesn't mean that's it's not a sin in God's eyes, but it doesn't need to mean that it is a sin. It's undetermined.

[DragonBlaze]

I can agree with that

[Tomi]

Originally posted by I Have a Sandwich

quote:

Originally posted by DragonBlaze 'Two horny teens' would be a sin in God's eyes. From what we know about God, he wouldn't have his son born from a sin. Plain and simple.

No, 'two horny teens' would be a sin in mans eyes. Its like how being gay is a 'sin' yet its no where in the bible. 'Sins' were all determined by the church, not by God.

I know this was a while ago, but the bible does say "A man shall not lay with another man."  I think it was in Leviticus or something.  My friend found it during our scriptures class.

Also, some other responses (yeah, I've gone to good catholic schools all my life, so I have learned lots of this kind of stuff).

A sin is not determined by the Church.  Sin is doing something wrong even though you know it is wrong.  Also, what is wrong is not determined by the church.  Morality is based on reality, in its purest form, it is not subjective.  When something is death-dealing (in some way) rather than life giving, it is wrong.  Morality is determined by the humanness of the action.  I'm taking a whole class right now on morality, so I might be able to explain better later.

[Drace]

Originally posted by DragonBlaze

quote:

Originally posted by Drace quote: Originally posted by DragonBlaze quote: Well as Drace pointed out, it's supposed to be guideline, not a way to live. Prove it. As it has been pointed out here before, the bible is mainly about interpreatations. I think the bible is more than just a guideline. You can't prove that it was just a guideline just as I cannot prove that it was more than that. No, it is not. It is NOT more than a guideline. The bible is a guideline just as the Koran and those of the other religions. They´re a way of life in which you can take example of, not live life like. That would be foolish.

Prove it. That is your own personal opinion. Its subjective, you have NOTHING to back that up. If you don't want to believe its nothing besides a guideline, thats fine, but don't bash my religeon because of your own opinon.

Only one who should prove anything are you. YOU prove that God wants what the bible says. I have to prove nothing. If God comes to speak to a million people at a giant square and it´s caught on several tapes and live tv and he says the bible is more than a guideline, THEN I´m willing to give you your right. But God has not done anything like that. You have no prove whatsoever that the bible is his command, that the bible is his will and that we should follow it till dead. Now, you PROVE that God wants it that way. And don´t say: "The bible says..." cause then you're already out of this discussion.

[Moosetroop11]

Here's a better example.

"Thou shalt not jump up and down and claim thou art a piggie after sundown"

Tell me the difference between what I've just said and the rules of the bible- both were written by humans. In fact the main difference is that lots of people believe in the bible. As far as I can see, religion is a massive case of going with the grain and believing what everyone else does.

If you guys DO jump up and down and claim you're a piggie after sundown, you'll go to smell after death. IT'S A GIANT TOILET OF SUFFERING

[WarxePB]

There's a problem with your arguments - Drace and MT are saying "Prove that God exists or the Bible was written by Him", but it's impossible to do that. However, it's also not possible to disprove it - therefore, even though you don't have any proof, you still can't rule it out, because you don't know what happened however many years ago. It would be like a scientist saying "Well, after a careful analysis of this soil, I don't see any iron ore, so threfore iron must not exist."

The way I see it, God does exist somewhere, even if it's not here. I think that every possible outcome exists in the universe somewhere, and since one of those outcomes is an omnipotent, omniscient being (but maybe not to our understanding of those words), there is technically a God. Of course, there's no proof of that, but as I said above, there's no proof that there isn't. A crappy justification, I know, but it's the best I can do.

[I Have a Sandwich]

Watch Dogma. There's a sopt where Serendipity discusses why God was always a man, and say that its because the wtriters were men, they interpreted it as they wanted, thus God being a man. The bible itself says that man is imperfect, whats to say the imperfect writers who channeled him imperfectly copied his words?

[Apex]

Originally posted by I Have a Sandwich
Watch Dogma. There's a sopt where Serendipity discusses why God was always a man, and say that its because the wtriters were men, they interpreted it as they wanted, thus God being a man. The bible itself says that man is imperfect, whats to say the imperfect writers who channeled him imperfectly copied his words?

Yeah and Chris Rock is the 13th diciple.

Yeah, it's a good movie.

[SaiKar]

lol at the "God didn't write the Bible" comments in a Bible discussion.

 

If God comes to speak to a million people at a giant square and it´s caught on several tapes and live tv and he says the bible is more than a guideline, THEN I´m willing to give you your right. But God has not done anything like that.

In the Bible there are a few stories where he does just that. I personally like the one where God sets a bunch of wet logs on fire with a huge towering pillar to prove to a bunch of heretics He exists. I don't have the reference offhand (I was never that good of a Bible student) but I'll find it if you want.

Think about it though. Even of God could appear to us (the Bible makes various references that looking at His face means death, but we'll skip that for now) and was caught by major news networks, you'd have millions, maybe billions of skeptics. Some sort of elaborate hoax, they would say. Government-religio conspiracy to restore the faith. You can fake anything with computers, some would point out, and it's true enough these days. Not actually God, others would claim. Who REALLY knows what God should look like?

So what would that prove? It would prove nothing to people that don't want to see it.

[Drace]

Originally posted by SaiKar
lol at the "God didn't write the Bible" comments in a Bible discussion.

 

quote:

If God comes to speak to a million people at a giant square and it´s caught on several tapes and live tv and he says the bible is more than a guideline, THEN I´m willing to give you your right. But God has not done anything like that.

In the Bible there are a few stories where he does just that. I personally like the one where God sets a bunch of wet logs on fire with a huge towering pillar to prove to a bunch of heretics He exists. I don't have the reference offhand (I was never that good of a Bible student) but I'll find it if you want.

Think about it though. Even of God could appear to us (the Bible makes various references that looking at His face means death, but we'll skip that for now) and was caught by major news networks, you'd have millions, maybe billions of skeptics. Some sort of elaborate hoax, they would say. Government-religio conspiracy to restore the faith. You can fake anything with computers, some would point out, and it's true enough these days. Not actually God, others would claim. Who REALLY knows what God should look like?

So what would that prove? It would prove nothing to people that don't want to see it.

And here we ago again. "In the Bible...".

Erm... haven't you read anything but that what I said?


To Warxinator: I could respond to you with saying stuff like "God's not scientificly proven so I can disprove that he didn't wrote the bible" and stuff like that, but with writting this, you can scan your brain for similiar things so I have to write less.
Ready?
Steady?
Do it.
. . .

[Meiscool-2]

Originally posted by DragonBlaze
I can agree with that

Thx

I can honestly say that I agree with you in the thought that God doesn't want us to have sex untill we are wed, but there being no proof, I had to argue it out.

Now, back to the original cause of this religious decussion; Jesus is a Nazi.