God vs. Religion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Liebling:-)))

Sussi *7.7.86 - 18.6.09*
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
31,022
Reaction score
9
God vs. Religion


It's not a sermon, and nor is it an attack. It is just what I think, and that shouldn't bother or influence anybody else.

For the purposes of this article, I will be saying God to mean all gods, the Bible to mean all holy books, etc. This is because I am technically Christian, and so these are the things that come more naturally to me, not because I believe Christianity to be superior to any other religions.

People have asked me many times (as they ask everyone else, I suppose) which religion I belong to. I’m a Methodist. But only on paper.

I don’t go to church, or pray or anything like that. I’m not even sure if God exists. But I respect the ideas of the religion, and of other religions. The problem I have is this: Man made religions.

God may have made the Earth, and all of space and all creatures everywhere, but it was Man who wrote a book about it. God may have sent a flood to cleanse the earth, and have saved only the few who were pure, but it was Man who spread the word. God may have told us he was everywhere and in everything and that he would know everything you thought and hear everything he said, but it was Man who set up an organisation and told us that if you wanted to speak to God, you must do it through them.

Man can and has taken the words of God and used them to suit himself. He looked at this newfound religion, and thought: “here is an opportunity to gain wealth and power” and He took it.

Now you may be thinking now about your parish vicar, who is paid little, and who only tries to help his community. I believe that most vicars want little more than to help others in a kind Christian way, and I have no problem with that at all. In fact, the world would benefit from more people who are willing to devote their lives to others.

What I mean, is the Church. Vicars may not have wealth or power now, but years ago, everyone would listen to anything that he had to say. A church could have run a country. If in the 1800s, the Pope had said that everyone should support the Liberals in the General election, then the Liberals would have won office.

Think of the Spanish Inquisition. They did some terrible things to people, and they were allowed to, because they were working for the Church. People died through their tortures, and it was ok, because the Inquisition was doing God’s will. Even though God told you not to kill.

It bothers me that you should go to Church every Sunday morning, and that if you want to talk to Him, you must put your hands together and say “Dear God . . .”

If God is everywhere, and knows everything, then why do we have to do these specific things in order for Him to hear us?

Another thing. Have you ever wondered why there is a Hell, if God will forgive you for anything you do?

Well, imagine the Catholic was a television company. Imagine it is the BBC. For years, people have been watching its channels, because it is the only thing on. But now new channels like ITV and C4 have appeared, and the BBC’s ratings are slipping. They need a new program.

The Catholic church was attracting fewer and fewer people, and, in the 1500s, they created Hell, and told everyone that if they did not live a Christian life, they would spend eternity there, and that if babies died before they were christened, they would end up in Limbo. Needless to say, the Catholics were back in business.

Organised religions are like corporations, competing with each other. Is that what God wanted? So I say I am not religious, because I will not belong to these man-made things. If God had written the Bible and ordered the printing presses of the world to run some copies off, then I would have no problem. However, He didn’t. Some geezer did a few thousand years ago. To be quite frank, I could have written it. At that time, people believed these things. We could have had a religion each.

Look at Jesus. Now it is proved that he existed, although who knows if he was the Son of God.

The thing is, two thousand years ago; he supposedly did some stuff, and told us he could do it because the Lord sent him. People believed him (well, enough of them to start a religion anyway).

If he had done the same 1600 years later at least one member of the audience would have said, “He’s a witch; burn him!”

If he had done it last week, some member of the audience would have said, “he’s good, but I prefer David Blaine.

I actually find the idea of a god (or gods) to be quite easy to believe. After all, people from all over the world - on continents that hadn’t even begun to communicate - had similar ideas. Perhaps Gods were actually aliens, as in the film ‘Stargate,’ or maybe they were another species of Human, which had superior powers but have since died out (maybe the same as started theories of Wizards, Elves, Pixies, Leprechauns and the like). Perhaps they were just a way of explaining what could not otherwise be explained.

Either way, I’m not saying any of this as an attack on organised religion, I merely wanted to try and explain why it is that I am not religious. I find it hard to do, but I have tried anyway.

God vs. Religion

:gpost: to those link. I have the same feeling as the link author.

It hit my head and remember those history about the people who did good miracle to save people's life with herbs, etc have to sentence to death because they think it's evil or witch by religions...

It does the same with Jesus who did miracle things, sentenced to death by Romans Religion leaders.

The people killed each other over their different religion beliefs. It still continue at present time...


What do you think of this?
 
When I mentioned what I thought about the bible (which I mean a book) in general way but the some people thought I talk about God... I only stated a book, not God as spirit... :dunno2:

Question:

How could the bible know me and my limit?

Should I get my children to follow what the bible says instead of do what I say?

Should the bible fix the limit on my children, not me?

That's what I am trying to say that the bible is a book, everyone likes to read and learn.

Which bibles should we take?

The many religion authors wrote the bible differently...

Example accord several different bibles like that:
  1. A man is allow to marry more than one woman.
  2. Married is supposed for woman and man only.
  3. The parents arrange the wedding for their children.
  4. The religion priest is not allow to marry
  5. The other religion priest is allow to marry
  6. and go on....

How should we know which right bible because we have many religions here in the world?
 
Last edited:
I disgree with whoever wrote that, people have a bunch of imagations running in that mind of theirs and think they know everything when they do not. The bible claims to be the very words of God, if anyone don't bothered to read the whole Bible to understand it, then they don't know anything about the Bible. Now if the bible is so fake then tell me why do you see a red print in the bible? Those red prints are words written by Jesus. In the bible has been proven to be totally accurate in its portrayal of historical events, we were not even there to witness those events, how would we know what's the truth and what's not the truth unless you were there? Some of those people that's been mention in the bible were there, they told their story.

God can communicate to the world in any way He wants. He could sent an angel to everyone. But he has chosen written communication which would be in the bible. God is a spirit he can put his words into a fleash and blood humans and the chosen human authors would write down God's words. It would be nothing less than the word of God. The Holy Spirit communicated through human writers the very words of God. This is how it is done.
 
I disgree with whoever wrote that, people have a bunch of imagations running in that mind of theirs and think they know everything when they do not.

Each person use her/his theory after focus on the different bibles where religion authors interpreted differently. It doesn't mean that you or other person are wrong but I see nothing wrong when the people use their theory on the bibles.


The bible claims to be the very words of God, if anyone don't bothered to read the whole Bible to understand it, then they don't know anything about the Bible. Now if the bible is so fake then tell me why do you see a red print in the bible? Those red prints are words written by Jesus. In the bible has been proven to be totally accurate in its portrayal of historical events, we were not even there to witness those events, how would we know what's the truth and what's not the truth unless you were there? Some of those people that's been mention in the bible were there, they told their story.

Which bible we can trust to?

How do we know which accurate translation on which bible?


God can communicate to the world in any way He wants. He could sent an angel to everyone. But he has chosen written communication which would be in the bible. God is a spirit he can put his words into a fleash and blood humans and the chosen human authors would write down God's words. It would be nothing less than the word of God. The Holy Spirit communicated through human writers the very words of God. This is how it is done.

I would beleive 100% if there're only ONE bible, the God gave, not different bibles with different translation where the different human religion authors made? Which accurate bible?

Which Bible Can We Trust
 
He is entitled to his opinion on his beliefs about God, yet it shows how quick some people are to make similar judgements, people choose to live their lives by whether God exisits or not, some prefer God to show them that He's real, some couldn't firgure it out or simply because they do not care or believe , but the truth is, it's matter a lot more than they might think. The Bible stated that God is real, and that He is the Creator of all, one need look no further than the first sentence of the Bible to be reminded, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." .

The Bible is the very Word of God as He is the author, He chose certain individuals to write down exactly what He wanted to tell humankind. as Peter wrote "Above all, you must understand that no prohecy in Scripture ever came from the prophets themselves or because they wanted to prophesy. It was the Holy Spirit who moved the prophets to speak from God" (2 Peter 1:20-21). Hebrew or Greek language, their words has been carefully translated into many language. Today we can read God's message in our own language- English.
 
I'm not going to be sucked into this again. We went round and round about this topic before (probably one of the reasons the Religion forum was closed in the first place).

I'll make my statement but I'm not going to argue. No one is ever convinced by arguing. If anyone wants to know all the facts and details, they can read the original posts (no reruns here, ha).

The Scriptures of the Old and the New Testaments are plenarily and verbally-inspired by God without any admixture of error in truth; that the Bible is reliable in science, history and every other matter it discusses; and that the Bible is the supreme and final authority in all matters of faith and practice.

Either a person accepts it by faith or doesn't accept it. No one can force someone to believe. If a person's heart and mind are humble and open, he or she can believe. If a person's heart and mind are hardened (thru pride, fear, or bitterness) and closed then he or she probably won't believe. That's between the individual and God. People can present the Gospel but only the Holy Spirit can convict the heart, and only the individual can accept or reject.
 
I only read the New International Version (NIV) because they have real life stories plus words of Christ in red letters.
 
I'm not going to be sucked into this again. We went round and round about this topic before (probably one of the reasons the Religion forum was closed in the first place).

I'll make my statement but I'm not going to argue. No one is ever convinced by arguing. If anyone wants to know all the facts and details, they can read the original posts (no reruns here, ha).

Yes I know and understand.

I only want you know that I am not here to fight with anyone or prove anyone wrong or name kind of religious or bibles but question why we have kind of bibles like that who interpreated differently like what I said above list about marriage, etc.

It's normal that people need the fact about the bible... which bibles we can trust to...



The Scriptures of the Old and the New Testaments are plenarily and verbally-inspired by God without any admixture of error in truth; that the Bible is reliable in science, history and every other matter it discusses; and that the Bible is the supreme and final authority in all matters of faith and practice.


Yes, I know that all the bibles have same scriptures but the problem is human author translate them into English differently.

Either a person accepts it by faith or doesn't accept it. No one can force someone to believe. If a person's heart and mind are humble and open, he or she can believe. If a person's heart and mind are hardened (thru pride, fear, or bitterness) and closed then he or she probably won't believe. That's between the individual and God. People can present the Gospel but only the Holy Spirit can convict the heart, and only the individual can accept or reject.



It has nothing do with fear, bitter, accept, unacceptance, etc. but want to know the proof of the fact before they are able to beleive to or in... We are not here to mock anything but need the fact... That's why I question about different religions who translate their own bibles into English differently.






 
I only read the New International Version (NIV) because they have real life stories plus words of Christ in red letters.

Can you please provide me one of link where you support to?
 
...It does the same with Jesus who did miracle things, sentenced to death by Romans Religion leaders.
Not correct. Jesus was accused of blasphemy by the Jewish religious leaders. He was condemned to death by the Roman political leader, Pontius Pilate. You have confused them together.


What do you think of this?
I think you better check your "facts."
 

Question:

How could the bible know me and my limit?

The truths of the Bible apply to every human being, past, present, and future. You are a human being, so you are included.


Should I get my children to follow what the bible says instead of do what I say?
If you aren't a Christian, then I wouldn't expect you to follow the Bible, so why would you teach your children to follow the Bible? That would be hypocritical, would it not?


Should the bible fix the limit on my children, not me?
The Bible teaches the truth. It's up to you to decide whether or not to obey. If a parent believes and obeys the Bible, then there is nothing in it that would contradict parental limits.


Which bibles should we take?
I'm not sure what you mean. You can take the Gideon's one out of your hotel room if you want. ;)


Example accord several different bibles like that:
  1. A man is allow to marry more than one woman.
  2. Married is supposed for woman and man only.
  3. The parents arrange the wedding for their children.
  4. The religion priest is not allow to marry
  5. The other religion priest is allow to marry
  6. and go on....
I don't know where you get your misinformation. :dunno:

The Holy Bible of Christians and Jews does NOT teach that God allows men to marry more than one woman. The Bible proves time and again that polygamy is against God's will. The Bible does NOT teach that parents have to arrange weddings for their children. Arranged marriages were the cultural norm of the time but they weren't commanded by God. Jewish priests were married (the tribe of Levites would probably die out pretty quickly if they weren't allowed to procreate :roll:).

Yeah, "and so on."


How should we know which right bible because we have many religions here in the world?
Truthfully, do you really want to know?
 
Can you please provide me one of link where you support to?

The NIV is an excellent version for getting an overall view
of the Bible, and if I were able to interpret at a church
service for the Deaf this is the text I would use because
it gives more of a meaning for meaning translation of
scripture.

However if one is a really serious Bible student and one
wants to study what the people of that time actually
meant in the context of what they were talking about
then the Old KJV is the one to choose.

There was a book I had one time that was titled
"The Bible As A Novel". It is the most interesting
book I have ever read. I wish I could find another
copy of it somewhere. But it had the entire story
written in order, with out jumping around or trying
to understand timelines. It also explained with in
the context of the story why certain things were
considered so horrible at that time and why others
were not. If any one knows where I could find a
copy of that book again, I would appreciate it.
 
The NIV is an excellent version for getting an overall view
of the Bible, and if I were able to interpret at a church
service for the Deaf this is the text I would use because
it gives more of a meaning for meaning translation of
scripture.

However if one is a really serious Bible student and one
wants to study what the people of that time actually
meant in the context of what they were talking about
then the Old KJV is the one to choose.

There was a book I had one time that was titled
"The Bible As A Novel". It is the most interesting
book I have ever read. I wish I could find another
copy of it somewhere. But it had the entire story
written in order, with out jumping around or trying
to understand timelines. It also explained with in
the context of the story why certain things were
considered so horrible at that time and why others
were not. If any one knows where I could find a
copy of that book again, I would appreciate it.

Disclaimer:

This is just my opinion.

The best Bible that is easy to read and most accurate in english language today is New American Standard.

The one I do not like the most is NIV. The reason is NIV translator use the rule of freewriting.

Let me explain:

The translator takes the general idea and write what they think is being said. To me that is very dangerous. The reason is that they assume they understand exactly what God is saying. They might be right but they can just be as wrong.

The New American Standard followed the same rules as translator of KJV. They tried to translate word for word. It is impossible to translate word for from from one language to other and for it make sense grammer wise. They tried to do that to the best of their abilities and not put in their own opinion as NIV might tend to do.

I am not saying that NIV should be trashed. It is easy to read and understand. However, there is possiblies that it could be wrong based on their rules of translating.
 
I see, Secretblend

The reason why I choose New International Version because it is much easier to be understood, some bibles that I came across their sciptures do not make no sense to me. I rather to read a bible to be understood once I see the big picture without being confuse by trying to firgure out all the bizarre names much as "thees" "thous" :ugh:

I don't mind trying out the New American Standard to compare with what I have. I also got another book which isn't a holy bible, it is just a book called "Knowing the Bible 101" its one of the great Christian books.
 
Disclaimer:

This is just my opinion.

The best Bible that is easy to read and most accurate in english language today is New American Standard.

The one I do not like the most is NIV. The reason is NIV translator use the rule of freewriting.

Let me explain:

The translator takes the general idea and write what they think is being said. To me that is very dangerous. The reason is that they assume they understand exactly what God is saying. They might be right but they can just be as wrong.

The New American Standard followed the same rules as translator of KJV. They tried to translate word for word. It is impossible to translate word for from from one language to other and for it make sense grammer wise. They tried to do that to the best of their abilities and not put in their own opinion as NIV might tend to do.

I am not saying that NIV should be trashed. It is easy to read and understand. However, there is possiblies that it could be wrong based on their rules of translating.

Ooh thank you for correcting me!:ty: I actually got these two mixed up.
I should have check. thanks and I agree with you.
 
Well, no offense to those whom read the "New" bibles, I would never trust any translated or "new" or any kind of that bible, I'd rather to have both untranslated bible and translated bible so that I can read both and have more good understanding.

But even though I own both translated and untranslated bibles, I would always follow the untranslated bible more than the translated bible..
 
Back to the topic...

I have been hearing some of people's different opinion, some people said that God dislike the religion, some of people said that God think the religion is important for people in earth so I don't know for sure...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top