Jump to content
The Emma-Watson.net Forum

Recommended Posts

Sweet OK then, seeing as I dont know much at all about Judaism. What are the main differences between it and Christianity?

 

Well that is a little hard for me to answer because I don't know so much about Christianity either lol. The biggest difference is that we do not believe in Jesus and only follow the Old Testament. Judaism is also crazy detailed, we have 613 laws that we must follow. Its hard for me to think of what to say lol... I guess really the main important difference is that we don't believe in Jesus.

 

To put it bluntly, the biggest difference between Christianity and Judaism is the messiah has already manifested in Christianity. Jews still believe that the messiah has not yet come to Earth. To Christians, Jesus Christ is already the messiah who came to Earth as man. (Now going onto controversial grounds) Upon revealing himself to man, Jesus Christ became viewed as a heretic form conservative Jews, particularly the pharisees who sought for his punishment as a heretic. It just so happens that the Romans ruled Judea at that time. The pharisees sought for the Romans to intervene and led to Christ's eventual crucifixion. Now here's where the separation takes place: The heart of the Christian belief is the resurrection. Jesus rose from the dead 3 days after his execution.

 

The Torah, the holy book of the Jewish faith, is essentially the Old Testament of the Christian Bible. Main differences is the addition of the New Testament and several passages in the Old Testament removed.

 

Islam on the other hand follows Christianity chronologically. They do believe in a Jesus Christ but only as a great prophet, much like Ezekiel and Isaiah. Mohamed is their main figure as the great prophet who finalised the previous faiths. Islam is said to be the completed version of the primordial faith.

 

 

I think the history of Christianity is fascinating, as well. We had a priest at my college and when he would say mass he would put all of this background information into his homily's (the explanation after the reading of the Gospel) and I was amazed because I felt like if I had learned this stuff in religious education, about famines and history and everything, I wouldn't have been so bored! He really knew his stuff and I can't even imagine what he had to learn at the seminary. I think it's great. He was very knowledgeable and I admired that a lot.

 

It is very fascinating how priests tie in things to support the week's gospel. Some use personal stories, others lessons from history. They're all different eggs in one basket, but it keeps mass interesting. You don't happen to be Black Irish are you?

 

 

I became Christian quite recently (couple of years ago), after having read two books by a very famous Swedish man called Jonas Gardell. The books are called "About God" and "About Jesus". Jonas is very religious but in these books he is critical towards the Bible but also explains Christianity and it's history which is fascinating. I really don't believe in much said in the Bible, to me it's just a bunch of stories written by men and changed constantly during history.

 

In today's institution, the bible is not meant to be taken literally anymore. The Book of Genesis for example has scientifically become disproven. The Vatican doesn't necessarily accept the theory of evolution but they are tolerant to the theory. They're not telling their followers that they will go to Hell if they believe in evolution either. The book however is viewed as the spriritual creation of man rather than the physical creation. The Church is now catching up with the times and being more open to the scientific field.

 

If you really want to get mindf***ed, just read the whole Book of Revelation. That in my opinion is one of the most fascinating parts of the bible, creepy even.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm not trying to be critical or point fingers but I have to ask - if you don't believe in much said in the Bible (if it's just stories made up by men) then how do you believe in God and Jesus?

 

If a person does believe in the Bible then they believe that Jesus died on the cross as a substitution for our sins. But I'm not exactly sure that Jesus preached tolerance. If he did, then why did he die for our sins? If he wanted us to tolerate everything (drugs, child abuse, rape, murder) then there would be no need for a substitute sacrifice because sin wouldn't exist. It would all just be moral relativism.

 

God does love everyone no matter what, but that doesn't mean that He will tolerate or condone everything that we do. God is a just god. If he weren't then unrepentant murderers would get into Heaven just the same as loving, caring, good, God-believing people would. That's not right. If that's the case then why should anyone follow Jesus? Why would you even try to do good or help others? And we're back to moral relativism.

 

If God is going to let everyone into Heaven no matter what they do or believe then why did He have Jesus die on the cross? Just for sick kicks? He had his only son beaten, ridiculed, tortured and murdered in the most barbaric of ways for absolutely no reason? I don't want to follow a God who is that sick and depraved.

 

But I don't think that is the God that I follow. I believe that there was a reason and a need for a substitute sacrifice. I can't see Him, I can't prove Him, I can't touch Him or talk to Him face-to-face. But that's why they call it faith. I can see what He has done in my life and the lives of others.

 

There are some who only want to believe in parts of the Bible. But if you don't believe some parts then why believe in any of it. If one single passage of the Bible is false, then it all must be false.

 

Let me put it this way - have you ever seen a restaurant get shut down for E. Coli? If only one or two food items are responsible for the E. Coli then why do they shut down the whole restaurant? If it was only the salad that they said had E. Coli would you be willing to eat their chicken then? No, because you can't trust it. If you can't trust all of it you can't trust any of it. It's not worth the risk if you can't trust all of it. Same way with the Bible, if you can't trust all of it to be true then it's not worth the risk to trust any of it. And who are we to decide which part is the correct part and which is the false part?

 

Again, please don't take this as an invitation to an argument. I'm not trying make light of you or your thoughts and I don't wanna start a flame war. I know just by having this discussion we're treading on some volatile ground.

 

 

 

.

I shall not argue then. =) I think you are making too many assumptions based on some short phrases very lightly concluding my beliefs. I could have written pages about it but I felt it would be of no interest to anyone so I simply made a few statements.

 

I will defend myself BRIEFLY.

Parts of the Bible are letters, naturally these have been changed through the course of history, as everything else, but is more believable then the old stories (from the Old Testament basically). I choose to believe the good things said about Jesus in these letters. Like what I said, that he talked about love and tolerance. By tolerance I mean not discriminating people who are different and loving everyone also for their faults (which can be many). Of course I don't think anyone should approve of murders etc. But if a murderer truly is sorry for what he has done and wants repentance than he shall be forgiven (believe me there are people I wish a lot of pain upon, but this nothing I'm proud of since I would like to forgive everyone who wishes to be forgiven). I do not believe in heaven or hell, just peace after death, for everyone. Punishment is to be suffered in life, not afterwards.

In my view Jesus was not the son of God, merely someone who spread good beliefs. Now that was 2000 years ago, surely his dying for our sins means nothing today but for the people who choose to see his action as something more meaningful.

 

I shall not say more about the Bible since I have not read it I am not very acquainted with it myself, I can only recall bits and pieces from the book I mentioned that I read a couple of years ago.

 

A resturant where E.Coli was found can still be excellent, I choose to see everything good about Christianity, call me naive but that's how I roll! I'm too negative in general anyway.

 

In today's institution, the bible is not meant to be taken literally anymore. The Book of Genesis for example has scientifically become disproven. The Vatican doesn't necessarily accept the theory of evolution but they are tolerant to the theory. They're not telling their followers that they will go to Hell if they believe in evolution either. The book however is viewed as the spriritual creation of man rather than the physical creation. The Church is now catching up with the times and being more open to the scientific field.

 

If you really want to get mindf***ed, just read the whole Book of Revelation. That in my opinion is one of the most fascinating parts of the bible, creepy even.

Then why is it taken literally?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you really want to get mindf***ed, just read the whole Book of Revelation. That in my opinion is one of the most fascinating parts of the bible, creepy even.

 

 

That part of the bible is really good yes But very creepy honestly that part scares the crap out of me that whole book i get terrified reading it..

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very fascinating how priests tie in things to support the week's gospel. Some use personal stories, others lessons from history. They're all different eggs in one basket, but it keeps mass interesting. You don't happen to be Black Irish are you?

 

Nope I am not Black Irish. I am partially Irish yes, but I am also English, Scottish and Danish. The priest at my church at school used to tell us a couple of really good stories:

 

One was of a priest that was having some doubts. One day, while he was saying mass, the wine *literally* turned to blood, and the bread turned to flesh. Because it was a miracle, the vatican took it and put it on display and it was lost for a very long time. A while ago, some scientists did tests on it and they did identify that the blood was actually blood but it wasn't any blood type found on earth. The bread was actually mad out of human skin and it was thicker around the edges until it gradually thinned to the cracker in the middle. It was amazing to hear this and I think it's really really symbolic because as a Catholic, the common teaching is that the bread and wine are actually the body and blood of Christ.

 

Another main point to his homily one time, was letting God into you to heal. He used the metaphor of a doctor - if we are sick and we go to the hospital and say "Doctor it hurts, but don't touch me, I don't want you to do an operation" how can we be fixed? He used this to talk about God and letting him inside our hearts to heal any hurt that we have. It seems like such a simple lesson but the way he said it was so poignant, he made a girl cry. It was amazing, and that has always stuck with me.

 

I was reading above about taking the Bible literally, etc. I've never read the Bible fully, but it is amazingly out-dated (duh). But according to today's standards, things like football (no playing with the skin of a pig) and tattoos (dont deface the body_ would be illegal. To some extent, people taking the Bible literally is ridiculous. For example, in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Huck's aunt makes him stand in a closet to say his prayers. In the Bible, it is mentioned to go to a quiet place inside and pray. This does not mean a literal quiet place, but a place inside your heart and your mind. I think the Bible is metaphorical in many aspects, and it isn't good to take it literally because I don't believe that was it's original intention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One was of a priest that was having some doubts. One day, while he was saying mass, the wine *literally* turned to blood, and the bread turned to flesh. Because it was a miracle, the vatican took it and put it on display and it was lost for a very long time. A while ago, some scientists did tests on it and they did identify that the blood was actually blood but it wasn't any blood type found on earth. The bread was actually mad out of human skin and it was thicker around the edges until it gradually thinned to the cracker in the middle. It was amazing to hear this and I think it's really really symbolic because as a Catholic, the common teaching is that the bread and wine are actually the body and blood of Christ.

 

Wow, any idea where this took place? If you've seen the movie Stigmata, they kinda-sorta go through that; something about the Vatican having their own scientists(sounds like an oxymoron doesn't it? ha) to investigate such miracles. One investigation I knew about was tears coming from the image of the Virgin Mary at a Benedictan monastery. The substance was tested and turned out to be human tears; the painting itself was also examined and there was no evidence of a pumping device or hoses or anything. The painting continued to 'cry' for months and the tears were collected.

 

That is what's known as transubstantiation. According to the Vatican, every time the supper is performed at the altar, the miracle of the bread becoming flesh and wine becoming blood takes place... every time. Didn't know about this in Sunday school but I did in my European History class.

 

Another main point to his homily one time, was letting God into you to heal. He used the metaphor of a doctor - if we are sick and we go to the hospital and say "Doctor it hurts, but don't touch me, I don't want you to do an operation" how can we be fixed? He used this to talk about God and letting him inside our hearts to heal any hurt that we have. It seems like such a simple lesson but the way he said it was so poignant, he made a girl cry. It was amazing, and that has always stuck with me.

 

That would relate to the story about Jesus healing a Roman officer's servant without even going to see the man. "I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the Word and I shall be healed". Essentially I think he was trying to teach the congregation that faith outweighs any medicine. I'll let you draw a conclusion on that.

 

To some extent, people taking the Bible literally is ridiculous. For example, in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Huck's aunt makes him stand in a closet to say his prayers. In the Bible, it is mentioned to go to a quiet place inside and pray. This does not mean a literal quiet place, but a place inside your heart and your mind. I think the Bible is metaphorical in many aspects, and it isn't good to take it literally because I don't believe that was it's original intention.

 

I remember this was actually this week's mass gospel. What I'm getting out of it is that it doesn't matter whether or not people know that you're a Christian. All that matters is you know inside that you're a Christian (if that makes sense). One of my previous posts mention how overt evangelicals annoy me a bit. Telling everyone how much you love God is good and all but that doesn't necessarily make you a better man than a quiet fellow who only worships in private.

 

Btw, Joe O'Connor, what denomination of Christian are you? I do remember something about most protestant denominations do not believe in the divinity of the Virgin Mary, not sure which ones. Among many other differences, that's one difference separating the Catholic church to most protestant churches. The Orthodox and Anglican churches are a different matter.

Edited by sirbenedictvs
Link to post
Share on other sites

In today's institution, the bible is not meant to be taken literally anymore. The Book of Genesis for example has scientifically become disproven. The Vatican doesn't necessarily accept the theory of evolution but they are tolerant to the theory. They're not telling their followers that they will go to Hell if they believe in evolution either. The book however is viewed as the spriritual creation of man rather than the physical creation. The Church is now catching up with the times and being more open to the scientific field.

Im sorry but I completely disagree with all of this. Science and Christianity practically do not mix at all. I dont agree that science has "disproved" Genesis, All evidence Ive seen or heard is a load of rubbish.

To put it simply, Evolution is just a theory. And its not called theory of Christianity, its called the Truth.

 

I shall not argue then. =) I think you are making too many assumptions based on some short phrases very lightly concluding my beliefs. I could have written pages about it but I felt it would be of no interest to anyone so I simply made a few statements.

 

I will defend myself BRIEFLY.

Parts of the Bible are letters, naturally these have been changed through the course of history, as everything else, but is more believable then the old stories (from the Old Testament basically). I choose to believe the good things said about Jesus in these letters. Like what I said, that he talked about love and tolerance. By tolerance I mean not discriminating people who are different and loving everyone also for their faults (which can be many). Of course I don't think anyone should approve of murders etc. But if a murderer truly is sorry for what he has done and wants repentance than he shall be forgiven (believe me there are people I wish a lot of pain upon, but this nothing I'm proud of since I would like to forgive everyone who wishes to be forgiven). I do not believe in heaven or hell, just peace after death, for everyone. Punishment is to be suffered in life, not afterwards.

In my view Jesus was not the son of God, merely someone who spread good beliefs. Now that was 2000 years ago, surely his dying for our sins means nothing today but for the people who choose to see his action as something more meaningful.

I like what The Dude said.

The bible needs to be taken as a whole, why put in parts that dont matter?

 

I'm a Christian. [=

 

-perfect.shivers

Top notch buddy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sorry but I completely disagree with all of this. Science and Christianity practically do not mix at all.

Science and Christianity might mix (There are creationist scientist for example). Science is about building knowledge in the form of testable explanations, which can perfectly coexist with Christianity. After all, Christianity is a relationship, no a religion. But, we have to separate faith and "science".

Edited by Will
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey peoples,

 

Just thought Id start a topic about Christianity and peoples relationship with God. (Its not a religion).

So feel free to ask me questions about my faith or anything Christian related as I am one (if you didnt already know).

Or just post your opinions or thoughts if you do or dont believe. Just general discussion!

Please ask questions, I quite like talking about it! haha.

 

Thanks.

 

PS How many Christians are on EW forum? I know theres a few of us.

Totally agree with your statement that Christianity is about having a relationship with God. I actually have that in my religious views on facebook : "Christianity - it's a relationship, not a religion."

 

I am proud to be a Jesus Freak, and I'm pretty excited that there are a few more on here! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

"And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars; see that yet be not troubled. For all those things have come to pass but the end is not yet."

"For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there shall be famines and pestilences and earthquakes and divers places"

 

Don't know why but i had to share. It's not that i blindfully believe what the Gospel says. It's that it actually speaks the truth, but like ages ago. Am i the only one that believes we're heading towards the end?.. I don't want to sound like those crazy religious people who just preach. No one knows when and if there will be an end and how long in human or God's measure of time will take. But i have in my mind the John's Revelations and how everything is following a specific way and puhh >.<

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sorry but I completely disagree with all of this. Science and Christianity practically do not mix at all.

Joe, I agree with a lot of what you say and I think I get what you mean here but perhaps it was just worded differently. I do believe science and Christianity can mix. The problem arises when science gets it wrong. Science told us for a century that the Brontosaurus was fact. Then it was discovered that they had the wrong head on the wrong dinosaur. Science is continually moving. God is constant.

 

Take for example Job. It is one of the oldest books in the bible. It was probably written about 1,500 years before Christ. The science of the day said that the earth rested on the shoulders of Atlas (although recent information suggests it may have been someone other than Atlas) or on the back of a turtle or pillars etc. But Job chapter 26 verse 7 says this"

 

He stretches out the north over empty space

And hangs the earth on nothing.

 

Other translations say that North meant the skies or heavens. At the time it was believed by the Greeks that Atlas held up the skies so they wouldn't fall to earth but Job is saying that the skies aren't held up by anything. Job also states in this passage that the earth doesn't rest on anyone's shoulders or on the back of anything but is suspended in space by nothing.

 

It may be true that Job and the author of the book of Job didn't even understand what exactly that passage meant but were inspired by the wisdom of God to utter these words. This was some 2,500 years before man came to the same conclusion about the earth.

 

It has been said that when science catches up with the Bible we will know everything. I don't know that we could handle the knowledge of everything with our finite minds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sorry but I completely disagree with all of this. Science and Christianity practically do not mix at all. I dont agree that science has "disproved" Genesis, All evidence Ive seen or heard is a load of rubbish.

To put it simply, Evolution is just a theory. And its not called theory of Christianity, its called the Truth.

 

Truth according to whom? Just Christians apparently. Other religions believe that their faiths hold omnipotence. Everybody's right and at the same time, everybody's wrong. I do not want to start a debate about Science vs. Christianity but I do want to say this. Do you believe that the Earth revolves around the Sun? Or do you believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth? According to Psalms 104:5 "...the Earth is the foundation, it can never be moved..." Do you take that quite literally?

 

Joe, what denomination of Christian are you btw?

 

There needs to be some common ground between science and Christianity because the two have been at odds with each other for hundreds of years. Galileo Galilei for example kept his discoveries of the cosmos secret up until his death for fear of condemnation and/or torture by the Vatican.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Psalms 104:5 "...the Earth is the foundation, it can never be moved..."

First all, Psalms is a poetic book, and Psalms 104:2-6 says: "The LORD wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out he heavens like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind. He makes winds his messengers,flames of fire his servants. He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. You covered it with the watery depths as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains."As you can see, it's like a poesy. Second, assuming it says "the Earth is the foundation, it can never be moved", who can move the Earth of its translational and rotational motion? xD

I do not want to start a debate about Science vs. Christianity

You can't start a debate about Science vs. Christianity anyways. They're no opposite and they're no contradictory each other. You might make a debate about "Creationism and Big Bang Theory", or "God exist?". But don't start it xD

There needs to be some common ground between science and Christianity because the two have been at odds with each other for hundreds of years. Galileo Galilei for example kept his discoveries of the cosmos secret up until his death for fear of condemnation and/or torture by the Vatican.

Indeed. But just something, about the Galileo Galilei, it wasn't about christianity and science, it was about religious - blind - people and science.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. But just something, about the Galileo Galilei, it wasn't about christianity and science, it was about religious - blind - people and science.

 

The problem being that many thought the two to complement each other. In Galileo's time, if you didn't take the Church quite literally, you were considered a heretic. The super-conservative Vatican at the time dissented anyone who questioned the authority of the church. It wasn't until Enlightenment that people became more open about their questions of the world around them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, I agree with a lot of what you say and I think I get what you mean here but perhaps it was just worded differently. I do believe science and Christianity can mix. The problem arises when science gets it wrong. Science told us for a century that the Brontosaurus was fact. Then it was discovered that they had the wrong head on the wrong dinosaur. Science is continually moving. God is constant.

 

Take for example Job. It is one of the oldest books in the bible. It was probably written about 1,500 years before Christ. The science of the day said that the earth rested on the shoulders of Atlas (although recent information suggests it may have been someone other than Atlas) or on the back of a turtle or pillars etc. But Job chapter 26 verse 7 says this"

 

He stretches out the north over empty space

And hangs the earth on nothing.

 

Other translations say that North meant the skies or heavens. At the time it was believed by the Greeks that Atlas held up the skies so they wouldn't fall to earth but Job is saying that the skies aren't held up by anything. Job also states in this passage that the earth doesn't rest on anyone's shoulders or on the back of anything but is suspended in space by nothing.

 

It may be true that Job and the author of the book of Job didn't even understand what exactly that passage meant but were inspired by the wisdom of God to utter these words. This was some 2,500 years before man came to the same conclusion about the earth.

 

It has been said that when science catches up with the Bible we will know everything. I don't know that we could handle the knowledge of everything with our finite minds.

Thats what I meant. In the bible i also says the world is round. Thousands of years before man discovered that.

 

Joe, what denomination of Christian are you btw?

Im Baptist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in God or religion. Religion for me is just something men made up because they need something to believe in, which in a way is a good thought, but not for me.

 

I do totally agree, it's exactly what I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in God or religion. Religion for me is just something men made up because they need something to believe in, which in a way is a good thought, but not for me.

Agree about the religion. But why don't you believe in God?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about the religion. But why don't you believe in God?

 

The two can tie together. The belief of an intelligent being reigning over man can be seen as an explanation for all things or for the sake of having someone or something to look towards in times of stress or uncertainty. People tend to have more faith in God during times of distress such as a dangerous threat or fear of dying because they have nothing else to turn to and need a remedy for it.

Edited by sirbenedictvs
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, any idea where this took place? If you've seen the movie Stigmata, they kinda-sorta go through that; something about the Vatican having their own scientists(sounds like an oxymoron doesn't it? ha) to investigate such miracles. One investigation I knew about was tears coming from the image of the Virgin Mary at a Benedictan monastery. The substance was tested and turned out to be human tears; the painting itself was also examined and there was no evidence of a pumping device or hoses or anything. The painting continued to 'cry' for months and the tears were collected.

 

That is what's known as transubstantiation. According to the Vatican, every time the supper is performed at the altar, the miracle of the bread becoming flesh and wine becoming blood takes place... every time. Didn't know about this in Sunday school but I did in my European History class.

 

 

 

That would relate to the story about Jesus healing a Roman officer's servant without even going to see the man. "I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the Word and I shall be healed". Essentially I think he was trying to teach the congregation that faith outweighs any medicine. I'll let you draw a conclusion on that.

 

 

 

I remember this was actually this week's mass gospel. What I'm getting out of it is that it doesn't matter whether or not people know that you're a Christian. All that matters is you know inside that you're a Christian (if that makes sense). One of my previous posts mention how overt evangelicals annoy me a bit. Telling everyone how much you love God is good and all but that doesn't necessarily make you a better man than a quiet fellow who only worships in private.

 

I havent seen the movie, but I read a book called Keeping Faith by Jodi Picoult about a little girl who sees God and then she starts to perform miracles, all the while her mom is going through a divorce because her husband cheated, etc. The little girl develops stigmata and at the end of the book no one is sure exactly what happened, but it's a really cool book because it shows that faith comes in many ways. I forget where the story took place, I'll have to ask someone at my church. I'd ask the priest but he's away praying in the woods of New Hampshire for a higher calling within the church. So I'm not sure facebook would work with him, lol.

 

As for faith outweighing medicine, I agree and disagree. I'm not saying that when we're sick we should just ignore the doctor and say, "God will cure it", because He probably won't. I mean, yes of course there are miracles and such like that, but I think God has more on his plate than curing strep throat, or whatever. The same goes for people who don't do anything, and they say, God will provide. Well yes, He will...eventually. We can't just sit around waiting when we can enable ourselves to start the process. I think God helps those who help themselves. As for healing mentally or psychologically, I believe that faith can do great things but at the same time, if a person is in danger of hurting themselves, they should get help and go on medication. I'm reading Eat, Pray, Love now actually, and it's kind of that situation - the woman goes through a crushing divorce and is literally on the verge of suicide and she decides to go on medication. her quest for religion after that is really, really, incredible. It's a great book and I highly recommend it, it's just great the way she talks about her faith. She doesn't have a set religion, but she is in touch with God, she truly has seen the peace, joy, and love that a higher being can give.

 

Agree about the religion. But why don't you believe in God?

 

I think that God can come in different forms to different people. It might not always be a benevolent man with a long beard in white robes, or anything, but people can find faith in different things. I firmly believe that. God comes to people in different ways, and people find peace differently. Some people need some more help than others - some people already have a quiet mind and they don't need calming or reassurance. God could be anything, it is all about how we achieve our happiness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in the Tao (God, the Way). I think that people don't really practice in daily life the Divine principles (I'm not referring to rituals) they read in their religious texts, the world would be a very different place right now if they did. :mellow:

Edited by halleluJah
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about the religion. But why don't you believe in God?

 

 

Well... I just can't believe in it. I don't know why, but for me it's impossible. I do believe in other things, but I don't see them as religious and absolutely not christian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... I just can't believe in it. I don't know why, but for me it's impossible. I do believe in other things, but I don't see them as religious and absolutely not christian.

Can I just ask, not trying to offend.

But how much have you looked into it? Have you gone to much/any churches or healings etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid I had a strong connection to the church. I grew up on a little island where the church and God has been important for hundred of years. And I tried to believe, I really tried. We went to church often and I just couldn't understand it.

Then I read the Bible and it just made it harder for me to believe. I guess I'm one of those who believe in science and nature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...