Judaism is more believable than Christianity - Page 2

Sledge · 26th December 2009, 06:27 PM

Really, who cares? Yes, we could argue and come up with the sub-sect of one religion or the other that is the most plausible, but all we're doing is sorting out in what order the assorted holy men go up against the wall come the revolution. If it makes you feel better to want rabbis shot first, that's fine with me.

SezMe · 26th December 2009, 08:19 PM

Sledge is right, who cares. I think it is far more important to discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Soapy Sam · 26th December 2009, 08:27 PM

The simpler the assumptions of a belief system, the more likely it is to be true.

Which is why I lean towards the "no belief" model.

Maia · 26th December 2009, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by parky76

there are many...many..many streams of Christianity. From Coptic and Orthodox...to Presbyterian and AME.

But none of them..none...will officially have as their view..that one can be a good Christian without believing that Jesus IS the literal Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, died for the sins of mankind, and Rose from the grave.

sorry charlie.

however, Conservative and Reform Judaism, are indeed liberal (and fluid) regarding one's beliefs of the Torah being the literal word of God, and especially the Talmud being the literal law of God.

Oh, now, come on... there's the Unity Church. They're kind of nuts, but they're Christians, and they really don't care if you believe any of that. Next, we have the Unitarian Conference.

Quote:

Adhering to strict monotheism, they maintain that Jesus was a great man and a prophet of God, perhaps even a supernatural being, but not God himself. They believe Jesus did not claim to be God, nor did his teachings hint at the existence of a triune God. Unitarians believe in the moral authority, but not necessarily the divinity, of Jesus.

Now, that's not even counting the Unitarian-Universalists, where you can pretty much show up in church and believe any old thing you want-- although honestly, I think that they belong in the Christian category too because of how they're perceived, if nothing else. For instance, you might see this on a Sunday morning:

People driving by the Unitarian church on their way to Southern Baptist services and seeing Unitarians going in:

Oh, they're going to church too.

Instead of:

Oh, they're going in to worship Satan and sacrifice goats on a pentagram. Then, they'll sing bad hymns off-key.

Although the part about the hymns is 100% true.

HansMustermann · 27th December 2009, 03:52 AM

Originally Posted by parky76

there are many...many..many streams of Christianity. From Coptic and Orthodox...to Presbyterian and AME.

But none of them..none...will officially have as their view..that one can be a good Christian without believing that Jesus IS the literal Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, died for the sins of mankind, and Rose from the grave.

sorry charlie.

however, Conservative and Reform Judaism, are indeed liberal (and fluid) regarding one's beliefs of the Torah being the literal word of God, and especially the Talmud being the literal law of God.

Parky, no offense, but just repeating it like the bellman from the Hunting of the Snark doesn't make it true

To take just the claim that Jesus is literally the Son of God, is technically false in most Christian doctrines out there. He's almost invariably something more complex than that, and, here's the important part, _preexisting_. That's right, he apparently existed long before Mary.

And then come such doctrines as Oneness Pentecostalism, in which God _is_ Jesus. And the Holy Ghost too. While they do use the phrase Son Of God for traditional reasons, it actually means an incarnation of God in a mortal body, rather than properly "son". Jesus is just a name and manifestation of God.

Sort of, God finally created a character down here, but you know it's still him anyway.

(You might notice it's essentailly the same doctrine as the Sabellianism from waay back.)

Basically methinks you underestimate the sheer amount of different interpretations and fanfic over the centuries, to fill in the plot holes and vagueness. You guys at least kept the fanboy fanfic separate as midrash, we made sects around it and had holy wars about whose fanfic is the true one

26th December 2009, 06:27 PM	#41
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Really, who cares? Yes, we could argue and come up with the sub-sect of one religion or the other that is the most plausible, but all we're doing is sorting out in what order the assorted holy men go up against the wall come the revolution. If it makes you feel better to want rabbis shot first, that's fine with me.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain. Last edited by Sledge; 26th December 2009 at 08:21 PM. Reason: Spolling mistook

26th December 2009, 08:27 PM	#43
Soapy Sam NLH Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 25,885	The simpler the assumptions of a belief system, the more likely it is to be true. Which is why I lean towards the "no belief" model.
Soapy Sam NLH Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 25,885

26th December 2009, 08:29 PM	#44
Maia Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by parky76 there are many...many..many streams of Christianity. From Coptic and Orthodox...to Presbyterian and AME. But none of them..none...will officially have as their view..that one can be a good Christian without believing that Jesus IS the literal Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, died for the sins of mankind, and Rose from the grave. sorry charlie. however, Conservative and Reform Judaism, are indeed liberal (and fluid) regarding one's beliefs of the Torah being the literal word of God, and especially the Talmud being the literal law of God. Oh, now, come on... there's the Unity Church. They're kind of nuts, but they're Christians, and they really don't care if you believe any of that. Next, we have the Unitarian Conference. Quote: Adhering to strict monotheism, they maintain that Jesus was a great man and a prophet of God, perhaps even a supernatural being, but not God himself. They believe Jesus did not claim to be God, nor did his teachings hint at the existence of a triune God. Unitarians believe in the moral authority, but not necessarily the divinity, of Jesus. Now, that's not even counting the Unitarian-Universalists, where you can pretty much show up in church and believe any old thing you want-- although honestly, I think that they belong in the Christian category too because of how they're perceived, if nothing else. For instance, you might see this on a Sunday morning: People driving by the Unitarian church on their way to Southern Baptist services and seeing Unitarians going in: Oh, they're going to church too. Instead of: Oh, they're going in to worship Satan and sacrifice goats on a pentagram. Then, they'll sing bad hymns off-key. Although the part about the hymns is 100% true.
	__________________ Satan, aka Precious the Cat-- the Comic! Come and read at Stripgenerator!

26th December 2009, 08:19 PM	#42
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,361	Sledge is right, who cares. I think it is far more important to discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

27th December 2009, 03:52 AM	#45
HansMustermann Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 9,791	Originally Posted by parky76 there are many...many..many streams of Christianity. From Coptic and Orthodox...to Presbyterian and AME. But none of them..none...will officially have as their view..that one can be a good Christian without believing that Jesus IS the literal Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, died for the sins of mankind, and Rose from the grave. sorry charlie. however, Conservative and Reform Judaism, are indeed liberal (and fluid) regarding one's beliefs of the Torah being the literal word of God, and especially the Talmud being the literal law of God. Parky, no offense, but just repeating it like the bellman from the Hunting of the Snark doesn't make it true To take just the claim that Jesus is literally the Son of God, is technically false in most Christian doctrines out there. He's almost invariably something more complex than that, and, here's the important part, _preexisting_. That's right, he apparently existed long before Mary. And then come such doctrines as Oneness Pentecostalism, in which God _is_ Jesus. And the Holy Ghost too. While they do use the phrase Son Of God for traditional reasons, it actually means an incarnation of God in a mortal body, rather than properly "son". Jesus is just a name and manifestation of God. Sort of, God finally created a character down here, but you know it's still him anyway. (You might notice it's essentailly the same doctrine as the Sabellianism from waay back.) Basically methinks you underestimate the sheer amount of different interpretations and fanfic over the centuries, to fill in the plot holes and vagueness. You guys at least kept the fanboy fanfic separate as midrash, we made sects around it and had holy wars about whose fanfic is the true one