lucifer_sam

the Bible doesn't actually explicitly define what hell is. there's no mention of a lake of fire, pointy objects or any of that other garbage. it merely states that it exists as "separation from God."

__________________
first.am

chard

Actually it does in revelation, heaven for us peoples of this earth will live in the new jerusalem the city of god. Not forgetting the new earth god has created for us for the old earth has faded away. Hell on the other hand it states that its hot and theres nothing to drink so if you wan't it its all yours.

lucifer_sam

i wouldn't put too much faith in Revelations, it was written at least a century after all the disciples had already recorded their own accounts of Christ's life by a hermit living in seclusion from the rest of the world. you have to understand, even if you believe the Bible was God's word, it was still written by humans and thus holds as much subjectivity as our own opinions do today.

__________________
first.am

pahuuuta

thats why you dont know if people wrote it just to be idiots they could of made up a lot of that

__________________

He Who Makes A Beast Out Of Himself Gets Rid Of The Pain Of Being A Man

mr dave

it's not whether or not the bible is an accurate history of the life of christ or just a collection of stories a bunch of stoners wrote 2000 years ago. the significant aspect is independent personal belief.

__________________
i am the universe

Trauma

Christianity is real enough for politicians to use it in political decisions that affect hundreds of millions of individuals.

That's pretty ****ing real.

__________________
A mi no me importa nada
Para mi la vida es un sueño

Freebase Dali

So basically what you're saying is that subject matter is irrelevant, just so long as people are able to believe in it in their own way?
That's crap.

If the whole point of Christianity has no connection to the accuracy of what people believe in, but the bare belief itself, then those beliefs aren't really based on anything but a personal weakness and the need for comfort.

__________________

SATCHMO

No it's not and You're misinterpreting what he's trying to say.

When most of us speak of religion or more specifically faith we tend to erroneously read in "belief" as the definition for both, and while belief and faith are not mutually exclusive and there is a distinction that must be made between the two. To be fair most people, including many self-professed religious people, associate their faith with their creed- that which explains there beliefs regarding the creation, human nature, the afterlife etc. Along with this usually follows an attitude of "I'm gonna' simply follow the rules as I'm told that they are by the bible or whatever respective religious text and I intend through this to circumvent any sort of damnation or bad karma that may result from the circumstances of my life" That in a nutshell among other distinctions is what differentiates religion from spirituality. This attitude is what many open minded evangelicals dub the spirit of religion. It is almost entirely fear based and Christianity, as well as the other Abrahamic religions is infested with it. Unfortunately this is the "religion" that most "outsiders" become the most exposed to, as it is definitely the most outspoken viewpoint.

Getting back to faith. Faith is a spiritual dynamic between the individual and the transcendental. It is a desire to align oneself through ones actions and habits as directly as possible with the divine. I hesitate to say God, because just the word god is saturated w/ so many religion-based and negative connotations that its use often takes the mind off course in discussions such as these. The relationship between the individual and the transcendental exists independently of scientific proof. Just as humans breath independently of the biological knowledge of what lungs are and their respective purpose. To those who choose to go beyond owning a belief structure and pursue a relationship w/ the divine there is no science in the world that can effectively invalidate their experience. The experience is the proof.

Now in regard to religious texts. Despite the evidence of historical inaccuracies and scientific improbabilities many spiritually minded people, including myself, will tell you that the wisdom that is inherent in such text is exists independently from its historic or scientific validity (which is exactly what mr. dave was trying to assert). To use an analogy, in one of Aesop's Fables, The Tortoise and the Hare, the moral of the story "slow and steady wins the race" has value despite the fact that we all know that tortoises and hares cant speak and the probability of them having a race against each other is pretty slim.
Despite the historical improbability of this event happening there is value, wisdom, inherent in it. The same goes for Christianity and other religions, but the problem with religion is that they are treated by fundamentalist nincompoops as if iys value is dependent on there historical and scientific accuracy, hence the entire apologetics movement. This IMO is the greatest mistake that most religions make. The value that is inherent in religious text is that which broadens and fosters one's relationship with the transcendent and which elevates ones level of consciousness. If it does not do this or if such wisdom is manipulated for greed based purposes or if its misinterpreted and implemented at a lower level of consciousness than what its intended for, then it is cancerous and should be ignored.

As Jesus said in Matthew 7:16 "You will know them by their fruit"

Freebase Dali

I understand your first two paragraphs. I was born and raised in church under a non-denominational Christian faith. I'm not debating the difference between beliefs and faith. I know the difference.
What I'm targeting is belief resulting from biblical scripture.

Most Christians I've met believe most of what the bible says (in the new testament, anyway).
I don't remember the verse (and excuse the sarcasm here) but I'm pretty sure that most Christians believe in an after-life as a result of their religion's ideals.

What I'm questioning here is if we're simply using the bible as a moral tap and give no thought to it in any other context, we're not really fulfilling the requirements set by the religion. Ultimately, we could strip out all the divinity and happenings from the bible and just leave quotes akin to the ones you see in Psalms and Acts and get our wisdom there. If we need to learn about sacrifice, why believe that a guy died for your sins, when you can simply learn about sacrifice like the rest of us do.
Are we simply using the bible as a tool? Or are we truly believing in Christianity?
One would assume those are two separate things.

__________________

cardboard adolescent

in the loosest sense, isn't the bible a tool to get to god? of course religion should be seen as a tool, it's hardly an end in itself. it's just words...