Aren't all religions the same? Is Christ the only way to God?

Mark Kerr said:
Garyzilla, my point was that I believe Christians need to stop trying to prove God's existence and stop trying to shoe-horn their belief of God into logic. Here are my personal conclusions:

1. God will never be proven or disproved via scientific evidence.
2. Belief in God is irrational. There is no evidence or logical arguments that make belief in God rational.

Yet, I still believe in Christ and believe all that He says he is...why?

Because my FAITH does not need science, evidence or reason. I would be faithful to God even if every shred of scientific evidence pointed away from the existence of God.

Thats all I was trying to say.

[MK]

P.S. Sometimes I just dont understand why Christians just cant admit that science and logic arent consistent with the story of Jesus. I mean, Christian Science is a joke, and Christ presents irrefutable logical contradictions.


I believe Mark that we are more on the same page than I thought. God is the author and creator of science. Yes we can use science to a point to prove that God exists. I think it falls into the relem of General revelation. But are we fullly going to prove God with science, and everthing about Him. By no means.

I believe that NOT believing in God irrational. God as put in every person a God shaped hole that only the true God can fill. The evidence is the Bible. John 1:1 states that.

I do believe that we do not know everything that there is about God, and what we do know is very small, and that is where FAITH comes.

-Pastor Garyzilla
 
That is an interesting point, perhaps science and logic are not consistent with the story of Jesus, yet science shows us that we are studying the creation of a higher power.

The story of Christ seems to be the biggest controversy....some believe he was the messiah, others disregard him as the messiah but had some type of purpose, others regard him as a common man - the point being, Christ is essentially the center of the debate. The existence of God is debated by a much smaller percentage of the populace.

The whole issue of the after life is highly debated as well between various religions - jehovahs believing that they get their own little planet, mormons...I forgot their story, the Jew spin, the Christian spin, the mesianic jew spin......ever kinda looked up at the ceiling tiles and thought: "does anyone really know?"

But its kind of like faith in Christ....a guy walks up to you and says "You will be redeemed if you believe that Christ died on the cross for your sins"...but if you dont believe, you'll go to hell. Another guy walks up and says "I'm a jew, thereby a descendant of abraham, and one of God's chosen people. When I die, I'm going to heaven. You're not jewish so you're screwed". Another guy walks up and says "Well, if you come down and pray with us and follow our doctrine, when you die, you will be the God of your own little planet" and you ask, "so what happens if I dont become one of you?" and he replies "Well, you essentially rot in your carcass, ashes to ashes, dust to dust, your soul dies when you die...the only way you can live forever is to become a jehova". And then some other guy tells you that you need to believe in a guy who travelled up the yucatan peninsula and buried some big stone tablets in upstate new york. And then another guy walks up and says "Yeah, I drink all week long, bang strange pussy at the office when my wife is out of town, and I make up for it by saying my hail marys when I get home at night, I'm going to heaven.

Now if you sit back and think about it.....all you have are the words of man and the bible....there is no proof, no irrefutable evidence, and yet a bunch of people believe in some kind of religion.....and they have their own twist on how they are going to heaven. As I am sitting here thinking about this, I'm thinking we are pretty fucked up.

To become a mason, one must pass a number of criteria, but the one that caught my eye was the belief in a higher power. Now mind you, the masons are said to have descended from the templar knights and various other sects whom have always had some type of spiritual influence in their workings. Evidently, a man's belief in a higher power, referred to in some texts as his creator, is the key component, not necessarily how he gets there. They also read from the king james in the lodge......I wonder if that pisses off the mormons and the catholics....or perhaps the mormons ....eh, I'm not going to go there. Anyway, my point was, regardless of the discrepancies between the various religions, the masonic order, as a global organization, embraces each other as brethren in light of the differences between their own religious affiliations ....perhaps it is a model for the rest of us. Instead, we have catholics killing protestants, muslims killing gentiles....it all seems like a bunch of man-contrived bushwa to me....the whole concept of God destroying the enemies of the jews is what probably started fundamentalists on their way....

I have no idea what I was trying to say.
 
MK.....

You said the one thing that in your previous post that is the factor that makes Christians or any believers in any religion and that is FAITH.
Without Faith there is no hope.
Without Hope there is no future.

Not meaning to sound sappy. But Faith is the permabond that hold a religious group together.

b2
 
I'll add a new twist to this. I have a friend who is a strong believer in predestination. As I interpret this God, at some point in eternity past, looked down the corridors of time to see all who would one day accept the offer of salvation through Christ. In other words God chooses His Elect, regardless of a person's exercised Faith. This goes directly against the Catholic teachings on "free will". To me this implies that a person could go through life striving to live a life of Faith, but suffer eternal damnation because they simply never had a chance as one of the Elect. Anyone have a take on this?
 
I'll work in backwards order here....

"Without Faith there is no hope.
Without Hope there is no future."

100% FALSE. I hope to win the lottery, but I have no faith that I will. Whether I decide to buy a ticket tonight or not(it's only a paltry 10mil ;)) tomorrow will come. I will have had no hope of winning the lottery, but tomorrow(the future) WILL COME regardless.

"I believe that NOT believing in God irrational. God as put in every person a God shaped hole that only the true God can fill. The evidence is the Bible. John 1:1 states that. "

This will fall on deaf ears, but the Bible is evidence of nothing. I'm not even going to go into detail here because proof is self-evident in the fact that we even need to have this thread.

"First of all christ said:no one comes to the father but by me.So there you go your question answered,be it by different denominations or whatever,you still need to come to christ to see the father"

If you believe the Christian mythos. As Hogg pointed out, attempting to "get to God" through Christ is an immediate yellow card for the Jews. It's completely off base for a Hindu and an atheist...well, no comment on that one.
 
Pre-destination is tricky. That is another Christian paradox. A God that knows the future, but puts you on Earth to make the choice to believe in Christ. If someone could answer the pre-destination question, then you would probably be considered one of the best Christian thinkers of the 21st Century.

[MK]
 
Grizzly said:
I'll work in backwards order here....

"Without Faith there is no hope.
Without Hope there is no future."

100% FALSE. I hope to win the lottery, but I have no faith that I will. Whether I decide to buy a ticket tonight or not(it's only a paltry 10mil ;)) tomorrow will come. I will have had no hope of winning the lottery, but tomorrow(the future) WILL COME regardless.

"I believe that NOT believing in God irrational. God as put in every person a God shaped hole that only the true God can fill. The evidence is the Bible. John 1:1 states that. "

This will fall on deaf ears, but the Bible is evidence of nothing. I'm not even going to go into detail here because proof is self-evident in the fact that we even need to have this thread.

"First of all christ said:no one comes to the father but by me.So there you go your question answered,be it by different denominations or whatever,you still need to come to christ to see the father"

If you believe the Christian mythos. As Hogg pointed out, attempting to "get to God" through Christ is an immediate yellow card for the Jews. It's completely off base for a Hindu and an atheist...well, no comment on that one.


Not to be mean Grizzly, but your post made no sense!
 
Because you wish it that way. It all made perfect sense.

I'll summarize for you:

1) Faith, hop and the future are all non-related and idependent of each other.

2) The bible is proof of nothing

3) Manfreakca's post only holds water to those of the christian faith.
 
Grizzly said:
Because you wish it that way. It all made perfect sense.

I'll summarize for you:

1) Faith, hop and the future are all non-related and idependent of each other.

2) The bible is proof of nothing

3) Manfreakca's post only holds water to those of the christian faith.

Grizz, I do not see how you can say the Bible is proof of nothing, when it has been proven to be correct over and over again. History, Archaeology have proven it to be correct. Plus what was listed on the first post. The real reason why people do not want to believe in God, Christ ect.. because it means they have to give something up, and be accountable to someone other than yourself. Your post really made no sense, and still does not.
 
Last edited:
The predestination thing is tricky, depends on what you believe. I think God knows all possible outcomes, I don't know if you know anything about the bible code or not but they found record of both al gore and bush winning the election. I believe jesus was fully man and fully god, yes, i believe it was possible for jesus to sin, he choose not to. The devil knew this, that's why he tried to tempt jesus. As far as walking on water and other such miricles, of course they defy logic and physics, that's what makes them miracles. If you belive in christianity then you belive God created the laws and universe with his word, then you will alos know that jesus was the word made flesh, for if he said mountain move, it would move. This is how jesus could turn water into wine.




Mark Kerr said:
Pre-destination is tricky. That is another Christian paradox. A God that knows the future, but puts you on Earth to make the choice to believe in Christ. If someone could answer the pre-destination question, then you would probably be considered one of the best Christian thinkers of the 21st Century.

[MK]
 
How do you know that the Bible is true? Isn't it just a bunch of fables?

There are many evidences that confirm that the Bible is reliable. First, history and archeology confirm the biblical record. Over 25,000 sites have now been discovered that pertain to the Bible. As Nelson Glueck, renowned Jewish archaeologist said, "It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Even though archeology does not prove spiritual truth, archeological confirmation is an amazing testimony to the accuracy of the Bible.
As a comparison, the religion of Mormonism makes many claims as to history, especially about the Americas. Yet none of its claims have been or can be verified by archeology, seriously damaging its credibility.
Another fascinating and unique aspect of Christianity is the accuracy of biblical prophecy. There are over 2,000 accurately fulfilled predictions in the Bible including over 200 specific details about the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. For example, Isaiah 53 beautifully describes the life of Christ 700 years before it took place! Even the town of Jesus' birth was foretold in the Old Testament (Micah 5:2). And there are no prophetic failures.
The Bible contains page after page of history written in advance. The skeptic must come to grips with this evidence.
Concerning the New Testament, it is helpful to appreciate that all of the New Testament writers were of the generation of Jesus. Each writer was either an eyewitness to Jesus or was an interviewer of eyewitnesses. Three of the writers were Jesus' disciples-Matthew, John, and Peter.
Another key fact is the manuscript evidence itself. Recognizing that there are no known original manuscripts in existence for the Bible or for any other ancient writing, let's examine the Bible. For the New Testament, there are over 24,000 handwritten copies or portions thereof from antiquity now extant. This is far more than other ancient books. For example, the second most available ancient manuscripts are from Homer's Iliad, for which there are 643 manuscript copies, while most ancient documents have fewer than 25 existing copies.
Important is the time interval between the actual events, the date of writing, and the earliest known manuscript copy. For the Bible, manuscript copies or portions thereof exist that were written within 35 to 160 years after the originals. Recent dating of one manuscript of a portion of the Gospel of Matthew (the so-called Magdalen text) suggests that it was written in about A.D. 50-a mere 17 years after the crucifixion of Christ. If these findings hold up, it means that the Gospel of Mark, which predates the Matthew Gospel, was written as early as A.D. 40-only seven years or so after the crucifixion.
The interval between the historical events and the written evidence is far better for the New Testament than any other ancient manuscript. For example, the first account of Buddha's life was written 700 years after his death. The earliest copy of Caesar's works is 950 years after being written, and the earliest available copy of Plato's works is dated 1250 years after the original. Yet we do not question the authority of these other works!
Even more impressive is the degree of textual variance in existing copies. Considering the enormous number of ancient New Testament manuscripts, there are only nominal differences in the various copies. The data for the New Testament is impressive. Only 40 lines, or one fifth of one per cent are in question. This compares to large textual variances in other ancient writings. For example, the New Testament is 25 times more accurately copied than the Iliad, which was also "sacred" and is considered one of the best copied works of antiquity.
Further support for the Bible comes from the fact that events of the New Testament are supported by writings outside the Bible. Corroboration is available from several secular and Jewish historians of antiquity. (Examples: Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Epictetus, Lucian, Aristides, Josephus, etc.)
Another interesting thing is the thousands of quotations found in writings of the early Church Fathers (A.D. 100-450). Even if all the New Testament manuscripts disappeared, it would still be possible to reconstruct almost the entire New Testament with quotes from the Church Fathers.
Thus, in his book, The Bible and Archaeology, Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum, stated about the New Testament: "The interval, then, between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact, negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established."
In addition to its being externally verified, significant further evidence of its reliability is the internally consistent nature of the Bible. It is truly an amazingly consistent document. The messages of approximately 40 different writers of the 66 books of the Bible, written over 1,500 years, in three different languages, all fit together like the pieces of a giant jigsaw puzzle. There is one continual theme throughout-God's plan of salvation from sin won for the whole world by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This consistency itself attests to the miracle of this book.
Its mere endurance speaks for itself. For thousands of years people have explored every nook and cranny of the Bible. Alleged difficulties have been systematically answered. Upon examination, there are no errors or contradictions in the Bible. (A good reference is When Critics Ask, A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties, by Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe.)
Moreover, part of the testimony of the Bible's power and truth is the evidence of changed history and changed human lives. The Bible has answers for today's problems. The relevance of biblical truths becomes evident to those who study it. People become convicted and changed.
The more one studies without bias the teachings found in the Bible, the more he or she will see that they conform to the truths of experience and human nature. It is just as powerful to the lives of people today as to those thousands of years ago.
The Bible has proven to be trustworthy, powerful, and significant.
 
If you subscribe to predestination, than it seems of little point to minister your Faith, as God would have already determine a person's salvation regardless of hearing the Good Word from us. However, Jesus clearly calls us to minister in his teachings. As God is all-knowing, only He could contemplate how sentancing someone to a life of eternal damnation regardless of there actions here on earth could be justified. Of course you could use the argument that God knew who would accept his word and be Redeemed. But my friend feels that there is truly an Elect that any worldly actions will not condemn, with the thought being that they walk in Faith because God has touched their hearts. But no promises are made that accepting Jesus alone will get you into Heaven. I don't think this would be an appealing way to "sell' Christianity for obvious reasons.
And by the way this guy isn't a Jehovah's Witness, in case you were wondering.
 
the bible is not the word of god......its the word of man.
it was written by men and has been edited countless times by man.

i believe in a higher power....god if u will.
the god of my belief would not doom 3/4 (a guess) of the worlds population, who were indoctrinated in and conditioned to believe in a religion other than christianity since birth, to burn in a lake of fire for all of eternity unless they accept jesus christ as their lord and saviour or a least acknowledge him to be the ONE and TRUE son of god in the flesh.
i have mentioned this in seemingly unjust dilemna (the need to reject ingrained and conditioned belief and/or the chance of not being exposed to christian teachings by some cultures) to evangelical sorts before. they answer by saying god has made available a way out and that everyone will be, at some point in their life exposed to the word of god and knowledge of jesus, and thats their big chance basically...
bullshit----what kind of god would that be.....how could anything that spawned such an incredible and complex and miraculous universe with such intricate and unfathonable systems and subsystems, from the atomic thru the physical and planetary, to solar systems & galaxies and on and on then be also so limited and petty as to lay before much if not most of humankind the practically herculean task of rejecting the beliefs they've been conditioned since birth to believe in favor of the ones favored by judeo christian believers or suffer unspeakable pain and misery for all of eternity.

btw
the "bible code" is mentioned......they also found amazingly accurate predictions in moby dick and other literary works...the bible code has been debunked.

lastly-logic's application and usefulness is limited.
its great for designing technological and mechanical devices but sucks for understanding and/or appreciating the nature of life,love,etcetcetc.
the practioners of zen and other eastern philosophies understand this best. thats why they also realize (or believe) that the true path to enlightenment and peace is to understand that YOU CANT understand and the belief that u can or that u do is an illusion.
YOURGOINGTOHELLDOTCOM
 
garyzilla said:
There are many evidences that confirm that the Bible is reliable.

Yes, that is absolutely true. In fact, it is possible for archeologists to trace Christ's journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. Pretty cool I think. However, most of the Old Testament is not confirmed by archeologists, except for the existence of certain ancient cities. For example, there is no evidence of the Jews being in Egypt, there are no written records describing the massive defeat of the Egyptian Army (despite the fact that Egypt kept good military records) etc.

garyzilla said:
Even the town of Jesus' birth was foretold in the Old Testament (Micah 5:2). And there are no prophetic failures.

There is no evidence that Jesus was indeed born in Bethlehem. In fact, there is more evidence that the early Biblical writers lied about the place and time in which he was born in order to make Jesus seem like a perfect fit for the prophet Isaih. (We have proof, for example, that Jesus could not have been born during the reign of Herod the Great, as the Bible writers foretold.) But I dont know how much stock I would put in this...

garyzilla said:
Concerning the New Testament, it is helpful to appreciate that all of the New Testament writers were of the generation of Jesus. Each writer was either an eyewitness to Jesus or was an interviewer of eyewitnesses. Three of the writers were Jesus' disciples-Matthew, John, and Peter.

Also inaccurate. Several of the books, such as The Gospel of John, James, the Letters of John, etc were not written until between 90 and 110 AD. All eyewitnesses were long dead. Second Peter was written between 130-150 AD, which is pretty far off.

garyzilla said:
The interval between the historical events and the written evidence is far better for the New Testament than any other ancient manuscript. For example, the first account of Buddha's life was written 700 years after his death. The earliest copy of Caesar's works is 950 years after being written, and the earliest available copy of Plato's works is dated 1250 years after the original. Yet we do not question the authority of these other works!

Umm...Yes we do. You will not find any acheologist who claims that the account of Buddha, Caesar or Plato is completely accurate. In fact, they will tell you that they are more likely to be incredible inaccurate. I know for a fact most philosophers do not consider Plato's account of Socrates accurate. (I wrote a paper in which my thesis was that philosophical reliance upon Plato is closer to religion than history.)

garyzilla said:
The Bible has proven to be trustworthy, powerful, and significant.

I completely agree. Historically, the Bible is very accurate. The major points of contention are things that we wish there had been more historical backing. If I saw someone walking on water, I would have written it down, etc. I know I would be running around town telling everyone! It is that kind of historical backing that people want, not whether he entered the Temple from the east or the west.

The Bible is a brilliant document, and I think trying to disprove it is really silly. There are greater theological debates that should stem from such a work.

[MK]
 
GZ, how does an ardent Christian explain/debate/refute the Nag Hammidi find and the gospel of Thomas. Is it one of those "its not in the word so it is not the word of God" sort of arguments that one-dimensional Christians are famous for?
 
Is the Nag Hammadi find the same as the Gospel of Mary find?

[MK]

P.S. Nevermind, looked it up on the Net.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top