The Identity of the Beast of Revelation and His Mark

[christiang]

I just finished a new study on what the "beast of Revelation" actually is, and how it relates to what is already forming in Europe as a United States of Europe, and what the "mark of the beast" actually is, and how it relates to the greatest financial ponzi scheme that has ever existed on the earth, and how the United States relates to these visions in the book of Revelation, and who the "antichrist" actually is, and what he uses right now to rule over all the nations of the earth. Take a read, some of the information in the study may have things you've probably already heard, but there is a deeper and shocking truth that many overlook in how this "antichrist" rules over our daily lives, over everyone, rich and poor, small and great, believer and non-believer. http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2018/12/07/th ... ng-of-666/ .

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 147 by Clownboat]

Christians and Muslims both tell their children that there is a god that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, yet hates the other so much as to send them to hell.

There you go again getting Catholic teaching wrong. I do not teach my children that God hates others and sends them to hell. First, the Church does not refer to the other in the way you do. Jesus spoke to the woman at the well and did not view her as other. Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan where a Samaritan, even though an outsider, was not considered other. Scripture tells us to love our enemies. So, I’m not sure what you were taught when you were a child.

Second, it is not a teaching of the Catholic faith to say God sends someone to hell. If a person does not want to be with God, then God gives them what they want and as Catholics we are taught the absence of God is hell. So, as you can see it is not our belief that God sends everyone in His Church to heaven and anyone not currently in the faith to eternal damnation. Are you unfamiliar with this Scripture passage, “He who is not against us, is with us.� Your understanding seems to be incorrectly understanding the Church’s position on heaven, hell, salvation, God, mercy, love, etc.

Not sure what you are going on about here as this has nothing to do with my being set free from my religious beliefs. Reading the Bible on my own was a huge eye opener. Have you read the Bible?

I was merely suggesting that perhaps, as a few of your posts have now suggested, you were not properly taught what it is the Catholic Church actually teaches/believes. So, you claiming to now be “free� from your religious beliefs means you are free from your straw man version of the Catholic faith. You rejected what you thought was the Catholic faith.

As for reading the Bible, I have read the entire Bible on my own. But it is important to point out that any Catholic who attends mass regularly will have received the entire Bible (all of the OT, all of the NT, as well as all the proverbs and psalms) within 3 years. So, a lifetime Catholic is continually fed the Word of God. And all of it. Not just the fun/easy verses that pastor Pete at the local Christian assembly on the corner chooses to share with his congregation on any given Sunday. The Catholic Church skips nothing. She does not, unlike so many others, pick and choose.

And yes, the Bible was and still is a huge eye opener for me too. (though I have a feeling you mean that in a different way than I do).

Quote:
I did. Go back and check it out. I explained that the 72 virgin teaching is not on par with Catholic teachings because with a little digging one can see Muslim belief as a whole is not reasonable.

Demonstrably false and my evidence is the billions of humans that do find it reasonable.

Wait a minute. Are you now suggesting something is reasonable if a large group of people finds it reasonable? So, you think Catholic belief is reasonable? You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

I believe there are a large group of people that believe in alien abduction or that man never landed on the moon, but even though others believe that, I find those beliefs unreasonable. I’m afraid your argument regarding the numbers of those who believe in the Muslim religion prove it is reasonable is actually unreasonable. It simply does not logically follow.

Quote:
I don’t find Muslim teachings historical, reasonable, or logical.

You're Catholic, I don't know why you would.

Wow! You are all over the place . . . Do you find their teachings reasonable and logical? I know many non Catholics, atheists, Baptists, doctors, teachers, repair men, humanists, etc. who also do not find Muslim teachings reasonable either. So, not sure what your point is.

In fact, you probably believe that you will go to a heaven and they don't deserve it.

I believe no such thing.

If you believed all this and found other religions to be reasonable, that would truly be something.

So, we’re back to this again? Yes! As you admit it would be unreasonable seeing how we teach two different things to believe we both could be right – that would be illogical. Which is why I can’t understand why you seemed to insist in your previous post that if I find my religion reasonable, I must find theirs reasonable. That doesn’t make sense. If I found their religion reasonable, I would believe in their religion. However I do not, because I do not find it reasonable for all the reasons I have previously mentioned.

Quote:
They teach serious errors that are harmful to human beings.

Pot, meet kettle.

Please name a specific Catholic teaching that is harmful to human beings. Thank you.

Irrelevant as the claims being compared were religious claims. Whether in the past or in the future, the claims are still religious.

I still have no clue why you continue to insist all religious claims are the same. Do you find all non religious claims the same? Of course not. You assess claims on their merit. You look into the source, historical record, corroboration, eye witness account, personal testimony, motivation, facts, logic, fruit, meaning, significance, etc.

Quote:
Asked and answered. If one does a little research the founding and flourish of Islam is troubling. The Islamic religion was not founded until the 7th century and Muhammad was not exactly as squeaky clean as Jesus, nor is he witnessed to have performed any miracles. Muslims do not believe in the crucifixion of Jesus, despite historical records. Muslims do not believe in showing love to the unbeliever. Women are beaten and mistreated in accordance with the Muslim religion. Terrorism is brought forth.

This is a bunch of hog wash.
Please show the historical record that shows a Jesus existed a was crucified.

There are many ancient writings and historical records that have been scrutinized showing Jesus existed and was crucified and the historical record reflects eye witness and testimonial account of miracles performed by Jesus. Islam does not even teach that Muhammad performed miracles.

Says the guy that believes in talking snakes, donkeys and the dead coming back to life.

Like I have said the reason I believe in the recorded testimony of certain miracles is because I believe the source. I believe the Bible and the Church to have the marks of what one should expect a true faith to have. I do not see these marks in Muslim teaching. Again, just because I believe Jesus turned water into wine does not then mean I would believe it if Sam today said He claims he saw Jesus sprout wings and fly through the sky and down into the sea where he remained underwater in the sea for 8 days and returned to the surface and then disappeared. Why wouldn’t I believe what Sam said until I had a chance to investigate and gather more information? Because I need to find out more about the source, Sam – about who he is and what his motivation is. I would need to see if there exists any corroborating evidence – did anyone else see this too? Does where and when Sam said he saw this check out. So as you can see, it isn’t because I don’t believe Jesus could actually do what Sam says He did that I don’t believe Sam. It isn’t because I deny the possibility of miracles, rather as you can see I apply faith and reason and it would be unreasonable to believe Sam without further investigation.

So, AGAIN just because I believe Jesus brought a man back to life does not mean I must believe Muslim teaching that 72 virgins awaits those who die in heaven. They are two different claims.

You actually think you are the type of person we should seek advice about Muslim teachings? You sir, have a dog in this fight.

You have no dog in this fight . . . Do you find Muslim teaching reasonable?

Quote:
I don't think you are being honest. If you were, you would also be a Muslim because the mechanism for belief for both appears to be the same.



Quote:
Not at all – as I have explained many times now. The Muslim religion makes no sense.

It does make sense for literally billions of humans.

Your comment does not logically follow. A great number of people at one point believed the earth was flat. This didn’t make it true.

As I just showed, the religion need not make sense in order for you to apply faith and then believe.

As I continue to repeat – it does need to make sense. I use faith and reason.

for what you call eye witness testimony, that is a bit laughable because I think you actually are referring to religious promotional material, not a historical record.

No, I am referring to ancient writings and historical recordings that we can study.

What reasoning are you using to believe that hundreds of dead bodies got out of their graves and walked the streets of Jerusalem? What reasoning are you using to believe that a snake and a donkey spoke or that a man survived in the belly of a whale for 3 days.

Miracles by definition defy some kind of scientific law. And I believe miracles are possible. My problem with the Muslim religion is not that they might claim some miracle. I have no problem with miracles. This doesn’t mean every miraculous claim is valid. I’m actually a little surprised you aren’t getting this.

Quote:
It meets your requirements though.



Quote:
Nope. For the 10th time now – nope it does not meet my requirements.

Yes it does!
The Quran is backed by a historical record. It provides words to live by. Billions consider it to be a good example and it has eye witness testimony.
These were YOUR conditions.

As I demonstrated the Muslim religion does not meet those conditions. I believe it fails on historicity, words to live by, good example, and eye witness accounts of miracles.

How did you miss my comparison about how faith and flipping a coin could both get you to a truthful conclusion, but they are not reliable ways to do so?

I didn’t miss the point. I disagree that it is a similar comparison. If one guy was reliable, trustworthy, a good example, other things he said/did were true, then I would be more inclined to exercise faith and take his advice and do what he said then flipping a coin to decide what to do. One would be exercising faith and reason – the other not really even faith more like chance/luck.

If I was selling you property, would you want a title company to assure you that the title is clean, or would you use faith or flip a coin to decide if i was being truthful?

If I had the access and means to a title company I would exercise that option. Otherwise, I would have to use secondary means to determine if I should go thru with the deal. Do I know anything about you? Do I like/trust you? Is there reason not to trust you? What has your experience with others been? What do they say about you? There are several things I could look into to decide whether it was reasonable to buy your property – flipping a coin would not be one of them.

Quote:
I would not apply faith to other religions because I have yet to find any other religion reasonable.

All the ridiculous things that are in the Bible you find credible.

Like what? Again, you realize belief in a creator that is not of this world would mean He would be capable of extraordinary things, right? So, really not that ridiculous to believe there is something more than we can currently know.

You can't as of yet explain what reasoning you are using

And yet I have several times now, but it is you who seems to want to lump everything together. Seems a little narrow and dare I say unreasonable.

You have not listed any reasoning for why you believe in talking animals for example.

Yes, I have. Surely a supernatural realm would not be subject to the same scientific laws as an earthly realm. I am not as limiting or closed minded in my views as you.

I see that you have faith in one religion while not apply said faith to others.

Yes! I see that too and with good reason!

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 147 by Clownboat]

Christians and Muslims both tell their children that there is a god that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, yet hates the other so much as to send them to hell.

There you go again getting Catholic teaching wrong.

Moderator Comment
Hi RightReason,

Instead you could write: That's not Catholic teaching.

Just depersonalise your posts as best you can.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[polonius]

Christiang posted:

I just finished a new study on what the "beast of Revelation" actually is, and how it relates to what is already forming in Europe as a United States of Europe, and what the "mark of the beast" actually is, and how it relates to the greatest financial ponzi scheme that has ever existed on the earth, and how the United States relates to these visions in the book of Revelation, and who the "antichrist" actually is, and what he uses right now to rule over all the nations of the earth. Take a read, some of the information in the study may have things you've probably already heard, but there is a deeper and shocking truth that many overlook in how this "antichrist" rules over our daily lives, over everyone, rich and poor, small and great, believer and non-believer. http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2018/12/07/th ... lation-the...

RESPONSE. Perhaps you should follow St. Paul's advice to test everything and put away childish things.

The Revelation story has been applied to many periods of history, but it remains a fable.

[showme]

Christiang posted:

I just finished a new study on what the "beast of Revelation" actually is, and how it relates to what is already forming in Europe as a United States of Europe, and what the "mark of the beast" actually is, and how it relates to the greatest financial ponzi scheme that has ever existed on the earth, and how the United States relates to these visions in the book of Revelation, and who the "antichrist" actually is, and what he uses right now to rule over all the nations of the earth. Take a read, some of the information in the study may have things you've probably already heard, but there is a deeper and shocking truth that many overlook in how this "antichrist" rules over our daily lives, over everyone, rich and poor, small and great, believer and non-believer. http://www.wisdomofgod.co/2018/12/07/th ... lation-the...

RESPONSE. Perhaps you should follow St. Paul's advice to test everything and put away childish things.

The Revelation story has been applied to many periods of history, but it remains a fable.

Revelation in general, parallels Daniel, which runs from Nebuchadnezzar to the 8th head of the beast and his 10 horns, which would be the feet of iron and clay, who will hate the "harlot"/Judah, and burn, and persecute her, which applies to the Caesars/dictators/Emperors of the present era, such as Hitler of the kingdom of the Kaiser/Caesar, and Stalin, of the kingdom of the Czar/Caesar, all of who persecuted Judah, the Jews. As with Daniel 2:44-45, and Revelation 16:13-16, all those nations will be gathered together and "crushed". Apparently, the nations are gathering against Israel, and the crushing of the nations can not be far off, although the crushing of the feet of iron and clay (Daniel 2:34) has already happened, and is on tract to happen again per Daniel 2:35. An example of the crushing of the iron and clay would be the battle of Megiddo in 1918, which included Germany/Rome, and Edom, the Ottoman empire, and the 1967 1973 Israeli wars, whereas Russia/Rome, and Edom/clay, the Muslims, were "crushed".

[Clownboat]

Christians and Muslims both tell their children that there is a god that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, yet hates the other so much as to send them to hell.

There you go again getting Catholic teaching wrong.

About 40,000 denominations of Christianity and you think you can hide behind Catholicism? Catholicism can be shown no more true than any other version. Stop pretending that it is special as you do yourself a disservice.

The hell concept is a real concept in both Christianity and Islam. I accept that your personal hell belief will vary from those of other Christians because the Christian religion is a mess with all sorts of different justifications for all sorts of horrible beliefs.

I do not teach my children that God hates others and sends them to hell.

Yes, I'm sure your version of condemnation is so much better than your neighbors.

First, the Church does not refer to the other in the way you do. Jesus spoke to the woman at the well and did not view her as other. Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan where a Samaritan, even though an outsider, was not considered other. Scripture tells us to love our enemies. So, I’m not sure what you were taught when you were a child.

I was taught about hell and heaven. I was taught about how one gets to either. My hell beliefs were myth, but so are yours it seems. I just don't teach my children about this mythical hell that unbelievers belong in.

This blanket condemnation of others is not healthy for humanity.

Second, it is not a teaching of the Catholic faith to say God sends someone to hell.

Semantics and Catholicism is not special anyways. Just one of many flavors of Christianity.

Not sure what you are going on about here as this has nothing to do with my being set free from my religious beliefs. Reading the Bible on my own was a huge eye opener. Have you read the Bible?

I was merely suggesting that perhaps, as a few of your posts have now suggested, you were not properly taught what it is the Catholic Church actually teaches/believes.

I have never been Catholic nor ever claimed to be, so why you keep bringing up one specific form of Christianity while ignoring literally 10's of thousands of other versions is lost on me. Well, not completely. Obviously Catholicism is your preferred version and the odds are, you were brought up Catholic.

So, you claiming to now be “free� from your religious beliefs means you are free from your straw man version of the Catholic faith. You rejected what you thought was the Catholic faith.

I'm free to be more Christ like ironically. It was my faith that informed me that billions of humans deserved hell. It was my faith that informed me the homosexuals choose their lifestyle and therefore deserve eternal punishment. It was my faith that informed me that Catholics almost had the religion right, they just worship a women instead of god. (Yes, that was my churches stance on Catholicism).

As for reading the Bible, I have read the entire Bible on my own.

What did you make of the ineffective punishing god that it portrays?
God creates humans, calls them good. Next thing you know, he is punishing humans by kicking them out of the garden of eden. What did that punishment accomplish?
Next thing we know, he is flooding the entire planet because they once again rebelled against him. Now what did that punishment accomplish?
Then he promises to never do that again, but he repeatedly sends his favorite tribe out to massacre other tribes so they can have their promised land. Seems to me like this god is made up and designed by man to serve man's purposes against other men.

Then we have this Christian offshoot with its own problems and differences, including sending his son, who is also himself and is perfect, but he has him killed, but he rises from the dead. This single god becomes 3, but not 3. Then this massacre of logic was codified 300 years later buy a group of men who wanted to be sure everyone was in agreement. And here we are, almost 40,000 denominations later.

But it is important to point out that any Catholic who attends mass regularly will have received the entire Bible (all of the OT, all of the NT, as well as all the proverbs and psalms) within 3 years. So, a lifetime Catholic is continually fed the Word of God.

It seems that all denominations indoctrinate. This is not exclusive to just Catholics. Consider this, Muslims go to Mosque and Hindu's to temple. Going to these places does not make their beliefs true. Same applies to yours, sorry.

And all of it. Not just the fun/easy verses that pastor Pete at the local Christian assembly on the corner chooses to share with his congregation on any given Sunday. The Catholic Church skips nothing. She does not, unlike so many others, pick and choose.

I would love to hear the Jephthah story told in church! 2 decades of being a believer and I had to read the Bible on my own to hear about that abortion.

Demonstrably false and my evidence is the billions of humans that do find it reasonable.

Wait a minute. Are you now suggesting something is reasonable if a large group of people finds it reasonable? So, you think Catholic belief is reasonable? You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Catholicism is reasonable to millions of people. Just like how Islam is reasonable to billions, or Hinduism if you prefer. I sure love having my cake and eating it too!

I believe there are a large group of people that believe in alien abduction or that man never landed on the moon, but even though others believe that, I find those beliefs unreasonable. I’m afraid your argument regarding the numbers of those who believe in the Muslim religion prove it is reasonable is actually unreasonable. It simply does not logically follow.

Your failure hear is thinking that I'm making an ad populum fallacy. I have demonstrated that Islam is reasonable to literally billions of people. This fact does nothing for the truthfulness of Islam, nor Catholicism etc... If I were to use this to argue for truthfulness, then I would be committing a fallacy. I'm just noting reality and that is not a fallacy.

Wow! You are all over the place . . . Do you find their teachings reasonable and logical?

You obviously need to be more specific. Which teaching are you referring to and I'll see if I can tell you if I find it reasonable or not for myself. Not sure why you care if I find it reasonable or not though. Do you know why you care if I find some Islamic teaching to be reasonable?

I know many non-Catholics, atheists, Baptists, doctors, teachers, repair men, humanists, etc. who also do not find Muslim teachings reasonable either. So, not sure what your point is.

Ask yourself, as this point about teachers and repair men is your point, not a point I have made.
Consider this though, if you claimed that Islam was unreasonable, and I could point to billions of plumbers that do find it reasonable (not that I can), then I would have evidenced my claim that it is reasonable to billions. This is what I have done for Islam as it is reasonable to billions of humans even though you said it is not reasonable. Now pay attention, this is not the same claim as saying it is therefore 'truthful'.

So, we’re back to this again? Yes! As you admit it would be unreasonable seeing how we teach two different things to believe we both could be right – that would be illogical. Which is why I can’t understand why you seemed to insist in your previous post that if I find my religion reasonable, I must find theirs reasonable.

That is because faith is the mechanism for belief. Belief in religions is not possible without faith. You are using 'special pleading' when you apply your faith to Christianity and not other religions. Guess why you cannot apply faith to other religions, yup, that's right, because you would become a member of a competing religion and that makes about as much sense as talking animals and a person living in a whale for 3 days.

That doesn’t make sense. If I found their religion reasonable, I would believe in their religion.

Nope. If you applied faith to Islam, you would be Islamic. You don't though, you apply your faith to Christianity only. "Reason' is not needed to be religious, just faith (see children).

However I do not, because I do not find it reasonable for all the reasons I have previously mentioned.

You're not fooling anyone. Global floods, talking animals, living in a whale for 3 days and dead bodies reanimating and walking the streets of Jerusalem is not reasonable. It is your faith that is the mechanism for your belief. You're just pretending that your faith is reasonable, but it's right up there with Muhammad flying to heaven on a horse if we are being honest.

Please name a specific Catholic teaching that is harmful to human beings. Thank you.

- That they claim to the 'one true church' is one. (CCC 2105)
- Infallibility of the Catholic Church. (CCC 2035)
- Only the Roman Catholic Church has authority to interpret Scripture. (CCC 100)
- The Pope is the head of the church and has the authority of Christ. (CCC 2034)
- Birth control.
We could go on and on, but I don't see the point. People believe religious claims because of faith, not because they are harmful.

Irrelevant as the claims being compared were religious claims. Whether in the past or in the future, the claims are still religious.

I still have no clue why you continue to insist all religious claims are the same.

True, you don't seem to have a clue. Not all religious claims are the same.

Do you find all non-religious claims the same?

Nope, but I find all religious claims are believed for the same reason. That reason is faith and faith is a requirement in order to believe. For this reason, all faith based religious claims are very similar in that you can only believe them via faith. Faith does not enter the picture for non-religious claims.

You look into the source, historical record, corroboration, eye witness account, personal testimony, motivation, facts, logic, fruit, meaning, significance, etc.

This blanket statement is not always true though. See all religions. All religions are believed because a person is capable of faith and applies said faith to said religion. Most religious people follow the religion of their parents. A small child is not capable of looking at sources, historical records and such. A child just takes on the faith of their parents. This is mechanism is in place for all of the prominet religions on this planet.

This is a bunch of hog wash.
Please show the historical record that shows a Jesus existed a was crucified.

There are many ancient writings and historical records that have been scrutinized showing Jesus existed and was crucified and the historical record reflects eye witness and testimonial account of miracles performed by Jesus.

Perhaps English isn't your primary language? I ask because I was pretty clear in what I asked of you and your response does not address it.
Copy/paste: "Please show the historical record that shows a Jesus existed a was crucified." I'm asking you to show us this record, not make empty faith statements about how it exists. I will need more than your faith in their existence.

Says the guy that believes in talking snakes, donkeys and the dead coming back to life.

Like I have said the reason I believe in the recorded testimony of certain miracles is because I believe the source.

You have faith in the source and this faith has led you to beliefs that animals can talk, men can live in whales for days and dead bodies can reanimate and walk the earth. You have faith, you are not demonstrating that you have reason.

I believe the Bible and the Church to have the marks of what one should expect a true faith to have. I do not see these marks in Muslim teaching.

You can stop trying to justify your faith. I suggest you just own it.
I'm going to cut out some more attempts at justifying your faith now to keep this from getting even longer.

So, AGAIN just because I believe Jesus brought a man back to life does not mean I must believe Muslim teaching that 72 virgins awaits those who die in heaven.

I never said you must. Please follow along. I'm claiming that you believe in talking donkeys and such because of faith in the Bible. Faith in a Holy Book is the same mechanism a Muslim uses. That is what is being pointed out, not that you must believe Islamic claims.

They are two different claims.

Yup, and these two different claims are both faith based religious claims that can only be believed if faith is in place. Reason alone will not make a person believe in talking animals after all.

You actually think you are the type of person we should seek advice about Muslim teachings? You sir, have a dog in this fight.

You have no dog in this fight . . . Do you find Muslim teaching reasonable?

Hear is one I do:
“None of you has faith until he loves for his brother or his neighbor what he loves for himself.� [Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 72]

Quote:
Not at all – as I have explained many times now. The Muslim religion makes no sense.

Pot, meet kettle. Just apply faith.

It does make sense for literally billions of humans.[/quote]

Your comment does not logically follow. A great number of people at one point believed the earth was flat. This didn’t make it true.

You really need to realize that I'm not making a 'truth' claim. This is something I cannot fix for you. Many people believing a claim does not make it true. This should be obvious to you otherwise Christianity, Islam and Hinduism would all be true, and we cannot have that.

As I continue to repeat – it does need to make sense. I use faith and reason.

There is no reason to believe in talking snakes, donkeys or dead bodies reanimating and walking Jerusalem. Not unless you have placed your faith in religious promotional material. It is your faith in a book that stems your beliefs. If I was wrong, you would provide 'reason' to believe in talking animals and such. "I have faith in the book that makes these claims" is not using reason, that is to have faith in a religious source, you know, like Muslim's and Hindu's do. To call that reasonable is not the same thing as demonstrating reason is actually being used.

for what you call eye witness testimony, that is a bit laughable because I think you actually are referring to religious promotional material, not a historical record.

No, I am referring to ancient writings and historical recordings that we can study.

Please provide your sources for examination. Something other than religious promotional material. Guess what, you're not going to be able to. Even though you can't, I personally still find it most likely that the stories came about due to actual people (just added to over the years as the gospels suggest).

What reasoning are you using to believe that hundreds of dead bodies got out of their graves and walked the streets of Jerusalem? What reasoning are you using to believe that a snake and a donkey spoke or that a man survived in the belly of a whale for 3 days.

Miracles by definition defy some kind of scientific law. And I believe miracles are possible.

I can believe that the sky is red, but that does not justify belief. You believing that miracles are possible also does not justify belief. You have so far failed to supply your 'reasoning'. You are just pointing out that you have faith in miracles. That I do not disagree with. Muslims also have faith in their miracles. Such is religion.

My problem with the Muslim religion is not that they might claim some miracle.

Again, trying to justify your faith by condemning another's. Just realize that you both believe because of faith and move on.

I have no problem with miracles.

You probably should though, as there is no evidence for miracles. Evidence/reason is not needed though if you're going to employ faith in a book that makes miracle claims.

This doesn’t mean every miraculous claim is valid. I’m actually a little surprised you aren’t getting this.

Please show where you got the idea that I'm not getting this. Copy/paste please.

As I demonstrated the Muslim religion does not meet those conditions. I believe it fails on historicity, words to live by, good example, and eye witness accounts of miracles.

Your belief/faith that the Muslim religion does not meet these conditions is not convincing. Islam includes a form of the Golden Rule for crying out loud, how can that not be a good example to live by?

If I was selling you property, would you want a title company to assure you that the title is clean, or would you use faith or flip a coin to decide if i was being truthful?

If I had the access and means to a title company I would exercise that option.

And that ladies and gentleman is reasonable. Faith that a title is clean is not reasonable. Faith that donkeys talk or humans have reanimated and walked the streets is not reasonable. He likes to use the two words together, but they are mutually exclusive.

Otherwise, I would have to use secondary means to determine if I should go thru with the deal. Do I know anything about you? Do I like/trust you? Is there reason not to trust you? What has your experience with others been? What do they say about you? There are several things I could look into to decide whether it was reasonable to buy your property – flipping a coin would not be one of them.

You would be a fool to buy a property without knowing if the title is clear. This applies to buying property from a family member because they could be unaware about a lien on the property. Your reasoning above to justify not using a title company is foolish because of the unknowns. Trust or faith in a person does not change this at all.

All the ridiculous things that are in the Bible you find credible.

Like what?

Donkeys and snakes can't talk silly and we know what happens to the human body once biological death takes place. These faith claims would be found ridiculous to your if they were in the Quran.

You have not listed any reasoning for why you believe in talking animals for example.

Yes, I have. Surely a supernatural realm would not be subject to the same scientific laws as an earthly realm. I am not as limiting or closed minded in my views as you.

Show that you speak the truth! Show this supernatural realm! Don't shy away now.

Yes! I see that too and with good reason!

Your reason is that you have placed faith in a book. If that was actually a good reason like you claim, then the Muslim also has good reason to believe in their preferred god concept.

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 155 by Clownboat]

About 40,000 denominations of Christianity and you think you can hide behind Catholicism? Catholicism can be shown no more true than any other version. Stop pretending that it is special as you do yourself a disservice.

I promise not to hide behind Catholicism if you promise to for even one post get accurate what it is the Church actually teaches. Deal?

The hell concept is a real concept in both Christianity and Islam. I accept that your personal hell belief will vary from those of other Christians because the Christian religion is a mess with all sorts of different justifications for all sorts of horrible beliefs.

My beliefs about hell are what the Catholic Church teaches about hell and yes hell is real. I’m afraid however, you might not understand what is meant by hell and certainly don’t seem to know what the Catholic Church teaches regarding hell.

Quote:
I do not teach my children that God hates others and sends them to hell.

Yes, I'm sure your version of condemnation is so much better than your neighbors.

Again, it is not my personal version. It is the teaching of Christ’s Church and I have no idea what other versions are. I’m only interested in the version that is true. Better is irrelevant and relative.

I was taught about hell and heaven.

Incorrectly taught, IMO if you were told Catholics go to heaven and non Catholics don’t. That isn’t the full story so quit misrepresenting.

This blanket condemnation of others is not healthy for humanity.

Good thing such blanket condemnation of others is NOT a teaching of the Catholic Church. However, you seem to apparently have a blanket condemnation of the Catholic Church.

Quote:
Second, it is not a teaching of the Catholic faith to say God sends someone to hell.

Semantics and Catholicism is not special anyways. Just one of many flavors of Christianity.

Hmmm . . . I know you think you have it all figured out. Why don’t you tell me what I believe? Just one of the many tactics of non-theism . . .

Quote:
As for reading the Bible, I have read the entire Bible on my own.

What did you make of the ineffective punishing god that it portrays?

And for your net question . . . “When did you stop beating your wife?�

It would be my opinion that your loaded question shows your understanding of the Bible is inaccurate. Your distorted perception is not mine.

God creates humans, calls them good. Next thing you know, he is punishing humans by kicking them out of the garden of eden.

If that is your interpretation of the Bible, might I suggest you missed a few things.

What did that punishment accomplish?
Next thing we know, he is flooding the entire planet because they once again rebelled against him. Now what did that punishment accomplish?

There are answers to all of your questions if in fact you are serious about seeking truth. If however your questions are rhetorical and you aren’t really interested in answers and already have your mind made up, then there isn’t much more to say.

I would love to hear the Jephthah story told in church!

Well, then you have not attended mass at a Catholic Church regularly. This story is read. I also have a feeling the meaning of the story doesn’t mean what I’m sure you would tell me it means.

The meaning of Jephthah is complex. First, Jephthah made a rash vow, not thinking about the consequences. It isn’t something God wanted. The story is not simply about human sacrifice and certainly not about God demanding human sacrifice. The story is more about not making foolish promises. Clearly you have reduced it, as many atheists are want to do, to some horrific story about an evil god. <sigh> Those who have ears, let them hear.

Quote:


Your failure hear is thinking that I'm making an ad populum fallacy. I have demonstrated that Islam is reasonable to literally billions of people. This fact does nothing for the truthfulness of Islam, nor Catholicism etc... If I were to use this to argue for truthfulness, then I would be committing a fallacy. I'm just noting reality and that is not a fallacy.

Riiiiiiiight . . . . your fallacy is implying having followers makes something reasonable. I wouldn’t believe a religion based on that criteria alone, because it would be unreasonable.

Quote:
Please name a specific Catholic teaching that is harmful to human beings. Thank you.

- That they claim to the 'one true church' is one. (CCC 2105)

Sorry, where is the proof of harm?

- Infallibility of the Catholic Church. (CCC 2035)

Again, harm? I can go on and argue why all these things are good and beneficial, however the burden of proof is on you.

Quote:
Do you find all non-religious claims the same?

Nope, but I find all religious claims are believed for the same reason.
That reason is faith and faith is a requirement in order to believe. For this reason, all faith based religious claims are very similar in that you can only believe them via faith. Faith does not enter the picture for non-religious claims.

So many errors in your above statement. First, I already explained my religious beliefs stem from Faith AND Reason, but you continue to ignore that. Second, it would be false to claim faith does not enter the picture for non-religious claims – LOL!

A small child is not capable of looking at sources, historical records and such. A child just takes on the faith of their parents.

Hmmm . . . yes children must take their parents word for a number of things – sticking a fork in the electrical outlet is not a good idea, placing that plastic bag over the head is not a good idea. How cruel to indoctrinate our children. We ought to let them figure these things out on their own. There will be plenty of time for the child to understand what it is they have been taught.

So, AGAIN just because I believe Jesus brought a man back to life does not mean I must believe Muslim teaching that 72 virgins awaits those who die in heaven.

I never said you must. Please follow along. I'm claiming that you believe in talking donkeys and such because of faith in the Bible. Faith in a Holy Book is the same mechanism a Muslim uses. That is what is being pointed out, not that you must believe Islamic claims.

But again, that is neither here nor there and doesn’t even say anything. It would be like saying I found a map that I find to be authentic, accurate and good and it helped me find X. And you claiming Muslims say they found a map that helped them find Y, so you erroneously conclude we both have used the same mechanism. But it isn’t the same mechanism. They are two different maps! Why would I follow a bogus map just because it is a map?

Quote:
As I continue to repeat – it does need to make sense. I use faith and reason.

There is no reason to believe in talking snakes, donkeys or dead bodies reanimating and walking Jerusalem.

Says you. I however, as I have explained, believe there could happen things that can’t be scientifically explained. I’m more open minded then you. I do not believe this world we live in is necessarily all there is or that the laws of this world cannot be usurped by the laws of a supernatural world. I think there could be things we don’t know or understand.

Quote:
I have no problem with miracles.

You probably should though, as there is no evidence for miracles. Evidence/reason is not needed though if you're going to employ faith in a book that makes miracle claims.

Mr. McCabe [the materialist skeptic] thinks me a slave because I am not allowed to believe in determinism. I think Mr. McCabe a slave because he is not allowed to believe in fairies. But if we examine the two vetoes we shall see that his is really much more of a pure veto than mine.

The Christian is quite free to believe that there is a considerable amount of settled order and inevitable development in the universe.

But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle. Poor Mr. McCabe is not allowed to retain even the tiniest imp, though it might be hiding in a pimpernel. –G.K. Chesterton

Your reason is that you have placed faith in a book. If that was actually a good reason like you claim, then the Muslim also has good reason to believe in their preferred god concept.

Wrong. I have placed my faith in God and His Church. I do not place my faith in the Muslim religion because it fails to meet the marks of what I believe a true faith/religion would have. There are major problems in the historical record of Islam, as well as the message of Islam, as well as its book! Sooooo, yeah like I said, I utilize faith AND reason, but sure keep repeating those silly little atheist objections like believing in Jesus Christ is equivalent to believing in Santa Claus. Look at the big strong atheists knocking down all those straw men! Isn’t that cute?

[showme]

[Replying to post 156 by RightReason]

The "Christian" concept of hell apparently changes with the weather as the church becomes more and more progressive. In large, the concept has centered around Dante's Inferno. The Catholic Purgatory, taught in Parochial school, prior to the Ecumenical Councils, would be a minimized version of hell, to gain entrance into heaven. The real hell would be centered around the Catholic Inquisition, whereas supposed heretics, being purified for entrance into heaven, such as a Purgatorial experience, were tortured, and burned alive or dead, depending on the outcome of the torture. Their possessions were split between the church and the state. This example of "rotten fruit" per Matthew 7:17, should be a pointer to the fact, that the "rotten tree", such as a "false prophet", such as Paul, whose testimony a church is based, is not likely to produce good fruit.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 156 by RightReason]

I however, as I have explained, believe there could happen things that can’t be scientifically explained. I’m more open minded then you. I do not believe this world we live in is necessarily all there is or that the laws of this world cannot be usurped by the laws of a supernatural world. I think there could be things we don’t know or understand.

There is a big difference between being willing to consider new and different ideas and actually accepting them uncritically as fact. There is absolutely no basis in reason, logic or evidence for accepting that an angry god caused a donkey to speak and berate its owner for mistreatment.

[RightReason]

[Replying to showme]

quote]The "Christian" concept of hell apparently changes with the weather as the church becomes more and more progressive.[/quote]

IMO, Christianity has experienced both extremes. Those who teach fire and brimstone and tell sinners they are all going to hell offering no help, mercy, or forgiveness. And those who teach the equally dangerous lie that hell does not exist or as long as you’re a “nice� person it isn’t something to worry about –God loves us just the way we are.

Christ’s Church doesn’t cower from the truth when speaking about hell (narrow is the gate -- neither drunkards or fornicators will make it to heaven), but she also makes sure not leave out God’s love and mercy and how with God all things are possible.

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 158 by brunumb]

There is a big difference between being willing to consider new and different ideas and actually accepting them uncritically as fact.

I couldn’t agree more.

There is absolutely no basis in reason, logic or evidence for accepting that an angry god caused a donkey to speak and berate its owner for mistreatment.

I couldn’t disagree more. It is more than logical to assume God’s reasons are not my reasons, or that God may be privy to information that I am not. And I certainly think it logical to believe a supernatural being would have the power to make donkeys speak or food to feed 5,000 from 5 loaves.