Why is YOUR religion (or atheism) better than any one elses?

[mrveggieman]

veggie--here you go. Dec of ind refers to the "Creator" and the "Supreme Judge of the World"
You can take a breath now.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in general Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of the good people of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States;

Again you epically failed to answer my question. I asked where JESUS was mentioned in the consitution or bill of rights. Not a generic reference to a creater. For all we know the founding fathers could have been referring to the Greek God Zeus. Again you are proving my point. You cannot prove your religion better than any other way of thinking and our founding fathers founded our nation without intention of favoring any particular religion. Please come back again with a real argument.

[Wickabee]

veggie--here you go. Dec of ind refers to the "Creator" and the "Supreme Judge of the World"
You can take a breath now.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in general Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of the good people of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States;

Simon Cowell?

[tpeichel]

People got crucified all of the time in ancient Rome. The question is whether the man known as Jesus(from the Bible) was real. There is no data to support he was real.

We have contempory reports of Alexander the Great and maybe Julius Ceasar's death mask(this is debated by scholars, but most agree one is real). This would be evidence. The Shroud of Turin has been carbon dated to the Middle Ages(not Jesus' time).

Antiquities of the Jews was written in the first centuries and includes information about Jesus.

Also, if you apply the generally accepted internal and external criteria used to evaluate the authenticity of historical texts, the bible does extremely well.

[drtom2005]

Antiquities of the Jews was written in the first centuries and includes information about Jesus.

Also, if you apply the generally accepted internal and external criteria used to evaluate the authenticity of historical texts, the bible does extremely well.

I've heard this argument before. It does not meet acceptable standards of evidence used today. If this is good enough for you, cool. It does not allow Christians to impose their will on the government or anyone else.

[centrehice]

Of course the Romans viewed Jesus as a criminal. He claimed to be a King and they executed him.

The gospels were written in A.D. 60-70, 30-40 years after Jesus was executed, which is a relatively short time. It's kind of like if someone who was at the Twin Towers on 9/11 and witnessed the events first hand, writes down their recollection of what happened twenty years from now.

The Gopsel of Luke was written over 200 years after the cultists death, - 3rd and 4th hand, and all Ballderdash.

[habsheaven]

Habs, your definition of logic and reason are quite different than mine. SO you can say anyone who practices any form of religion is less logical than any atheist? if so, you are the one who's logic is in question.

veggie, I don't think my religion is better I just believe everything came from something, the logic you can get something from nothing doesn't seem, well very logical. Their was an initial movement, something started all of this.

I love science and continue to research all forms of religion and history. At this point in time I do believe that Jesus was a from of God on Earth and for that reason, I accept Him as the way. I know it sounds crazy and there is no "proof" I could provide you. but the logic habs speaks of is what has lead me this way so far. logic for me is knowing what I want to know and then figuring out how I can get to the point of knowing it.
Religion of all kind, evolution, astrology, the Iching, all point to a single source. Though I feel that this form of life will never lead me to truly finding this one source, I do feel the need to try an understand what it could be. Whether science, religion, philosophy, or anything else can give me that answer, I will look there.

As I stated above at this point Jesus seems to hold more answers than anything else. I do not think I know better because of this, simply I believe I am right and I am willing to be proven wrong.

Jay, I get my definition of logic from the dictionary. If your definition is different from mine than it is wrong.

With regards to the first bolded part. Where did God come from? If He exists, there are two options to how He came to exist. He either came from something (which you claim is logical) or He came from nothing (which you claim is illogical). The reality of it is; logic dictates that it all started somewhere from nothing. It is illogical to believe that any religion has the answers to this question when one examines all the other illogical claims made by religion.

As to the second bolded text; If the police pursued criminals in the same manner they would be (and have been) criticized for their use of this method. Of course, I long suspected that this is how christians arrive at their various viewpoints, I just never expected one to admit to it.

[Wickabee]

According to teaching, God never came about because God has always been with no beginning or end. So to ask where he came from is one of those questions that shows.misunderstanding.

[drtom2005]

According to teaching, God never came about because God has always been with no beginning or end. So to ask where he came from is one of those questions that shows.misunderstanding.

The issue I have with this statement is I could change it to this.

The universe never came about because the universe has always been with no beginning or end.

It is more correct, because I know the universe is here. I'm in it.

[shrewsbury]

habs, if you don't know the first you will never get to the second, so first you would have to know God to know where He came from.

how to you think science works? you must first have a hypothesis (what you want to know and prove) then second you have to figure out how to prove your hypothesis(figuring out how to get to the point of knowing it)

if you decide you want to be a network engineer (what you want to know) you will need to figure out how to get the skills (figuring out how to get to the point of knowing it)

and how else would the police solve anything? first they would have to figure out what type of crime it was (what you want to know) and figure out how it was done and by whom (get to the point of knowing)

your logic is limited by assuming any premeditated desire leads one to be brainwashed or stuck with only one way, but where did Darwin start? figuring out what he wanted to know and then figuring out how to obtain that knowledge? hmm, sound familiar?

the difference is your logic requires and is limited by the physical, but all logic starts with an idea, a desire, and years of reevaluation.

so perhaps you should recheck that online definition of logic, did you use wikiedia?

[Wickabee]

The issue I have with this statement is I could change it to this.

The universe never came about because the universe has always been with no beginning or end.

It is more correct, because I know the universe is here. I'm in it.

That's fine. It doesn't change the teaching. Also, because you've never seen something is not proof of non-existence.