How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[squealpiggy]

I did check out some other videos of scientologists. Apparently they go on the attack as a matter of policy. Some barmy bad bint came out of the building and started saying "How many crimes have you covered up today!? How many crimes are you responsible for!?" My response would be "None so far, but it's still early."

[Super_Lightweight]

Scientology is a creation of a science fiction writer. Christianity is a result of historically verifiable happenings.

[tyson]

Scientology is a creation of a science fiction writer. Christianity is a result of historically verifiable happenings.

Both cases are pretty equal though.

Both are beliefs, both rely on a book. None are written by gods, both by men.
Men are corrupt, hence both books can not be considered as absolute truths.
And the Bible is probably the most misquoted book of all time.

And those historically verifiable happenings concerning Jesus and God's work are only present in the Bible, thus not really verifiable...

There are many historians that lived in that area around the time of Jesus.
Not one single of them ever wrote anything concerning Jesus Christ.

Three people mentioned Christ, Christa or something like that, but that's not a name. It's a title, meaning "The annointed one".
No mention of the name Jesus or the miracles he performed.
Only a few lines mentioning "The annointed one".

I'm sorry, but that is not sufficient enough as proof that there existed a Jesus, son of God.
If science provided such little and far-reaching proof, they would get laughed out of this world

[Mozza]

Scientology is a creation of a science fiction writer. Christianity is a result of historically verifiable happenings.

I'm sorry but very little of the Bible is historically verifiable, especially the important things like miracles.

[K-Nan]

Why is this thread so laden with arguments for or against Christianity? The basis of religion is FAITH. You cannot disprove faith, because it's based on your own belief. I'm not a believer, but I wouldn't spend my time trying to argue with somebody who believes, because they simply have something that I don't. That's all.

[squealpiggy]

Scientology is a creation of a science fiction writer. Christianity is a result of historically verifiable happenings.

Scientology is the creation of a science fiction writer who claims to have the monopoly on the truth. The Koran was written by a spiritual leader turned conqueror who claimed to have the monopoly on the truth. The bible was assembled by a couple of politically motivated councils (the Old Testament assembled between the 12th and 2nd century BC, the New Testament by the Council of Nicaea in AD 325) who claimed to have a monopoly on the truth.

The main source for "historical" information about biblical events comes from the bible itself. Very little of the old testament has been verified independently and the main argument of the old testament (Exodus and the following forty years of desert exile and subsequent conquest) is not supported by any archaeological evidence!

Besides which that doesn't really matter. I'm just suggesting that nutcases come in all creeds and that Tom Cruise's insane rantings are no more invalid than anybody elses.

[tyson]

Why is this thread so laden with arguments for or against Christianity? The basis of religion is FAITH. You cannot disprove faith, because it's based on your own belief. I'm not a believer, but I wouldn't spend my time trying to argue with somebody who believes, because they simply have something that I don't. That's all.

It's not the faith that's being argued. It's the book behind, which christians claim are accurate and verifiable historically.
The Bible is not accurate or verifiable at all. It's a book written by people in power to provide guidelines on how they want people to behave.
If not, we all burn in HELL :

There are higher powers that we don't know about, I am sure of that.
But The Bible? Pure and utter bulldog in a religious matter.
It's a nice history book if read correctly, but nothing else.

[K-Nan]

It's not the faith that's being argued. It's the book behind, which christians claim are accurate and verifiable historically.
The Bible is not accurate or verifiable at all. It's a book written by people in power to provide guidelines on how they want people to behave.
If not, we all burn in HELL :

There are higher powers that we don't know about, I am sure of that.
But The Bible? Pure and utter bulldog in a religious matter.
It's a nice history book if read correctly, but nothing else.

They believe in it. If you don't, there is no way in which you can disprove a belief. You think it's about facts and presentation of evidence, when really it's about a deep rooted belief in something. That belief won't be dispelled by a lack of archaeological evidence or whatever else there may (or may not) be.

[squealpiggy]

Why is this thread so laden with arguments for or against Christianity? The basis of religion is FAITH. You cannot disprove faith, because it's based on your own belief. I'm not a believer, but I wouldn't spend my time trying to argue with somebody who believes, because they simply have something that I don't. That's all.

I would agree but there again the debate is about whether or not after I die I'm going to Magical Disneyland for everlasting happiness or Magical Flamingoland for everlasting WTF.

So obviously the veracity of the faith is going to be questioned.

[Sweet Pea 50]

"Magical Flamingo land for everlasting WTF..." **** sounds awesome. Where do I sign up.