Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: StSanta on January 21, 2001, 02:34:00 PM
-
Yeah, let's start the inauguration with a prayer by a Christian, effectively cutting out all other religions.
Way to go USA.
In the words of Marvin The Paranoid Android, from Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy
"Pitiful, isn't it?".
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-21-2001).]
-
How does a Christian praying "cut out" anyone? Good example, if you ask me, and poor understanding of what the concept of separation of church and state means (don't feel bad--you're not alone).
And why would a Dane even care?
Isn't it odd how FEW posts you can find where Americans actively "bash" other countries (terrorist nations notwithstanding) and how MANY posts you can find by other folks actively bashing America?
Is it envy, or just intolerance? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
jedi, imagine being a follower a polytheistic religion - having more than one god. If you heard the prayer, you'd know that it would cut you out of the loop.
It would, in fact, cut anyone out of the loop who does not consider god (whatever it is) as an ominiscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent god.
Anyone who believes in a god different than the Christian one would be left out.
You're right - I am jealous. Of the separation of church and state you (in theory) have in the US. Unfortunately, there's growing evidence that the Bush administration will do its part to violate this. An example:
"Bush was also to issue executive orders on
Saturday outlining ethics guidelines for his
administration and declaring a national day of prayer, the officials said."
Freethinking spans all borders. In the past, it has been a very dangerous path of the mind and freethinkers have found themselves persecuted and killed. Your founding fathers, some of which were freethinkers themselves, sought to eliminate this - sought to eliminate state sponsored support for particular religions. This, in my view, is an approach that's daring, innovative and worth much respect.
The separation of church and state issue is not wildly complicated, and believe me, I have a decent grasp of it. Do not assume disagreement with your own understandment of it is a result of me being erroneous. Discuss, and then find out. Do not judge without evidence.
The US goverment should spend no effort promoting a specific religion, that, in essence, is what it's boiling down to.
national prayer day is supporting some mainstream religions and leaving others out - there are religions that do not put any empathis on prayers, thinking of it to be useless and demeaning, and an act of infidels.
I could go on, but hopefully you'll see my point.
This post is not bashing the US - on the contrary, it's about preserving the values of the founding fathers.
Me, I have no religion, so I ain't siding with any.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-21-2001).]
-
Ok...just to even the score...Denmark sucks!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Anyways, I'm not religious. I'm a recovering Catholic, but lean more towards "no opinion" now. Prayer at official functions is not "cutting people out." That's like saying that playing our National Anthem at sporting events cuts any foreigners out of the game. When there is prayer at some official event, I just respect others beliefs, bow my head and catch a few ZZZs.
-
The King is dead!
Long live the King!
Yeager
-
It was a Christian prayer as that is the faith this country was founded on and is the largest majority religion in the country today.
StSanta, come on, you can come up with better than that to stir the pot with (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
You know...I agree with StSanta.
(and I'm cristian, and believer)
-
Eagler, with all due respect, you're wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). And I have the quotes to prove it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
The US has a great constitution, there's no doubt about in. In some areas, it is much superior to what we have here in Denmark. Here, I have to go through, with foul taste in my mouth, a state sponsored exclusive religion. I have to live in a country that essentially is a Lutheran-Evangelical one, eve if it's just words. I'm very intersted in a separation of church and state here and believe it to be doable, especially since the success seen in our neighboring country, Sweden.
Let me pull out some quotes to support my claim of not being totally ignorant about the separation of church and state:
I. U.S. Constitution and U.S. Treaties and State Constitutions
The Constitution of the United States (1787-1788; 1st Ten Amendments ["Bill of Rights"] ratified 1791; no reference to any god is to be found in the body or
in the amendments to the Constitution)
Pretty clear cut.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
freedom of press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Amendment 1,The Constitution
of the United States.)
This one is actually fantastic. Such foresight in those days. Must be admired.
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion--as it has itself no character of enmity against the law,
religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims], ... ("Article 11, Treaty of Peace and Friendship between The United States and the Bey and Subjects of
Tripoli of Barbary," 1796-1797. Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America. Edited by Hunter Miller. Vol. 2, 1776-1818, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1931, p. 365. From George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 45.
Settles the "one nation under God" issue.
To support it:
Now be it known, that I, John Adams, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the said treaty do, by and within the consent of
the Senate, accept, ratify and confirm the same, and every clause and article thereof. ("Treaty of Peace and Friendship between The United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary," 1796-1797.
Showing the freethinking spirit of some of the founding fathers:
I may grow rich by an art I am compelled to follow; I may recover health by medicines I am compelled to take against my own judgment; but I cannot be saved by a worship I disbelieve and abhor. (Thomas Jefferson, notes for a speech, c. 1776. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p. 498.)
A quote showing how the American approach and founding fathers positively affected Europe:
Our [Virginia's] act for freedom of religion is extremely applauded. The Ambassadors and ministers of the several nations of Europe resident at this court have asked me copies of it to send to their sovereigns, and it is inserted at full length in several books now in the press; among others, in the new Encyclopedie. I think it will produce considerable good even in those countries where ignorance, superstition, poverty and oppression of body and mind in every form, are so firmly settled on the mass of the people, that their redemption from them can never be hoped. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Wythe from Paris, August 13, 1786. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 311.)
Thosse favouring a small government will love this one:
It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.(Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed., The
Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363
Also relevant:
I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry,
January 26, 1799. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p. 499.)
More relevant to this discussion:
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression. (Thomas Jefferson, "First Inaugural Address," March 4, 1801; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 364.)
And this one, about prayers and fasting:
Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General Government. It must
then rest with the States, as far as it can be in any human authority. But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting and prayer.
That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States an authority over religious exercises, which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It
must be meant, too, that this recommendation is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and
imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription, perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation less a
law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not believe it is in the best interests of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its
discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time
or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for
itself the times of these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own
hands, where the Constitution has deposited it. (Thomas Jefferson, just before the end of his second term, in a letter to Samuel Miller--a Presbyterian
minister--on January 23, 1808; from Willson Whitman, arranger, Jefferson's Letters, Eau Claire, Wisconsin: E. M. Hale and Company, ND, pp. 241-242.
Quite clear as well.
This Thomas Jefferson dude seems like a fellow I'd have fun drinking with:
In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to
his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever
preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio
Spofford, 1814; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)
One for us atheists:
... If we did a good act merely from the love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? It is idle to say, as some
do, that no such thing exists. We have the same evidence of the fact as of most of those we act on, to wit: their own affirmations, and their reasonings in
support of them. I have observed, indeed, generally, that while in Protestant countries the defections from the Platonic Christianity of the priests is to Deism,
in Catholic countries they are to Atheism. Diderot, D'Alembert, D'Holbach, Condorcet, are known to have been among the most virtuous of men. Their virtue,
then, must have had some other foundation than love of God. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Law, June 13, 1814. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The
American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 358.)
And:
... Jefferson, who as a careful historian had made a study of the origin of the maxim [that the common law is inextricably linked with Christianity], challenged
such an assertion. He noted that "the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ
pronounced or that such a character existed .... What a conspiracy this, between Church and State." (Leo Pfeffer, Religion, State, and the Burger Court,
Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1984, p. 121.)
This one is directly applicable to the topic:
And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together. (James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822; published in The Complete Madison: His Basic Writings, ed. by
Saul K. Padover, New York: Harper & Bros., 1953.)
Something for the current set of American politicians to learn from:
[on Washington's first inaugural speech in April 1789] . .. That he was not just striking a popular attitude as a politician is revealed by the absence of of the
usual Christian terms: he did not mention Christ or even use the word "God." Following the phraseology of the philosophical Deism he professed, he referred to "the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men," to "the benign parent of the human race." (James Thomas Flexner, George Washington and the New
Nation [1783-1793], Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970, p. 184.)
Deism of course is the belief that a god or gods created the world but left it at that and does not meddle further into the affairs of the universe.
How about some protection from religion (freedom from religion, even)
As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of government to protect all conscientious protesters thereof, and I know of no other business government
has to do therewith. (Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776. As quoted by Leo Pfeffer, "The Establishment Clause: The Never-Ending Conflict," in Ronald C.
White and Albright G. Zimmerman, An Unsettled Arena: Religion and the Bill of Rights, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1990, p. 72.)
E PLURIBUS UNUM, latin for "one out of many" does not refer to any god or religious matter, it's a direct reference to the creation of one nation, from 13 states.
There are a lot of quotes that can be used. Just taking a cross section to support that mixing religion and state is in violation with the ideals of the founding fathers. They'd probably be screaming loudly if they saw the current state of affairs. I'll post more if needed.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-21-2001).]
-
Santa, as atheist ,what do you think that the purpose of life is? just curious...I have my own ideas and many of them include God in the equation.
I'd really like to know what does someone,like you, that believes there is no god, answer to this question. Because if I am put in your place, I dont find any sense to life, other than a black hole.
-
Santa, how does the lack of "official" seperation of state and church in Denmark, leave you with a foul taste?
Church tax is optional.
Education about religion in Schools covers all the major + several minor religions.
The Church has *no* power in terms of law and legislation.
We dont have premiers referring to God(s) every 3rd sentence and we dont have prayers in parliament. I really dont see the issue.
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
"This is Yardstick. Follow me"
-
Well, the USA and its' constitution were founded on the the bible and the beliefs that christianity follows. Just because people of other religions have entered the country since its inception is no reason to forget the things the nation was built upon.
That's part of the deal I guess: You have freedom of religion, but only because the christian people who founded the nation guaranteed it to you - don't expect everyone to like it, or follow your religion, especially since many other religions run contrary to the ideas put forth by the founding fathers.
If you are a hindu believer, and the fact that there was no prayer to sheeba in the inaugoration upsets you, you have the freedom to whine about it, or move back to India. Not many places on the planet can say the same.
-
If you don't pray, think of whatever doing the moments of prayer or silence. Just because you can't believe in a God, don't ask the rest of us not to either...
Eagler
-
Originally posted by Gman:
If you are a hindu believer, and the fact that there was no prayer to sheeba in the inaugoration upsets you, you have the freedom to whine about it, or move back to India. Not many places on the planet can say the same.
Almost any democratic nation in the world (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by RAM:
Santa, as atheist ,what do you think that the purpose of life is? just curious...I have my own ideas and many of them include God in the equation.
I'd really like to know what does someone,like you, that believes there is no god, answer to this question. Because if I am put in your place, I dont find any sense to life, other than a black hole.
You asked, I'll answer. I'm christian by baptism, not by choice. I chose to take my own path, did not like what I heard from the church or from anyone spouting their beliefs in my direction. I've been to a few churchs just to keep up on what they think and what their doing. One church I went to practiced a form of brainwash. No lie, no sarcasm, honest truth. They tried to suck me in, "without believing in God your life will be empty and you when you die you will go to hell." To this I replied "I'm living my life just fine without your God placing a burden on it, I have free time on Sundays. I do not feel I need to worship something I can not feel, see, hear, or have seen any sign exists. How can I go to hell if I don't believe there is one?" Anyways, that pissed 'em off really good and they retorted with religious quotes from the bible. I didn't pay much attention, wasn't interesting. I just turned my back and walked away. That left a really bad taste in my mouth, I don't like being told what I should and should not believe in.
I live my life quite fine without having to look for something superior to guide me through it. I found my niche, and it's working out just fine. It's my fault if I do something dumb or wrong, and I have always done just fine without a God in my life.
Maybe there is no sense to life, you are born, you live a while and then you die. To animals have a purpose in life? Yes, to live and promote their species. Do we have a purpose to live? Only if you make a purpose to it. My take on life is to live my life to the fullest and have fun while I'm here. When it's over, it's over and that's it for me. Nothing to look forward to at the end, only thing to do is to have fun while I'm here... and so I do.
That's what I think as a non-religious person.
-SW
-
FYI: George Washington began the tradition of an inaugural prayer service in 1789.
Edit: Typo..oops (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Ozark (edited 01-21-2001).]
-
Its all lies and convenient red-taping.
Just look at the dollar bill. IN GOD WE TRUST.
Hmm... sounds like the state is promoting the church.
Believe in the Force...and it shall never fail you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
<S> SeaWulfe.
let me ask you another question.
Based on your answer, I take it as that you think that when life is over, its all over. So there is no real sense? its all chaos?.
Maybe I'm too weak to think on a future after the death without further things. I dont share many things with the catholic christianism (I'm baptisted as one). Still I think there is SOMETHING that created us, I dont know if its called God, Allah, Jehovah, or even if it is a spirit that lives in anything alive that surrouds us (the base of the anymist religions).
I simply **feel** that we are not on our own ,and that after we die we will have much more things to experience.
But that is only my take on this matter (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-21-2001).]
-
Originally posted by RAM:
<S> SeaWulfe.
let me ask you another question.
Based on your answer, I take it as that you think that when life is over, its all over. So there is no real sense? its all chaos?.
I simply **feel** that we are not on our own ,and that after we die we will have much more things to experience.
Chaos? No there is order to life, or atleast a percieved order. We create order within our lives, and we live in order. It's not chaos, human nature gives us the ability to think logically and create a life that is easy for us all to live. God didn't create the governments we live in, we did so we don't wander this planet aimlessly. I don't believe we're alone either, I believe there are planets out there capable of sustaining life and we will find that out sooner or later. It's all just a matter of our own reliance that there is something after death and that we are alone in the universe. It's simply to vast for us to know what's out there. We assume we're the only intelligent life, maybe we are. But somewhere out there, there must be a planet somewhat like ours where life is. We don't even know what's under the icy surface of one of saturn's(I think) moons. We think there's water and that there's a heated core. We just recently found life on the ocean floor on our own planet, where light never shines but there are fish and other creatures living there. There's just too much for us to understand and we second guess things. That is why people feel the need for a God and perhaps the need to look for something after life. You probably wouldn't leave a normal life if you were to find out there was nothing after death(just based on what you said about God and you hope there is something after you die).
I don't know, there's just too much for us to grasp with our limited brain power(only use 10% or something like that of our entire brain). We don't even know what we're capable of because we can't use our entire brain.
I just live my life to what I expect to get out of it and nothing less. If we were to find out that there was no higher power, we might live in chaos.
I just don't have a "feeling" that there's anything that created us. If there is, it gave me the s__t end of the stick and I would never thank it for what it did.
Other people have faith and that's fine by me. Just keep it away from me, I want no part of it just like they want no part of what I have to say.
Don't take this offensively if I say anything you don't like, I don't mean it. It's just my position on it all.
I personally don't care what faith(s) and what religious sayings are used on the national money, at the presidential inauguration or said to represent the United States(or any other country).
Other people can believe what they want to, and I will do my own thang. ;-)
OTOH, I do wonder if something does happen after life. Maybe when we die we slip to another dimension, but I'm not sure what it would be like there. Not even sure if there would be a superior being there.
I will figure it out when I die, just like everyone else. :-)
-SW
-
Daff, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth because it actively supports one religion and not others. it leaves a foul taste in my mouth that I cannot leave the state church til I am 18, unless I get my parents consent around 15.
It screams of superstition, of the dark ages, of mass grandeur delusion to *force* people into a belief system, *especially* a belief system with such a *violent* history as the lutheran evangelical has had in Denmark.
The US haven't had those sorts of persecutions, but it UPSETS mme when I realize that for 18 years, I had no choice but to follow in line so to speak. It's disgusting, dehumanizing and demeaning.
Gman, I can produce more quotes of the founding fathers, showing that they weren't precisely keen on religion and some not keen on Christianity in particular. Can you support your view with quotes from the same? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
RAM: you've hit the jackpot question; most think the life of the atheist must be extraordinarily good and easy - never having to answer to something, never having to *answer* something.
The truth is the direct opposite. By not having an universal law that cannot be debated, I am forced to take each and every value into questioN; ask what it is, why is it there, if it makes sense in the greater scheme of things, how it affects me and my environment and so forth. I use a collection of moral theories from different phiolosphers that each are flawed, but used combined gives a decent, if imperfect, system.
The question about the meaning of life is a good one. One I can answer with: what is the meaning of coffee? The only answer I've found so far is to *experience* - to go out over the normal and known and see what else there is; Aye, it will all be nullified by death, but with life I feel the journey, not the destination, is the goal.
Me, I am a moral hedonist. I will not allow my search for pleasure to violate or hurt others, within reasonable limits (Jehovas witnesses do not appreciate skydiving, but I don't care is an example, even though I might hurt their feelings).
I live to be astounded. I live to be awed by people, by nature, by my own reactions. I live to learn about the world, and, more importantly, about myself. Of course,e very day life right now is not very exciting due to lack of funds, but if I live long enough, I will have enough cash to experience many wondrous things. And tragic things of course; the realisation that I will probably outlive loved ones is very scary, especially as to an atheist, there is no comfort in there being a better place.
I view myself as an animal - an advanced animal. There's nothing miraculous or divine in me. Still, I am in awe of the accomplishments of the human animal, the great potential. The capability to do utterly reprehensible things and the ability to accomplish astounding insights and understandings. Music - what a concept for an animal! Even our use of language sometimes fascinates me; usually when I am in a group somewhere, I am the observer. SOmetimes I think I'm one of the few in the group that observe the marvellous things that happen when humans interact, but I know I am not.
Life, all in all, is fantastic. It's also finite. In this, I understand the appeal of theism. It gives us what we really don't have, unlimited time.
Depressions when yer an atheist are hard hitting and severe - at least I've had my worst one ever just recently and it has taken me some time to fight back. Hope can only be found in yourself, in others and in finding the small things in life to improve your mood. There is not, and will never be with all probability, divine intervention. Yer on your own, and you should treasure it; total responsibility and total freedom.
Would it be nice to have something ethereal, caring, loving? Yes. Would also be nice to take rides on unicorns, I think.
Be as it may, I *cannot* believe, even though I want to. My mind is always looking for plausability, for evidence and support. I'm a born skeptic and sometimes even doubt the most obvious of things.
Things aren't chaotic -- at least we experience some kind of continuum, be it illusionary or not. Death is quite simply the absence of life - there is no good, evil, no pleasures and no pains. What saddens me most is it removes the possibility of experiencing.
I don't fear dying per se. I fear missing out on all the cool stuff that awaits anyone willing to look (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Oops, turned into an essay. Sorry about that; hope I answer your question.
Those who wish to pray, feel free to. But please, do not expect me to stand in silence while you do; that is entruding on *my* right to freedom *from* religion. I shall tolerate religions; while I might not respect the religion, there are very few religious *people* I do not respect. We all operate differently and hae different priorities in life. Mine seems to operate around finding support for ideas and dismissing those that do not add up.
Limited spiritual life? Myabe; but my spiritual experiences can approximate religious ones I gather; hair raising on back of head, awestuck face and so forth.
Guess I've either been taken by Satan or (if there are such things) the gods want me to be what I am (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
Santa, you said it better than I ever could (or atleast with my head clouded over by the flu). I think we're on the same page on our stance on things. I too believe humans are just super-intelligent animals. We eat to live, we kill to eat, and in the end we die just like everything else.
However, life has it's depressionary fits for everyone.. religious or not. That's why we invented drugs, or we harvest marijuana or we ferment wheat or potatoes or grapes to create alchohol. You need an escape from yourself every now and then so you when you come back around to sobriety you feel a little better with you break from reality.
;-)
I have faith, in myself, that I can do whatever I want(within the limitations of my morals) and still have fun.
Anywho, I hear ya Santa... even if you are a luftweenie! ;-)
-SW
-
"The US haven't had those sorts of persecutions"
Hummmm, I suppose that depends on whom you are talking to/about, the Europeans, who came here of their own accord; the Africans who were brought here against their will; or the Native American who were slaughtered, in numbers greater, than any other peoples in any era anywhere on the face of the planet.
------------------
OhNooo
smile awhile
-
its hard to really spearate religion because of the following.
Lets say Bush was gonna do a prayer, what if they popped out and said "NO you cant pray" doesent that violate freedome of religion? Im kinda weak on do's and donts here but I do understand why its kinda hard to spearate them, no matter what ya do you will step on just as many toes. Its frusterating like that, basically what it boils down to is trying to please everyone and thus not doing enough for either, thus pisseng everyone off, self destructive if you will. I agree with StSanta that maby he didnt need to do that, but its kinda hard to tell people NOT to pray, alot harder than just being unhappy with it. Thw whole Idea of separation of church in state is like many ideas, it seems good and feasable on paper and in mind, but when put into turbulent real world situations it does not fuction as it should because of the variables in how it is implemented and the feelings of thos it affects, once again i must say I dont care If you worship your lawn mower, just keep it outta my yard (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
cmon people it has good intentions, dont slam it too hard (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Good intentions or not Wobble, it definitely was at the wrong place and at the wrong time. "Land of the free...", should that be restated as "Land of the free, but our religion will be in your face day in and day out..."?
You pray at meals, you pray in a catholic school, you pray when you are at home, you pray at your office silently to yourself, you pray at church, you pray in your car, you can pray anywhere you want to... but you don't pray in one religions prayer on a nationaly televised event. It's just bad taste, and smells of enforcing one type of belief system on a country built around freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
The National Anthem and a prayer are two different things, one is said within our country representing our country. The other is something that represents one religion, in a country with multiple religions.
Bad taste all the way if you ask me.
-SW
-
or the Native American who were slaughtered, in numbers greater, than any other peoples in any era anywhere on the face of the planet.
=======
Where can I substantiate this claim?
Yeager
-
Go to any half assed us history class and you will see in the textbooks how quickly the native american populations dropped after the US conquest of its western territories.
The same thing happened in South America and Central America. Heck, whole civilizations were wiped out.
I still stand in my position on this: Look at the dollar bill's "In God We Trust" and then tell me how constitutional that is. Truth is people, that little green piece of paper IS god nowadays. It gets away with anything and can make unbelievers flock to it and make sacrifices in its temple.
That the new president wants to teach Genesis in school and make people pray in schools may happen. All you need is fanatical people (like those amazinhunks that knock in your door every saturday at 6:30 am, wake you up, smile and remind you to go to church and then offer to sell you cookies) in the right places, a lot of the green papered god and of course, some media support (aka, if they got the SCOOTER to become popular, they can do ANYTHING).
Gimme some SOMA dammit... need some escape from this hypocrisy... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Santa, I'm athiest, but I don't see any reason to call for the banishment of organized religions. I don't expect Bush to drop his religion anymore than I'd have expected Gore to quit asking himself what Jesus would do for every major decision.
If an incoming president wants to have a prayer of thanks, or even a prayer every day happy because he had a good breakfast, I could care less. If you start to limit people's expression of religion you've gone beyond seperation and into the denial of basic rights.
On the one side, people are still calling for replacing evolution with creationism, on the other are people outraged at every mention of religion. Somewhere in the middle most of us are particularly unconcerned.
-
I'm a believer and I agree with Fatty's statement 100%.
It's really funny how you Euros get these nutty (wrong) ideas about how things are here in the States. Too much TV I think. Either that or a real boring Sunday without a joystick, eh Santa?
Hats off to the President for expressing his faith in a world which is increasingly hostile to God. Fight the power!
-
Yeager
You could start with Pulitzer Prize winner "Guns, Germs, and Steel" subtitle the Fate of Human Societies by Jared Diamond. ISBN 0-393-03891-2 this covers ... well the fates of worldwide human societies.
More to the point of native americans I suggest Russel Thornton's "American Indian Holocaust and Survival", and Henry Dobyns "Their Number Became Thinned"
The numbers these authors discuss are backed up to a large degree by modern physical anthropology and are truly staggering.
I am somewhat amazed that we who are immersed in, and proud of, our knowledge of W.W.II history have so little knowledge of the much larger history of the entire spectrum of mankind??
The following is a paraphrase cause I forget the exact quote (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Whomever fails to study the past is destined to repeat it's mistakes.
------------------
OhNooo
smile awhile
-
actually disease from white settlers killed far more indians than bullets, not trying to make an excuse though. I dont like religion being crammed in my face, however you are the one holding the remote when it comes on TV change the channel if it bother you so much. I dont really care either way, I believe in god but not organized religion. When i see it on TV i dont see some amazinhunk trying to push his faith on me i just see someone expressing their feeling, as long as they dont push it at you ya cant really squeak about it.
Whats next? no preyer at weddings because not all the people attending believe in a given religion, cmon folks.
[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
Guys, show me where I said "abolish all religions" in my post. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
I'll say it in private mostly because I think superstition is a Bad Idea(tm). But I'll never say it and seriously mean it and I wouldn't say it on a forum where I know it will be a needlessly inflammatory comment. Unless I got something at stakes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
What I do want is a separation of state authority and religious matters. We don't have that here, at least not on paper. It's a little weird that Denmark is a much more secular country than the US, despite of this.
Deja, I was thinking the same; we're actually sharing a view here. If you bring the alcohol, I'll bring the weed; let's celebrate (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
The persecutions I was referring to was not any old persecution, but religious persecution. Hell, the HCristians managed to sneak their way into Viking society, snatch a few top positions and soon, Asatru was in a recession or almost extinguished until very recently when it was formally accepted as a real religion in some Scandinavian countries.
Freethinkers or people with alternative views were, during a long time here, persecuted and killed. Banished from society or frozen out. This happened up until recently; a number of Danes left for the US for the greater religious freedom there. My respect for the state church (that refers to itself as the people's church in a lame attempt to avoid the negative associations) is quite low; boosted somewhat by concessions to secular life and an overall unintrusive attitude.
So, with that being said, the US and some other states have this *great* thing with separation of church and state. I'd think it's worth protecting just as much as your other amendments; historical records show what can happen when this is not the case.
If Bush wishes to pray or express his personal belief; let him be free to. I do not however think using public state oriented gatherings to push his religion is a good thing in a country where there exists a separation of church and state.
And that, quite basically, is the main objective of the major religions; to expand. As history has shown and indeed we see in every day life, this is a major factor. Missionaries here and there, wars with religious background coming up from rocks where it has hidden.
There are many positive sides to religion. These manifests themselves in the *personal faith* of the individual and what it adds to this individuals capacity/life philosophy. It can add strength during esperate times, it can give hope when no hope can be found elsewhere. Can be a moral guideline that helps the individual to help others. To me, it's not "all religion is bad" as in an absolute statement. But when it becomes a group mentality mob thing, things do turn ugly.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups apply here as well as in many situations more immediate to me (such as the pic in my sig (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)). I think history has shown us the strength religious freedom and freedom from religion can bring to a country; the US founding fathers,having a great understanding of the American enlightenment period and contributing to it, really had a lot of foresight when they implemented this through the constitution.
Ya got something very sweet, something envyable. Methinks it's worth guarding, and guarding well.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
StSanta, I think a week in the Mir would cure your atheism...
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Gunthr
-
Gunthr, if I could go to Mir, I'd die a happy man.
What an experience (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Atheism is the cure for theism, you got it the wrong way around (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
If God gave me a cute brunette, good health and enough cash to sustain me for the rest of my life, I'd concede that he might eventually possibly maybe exist (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
Santa, your posts show that your knowledge of the US is quite poor. The thought that Bush is a threat to the separation of church and state is pure nonsense. Where do you get your strange impressions from? Do you subscribe to USA Today? Maybe you watch US sitcoms? I suggest you refrain from discussing things you know nothing about.
Separation of church in state is quite alive and well here in the US. In fact there has been a liberal campaign in the last half-century to stamp out expression of religion in any way that could be even slightly construed as "inappropriate". US Presidents giving due respect to God and leading people in prayer in public is nothing new and thank God will continue.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
liberals goal is to remove any reference of God entirely. They are using the separation of church and state as a tool only. Once God is removed, man is left with government being the one 'true' power. The belief of God and being held accountable for one's life actions at an individuals "passing over", runs against the grain of the average liberal's mindset. Aren't all atheist's lib's? I've never met a conservative atheist yet (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
liberals goal is to remove any reference of God entirely. They are using the separation of church and state as a tool only. Once God is removed, man is left with government being the one 'true' power. The belief of God and being held accountable for one's life actions at an individuals "passing over", runs against the grain of the average liberal's mindset. Aren't all atheist's lib's? I've never met a conservative atheist yet (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
Eagler, I agree with you! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
The left-wing brought up on Darwin's nonsense along with other 20th century scientific thought is brainwashed to believe that we are created from random chemical reactions and thereby live in a meaningless universe. All the liberal is left with is his body. That's why he pushes for cradle to grave social programs. If this meaningless life is all there is then why not make it as comfortable as possible.
The right-wing correctly observes that we've lost a sense of divinity in the world, that there's no moral foundation. The conservative errs however in attempting to codify morality into law. The liberal rightly chaffs at this violation against his freedom of will.
Spirituality is necessary to give meaning back to life but it has to be a personal spirituality. Organized religion is at best a symbolic representation of inner truth and to make others adhere to lists of moral commandments is to violate THEIR divinity!
StSanta, others may try to censor you but I welcome your opinions.
Freedom of speech, what a squeak! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
cmon people it has good intentions, dont slam it too hard
Momma always said the road to hell is paved with good intentions...
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Jay.
-
Going back to the original post, what is the problem with a prayer before the innauguration?
Is it
a) any prayer or reference to God is wrong
or
b) the person saying the prayer was a Christian
or
c) none of the above
Before I could even think about commenting on this, I'd have to know what exactly it is we are talking about.
I didn't watch any of the innauguration stuff (boring!) so I didn't hear the prayer -- does anyone know a link where I can read what the fuss is about?
Fury
-
here you go:
www.foxnews.com/politics/012001/bush_speech.sml (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/012001/bush_speech.sml)
I don't believe Bush ever said "Let us pray.." I think StSanta got excited either because of the biblical references made by Bush in this speech or the fact prayers were publicly said by a minister during the ceremony.
Eagler
-
funked, my knowledge of the separation of state and church issue in the US is reasonable. And I posted references; Introducing a day of prayer, authored by the state, is very much against the spirit of the founding fathers. I posted a reference for you to divulge in.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
Deja, I was thinking the same; we're actually sharing a view here. If you bring the alcohol, I'll bring the weed; let's celebrate
I think you meant wulfie.. he's the stoner-student-punk that represents the AKs (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I am for the separation of church and state. However, I am someone who would rather see someone believe in something as opposed to nothing. I do oppose ANY religious zealot that believes his religion gives him some kind of license over other people.
Basically, I'd rather see people believe in something as opposed to nothing. I'd rather see people not judged based on what they do/don't believe. I'd rather see more respect for other people's beliefs.
I don't feel that a prayer by a christian at a state event is disrespectful of other people. Nor, would I believe a meeting between the President and the Pope, the Dali Lama, or any other religious icon to be disrespectfull to anyone.
Keep government control out of the church. Keep church control out of the government. Let the personal beliefs fall as they might.
AKDejaVu
-
Well, as my dad said right before he pushed me off the dock "Why not just dive right in!"
I support Bush's wishes to express his feelings of spirituality. Anything that gives me more insight into his feelings than his usual bungled speeches is welcome. Seriously, I really do feel that separation of church and state has a great deal more to do with anybody's right to say what they feel than the right to say what you don't want to hear other people say. This goes for religion, the arts, politics, whatever. That's what this country is about. The right to express yourself in whatever manner you feel is true. And the right to ignore it if you feel otherwise. As far as I can tell, that's what StSanta may have been talking about at the beginning of this. What he may not have realized, or at least expressed, is that we DO have the privilige of telling somebody we don't agree with to go stick it back in their own sock. and usually there is some kind of finger-gesture as well.. what can I say, we're Americans, we're easily worked up.
-kidcol-
-
Anyone think politics are polarizing? Try religion...
Santa-
The President can suggest legislation, he can sign legislation, he can veto legislation, but he cannot force legislation. Any attempt he would make to force any form of legislation that favors one belief over another will be met with an immediate and vitriolic response by Congress. As Jedi states, you wouldn't see Bush as a threat here if you totally understood our process. In fact, our town was just forced to remove the 10 Commandments from the courthouse lawn because of our state civil liberties union. Religion has no protection here, unless it is unChristian...
To any atheist still listening:
Religion=faith in the unseen and unknown- either you have it or you don't. Saying that it doesn't exist because it cannot be proven is naive. I can hit you in the hand with a hammer and it will hurt, and those around you that don't see the strike or feel the pain will still believe you are hurting. It's like saying there is no wind since you can't see it, that water doesn't exist since you can't taste it, or freedom doesn't exist because you can't hold it in your hand.
No matter; some believe, some don't, and some won't because of the cost involved in believing. Religion incurs a responsibility that some aren't ready to face- I know, I used to be one of them. I wanted to hear no reference to religion, as it made me very uncomfortable. I knew I was living wrong, I just didn't want to be reminded. It was more comfortable to stay in my world and deny.
When I finally came to my senses I faced my life squarely and asked God to use me. Now some of you will deny this could have happened, but let me tell you how I know; the moment I asked for forgiveness (a very private moment at home in my bed, not surrounded by minions at church) I felt something. I don't mean just "something", I mean I felt a sensation like I have never felt in my life. The best way to describe it would be to say it felt like a giant finger touched my chest, like the lightest touch of a finger in a bowl of water. From that point a warmth spread like ripples throughout my body, and I felt a sense of peace like I have never known. It was euphoric in the truest sense, and I realized I was weeping with joy. Even to this day I cannot describe the event with justice, as my words fail to rise to the event. I knew God had touched me.
-
Kieren
<S>
Very brave post. They used to feed ppl to lions for less, you'll just have to endure criticism from the lost here (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
<S>
Eagler
-
Religion=faith in the unseen and unknown- either you have it or you don't.
Faith in the unseen and unknown is simply faith in the unseen and unknown. Religion is an organized attempt to place one group's faith as more legitimate or important than another group's faith.
AKDejaVu
-
", it leaves a sour taste in my mouth because it actively supports one religion and not others. it leaves a foul taste in my mouth that I cannot leave the state church til I am 18, unless I get my parents consent around 15.
It screams of superstition, of the dark ages, of mass grandeur delusion to *force* people into a belief system, *especially* a belief system with such a *violent* history as the lutheran evangelical has had in Denmark."
Come'on..You just dont throw over 1000 years of tradition out in one afternoon. There has only been any significant number of "other" religions in Denmark since the 70's...on top of that, Denmark is probably one of the least religious countries in Europe. I can only remember less than a handful from my school who were really religious.
It seems to me you're more upset because you want to be upset...there isnt anything of of any kind of substance to be upset about.
As for not being able to officially leave the church until you're 18, does it matter?
You can't vote, you can't buy a drink and you can't get a drivers license either until you are 18.
As for the violent history, well, look back a 1000 years and then talk about violence :P
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
"This is Yardstick. Follow me"
-
Early man knew nothing about the existance of the radio waves that pass through all of our bodies, unsensed by our dim faculties.
The narrow sensitivity of our bodies do not permit us to directly experience many things... and personally, without passing judgment on anyone, to not keep an open mind about the possibility of God is a deliberate act which is against your nature...
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Gunthr
-
Originally posted by MrBill:
Yeager
You could start with Pulitzer Prize winner "Guns, Germs, and Steel" subtitle the Fate of Human Societies by Jared Diamond. ISBN 0-393-03891-2 this covers ... well the fates of worldwide human societies.
More to the point of native americans I suggest Russel Thornton's "American Indian Holocaust and Survival", and Henry Dobyns "Their Number Became Thinned"
The numbers these authors discuss are backed up to a large degree by modern physical anthropology and are truly staggering.
I am somewhat amazed that we who are immersed in, and proud of, our knowledge of W.W.II history have so little knowledge of the much larger history of the entire spectrum of mankind??
The following is a paraphrase cause I forget the exact quote (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Whomever fails to study the past is destined to repeat it's mistakes.
MrBill, you are a liar!
The book you name ("Guns,...") clearly states that 98% or more of the native populations died out from the european diseases they had no immunity against, not from persecution.
Besides, "The US haven't had those sorts of persecutions" referes to religious persecutions like this whole thread. That is why I will not try to argue other stupidities in your posts - they have nothing to do with religion either.
miko
P.S. A person who just became a president of USA made a personal prayer to the God he believes in. What is more natural and how does it affect anyone else? Had he been a hindu, he may have prayed to some other God then Judeo-Christian one. Who cares?
[This message has been edited by miko2d (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
and personally, without passing judgment on anyone, to not keep an open mind about the possibility of God is a deliberate act which is against your nature...
I couldn't agree more. Well said.
AKDejaVu
-
I still dont know why we are arguing religion here, its like a game of tic-tac-toe, there will never be a winner (unless 1 side is retarded) religion has been a source of argument for thousands of years, cant we just say...
"you think what you think, ill think what i think, dont tell me im wrong i wont tell you wrong, because neither of us really know whats going on anyway"
-
Regarding the seperation of Church and State, Fatty said what I would have. Good post.
Also, Kieren's post got me to thinking. Many people describe such events, and there is no doubt that something happens to these people that produce tangible changes in their lives.
He describes it as being touched by God. Who are you or I to say that isn't what happened? The only other explanation that one can offer for such events is something along the lines of it being a demonstration of human willpower coupled with a want to believe, which is no more provable than Kieren's explanation. Believing in such a theory is as much a leap of faith as the idea that he was touched by God.
-
Kieren, Lance - I've had experiences like that. The last time was when I had half a tab of e on top of quite a bit of alcohol - never did it again. Didn't like the lack of self-control.
The mind is a powerful tool, and thoughts can affect the physiology of the body. Attribute those effects to whatever you want.
[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 01-22-2001).]
-
I agree with StSanta. The separation of Church and State MUST be inviolate.
This separation has been weakening ever since the United States of America were formed and, it seems to me, that this weakening is accelerating. Liberals and Conservatives all seem eager to do away with the fundamental structure of our country.
For the record, I am an agnostic. I don't know if there are God(s). It is something that science CANNOT prove or disprove. The way I see it, it doesn't really matter if there are or are not deities. I simply think that we should try to make our stay in the existance as pleasant for all as we can.
What happens afterwards? I don't know and neither does anyone else.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Kieren, I would happily accept a god or gods into my life. it'd make life more cheerful and give a sense of purpose.
I am, however, not able to deceive myself to such a large degree. I need evidence; my feelings have been wrong more than once. And it is true that *if* you want something to be true, that's a *very* good reasoning for questioning and examining it.
You say:
To any atheist still listening:
Religion=faith in the unseen and unknown- either you have it or you don't. Saying that it doesn't exist because it cannot be proven is naive. I can hit you in the hand with a hammer and it will hurt, and those around you that don't see the strike or feel the pain will still believe you are hurting. It's like saying there is no wind since you can't see it, that water doesn't exist since you can't taste it, or freedom doesn't exist because you can't hold it in your hand.
Well, pain response can be measured scientifically - set up an experiment, try out a falsifiable theory. Quite easy. Wind is basically gas in movement, which is a liquid. Also quite easy to support using scientific measurements. The same goes for water; all these things belong to the physical realm and are relatively easy to prove.
Then you have the theism theme; the logic goes as follows: Everything has to be created. A god or gods created the world for reasons unknown to us. These gods or gods however are ethereal and immaterial and have always existed or did not have to be created.
An argument commonly heard. Any student of logic would say that it is fatally flawed; the conclusion violates the premise: everything is created, except the gods. The problem is known as the problem of infinite regression and there is a lot of literature out there debunking it.
Now, this is purely a thought experiment and due to the nature of this god thingy, it is not falsifiable, something that skeptics say is increibly convenient. Even so, logically it does not hold water.
This is claim one. After this comes a variety of claims about the properties of god or gods, and the wishes of this. And an antrophomorphic view of the gods; ascribing human values or traits to something that quite clearly does not even closely resemble anything human.
If there is no supporting evidence and a violation of logic, I cannot get myself to believe fantastic claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I don't live wrong. I live a very just life, going out of my way to ensure I do not necessarily bother people. I make damned sure that I am not a hypocrite and force myself to admit my wrongdoings, if only to myself when me ego gets in the way.
Kieren, I do not discount your story, nor do I distrust your sincerity. I honestly believe you that you're sincere when you say you've had a personal religious encounter with god. It must have been a turning point in your life and a very warm sensation.
Unfortunately, personal experiences do not fall into the realm of reliable evidence to me. Too many people have seen Elvis boarding UFO's (extreme example, I know) for it to be considered a reliable source of information.
I am a non theist now, just as I was when I was a new born. Religiosity is an acquired state I feel. I'm an atheist because the alternative does not seem to make any sense at all. And I am a moral one - there is really no need for a god to exist for there to be morality.
If the logical flaws could be weeded out, we'd have a nice hypothesis. If this could be supported, we'd have a theory. At this point, I'd start to be very interested. Unfortunately, this far no one has come close to prove anything "supernatural".
There is a $1 000 000 reward; see www.randi.org, (http://www.randi.org,) for anyone that can under scientific scrutiny produce something supernatural. The scientists involved are not randi's personal favourits but experts on whatever area is being disputed.
I imagine life with a god must be quite satisfying - the sense of purpose, the sense of there being some kind of equilibrium between good and bad, hope when there is little, group belonging. Something bigger than you and me or life itself. It must be comforting. I'd like it to be true. Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of evidence or logical support for most supernatural claims.
To each his own I say; as long as all parts are willing to acknowledge the weaknesses of their position. The weak atheist does not make claims that god does not exist - weak atheism, and I belong to that category, is simply a *lack* of faith in deities or a deity.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
wow what a thread ( buddist )
not one flame in it really congrats all <S>
-
FWIW, I would never try to ram my theology down anyone's throat. The only thing I wished to add was a perspective different from many expressed here. There are plenty of bad examples of supposedly religious people to cite when discussing the validity of religion itself, but sometimes we lose sight of the fact that the people who are religious are as fallible as those who are not.
There are many reasons religion works for me, and I won't bore you with them all. The big ones would include salvation, an acceptance that some things are way beyond my control, and the fact that no load given to me is more than I can bear. When things look bleakest I can always remind myself that God will not give me more than my abilities can handle. I know that when I screw up (and I will) I can be forgiven. When I am challenged I am happy, because I know God found me worthy of the test. It makes me a better person- not better than others, but better than I would be on my own- because I always trust that God will give me what I need if I believe in Him.
Now all that said I don't have the right to force anyone to cater to my beliefs, and therefore there should be a separation of church and state. "Give to Caesar what is his" as Jesus said. I do find it alarming that so many feel threatened by Christian religions, yet not threatened by satanism or any such extremist and destructive religions. As a teacher I can more likely discuss in detail the steps to human sacrifice without worry than to describe how communion is served in a Baptist church.
Proving the existance of God? This argument is as old as religion itself. There are of course personal testimonies, such as mine; there are historical accounts written in ancient tomes such as the Bible; still, most can be (and are) explained away by science. I think this is by design. Religion is faith, and how strong can faith be if it is placed only in proof? No, I don't mean that no proof should ever be sought, but to make certain every aspect of God is proven before His existance can be verified misses the point, I think.
Here's the funny thing- I read the Bible over-and-over, and every time I do, I find some more conventional wisdom I had missed in previous readings. I find truisms of human nature. I see myself in many of the characters of the stories. Even if I didn't believe- and I do- it is the most useful book on human nature I have ever read.
To get off the soapbox at last, someone mentioned "the meaning of life"... to the religious, this means to serve God. This is why talents were given to all, and in varying degrees. We as the human race are a single body, and every part has its job. We are tasked with doing the most with the talents we have, whatever they are. We are tasked with denying ourselves for the benefit of others. We are not perfect, none of us, nor can we make ourselves perfect regardless of how we live our lives. We need God's grace to achieve salvation, and we do that by serving Him (by serving our fellow man).
Man, did I just get scary to about 99% of the listeners here or what? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Alright dammit! thats enough! I think we should all worship something that has shone that it is trualy special, something that has proven that it is above all of us and all we have created, something that will never understood but will always seen as amazing in its abilities to mystify us all...
hence forth we shall all worsh the AH Chog (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
now quit yer bickering (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Santa I didn't make myself very clear and I apologize for that. What I mean is that you don't seem to have a grasp of how the Average Joe feels about this issue. Most people in the US (myself included) value the separation pretty highly. If Bush were to go too far in this area there would be some consequences for him. He would have a hard time getting re-elected and if he really screwed up, it would hurt his party for a long time by turning off moderates. However praying in public by the President has a long tradition and is perfectly acceptable. Likewise, asking Americans to pray does not cross any boundaries because there are no "teeth" behind it - it's a request not an order. Besides, we already have a day set aside, by law, for thanking God - Thanksgiving.
-
AH ok funked, gotcha. Why do you need a day of prayer then?
I''m happy the majority of Americans treasure the separation of church and state - it's worth protecting. I'm quite pissed that we haven't come that far here yet (and what, it's only been 200 years?).
But ya gotta wonder about the Bush character. All along he says "I am a uniter, not a divider". Then he blocks some of Clintons environmental protection plans, appoints a female that liberals (and moderate republicans) feel is pretty much anti environment and an attorney general that has stated that there are laws higher than the secular ones that are more important, who've actively worked to overturn Roe Vs Wade and yet says he'll protect this law. Add "national prayer day", a state sponsored religious event clearly favouring one religion. Scary stuff.
All in less than a week. It seems as if Bush has to pay his debts to the Christian right - and it seems as if he is doing it.
Kieren, very nice post. While I do not agree with what you say, I can clearly understand your position. It seems our fundamental differences are how we view humans - you feel that god will challenge us, but not above our abilities, you see the human race from an organic point of view - with each human being a cell in something greater. A need for god for salvation since we're fallible creatures.
Me, I feel we're thrown up sometimes against challenges we have no way of dealing with - a drunken driver clipping yer legs, a devastating loss of a loved one - things that seriously disrupt your life and not for the better. I see humans as group oriented mammals that focus on the furthering of group interests - which inevitably leads to conflicts with other groups. And lastly, while humans are fallible, I do not feel a need for a god to save us. I am unsure what we have to be saved from and I find it a little unmotivating to be in a game that you can't win and need someone else's approval to get out of alright.
That's about it, really. I think morally speaking, we'd agree on at least 95%.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
Hopefully I shant drag this further out of OP territory-
Religion=faith in the unseen and unknown- either you have it or you don't. Saying that it doesn't exist because it cannot be proven is naive. I can hit you in the hand with a hammer and it will hurt, and those around you that don't see the strike or feel the pain will still believe you are hurting. It's like saying there is no wind since you can't see it, that water doesn't exist since you can't taste it, or freedom doesn't exist because you can't hold it in your hand.
Well, pain response can be measured scientifically - set up an experiment, try out a falsifiable theory. Quite easy. Wind is basically gas in movement, which is a liquid. Also quite easy to support using scientific measurements. The same goes for water; all these things belong to the physical realm and are relatively easy to prove.
You missed his point, Santa: he was talking about that which is NOT directly observable... if someone came in exhibiting signs of having hit his hand with a hammer, but you never saw the strike, would you automatically (a) assume he was telling the truth about his experience, or (b) assume he was trying to mislead you? Would you have to see bruising? Its entirely possible that he could be faking or could have imagined his pain, how do you discern between one and the other? No proof other than the "victims" word, how do you judge that?
Unfortunately, personal experiences do not fall into the realm of reliable evidence to me. Too many people have seen Elvis boarding UFO's (extreme example, I know) for it to be considered a reliable source of information.
I guess this is my answer... the question is where you're going to draw the line. What's a less extreme example? I'd rather see how you judge good information from personal experiences, because I believe we rely more on that than any other source: even if it's only "be true to thine ownself". An illustration:
If there is no supporting evidence and a violation of logic, I cannot get myself to believe fantastic claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
So, that's in your experience?
Last one-
And an antrophomorphic view of the gods; ascribing human values or traits to something that quite clearly does not even closely resemble anything human.
Christian god does, supposedly, at least one person of the godhead. He said as much about himself. Are there any others in other traditions?
Anyhow,
Jay.
-
Santa do you remember the first few months of the Clinton presidency? Gays in the military, nutty socialist health care proposals, etc. That stuff didn't go over too well and Clinton spent 2-3 years backtracking. That might be repeated here.
Also there was no "state-sponsored religious event". He asked people to pray. That is all.
PS Christian right has nothing to do with environmental issues. I know plenty of Bible-thumpers who are nature freaks too.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
Jay, now YOU are missing the point (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
There *is* evidence, physical evidence, to be examined in your example. Something has happened. It is up to you to judge available evidence and come to a conlcusion. One of those conclusion can be "evidence shows that something has happened to his hand, but there's not enough evidence to support or disprove his story".
With the god bit, there ain't. there is nothing to examine, no evidence, no support.
Make a claim with this background, and you'll have a hard time convincing a skeptic.
As far as antromorphic gods; I give you Asatru, Islam, Judeaism, Christianity, Old Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Punic (wrong word?) mythology...I could go on.
Few religions avoid it. Some strains of buddhims seem to be able to do so.
funked, I hope he pays a price for being such an utter liar. "uniter, not divider" my @r$3. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
i'm on a hiiiiiiiiighway to hell......
-
StSanta
Did you think he would unite everyone at once, immediately or on every issue? That's impossible. He's trying to unite as many as possible and at the same time stay true to his roots. Give Bush some time, don't let the spin get to you too soon. He hasn't even been in office a week (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I think you'll see, in time, his admin does more uniting than dividing, minus the JJ's and the Sen Kennedy's, NOW's and such. Those groups/mindset wouldn't be happy unless you did it 100% their way... sorry they lost (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
Jay, now YOU are missing the point (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
There *is* evidence, physical evidence, to be examined in your example. Something has happened. It is up to you to judge available evidence and come to a conlcusion. One of those conclusion can be "evidence shows that something has happened to his hand, but there's not enough evidence to support or disprove his story".
With the god bit, there ain't. there is nothing to examine, no evidence, no support.
Make a claim with this background, and you'll have a hard time convincing a skeptic.
There's plenty of stories of people who claim to have undergone "miraculous" healing and whatnot- claiming that "the power of the mind is not to be underestimated" as a basis for the healing is no different, in my view, than claiming God did it: what proof is there that the mind can make miraculous healing? My point is that you can take a phenomenological standpoint and still not be some whacked-out flake. If, in your experience, personal experience doesn't count for much, then that's all we can say about the subject, for you. Not everyone, though, shares your personal experience(s) or outlook.
The erstwhile case of the mystery hammer injury, admittedly, would have observable evidence: how far down the road of logical positivism you'll go to determine the truth of the matter (or, maybe it would be better to say the road of forensics, though I begin to wonder if there's much difference between them) is up to yourself. It's almost like a Holmes-esque deduction, in the end: Eliminate all other possibilities, and the one thats left, however improbable, must be the right one.
Re- God in this context, you'd have to examine the evidence as closely as the hammer injury, I agree: I doubt though that we'd see eye to eye on what counts as evidence.
I know an aged religious leader who once addressed a crowd on various types of "expression" some evangelicals use, and who said that he'd expect to see some difference in a person who'd been "touched" by God; if nothing changed for that person (and I assume he meant lifestyle) then what good was the experience? Do those changes count as evidence in your view? Or are they just more of the wonderful "power of the mind" I've heard about?
As far as antromorphic gods; I give you Asatru, Islam, Judeaism, Christianity, Old Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Punic (wrong word?) mythology...I could go on.
Few religions avoid it. Some strains of buddhims seem to be able to do so.
Thank you- my point was I'd expect to see human-like attributation to a god-figure. I don't understand why its "quite clearly" got to be any other way: if humans have been divinely inspired to worship a deity, what form would a god choose? what language?
Anyhow... maybe another thread would be a better forum. *grin*
*S* and regards,
Jay.
-
"But know this, that in the last days, perilous times will come:
"For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people, turn away."
2 Timothy 3:1-5
and in addition....
"always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
2 Timothy 3:7
Think about it.
Ice
-
Originally posted by Ice:
"But know this, that in the last days, perilous times will come:
"For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people, turn away."
2 Timothy 3:1-5
and in addition....
"always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
2 Timothy 3:7
Think about it.
Ice
hmmm....you mean these end times?
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
last time i checked that generation passed about 2000 years ago -
[This message has been edited by mrfish (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
And still no one has said anything about my dollar bill statement. How consitutional is that?
I have read the bible, translated parts of the Koran, Jain texts, budhist texts, Hindu, Shinto, Gaiaist,and so many more I cant remember their names.
I truly enjoy reading them, as they are the only true records from the wisdom of the ancient world. Just ignore all the religious implications in those texts and you will learn a LOT.
Besides, we are all really karmasutra'ists right? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Besides, we are all really karmasutra'ists right?
I tried to avoid the thread hijacking impulse.. but alas I am only human. Shouldn't that be "kama sutra"? I'd hate to think that what comes around goes around during sex (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
AKDejaVu
-
really karma should be kamma anyway deja - it is that way most buhddist texts - same for darma is damma - its just that if you say kamma people think of punctuation
-
Interesting path this thread has taken.
A simple test.
Ask a friend to stand in the middle of a room, saying nothing, doing nothing. You stand before him/her but turn your back to him/her. Ask another friend to stand with you, facing away from friend #1. Now, without turning around, convince to friend #2 that friend #1 does or does not exist.
[This message has been edited by Apache (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
hmmm....you mean these end times?
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
last time i checked that generation passed about 2000 years ago -
[This message has been edited by mrfish (edited 01-23-2001).]
mrfish
I was under the impression Matthew was referring to the generation which sees the signs described earlier in the 24th chapter.
Eagler
-
Ice, it's the normal Christian dogma of saying "ok, we cannot prove our stuff, so we'll just call anyone who doesn't see it our way a heretic and blind to the truth, without supporting our assertions since we never do, and since everyone believes in this stuff as a matter of faith, we don't have to". Incredibly convenient.
No insult inteded, but it is a bit insulting to be called blind to the truth for requiring claims to be substantiated. Not to mention all the names ya listed there.
Re: miracolous healing; we don't know is the answer. Well, we do know to some extent; experiements with the placebo effect have shown just how much mental attitude can affect body functions. Youga practitioners can lower their heart rate at will and there are examples of people directing their blood flows. So, we don't know everything yet, and then we should say "we do not know". Not "god did it" or "science says it is this" *unless* there is evidence either way.
Evidence. I see evidence in the scientific way. Logical positivism to an extent, yes.
How do I judge whether a bridge is safe to cross? Available evidence. I do not go by faith. I suspect this is how most of us go around in our daily life. The question is; why do some of us stop when it comes to spiritual matters?
Ugh, being called all those names got me p'd off. I am gonna stop here.
I HATE such a dogmatic approach. I hate that way of "discussing", since it ain't discussing.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
-
I was under the impression Matthew was referring to the generation which sees the signs described earlier in the 24th chapter.
Eagler[/B][/QUOTE]
could be eagler but that isnt my interpretation of the verse
matthew told everyone to drop what they had, dont bother getting married or making plans for the future just run to the hills because it is all coming down - i think they thought it was all going to happen right away - that is what the texts sound like at least
this stuff was very popular among jewish thinkers at the times though - and christianity is really only a sect of judaism. you have to believe in the first part of the bible for the new testament to be relevant to you right? in fact, had it not been for paul's influence on the early church non-jews might have never been admitted to the club -
i guess it can be debated all day and has for ever but none of my ancestors were from isreal or the middle east or were jewish at all for that matter so this fulfullment of prophecy stuff is the part of christianity i always have trouble with - that and the inconsistent resurrection and other stories among the 4 gospels.....so how many angels and marys were there - was the stone there or moved? if there is inconsistency in even one place it makes blind faith a little tough....
dont get me wrong though - i am not foaming at the mouth against the church, i have on my wall a framed verse from the new testament- the part where jesus kicks the money-changers out of the temple. to me it is an awesome story about modern culture and value conflicts and keeps me going sometimes- but i still wonder how this middle-eastern jewish sect got to the forefront of america and europe, nothing against the jews but it doesnt seem very relevent to me as a caucasian -
[This message has been edited by mrfish (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
Santa...
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
Hebrews 11:1
It's not uncommon in this world for those without faith to condemn those with faith.
The choices you make in your life are your business...I wish you the best (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Cyas in the skies!
Ice
-
to each his own, mrfish <S>
Don't think you can take everything in the Bible at face value, it's there to guide, comfort and enlighten. There have been so many interpretations and edits - i.e. when the reference to reincarnation was removed in 4th century by Emperor Constantine and again in the 6th century by the 2nd Council of Constantinople - that each of us has to take what wisdom from it we are ready for it. I think this goes for most "religious manuals" whatever the faith. They are all paths leading to the same House. We just have to choose a path that's right for us now and try to follow it without knocking anyone else down or falling down too many times ourselves...
Eagler
-
amen brother eagler! whatever does the dishes-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Ice:
"For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power."
Some insult. I haven't called you Christian dudes names yet, so why do you call me names? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
F*ck you too, is my reply (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
<note the humour in this post, and please, please, please, do not take it personally (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"We are the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
guys? what about the dollar thing? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Santa-
Whoa! He is quoting the Bible WRT the nature of man, not you personally. If you read the passage, you see it is a pretty good description of the world. I don't believe he was in any way directing an insult towards you.
-
TAC- see somebody responded - i agree lets trash the old dollar slogan and substitute it with "whadda you lookin' at"
-
Really? where? not even with wordsearch do I find it. Please point it out (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Im really interested in this. My US Gov. teacher never could answer that one.
-
"For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power."
I would just like to interject that is not a matter of whether you believe there is a God or not and whether you serve him or not that determines your morals. It is you who sets your morals for yourself, or you can abide to a set of morals already established. Generally this quote from the Bible is in reference to those that are without faith, or "lost" as the church likes to say. Now the question I have for you, how many people of faith do you think are much like the aforementioned quote describes? Quite a few, it's all a matter of what you think is right and wrong. Where you place yourself amongst your fellow man. You do not need a God or faith to be a good person. To say that would be like an uninformed juvenile telling a physics teacher what elements we have yet to discover. Get my drift? I do not believe in a God, and I have no faith... but I am still a person with morals. Just because I am considered a pagen, I do not run around being sub-human.
So let us pretend for this moment there is indeed a God and that God has been judging us since the day we were born till the day we die. A man of faith comes up to that God to be judged, but he has quite a few "deviations" in his life in which he was quite less than what God expected of him. He asked for forgiveness, he was forgiven(let us pretend). He is admitted into the next afterlife(lets pretend it's the catholic heaven in this instance).
Now, a man of no faith who has lived a great life who has made a few mistakes but did not ask for forgiveness comes up before the God. He served his fellow man and could always be counted on for helping his fellow man. He did what he was asked of, and he always satisfied everyone around him. The mistakes he made were small ones, but enough to put a mark on his record. This man of no faith has lived a great life and while he did not serve the God, he served man. He was ignorant of the fact there was a God, so he did not know.
Do you think he'll be admitted into this heaven that exists?(still pretending remember)
I'd like to hear your answers. Men of faith aren't the only good people on this planet. ;-)
-SW
-
So Many Amereican bashers out there don't appriciate what the United States has done in the world . American loaned half the world money and manpower to rebuild after WWII.
IN GOD WE TRUST
[This message has been edited by paintmaw (edited 01-23-2001).]
-
Seawulfe-
This is one of arguments commonly brought out in such a discussion. Is it possible to be a good person and not be saved? Yes.
Assume God is perfection, and in His perfection He cannot tolerate sin with Him. Any sin. Also assume that man is destined to sin regardless of any effort made to the contrary. This means that the only way anyone gets to heaven is through the grace of God, i.e. He forgives all your sins. You must ask for forgiveness and have a real change of heart in order to be given this gift. You see, if you don't ask for forgiveness it is like being in denial of your sin. If you are in denial you can hardly be repentant. Without repenting you will never change. Without change you remain sinful.
People cannot make themselves perfect, as I think even the most agnostic or atheistic can concur. You only have then to believe that God will not allow sin to enter heaven to understand why you must ask forgiveness to be saved.
I don't necessarily think that unbelievers are terrible people; I was raised in an atheistic family, and I love them. We are all accountable for our lives, and if you are a believer, you know that you will do so before God at the judgement. If you recognize your sin and earnestly repent, you are forgiven however heinous your sin. To God, sin is sin, there is no degree. If you do not repent you are accountable nonetheless, but with the additional sin of having rejected God, the only truly unforgiveable sin. As to not knowing God, it states in scripture that all will have the opportunity, but many will reject.
-
towd,
Buddhist here too (Soto Zen). I agree, very interesting. A salute to all!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Kieren; that was a DIRECT REFERENCE to people of no faith; it is as insulting and harsh as the following:
Christians are mindless ugly bigots using their oppressive dogma to compensate for lack of charm, intelligence, objectivity and grace. They're nitwits idiot with the charm of a 6 week hangover and two pints of urine combined. So poor are their brains and so big are their delusions that they think there is a big Skydaddy In the Clouds that has a personal interest in everyones sex life. So braindead, idiotic, moronic and useless is their philosophy that it is an insult to human intelligence to let this vile piece of puke infect an otherwise healthy and potentialy good mind. It is utterly distateful to see them spread their poisons into the minds of the defenceless; the young kids who have total faith in their parents.
Christians are disgusting. They're appaling. They're the result of eons of superstition and impervious to logic and reason. It is hard not to hate all of them and, personally, I wish they all die horrible deaths, preferrably at my hands".
Nice huh?
If I went around calling Christians all this, would they not be A TAD BIT P'D OFF?
So why apply double standards?
Ice, thanks for bringing it up though; it validates my belief in western humanism.
Seawulfe, the way I've had it explained is that the Christian deity runs by different rules than what we earthlings do - i.e what we think is good, he might not. We don't know exactly how he judges even though we, through the bible, have a good idea of what he considers good and bad, so therefore the only way to get into heaven is by his grace.
Along these lines are Pascal's Wager. Pascal was a great mathematician, which has led me to believe his wager was more of a humorous attempt than anything else: It goes:
If God REALLY exists, and we believe (= bet that God exists), we have an infinite gain.
If God REALLY exists, and we don't believe that, then we have the potential of an infinite loss (hell, or at least eternal separation from God).
If God really does NOT EXIST, and we believe that God exists, we essentially lose nothing.
If God really does NOT EXIST, and we believe that God doesn't exist, we essentially gain nothing.
In short; the rational approach is to believe in god, since you lose nothing and have everything to gain.
It looks very compelling at the surface, but once again, the logic is flawed.
Assume that God is Barney the Atheist Loving God who dislikes believers. You have now reversed the table. That's the most fundamental flaw of it (and there are others, logic related ones).
I find it rewarding to discuss such things - sometimes I am wrong, sometimes the ones I discuss with are wrong. Spent hours on the undernet #atheism and #philosophy channel throwing arguments around for fun in a good natured way - I believe it is good for me to realise the flaws of my positions and I enjoy dissecting the arguments of others.
But this is one thing. Being called selfish and whatnot for being a non theist - and this is *in the bible*, which means that any good Christian is to believe it, since it is God's words, is UTTERLY INSULTING.
How can you NOT get pissed off when some OLD guy who wrote a passage in a book calls you all these names without knowing you, and then gets all his loyal followers to adopt the same position?
It is insulting. As insulting as my first passage about Christians (which is equally untrue) is.
Dude. I'm a good person. The Bible is wrong in that passage. But can it be wrong in the eyes of the bible following Christian, since it is the word of God?
Would really like the input from Christians on this one; are all non Christians this bad?
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Whoa. If you can take that passage of the Bible as a personal insult I think you are really reaching. It was describing a broad range of humanity, not you specifically. It doesn't say if you don't believe you are guilty of all of those sins. It describes the different types of people that are out there. Moreover, believers are lumped in there, too. That's right, believers are not perfect, that is the point. I could just as easily see myself in that passage as you can, and I am a believer.
-
Kieren, it is implicity saying that those who deny the power of god is amongst the crowd, and then we have guilt by association.
I could add a bit to my insult and make it the same way. The intent would be very well in the open, but there'd be an escape clause.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
I think that we sometimes forget that the term "God" is a concept, an idea, a projection of the rational mind and nothing else.
The key is not to ask, "Where is God?" but to ask, "Where does that question come from?" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Just another note on the discussion...
I somehow get the feeling from non-Christians that Christians walk around in an aura of haughtiness, as if they are superior. Indeed, some do, but most I know are the opposite. Christians have every one of the failings of non-Christians, make no mistake about it. All you need do is read Exodus to discover that, even though the Israelites saw the power of God directly, they defied it. That book serves as a warning to believers that if one isn't wary to the wants of the flesh will overcome one. Time and again the Bible speaks of how supposedly religious people use their position in religious society to acquire personal gain at the expense of others. The Bible refers to people that had been strong supporters of Christianity but had fallen away. Take any of the religious figures you can name (aside from Jesus) and their sins are there to read in black-and-white. Believers are not without sin. At the same time there are stories of how, with God's help, these people overcome their personal desires and work to God's glory.
In the end it seems you view Christians as a group of people pointing their fingers out at society and spouting how bad everyone is, and how pure they themselves are. Wrong. Christians point that finger at themselves daily and strive to find their own demons to exorcise. Christians believe that all have a daily struggle against sin, a personal struggle. But Christians are also taught to help uplift their fellow man, to witness, to rebuke when necessary, and to be an example of Christian faith.
But let's parse that paragraph a bit for an interpretation:
"For men will be lovers of themselves,
Vanity
lovers of money,
Greedy
boasters,
Braggarts
proud,
Not recognizing God's role in life or success
blasphemers,
Knowingly acting against God (i.e., using the Lord's name in vain)
disobedient to parents,
Incorrigible
unthankful,
To either God or anyone
unholy,
Following self-destructive pursuits, or degrading of another's humanity
unloving,
Can refer to not loving God (obedience), or more directly not loving anyone
unforgiving,
Bearing grudges
slanderers,
Gossip
without self control,
Prone to emotional outbursts
brutal,
Cruel; incapable of empathy
despisers of good,
This can mean someone who knows good from bad, but chooses bad. Acting against what is right is construed as "despising good"
traitors,
Take literally
headstrong,
Stubborn
haughty,
"Holier-than-thou"
lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
Again, a reference of knowing right from wrong and choosing wrong, in this case knowing God's will and denying it in favor of personal desires
having a form of godliness but denying its power."
As the Bible states, we are made in God's image, therefore we have "the form of Godliness" but by refusing to accept God we deny His power.
[This message has been edited by Kieren (edited 01-24-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Tac:
Really? where? not even with wordsearch do I find it. Please point it out (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Im really interested in this. My US Gov. teacher never could answer that one.
Tac
I'll take a shot at your comment ..
"In God we Trust" has nothing to do with the "state" promoting the "church".
It is simply stating as a nation we believe and trust in a higher power. It's not telling you that you yourself have to believe, goodness knows with all of our "freedoms" here you can believe or disbelief whatever you want. It's stating the government is based on the assumption that there is a higher power than itself. I for one am glad for that. When my government doesn't believe such, I will worry.
Eagler
-
Kieren, thanks! Made my day. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Heh, ok, since I am on a roll, let me continue. Unbelievers fall into this category of people, there's no denying that based on that passage. How would you feel if I placed you in a list of murderers, child abusers, liars, perverts, torturers and sadists, cross dressing allied pilots and sheep shaggers? A bit tiffed? I'd think so. And, if I then said "but I am not saying you're like them at all, it's just a convenient place for me to put you", you'd rightfully call me on my bullsh|t, no?
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Just found a relevant AH biblical quote:
Matthew 26
52 "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
Not that it's right; Hartmann didn't die by the sword for instance (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
It's a nice quote still.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Santa-
How would you feel if I placed you in a list of murderers, child abusers, liars, perverts, torturers and sadists, cross dressing allied pilots and sheep shaggers?
I am no better than anyone in that list. The point I keep trying to make is sin is sin is sin. No sin is greater than any other. If I am a sinner (and I am) then I am included in that list (by virtue of having committed similar level sins against God). So the answer is no, I wouldn't be tiffed if under the context of this discussion you called me these names.
As for the original passage, it is the Christian view of humanity in general. You may disagree with it, but to take a personal insult from it I still cannot see. Do you possess any of the qualities discussed, even one? That's a fair question, isn't it? If you do, welcome to the human race. If not, you are otherworldly, as I have never met anyone that didn't have failings. Remove the Biblical origin of the passage and it does indeed describe to a great extent people. Sure, it left out the good qualities, which we also possess, but the context from which the passage was taken was meant to be a warning to believers not to slide into the failings of the flesh. The Bible spends a lot of time reminding believers to look inward and upward. In fact, if you read carefully, it spends more time discussing the failings of believers than it does pointing outward to outside groups.
-
Very well said Kieren, in all the above posts. I hope that when I have kids they have teachers like you - if they still let Christians teach in public schools then...
------------------
LuckyDay
"What're you going to do, bleed on me?"
-
Kieren:
I am no better than anyone in that list. The point I keep trying to make is sin is sin is sin. No sin is greater than any other.
Christianity teaches you that you're as low as scum sucking sadistic pedofile murdering rapist.
A wee bit of a demeaning religion, wouldn't you say?
I'm a western humanist. As such, I focus on the human animal, its vast potential and its positive sides, as well as acknowledging the darker aspect. I find it pretty sad when people express such sentiment about the human animal and I beg your forgivenes for finding it unworthy.
If I am a sinner (and I am) then I am included in that list (by virtue of having committed similar level sins against God). So the answer is no, I wouldn't be tiffed if under the context of this discussion you called me these names.
Hm if you are all these things, it should not matter in what context I call you equal to a child abuser.
One of the things with Christianity I find hard to accept, due to aforementioned reasons, is this concept of original sin - two individuals, unknown to me, are not nice to god. God decide to punish their unborn children (and indirectly me, if I was a Christian) for their actions. I am not sure what we can learn from this, other than something about the nature of god.
As for the original passage, it is the Christian view of humanity in general. You may disagree with it, but to take a personal insult from it I still cannot see.
Well, I don't care WHO the hell put me in the same list as murderers, rapists and whatnot; it is bloody insulting as I do not belong there. Since Ice was party communicating with me, and you certainly are, one would expect that you considered my secular position and how your message could be interpreted. I try to not be blasphemous or offensive since I find you a great guy.
Do you possess any of the qualities discussed, even one? That's a fair question, isn't it? If you do, welcome to the human race. If not, you are otherworldly, as I have never met anyone that didn't have failings.
Let's examine it:
"For men will be lovers of themselves
I don't love myself. I like myself.
lovers of money
I don't love money. I find it a useful tool that is hard to be without.
boasters
Other than my mocking LW thing here, I don't boast much. Sometimes, I'm proud of an achievement.
proud
Guilty as charged. Wonder what's wrong with being satisifed with personal performance? Perhaps this is related to the human animal being a low life?
blasphemers
Blasphemy is a victimless crime (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
disobedient to parents
Overall, nope. Certainly not anymore; and we're all grown up adults. They respect me and my limits, and I return the favour.
unthankful
Nope. Am happy that I have this little place, no money, disturbing neighbors and (at the moment) a chaotic private life. Because I am priviledged and could do a helluva lot worse.
unholy
holy and unholy are foreign pointless concepts to me; since nothing is holy, nothing can be unholy.
unloving
I love my family more than I love life itself.
unforgiving
Occasionally. Sometimes, you must be. Death penalty proponents would understand this.
slanderers
Ehm, not a chronic gossiper, no.
without self control
No, I've stopped smoking several times. Also started after years of pause out of a desire to smoke. Just recently stopped again.
brutal
I'm a very harmless little guy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
despisers of good
I love the good. The good, however, does not always love me.
traitors
Nope.
headstrong
Does that include committed to principles and standards, such as not harming others?
haughty
Yes, and damned proud of it, too.
lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God
I have no god. Hard to love what I do not have.
having a form of godliness but denying its power.
Not an ounce of godliness in me. 100% Pure Human.
And from such people, turn away
If we're all like this Kieren, we must all turn away from each other. The propgation of the human species would be at jeopardy. Either the world NEEDS sinners to keep humans on the planet, or this line is to be ignored.
I posses some of them. Most are minor personal flaws that can be overcome by kicking in one's brain. Those I don't have are utterly repulsive and very far from me as a person. I very much dislike being grouped with them in a guilt by association way.
Remove the Biblical origin of the passage and it does indeed describe to a great extent
people. Sure, it left out the good qualities, which we also possess, but the context from which the passage was taken was meant to be a warning to believers not to slide into the failings of the flesh. The Bible spends a lot of time reminding believers to look inward and upward. In fact, if you read carefully, it spends more time discussing the failings of believers than it does pointing outward to outside groups.
The bible spends a lot of time telling humans that they're essentially worthless it seems. I'm not worthless, and I'm offended when someone, using scripture, refers to me in any way as such. Most non Christians would be, I would imagine.
You seem to know your bible quite well, Kieren. Perhaps you could explain to me why there is such a focus on humans as fallible scum sucking pondlife?
Btw; I hope this discussion in no way puts us up against each other; I would rather just stop posting more than do that. Discussions like this aren't worth it. But they're fun if both parts are prepared to just rough it out for the fun of it.
<S!>
--
StSanta
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-24-2001).]
-
Is there a formed religion that basically says that if you behave yourself and dont do anything that you know is wrong and that if you feel honestly bad about the things you have done wrong and try to make up for them you will be ok? cause that would be mine.
just look at the term "Organizer Religion"
thats an Oxymoron, religion is the most chaotic unknown about thing there is, to call it organized in any way is to dallude ones self IMO. But whats worse is these religions tell you that if you dont prey the ways THEY have deemed fit or we are wrong, thts BS.
-
I am not offended in the least by this discussion; it is actually one that I believe most Christians find themselves in from time-to-time. The difficulty for me is determining when to bow out for fear of becoming overbearing. If you are seeking my viewpoint on the topic I will happily continue. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Yes, the Bible does express that humans, all humans, are worthless without God. It does lump me in there with child molesters as well, but it is more complicated than that. From an absolute standpoint sin is sin. The line in the sand is harsh and absolute. On the other hand there is the amount of sin one commits to consider as well. Remember, by the Christian viewpoint one must confess and repent sin to be forgiven. To completely repent means to recognize and attempt to change (with God's help) what is wrong with your life. God knows what is in your heart, and knows when your request for forgiveness is genuine. He knows when you truly intend to change. He is ready to help when you are ready. Still, the more sin you commit, the more you need to repent, the more change necessary.
There is another reason the amount of sin is troubling- after a while your heart hardens and you become insensitive to the sin in your life. It becomes easier and easier to do things that you know you should not do. Pretty soon the sin pervades your life completely, so much so that the original you is lost in it.
Now here comes the kicker- if you look at the things that God would eliminate from your life you see that they are almost all self-destructive. Take the Ten Commandments as a simple example. These rules were designed to apply simple rules of co-existance for the people of Israel. Jesus made it even simpler when he summed up all the laws of Moses; love one another.
Love? What does that mean? Sex? Familial bonding? Romance? Love in the Christian sense is serving and caring for others before yourself. God is referred to as "our Father in heaven" for a reason; it signifies the relationship we have with Him. Parents can readily understand the unrelenting love they have for their children, regardless of their transgressions. Your children can anger you, mock you, steal from you, but in the end you still love them. At times it isn't easy. Sometimes, because you love them, you must allow them to suffer the consequences for their decisions. Sometimes those consequences are painful, but it must happen to teach and prepare them for what comes after. This is what God does with us. He is always ready to forgive us if we change, but he will eventually allow us to suffer the consequences of our actions if it is in our best interests (as interpreted by Him, not us). If we remain incorrigible we are eventually cast out (separated from God). Bear in mind, this is our choice, not God's. It is God's desire that all be saved. It is why He brought Jesus into the world.
You mention capital punishment- does it surprise you that I would be for it in some cases? That may sound un-Christian, but in truth it isn't. And it doesn't mean that I am unforgiving, either. It means that people are held accountable for what they do. A person on death row may be forgiven of their sin by God, but that does not mean they shouldn't be executed.
Remember Moses? Neither he nor his brother Aaron were allowed to enter the promised land. Why? They took credit for bringing water forth from the rock at Kadesh. While that seems minor in comparison to all the great work that was done through him, it must be remembered that Moses was the direct contact to God for the Israelites. Moses was held to very exacting standards by God, as Moses was the bringer of God's law for Israel. Did Moses lose his salvation? No. He was denied an earthly desire, but his salvation was clearly illustrated during Jesus's transfiguration in the Garden, where both Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke with Jesus. You see, nothing on earth is worth more than your soul, not even the fruits of your life's labor.
Don't forget Jesus on the cross. He was there with two criminals, one repentant, one not. One criminal taunted Jesus, the other asked Him to "remember my name when you return to your Father". Jesus assured him he was saved. Even at the last moment, the criminal, though he was executed for his crimes, found repentance and forgiveness. Though his life may have been nothing but crime (and we don't know, it is the only mention of this person) it was still worthwhile, as another soul was saved.
Our lives and experiences are about growing, changing, interacting with one another, and ultimately coming to the understanding of our need for God. We are given the necessary tools to operate according to God's plan. The trouble begins when we fail to seek that plan and try to do everything on our own. This is why we are reminded so often of how easy it is to forget God, and that without Him nothing is possible or worthwhile. If we spend our whole lives chasing about after what the world has to offer but as a result lose our souls for all eternity, what good is that? I won't tell you that people who don't find salvation won't be successful in this life; plenty of them will be. I won't tell you that people that lead pious lives won't suffer, because clearly many do. Religion attempts to get us to look beyond the temporal (the now) in order acquire true wealth in salvation (eternity). This isn't just fire insurance, BTW. When it finally clicked for me I understood you don't come to God just because you are afraid of Hell; you come to God because it becomes clear He wants what is good for you, and that He is the giver of all that you hold dear in your life. You trust Him to use you to do great things, and that when great things happen to you, it does so because you have been given an opportunity to do something important for God.
Personal case in point: I have been given some mediocre athletic ability- not professional by any means, but I have a wide range of abilities. The one that brought me the most notoriety was running. For years I was a local front runner, often winning races by wide margins. People would see me out, they identified running with me. Then one day our local Athletic Director came to me with a problem- they were in a jam because they had just lost both Cross-Country coaches, and season started in a week. Would I be interested?
This was a problem. I was at the peak of my athletic life, and training thes guys and gals would seriously impact my personal training, not to mention inhibit totally my ability to compete. I wanted to say no. Then I thought about it. There was a reason I was given the ability to run, and it wasn't about winning a bunch of regional road races. It was about reaching out to others and helping to develop in them something good. Where this good might take them was anyone's guess, but in today's world any success for a teenager is a good thing. I set aside my personal desires and jumped in. Four years later that group of guys competed in their first state meet, light years ahead of where we started. Did I make that happen? No way! God did, but He used me to do it. Along the way I was also able to instill concepts of respect, dignity, concern for others, leadership, and sportsmanship to a group of gentlemen who learned their lessons well. And there has not been a single race, not a single important event where we have not thanked God and asked His blessing for our efforts. I thank God for bringing me into this situation, and am glad He finds me worthy to do so.
I close with our situation. God has me here typing to you when I should be doing myriad other tasks. Why do I do it? Because I know there is a reason, though I cannot be sure what it is. You are asking questions that I quite honestly hear a lot. Perhaps I will impact you in some way, perhaps not. Perhaps there are some reading now that may better understand what Christianity is about, and what it isn't. Maybe, some years down the road someone may think back on these words and a light will click on. I don't know. But I have the faith to know I landed in this thread for a reason, and that is all I need to worry about. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Hi Kieren
Appreciate your response. Don't worry about being overbearing; as a non theist, it's a quality few people have. As a LW pilot, it's a necessity. Personally, I don't think explaining ones views and ideals fall into this category.
I'd like add some additional question, or where necessary, come with my views on the Christian philosophy, from an outsiders point of view.
Yes, the Bible does express that humans, all humans, are worthless without God. It does lump me in there with child molesters as well, but it is more complicated than that. From an absolute standpoint sin is sin. The line in the sand is harsh and absolute.
Absolutism, I feel, is a human concept. Much like an ideal mathematical circle, it can be found in thought but not elsewhere. It's also an inherently dangerous thing - "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". This is especially true when we're talking about religious absolutism (which that comment quite nicely is directed at). One problem is it is unadressable - it cannot be questioned or discussed. If humans were absolutists, our curiosity would have been reduced to near nil and social and technological advancements be close to that as well. Perosnally I adhere to "nothing exists absolutely" (and no, that's not an absolute statement (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).)
"On the other hand there is the amount of sin one commits to consider as well. Remember, by
the Christian viewpoint one must confess and repent sin to be forgiven. To completely repent means to recognize and attempt to change (with God's help) what is wrong with your life. God knows what is in your heart, and knows when your request for forgiveness is genuine. He knows when you truly intend to change. He is ready to help when you are ready. Still, the more sin you commit, the more you need to repent, the more change necessary.[/b]
It is my understanding that any level of sin is enough to exclude you from paradise unless you receive God's forgiveness, which is given to you, as you say, by God's grace when he knows you're sincere. It could be argued that this opens up the possibility of one final repentance and that the amount of sin really isn't importance.
For a non theist, or someone like me (western humanist with anarcho-syndicalist tendencies (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)) the abandonment of self reliance is also troublingWhile I accept interdependence with other humans is existant, I seek to minimize it in most critical areas of life. Where it cannot be minimized, I cultivate it. Personal improvement is a field that is aptly suited for individual and personal work without the interference of external forces.
So here, we can agree to disagree, quite civilly (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
There is another reason the amount of sin is troubling- after a while your heart hardens and you become insensitive to the sin in your life. It becomes easier and easier to do things that you know you should not do. Pretty soon the sin pervades your life completely, so much so that the original you is lost in it.
I'll replace the word "sin" with "wrong doing" to get it secularized. After doing so, it is hard to argue with this argument. I still think you are what you think and do - the sum of your experiences and thoughts. The original you exists in the present and nowhere else (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Am glad I am not the same gung ho testosterone poisoned "wow this looks cool I'll try it despite the consequences" individual I was as teenager (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Now here comes the kicker- if you look at the things that God would eliminate from your life you see that they are almost all self-destructive. Take the Ten Commandments as a simple example. These rules were designed to apply simple rules of co-existance for the people of Israel. Jesus made it even simpler when he summed up all the laws of Moses; love one another.
Some are, but far from all. The bible's take on homosexuality and general misogynism is hard for a European liberal (carries the opposite meaning than the American liberal) to swallow. Also people coexisted succesfully before Christianity; the ten commandments effectively is just a summing up of ideals and moral laws that have been with the human animal ever sine we turned into a social flock animal. It can be seen in more primitive forms in other species of animals as well.
Finally "self destructive" must be defined on a personal level. Had a long discussion yesterday with a friend about when the state should intervene to stop the individual from doing potentially dangerous things. My example was diving on old WWII wrecks - if I was to find a WWII wreck, do a dive on it and find old ordnance; bombs, ammonution and so forth, the state would instantly put a dive ban on that wreck. Here I disagree with the state about what is self destructive; my point is that it is life enriching and the state has the opposite position. Exchange the state for an absolute authority and you have the problem, only in an absolute form which is even worse.
"Love one another" is a good rule. Unfortunately, it is a bit simplistic when looking at complex group interaction and conflicting areas of interests. I feel the best approach is to be realistic and find a compromise that might not be to everyone's liking but can be accepted by all parts.
Love? What does that mean? Sex? Familial bonding? Romance? Love in the Christian sense is serving and caring for others before yourself.
Admirable, but exposes onself to self destruction and abuse. Perhaps it is good to some degree, but not perfect.
God is referred to as "our Father in heaven" for a reason; it signifies the relationship we have with Him. Parents can readily understand the unrelenting love they have for their children, regardless of their
transgressions. Your children can anger you, mock you, steal from you, but in the end you still love them. At times it isn't easy. Sometimes, because you love them, you must allow them to suffer the consequences for their decisions. Sometimes those consequences are painful, but it must happen to teach and prepare them for what comes after. This is what God does with us. He is always ready to forgive us if we change, but he will eventually allow us to suffer the consequences of our actions if it is in our best interests (as interpreted by Him, not us).
Consequences such as lingering and painful disease, utter destructon of personality, victimization. Consequences from things outside your personal control; a robbery, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake.
I believe it is also true that parents, loving ones that is, would go to extremes to ensure that their kids have as good possibilites as there can be. Here, god creates fallible humans and then let them play on a stage of his creation, subitting them to humiliating and painful failures and disasters. A good human parent would not do this. I believe that to lose the love of my parents, I'd have to torture my siblings or something like that - disobedience is simply not enough.
If we remain incorrigible we are eventually cast out (separated from God). Bear in mind, this is our choice, not God's. It is God's desire that all be saved. It is why He brought Jesus into the world.
I would have to disagree. If we are to use the analogy of human parents, this is not true in all cases. And God, with all his power, could have created a place where the'd be no need for salvation. he could have cut his losses when the Alpha version of Humans went wrong, instead of submitting *innocents* to rules of *his* creation, unbending rules, sometimes unacceptable and unreasonable rules.
He gives us the capacity to question, yet is unwilling to see that capacity used against himself if the outcome results in a negativ image of hi. Send the buggers to hell if that happens. Again, this does not in my mind correspond to an image of a loving parent.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Continuation post: the bb doesn't like very large posts it seems:
Of course it is here the Christian concept of free will enters. This is somehow etheral and for unknown reasons and working in an utterly mysterious way, it leaps over what we refer to as causality. This far, I haven't seen a rational explanation to it.
{b]You mention capital punishment- does it surprise you that I would be for it in some cases? That may sound un-Christian, but in truth it isn't. And it doesn't mean that I am unforgiving, either. It means that people are held accountable for what they do. A person on death row may be forgiven of their sin by God, but that does not mean they shouldn't be executed.[/b]
This I feel has little to do with religion but rather a secular pragmatic approach with some philosophic backing. The bible is somewhat ambigious on this; an eye for an eye and turn the other cheek. Of course, one is the old testatement god and one is the new one; but the whole bible is the word of god, no?
Remember Moses?
Wasn't he the dude with the beard and kid? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Neither he nor his brother Aaron were allowed to enter the promised land. Why? They took credit for bringing water forth from the rock at Kadesh. While that seems minor in comparison to all the great work that was done through him, it must be remembered that Moses was the direct contact to God for the Israelites. Moses was held to very exacting standards by God, as Moses was the bringer of God's law for Israel. Did Moses lose his salvation? No. He was denied an earthly desire, but his salvation was clearly illustrated during Jesus's transfiguration
in the Garden, where both Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke with Jesus. You see, nothing on earth is worth more than your soul, not even the fruits of your life's labor.
Well, I'd think that god would hold us all to the same standards. This is what I've understood from reading the bible.
For us soul challenged beings (and until you can scientifically prove the assertion of there being a soul, I shall describe me as such, just as I describe me as lacking a Grynthty if someone claims there is such a thing), the most valuable thing we have is life itself; it is to be cherished and lived, even though sometimes living it requires risking it. i place an emphasis on the actual rather than the remotely possible. It is, I feel a sensible approach. It is the same approach I have when I cross a bridge; sure, potentially it might turn into a giant swan and fly away, and leave me on some weird planet, but right now it actually looks like it is a working bridge that will support my weight.
Don't forget Jesus on the cross. He was there with two criminals, one repentant, one not. One criminal taunted Jesus, the other asked Him to "remember my name when you return to your Father". Jesus assured him he was saved. Even at the last moment, the criminal, though he was executed for his crimes, found repentance and forgiveness. Though his life may have been nothing but crime (and we don't know, it is the only mention of this person) it was still worthwhile, as another soul was saved.
I gather had I been there, I'd say "what a git", agree with the other criminal and tell him to "shut up and die already" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). It's too implausible for me.
Our lives and experiences are about growing, changing, interacting with one another, and ultimately coming to the understanding of our need for God.
Agree with the first part, but not the last.
We are given the necessary tools to operate according to God's plan.
Assuming there is one. I would say we've been given some tools by evolution and we're using our extensive capabilities and incredible intellect to futher our species as good as we can. The ultimate goal (which is futile, but hey, the trip is worth more than the goal) is to keep the human animal alive for as long as possible. It's a biological imperative.
The trouble begins when we fail to seek that plan and try to do everything on our own. This is why we are reminded so often of
how easy it is to forget God, and that without Him nothing is possible or worthwhile. If we spend our whole lives
chasing about after what the world has to offer but as a result lose our souls for all eternity, what good is that?
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Hiyas Kieren...
Good work (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I don't think I could ever shoot ya down now (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Santa....
I did not speak anything to you, I just quoted God's word and ask you or others to think about it.
I stand in judgement over no man...my own lifes walk is enough for me thank you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Even though you mock God, he loves you anyway. No words you speak about the subject are in anyway new or original when viewed throughout the years of history.
It is my hope that you would come to know his Son as your Savior...every knee will bow someday, including mine.
Take Care (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Ice
-
Ugh, longer than I thought: last part:
I believe with good conviction based on my experiences and available evidence, that the ultimate goal is life is to be defined by the individual himself. For me, it is experiencing things; death will stop it. It will nullify my accomplishments and remove my experiences from me. Effectively, it will put an end to one world; my world. We've been given this great capability; it would be foolish to not utilize it to the best of our ability. I'd go so far as to say it would be insulting to life itself not to.
Another area where I disagree with the Christian mythology/philosophy/cult (whichever is less offensive (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)).
I won't tell you that people who don't find salvation won't be successful in this life; plenty of them will be. I won't tell
you that people that lead pious lives won't suffer, because clearly many do. Religion attempts to get us to look beyond the temporal (the now) in order acquire true wealth in salvation (eternity).
Indeed; this is what Christianity does, and it is one reason why one could call it a life denying one. Remove the actual for the potential. Stomp on what you have for a far and quite unlikely (speaking in scientifical terms) possibility. I disagree heartily with this philosophy.
This isn't just fire insurance, BTW.
When it finally clicked for me I understood you don't come to God just because you are afraid of Hell; you come to God because it becomes clear He wants what is good for you, and that He is the giver of all that you hold dear in your life.
Well, honestly, don't you think Hell was put in there as a motivator? Think of it; on one hand; etenral bliss. on the other, extreme pain for all time; humiliation and whatnot.
It's a loaded question if there ever was one; it's akin to pushing someone out over glowing coal, then offering to help him, saying "hell, it's your choice. Refuse my help, and eventually you'll burn on the coal, or accept my help and get away unscaved." An easy choice for most men and women.
You trust Him to use you to do great things, and that when great things happen to you, it does so because you have been given an opportunity to do something important for God.
Mm, it is nice to see it explained this way. It crystallizes the differences in philosophies. I credit myself for *both* good and bad, not just one of the two. To take MY accomplishments and say "god did it for ya/through ya" makes me want to respond with an offensive line full of profanity. Of course, being the overly civil and great guy I am, I only do so if the other person intrudes unwantedly into my personal life at his or her own request and without my consent (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
As far as your example; it is a good one of sacrificing personal gain for the good of others. On the other hand, one could argue that due to your moral standards, the personal gain would actually have been a loss. It would be nice to see you take credit for your own achievement there; really admireable and a good example to others.
I close with our situation. God has me here typing to you when I should be doing myriad other tasks.
Yes, I've also come to the conclusion it takes divine intervention for people to interact with me for longer than five minutes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Why do I do it? Because I know there is a reason, though I cannot be sure what it is. You are asking questions that I quite honestly hear a lot. Perhaps I will impact you in some way, perhaps not. Perhaps there are some reading now that may better
understand what Christianity is about, and what it isn't. Maybe, some years down the road someone may think back on these words and a light will click on. I don't know. But I have the faith to know I landed in this thread for a reason, and that is all I need to worry about
Mm, a good explanation. Much more worthy than mine; I landed in this thread because I have too much time on my hands and a personal interest in it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
I realise fully well that you and I probably won't be able to convince each other of which way is the right one. But, I feel this discussion is an excellent one for gaining understanding of the other guys position and that's basically what I'm trying to explain. Please do not see it as a demaning "my philosophy is better than yours" post, but rather as an explanation of an alternative philosophy. I see yours in this way, and really appreciate your effort.
The thing that can be quite irritating to the atheist is that IF the atheist is right, nothing comes out of it, because death will simply be the end of life. If the Christian is right, the atheist will say "oh f*ck" and have to befriend Satan. He seems like a mellow guy; a victim of a slanderous campaign from god and the other angels (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
If Pascal's Wager is valid, which it ain't (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Oooh, looks like this will be my FIRST thread to reach 100 posts. WOOHOO!
<S!>
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Ice:
I cannot mock that which I do not know to exist.
Other than on an abstract level and I don't believe I've done that.
Coullda done a lot better if I tried (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Santa-
It is my understanding that any level of sin is enough to exclude you from paradise unless you receive God's forgiveness, which is given to you, as you say, by God's grace when he knows you're sincere. It could be argued that this opens up the possibility of one final repentance and that the amount of sin really isn't importance.
For a non theist, or someone like me (western humanist with anarcho-syndicalist tendencies ) the abandonment of self reliance is also troublingWhile I accept interdependence with other humans is existant, I seek to minimize it in most critical areas of life. Where it cannot be minimized, I cultivate it. Personal improvement is a field that is aptly suited for individual and personal work without the interference of external forces.
I'll jump in here. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Yes, you are right, it is quite possible to have a "deathbed conversion" as you said. This is what I alluded to with my remark about Jesus and the two criminals. But for the average person it won't work out that way. Many will live their entire lives normally, without some tragic ending that suddenly gives them that epiphany. In the case of sin and repentance it is necessary to make change to show true repentance. The more sin you repent, the more you have to change, therefore the more dramatic the effect on your life will be.
As for self-reliance, God doesn't ask you to lie around and wait for Him to make things happen. God expects you to ask for His guidance, to go where He directs you, and to do what He says. This doesn't mean a yellow-brick road is laid before you, and that your life will be easy. Sometimes you will be tested harshly, and your perserverance will be tested, but God does not give you more than you can handle. If you ask for His help he will give it. And God doesn't intend for you to live apart from others, nor be independent. God asks us to care for one another, to help each other, to love one another.
Consequences such as lingering and painful disease, utter destructon of personality, victimization. Consequences from things outside your personal control; a robbery, a volcanic eruption, an earthquake.
I believe it is also true that parents, loving ones that is, would go to extremes to ensure that their kids have as good possibilites as there can be. Here, god creates fallible humans and then let them play on a stage of his creation, subitting them to humiliating and painful failures and disasters. A good human parent would not do this. I believe that to lose the love of my parents, I'd have to torture my siblings or something like that - disobedience is simply not enough.
Hmmm... turn that around a bit. Are you suggesting God gives you lingering disease? Causes evil against you? Evil does exist, and God allows it to; this does not mean He visits it upon you. Evil is often the result of man turning away from God, or sometimes (but not always) brought upon ourselves. God is very much in the mold of a parent, and does much to keep you with Him. God did create the world we live in, and yes, He could have removed any possibility of us choosing wrong; but that is the point. He gave us free will, that we follow Him of our own choice. And, like a parent, having given us the freedom to make our own choices He cannot force us to do the things that are good for us. He is willing to take us back whenever/if ever we decide to come back, but He will not force us. He allows us to suffer the consequences of our decisions. In the end, what happens to our flesh isn't God's prime concern, rather our eternal souls. This should be borne in mind when considering the suffering of good people who apparently lead blameless lives. Bad things do happen to good people, but in the end it is for a higher purpose. Can I give you another of my famous stories?
I just lost a high school friend to cancer. I don't know why he got it, probably from the chemicals he used at work (ironically, he was a mortician). He was a community leader, involved in all forms of civic groups. He was kind, energetic, and I might say full of life. He went through a lengthy illness, and suffered much. He left a beautiful young wife and four elementary aged children. Yet not once, not once did he complain publicly (and I saw him often), fall into depression, lash out, or in any way lose faith. He held his head up until the very end, and in death will be remembered as much for the way he died as the way he lived. His strong faith in God told him there was a reason for his illness, and I think there was. He has become an inspiration. His faith allowed him to face a terrible situation, and I'd like to think his courage and faith has been rewarded.
God didn't cast him out, He brought my friend home. His job on earth was done. His stay was short, but he had done so much. Now, in death, many people have a greater resolve to throw themselves into life the way he did, in all ways, even into religion.
God doesn't cast errant children (people) away, they choose to live apart from Him. Only at the judgement do we face accountability for those sins. If you spent your life turning away from God and fail to repent, he will then turn away from you at judgement. It is your choice for heaven or hell, God just set the rules.
This I feel has little to do with religion but rather a secular pragmatic approach with some philosophic backing. The bible is somewhat ambigious on this; an eye for an eye and turn the other cheek. Of course, one is the old testatement god and one is the new one; but the whole bible is the word of god, no?
Jesus said He didn't come to change the law, but to fulfill it. Not one word of the Old Testament was changed. The danger of grabbing quotes from the Bible (as you have above) is that it is easy to remove them from the context in which they were spoken, lending them entirely new meaning. "Eye for an eye" was intended for the Israelites and keeping with the law. It was a law that represented fairness and equitable punishment for crime. "Turn the other cheek" refers to social conduct, and how one should refrain from reacting to abuse from others, to try to rise above the failings of human nature. Both were/are necessary. Nothing has changed, and despite the appearance, they are in no way contradictory.
Well, honestly, don't you think Hell was put in there as a motivator? Think of it; on one hand; etenral bliss. on the other, extreme pain for all time; humiliation and whatnot.
It's a loaded question if there ever was one; it's akin to pushing someone out over glowing coal, then offering to help him, saying "hell, it's your choice. Refuse my help, and eventually you'll burn on the coal, or accept my help and get away unscaved." An easy choice for most men and women.
There was gerbil in a cage that detested his master. The gerbil longed to be out of the cage, to run free about the house exploring all the delicious smells and wonderful dark places he could see from atop his perch. Day after day the master would come and feed and water the gerbil. One day, the gerbil decided once and for all he would be free, so he decided the next time the cage was opened he would bolt for the opening. He was much faster than the master, so once free he would never be caught. The next day, sure enough, the master came, opened the door, and forward rushed the gerbil. The gerbil leapt out the door, and with one paw caught the master's sleeve. Looking down the distance to the floor he noticed for the first time the cat which had been patiently sitting under the cage day after day...
We don't always see why things are done the way they are done. We certainly didn't understand as children why vegetables were better than candy, why driving fast was dangerous, and how abusing controlled substances can have disastrous consequences. In the same way we won't always see the reason for what God does, we simply trust Him and know He knows best.
-
Heya Kieren (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Here goes the next round (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Am snipping a lot to keep text size down; otherwise I on't be able to post the message.
<regarding deathbed repention etc>
For most of us, dying takes more than three or four seconds. This would leave ample time to truly regret all the bad things done in life, and I mean truly regret It's a bit unfair I think, but hey, that's just my view on a specific religious belief.
<self reliance>
Yep. Sort of like a human master that tells you what to do. Removes your self reliance and places you in a dependancy situation.
<god testing us>
We all are subjects to hardships, no doubt about it. Some can be overcome, some cannot. Outrunning an avalanche wearing nothing but climbing crampons would be a good example of an "act of god" that will overpower you. Ain't no arguin' with the laws of physics.
With self reliance, I do not mean "asocial behaviour". I mean relying on the self to provide to as large an extent as humanly possible. I see far too mahy "loving" couples where the interdependency has gone so far as to quell and starve the relationship. It seems, that the relationship with god that Christians have might approach this situation; my way or the highway, with one part being utterly out of control. It is akin to one part putting up some unreasonable demands and then blaming the other part for not fulfilling them.
<god giving us diseases>
God created all living and dead things, including hostile microbes such as bacteria and virus. He even created an anomaly where your own body cells reproduce in a strange way; cancer. Unless you can give me a compelling reason such as "only unrepenting sinners get cancer", I'd say "yes".
I mean, sure, let him be harsh. But these diseases are beyond harsh; they're cruel.
<causes disasters>
This line of argument would suggest that natural disasters only happens to disbelievers or unrepenting sinners. There is overwhelming evidence that it's not so.
Anything that will harm me or my loved ones is evil. That includes natural disasters and disease.
<god the mold of the parent>
He couldda removed some of the more painful random things here in life, as discussed above. And I am not sure he does much to keep us close to him; he puts up a book of rules that are unbending, made us ALL sinners because of the mistakes of others (i.e blaming us for something we had nothing to do) and refuse to discuss rationally alternatives to his rules (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
I for one would like to have a chat with god about some of his rules. I can talk to MY parents about the rules; good parents allow interaction, both ways (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
<god giving us choices>
He puts up a loaded choice. I am not sure how one can interpret it in another way. I am wondering about free will; how do you personally think it somehow evades causality?
<suffer the consequences of our actions>
Mm, it sounds reasonable. But these acts of God also condemn a good deal of people to eternity in hell; say a man that would live to be 80 had nothing happened; he would have time to seek out his spiritual life. Unfortunately, he was killed age 25 as an earthqukae tipped his house on him. No chance to repent; eternity in hell. the greater purpose is also withheld from man. havin seen suffering people through working on hospitals, I must conclude that a god that allows so great pains is not a good god, but an evil one. I've seen people in so bad shape it makes your eyes tear up. An omnibenevolent god would not allow it to happen.
<friend with cancer>
Depending on the type of cancer, one can live a rather worthy lives up until the last month or so. Other diseases do not allow a gracious exit from life. I am saddened that you've lost a friend who by your description must have been a great man; and I am glad he faced his hardships with his head hold up high. Non theists can, and do, do this as well; I don't think faith is needed to fight hardships.
<god not casting him out>
Hm, well, it seems to come down to a greater plan, yet we have no evidence of this, none whatosever. it is, for me, a very unsatisfying way of explaining evil. one that can be used to justify everything, including the Holocaust. If osomeone were to say your purpose in life is to be an example and they'd then proceed to, in the name of a greater purpose, kill your family and torture you, perhaps you'd question this higher purpose.
<us choosing a life away from god>
It's a loaded choice. Obedience, and heaven. Questoining, and hell.
<regarding cheeck vs tooth>
Crime is social interaction. Everything we have between humans is social interaction.
That rule is suggesting that all laws are god made; otherwise it would be impossible to apply one and not the other. Laws clearly differ from nation to nation.
<snip gerbil story>
Once again, it is the argument of ignorance; a logical fallacy whereupon one tries to validate ones argument by referring to the unknown - "we do not know that there aren't UFO's, therefore they exist".
I cannot help but to reject it because of the loose logical foundation. Sorry :/.
<our ignorance as to the purpose of things>
But how can you know? Because he said so? With carrots, we learned why as our knowledge expanded. I see no reason to artificially limit ourselves, or to suggest that some things are unknowable; science has been around in its present for for only a few hundred years, yet have transformed society more than all religions combined. Eradicated diseases, increased life span, you name it.
Perhaps god WANTS us to find the answer? The very nature of god means we have to second guess a lot, when issues aren't covered by the bible. Otherwise we have to use bible passages out of context and that's no good.
There are too many questions, and too few answers when it comes to religion. Every answer it provides ineviatbly leads to three new questions. We're told not to ask them as a matter of faith. Combine this with psychological and secular explanation to the religion phenomenon and I find it hard to accept as the truth. There simply are too many contraindicators.
Then again, I am a human lacking faith. I think I am unable to have faith; I want answers, and if I do not get them, I will seek them and question the validity of a claim until I get them. Or take a neutral position, such as "I don't know, and that means I cannot support either claim".
And that seems to be the big difference between me and you; you're a man of faith and I am not.
It's cool that we still can get along and discuss civilly, don't ya think (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Thanks for taking your time explaining your position to me; you've given me some insight into your position and I am sure as I process it in my brain over the next few days, I will be able to understand your position much better.
<S!>
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Heya Kieren (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Here goes the next round (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Am snipping a lot to keep text size down; otherwise I on't be able to post the message.
<regarding deathbed repention etc>
For most of us, dying takes more than three or four seconds. This would leave ample time to truly regret all the bad things done in life, and I mean truly regret It's a bit unfair I think, but hey, that's just my view on a specific religious belief.
<self reliance>
Yep. Sort of like a human master that tells you what to do. Removes your self reliance and places you in a dependancy situation.
<god testing us>
We all are subjects to hardships, no doubt about it. Some can be overcome, some cannot. Outrunning an avalanche wearing nothing but climbing crampons would be a good example of an "act of god" that will overpower you. Ain't no arguin' with the laws of physics.
With self reliance, I do not mean "asocial behaviour". I mean relying on the self to provide to as large an extent as humanly possible. I see far too mahy "loving" couples where the interdependency has gone so far as to quell and starve the relationship. It seems, that the relationship with god that Christians have might approach this situation; my way or the highway, with one part being utterly out of control. It is akin to one part putting up some unreasonable demands and then blaming the other part for not fulfilling them.
<god giving us diseases>
God created all living and dead things, including hostile microbes such as bacteria and virus. He even created an anomaly where your own body cells reproduce in a strange way; cancer. Unless you can give me a compelling reason such as "only unrepenting sinners get cancer", I'd say "yes".
I mean, sure, let him be harsh. But these diseases are beyond harsh; they're cruel.
<causes disasters>
This line of argument would suggest that natural disasters only happens to disbelievers or unrepenting sinners. There is overwhelming evidence that it's not so.
Anything that will harm me or my loved ones is evil. That includes natural disasters and disease.
<god the mold of the parent>
He couldda removed some of the more painful random things here in life, as discussed above. And I am not sure he does much to keep us close to him; he puts up a book of rules that are unbending, made us ALL sinners because of the mistakes of others (i.e blaming us for something we had nothing to do) and refuse to discuss rationally alternatives to his rules (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
I for one would like to have a chat with god about some of his rules. I can talk to MY parents about the rules; good parents allow interaction, both ways (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
<god giving us choices>
He puts up a loaded choice. I am not sure how one can interpret it in another way. I am wondering about free will; how do you personally think it somehow evades causality?
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Part II:
<suffer the consequences of our actions>
Mm, it sounds reasonable. But these acts of God also condemn a good deal of people to eternity in hell; say a man that would live to be 80 had nothing happened; he would have time to seek out his spiritual life. Unfortunately, he was killed age 25 as an earthqukae tipped his house on him. No chance to repent; eternity in hell. the greater purpose is also withheld from man. havin seen suffering people through working on hospitals, I must conclude that a god that allows so great pains is not a good god, but an evil one. I've seen people in so bad shape it makes your eyes tear up. An omnibenevolent god would not allow it to happen.
<friend with cancer>
Depending on the type of cancer, one can live a rather worthy lives up until the last month or so. Other diseases do not allow a gracious exit from life. I am saddened that you've lost a friend who by your description must have been a great man; and I am glad he faced his hardships with his head hold up high. Non theists can, and do, do this as well; I don't think faith is needed to fight hardships.
<god not casting him out>
Hm, well, it seems to come down to a greater plan, yet we have no evidence of this, none whatosever. it is, for me, a very unsatisfying way of explaining evil. one that can be used to justify everything, including the Holocaust. If osomeone were to say your purpose in life is to be an example and they'd then proceed to, in the name of a greater purpose, kill your family and torture you, perhaps you'd question this higher purpose.
<us choosing a life away from god>
It's a loaded choice. Obedience, and heaven. Questoining, and hell.
<regarding cheeck vs tooth>
Crime is social interaction. Everything we have between humans is social interaction.
That rule is suggesting that all laws are god made; otherwise it would be impossible to apply one and not the other. Laws clearly differ from nation to nation.
<snip gerbil story>
Once again, it is the argument of ignorance; a logical fallacy whereupon one tries to validate ones argument by referring to the unknown - "we do not know that there aren't UFO's, therefore they exist".
I cannot help but to reject it because of the loose logical foundation. Sorry :/.
<our ignorance as to the purpose of things>
But how can you know? Because he said so? With carrots, we learned why as our knowledge expanded. I see no reason to artificially limit ourselves, or to suggest that some things are unknowable; science has been around in its present for for only a few hundred years, yet have transformed society more than all religions combined. Eradicated diseases, increased life span, you name it.
Perhaps god WANTS us to find the answer? The very nature of god means we have to second guess a lot, when issues aren't covered by the bible. Otherwise we have to use bible passages out of context and that's no good.
There are too many questions, and too few answers when it comes to religion. Every answer it provides ineviatbly leads to three new questions. We're told not to ask them as a matter of faith. Combine this with psychological and secular explanation to the religion phenomenon and I find it hard to accept as the truth. There simply are too many contraindicators.
Then again, I am a human lacking faith. I think I am unable to have faith; I want answers, and if I do not get them, I will seek them and question the validity of a claim until I get them. Or take a neutral position, such as "I don't know, and that means I cannot support either claim".
And that seems to be the big difference between me and you; you're a man of faith and I am not.
It's cool that we still can get along and discuss civilly, don't ya think (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Thanks for taking your time explaining your position to me; you've given me some insight into your position and I am sure as I process it in my brain over the next few days, I will be able to understand your position much better.
<S!>
-
I wish god, or Buda, or The Bronze Midgit or whatever whould strike this thread dead. UUGGHH I had my share of religion at privats school (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
Originally posted by TheWobble:
I wish god, or Buda, or The Bronze Midgit or whatever whould strike this thread dead. UUGGHH I had my share of religion at privats school (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
Hope you did better in religion than you seem to have done in English (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
Wobble-
If you notice, this thread has gone on for over 100 posts without flame. Quite a feat, eh? If you are bored please don't feel obligated to read further. Myself, I am happy to have a civil discussion with a person of diametric viewpoint. It challenges the mind and your beliefs. I think Santa must feel the same way (though I am loathe to speak for him). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Santa-
Back to the topic. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Think of God's plan for you not as a "my way or the highway" situation, rather as a choice of doing what He wants or not. It sounds as though you believe that God physically flings you aside if you don't do what He wants. I don't think so. God lets you choose to do what He wants or not, but if you don't you move away from Him. At any point God is there to take you back, to wipe away your sin, to bring you into salvation. Only at the judgement does he make you stand by that decision. But it is your decision, not His.
The standards are tough, and it is impossible to meet them. That is the point of grace. If we didn't need grace to get salvation, why would we need God? If we could achieve perfection alone, what would God's purpose be? We are imperfect, we cannot make ourselves perfect, only God can do that.
As for disease, that is a natural function of life. God doesn't give it to us, it happens. I never said, nor meant to intimate, that unrepenting sinners were the only ones to suffer disease and disaster. I did say that our self-destructive tendencies can cause disease or disaster, but that is not an all-inclusive list. Your life on earth is limited, and you will die in some form or fashion. Cancer isn't evil, it simply is. Avalanches are not evil, nor tornadoes, floods, etc. We are allowed to live in this world, along with all the inherent risks associated with doing so. We can hasten our demise in many cases, but it is also true many things beyond our control do happen. It really doesn't matter though, because it is the soul that is important, not the flesh.
We are inherently sinners, not because Adam and Eve were, but because we are people. Our bodies crave things that our souls shouldn't. Adam and Eve sinned because they were people.
Try this. Imagine the beginning with man in the Garden of Eden (paradise). Now man is in the perfect situation, yet somehow caves in to his darker nature and screws it up. God asks one simple thing, stay away from the fruit of a particular tree. The serpent (Satan) knows precisely how to get between God and man, and does so. He makes man jealous of God's knowledge, and coerces them into eating. Man is then cast out, because sin can't be tolerated in paradise (heaven, that is the analogy).
Flash forward. Moses comes, and leads the fledgling Israeli nation out of Egypt. By now the people, having suffered hundreds of years of slavery, are ready to live for God. But how? God gives the law to Moses, who delivers it to the people. He sets out the holidays and their purposes, the rules for law breakers, daily life, etc. He dies, and the nation marches on. Time passes...
Before long, things are screwed up again. The teachers of the law have added so many of their own regulations, and have strict adherence to the law, that they no longer teach or practice the spirit of the law. The law was twisted, by man, to be a tool for some to gain power and prestige over others. The law was perverted beyond its original intent.
Then comes Jesus. Jesus showed how the law alone could not bring people to perfection, and that only through Him could salvation be won. As Jesus told crowds what they needed to do to be saved, and what things could cause damnation, it became clear to the listeners it was impossible for anyone to live a blameless life. Jesus agreed, and pointed out that He was the way, the only way to salvation. His blood became the ultimate sacrifice (dictated by law, animal sacrifice was part of the religion until this point). The only stipulation to salvation was that you followed, to the best of your ability, Jesus. You will inevitably fail from time to time, but you will be forgiven if you ask.
The string? Paradise-->Fall of Man-->The Law-->Perversion of the Law-->Jesus-->Salvation. God knew what would happen from the first day of the world. He knew that people would inevitably fall short. He provided a way for people to have free will and still be saved. The choice is ours.
Will add more later...
[This message has been edited by Kieren (edited 01-26-2001).]
-
<S> Kieren, you really seem to know the bible. I'm not as familiar with it as you are. Forgive me for interjecting here.
StSanta said, "Perosnally I adhere to "nothing exists absolutely" (and no, that's not an absolute statement .)"
StSanta, that is a wrong statement, based on the premise that you know absolutely everything and are able to judge whether it exists absolutely or not. I get the feeling that you are used to arguing points very logically, relying totally on strings of words to sew a water-tight case. The problem is, I think you miss the truth.
Could you concede that, instead of your assertion "nothing exists absolutely", that in reality, it may be that certain things do exist absolutely, but they may be outside your knowlege or experience? Say, like the radio waves that passed through early man's body without him even being aware of it, let alone quantify it?
You really shouldn't be so fast to deny the existence of God. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Gunthr
-
Gunthr, it's only a logical contradiction if I was to claim that "nothing exists absolutely" is an absolute statement. I don't. I claim it as a fact, based on available evidence. Facts are not 100% bulletproof as history has proven.
Furthermore, I am a disbeliever, not a denier. I lack a faith in god and I lack a faith in Nirfur, God Of All Things Yellow And Purple. I was born without a faith, and I have remained so for my life. Unlesss you count "believing what your parents say" period prior to the age of reason.
I say like Hawking that the "...existance of god is very very unlikely indeed". Sort of like with Nirfur.
How quickly do you dismiss the idea that there might not be a god, or that evidence, phsyical and scientifical, is very scarce, despite the Christian religion having existed in 2000 years? How do you react when you see how many things that Christians used to believe that have been proven false? Do you see it as an intenital flaw in the bible when it contradicts modern science? (such as plants growing before there was sunlight etc)?
There are MANY questions to be answered if you want to rationally justify a belief in a belief system as complex as the Christian one. My position is easier to justify; I'm just a skeptic and some dudes come with a claim - I say "support your assertion". I do *not* say "god does not exist". He might. Or she might. She might be Nirfur, even though he's a she.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
no text
[This message has been edited by AKSeaWulfe (edited 01-26-2001).]
-
Hi again Kieren, the Christian dude who can discuss civilly (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Think of God's plan for you not as a "my way or the highway" situation, rather as a choice of doing what He wants or not.
But this is "his way or the highway" - and with a really loaded choice. it's really worse than that; it's "my way or hellish torture for eternity". Now, I am pretty sure the idea of hell cropped up when people were less educated than we are nowadays - nowadays many of us are used to abstract thought and do not need to be scaed into believing ina pilosophical system. It's a remnant of past times, I feel. If you look ath the Danish state church, it rarely speaks of hell; instead it does what you do; speak of heaven. A shift that has arrived during later years and one I welcome.
I do not believe god physically can sling me around (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). If I am dead, I am in a spiritual state which is decidedly non physical. It's what he chooses to do with me at this point I'm referring to.
And again I must say that God presents us with a loaded choice. In my previous example with the ccoals; it is much the same here. We are to consider the pusher good, and our decision the imperative thing. I must disagree.
To me, measuring someone by standards that cannot be reached and then personally picking the destiny of someone forced to play the game sounds a little sadistic to me. It's the stuff Roman emperors would appreciate. Again, I find it hard not to find it disagreeable.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Part Deux
The answer to your question about the need for a god is, of course, that we don't (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). Deism is a perfectly acceptable religious faith I feel; god or gods created what is and then buggered off/were destroyed at the completion. It's a bit easier to explain than is Christianity, but probably less rewarding to do so (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
We make ourselves what we are - sure we're limited. Limited does not mean flawed; a tire for Formula One racing is limited, but in a race, it's the best there is. Humans have evolved through thousands of years and are now the dominant species. We're doing very good seen from that point of view; perhaps *too* good.
Without my limitations and if we go to the microlevel, my flaws, I would not be me. If god made me perfect, he would forever alter me and it would not be me who shared his kingdom in heaven. Which of course brings up some questions regarding body and mind, but that's a whole different discussion (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Disease is clearly put into the world by God, since he is the creator. It randomly strikes people depending on circumstances to a large degree - in some case, modern science would say that some are more prone to certain sufferings due to their DNA makeup.
I feel I must reiterate; for me, anything that'll kill or maim me or my loved ones is evil. Not a categorical statement but an overall one; I can think of things worth dying for. Not many though.
Isn't it a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy to say that self destructive behavior will harm the individual? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Avalanches and other disasters may cause someone who would, if he had the opportunity to live longer, repent. A lost soul for god, by an Act Of God (and I've heard many Christians describe natural disaster in this way).
I understand that that the important thing in the Christian philosophy is not the present or even near future; but what happens once we die. And again I feel it is stomping on the factual for the remotely possible, but your mileage may (and inevitably will!) vary (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
With regards to sin; are other animals also inherently sinners? I feel the special status given to humans is undeserved; as does modern science. We're capable animals that have some qualities other animals do not, but we're animals nevertheless. We're simply using what evolution has given us. We're not outside natural selection.
under the right circumstances and with the right technology and time, I am confident we as humans could breed ever increasingly intelligent monkeys. Once they reach the cognitive levels of say an 8 year old, which clearly is a sinner, we'd have to include them (given similar performance) into the list of animals who are to be judged when they die. Again, it raises questions.
Assuming we're inherent sinners; why are we convicted before we have done the crime? Because of our ancestory? This, I feel, is not right. The things our body crave that are sinful IMHO, are things which can destroy the body. Even these are the result of a complex brain in a very fast developing society - we're using the same basic features now as we did many thousands of years ago - our response to situations that are much more complex are different, but based on the same. Sort of like an equation.
God did not have to tempt the human animal. He did not have to place a deceiver amongst mankind.
And, moreover, it is to me distateful to condemn man for seeking wisdom! Wisdom is a necessity for us - wisdom leads to understanding, and it is the *only* way forth. What did god have to fear from us gaining wisdom? Rejection of Him? Perhaps that is so; because it is quite easy to make him appear extremely unsympathetic. It seems all of the problems could have been solved had he done his job better, and now he's blaming it all on humans. His creations. Flawed by design. His design.
And he designed us the way we are, yet he condemn us when the flaws show up. I cannot call such a deity a benevolent one.
Sounds great; this is a good discussion. Ufortunately, it seems I've unfairly gone on an offensive, leaving you on a defensive position that's time consuming and frustrating. Feel free to question my position as well; it is not fool proof (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
In fact, sometimes I feel it's leaking so bad that French people would avoid it and call it a "shower".
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Part Deux
The answer to your question about the need for a god is, of course, that we don't (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). Deism is a perfectly acceptable religious faith I feel; god or gods created what is and then buggered off/were destroyed at the completion. It's a bit easier to explain than is Christianity, but probably less rewarding to do so (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
We make ourselves what we are - sure we're limited. Limited does not mean flawed; a tire for Formula One racing is limited, but in a race, it's the best there is. Humans have evolved through thousands of years and are now the dominant species. We're doing very good seen from that point of view; perhaps *too* good.
Without my limitations and if we go to the microlevel, my flaws, I would not be me. If god made me perfect, he would forever alter me and it would not be me who shared his kingdom in heaven. Which of course brings up some questions regarding body and mind, but that's a whole different discussion (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Disease is clearly put into the world by God, since he is the creator. It randomly strikes people depending on circumstances to a large degree - in some case, modern science would say that some are more prone to certain sufferings due to their DNA makeup.
I feel I must reiterate; for me, anything that'll kill or maim me or my loved ones is evil. Not a categorical statement but an overall one; I can think of things worth dying for. Not many though.
Isn't it a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy to say that self destructive behavior will harm the individual? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Avalanches and other disasters may cause someone who would, if he had the opportunity to live longer, repent. A lost soul for god, by an Act Of God (and I've heard many Christians describe natural disaster in this way).
I understand that that the important thing in the Christian philosophy is not the present or even near future; but what happens once we die. And again I feel it is stomping on the factual for the remotely possible, but your mileage may (and inevitably will!) vary (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
With regards to sin; are other animals also inherently sinners? I feel the special status given to humans is undeserved; as does modern science. We're capable animals that have some qualities other animals do not, but we're animals nevertheless. We're simply using what evolution has given us. We're not outside natural selection.
under the right circumstances and with the right technology and time, I am confident we as humans could breed ever increasingly intelligent monkeys. Once they reach the cognitive levels of say an 8 year old, which clearly is a sinner, we'd have to include them (given similar performance) into the list of animals who are to be judged when they die. Again, it raises questions.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
UGH, gotta learn how to make my replies smaller. Parth III (old BR song btw (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
Assuming we're inherent sinners; why are we convicted before we have done the crime? Because of our ancestory? This, I feel, is not right. The things our body crave that are sinful IMHO, are things which can destroy the body. Even these are the result of a complex brain in a very fast developing society - we're using the same basic features now as we did many thousands of years ago - our response to situations that are much more complex are different, but based on the same. Sort of like an equation.
God did not have to tempt the human animal. He did not have to place a deceiver amongst mankind.
And, moreover, it is to me distateful to condemn man for seeking wisdom! Wisdom is a necessity for us - wisdom leads to understanding, and it is the *only* way forth. What did god have to fear from us gaining wisdom? Rejection of Him? Perhaps that is so; because it is quite easy to make him appear extremely unsympathetic. It seems all of the problems could have been solved had he done his job better, and now he's blaming it all on humans. His creations. Flawed by design. His design.
And he designed us the way we are, yet he condemn us when the flaws show up. I cannot call such a deity a benevolent one.
Sounds great; this is a good discussion. Ufortunately, it seems I've unfairly gone on an offensive, leaving you on a defensive position that's time consuming and frustrating. Feel free to question my position as well; it is not fool proof (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
In fact, sometimes I feel it's leaking so bad that French people would avoid it and call it a "shower".
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
To the first response...
There are definitely many ways to approach the Bible. If you take the Southern Baptist approach, it is fire and brimstone; the Northern Baptist speaks of the love of Christ. This is the result of teaching more from either the Old Testament or New Testament. The "Old Testament God" is the God of wrath, the creator, the judge, the punisher. The "New Testament God" is the God of love. They are not contradictory. God is the way He is as the situation dictates. Yet Jesus assured us that He was from the same God of Moses, and that not one word of the law was changed. God is consistant.
Hell exists. What is God to do, say "come live with me, but if you don't that's ok, too."? When you talk to your children you give them their choices- they may not like any of them, but those are the choices that are available. You lay everything out and let them choose (if the situation is befitting a child choosing).
I think you need to turn something else around to understand my viewpoint. Your view of God has him sadistically creating a no-win situation for mankind, then revelling in the banishment of tortured souls to hell. What would the point be? He could send us all to hell without the game, skip the slow, boring parts and get right to the real fun. Yes, He could have created us as perfect servants, but He chose to give us the choice to serve Him or not. Why, who knows. That is the purpose of our creation, to serve God.
As far as natural disasters and disease being evil, in a broad sense they are (as they can be brought to ill use by Satan) but they are only tools. In the literal sense evil is the intent to cause malevolence. There is no cognizance in natural disasters or plague. They don't target any particular group. God does allow them to happen. God can use them to accomplish His goals, if He so desires (and He has; many times in the desert the Israelites felt His wrath in the form of disease, snakes, and other natural calamaties). But disease and natural disasters possess no intelligence, therefore are not of themselves "evil".
Animals are not on the same plane as humans any more than man is on the same plane as God. God created man and gave the creatures of the earth to man (Genesis). Man was told to "subdue" them, to rule over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the animals of the land. The animals were not given, as far as I know according to the Bible, souls.
Why are we convicted before we do the crime? Good question, but the answer is easy- God knows all, from beginning to end. He knows what you are going to do before you do. In that sense your life is pre-destined, but it changes nothing. You don't know how this movie ends, so you have to play it out and strive for the best.
Condemning man for seeking wisdom? That isn't what happened with the fruit. All Adam and Eve need done to seek wisdom was to seek God himself. God gave them all they needed. Their particular sin was not seeking wisdom, but why they sought wisdom. You hit is just right, they wanted to be equal to God. As you recall, this was why Satan was cast from heaven to begin with- he wanted to replace God. Biting an apple wouldn't bring them up to the level of God, and Satan knew it. It did expose the envy in the heart of Adam and Eve, and led to lies and evasion of responibility. Paradise was lost to man, but even that was part of the plan. If you take the Bible from front-to-back you see clearly how man was given, even though God knew the results beforehand, a chance to be in paradise forever. Man failed to maintain himself well enough to remain in paradise, so he was cast out. Man sought a means to make himself worthy of heaven, so God sent the law. Man failed to understand and follow the law properly, and it failed. Then God sent Jesus to fulfill the law, and offer the only true way to heaven.
You see, all the Bible up to that point in history was leading, instructing, and illustrating a very saliant point; man would always find a way to screw himself up. The opportunities from God were real. Paradise was real, the law was real, but somehow man always corrupted what God made. This was very obvious by the time of Jesus. God sent Jesus to be the one and only man to live a blameless life. He became the lamb of sacrifice for humanity's sins; only by calling upon that sacrifice can anyone be saved. (By the way, if you want the background of blood sacrifice, let me know)
For those that have commented that I seem to "really know the Bible", let me add a cautionary "don't take my word for it". I am human and am giving my interpretation of my learning. I certainly have made errors along the way, and welcome any corrections. Santa, you do me a great service by keeping this alive; I am forced to defend my views, and to think deeply about my learning and what Biblical verses and passages really mean. I do not feel like I am on the defensive at all, so do not feel the least bit guilty for the questions you ask. Besides, wouldn't I look silly if I cursed you out and told you to get lost? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Loving or brimstone-esque? I can dig up some bible quotes that show him (really independent of situation) to be quite a bugger when tiffed, wiping out people in pretty bad ways.
This multitude of interpretations of the bible is a source for trouble - who is right? When two different Christian interpretations meet, inevitably there will be disagreements - and sometimes, these turn extremely violent. Some say the answer is to intrepret some parts literally and other parts metaphorically - unfortunately, the writers of the bible didn't have a red pen for literally and a blue pen for metaphorically. I can elect to see it from one extreme and eventually come out approximating what I want and need to hear.
An omnibenevolent God would not punish his creations in such a way as described in the old testatement, I think. We in our daily life are too civilized for some of those methods - in most of the world, we've outlawed the death penalty. Either our current moral standards to too mushy, or we can find some inconsistencies with the god images of the two testaments.
With regards to Hell; who created this place? For what purpose? I haven't got the biblical quotes on this one,; only an idea that might be wrong (and therefore I'll wait for an answer before going into detail (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
With your children, you create the best choices you can. You do not, unless you wish to coerce them into following your will, create an extremely bad one and an extremely good one, and then call their choice "free will". I'd have a problem with it, at any rate (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
I am not saying the Christian deity is sadistic. I am saying he is making it a lot harder for his creations than need be, and one can wonder why. The need for god's grace is an example, as is creating goals that are impossible to meet. And I am questioning whether I want to serve such a deity (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
They might not in the Christian philosophy, but they are in my world; things do not need to be conscient to be evil. For me, it's simp,ly a classification of something being "quite bad indeed" - for me or others. Disasters and diseases fall into this category. It's not so much a classification that suggest malicious intent; rather it's judged by the outcome.
The hypotethical monkey situation creates an interesting situation; if given the same ability to choose, are monkeys to be judged by the same standards? You say no, and I believe you.
Of course, I'm also a neo-Darwinist who conisder Genesis to be a metaphorical work; how can plants grow before there is sunlight, and how can there be light with no sun? Just examples. As such, God would have o have put the soul into modern man in a relatively late stage of earths development. It creates additional problems and questions that are hard to answer, unless you interpret Genesis literally.
Thanks for answering my question about us being judged before having done anything wrong. It answers something where I've gotten conflicting answers - namely the question of destiny. Interestingly enough, we almost share a position here - with me holding the opinion that causality is sort of important, I cannot see (other than on a chaotic quantum level which we know very little about) how we really can set ourselves outside of it. We might experience a sense of choice; it is virtual but might not be more. I don't know.
But still, if he knows the answers beforehand, why does he let us go through some pretty horrible things? He has the result of the test already?
Is God fearful of other achieving his level of wisdom, and if so, why? Why is he so insistant on being the one with the über-ride? He seems to go to great extremes to keep an edge on his creations; much like earthly rulers do. God knew the outcome, yet blamed man for doing what he was designed to do. Isn't it akin to building a plane without wings, and then blaming it for not being able to fly properly?
If I was a deity like Jesus, I don't think I'd have much problems going through what he did (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Especially if I knew I was guaranteed a place up with my father.
The trinity also has me confused. God sent Jesus, which basically is part of the divine, down to die on earth, which at any rate is just a temporary testing ground for humans, then took back his Son to him, and we're supposed to be grateful? He died, from a secular point of view, because he was a revolutionary; someone who threatened the stability of the system. And it seems the system was right that he was a threat, as merely 300 years after his death, the old gods were a thing of the past.
For a man lacking faith, it's hard to see how he did anything for me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Kieren, I must admit that you seem to have a good grasp of the bible; that's why I am asking you these questions. Normally, I somehow manage to offend the Christians I discuss the bible with and I end up either being yelled at or ignored (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). I realize that to believers, my position must seem like a blasphemous one.
So if I turn into blasphemous mode, just lemme know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
The hypotethical monkey situation creates an interesting situation; if given the same ability to choose, are monkeys to be judged by the same standards? You say no, and I believe you.
Of course, I'm also a neo-Darwinist who consider Genesis to be a metaphorical work; how can plants grow before there is sunlight, and how can there be light with no sun? Just examples. As such, God would have o have put the soul into modern man in a relatively late stage of earths development. It creates additional problems and questions that are hard to answer, unless you interpret Genesis literally.
Thanks for answering my question about us being judged before having done anything wrong. It answers something where I've gotten conflicting answers - namely the question of destiny. Interestingly enough, we almost share a position here - with me holding the opinion that causality is sort of important, I cannot see (other than on a chaotic quantum level which we know very little about) how we really can set ourselves outside of it. We might experience a sense of choice; it is virtual but might not be more. I don't know.
But still, if he knows the answers beforehand, why does he let us go through some pretty horrible things? He has the result of the test already?
Is God fearful of other achieving his level of wisdom, and if so, why? Why is he so insistant on being the one with the über-ride? He seems to go to great extremes to keep an edge on his creations; much like earthly rulers do. God knew the outcome, yet blamed man for doing what he was designed to do. Isn't it akin to building a plane without wings, and then blaming it for not being able to fly properly?
If I was a deity like Jesus, I don't think I'd have much problems going through what he did (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Especially if I knew I was guaranteed a place up with my father.
The trinity also has me confused. God sent Jesus, which basically is part of the divine, down to die on earth, which at any rate is just a temporary testing ground for humans, then took back his Son to him, and we're supposed to be grateful? He died, from a secular point of view, because he was a revolutionary; someone who threatened the stability of the system. And it seems the system was right that he was a threat, as merely 300 years after his death, the old gods were a thing of the past.
For a man lacking faith, it's hard to see how he did anything for me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Kieren, I must admit that you seem to have a good grasp of the bible; that's why I am asking you these questions. Normally, I somehow manage to offend the Christians I discuss the bible with and I end up either being yelled at or ignored (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). I realize that to believers, my position must seem like a blasphemous one.
So if I turn into blasphemous mode, just lemme know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_4916770)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
-
Santa-
I think you have a fair understanding of the Bible, believe it or not. The trouble is I think, as you have alluded, much of the Bible has multiple interpretations. You have picked as consistant a side as have I, except I disagree with your analysis. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I don't know that I would agree that God is supposed to be omnibenevolent. He is love, vengeance, law, justice, anger, in fact many things, therefore couldn't be called really all anything. He can be loving, or angry, or vengeful, but not on a human level. If God is vengeful it within the context of His Word. If He is love, it is within the context of His Word, and so on.
This is the difficulty faced by the Bible; how do you describe to man concepts that are not of man? How do you communicate the message of God to the people? You do so by using the language of man, and analogies that relate to the everyday life of the audience. There is a reason that God is referred to as a father; man understood that relationship very well. These were harsh times as well (the time of the writing of Scriptures) and children could indeed be cast out of their families. It was an accepted part of life. Jesus was referred to as a shephard, not surprising as there were many shephards and they understood the analogy well. Further, he referred to separating the believers from the rest of the world as "separating the wheat from the chaff" which the farmers understood. He took that analogy further by saying "the chaff is thrown into the fire".
So, how do you know which parts are to be taken literally and what parts to take figuratively? I think you have to look at the totality of the Bible, not selective parts. As it was written by several people for several audiences it is possible to take parts out and divine a meaning inconsistant with the whole. The New Testament alone is proof of this. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John basically told the same story, but you notice they emphasized different aspects. They also were writing for different audiences, therefore structured their books in ways their audiences could best understand Christ and His mission. Taken together they give a complete picture of Jesus and His life. Taken apart it looks like five guys that couldn't get their stories straight.
Hell- concept or reality? The Bible says there is a hell, and describes it as a lake of fire. Is this to be taken literally, or is this the nearest human approximation to an eternity without God? Remember, when Jesus was on the cross God momentarily turned away, because Jesus had taken on the sin of the entire world. That was a taste of hell. I don't know if there is literally a lake of fire; I do know there is the possibility of eternal separation from God, and that I know is just as scary. But how about the bulk of humanity? Do you say "You choose to be with God, or not, but if you aren't with Him it will be really, really bad!"? It doesn't carry much weight, does it? The pain of fire is very easy to understand, and the thought of being immersed in it for all eternity is a picture I think we can easily form and be revulsed by.
When God punishes, it is for ultimate good. Sodom and Gomorrah and all their inhabitants were destroyed because they had so sunken into sin and debauchery there was no longer any hope of redemption. Their very existance represented a threat to the well-being of God's people. God did wipe them out in one fell swoop. To call them innocent is not accurate.
When the Israelis entered the promised land they were to completely destroy the inhabitants that were in residence. Why? Because God knew that the inhabitants would lead the Israelis into idol worship and paegan religions. This would destroy the nation. This could not be allowed to happen.
The Trinity? One of the great mysteries of the Bible. I won't even pretend to understand it. God in three forms- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. As I have said before, I have felt the Holy Spirit personally. I see evidence of God in my life every day, and I try to express the love of Jesus in all that I do. I accept this concept as something I may not be able to grasp (like higher mathematics!), but I am sure it exists.
S!
-
Hey Kieren, sorry for the late reply, sort of missed the thread.
You have picked as consistant a side as have I, except I disagree with your analysis.
Gotta hand it to ya; you've handled this admirably. never thought I could have a civil discussion with a Christian regarding the bible. That has earned you another coolness point (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Keep saving and you might join me in Fighter Pilots Heaven (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
I am glad we agree that god is not omnibenevolent - the question then, at least for me, is to decide just what kind of a fellow he is. A little nasty at times but overall good, or a very bad deity indeed.
We're humans, so we're limited to what our biology and environment allows us to do. i think personally that it is wrong to take such an important aspect of life and declare it as out of reach for our understanding. You will probably disagree, and I respect that.
With all the difficulties in interpreting the bible and indeed the multitude of different interpretations, wouldn't you agree that it is rather hard to be absolute on many points? In some areas, you're effectively left with the same moral relativm (to some degree) that those who disbelieve in absolutes have.
The bible is full of truism; i've read passages and come to that conclusion. it's also full of stories from contemporary life of that day and the views held represents those views. In some areas, such as with women, it is outdated; the writers could not predict the development we've seen in the last few hundred years. Unfortunately this does not sound good to believers; the word of god cannot be flawed. I feel this is an area where many differences of opinion can arise.
With Mathew and the other chaps; if held under close scrutiny, I am sure one could find places where they contradict each other. Rationalisation could do an attempt to explain it, but not fully. Being who I am, I've seen websites with such contradictions listed.
I'm separated from god by definition, since I lack a belief in all deities. It's not so much a choice as it is a result of my skeptical nature. Most of us apply really a healthy dose of skepticism and rational thought in our every day life - will the bridge sustain my weight, is this dangerous and so forth. Somehow, some of us, due to the spiritual nature of their being, either transcends it or simply halt the process (depending on which side yer on (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)). For me, it's the latter; it seems we abandon the very rational thoughts that keep us alive when it comes to spirituality.
95% of the human population are theists, so I'm a minority. But to claim validation because of large numbers is a logical fallacy.
I also question whether god's punishments are for ultimate good. I'm skeptical of authorities in general, and especially so of absolute authorities (if you allow me to use that expression). Some of his calls are dubious to me; why won't he allow others to gain reach his level of wisdom? What does he fear?
The slaughter at the promised land is a good example - here, god for SOME reason intervenes with the Free Will - he does NOT allow his creations to choose whether to follow him or not. Instead, he quite brutally help them remove an obstacle. I might be missing something here though, but that's my immediate impression.
The trinity; seems we share a position here; un-understandable (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Thanks again for this discussion, it's given me both food for thoughts and a better understanding.
Wish you all the best.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1619_3845234)
"I don't necessarily agree with everything I think." - A. Eldritch
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 01-29-2001).]
-
This seems to be winding down, and I am not sure if the last few questions were rhetorical, but I will attempt to answer them in the event they were not.
I sometimes wonder if the Bible is intentionally capable of being interpreted differently. If it was spelled directly out there is no guaranteeing the people would believe or follow anyway. As an example, people would always ask Jesus to show some proof of what He said. Jesus replied "If the people saw all the wonders God performed for them when they left Egypt and still couldn't believe, nothing I do now could convince you" (paraphrased). This is an instance where faith has to guide you. The way it is now you have to work to fully understand the Word, and you need to continue to study it throughout your life because no matter how many times you read the Bible you will find new lessons.
Jesus told parables that people at the time simply could not understand. Yet, when He explained them, they became so simple and clear. This is what it is like to reread the Bible, you suddenly reread something and have an epiphany, seeing things you never realized were there before.
Being absolute about it on the whole? I know absolutely it is the truth, and it is the best vehicle on earth for understanding the nature of God. It is work to read and understand, that is also absolutely true. There are many parts that I agree are open to debate of whether they are meant to be literal or figurative, but the overall message is absolute.
The Bible's relevance today is a good debate as well. You say that the Bible no longer is appropriate in today's world, that it is out-of-date. A believer would say the world is more corrupt and out-of-tune with God, as is clearly illustrated by the teachings in the Bible. This is where believers are taught to remain apart from the world, to hold fast to the faith. We have to live in the world, but we don't have to become part of the corruption of the world. We are to interact with people who do not share the faith, in fact we are required to do so. We are not to judge people. We are not to consider ourselves above anyone. We are charged with spreading the Word and leading exemplary lives.
God does punish those that reject Him, eventually. In the case of whole civilizations that were destroyed, this usually happened when the existance of that evil was a direct threat to the existance of His people. Remember, God knows all, and knows these civilizations would not repent. God promises to punish the wicked, and He will keep His promise to do so, albeit in His own time. Sometimes rebellious civilizations are used to serve God's purpose- look what Egypt did for the nation of Israel. This can be confusing, especially during the time that things happen. Still we can later look back and view the whole event and see the purpose that we were too close to see at the time.
Cheers!
P.S. I haven't found you to be insulting or denegrating me in any way, so I hope you don't feel like you have. It has been a pleasant discussion for me!