 |
|
|
|
Wednesday, May 28, 2008 - 05:42 am  chritanity rocks you filthy athiest!Hiel Jesus!!
| |
| Thursday, May 29, 2008 - 06:01 am Remember there are those who will claim to be a Christian, but not act that way! For ie... Hindu's have the belief that cattle are sacred. If I claimed to be Hindu and you saw me at the local burger joint eating a triple cheese burger, would you not question if I actually was a Hindu? The same thing applies to somebody who claims to be Christian. All throughout history there have those who claim to be Christian, but by their action prove otherwise. That is one reason why 'Christianity' has such a bad reputation. Just like the actions that Yankee mentioned in a earlier post, those are NON-Christian actions. Because in reality if one actually lived by the standards that a Christian should, then there would not have been the sad history that is associated with so called 'Christians'.
| |
| Thursday, May 29, 2008 - 12:44 pm Yankee: "There appear to be many leaders that like little boys (see: Catholic Church)" Serpent: "All throughout history there have those who claim to be Christian, but by their action prove otherwise[...] Just like the actions that Yankee mentioned in a earlier post, those are NON-Christian actions." Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston following a year of revelations that he and his subordinates had repeatedly allowed priests accused of sexual abuse to remain in the ministry. (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DEEDA103EF93BA15756C0A9629C8B63) Serpent, are you suggesting that the Archbishop of Boston did not live by the standards that a Christian should? I think that we would both agree that sexual abuse of minors is wrong, and that those who conduct it and allow it to be conducted by helping to cover it up should be brought to justice. Given that the post of Archbishop is a papal appointment and that, rather than suffer justice under American law, the then-Pope (John Paul II) offered Cardinal Law a position as archpriest of the Rome Basilica of St. Mary Major and he now apparently sits on boards supervising preistly discipline and the appointment of diocesan bishops, would this not also indicate that the Pope himself is indirectly supporting the cover-up? Does this imply that he also does not live by the standards that a Christian should by allowing Cardinal Law to escape justice?
| |
| Thursday, May 29, 2008 - 12:54 pm I know this doesn't add anything to my argument, but I like this quote from Christopher Hitchens (http://www.slate.com/id/2116085/). "Since I have more than once criticized Maureen Dowd in this space, I should say now that I think she put it best of all. A church that has allowed no latitude in its teachings on masturbation, premarital sex, birth control, and divorce suddenly asks for understanding and "wiggle room" for the most revolting crime on the books."
| |
| Thursday, May 29, 2008 - 08:57 pm Zetetic, that is not only exactly what I am suggesting, but it is what the truth is. Any reasoning person 'Christian' or not, knows that child abuse is wrong, actually that is something that you wouldn't need a Bible or scroll or anything to understand. Of course there are gonna be bad people in any/all religions, but as you so perfectly pointed out, what did those in authority do about it after the mistakes were made? They in effect minimized the gross wrong that was committed. The point I was making is that all because a person says that they are Christian does not make them one. Just like any other religion. To actually be a Christian would you not have to live by Bible standards as closely as possible? If you do not, then you cannot be a real Christian. I think it was Ghandi who once said 'I love Jesus, but I hate Christians.' See he loved the idea of christianity, but not the reality of those who claim to be so.
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 12:54 am Serpent, are you Christian? If any reasoning person can know that certain acts are wrong, and that to be a Christian you would have to live by the Bible very closely, then why would anyone submit themselves to those in authority who clearly don't live by the Bible themselves? In fact, if any reasoning person can know that certain acts are wrong, what is the need for the Bible, and thus the need to label someone as Christian or not? Surely it would be better for these people to reason for themselves (at this point it becomes irrelevant whether or not this person believes in a god or gods, as how they act is determined by how they think). In other words, dispense with the dogma, and let people of reason get on with treating people well.
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 05:10 am Zetetic, to answer your first question, I have no idea why. I could only imagine it would be because they think they have nowhere to go. Maybe a blind faith, i really dont know, I have wondered that myself. But I dont think you understand the point I am trying to make. Maybe I do not explain it well enough. My point is simply, ALL BECAUSE A PERSON SAYS THEY ARE CHRISTIAN, DOES NOT MEAN THEY ACTUALLY ARE. There are several 'fake' christians out there that give the name/term Christian a bad reputation. As for the bible, of course it is a great book to live ones life by, it has many valuable lessons and things to learn from, but you do not need it for certain simple things. Like the child abuse mentioned earlier you do not need the bible to tell you that it is wrong. That is a given, as is murder, stealing, etc.... I feel like you just misunderstood the point I was trying to make!
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 11:27 am I think I may have misunderstood the point you were trying to make. However, your last post has prompted another puzzle for me. If those of us (including me) who are not Christian try to work out what Christians stand for (or any other religion, for that matter), we naturally turn to figures of authority for that religion. In Christianity's case, that means someone like the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury (here in the UK) and other church leaders as these, one would assume, should best represent the views of their respective denomination. Indeed, Catholicism in Europe vigorously defended the Latin mass for centuries precisely to ensure that the Bible was only accessible via the interpretation of Priests so that it was they who determined what Catholics stood for, rather than those who turned up for mass. If we, i.e., non-Christians, cannot go by what these authority figures say even though they claim to be Christian (because they demonstrate some non-Christian behaviour, or even downright immoral behaviour), then how can we understand what true Christians stand for? Or even which Christians are true Christians?
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 12:16 pm Zetetic, it's a well founded fact that the true believers of any religion are exactly those ones that make the religion look good
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 04:53 pm If the true believers are those that make the religion look good, and the "authority figures" for certain denominations make them look bad, then what is the point in establishing these authorities/organisations to "manage" (for want of a better word) the religion/denomination? And why do some believers (some of whom must surely be true believers) defend these authorities when criticised? I find it more than a little worrying that these people who claim to represent all of a denomination can sometimes act in such terrible ways. Particularly given that in this and other countries, these people may be given priviledged access to MPs, etc. Indeed, Anglican bishops still sit in the House of Lords here in the UK.
| |
| Friday, May 30, 2008 - 07:57 pm That is exactly the reason that there are so many religions that claim to be christian. Somebody didnt like what one group of ppl were saying/teaching so they split off and make their own religion. Because how can you have literally hundreds, even thousands of diffrent religions, that although they may agree on a few things, disagree on many others? And still say they are Christian. Not everybody can be right! There is only one truth. And even though there are very very good people in all kinds of religions, all because they are good ppl does not make them right. Althroughout history and nature there have been many theories and ideas put forth, both religious and non-religious. But there is only one truth. So the responsibility of each person is to determine what the truth actually is. If they claim to be Christian, then they gotta compare their beliefs with what the Bible says. Or like the example mentioned earlier, if they are scientists, then they gotta compare their theory with what other scientific FACTS say. I agree with you in that it is worrying that many who claim to represent a particular faith hold such authority, and by their actions prove they are nothing like who they claim to represent (In this case God).
| |
| Saturday, May 31, 2008 - 06:58 am Wow, news flash, Christians sin. What a revelation! You'd think someone would have figured that out a long time ago. What alternative world are you guys expecting? That all Christians, any Christians, live perfect lives? Or that their sins are only little ones?
| |
| Saturday, May 31, 2008 - 06:43 pm Of course all sin, including Christians, but not as grossly as many who claim to be Christian are willing to.
| |
| Sunday, June 1, 2008 - 01:59 am How could that possibly be the case, all people sinning as grossly as the most grossly sinning Christians, or of any other group?? That would be a statistical impossibility. Anyway, people who are in management positions in any organization are not necessarily the best skilled at what that organization does. And the best teachers are not necessarily the best at doing the thing itself. There are unfortunate consequences when we give undue deference to anyone in authority, including spiritual leaders; many don't deserve it, and some take advantage of it. That's not really so surprising though, is it?
| |
| Sunday, June 1, 2008 - 07:00 am No it's not suprising. But no doubt you would agree that if you are to be an effective teacher, you must know the thing being taught. So if as a spiritual teacher of any given religion or faith, you are teaching ppl the best way to live happier healthful and successful lives, to the best of their ability. Therefore you must be doing the same. Otherwise you are what they call.....hmm... a hypocrite! Again my point is that if I TELL you I am a Christian, but I do not live by standards that a Christian must, am I really a Christian?
| |
| Monday, June 2, 2008 - 02:23 pm I think that the great difference between a real Christian and the non-Christian cannot be found in our actions. Everyone sins - and quite grossly. The difference comes in how the sin is dealt with. King David, after getting Bathsheba pregnant and killing her husband to cover it up, said "against you and you only have I sinned." Recognition and confession of sin is a key to Christian behavior. Adam
| |
| Monday, June 2, 2008 - 09:40 pm Adam I agree 100%, at the same time, Christianity is a way of life, not just a label. Along with your last key point a person must do all that is within their power to not make same mistakes.
| |
| Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - 06:53 am Adam discussing theology with Serpent. Don't **** up, Adam! "But no doubt you would agree that if you are to be an effective teacher, you must know the thing being taught." Agreed. "So if as a spiritual teacher of any given religion or faith, you are teaching ppl the best way to live happier healthful and successful lives, to the best of their ability. Therefore you must be doing the same." Not agreed, some people find it difficult to take their own advice. "Otherwise you are what they call.....hmm... a hypocrite!" Agreed, with reservations. "Woe unto you, hypocrites," I know, and "judge not," also, but somehow judging someone a hypocrite often seems to be a very effective conversation stopper, too effective, as though no more thought or understanding is now necessary. "Christianity is a way of life, not just a label." Agreed.
| |
| Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - 08:25 am LOL so then we agree mostly.... You are right, thats the problem! Those that dont live by their own advice. That is if they take the time to have the correct advice at all. You know when it comes to the idea of judging people, we all have brains and the ability to make decisions and tell in most cases what a persons character is, although not in all cases. In fact that is how we make friends etc.. by judging them. But maybe where a person goes wrong is judging sombody to the point of saying that they have no value or intrest from their Creator/ God. Because in the case of a hypocrite or even other things, you do not make or even judge them as such. But you can see their actions and discern/judge what kind of character they have. They themselves make that evident. Can't you? And of course this is all in good conversation and discussion. No hostility intended what-so-ever!!
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 05:33 am Serp, I think most people agree on most things, and it's the differences that make for interesting conv ... though there is always someone who seems intelligent, yet sees the world in an entirely different way ... and who's probably thinking the same about you. Anyway, all in good conversation as you say, and it's a nice counterpoint to the hard work of building up a military able to lay waste to entire nations.
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 06:18 am I find it odd Christianity is a man made religion about Christ...Not the message he preached. 1. Christ said specifically he came not to abolish the law but to fufil it. Most religions never acknowledge this. The standard reply is "The Law was nailed to the cross". If I commit a crime or in this case dont commit a crime and pay my debt to society does that abolish the law for everyone else? 2. Christs message to the world was not about sin or salvation. Christ preached the Kingdom of God. He commanded his disciples to preach the same message. 3. Christ never called the World to salvation. He stated No man comes to me but the Father draws him. This contradicts the basic philosophy of religion today. If Christ is calling everyone to salvation he is doing a horrible job at it. 4. Christ confirms the truth in Death. The wages of sin are Death. He makes no mention of an enternity in Hell. The other biblical mentions of an afterlife are the same. Dead is dead. You hear, feel, or know nothing. Every one who has ever lived will be resurrected and will account for their lives good or bad and be judged accordingly. But no one is condemmned. No eternity in Hell. No Devil poking you with a pitchfork. No heaven. Just a paradise on Earth full of Muslims, Mormons, Shintoists, Jews, and athiests  I just find it odd so many claim Christ without even knowing what his message was.
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 07:23 am Sam you are correct. Just to add to your points: 1. The 'Law' that was fulfilled was the Mosaic law that of course included the ten commandment, but also included many statutes, over 600 of them. This written code regulated the realms of worship, government, morals, justice, even diet and hygiene. It also had laws about animal sacrifices. The obligation to follow those laws word by word did in fact die when Jesus was killed, but He gave a new law. A law motivated by love. In fact at Romans chapt 13 particularly verse 8-10 it even says love is the laws fulfillment. So the principles that are in that law do still apply. 2. At Mt.28:19,20 Jesus talking, commanded his disciple to do that very thing. At Mt 20:28 although it says that Jesus came to be a ransom, notice what it says first as to why he came....to minister! 3.Sam quoted John 6:44. Although at John 14:6 Jesus also said that No one comes to the Father except through me. So of course Jesus is key to having a relationship with God. 4.Rom 6:23 does say the wages sin pays is death. Ecc 9:5 says the dead are conscious of nothing at all. So dead is dead. Everlasting life was never promised to unrepentant sinners. The whole chapt of Psalms 37 several time mention that the meek will inherit the earth. In fact Isa 45:18 says what the reason the earth was even created. And Ecc 1:4 says how long the earth will be here. Most ppl who claim to be Christian know the 'Lords Prayer' at Mt chapt 6. There Jesus gave a model for ppl to follow when they pray. First thing was for his fathers name to be hallowed, or sanctified(made holy), the second thing was for his kingdom to come. So I agree 100% to claim to be a Christian you need to know what his message was.
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 10:12 am Goly gee, Jesus is one cool dude! Sarcasm aside, the trouble is that the bible is actually very complex. Consider that it begins with God doing stuff, then has a whole period of time where it goes off having a bunch of people doing stuff, then Jesus comes in and tries to clear things up. There will always be a moral grey area. However, you can be sure that following the Ten Commandments, and following most of what Jesus said you will probably be fine. Fact is, there are very few instances where an important theological law wouldn't be obvious to someone with any regard for their fellow man. I think the most obvious theme apparent in the bible is that of Forgiveness. It is all throughout the Old Testament, and is continually reaffirmed in the New Testament. All Christians should know that people screw up, even themselves, and sometimes often too. Becoming a Christian does not make one immune to sin, just read some of the epistles... they are pretty much Paul reminding the Christians he sent those letters to that it won't be easy. As for the whole thing about not judging, I believe that it is referring to the condemnation part, not the evaluation part. Example: I can call someone guilty of committing murder, but I cannot gauge whether or not the act was morally wrong in the eyes of God. I am not the best Christian, but I believe in the Holy Trinity and work to improve myself according to the teachings of the bible. Is not belief and intent enough to allow someone to be called a Christian? Be honest, how often do you knowingly do something that you are absolutely sure is wrong? Mostly likely, never. Either you thought it was necessary for the greater good, or you somehow convinced yourself that your action was morally right (even if someone else would disagree). The latter is the reason for the moral compass in the Bible. If people just decided what was right and wrong themselves, we would have chaos. The biggest trait that needs to be developed for one to be a good Christian is that of self control and reasonable kindness. The trial is coming to that point and staying there.
^^^^ That is the summary of the Bible.
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 04:07 pm No i dont hate athiest read the furom NAZISM!!!! to see why i said that plz post your comments on what u thot about it.
| |
| Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 08:22 pm Sun Tzu alot of the things you said I agree with. A few I dont. But you are right the bible is a complex book that is meant to be read and studied. What I dont understand is the moral 'grey area.' The bible clearly shows and explains what is 'right' and 'wrong.' Otherwise if a grey area exists then are the clear and precise principles in the bible just a suggestion? Also if you have the grey area then who decides what falls into that grey area? Thats why the bible is very specific about things such as morals. Forgivness is a very important part of the bible no doubt, cause all, including Christians do sin. (Rom 3:23) I also like the example of judging. We can many times figure if a person is guilty, but thats is all we can do. The only way we can judge that a person did somthing wrong in Gods eyes is if he says it is wrong. But we cannot determine if that person is a repentant sinner(as we would hope they are). That judgement is not ours to make. As for a Trinity, (which is a word not even found in the bible) I believe that God, Jesus, and the holy spirit(ghost) are seperate things. Jesus being Gods son. And not only belief and intent necessary to be a Christian, but actions must be as well. I may actually believe that I can naturally run a 2 min mile, and I may even intend to do it. But the only way to prove I am what I say I am, is by my actions. In this case naturally running a 2 min mile. Because the problem with a moral grey area is that like you mentioned "Either you thought it was necessary for the greater good, or you somehow convinced yourself that your action was moraly right (even if someone else would disagree)." The problem with that is the YOU part. Its not really up to US to decide what is morally right and wrong. Thats Gods right. We have shown we cannot shoulder that responsibility.(Jer 10:23) A person can rationalize almost anything. You may even have good intentions for doing so, but many a horrible act has been commited with good intentions behind them.
| |
| Monday, June 9, 2008 - 05:56 pm I just had two questions that can go to any Christians on the board. 1. Why would God damn a individual to hell for giving them the ability to think/free will. 2. Alot of people say that abortions/Cloning is a method of playing god, does that mean that God isn't all almighty and power as hes thought to be... And with enough patience a single human being can become a God? I do like the teachings of the bible but I believe god is unjust.
| |
| Tuesday, June 10, 2008 - 08:39 am @Serpent Just to make things clear, when I said intent I meant to include a reasonable effort which I automatically associated with intent. A moral gray area means situations that are complex enough that doing either action will result in some wrong and some right. The question is which decision is most moral, and which decision does the most good come out of things? Nobody knows exactly which path God would have them choose, there is no divine revelation. As for the rationalization part, the intent of that statement is to show that people generally do what they think is right, whether or not it can reasonably be justified. Also, that is why I said there is a reason for the moral compass that is in the bible even if it can only offer a general direction. Trust me, read one book on Moral Theology and you will see that much deliberation would be needed to make every decision in life. There are very few decisions made in everyday life by the average person that can be described as anything but morally vague. @Loki 1. I may not be the person to speak, but God does not damn people for having free will. He gives them a choice. Have you ever read Milton? I think it was paradise lost where he talks about Satan and how he came to hell. He made the conscious decision to oppose God, and was sent out of heaven. Those who have been "damned" are much like Satan (I am not implying that they are inherently evil, I am working off Milton's Satan) because they have freely and willingly chosen to oppose God and should know that what they are doing is wrong. I think the Christian teaching is that if a person has never had the opportunity to learn of God and Christian morality then they cannot freely and willingly oppose or follow his will and would not have effectively damned themselves. Basically, God doesn't damn people; people choose to damn themselves. And God always forgives people who ask for it, so he gives them every opportunity to change their minds and repent. 2. Well, I think you have the abortion thing mixed up. The reason it is opposed by Christianity is because from the moment a child is conceived that it has life. If it has life, then abortion would end that life. Life is sacred and to end it would be murder, and God doesn't like murder. Much different and more straightforward than cloning. Now, cloning was something the bible was not around to deal with. The question is what makes it wrong? Trying to become God is not the problem. We humans can only manipulate the universe, we are subject to the laws of physics and energy, of chemistry and biology. How can we ever become God who is reckoned to be responsible for the greatest magic trick ever, creating everything from nothing? The answer is we simply can't, we can never do more than manipulate or even trick the universe into doing what we want. We can have great power, but never omnipotence. Playing God means that we attempt to do that which we do not truly understand, we are toying with the very stuff of life in cloning. We can create that which is alive in the physical sense, but is it alive in the spiritual sense? Does it have a soul? Nobody knows. What is the moral consequence of trying to put life into that which might not have a soul? Nobody can say for sure. The ultimate question being, do we wish to toy with that which God considered good and sacred? How can it be justified, if we cannot understand the morality or comprehend the consequences for this living being we have copied? We play a gamble, and do not do any justice to the clone we have copied.
| |
| Tuesday, June 10, 2008 - 05:31 pm A "righteous" man is not necessarily what we might consider a "good" man. Grasp the nature of the differences betweens God's expectations(as espoused in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures) and man's, and you will understand Christianity.
| |
| Tuesday, June 10, 2008 - 09:47 pm Loki of Azure made a good point about God damning ppl for using their free will. But what ya gotta realize is that free will, just like any other privilege, comes with responsibility. Technically 'free will' allows a person to do anything, but they still may have to pay the consequences for using it. LOL I guess its like horsepower...you may have it, but you dont always wanna use it, and if you do, you might have to pay the consequences. And Sun Tzu made the statement "Trust me, read one book on Moral Theology and you will see that much deliberation would be needed to make every decision in life. There are very few decisions made in everyday life by the average person that can be described as anything but morally vague." I agree with you about reading a book on moral theology you prolly would have to spend much time and energy trying to figure out what is the best decision in everyday life. But I don't think so with the 'TRUE' Moral Guidebook the bible. Maybe I just cant think of any particular circumstance that would come up in everyday life that leaves room for a gray area. But I suppose their is a 'moral compass' but just as a compass that points north, if you decide to go NE will you actually end up north? As for the abortion thing I agree 100% with Sun Tzu. And I'm not educated enough on cloning and what all is involved to even have an opinion on that. Sorry for my ignorance!
| |
| Wednesday, June 11, 2008 - 05:58 am Here's a grey area, Serpent. A pre-teen kid approaches a military checkpoint carrying a medium sized bag that she is clutching oddly. When challenged by one of the two sentries to stop, she looks scared and starts fiddling with something inside the bag. You are watching this through the optics of your sniper rifle because you are in overwatch of this checkpoint. She is now within 20 meters of the soldiers you are covering. What do you do?
| |
| Wednesday, June 11, 2008 - 11:31 pm Well use the bible, are there any principles that you can go by to make that decision? First thing to figure out is this: Is war a moral thing? Now I understand that in the world in which we live, and the governments that rule the majority of the population, there are things that happen that make them feel they are justified in going to war. So which one of the ten commandments would apply? When a person gets involved in an immoral thing, then immoral things will happen. For example according to the bible sex out of marriage is immoral. So what if you spend alot of time in bars and clubs where the people there are generally promiscuous individuals? Going to the bar or club in itself is not immoral. But what can happen by going there is. Because after a while as things progress and you get more comfortable with your surroundings immoral things may happen. Eventually you may end up doing something immoral. You may have not even intended to do anything immoral, but you did do things that put you in that position. Although this sounds cliche and it has been commercialized, but never-the-less 'What would Jesus do?' The answer to that question is the answer to your question about the 'gray area'.
| |
| Thursday, June 12, 2008 - 04:43 am Tao, the subtle reality of the universe cannot be described, That which can be described in words is mearly a conception of the mind. Although names and descriptions have been applied to it, the subtle reality is beyond the description. Tao Teh Ching - beginning of chapter 1 The subtle essense of the universe is elusive and evasive. ... It is the subtle origin of the whole of creation and non-creation. It existed prior to the beginning of time as the deep and subtle reality of the universe. It brings all into being. Tao Teh Ching - portions of chapter 21 "There is, O monks, an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed. Were there not, O monks, this unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, there would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed. "Since, O monks, there is an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, and unformed, therefore there is an escape from the born, originated, created, formed." The Gospel of Buddha Sermon at the bamboo grove at Rajagaha Neither the multitude of gods nor great sages know of my origin, for I am the source of all the gods and great sages. A mortal who knows me as the unborn, beginningless great lord of the worlds is freed from all delusion and all evils. The Bhagavad-Gita - The tenth teaching, verses 2 & 3 There is One, only One Supreme Being, Truth Eternal, Creator of all seen & unseen, Fearless, Without hatred, Timeless Being, Non-Incarnated, Self created, Realized by the Grace of Guru (Perfect Master Only.) Guru Granth Sahib Page 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1 For thus saith the Eternal that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the self existent One; and there is none else. Isaiah 45:18 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself. He was present originally with God. All things were made and came into existence through Him; and without him was not one thing made that has come into being. Gospel of John 1:1-3 You are the Absolute Existence which causes (our) transient (existences) to appear. Masnavi - Book 1 - Creator and Creation God is the indescribable, uncreated, self existent, eternal all knowing source of all reality and being. Our attempts to blame him or define him are flawed in their conception. A small child cannot understand or relate to the actions of an adult. They only know how those actions make them feel. This basic selfishness is the main stumbling block on a path to self discovery ....One who truly seeks God must first make the small leap of faith and acknowledge the relationship between Creator and created. And realize that humanities accumulated knowledge is insignificant in comparison. Once you have realized you know nothing you can begin....
| |
| Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 06:59 am I have enjoyed following this thread over the last few months. I think Loki's issue of free will goes right to the heart of the matter. God created Adam and placed him in the garden to make a great choice - to exercise his free will. His choice was to obey God in the one prohibition - not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil on the penalty of death. Adam was freshly created from the hand of God and inclined to obedience, Satan came to Adam and told him that he could be like God. Adam listened to Satan and allowed his wife to eat the fruit first to test whether the word of the Lord was true (I will develop that argument, if anyone wants). When he saw the Eve did not die, he ate AND accepted the worship of Satan (a complex argument that I can develop, if anyone wants. In essence, the whole of sin and forgiveness comes down to the exercise of free will. People who hate God chose to do so, and do not want to spend an eternity with Him. They chose that is part of what it means to be created in the image of God. Adam
| |
| Sunday, January 10, 2016 - 09:30 pm I am catholic, but what is the interest?
| |
| Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - 02:47 am The modern idea of hell did not exist until after Dante Alighieri created it. Essentially, a work of fiction was so popular that the Catholic church adopted parts of it as official dogma. Crazy as it sounds, it's the truth. I'm also a so-called "Christian". But my belief system does not exactly match any denomination. The Mennonites are the closest approximation to my own beliefs. But even they are only an 80% match. 1. Why would God damn a individual to hell for giving them the ability to think/free will. It's not for the free will itself, but rather for what is done with it. I can give you a hammer; you can build a house or crush someone's skull with it. My reaction would be appropriate for each - praise or condemnation. God must feel that He already gave us all the guidance we should need. 2. Alot of people say that abortions/Cloning is a method of playing god, does that mean that God isn't all almighty and power as hes thought to be... And with enough patience a single human being can become a God? I don't think either is 'playing God'. But I do think any parent wants his children to grow up to be what he considers good people; strong moral character, both physically and mentally able. I don't see why God would want it any other way for His "children". Eventually, those of us who "make the cut" would probably become as God is, eventually. Perhaps, someday, His children will go forth and create their own creations. Which does bring me to a circular argument I like to use. I figure God exists as long as humans exist. The argument goes as thus: First, we must define God. 1. all knowing 2. ever present 3. all powerful. As long as humans exist, we will search and inquire about the nature of the universe. Eventually, even if it takes a trillion years, we will master everything there is to master. At some point, we will figure out how to look at all points in all of creation at all times and report everything back to one person. At that point, there are only 2 possible outcomes. 1. he finds God - and he probably won't be happy about it. 2. he finds that he is God. Either way, there is a 100% probability that one of these two outcomes is true... as long as humans exist. But if we become extinct, then nobody will be around to tell me I'm wrong. Who knows? Perhaps some scientist in the far distant future realizes that his experiment just created the universe in which he lives. Now wouldn't that cook your brain?
|
