- This topic has 94 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,13:03) Quote (Not3in1 @ July 15 2008,18:15) Kevin, I'm running the kids to football and cheer practice, but I will respond later tonight. I enjoy your view, although I don't believe you are any more happy or “free” by adopting your new understanding than you were when you believed in the Yahweh of the bible. So if believing and searching out religion is not for freedom and peace, why even bother at all? Why not join hands with Stuart and say, “To hell with god and his so-called bible! He doesn't exist!”? This is your next step as far as I can see……. Sincere question, what prevents you from taking this step right now, this minute?
Love,
Mandy
Because ditching the bible does not mean you must ditch God
. I know Christians can't understand that.
Gotcha.So how will you know anything about God? Just by observation of creation? Is there anything to be said of personal relationship?
Quote (t8 @ July 16 2008,17:11) Welcome to the valley of decision and the supermarket of confusion. Will trusting in yourself give you salvation?
Deep stuff.Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,09:55) What makes you so certain that the God you met was indeed the God of the bible? Did He tell you?
Because that God I met as a very small child also talks to me through the bible.Question – didn't you come to God through J e s u s, a character in the bible?
Quote (t8 @ July 16 2008,17:11) Evolution is one theory that doesn't need God, so they think, but it is popular because men like the idea that there isn't a God.
1 Cor 13:11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.Still waiting for you to drop your childish rejection of reality. I know growing up, acknowledging fantasy and accepting reality must be difficult but so many other have achieved it. Paul didn't even know about the theory of evolution so how do you know that you must reject it?
Stuart
Hi epistemaniac
Quote who are you to so dogmatically cram your beliefs down my throat! Why should I allow myself to have to believe that there are no moral absolutes? Just because you say so? And you complain about dogma among Christians!! How hypocritical!!
Well that is hypocrisy multiplied on your part then because your benchmark of deciding truth is a religious assertion. Scientists the world around can agree on objective facts because of the empiricism of the scientific method. Whatever limits you personally claim for empiricism you do not have any comparable means for making absolute claims. Objectively the truth claims of christianity are pathetic, and there is plenty of evidence that christianity has stolen and claimed copyright on ethical principles that have been key evolutionary survival behaviours for maybe 100 times longer than christianity has existed. Of course religions add their own bizarre rituals and ‘moral absolutes’ that die along with the particular religion. Plagiarising and codifying long-developed principles of human conduct then denying the truth of their origins is dishonest. To claim an imaginary being in the sky has told us these absolute ways to behave is naïve and not supported by evidence.Stuart
Quote (epistemaniac @ July 16 2008,00:03) Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,09:32)
But how are your moral absolutes different from your neighbor who may be a Buddhist? You say you are getting them from your god, but what if another claims the same god yet has a different set of absolutes?There are no moral absolutes. While it is wrong to kill, it may end up being the only choice if doing so prevents the death of several others. Theft is wrong, but there may be instances where it is necessary for survival.
In the end, our societies provide our morals, and as such, our morals change with time. If they don't then you should be living by the laws set up in the OT. And don't use the excuse “those were for the Israelites”. You want to follow that god, you should abide by his rules.
who are you to so dogmatically cram your beliefs down my throat! Why should I allow myself to have to believe that there are no moral absolutes? Just because you say so? And you complain about dogma among Christians!! How hypocritical!!Dude, take a chill pill. This is an Internet forum, I have not come and knocked on your door like a rude JW, Mormon, or the occasional Evangelical. In other words, you don't like what I share, don't read the words, simple as that. There is a section on this board which I cannot access, if you feel safer there, try that section.
So let's see if you actually have anything of substance to share beyond your act of righteous indignation…
Quote Secondly, who are you to tell me how to interpret the Bible? If parts of the Law have been fulfilled, meaning that some aspects of the OT law no longer apply, who are you to think that you can say otherwise? Can you say “hermeneutics” 
? Goooodddddd….. I knew you could.Who are you to tell anyone else how they are to interpret the bible? Christians do that here, and the arguments are aplenty. So what gives any of you authority to say what the right interpretation is? I thought you were supposed to all share the same unifying spirit, yet you seem to agree on so little. The major parts, surely, but it seems to all fall apart after that. Trinity, oneness, Jesus was an angel, no one has seen Yahweh, Yahweh was indeed seen, It was Jesus who was the one seen, it was just an angel, baptistism is needed for salvation, baptism is just an act of obedience, one must speak in tongues, we have free will, we don't have free will, Jesus existed before his birth, no he didn't, demons exist, demons are just symbolic, and on and on and on.
And see? You did it above. There are some Christians who disagree with you who say that Jesus fulfilling the Law does not mean the Law has been done away but that Jesus fulfilled the Law by being the ultimate sacrifice. However, Torah should be observed. So who is right, you because you are too lazy to observe Torah?
Quote And who are you to presume to tell me what Christians “have” to do….? You are funny. On the one hand you complain about the stereotypes that people lay on you…. what you MUST believe…. and then you turn around and do the same thing… again… hypocrite. You need to find a place where your feelings won't be hurt so easily. May I suggest one of the boards where they ban people for not believing as they do? You should find one where most of your beliefs match and you find your safe little Internet haven.
As I said before, there is a section here for Christians who are easily offended, go use it.
Quote At any rate, what happened to your pluralism kejonn? I thought what was right for you was right for you and what was right for me is right for me? Who are you to critique my beliefs and say that they are wrong? Why change now, just because Christianity teaches things you don't like? Is this your system of ethics at work? You can conveniently change and one minute say that everyone's individual beliefs are their own business, but then when someone believes something you don't like or disagree with you can vocalize/write how wrong they are? If no one is right and no one is wrong, then Christians are NOT wrong either, and we can go on our merry way believing exactly as we like without the need for your judgments and dogmatic assertions that we are wrong, thank you very much. But, if you can insist on the right for your self to subject our views to criticism, and say we are wrong, then you need to get off your high horse and stop acting insulted just because the Christian says that you are wrong on this or that point. You can't have it both ways, and trying to is just Special Pleading on your part, and is fallacious reasoning. I am sharing my opinions and thoughts. Did I tell you how to live? No. You are a very sad person if you take this seriously.
And yes, I do have an issue with dogmatic fundamentalistic Christianity. People in that arena want public policy to reflect their beliefs and don't want others to have a say. They pretend to, but that is not the truth. Like I said elsewhere, at least in the US, Christians don't want freedom of religion, they want freedom of the Christian religion.
Quote How are my beliefs different from that of a Buddhist? The Buddhist abstains from various behaviors they consider wrong or bad or evil because they build up bad karma. Individual persons committing these acts are not, in fact, to be seen as individuals at all. Individualism is illusory. This ought to be an obvious departure from biblical ethics where individuality is maintained and viewed as important, and that people will be held responsible for what they do, as individuals. Further, Christians do not believe in reincarnation/rebirth, and do not fear that bad karma will come back to haunt them in the next life, or that they can redress some of the wrongs they commit in one life in the next life. lastly, the most important difference is that some forms of Buddhism do not believe in any god at all, thus their moral laws are not based on the unchanging character of an omnipotent omniscient omnibenevolent God such that Christians believe in. eghttp://nidahas.com/2007/02/23/buddhism-vs-atheism/ As far as ethical systems go, they are about as different as 2 can be. Sure they both have ethical beliefs, but the basis of, and the reasons for these beliefs are quite different Did I say different beliefs? No, you were speaking of moral absolutes. Don't run off in a rant about different beliefs.
So, how is a Buddhist different from you on the ideas of killing,
theft, etc? Perhaps the Buddhist does not agree with you on some other issues, such as homosexuality or the ability to view pornography, but who is right or wrong? You will say you, he will say he. But who is ultimately right? You are both basing these differences on beliefs yet there really is no right or wrong here.Quote At any rate, Christians base their morals on the general ethical principles of the Bible, the Old and New Testaments, the former interpreted in light of the teachings of the latter, which itself reflects the character of God. Get real. You mean you toss the OT whenever it is convenient.
Quote In regard to your dogmatic assertion and unproven opinion that there are no absolutes, I would like to ask, “do you really mean that? Absolutely?” Relativism has an inherent contradiction in that it makes a universal statement, while stating that no such universal statements can be made. Saying that there are no moral absolutes is, itself, a moral assessment, so in is not possible to engage in Special Pleading here, the system is self referentially false and therefore no rational person should hold it. So many words, so little answers.
Quote here is a moral absolute for you kejonn:
It is wrong always and everywhere to boil newborn infants in peanut oil.The specific act? Depends. What if your god told you to do it? You might come back with “but he wouldn't” yet Yahweh seemed to tell people to kill whole cities of people, including infants. No, they didn't boil them in peanut oil, but the end result is the same.
See, the difference here? I don't believe God would tell anyone at any time to kill someone. So I would say “no” it is not right. But your god, according to your bible, does tell people to kill.
So, now that I answered your question, I will ask one in return. Is it morally correct to kill your next door neighbor if you god tells you to?
Quote If you disagree, then you have no room speaking of a “monstrous god”, complaining about the supposed lack of morality from the “OT God”, your own morals are far worse.
See above. Read the OT sometime, particularly Joshua. Get your nose out of the Gospel of John and check out the real character of your god.Quote (t8 @ July 16 2008,00:11) Quote (kejonn @ July 15 2008,13:22) The answer? I cannot justify it, it is based on belief alone. Nothing more or nothing less than any theist I suppose. But I am very open to allow my beliefs to evolve as science or reason shows them to be valid or faulty.
A large chunk of our DNA is the same as a daffodil.So men are flowers. Do you believe? A case can be made here after all. But alas nobody wants to be a flower, so the theory fails.
This fails on so many levels. So what if we share DNA with another organism? This just goes to show that there is some commonality with other living matter.
Quote Evolution is one theory that doesn't need God, so they think, but it is popular because men like the idea that there isn't a God. No, evolution does not need any god, but that does not mean that God belief must be jettisoned if you accept the theory of evolution to be the best explanation available outside of “Godditit”. You just disagree with evolution because it doesn't match up with your particular creation myth.
Quote Popular belief and truth are not the same. So what is truth? Pilate asked, Jesus didn't even answer. He supposedly said in another place that he was the “way, truth, and life” but Pilate was not there to hear him. He failed Pilate in that moment.
Quote Maybe men are aliens who drive big space ships. Perhaps life hitched a ride on a comet. Welcome to the supermarket of religion. There is a product just waiting to cater for where you are at. Yep, and you bought into the version you like. Notice how yours does not match WJ's.
Quote Maybe men accept that which tickles their ears and the bible doesn't tickle many people. Yep, that is why 95% of Christians don't read the OT.
Quote Perhaps the biggest difference is attitide. One man's attitude is that this is not to my liking, another man says I will except truth and change if I have to. Or, here is a book about “truth”, I will interpret in a way which seems right to me.
Quote Welcome to the valley of decision and the supermarket of confusion. Will trusting in yourself give you salvation?
Will trusting in a person who has no proof of existence beyond the pages of the bible give you salvation? You believe so, but that does not mean it is true.I've said it before, it bears saying again: “truth” in religion is what you have accepted.
Quote (Not3in1 @ July 16 2008,00:49) Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,13:03) Quote (Not3in1 @ July 15 2008,18:15) Kevin, I'm running the kids to football and cheer practice, but I will respond later tonight. I enjoy your view, although I don't believe you are any more happy or “free” by adopting your new understanding than you were when you believed in the Yahweh of the bible. So if believing and searching out religion is not for freedom and peace, why even bother at all? Why not join hands with Stuart and say, “To hell with god and his so-called bible! He doesn't exist!”? This is your next step as far as I can see……. Sincere question, what prevents you from taking this step right now, this minute?
Love,
Mandy
Because ditching the bible does not mean you must ditch God. I know Christians can't understand that.
Gotcha.So how will you know anything about God? Just by observation of creation? Is there anything to be said of personal relationship?
What is a personal relationship? Think about it.In a personal relationship, people communicate with one another. You can do that with God, IMHO, but what you get back is much more vague than what you would get from your fellow human.
There is so much more available in real human relationships that aren't there with God. That is just the nature of things.
As far as knowing God, it is not that possible. God does not seem to want to reveal himself. Thus, people turn to religious texts to know the nature of God. They all are in disagreement over what his/her nature is like (I don't think God can be classified by sex anyway).
In the end, people of the same religion come up with different conclusions about the nature of God. This is called SPAG: “self projection as God”. In other words, God is who we end up making him/her. It may not be accurate, but it is all we have.
Quote (Not3in1 @ July 16 2008,00:58) Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,09:55) What makes you so certain that the God you met was indeed the God of the bible? Did He tell you?
Because that God I met as a very small child also talks to me through the bible.Question – didn't you come to God through J e s u s, a character in the bible?
So, does God speak to you through the book of Joshua?Mandy wrote:
Quote OK. But what if they didn't make it all up? What if God really is sort-of human-like and has killed, gets angry, jealous and all the humanistic characteristics that are attributed to him? What if he hates homo's and will send someone to a burning hell for adultery? What if…… If in the end this is all true of God, do you want nothing to do with this God? Or would you rather go back and try to learn to live with and understand this God? Remember we are the creation, he is the Creator (even as you understand creation). Do we really get to say how and what are Creator is like?
As kids, do we get to choose our parents? Some of us have had gloriously gifted childhoods while other's of us have been neglected and abused. When we are old enough we can disown our parents, but they have still given us life. The old saying is true, “You can run but you cannot hide.” And a favorite of mine, “It is – what it is.”
Please forgive the analogy – (I have read some of more biographical posts) – but this sounds like an abuse victim trying to defend her abuser, (e.g. “He may hit me every now and then, but he is the only one who loves me and takes care of me.”)
Do you really intend to proclaim, “God may not be all that great, but He's the only one we've got?” Is that your testimony?
Quote (Stu @ July 16 2008,19:26) Quote (t8 @ July 16 2008,17:11) Evolution is one theory that doesn't need God, so they think, but it is popular because men like the idea that there isn't a God.
1 Cor 13:11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.Still waiting for you to drop your childish rejection of reality. I know growing up, acknowledging fantasy and accepting reality must be difficult but so many other have achieved it. Paul didn't even know about the theory of evolution so how do you know that you must reject it?
Stuart
The present verse (1 Cor. 13:11) is a comparison of the believer’s earthly life and his subsequent perfection in the presence of the Lord. The analogy (v. 11) that Paul uses is that of a child and an adult. Notice that Paul writes the first person singular I, and depicts himself as a child who talks, thinks, and reasons. A child normally has a limited but developing vocabulary with which he or she communicates. The thought patterns of a child are immature and incomplete, and that is exactly what an adult expects from a child.
Paul employs the past tense when he refers to his childhood and to his entering the state of manhood. He compares the two periods of his life and then draws the conclusion that the things that interested him as a child had no attraction for him when he became a man. He does not belittle the talking, thinking, and acting of a child—these are characteristic of childhood. But when the child enters adulthood, everything takes on proper dimensions. To illustrate, the primary-school building which a child attends appears big and formidable. But when he or she visits these premises in later years, the school appears to have shrunk in size.
Similarly, at present we have received God’s revelation which is sufficient for our salvation. Yet we realize that our knowledge remains partial until we personally see Christ face to face. At that time we will clearly understand God’s design and purpose.
Kistemaker, Simon J. ; Hendriksen, William: New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids : Baker Book House, 1953-2001 (New Testament Commentary 18), S. 468The only childish rejection of reality I see are among atheists whose disbelief in God shows that their epistemic faculties aren't functioning properly. At any rate, quoting Paul to say that belief in God is childish is irresponsible and if we approach literature of any kind in this way, I might just as well thank you for your warm accurate exegesis of Scripture and thank you that your writings are such a clear affirmation of the truth of Christianity that I might encourage you to go to seminary, such is the depth of your belief and piety.
blessings,
KenQuote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,23:58) What is a personal relationship? Think about it. In a personal relationship, people communicate with one another. You can do that with God, IMHO, but what you get back is much more vague than what you would get from your fellow human.
There is so much more available in real human relationships that aren't there with God. That is just the nature of things.
As far as knowing God, it is not that possible. God does not seem to want to reveal himself. Thus, people turn to religious texts to know the nature of God. They all are in disagreement over what his/her nature is like (I don't think God can be classified by sex anyway).
In the end, people of the same religion come up with different conclusions about the nature of God. This is called SPAG: “self projection as God”. In other words, God is who we end up making him/her. It may not be accurate, but it is all we have.
Once again your dogmatism is astounding. It may be all YOU have, but it is not all I have. When did I give you the privilege of speaking for me?I do agree with Mark Twain, in the beginning God created man, and ever since that time, man has been TRYING to return the favor.
blessings,
KenQuote (epistemaniac @ July 16 2008,14:13) Quote (kejonn @ July 16 2008,23:58) What is a personal relationship? Think about it. In a personal relationship, people communicate with one another. You can do that with God, IMHO, but what you get back is much more vague than what you would get from your fellow human.
There is so much more available in real human relationships that aren't there with God. That is just the nature of things.
As far as knowing God, it is not that possible. God does not seem to want to reveal himself. Thus, people turn to religious texts to know the nature of God. They all are in disagreement over what his/her nature is like (I don't think God can be classified by sex anyway).
In the end, people of the same religion come up with different conclusions about the nature of God. This is called SPAG: “self projection as God”. In other words, God is who we end up making him/her. It may not be accurate, but it is all we have.
Once again your dogmatism is astounding. It may be all YOU have, but it is not all I have. When did I give you the privilege of speaking for me?I do agree with Mark Twain, in the beginning God created man, and ever since that time, man has been TRYING to return the favor.
blessings,
Ken
It may be just me, but you come across as being a jerk.Quote (epistemaniac @ July 17 2008,07:09) The only childish rejection of reality I see are among atheists whose disbelief in God shows that their epistemic faculties aren't functioning properly. At any rate, quoting Paul to say that belief in God is childish is irresponsible and if we approach literature of any kind in this way, I might just as well thank you for your warm accurate exegesis of Scripture and thank you that your writings are such a clear affirmation of the truth of Christianity that I might encourage you to go to seminary, such is the depth of your belief and piety.
I wasn't trying to interpret scripture. I just thought as a stand-alone quote it suited t8 perfectly. t8 (to whom my post was addressed) and Nick will not actually deny it, they see child-LIKE thinking as a sign of piety.May I comment that your epistemiology is none too flash. A rational non-religious worldview has some major points where regression breaks down. What happened 'before' the big bang, what is going on at a level smaller than the 'grain of space-time', and is the empirical (ie able to be sensed) world the limit of truth – are there mechanisms in play that we cannot know about – are limits. Now, bearing this in mind, tell me one thing that you know (take care with that word epistemologically) that I as an atheist cannot possibly know.
Stuart
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ July 17 2008,05:50) Mandy wrote: Quote OK. But what if they didn't make it all up? What if God really is sort-of human-like and has killed, gets angry, jealous and all the humanistic characteristics that are attributed to him? What if he hates homo's and will send someone to a burning hell for adultery? What if…… If in the end this is all true of God, do you want nothing to do with this God? Or would you rather go back and try to learn to live with and understand this God? Remember we are the creation, he is the Creator (even as you understand creation). Do we really get to say how and what are Creator is like?
As kids, do we get to choose our parents? Some of us have had gloriously gifted childhoods while other's of us have been neglected and abused. When we are old enough we can disown our parents, but they have still given us life. The old saying is true, “You can run but you cannot hide.” And a favorite of mine, “It is – what it is.”
Please forgive the analogy – (I have read some of more biographical posts) – but this sounds like an abuse victim trying to defend her abuser, (e.g. “He may hit me every now and then, but he is the only one who loves me and takes care of me.”)
Do you really intend to proclaim, “God may not be all that great, but He's the only one we've got?” Is that your testimony?
WIT,Sorry, but you only caught part of our conversation and so of course what I wrote doesn't make complete sense to you. No, this would not be my testimony of God at all. I was in the middle of making a point to Kevin.
Love,
Mandy
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
