I thought the discussion was about religious belief, not immorality and crime. Is the criminal robbing your house doing because of his religion? Doubtful. He's probably doing it to feed his drug addiction.
So, A Wiccan meditating to her goddess in front of her altar, and a Catholic praying the rosary to Mother Mary--these are immoral acts because they are not Christian( according to TWI type definition of Christianity-- I myself consider Catholics Christians) on par with robbery and other criminal activity?
Really, I think if you would look at even broad definitions of different religions, they all have similarities on rules/laws/beliefs about don't harm others.
Is not religion defined, however loosely, as a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life? Belief that there is NOT a God is just as much a religion as the different religions whose belief is in different gods.. Be it as it may, everyone has a belief system they follow religously and it effects every part of their life.
To Hitler, his religion was all about forming a master race. Maybe to some that is immoral, to others, it was a religous decision that many in Germany followed willingly. And I'm sure most have read enough about how Hitler used Christian scriptures to back up his point.
But it all comes down to labels. Stereotyping everyone because they say they are 'Christian". When the word Christian is a man made term that has been used to describe everyone from Hitler to Mother Teresa. And I'm sure no one is going to put these two in the same boat. The same with Islamics. And that's just the tip of iceberg. Religion IS man made! That's not to say the belief in GOD is man-made, but any set doctrines/rules/beliefs concerning Him is man made (including the belief He is Not).
In the end, it really has nothing to do with religous labels, but really what everyone sees as the effect the person had which was a result of their belief, their relogion. The problem is, the moral (or immoral) question always arises, and without a set "truth" it is all subjective. Without a God, then truth and what is right or wrong, come only from your self made belief.
The same is true when proving or disproving someone else's religion. We view other's based on our own belief and religous system. And without a 'Truth' standard, there is no right or wrong religion, and as such, everyone can believe as they choose thus doing as they please, because it really is just your opinion. And Hitler's perfect race may just someday become a reality when they have enough of a 'higher power" behind them, be that nuclear weapons or some actual superhuman "being" and there is nothing wrong with that, at least in their religion!
No, the only way to prove a certain religion is similar to those records in the Hebrew Bible, where the Egyptians prayed to their God and Moses to His, and who actually won out.. Or Elijah and the prophets of Baal.. Unfortunately, most don't see these kinds of things every day.. And really, unless there is a need, you never will, because most people's minds are already made up on what they believe is Truth.
Some people believe in God, some do not. Each person made the decision for themselves because it was "right" in their heart/eyes. I have not read anyone on this thread who confesses a belief in God state that if someones disagrees with them, that person must have beliefs that are false/evil/doctrine of devils. We all get our moral compass from somewhere. I attriubute mine to God, attribute yours to whomever/whatever you wish.
Lots of evil has been wrought in the name of God. But that is no proof that there is no God. You either believe in Him, or you don't.
Why does someone have to be wrong? Well, they don't have to be Oak.. No, that's fine. Enjoy your life where everyone is right.. Including the guy who breaks into your house and steals your goods. He's right you know.. He needs to make a living.
Wow, sarcasm and a strawman argument all in one post. Good job.
If it wasn't clear enough, I'm talking about religious beliefs. Some actions are just wrong. Somebody can certainly believe that it's okay to steal my stuff, but I can also believe that there's a law against it or believe that I'm going prevent him in some way.
So, sure.. Believe as you want. Everyone in the world is right. Everyone has a right to do as they please. Murder, kill, steal, or be nice and friendly and not have what you want.
Do you really think that this is what I'm saying, or are you taking religious equivalence to ridiculous ends thinking it makes your point?
Who cares. Everyone's right in their own eyes! Sure. So stop complaining next time the governemt wants to raise taxes, take away your property, and everything else you do. They have that right, and you shouldn't be complaining because no one has to be wrong, nay they are all within their rights as humans tht live according to themselves!
Again, I have the right to complain, and act if someone's beliefs encroaching on me and my life.
Just because it's easier to do what YOU want, and believe what YOU want to believe,...
What's your point here, you do what YOU want and believe what YOU want to believe too
...and ignore everything else in life, doesn't make it right and true.
What is this referring to? I can't have a non-Christian belief system without "ignoring everything else in life?
And yes, someone has to be wrong.
Only if your vision of God is so small that it can't incorporate muliple viewpoints
The fall of man is just that, those who do what they want.
This is a point in which we disagree.
Unless you continue to enjoy being blind to that fact every minute of life.
isn't this "begging the question"? A logical fallacy where the way the question is phrased assumes the answer
I'm not talking about the fall of man with Adam and Eve which is just a shadow of what happens every day. People doing what they want. Believe as they want. Kill as they desire, steal and rape as they desire. Start wars and terrorize as they desire. Trust me, it's all as THEY DESIRE,
One might argue that man was always this way, that there wasn't some golden age where man was pure and uncontaminated.
and only rarely has to do with some religion indoctrination. And usually that's just the front they play or some person controlling them (doing as THEY desire!). In the end, everyone does what they do because they desire it to be so.
Sure, including whether to beleive or not believe in any given religion. Free will.
There is such a thing as truth.
Maybe, but I don't feel qualified to decide what it is for anyone else, unlike, say...you.
And it has little to do with doctrines and laws and commandments. But it does exist. However it will never be found by those who do what is right in their own eyes. Because by doing so, you have blinded your ownself from knowing it, and set yourself up for only knowing that which your own self desires, which is no different than most of the world that destroys itself everyday.
The question still remains, who decides what "truth" is, and if the answer is "God", who decides what version of "God" is right?
Is not religion defined, however loosely, as a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life?
Partially, yes.
Belief that there is NOT a God is just as much a religion as the different religions whose belief is in different gods..
I disagree. While there may be atheists who elevate their position to that of irrational belief, many simply choose to be atheists because they see no compelling evidence to believe
Be it as it may, everyone has a belief system they follow religously and it effects every part of their life.
Religion is different in that it is a choice to believe despite a lack of physical, objective evidence
Religion IS man made!
Agreed
That's not to say the belief in GOD is man-made,
There's a actually a pretty lively debate about this, The New York Times magazine had a great article on it.
but any set doctrines/rules/beliefs concerning Him is man made (including the belief He is Not).
Do you believe in Santa Claus? If not, is your lack of belief a religion?
...without a set "truth" it is all subjective. Without a God, then truth and what is right or wrong, come only from your self made belief.
Even with a God, it's still subjective, if it was objective, then their wouldn't be the arguments that there are.
The same is true when proving or disproving someone else's religion. We view other's based on our own belief and religous system. And without a 'Truth' standard, there is no right or wrong religion, and as such, everyone can believe as they choose thus doing as they please, because it really is just your opinion.
Yup.
And Hitler's perfect race may just someday become a reality when they have enough of a 'higher power" behind them, be that nuclear weapons or some actual superhuman "being" and there is nothing wrong with that, at least in their religion!
That's what they thought, and thankfully the Allies defeated him and did not allow his beliefs become reality.
No, the only way to prove a certain religion is similar to those records in the Hebrew Bible, where the Egyptians prayed to their God and Moses to His, and who actually won out.. Or Elijah and the prophets of Baal.. Unfortunately, most don't see these kinds of things every day.. And really, unless there is a need, you never will, because most people's minds are already made up on what they believe is Truth.
Good point. My position is that those records are fiction, yours is that they are true. Since it doesn't appear that those kind of showdowns are happening these days, you and I both have our opinions.
...People believe something because that's what they decide to believe, and interpret everything else in light of those beliefs, not becasue the bible or some other "holy" book says so. Because when pressed, most bible believers will resort to personal experience to back up whatever their holy book says...
... For me, it starts with belief.
I believe in GOD. Not ''a god'' , but GOD ALMIGHTY.
Why? Because He manifests HIMSELF in everything ........................so..I just do. Call it gut, faith, intuition, whatever.....I believe ( it's written in my heart.)...
...But, again, I rest in what my Lord said in John 14:26 "But the Comforter, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, HE shall teach you all things................"
I agree with you there, Oak. I've said it before that our belief system interprets the world around us. When it comes right down to it people usually lean on personal experiences to back up why they believe the way that they do…And being a Christian I am also very passionate about the points of Bliss' posts – that Christianity is a PERSONAL experience. I cannot prove that Jesus Christ got up from the dead – but my faith came by hearing the word of Christ [Romans 10] and somehow a connection was established with my heavenly Father – and I have no doubt that Christ is alive! There are passages that speak of believers knowing whether Jesus' teaching is of God, of the Spirit guiding Christians into the truth, of God opening the believer's understanding. But all this is internal – subjective – and holds no weight in a debate [a little polemic poetry ].
Sorry – I know I'm no help to either side of this debate – I just enjoy exploring belief systems. I'm sure glad we all don't think alike…or believe alike…It's a fun thing to do to try and take a look at our own belief system through the eyes of another.
…with much love and confusion blowing your way, the Guesstimating Theologian.
T-Bone, I have no beef with Christians like yourself, who see faith as a personal thing; I do have a problem with Christians, as well as Muslims and Buddhists and Pagans who insist that their personal experience applies to everyone.
If a belief that Jesus rose from the dead helps one to be a better person and is a comfort during the tough times, I'm all for it, I have no doubt that this works for the individual. When one insists that ones personal subjective experience negates my own, then I have a problem.
So what is the term "doctrines of devils" referring to in Bliss' post then?
Think you'd have to ask Bliss that question, I don't pretend to know how to read minds. But it DOES NOT seem to suggest that anyone (all inclusive) who does not believe in Him in the same manner that she does is following them.
Each to his own. It is personal. I just get tired of all the "bickering" about it that goes nowhere. And Bliss's post, nor Rottie Girls, nor others here seem to be to be proselytizing. Just stating their personal beliefs.
You missed my point entirely Oak.. It has nothing to do with proving 'my version' or 'my belief". You asked the question, why does someone have to be wrong?! That was my point..
There is a truth. What I think is truth? No.. But there is a truth and I doubt anyone has it 100%! And there is a right and wrong.
Very few believe there is no right or wrong. Thus no truth at all, and anything goes in life...
More believe there is an absolute truth, and their truth is what should rule the world..
However, a good majority just believe there is an absolute truth that they only know some of and they work towards knowing throughout their life.
And another majority think truth is subjective, and your right and wrong could be just as right as the other persons even though they don't agree with one another. And thus why does someone have to be wrong?!
Yes, belief in Santa is a religion. As I already mentioned the defintion of religion from the dictionary, "a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life." Religion doesn't just incorporate "spiritual' beliefs or beliefs that are really 'blind faith' assumptions, but also sets of moral 'laws" that define communities whether or not they come from some "higher power".
You can't say truth is subjective and then turn around and say some actions are just wrong. That's contradictory, unless you are referring to some actions being wrong only in your eyes! Thus subjective truth is nothing more than an oxymoron, and really there is no right or wrong except what you like to 'label' as such but it really doesn't exist. Can you prove it exists?
Or are you trying to say only 'some" truth is subjective? Maybe that truth which doesn't align with your truth is subjective?! What amount of truth then is subjective? And who decides on what truth is subjective?
You said that even with a God, truth is still subjective, if it was objective, then their wouldn't be the arguments that there are. However I beg to differ. The arguments there are have nothing to do with God's truth being subjective, the arguments there are is the subjectivity of their either 'being a God' or whether what God's non-subjective truth is. The question on what is God's truth is much different than saying that 'even with a God, truth is subjective'.. Two different things.
Do I believe in a God, sure! Do I consider myself a follower of Yeshua ben Yahweh? Sure I do.. However, my beliefs don't cause me to "persecute" others of differing beliefs. I don't consider myself to be any different than the rest of mankind, of which there are basically 2 groups, those who have a "higher power' for which they live for (be that a God, a nation, a wife, a job or whatever), and those who live for themselves. While some try to serve 2 masters, themselves or others, ultimately one wins out.. And honestly, that's what religion usually always boils down to despite the labels.
Well T & O, perhaps I did miss your point, as obscured as it was with strawmen that it was in danger of becoming a fire hazard. :B)
I can't say truth is subjective and then say some actions are wrong? Sure I can. Am I saying that only some truth is subjective? Yes I am.
The "truth" that I refer to is the "truth" that can't be verified. One person's truth is that they "know" that a god exists and communicates with them. There's no way to show that this is false, but there's no way to show another person another's inner feelings are true either. If all you're saying is that there is some "truth" that is not fully knowable or understandable
There is a truth. What I think is truth? No.. But there is a truth and I doubt anyone has it 100%! And there is a right and wrong.
Okay, so what if we agree that there is some "truth" and a right & wrong, but if nobody has it 100%, or can have it 100%, then what's the practical difference between that and there not being an objective truth? Not much of one, if any.
You keep bringing up the contrast between people doing what they want to do, and this "truth", but my point is that from an objective perspective, you can't tell which is which.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I understood that you were responding to the history lesson. You clearly believe that what you believe is in stark contrast to what the perpretators of the abuses in the history lesson believe(d). Perhaps I mentally combined what you and T & O where saying to come up with a misrepresentation of your position.
So you don't believe that I, who does not believe that Jesus is my savior and does not believe in the god of the bible, am following the "doctrines of men and devils"?
Well, Bliss answered for herself, so I'm saved the trouble. You expressed an opinion about it, so I asked you
I don't pretend to know how to read minds. But it DOES NOT seem to suggest that anyone (all inclusive) who does not believe in Him in the same manner that she does is following them.
Oh, so you do have an opinion about what it means.
Each to his own. It is personal.
Actually, that's my point.
I just get tired of all the "bickering" about it that goes nowhere.
Then why did you get involved in the bickering yourself?
And Bliss's post, nor Rottie Girls, nor others here seem to be to be proselytizing. Just stating their personal beliefs.
Right. Didn't say they were proselytizing.
Actually, a robust discussion is fun, doncha think? If we all agreed, it would be pretty d*mn boring.
I'll not be able to get back to the computer for another day or two, so if anyone responds, or wants to beat me up, I'll be back on Thursday
Yes, belief in Santa is a religion. As I already mentioned the defintion of religion from the dictionary, "a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life." Religion doesn't just incorporate "spiritual' beliefs or beliefs that are really 'blind faith' assumptions, but also sets of moral 'laws" that define communities whether or not they come from some "higher power".
To be clear, I believe the question Oak posed was, "does the lack of belief in Santa make it a religion?"
The answer is no. The same way that atheism and agnosticism are not religions. Do atheists and angnostics have a religion as per your definition? Yes, but atheism and agnostisism are not them. That lack of belief has little to do with the way they act and whether or not they murder or steal or are just plain bastards. It would be more accurate to say that, for example, secular humanism was their religion (if that fits the person). It could be a number of other labels as well, but their lack of belief in a god has little to do with how they live and what guides their life.
It all comes down to faith, folks. That is why these arguements are so pointless. One claiming that their god is "God all Mighty" or the "creator of the heavens and the earth" or "the one true God" has nothing to do with whether those claims are true or not. Is there an ultimate truth? I believe there is. The thing is none of us will ever know until we get there, IF we get there. This simple fact is why in my opinion it is very logical and important to have a huge helping of humility when it comes to your personal belief in a god. You, me, the rest of them, everyone could be completely wrong. Unfortuantely, many views of religion (theistic) require the adherent to believe completely 100% that their god is God or the head God. It seems this makes it more about who's god is bigger and badder and truer and trying to prove that one way or the other, and not about how we live our lives and treat others, and for Christians that is what it is supposed to be all about...the Law of Love.
What is important, IMO, is how we deal with eachother, which is something that all religions address. Some in a not so appealing way, which is why many of us don't think those religions are right. They don't appeal to our sense of right and wrong. That is what it comes down to.
What we believe and what is truth only coincide if your unvarafiable claim of truth just happens to hit the lottery in the infinite number of other unvarifiable possibilities. It is like picking your "Big Game" numbers and claiming you have the winning ticket, even though there hasn't and will not be a drawing (at least not until we are all dead). Everyone would want to believe they have the winning ticket, but no one would really know. Hopefully it is YOUR office pool that wins. Good Luck!
The question is then raised: why is one person's experience more valid than the next person's? If one person ascribes certain life events to the God of the bible, and I ascribe those same events to the Goddess; or Manannan, the celtic Sea God; or fairies; or extraterestrials or Allah...why are those beliefs less valid? Less divine and more "doctrines of men and devils"?
it seemed you might have thought that others were ascribing "doctrines of men and devils" to your beliefs. I did not get that same impression from the posts. Yes, I have an opinion about the things posted here, or I would not have posted on the thread. Guess by posting I did enter the fray, so I could be considered to be bickering, also.
As to
Actually, a robust discussion is fun, doncha think? If we all agreed, it would be pretty d*mn boring.
I guess our "definitions" of a robust discussion may be different. I enjoy discussing different points of view, but usually don't enjoy the type of discussion found in the Doctrinal and Politics and Tacks forums. Had I realized that is where I was posting, I may not have responded here. (I click on "View New Posts" and scan the topics, and don't usually pay much attention to the forum they are in. May not be wise, but still what I do.) I don't mind stating my point of view, but don't enjoy the back and forth of "prove it, prove it" when it is a belief that cannot be empirically proved or disproved. You either believe it or you don't. Nor do I wish to persuade others to accept my point of view on a forum. I state it, take it or leave it. Makes no difference to me. (In person-to-person relationships it could make a difference to me as far as to the type or depth of friendship I may pursue with someone. Some people's beliefs turn me off and I'd prefer not to spend time with them. Just to be clear, since the existence of God is the topic of this thread, I have good friends that are agnostic or atheist, but our beliefs are not the basis of our friendship and so it is a non-issue between us.)
so if anyone responds, or wants to beat me up
This is just a response, not an attempt to beat you up. I don't like the discussions where people beat up on one another. That's not how I define a "robust" discussion, and why I usually avoid such forums. I don't know how you define "robust" and am not trying to make any implication with my statement.
Hope you're having fun while away from GSC. Vacation? Business? Pleasure? Both? Whatever it is, hope it is a good time for you.
So, since I believe there is GOD, I then know that HE CAN DO ANYTHING HE WANTS, and therefore, would NOT leave us without witness.
i could ask a million questions about the things you wrote, bliss, but let's just start with this one sentence.
it seems to me that you make these massive leaps of "logic" and phrase them as though they were statements of simple fact. how does "i then know he can do whatever he wants" follow "since i believe there is God?" aren't you making a pile of assumptions to get from one statement to the other?
the same with the next part. how does it follow that god can do WHATEVER HE WANTS so he wouldn't leave us without a witness? i don't see any logically progression here. not a lick. they're all just assumptions that you've decided are true--which is your business--but they're no more logically sound than "since i believe in radio, i know that concrete is my friend, and therefore, chickens are tasty and glum."
i could ask a million questions about the things you wrote, bliss, but let's just start with this one sentence.
it seems to me that you make these massive leaps of "logic" and phrase them as though they were statements of simple fact. how does "i then know he can do whatever he wants" follow "since i believe there is God?" aren't you making a pile of assumptions to get from one statement to the other?
the same with the next part. how does it follow that god can do WHATEVER HE WANTS so he wouldn't leave us without a witness? i don't see any logically progression here. not a lick. they're all just assumptions that you've decided are true--which is your business--but they're no more logically sound than "since i believe in radio, i know that concrete is my friend, and therefore, chickens are tasty and glum."
can you fill in the blanks for me?
I thought this was the DOCTRINAL SECTION?????................which to me, implies we discuss doctrine................
You were IN TWI Sprawled Out. I don't adhere to their doctrines, although I am still ''Christian''.
I am sure you know where I am coming from.
And you are right...It is my business what I decide is true.
You too. Isn't that cool?
Unless you want to truly discuss the scriptures, these kind of questions really have no benefit to either of us........except maybe someones ego........
so...........I really don't have any ''blanks'' to fill in for ya.
This isn't a rule in the doctrinal section (actually, I think the only rules are that we pick up after ourselves and refrain from human sacrifice) but down here there's usually has traditionally been a little more discussion and challenging of beliefs than upsatirs. "Discussion" as in an actual exploration of different positions, "challenging", not as in telling someone that they're wrong, but in requiring them to explain why they believe or think the way they do as part of the give and take. Folks who say "I believe ABC or XYZ" without offering much in the way of "why" are assumed to not want to have a doctrinal discussion and are directed to the Prayer Forum or the Guitar thread <_<
Even threads that focus on particular scriptures can get pretty heated. I participate in a few of them myself and can manage to discuss the relative merits of different doctrinal positions and maintain the premise that the bible is "god-breathed" for the sake of the discussion.
Discussions in the doctrinal forum have caused me to rethink my position on more than one occassion, and have forced me to sharpen my position on others due to the questioning of others. It's part of what Doctrinal is.
I thought this was the DOCTRINAL SECTION?????................which to me, implies we discuss doctrine................
gee, i thought that's what i was doing. the three points in that sentence summed up what seemed to me to be the foundation for what you believe, i.e., your doctrine. it was logically flawed to me. so i asked you to clarify. but you don't see any blanks to fill in--which pretty much answers my questions:
"I believe what i believe because i believe it. don't confuse me with the facts."
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
32
13
21
14
Popular Days
Mar 28
15
Mar 26
13
Mar 29
12
Mar 19
12
Top Posters In This Topic
Oakspear 32 posts
Bramble 13 posts
TrustAndObey 21 posts
cman 14 posts
Popular Days
Mar 28 2007
15 posts
Mar 26 2007
13 posts
Mar 29 2007
12 posts
Mar 19 2007
12 posts
Bramble
I thought the discussion was about religious belief, not immorality and crime. Is the criminal robbing your house doing because of his religion? Doubtful. He's probably doing it to feed his drug addiction.
So, A Wiccan meditating to her goddess in front of her altar, and a Catholic praying the rosary to Mother Mary--these are immoral acts because they are not Christian( according to TWI type definition of Christianity-- I myself consider Catholics Christians) on par with robbery and other criminal activity?
Really, I think if you would look at even broad definitions of different religions, they all have similarities on rules/laws/beliefs about don't harm others.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
Is not religion defined, however loosely, as a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life? Belief that there is NOT a God is just as much a religion as the different religions whose belief is in different gods.. Be it as it may, everyone has a belief system they follow religously and it effects every part of their life.
To Hitler, his religion was all about forming a master race. Maybe to some that is immoral, to others, it was a religous decision that many in Germany followed willingly. And I'm sure most have read enough about how Hitler used Christian scriptures to back up his point.
But it all comes down to labels. Stereotyping everyone because they say they are 'Christian". When the word Christian is a man made term that has been used to describe everyone from Hitler to Mother Teresa. And I'm sure no one is going to put these two in the same boat. The same with Islamics. And that's just the tip of iceberg. Religion IS man made! That's not to say the belief in GOD is man-made, but any set doctrines/rules/beliefs concerning Him is man made (including the belief He is Not).
In the end, it really has nothing to do with religous labels, but really what everyone sees as the effect the person had which was a result of their belief, their relogion. The problem is, the moral (or immoral) question always arises, and without a set "truth" it is all subjective. Without a God, then truth and what is right or wrong, come only from your self made belief.
The same is true when proving or disproving someone else's religion. We view other's based on our own belief and religous system. And without a 'Truth' standard, there is no right or wrong religion, and as such, everyone can believe as they choose thus doing as they please, because it really is just your opinion. And Hitler's perfect race may just someday become a reality when they have enough of a 'higher power" behind them, be that nuclear weapons or some actual superhuman "being" and there is nothing wrong with that, at least in their religion!
No, the only way to prove a certain religion is similar to those records in the Hebrew Bible, where the Egyptians prayed to their God and Moses to His, and who actually won out.. Or Elijah and the prophets of Baal.. Unfortunately, most don't see these kinds of things every day.. And really, unless there is a need, you never will, because most people's minds are already made up on what they believe is Truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Suda
Some people believe in God, some do not. Each person made the decision for themselves because it was "right" in their heart/eyes. I have not read anyone on this thread who confesses a belief in God state that if someones disagrees with them, that person must have beliefs that are false/evil/doctrine of devils. We all get our moral compass from somewhere. I attriubute mine to God, attribute yours to whomever/whatever you wish.
Lots of evil has been wrought in the name of God. But that is no proof that there is no God. You either believe in Him, or you don't.
Suda
Edited by SudaLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
If it wasn't clear enough, I'm talking about religious beliefs. Some actions are just wrong. Somebody can certainly believe that it's okay to steal my stuff, but I can also believe that there's a law against it or believe that I'm going prevent him in some way.
Do you really think that this is what I'm saying, or are you taking religious equivalence to ridiculous ends thinking it makes your point? Again, I have the right to complain, and act if someone's beliefs encroaching on me and my life.Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Suda:
So what is the term "doctrines of devils" referring to in Bliss' post then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I agree with you there, Oak. I've said it before that our belief system interprets the world around us. When it comes right down to it people usually lean on personal experiences to back up why they believe the way that they do…And being a Christian I am also very passionate about the points of Bliss' posts – that Christianity is a PERSONAL experience. I cannot prove that Jesus Christ got up from the dead – but my faith came by hearing the word of Christ [Romans 10] and somehow a connection was established with my heavenly Father – and I have no doubt that Christ is alive! There are passages that speak of believers knowing whether Jesus' teaching is of God, of the Spirit guiding Christians into the truth, of God opening the believer's understanding. But all this is internal – subjective – and holds no weight in a debate [a little polemic poetry
].
Sorry – I know I'm no help to either side of this debate – I just enjoy exploring belief systems. I'm sure glad we all don't think alike…or believe alike…It's a fun thing to do to try and take a look at our own belief system through the eyes of another.
…with much love and confusion blowing your way, the Guesstimating Theologian.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
T-Bone, I have no beef with Christians like yourself, who see faith as a personal thing; I do have a problem with Christians, as well as Muslims and Buddhists and Pagans who insist that their personal experience applies to everyone.
If a belief that Jesus rose from the dead helps one to be a better person and is a comfort during the tough times, I'm all for it, I have no doubt that this works for the individual. When one insists that ones personal subjective experience negates my own, then I have a problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Suda
Oakspear,
Think you'd have to ask Bliss that question, I don't pretend to know how to read minds. But it DOES NOT seem to suggest that anyone (all inclusive) who does not believe in Him in the same manner that she does is following them.
Each to his own. It is personal. I just get tired of all the "bickering" about it that goes nowhere. And Bliss's post, nor Rottie Girls, nor others here seem to be to be proselytizing. Just stating their personal beliefs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
You missed my point entirely Oak.. It has nothing to do with proving 'my version' or 'my belief". You asked the question, why does someone have to be wrong?! That was my point..
There is a truth. What I think is truth? No.. But there is a truth and I doubt anyone has it 100%! And there is a right and wrong.
Very few believe there is no right or wrong. Thus no truth at all, and anything goes in life...
More believe there is an absolute truth, and their truth is what should rule the world..
However, a good majority just believe there is an absolute truth that they only know some of and they work towards knowing throughout their life.
And another majority think truth is subjective, and your right and wrong could be just as right as the other persons even though they don't agree with one another. And thus why does someone have to be wrong?!
Yes, belief in Santa is a religion. As I already mentioned the defintion of religion from the dictionary, "a set of beliefs that one aligns themselves to and that guides ones life." Religion doesn't just incorporate "spiritual' beliefs or beliefs that are really 'blind faith' assumptions, but also sets of moral 'laws" that define communities whether or not they come from some "higher power".
You can't say truth is subjective and then turn around and say some actions are just wrong. That's contradictory, unless you are referring to some actions being wrong only in your eyes! Thus subjective truth is nothing more than an oxymoron, and really there is no right or wrong except what you like to 'label' as such but it really doesn't exist. Can you prove it exists?
Or are you trying to say only 'some" truth is subjective? Maybe that truth which doesn't align with your truth is subjective?! What amount of truth then is subjective? And who decides on what truth is subjective?
You said that even with a God, truth is still subjective, if it was objective, then their wouldn't be the arguments that there are. However I beg to differ. The arguments there are have nothing to do with God's truth being subjective, the arguments there are is the subjectivity of their either 'being a God' or whether what God's non-subjective truth is. The question on what is God's truth is much different than saying that 'even with a God, truth is subjective'.. Two different things.
Do I believe in a God, sure! Do I consider myself a follower of Yeshua ben Yahweh? Sure I do.. However, my beliefs don't cause me to "persecute" others of differing beliefs. I don't consider myself to be any different than the rest of mankind, of which there are basically 2 groups, those who have a "higher power' for which they live for (be that a God, a nation, a wife, a job or whatever), and those who live for themselves. While some try to serve 2 masters, themselves or others, ultimately one wins out.. And honestly, that's what religion usually always boils down to despite the labels.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Truth is ever growing and changing and moving within.
Truth can be found in anything.
If we cannot change with the truth then we get stuck within ourselves.
And we are limiting that which is constantly revealing more and more truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
You know, I couldn't figure why all this hubbub over my post until I went back and followed the trail.....................
I was NOT responding to Greasy's first post. The ''is there a God? Answer: NO" post.
I was responding to Doowaps history lesson.
The people commiting evils, all in the name of God. This is why I said what I said.
I did not say ''that all ya'll believe doctrines of men or devils!!!!".
Geez.
Thankful I just believe in God and not man's words or religious doctrines that lead to all that UN goldly stuff (killing, torturing.....)
sorry if it through any of you off......................ya you OAK...................
.
Guess I shoulda used the """"""" button the first time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Well T & O, perhaps I did miss your point, as obscured as it was with strawmen that it was in danger of becoming a fire hazard. :B)
I can't say truth is subjective and then say some actions are wrong? Sure I can. Am I saying that only some truth is subjective? Yes I am.
The "truth" that I refer to is the "truth" that can't be verified. One person's truth is that they "know" that a god exists and communicates with them. There's no way to show that this is false, but there's no way to show another person another's inner feelings are true either. If all you're saying is that there is some "truth" that is not fully knowable or understandable
Okay, so what if we agree that there is some "truth" and a right & wrong, but if nobody has it 100%, or can have it 100%, then what's the practical difference between that and there not being an objective truth? Not much of one, if any.You keep bringing up the contrast between people doing what they want to do, and this "truth", but my point is that from an objective perspective, you can't tell which is which.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Bliss:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I understood that you were responding to the history lesson. You clearly believe that what you believe is in stark contrast to what the perpretators of the abuses in the history lesson believe(d). Perhaps I mentally combined what you and T & O where saying to come up with a misrepresentation of your position.
So you don't believe that I, who does not believe that Jesus is my savior and does not believe in the god of the bible, am following the "doctrines of men and devils"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Actually, a robust discussion is fun, doncha think? If we all agreed, it would be pretty d*mn boring.
I'll not be able to get back to the computer for another day or two, so if anyone responds, or wants to beat me up, I'll be back on Thursday
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
To be clear, I believe the question Oak posed was, "does the lack of belief in Santa make it a religion?"
The answer is no. The same way that atheism and agnosticism are not religions. Do atheists and angnostics have a religion as per your definition? Yes, but atheism and agnostisism are not them. That lack of belief has little to do with the way they act and whether or not they murder or steal or are just plain bastards. It would be more accurate to say that, for example, secular humanism was their religion (if that fits the person). It could be a number of other labels as well, but their lack of belief in a god has little to do with how they live and what guides their life.
It all comes down to faith, folks. That is why these arguements are so pointless. One claiming that their god is "God all Mighty" or the "creator of the heavens and the earth" or "the one true God" has nothing to do with whether those claims are true or not. Is there an ultimate truth? I believe there is. The thing is none of us will ever know until we get there, IF we get there. This simple fact is why in my opinion it is very logical and important to have a huge helping of humility when it comes to your personal belief in a god. You, me, the rest of them, everyone could be completely wrong. Unfortuantely, many views of religion (theistic) require the adherent to believe completely 100% that their god is God or the head God. It seems this makes it more about who's god is bigger and badder and truer and trying to prove that one way or the other, and not about how we live our lives and treat others, and for Christians that is what it is supposed to be all about...the Law of Love.
What is important, IMO, is how we deal with eachother, which is something that all religions address. Some in a not so appealing way, which is why many of us don't think those religions are right. They don't appeal to our sense of right and wrong. That is what it comes down to.
What we believe and what is truth only coincide if your unvarafiable claim of truth just happens to hit the lottery in the infinite number of other unvarifiable possibilities. It is like picking your "Big Game" numbers and claiming you have the winning ticket, even though there hasn't and will not be a drawing (at least not until we are all dead). Everyone would want to believe they have the winning ticket, but no one would really know. Hopefully it is YOUR office pool that wins. Good Luck!
Edited by lindyhopperLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
I don't think the God-head is anything like a head God.
We are acted upon by that which is spiritual, dead or alive.
What becomes is always equal to what we are and have already.
There is no chain of command spiritually, no orders given.
Being led or doing from the heart is God and Christ.
There is freedom, but abusing it will put one where he has by whatever it is.
In this mortal life here on earth any way.......
In the heavens there is no wrong turn.
To the pure all things are pure.
And yes I believe it can be done before we die.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Suda
Oakspear,
When you stated
it seemed you might have thought that others were ascribing "doctrines of men and devils" to your beliefs. I did not get that same impression from the posts. Yes, I have an opinion about the things posted here, or I would not have posted on the thread. Guess by posting I did enter the fray, so I could be considered to be bickering, also.As to
I guess our "definitions" of a robust discussion may be different. I enjoy discussing different points of view, but usually don't enjoy the type of discussion found in the Doctrinal and Politics and Tacks forums. Had I realized that is where I was posting, I may not have responded here. (I click on "View New Posts" and scan the topics, and don't usually pay much attention to the forum they are in. May not be wise, but still what I do.) I don't mind stating my point of view, but don't enjoy the back and forth of "prove it, prove it" when it is a belief that cannot be empirically proved or disproved. You either believe it or you don't. Nor do I wish to persuade others to accept my point of view on a forum. I state it, take it or leave it. Makes no difference to me. (In person-to-person relationships it could make a difference to me as far as to the type or depth of friendship I may pursue with someone. Some people's beliefs turn me off and I'd prefer not to spend time with them. Just to be clear, since the existence of God is the topic of this thread, I have good friends that are agnostic or atheist, but our beliefs are not the basis of our friendship and so it is a non-issue between us.)This is just a response, not an attempt to beat you up. I don't like the discussions where people beat up on one another. That's not how I define a "robust" discussion, and why I usually avoid such forums. I don't know how you define "robust" and am not trying to make any implication with my statement.
Hope you're having fun while away from GSC. Vacation? Business? Pleasure? Both? Whatever it is, hope it is a good time for you.
Suda
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
i could ask a million questions about the things you wrote, bliss, but let's just start with this one sentence.
it seems to me that you make these massive leaps of "logic" and phrase them as though they were statements of simple fact. how does "i then know he can do whatever he wants" follow "since i believe there is God?" aren't you making a pile of assumptions to get from one statement to the other?
the same with the next part. how does it follow that god can do WHATEVER HE WANTS so he wouldn't leave us without a witness? i don't see any logically progression here. not a lick. they're all just assumptions that you've decided are true--which is your business--but they're no more logically sound than "since i believe in radio, i know that concrete is my friend, and therefore, chickens are tasty and glum."
can you fill in the blanks for me?
Edited by sprawled outLink to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
I thought this was the DOCTRINAL SECTION?????................which to me, implies we discuss doctrine................
You were IN TWI Sprawled Out. I don't adhere to their doctrines, although I am still ''Christian''.
I am sure you know where I am coming from.
And you are right...It is my business what I decide is true.
You too. Isn't that cool?
Unless you want to truly discuss the scriptures, these kind of questions really have no benefit to either of us........except maybe someones ego........
so...........I really don't have any ''blanks'' to fill in for ya.
peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
This isn't a rule in the doctrinal section (actually, I think the only rules are that we pick up after ourselves and refrain from human sacrifice) but down here there's usually has traditionally been a little more discussion and challenging of beliefs than upsatirs. "Discussion" as in an actual exploration of different positions, "challenging", not as in telling someone that they're wrong, but in requiring them to explain why they believe or think the way they do as part of the give and take. Folks who say "I believe ABC or XYZ" without offering much in the way of "why" are assumed to not want to have a doctrinal discussion and are directed to the Prayer Forum or the Guitar thread <_<
Even threads that focus on particular scriptures can get pretty heated. I participate in a few of them myself and can manage to discuss the relative merits of different doctrinal positions and maintain the premise that the bible is "god-breathed" for the sake of the discussion.
Discussions in the doctrinal forum have caused me to rethink my position on more than one occassion, and have forced me to sharpen my position on others due to the questioning of others. It's part of what Doctrinal is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
gee, i thought that's what i was doing. the three points in that sentence summed up what seemed to me to be the foundation for what you believe, i.e., your doctrine. it was logically flawed to me. so i asked you to clarify. but you don't see any blanks to fill in--which pretty much answers my questions:
"I believe what i believe because i believe it. don't confuse me with the facts."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Doctrines don't have to be scripture based. Christian doctrines do, I guess, but others, not so much.
They can be more like ideas, world views, not anything chapter and verse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.