cman, you've gone to a topic that's not really dealt with much here, methinks. Or if it is, I've missed it.
Christianity, The Latest Version, tends to present this era of the One Body of Christ as an enviornment where everyone, every "member" is the same. Everyone will have the same spirit and love of God and as a result of Christ's redemption everyone will know God the same, function the same, and all see signs, miracles, wonders and you name it.
I don't think it's that way at all. An incendiary statement I know, but I'll try to offer an explanation.
All are loved of God, Christ died for all, and all can come to Christ and be saved. All Christians form the Body of Christ and God dwells in us all, in Christ.
The way this "Body" is described in the New Testament though indicates that each member will function differently. Everyone has a place, but everyone doesn't have the same place. Everybody doesn't do the same thing, have the same strengths or weakness, doesn't excel equally. In theory everyone could, but everyone doesn't. It's not a bad thing, it's the way it is and the way it ought to be, given the metaphor of a "body".
People will always say "I don't get it". About some things, maybe everything. I do, you do, we all do.
The job of each member is to make their own unique contribution. Religion tends to want to make us all sit up and bark the same way. It absolutely doesn't work that way. "Freedom" in Christ is usually defined in such a way as to limit it, not by what Christ has done but by a list of minimum requirements imposed on each individual.
I've found in Churches that think that way I see more false expectation, more fraudulent behavior. Courteous, nice behavior but well patterned, learned behavior. Let someeone say "I don't see God that way you teach, I don't get it', and it's equal to sacrilege. EVeryone is expected to feel good, act blessed and say hallelujah enough times at the right time. God blesses everyone the same way, equally, step up and show your stuff.
But I don't think that's the case. I tend to think it's the responsibility of everyone to share what they've got. Those who feel they have insight or understanding need to speak for that. It doesn't matter if others don't accept it because they don't see it every "working" that way. It's important that those who do speak about it and "hold forth" as it were. With the patience and love that a member in a body would show. Each does their part for the whole.
Well, I would have been, had I held any regard for your opinions. Sorry...
ADan,
Do I understand you? Well, damned if I know, fer sure that is. I think I have a feel for what you're about.
You always strike me as a thoroughly gentle soul with possibly a hint of the "peacemaker" in his DNA, maybe?
The kind of person that, when you're not around, the universal consensus is that you're a "really nice guy".
Sorta how I picture you anyway.
I'm still intrigued by your comment about "needing" God. That's one point where we seem to be on the same planet, but different worlds. I've always found God to be a quite useless accoutrement. Something one can pay obeisance to or not, but nothing's going to come of it one way or the other. Hardly the way one should regard the most powerful being in the universe, eh?
I've always found God to be a quite useless accoutrement. Something one can pay obeisance to or not, but nothing's going to come of it one way or the other. Hardly the way one should regard the most powerful being in the universe, eh?
My view is "of course I need Him." By Him all things consist. Worship comes out of recognizing that. Giving obeisance or obedience only comes out of that. Giving obeisance to a god "to get" (i.e. nothing or something is "going to come of it") is as useless with the God I know as it is with any other gods. As sincere as I was in TWI, that thinking crept in unawares. And it's human nature: we want to manipulate God, control Him. TWI was great at this: understand God (and His "promises") and you can control Him.... make demands upon Him. As you said, hardly the way one should regard the most powerful being in the universe. "Demand payment." Mountaintop checkbook. Likewise with worship. Doing it in self-interest is a little backwards.
But in the sense of "what good is it to acknowledge God?", I think Dawkins' view is mine as well, only I believe: it's respecting things as they really are. It's being honest. Denying reality, no matter how it makes us feel, is just not an option for Dawkins or for me.
Oh my Garth, whatever shall we do? Does this mean stoning is not cool anymore? There is more than one form of stoning, people mouthing off about it is another form of stoning. Ever see that old cop thing scared straight? I think that is what God was looking to achieve, that not working, the Jesus of the New Testament fit the bill, but how do we ever get rid off all the adultry? Maybe someone (perferably an atheist) should just lopp off Hugh Hefner's pee pee? think that might work? Maybe obedience was the pivotal point.
I think sky illustrates another relevant point to this discussion. Not so much the fate of Mr. Hefner's appendage but the seeming illogic of some biblical/religious concepts. Why is it that God has such a hard time creating beings who want to listen to Him? He got dumped in the garden, dumped coming out of Egypt, dumped by the northern kingdom, dumped by the southern kingdom, dumped by every other race inhabiting the area... And the answer is what, beat them into submission? His design was so bad that at least once He had to wipe the race out. Well, all but what, eight? And He promises to do it again.
There are factors beyond the scientific aspects of the discussion that figure into the thought process of becoming an athiest or agnostic. I certainly don't have all the answers, if the answers are even knowable, but I just don't understand how an all-powerful being with a view into the future could be, well, that short-sighted.
Unfortunately, Dan, that sort of answer only feeds the atheist and/or agnostic more reasons NOT to believe. It may sound good (in a humility sense) but all you're really saying is: "I don't know but, I know I'm right and you're wrong."
Marx, for example, wanted to wipe out religion. In his view, and I think Stalin's, religion would die of itself anyway, but why not hasten the process? Stamp it out. Many "enlightenment" and post-enlightenment thinkers would not have dreamed that religion would be such a big deal in the 21st century.
Just wanting to clarify,
many intellectuals during the enlightment believe that religion would be gone by now?
I hear Sweden is mostly atheistic/agnostic/generally non-believers. Europe apparently is far more secular than the U.S.
Is the move toward atheism a general trend in develeped countries?
I think sky illustrates another relevant point to this discussion. Not so much the fate of Mr. Hefner's appendage but the seeming illogic of some biblical/religious concepts. Why is it that God has such a hard time creating beings who want to listen to Him? He got dumped in the garden, dumped coming out of Egypt, dumped by the northern kingdom, dumped by the southern kingdom, dumped by every other race inhabiting the area... And the answer is what, beat them into submission? His design was so bad that at least once He had to wipe the race out. Well, all but what, eight? And He promises to do it again.
There are factors beyond the scientific aspects of the discussion that figure into the thought process of becoming an athiest or agnostic. I certainly don't have all the answers, if the answers are even knowable, but I just don't understand how an all-powerful being with a view into the future could be, well, that short-sighted.
-JJ
These are rather dark times JJ, in the history of God's creation. Lest you victimize God to much, dont forget killing and murder and rejection go on everyday on planet earth here while he is absent. Oh and with respect to who gets "dumped", people everywhere are continuously "dumping" there spouses a biblical no-no.
There is a rather king size view in one of Jesus parables, where he describes the sinister plan. The plan is not just to reject and dump him. The plan is to murder you know who and take over everything he has. Moreover, the reason for being here, was never to "commit sin", thus the consequences for the action cannot not be attributed to you know who.
You make the argument that based upon democracy, you know who is a bad guy and should be voted out of office. You know who, father and son only get two votes, which on the face of things seems a tad unfair. The compliment is, that he went with it anyway, based upon his capacity for righteousness. Your not left without explanation for what you said. Turns out in the book of Job there was Job's three friends and a fourth guy named Elihu who went into one of the best philosphical arguments ever to assist the suffering Job. Elihu (a term meaning God) was yet another orator who was predictive of the coming of Christ.
You might do well to take a peek Gen: 2:4 for "these are the generations and the earth when..." who are the these? Well the ones listed of course. The created beings some of who were in heaven looking into the things going on in earth. Yep, the angels desired to peek into these things.
It is not outside the realm of any authority, wether God's, the United States or China, to set up priniciples of law to be followed. God does allocate a higher bad value to things like telling lies and adultry, which if one thinks about logically are very sound. Man's law is vastly larger than God's simply because it tolerates liars and adultery. (Larger in terms of complexity) Thus the Almighty wins again. Not only does the Almighty win, but Judeo-Israeli law provided what is the first soceity with a basis of laws incorporating concepts like "trespassing" "ordinances" "laws" and "iniquity". Other societies simply saw the fortutious nature of what God had done and ripped him off so to speak.
Atheists typically love to rant about "The Exodus" and Leviticus. Yet, according to Paul's own admission, it is only apparently not understood. To which David echoed terrific thoughts, as too what liberty is there when understood properly. One good is example is "bearing false witness" which does not imply not telling the entire story when some control freak is trying to subvert you; rather it implies bearing a load of untruth against another to damage someone who is innocent and even those who are not innocent. Why? Because its not up to man to tell lies to whip up storms against those whom they perceive are blamable. Of course you really can't explain this to people without some getting it wrong. Why? Because people who dont care will always cherry pick and use it as a license to harm others that is why. So the law must take on a certain type of veracity for people to get it. This flaw is not God's but rather man's diminishing respect for him on how to apply it.
Then there is the rants about clean and unclean animals for appetite. Even a vegetarian will point to the Genesis account for there particular twist. Moreover, it's pretty common knowledge that some people back then worshipped animals and thought that by eating a cat one might take on cat like qualities. Thus, you know who gets bashed again for trying to find a way through the mess. Interesting that in trying to find a way through the mess, we now know that consumption of pork and other "freebies" today, can cause cholesteral problems. Nope, God was simply trying to find methods of convience to deal with man's ignorance all the while knowing that down the road he would take punishment from mouths of people who need a cheap excuse for only they know what.
Ever wonder why the Almighty is so quite? They poison him if he does or doesnt that is why. That is one good reason. The other is we really have a good subset of values to work with, all we have to do is DO IT , to get more. Its good stuff, all the time.
Well, seeing that I'm polytheistic and know others who are ...not every god demands obedience, and not every god is jealous if a person should get to know another god. Which is probably why the Bible god seems unfriendly to pagans/Wiccans etc.
As to why some people are absolutely certain their god is the only god, or the right god, or are certain there are no gods at all and anyone who believes in such is deluded...I think people are different. What some might perceive about diety is not what another might perceive. Why that is so hard to figure out I don't know. People are different have different experiences adn influences.
I think we are physical beings with glimpses into the spiritual, perceptions and experiences vary, what's wrong with that?
I think we are physical beings with glimpses into the spiritual, perceptions and experiences vary, what's wrong with that?
Everytime you say something Bramble I empathize with what you are saying.
I remember when I was about 19, and after listening to all the VPW stuff. I would come across passages that VPW abused, and it put a knot in my stomach. It was like reading something somebody had stuck a fork into, and I couldnt get through it anymore, neither did I want to try. It was as if someone named VPW had made those words seem horrifyingly ugly because of VPW like abuse.
These are the inflicted wounds of a group named TWI. The news which does not seem good today is that tommorow they wont be wounds but be things that are being and can be transformed into something beautiful. Why? Because how many people on earth get to see how sinster some people can become by misabusing words? Not to many. You also get to look at life from the catbird's seat. If someone is shouting bible, they had better be able to make it sing the way it should. It's good business Bramble, for you and God to sort this out. Its good business for God to have people who understand what the requirements are in applying that bible.
Bramble, TWI gave me a good look into relgious application that was erroneous that I benefited by. One of my favorite examples is those who always quote "forsake not the gathering together of the saints" in an effort to controll activivites of those on the periphery. They always conviently forget the one in I John that says "you need no man to teach you" because of the Holy Ghost. It turns out Bramble that we can figure out more in our prayer closet than otherwise, which is good news. What about forsaking the gathering together? People can "gather" anywhere Bramble, like we are gathering here at GS to communicate. Now i don't that out of the bible saying not to forsake gathering, I do it because i enjoy talking to people like you. Gee , isnt this the way the bible is suppose to work, where things happen naturally? I think so.
You do one thing Bramble that no one else does. You always put philosophy, religion and non-religion to the personal application, as in what does it mean to so and so. That's good, because thats the test it should have, today. Discussing philosophy and theology in mental dynamics, is just pure intellectualism run amuck, and does little to satisify the needs of the person. I hesistate to paraphase what you are saying, because I dont want to step on your toes. If I do step on your toes, feel free to step on mine, its all good and part of what must be done, to communicate effectively.
cman's comment made me think of the one body example, which can be applied to across the board I think.
Some people may have insights and understanding that come to them in any form - learning, insight, actual events. Others, none.
Insisting that one person work to duplicate what another's learned and experienced will prove futile in this area. Geroge, saying to you, "try again, try harder, try it like this", is fine, to a degree if your interests are the ones being served. And everyone means well, right? Even the most boring repetitive rehetoric. :) But it may very well be a waste of time because putting you on my timetable and to my expectations is useless. So pestering other people is stupid.
My thought is - there's nothing "wrong" with how an atheist believes or feels. They may be wrong by what I believe to be true, limited in understanding but the truth is I am too in my own ways. Everyone is. It's completely normal that some won't come to the same place as I am.
When a Christian insists that another believe and do as they do and how they do - that's wrong. Everyone's place is in development and it's their own. Likewise humanity as a whole, within it's own collection, "body". It's everyone's job to bring what they have and contribute it, honestly and truthfully.
I think sky illustrates another relevant point to this discussion. Not so much the fate of Mr. Hefner's appendage but the seeming illogic of some biblical/religious concepts. Why is it that God has such a hard time creating beings who want to listen to Him? He got dumped in the garden, dumped coming out of Egypt, dumped by the northern kingdom, dumped by the southern kingdom, dumped by every other race inhabiting the area... And the answer is what, beat them into submission? His design was so bad that at least once He had to wipe the race out. Well, all but what, eight? And He promises to do it again.
There are factors beyond the scientific aspects of the discussion that figure into the thought process of becoming an athiest or agnostic. I certainly don't have all the answers, if the answers are even knowable, but I just don't understand how an all-powerful being with a view into the future could be, well, that short-sighted.
-JJ
Well put, JumpinJive, well put! This point of yours brings up a good portion of what I have against the Judeao-Christian-Islamic deity. Yes, I said, have against him.
I especially like the line by Sky of "There is more than one form of stoning, people mouthing off about it is another form of stoning." I almost fell off my chair LMAO at that one. Such a riot! ... Perhaps there is another form of stoning that Sky can perhaps relate to, more than he knows? ;)
When a Christian insists that another believe and do as they do and how they do - that's wrong.
It is wrong because that is not offering choice. If that Christian is right, others, if they are going to believe, must choose to believe. IMO you cannot really believe in Christ if you are not allowed the choice not to believe, no matter how much you say you embrace Christ...or to put it in other words, if you are not allowed the choice to discard Chrsitianity, you cannot truly believe in Him.
Of course, that applies to any religious belief.
there's nothing "wrong" with how an atheist believes or feels. They may be wrong by what I believe to be true, limited in understanding but the truth is I am too in my own ways. Everyone is. It's completely normal that some won't come to the same place as I am.
They may be wrong (or right), but not because of what you believe to be true.
Lifted up, my sentiments exactly. Choice is necessary. Christian doctrines differ. There are those who believe God has predetermined each choice, others don't believe that. But in either case, the person has to make the choice, in the end for it to be valid. "Heart", not at the point of a gun, figurative or otherwise.
In a sense though it seems that some choices are made for us by the lives we live, as a result of the choices we've made. The outcome of a series of events, actions and choices has a result, an outcome. One that may not be predictable from one side but that's reasonable once it's occured.
Matters of faith often include those outcomes that fall out of that normal flow of expectations. IOW, I may be faced with something that can't be explained in light of the causes and choices I've made alone. Something else" is implied or obvious and needs to be considered.
I'm having a tough time allowing for even the possibility of Christianity - or any other religion that I'm aware of - being true.
It seems to be that you can't have it both ways. (Yeah, I'm gonna get real black-and-white here for a minute) EITHER you live in a world that obeys the known laws of physics or you don't. You can't have a world that conforms to the laws of motion one minute and is immune the next.
How can we trust that the world will stay within it's well-greased grooves (to borrow a line from Steinbeck) if we also believe that God will allow us special dispensation if we pray to Him just right? I'm reminded of when the Grounds crew was praying for rain at HQ while the Way Builders were praying for sunshine to dry up the grounds for the ROA. Is this a reasonable way to think?
We expect gravity to work all the time. We expect the sun to rise every morning, But we want God to override any of those sort of processes if it seems to fit our needs. Cancer should be able to be stopped by an effectual prayer. The hurricane should veer away from our town if enough believers beseech the Lord in the proper manner (and the poor S.O.B.s in the town it DOES hit? ah, f'em).
The oft heard response to the concept of physical "laws" is that "Well, those are man-made laws!" Yeah, like religion ISN"T? Sorry to break the news to you, but MEN wrote down the books of the Bible, MEN translated it( a gazillion times and counting), and MEN have concocted the doctrines from it over the centuries. At least the writers were shrewd enough to have Moses get his 10 commandments down from the mountaintop where they were written by the very Finger of God - no P.I. or bad translation THERE!
Such a great metaphor! Having the Bible written by the very hand of God! I think that says a great deal about what we'd like The Bible to be. An unquestionable authority to refer to for all of life's questions. If only it were so...
Thats actually a really funny movie. Your right I dont have much experience in that stuff. Does this mean that you have participated in "stoning" yourself? Glad to make you laugh.
Many Christian doctrines seem to have no real choice other than another Chrisitan doctrine. To leave the one true truth/God/church usually involves dire consequences like hell or destruction. Evil lies right outside the door, so to speak. Whether other world religions have that aspect I am not educated enough to say.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
22
12
23
30
Popular Days
Oct 19
23
Oct 16
19
Oct 17
17
Oct 23
16
Top Posters In This Topic
sky4it 22 posts
cman 12 posts
Bolshevik 23 posts
anotherDan 30 posts
Popular Days
Oct 19 2007
23 posts
Oct 16 2007
19 posts
Oct 17 2007
17 posts
Oct 23 2007
16 posts
Posted Images
socks
cman, you've gone to a topic that's not really dealt with much here, methinks. Or if it is, I've missed it.
Christianity, The Latest Version, tends to present this era of the One Body of Christ as an enviornment where everyone, every "member" is the same. Everyone will have the same spirit and love of God and as a result of Christ's redemption everyone will know God the same, function the same, and all see signs, miracles, wonders and you name it.
I don't think it's that way at all. An incendiary statement I know, but I'll try to offer an explanation.
All are loved of God, Christ died for all, and all can come to Christ and be saved. All Christians form the Body of Christ and God dwells in us all, in Christ.
The way this "Body" is described in the New Testament though indicates that each member will function differently. Everyone has a place, but everyone doesn't have the same place. Everybody doesn't do the same thing, have the same strengths or weakness, doesn't excel equally. In theory everyone could, but everyone doesn't. It's not a bad thing, it's the way it is and the way it ought to be, given the metaphor of a "body".
People will always say "I don't get it". About some things, maybe everything. I do, you do, we all do.
The job of each member is to make their own unique contribution. Religion tends to want to make us all sit up and bark the same way. It absolutely doesn't work that way. "Freedom" in Christ is usually defined in such a way as to limit it, not by what Christ has done but by a list of minimum requirements imposed on each individual.
I've found in Churches that think that way I see more false expectation, more fraudulent behavior. Courteous, nice behavior but well patterned, learned behavior. Let someeone say "I don't see God that way you teach, I don't get it', and it's equal to sacrilege. EVeryone is expected to feel good, act blessed and say hallelujah enough times at the right time. God blesses everyone the same way, equally, step up and show your stuff.
But I don't think that's the case. I tend to think it's the responsibility of everyone to share what they've got. Those who feel they have insight or understanding need to speak for that. It doesn't matter if others don't accept it because they don't see it every "working" that way. It's important that those who do speak about it and "hold forth" as it were. With the patience and love that a member in a body would show. Each does their part for the whole.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Socks:
Sky4it thinks we need some Abigail and Bramble too sort this all out. Where are those two beauties when u need em? Eh? Eh is what they say in Canada.
peace socks peace, bramble she can make me dance good heavens ! Better than Leonard Skynard that girl has got it going. oh my.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
"Were you insulted George? "
Well, I would have been, had I held any regard for your opinions. Sorry...
ADan,
Do I understand you? Well, damned if I know, fer sure that is. I think I have a feel for what you're about.
You always strike me as a thoroughly gentle soul with possibly a hint of the "peacemaker" in his DNA, maybe?
The kind of person that, when you're not around, the universal consensus is that you're a "really nice guy".
Sorta how I picture you anyway.
I'm still intrigued by your comment about "needing" God. That's one point where we seem to be on the same planet, but different worlds. I've always found God to be a quite useless accoutrement. Something one can pay obeisance to or not, but nothing's going to come of it one way or the other. Hardly the way one should regard the most powerful being in the universe, eh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
anotherDan
nice guy / gentle soul
yeah, I get that a lot!
My view is "of course I need Him." By Him all things consist. Worship comes out of recognizing that. Giving obeisance or obedience only comes out of that. Giving obeisance to a god "to get" (i.e. nothing or something is "going to come of it") is as useless with the God I know as it is with any other gods. As sincere as I was in TWI, that thinking crept in unawares. And it's human nature: we want to manipulate God, control Him. TWI was great at this: understand God (and His "promises") and you can control Him.... make demands upon Him. As you said, hardly the way one should regard the most powerful being in the universe. "Demand payment." Mountaintop checkbook. Likewise with worship. Doing it in self-interest is a little backwards.
But in the sense of "what good is it to acknowledge God?", I think Dawkins' view is mine as well, only I believe: it's respecting things as they really are. It's being honest. Denying reality, no matter how it makes us feel, is just not an option for Dawkins or for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JumpinJive
Cute, Dan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JumpinJive
I think sky illustrates another relevant point to this discussion. Not so much the fate of Mr. Hefner's appendage but the seeming illogic of some biblical/religious concepts. Why is it that God has such a hard time creating beings who want to listen to Him? He got dumped in the garden, dumped coming out of Egypt, dumped by the northern kingdom, dumped by the southern kingdom, dumped by every other race inhabiting the area... And the answer is what, beat them into submission? His design was so bad that at least once He had to wipe the race out. Well, all but what, eight? And He promises to do it again.
There are factors beyond the scientific aspects of the discussion that figure into the thought process of becoming an athiest or agnostic. I certainly don't have all the answers, if the answers are even knowable, but I just don't understand how an all-powerful being with a view into the future could be, well, that short-sighted.
-JJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
anotherDan
My answer, of course, is:
Maybe it's we who are short-sighted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Unfortunately, Dan, that sort of answer only feeds the atheist and/or agnostic more reasons NOT to believe. It may sound good (in a humility sense) but all you're really saying is: "I don't know but, I know I'm right and you're wrong."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Just wanting to clarify,
many intellectuals during the enlightment believe that religion would be gone by now?
I hear Sweden is mostly atheistic/agnostic/generally non-believers. Europe apparently is far more secular than the U.S.
Is the move toward atheism a general trend in develeped countries?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
These are rather dark times JJ, in the history of God's creation. Lest you victimize God to much, dont forget killing and murder and rejection go on everyday on planet earth here while he is absent. Oh and with respect to who gets "dumped", people everywhere are continuously "dumping" there spouses a biblical no-no.
There is a rather king size view in one of Jesus parables, where he describes the sinister plan. The plan is not just to reject and dump him. The plan is to murder you know who and take over everything he has. Moreover, the reason for being here, was never to "commit sin", thus the consequences for the action cannot not be attributed to you know who.
You make the argument that based upon democracy, you know who is a bad guy and should be voted out of office. You know who, father and son only get two votes, which on the face of things seems a tad unfair. The compliment is, that he went with it anyway, based upon his capacity for righteousness. Your not left without explanation for what you said. Turns out in the book of Job there was Job's three friends and a fourth guy named Elihu who went into one of the best philosphical arguments ever to assist the suffering Job. Elihu (a term meaning God) was yet another orator who was predictive of the coming of Christ.
You might do well to take a peek Gen: 2:4 for "these are the generations and the earth when..." who are the these? Well the ones listed of course. The created beings some of who were in heaven looking into the things going on in earth. Yep, the angels desired to peek into these things.
It is not outside the realm of any authority, wether God's, the United States or China, to set up priniciples of law to be followed. God does allocate a higher bad value to things like telling lies and adultry, which if one thinks about logically are very sound. Man's law is vastly larger than God's simply because it tolerates liars and adultery. (Larger in terms of complexity) Thus the Almighty wins again. Not only does the Almighty win, but Judeo-Israeli law provided what is the first soceity with a basis of laws incorporating concepts like "trespassing" "ordinances" "laws" and "iniquity". Other societies simply saw the fortutious nature of what God had done and ripped him off so to speak.
Atheists typically love to rant about "The Exodus" and Leviticus. Yet, according to Paul's own admission, it is only apparently not understood. To which David echoed terrific thoughts, as too what liberty is there when understood properly. One good is example is "bearing false witness" which does not imply not telling the entire story when some control freak is trying to subvert you; rather it implies bearing a load of untruth against another to damage someone who is innocent and even those who are not innocent. Why? Because its not up to man to tell lies to whip up storms against those whom they perceive are blamable. Of course you really can't explain this to people without some getting it wrong. Why? Because people who dont care will always cherry pick and use it as a license to harm others that is why. So the law must take on a certain type of veracity for people to get it. This flaw is not God's but rather man's diminishing respect for him on how to apply it.
Then there is the rants about clean and unclean animals for appetite. Even a vegetarian will point to the Genesis account for there particular twist. Moreover, it's pretty common knowledge that some people back then worshipped animals and thought that by eating a cat one might take on cat like qualities. Thus, you know who gets bashed again for trying to find a way through the mess. Interesting that in trying to find a way through the mess, we now know that consumption of pork and other "freebies" today, can cause cholesteral problems. Nope, God was simply trying to find methods of convience to deal with man's ignorance all the while knowing that down the road he would take punishment from mouths of people who need a cheap excuse for only they know what.
Ever wonder why the Almighty is so quite? They poison him if he does or doesnt that is why. That is one good reason. The other is we really have a good subset of values to work with, all we have to do is DO IT , to get more. Its good stuff, all the time.
Edited by sky4itLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Well, seeing that I'm polytheistic and know others who are ...not every god demands obedience, and not every god is jealous if a person should get to know another god. Which is probably why the Bible god seems unfriendly to pagans/Wiccans etc.
As to why some people are absolutely certain their god is the only god, or the right god, or are certain there are no gods at all and anyone who believes in such is deluded...I think people are different. What some might perceive about diety is not what another might perceive. Why that is so hard to figure out I don't know. People are different have different experiences adn influences.
I think we are physical beings with glimpses into the spiritual, perceptions and experiences vary, what's wrong with that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Everytime you say something Bramble I empathize with what you are saying.
I remember when I was about 19, and after listening to all the VPW stuff. I would come across passages that VPW abused, and it put a knot in my stomach. It was like reading something somebody had stuck a fork into, and I couldnt get through it anymore, neither did I want to try. It was as if someone named VPW had made those words seem horrifyingly ugly because of VPW like abuse.
These are the inflicted wounds of a group named TWI. The news which does not seem good today is that tommorow they wont be wounds but be things that are being and can be transformed into something beautiful. Why? Because how many people on earth get to see how sinster some people can become by misabusing words? Not to many. You also get to look at life from the catbird's seat. If someone is shouting bible, they had better be able to make it sing the way it should. It's good business Bramble, for you and God to sort this out. Its good business for God to have people who understand what the requirements are in applying that bible.
Bramble, TWI gave me a good look into relgious application that was erroneous that I benefited by. One of my favorite examples is those who always quote "forsake not the gathering together of the saints" in an effort to controll activivites of those on the periphery. They always conviently forget the one in I John that says "you need no man to teach you" because of the Holy Ghost. It turns out Bramble that we can figure out more in our prayer closet than otherwise, which is good news. What about forsaking the gathering together? People can "gather" anywhere Bramble, like we are gathering here at GS to communicate. Now i don't that out of the bible saying not to forsake gathering, I do it because i enjoy talking to people like you. Gee , isnt this the way the bible is suppose to work, where things happen naturally? I think so.
You do one thing Bramble that no one else does. You always put philosophy, religion and non-religion to the personal application, as in what does it mean to so and so. That's good, because thats the test it should have, today. Discussing philosophy and theology in mental dynamics, is just pure intellectualism run amuck, and does little to satisify the needs of the person. I hesistate to paraphase what you are saying, because I dont want to step on your toes. If I do step on your toes, feel free to step on mine, its all good and part of what must be done, to communicate effectively.
Edited by sky4itLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
cman's comment made me think of the one body example, which can be applied to across the board I think.
Some people may have insights and understanding that come to them in any form - learning, insight, actual events. Others, none.
Insisting that one person work to duplicate what another's learned and experienced will prove futile in this area. Geroge, saying to you, "try again, try harder, try it like this", is fine, to a degree if your interests are the ones being served. And everyone means well, right? Even the most boring repetitive rehetoric. :) But it may very well be a waste of time because putting you on my timetable and to my expectations is useless. So pestering other people is stupid.
My thought is - there's nothing "wrong" with how an atheist believes or feels. They may be wrong by what I believe to be true, limited in understanding but the truth is I am too in my own ways. Everyone is. It's completely normal that some won't come to the same place as I am.
When a Christian insists that another believe and do as they do and how they do - that's wrong. Everyone's place is in development and it's their own. Likewise humanity as a whole, within it's own collection, "body". It's everyone's job to bring what they have and contribute it, honestly and truthfully.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Well said socks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
I especially like the line by Sky of "There is more than one form of stoning, people mouthing off about it is another form of stoning."
I almost fell off my chair LMAO at that one. Such a riot! ... Perhaps there is another form of stoning that Sky can perhaps relate to, more than he knows? ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
Not comparing George to a pig, of course, or anyone else for that matter.......
Never teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein, Mark Twain, or Winston Churchill
(unable to properly attribute)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
It is wrong because that is not offering choice. If that Christian is right, others, if they are going to believe, must choose to believe. IMO you cannot really believe in Christ if you are not allowed the choice not to believe, no matter how much you say you embrace Christ...or to put it in other words, if you are not allowed the choice to discard Chrsitianity, you cannot truly believe in Him.
Of course, that applies to any religious belief.
They may be wrong (or right), but not because of what you believe to be true.
Edited by Lifted UpLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thanks Oaks.
Lifted up, my sentiments exactly. Choice is necessary. Christian doctrines differ. There are those who believe God has predetermined each choice, others don't believe that. But in either case, the person has to make the choice, in the end for it to be valid. "Heart", not at the point of a gun, figurative or otherwise.
In a sense though it seems that some choices are made for us by the lives we live, as a result of the choices we've made. The outcome of a series of events, actions and choices has a result, an outcome. One that may not be predictable from one side but that's reasonable once it's occured.
Matters of faith often include those outcomes that fall out of that normal flow of expectations. IOW, I may be faced with something that can't be explained in light of the causes and choices I've made alone. Something else" is implied or obvious and needs to be considered.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
I dunno.
I'm having a tough time allowing for even the possibility of Christianity - or any other religion that I'm aware of - being true.
It seems to be that you can't have it both ways. (Yeah, I'm gonna get real black-and-white here for a minute) EITHER you live in a world that obeys the known laws of physics or you don't. You can't have a world that conforms to the laws of motion one minute and is immune the next.
How can we trust that the world will stay within it's well-greased grooves (to borrow a line from Steinbeck) if we also believe that God will allow us special dispensation if we pray to Him just right? I'm reminded of when the Grounds crew was praying for rain at HQ while the Way Builders were praying for sunshine to dry up the grounds for the ROA. Is this a reasonable way to think?
We expect gravity to work all the time. We expect the sun to rise every morning, But we want God to override any of those sort of processes if it seems to fit our needs. Cancer should be able to be stopped by an effectual prayer. The hurricane should veer away from our town if enough believers beseech the Lord in the proper manner (and the poor S.O.B.s in the town it DOES hit? ah, f'em).
The oft heard response to the concept of physical "laws" is that "Well, those are man-made laws!" Yeah, like religion ISN"T? Sorry to break the news to you, but MEN wrote down the books of the Bible, MEN translated it( a gazillion times and counting), and MEN have concocted the doctrines from it over the centuries. At least the writers were shrewd enough to have Moses get his 10 commandments down from the mountaintop where they were written by the very Finger of God - no P.I. or bad translation THERE!
Such a great metaphor! Having the Bible written by the very hand of God! I think that says a great deal about what we'd like The Bible to be. An unquestionable authority to refer to for all of life's questions. If only it were so...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Who believes all that? No one I know of.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Garth:
Thats actually a really funny movie. Your right I dont have much experience in that stuff. Does this mean that you have participated in "stoning" yourself? Glad to make you laugh.
Edited by sky4itLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Many Christian doctrines seem to have no real choice other than another Chrisitan doctrine. To leave the one true truth/God/church usually involves dire consequences like hell or destruction. Evil lies right outside the door, so to speak. Whether other world religions have that aspect I am not educated enough to say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Yeah there's quite a few religions in the world.
I think all will experience hell and heaven.
To be fair. Religion or no religion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
No, but I understand the culture, and appreciate the weird humor in it. As well as the music.
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.