online dating service
REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

 

     
Posted In Forum:
Home   login   MyForums  
Show ALL Forums  
 
 Author Thread: Your case for/against God.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 109 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 11/7/2009 8:09:12 PM
Message # 107 - Abby

Apologists for God(s) concerning his /her /its / their failure to deliver the goods sought by prayerful intercession invariably invoke the usual escape clauses....

It's not his / her / its / their will at that time.

The prayers were made with improper / selfish motives.

the diety'(s)' action's are unfathomable to mere mortals...but he / she / it / they must have had a good reason which the diety(s) is under no obligation to share with mere mortals.

The intercession was witheld to prevent a worse evil from happening.

The intercession was witheld for the sake of the spiritual growth of the person praying, or the person who is the object of the prayer.

The people who make these kinds of rationalisations presume to speak for their god(s) but their god(s) seem to be silent in their own defence.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 104 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 11/7/2009 2:57:52 AM
Re Message #103 - Countbli


I could pray to a milk jug and get the same results. Any prayer that doesn't get answered is not the will of the milk jug and any prayer that does get answered is the will of the milk jug.


Strange that you mention the god of milkjugs. I often pray to the milk jug god that the milk in my milk jug doesn't sour before it's use by date. Sometimes my prayers are answered...and sometimes not. I suppose I could pray to the refigerator god to help the milk jug god out....but i have learned by using scientific heuristic learning methodologies, that if i consistently close the refigerator door securely, and lower the refrigerator thermostat setting, that my prayers are answered more often than not. The only problem being that the freezer god sometimes turns the milk in the milk jug into an icy milkblock!
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 49 (view)
 
Conservative Bible Project...reforming that socialist Jesus.
Posted: 10/23/2009 3:30:42 PM

Please note this is not a *translation,* which would require going back to original texts and translating it into English.


arwen, I think you are right, though I think you may be incorrect concerning the possibility of translating the original texts.

The original texts are no longer extant. The only texts that are available for examination are translations of copies of copies of copies of recorded oral recollections passed on from generation to generation over several centuries. The best that can be suggested is that the earliest available copies of the original texts might be examined. The average online wikipediaist is usually not conversant in Hebrew, Aramaic or Ancient Greek.

This bunch of idealogue editors are intent on Bowdlerising the bits that don't sit well with their own politico / economic world view. A bold, and rather silly, but subversive exercise. Not even Hitler tinkered with the bible, to accord with the language and principles of National Socialism....maybe the politically conservative biblical censors have a little more chutzpa than Adolf did.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 62 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 10/21/2009 5:25:04 AM
Re Message #61 abby156


I will answer your last question about amputees. The miracles Jesus performed during his 3 and 1/2 year ministry were a fulfillment of messianic prophecy ( see Isaiah 29 as an example)


It would seem that the prophecy that Isiah 49 is referring to is the defeat of the Assyrians in a prophesised assault against the Israelites in Jeruselam by Sennacherib and his host. I could not elucidate any reference to a messiah, and more specifically to a messiah with miraculous healing abilities. it might be helpful if you would reference the verses in Isiah chapter 49 that supports your thesis.


He did nothing randomly


He (God) seems, according to his biographers to act consistently at times...and inconsistently at other times.....sometimes kind...sometimes cruel....like any absolute despot.....the lord giveth and the Lord taketh at his whim....that which doesn't have any reasonable explanation is sloughed off as "God moving in mysterious ways"....don't question the whys or wherefores....just accept, and have faith.


There is one case where Christ "restored" an amputee. In Luke 22 we see a disciple of Christs' striking off the right ear of a servant of the high priest. Christ restored the ear.


Luke 22: verses 49-51 are deliciously ambiguous about the nature of healing performed by Christ. The verses do not indicate that the servant's ear was "restored" to its original condition and position on the servant's head, merely that servant was healed. This could just as well have been achieved by rendering mundane first aid, as by a miracle....but miracles are much more interesting and impressive, and are more likely to make for better reading than bandaging a bloody head.


49When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" 50And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.

51But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.


All sorts of maladies have been alleged to have been healed by the supposed intervention of divine, supernatural agencies, for which there is no, as yet alternative explanation. Some of these claims have been proven to have been patently fraudulent, others may have a rational explanation, but not explicable by current scientific bio / technology. The microscope, stethoscope, and other scientific instruments have provided rational explanations for pathologies that were once assumed to have had supernatural origins. I think it may be safe to say, that improvements in birthing survival has had more to do with effective hygiene practices, and an understanding of the microbiology of sepsis than the efficacy of prayer.

Of the alleged miraculous healings attributed to god, there is one class of miraculous healing that is apparently conspicuously absent from human history and God's grace, and that is the regeneration of amputated human limbs. Certainly some reptiles, amphibians and crustacians are capable of regenerating limbs, does that mean that God favours cold blooded animals over hominidae???
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 132 (view)
 
Why do Non-Christians feel the need to press their anti-religous belief's on people?
Posted: 10/18/2009 2:27:07 AM
Reply to message #126 Ladytix


The reason people want to erase or disprove Christianity is that they don't want to hear they are doing something wrong.


That is a broad generalisation that has no basis in fact. Although it suits the mindset of many christians to take that viewpoint, and it sits well with the theological propaganda of that faith, however the same charge may be made, and made just as unconvincingly against people of competing theistic faiths.


They know deep down it is right, but are in complete disobedience and don't want any reminders of their wrong choices.


That is an unwarranted assumption....also without any basis in fact. There are many reasons why one may not give any credence to the christian...or indeed any other theistic faith position. Secular / atheistic people may be viewed as disobedient to the god(s) of many faiths by the believers of those faiths....but that is merely the viewpoint of the faithful....you, purportedly as a christian are disobedient to the god Allah, I take it that you would welcome criticism for your unreasonable disobedience to Allah's will?


Also misery loves company, they want others to remain lost too


This is a misconception, also happily put about by some christians and no doubt people of other faiths, that the non religious, the atheists etc are an unhappy miserable bunch, quite unable to function effectively without "god's grace" shining down upon them from the heavens above. I am no more "lost", with regard to christianity, than I am "lost" with regard to Islam, Jainism, Shintoism, Judaism, or animism etc....but if I were to choose a theistic belief system to follow...I find the old Norse gods very appealing...as a warrior....fighting all day in Asgaard....and wenching and drinking all night in Valhalla seems a much more interesting afterlife than any of the christian harps, halos and angels wings that Heaven has to offer. None the less...unfortunately there is no more evidence to support the existence of the Norse pantheon, than there is evidence to support the pantheon of gods, angels, cherubim and seraphim et al in Christian mythology, so I shall just have to be content with my present existence here on Earth.

As to others "remaining lost" better to find reason and make rational decisions based on the evidence, than to believe as a matter of blind faith, what one was indoctrinated with as a child. Some people outgrow the myths and legends of childhood, some do not. Although few people believe in the tooth fairy, the easter bunny and Santa Clause as they did as a child....somehow as adults many are happy to perpetuate the myths for their own children, knowing that it is a fraud. I suspect that same may also be true of some theists also in respect of their faith. If I am lost to a mythology that is not all that benign, I am happy not to be found.


Very sad, but those who have the Spirit of God and follow see things through God's eyes.........as there really are!


Those who believe that they have the Spirit of God and follow, see things through the eyes of the sacred text writers and the doctrines of their faith, as interpreted by their faith's leaders (past and present), to do otherwise often in the past one might have ended up on a heretic's pyre. Today...heresy in some faiths is still a capital offence. One day however, you may come to understand, that the only eyes that matter are Odin's...but as it is also a banning offence to preach exclusivity of truth....I suggest the possibility that the evidence, for Odin's eyes are as convincing as the evidence for the eyes of the Judeo / Christian god.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 89 (view)
 
Ex-atheists?
Posted: 10/14/2009 2:30:42 PM
Re Msg:87 by scorpio mover

You and RDtoo seem to have in common the tortuous torture of the English language to prove dubious points.

Having a passion for something does not mean that one is religious in the most common sense of the word, and a collective of people who share a passion for something, does not necessarily mean that they are part of a religion or partaking in a religion in the usual sense of religious, which means belief in a transcendant reality or supreme being. I doubt that catholic girls, or jewish girls, or protestant girls would confuse their favourite boy band with the diety that they worship at church or synagogue, so why try to make the rather silly case that boy bands are religious idols??

One way of examining whether something is a religion is to look at its attributes. (am indebted to http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/ for the comparative analysis)

Religious Attribute..........................Religion........................Atheism

Belief in God(s)...................................Yes..................................No

Prayer ................................................Yes..................................No

Churches / temples / Mosques.............Yes.................................No

Holy Book / Scripture..........................Yes.................................No

Priests / Religious leaders -heirarchy....Yes................................ No

Belief in the supernatural (including
............................angels/devil ).............Yes................................No

Miracles.................................................Yes................................No

Afterlife..................................................Yes................................No

Holy Wars...............................................Yes...............................No

Heaven / Hell..........................................Yes...............................No

Lifestyle restrictions (dress, diet,............Yes..............................No
marriage etc etc.)
Belief without evidence (faith as a...........Yes...............................No
virtue)
Belief despite conflicting evidence..........Yes................................No

Supernatural origins of universe..............Yes...............................No
and/or humans
Murderous fundamentalist extremists......Yes..............................No
(who are so, based on their religious
convictions)

Annoying street / doorstop preachers.......Yes..............................No

Belief in an immortal soul...........................Yes..............................No

Regular ritual, ceremonies, acts of..............Yes..............................No
worship, liturgy,

Belief in sin (original or otherwise)...............Yes.............................No

Blasphemy....................................................Yes............................No

We are god's chosen people...........................Yes............................No


Here following are a few websites that debunk the silly notion that atheism is a religion.


http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/atheismreligion.html

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm

http://www.skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia37.html



My favourite quotation concerning the "Atheism is a religion" phurphy...is....

"Atheism is to religion what bald is to hair colour"
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 9 (view)
 
Atheist's and Islam
Posted: 10/10/2009 2:36:35 PM
In answer to the OP

There are probably many reasons for the apparent lack of debate between atheists and muslims vs the apparently vocal debate between atheists and christians. I say apparent, because it is likely that most atheists...and most christians don't give a hoot what the other thinks or believes...and just go about their lives oblivious of or indifferent to the beliefs and practices of each other.

In western countries, many atheists are former christian theists, and relatively few are former muslim theists. Although atheists who are former christians have no greater belief in muslim mythology than they do christian mythology, they do however in the main, have a greater familiarity with christian mythology than they do muslim mythology, and therefore may be more inclined to dispute the content of sacred christian texts than sacred muslim texts.

As far as I can understand, christians don't have the equivalent of the muslim fatwa, so it is probably safer for non christians to challenge the tennets of the christian faith than it is to challenge the tennets of the muslim faith. Many muslims take their fatwas seriously, and sadly, a number of people of different faith positions have died as a consequence of fatwas being executed.

Some people do have the courage to take islam head on...but often they live life as a fugitive from fanatical religious persecution and retribution. Below is a link to an interview between Taslima Nasrin a Bangladeshi feminist writer and Kerry O'Brien on "Lateline" ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) TV (1995).

http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/articles/taslima-nasrin-writer-trial
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 49 (view)
 
11:11
Posted: 9/14/2009 2:00:43 PM
A Sequence of date/time numbers of itself only has the power that we choose to give it. Some will superstitiously infer some meaning from them, and in so doing may influence behaviours which may possibly result in the predicted outcomes coming to effect for some who have a belief of such things. Then again, predicted outcomes may be quite coincidental to the beliefs held to. Either way, someone will make a buck from the superstitious and incredulous.

eleven:eleven am was the moment in time that the First World War ended. Think of how many lives might have been saved if the armistice went into effect a day or two earlier.

Vancer ^^^^^^ Nicely put..... perceptions surrounding supposedly magical effects...tend to follow from magical thinking, rather than magical causation.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 246 (view)
 
Biblical inaccuracies/contradictions
Posted: 8/11/2009 7:04:48 AM
Message #245
A_theist

It is not required that you agree with my view. I did show you that rationally from my point of view the Bible is the inerrant word of God.


A mad man may may offer plausible, reasonable explanations of events from his own point of view.....just that his point of view may not be consistent with the the point of view of those who don't share his pathology.

Message # 246
Khyrene

The difficulty with addressing issues of biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility, is that apologists for biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility respond to criticisms of the bible, by the application of a circular kind of argument.....even in the face of apparent contradictions, inconsistencies, and factual errors.

This issue is not confined to christians...it is also an affliction shared by other faiths.

Such apologetics follow variations of the sequence outlined below.

The Sacred text affirms that it is the inerrant / infallible word of god (Initiate quote-fest of passages from the appropriate sacred texts)

(stated explicitly...or implicitly) God, being omnipotent, is incapable of error

The Bible is the inspired word of god - (round two of quote-fest of selected passages from sacred texts continues where round one finishes off...or reprises quotes from round one) which the adherant embraces as an act of faith, because that is what their faith requires of them as a believer)

Conclusion: The Bible is inerrant / Infallible

rinse and repeat.

Message #244
Driven2think

^^^^^My man, you went to a lot of work answering my post with your aplogetic gymnastics but the bottom line is that no inerrant God would allow ANY errors in a book that we are to put our trust, faith & belief in; a book that was, as the story goes, created for us.

To ascribe a mess of a book like the bible to an infallible omnipotent God is an insult to such a being.


Your argument is not logical.....an infallible, omnipotent God...is free to incorporate any errors, factual inaccuracies, contradictions and inconsistancies, that he / she / it / they wish in their sacred comic books / intergalactic soap opera scripts, simply because they choose to...it's their universe after all (But meh...I'm a pastafarian....and the noodley one's recipe book of life can never be wrong even if the recipes are mistranslated...and incorrectly interpreted by those perfidious bechemal sauce heretics!!!!)
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 35 (view)
 
Do Jews, Christians and Muslims All Pray to the Same God?
Posted: 7/18/2009 7:39:06 AM
#34


Tim was saying in Islam their God is distant, not near, not a loving principle, he was an absolute authority who could command a caravan be attacked and the women raped


As opposed to the Xtian god....who is near enough to observe a caravan being attacked and the women raped....but choses not to intervene??? I am not certain that divine neglect is any more morally superior than capriciously compounding evil.


Tim Staples sells his talks.


You have that right.....whether he has not taken vows of poverty as one would if they were in holy orders is unclear...as is how much goes to him...and how much goes to the church.


...Fees: Costs include an honorarium for the first talk (plus 15 minute Q&A session) of $1250 plus travel expenses. The honorarium for each additional talk given that day is $800...
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 140 (view)
 
Reincarnation in the Bible
Posted: 7/17/2009 1:49:54 PM
re message #139


It was just such a good read, and so imaginative, that many believed it must be true.


The same also may be said of many sacred texts

I also was and am still an avid reader of ancient Greek, Roman and Norse mythology, finding them very entertaining in a pantheistic days of our lives kind of way. I was quite a religiose Anglican in my earlier years, looking at the incredible goings on of Greek, Roman and Norse gods, goddeses, and other divine and semi divine beings as being altogether too fantastic to be real. It took me to adulthood to realise, that the Abrahamic faiths are of the same mythological genre of literature. Reincarnation and rebirth seems to be a common theme in many religions and cultures....that it is a commonplace notion, does not mean that there is any factual basis for the belief, just that there is a desire to have a better life, than the one we are living.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Would You Call The Flood Of Noah Euthanasia?
Posted: 7/14/2009 2:13:22 AM
message #5


<div class="quote">Where does it say Countibli that a woman must marry her rapist?

Meh....I'm a secular humanist.....but finding out the biblical reference to the judaic law on such things was but a few keystrokes away....

Look up Deuteronomy 22:28


<div class="quote">Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New King James Version)
28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

It seems the Judaic laws were concerned more with the offence given to the father, than the father's daughter, for reducing his daughter's eligibility to marry someone more desirable to the fortunes of the family. What kind of dowery would tainted goods attract??? I guess a rapist who preys upon a married woman...would presumably be stoned to death, as an adulterer. Presumably a woman who was not a virgin when she was raped was the cause of no economic loss to the father, therefore no compensation could be demanded of the sexual offender. It seems that the victim of the assault is not the woman, but the father....what an interesting cultural concept, but not so surprising if women are treated as property...either of a father or a husband...or of a rapist who is good for the 50 shekels of silver : S


<div class="quote">As giver of life, and master, he can decide on strong action, but would have preferred to die in their place, but this could not be done, until Roman days.

I find this a remarkable apology on behalf of god. Are you telling me that an omnipotent, omniscient god could not take "strong action" any time he/she,/it/they chose to do so, and could not have died for the sake of humanity at any time, prior to , or even after Roman days???


<div class="quote">Would you like to live in a world without the flood and Noah?

Except as a biblical allegorical narrative (the flood and Noah)...we ARE, living without the flood and Noah, just that some people like the sunday school narrative a lot. Who cannot love such a story...after all it's got cutesey animals walking two by two into an incredible tardis ark. Pity about the unicorns though...they seemed to have missed the boat ride. : (


<div class="quote">Other gods are said to have made people, and death is part of life, but people don't seem to think bad of that.

This is a fallacious tu quoque argument. It's like saying...hey guys...why are you giving my god such a hard time Huh???....there are other gods just as bad...and even worse than my god, and you don't get on their backs about it!!! This line of faulty reasoning doesn't establish that your god is a good and just god.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Would You Call The Flood Of Noah Euthanasia?
Posted: 7/10/2009 1:35:59 PM
Something else, if the events actually happened as stated. I would call it brutal, murderous, egoistic stupidity.

But as the events as stated were a bit of tribal propagandising, by way of allegorical mythmaking....I would call it brutal, murderous, egoistic stupidity.

It worries me that your train of thinking...i daren't call it logic, would suggest that innocent minors would be better dead than living in a culture without redemption. It doesn't seem far from the kind of reasoning that would have the religiose burning heretics in order to save their immortal souls from their heretical beliefs.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Who are the Djinn?
Posted: 6/28/2009 2:37:30 PM
Message #1


do you think that those beings that portrayted themselves as fairies, gnomes and elves in the medieval days are those same beings that are portraying themselves as little, grey bug-eyed beings from outer space simply because they are molding themselves to fit the scientific paradigm of the age? Could it be that these so-called aliens are are the same ancient companion race to mankind.... the djinn?


Allmost anything is possible.........but the degree of probability needs to be weighed by the evidence. Every mythology has its "good guys" and "bad guys" to explain the universe within that mythology....be they prehistoric.....or post modern. Just as gods evolve with the evolution of human cultures, so do their underlings and minions.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 25 (view)
 
Lack of tithing=economic diseaster
Posted: 6/20/2009 7:31:25 AM
GM is a company set up for profit. If we believe that this should be applied to all non-profit organisations, then we have to do the same for all charities, such as Cancer Research.


There is no requirement for all charities to be required to undergo chapter 11 bankruptcy produres. Non-prophet charities should be exempt of course!

2hi-iq-4u was only suggesting that churches might follow GM's loss mitigation model.....he was making no suggestion that ALL non-profit organisations should chapter 11, that was a nice rhetorical flourish all of your own. It was nice of you to include Cancer Research among the list of endangered charities...threatened by your proposal. Unless you are suggesting that Cancer research, is more a matter of faith healing than evidence based scientific research.

I think 2hi-iq-4u might be suggesting, tongue in cheek, that the profitable churches liquidate the unprofitable parts of their operations....how profitability may be determined I don't quite know...attendances at services....conversions to the faith....congregation enlargement....revenue inwards....amount of influence exerted on decision makers and the broader community.....number of saints beatified....the wealth accumulated by key personnel in the church heirarchy....they could all be factors for consideration.

Some churches have subsidiary functions, some of which undoubtedly contribute to the common good of the community, that may not be denied....but churches exist for the propogation, and dissemination of the faith that founds them, that is their main raison d'etre...not all churches and not all aspects of ecclesiastical enterprises are necessarily for the common good, and may actually be harmful to the community.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 47 (view)
 
Why do Christians take away the personal name of God?
Posted: 6/18/2009 4:49:24 PM
messge # 48

Egads! My dear God John...for we are all gods....did ye no' say so???


In the old testament it is said "ye are gods".. jesus himself endorses that, so i guess we are all gods
I didn't realise that christians were polytheists....I always thought that christians were monotheists...(somehow doing a razzle dazzle in explaining that the trinity is one instead of three....but I digress.) I wonder what Yahwe would make of your claims to being a divinity??


Since god and jesus are one why cant i call jesus god,
Um....God and Jesus, according to christian trinitarian doctrine as I understand it represent 2/3rds of one.....the remainder of the fraction consisting of the holy ghost (spirit). The Holy ghost may be wondering why you have been neglecting him /her /it /them in the equation! As was pointed out by TMF....the biblical reference to God and Jesus being one, may have more to do with their collective PURPOSE, than their NUMERICAL character of being fractions of one supernatural entity. However...if you have a one track mind on the matter....do continue going around and around in circles with that notion.


Too many people say we cannot get to be gods. Well if we spent 40 days fasting for example please dont misquote that or spent 8 hrs praying to god per day and were faithful in all the principles of god, dont u think that we would be pretty much in tune with god.
I am beginning to smell the taint of salvation by works in the ritual of fasting and prayer in your comments......salvation is through God's grace....which he offers or denies at his own whim. It cannot be assumed that a life spent in fasting and prayer will have any greater prospect of earning salvation, than using to positive benefit the gift of life that God has apparently deigned to give us. I am beginning to understand your motivation in spamming this forum with your pious posts.....you seem to be hankering for a piece of the divinity action. However.....you should take note....for the sake of your eternal soul, the Gospel according to Mathew....wherein, it is said that "The last will be first, and the first will be last". That you may be assuming that you...by your very "godly behaviour" will earn a front pew in God's church(with the rest of the 139,999) during the tribulation, but it doesn't necessarily follow that you will in fact do so. Given the numerical odds of your competition....the probability of being among the 144,000 from a starting gate of billions....all I can say is....good luck.


Dont call me princess you heathen.
I think TMF may have referred to you as "princess" becuse you seem to be a little precious about yourself...and you appear to have more than a little sense of entitlement....but I may be mistaken....I think that you are the absolute prince of piety. You seem to reserve to yourself the right to use disparaging remarks, when challenged by those who question the rationality of what you are propounding.....hardly a godly behaviour I guess.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 46 (view)
 
What Do You Think--Should This House Be Cleansed?
Posted: 6/18/2009 8:53:37 AM
Message #45


In christ we have no need for pagan rituals we can go where we want, when we want, inspite of other weird beliefs or events


I hope you keep that thought in mind when you next go strolling through a minefield....as I understand it....those who walk in Christ in Iraq or Afghanistan are just as likely to be blown up by an EOD as those who don't walk in christ. The amputee wards in military and VA hospitals are probably well populated with christian soldiers who's prayers for surviving their tour of duty in one piece went unanswered.

The "cleansing" of houses by ritual....has probably no greater affect than any other kind of supestition, but if it has the placebo effect of putting one's mind at rest, then there is probably little harm in it...unless the ritual involves harm to animals or humans.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 20 (view)
 
Pray at the Pump? Does God Really Care about the Mundane?
Posted: 6/18/2009 8:09:57 AM
^^^^^^^


I dislike it when people quote me: unless its positive, please dont quote me. I find i am always misquoted.


Brother John you tend not to quote directly from other people's posts...perhaps you don't know how to...or choose not to, but you rarely seem to resist the temptation of interpolating your own value judgements concerning other's motivations and lifestyle choices, inimical to your own BAC (Born Again Christian) world view.

The forums are not mutual agreement societies where fallacious and illogical dialectic is just taken as read and allowed to stand unchallenged. If you make a logically insupportable (aka dumbass) comment...then I and others will question the validity of what you are saying. I personally don't take too greatly to being preached at by those who, with self proclaimed righteous piety, proselytise that their brand of mythology as being the one and only brand of mythology that has any value...but then that may be just me.

As to god lotto...I was referring to the probability that God would answer one's prayers and fill one's fuel tank with cheap fuel.....and my remark concerning the devil looking after his own.... was making the observation that the wages of sin, also include the wherewithal to pay for the gasoline that fills a Mafia Don's gas tank...unless of course you are suggesting that God also answers the prayers of penitent and impenitent crime bosses.


be not deceived because they have a little bit of money, something u worship i bet:
So...you are a problem gambler?? I would never have thought a good pious christian such as yourself would be a betting man....but then I guess Gambler's Anonymous is as patronised by all manner of sinners, be they christian or heathen. You may presume to make the error of assuming what I do or don't worship, without having any idea of who I am. But I'll humour you.... you are quite incorrect.....I have no idea of whether you are actually a gambler or a gambler in remission...or a total abstainer from gambling, it is the kind of value judgement that you seem to be happy to apply to others though, even if you do refer to it as being "fleshly".


Where is the mafia now that you have glorified
How do you impute that my comment was glorifying the mafia???? I merely used the example of the mafia...contrasted by the righteous poor.....to point out that the sinner is just as likely to have the $$$ to fill his fuel tank...and that the righteous poor....are just as likely to lack the $$$ to fill their fuel tank with gasolene, regardless of the amont of bended knee earnest praying that they might do. Whether the Mafia boss...has a downside to their kind of life...is immaterial as to whether or not they have the wherewithal to pay for their fuel, regardless of the state of the POL commodities market.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 19 (view)
 
Pray at the Pump? Does God Really Care about the Mundane?
Posted: 6/17/2009 11:52:06 PM
The hand of God, playing with the oil prices???....now tell me is God also responsible when oil prices go through the roof as well??? The oil producers are just as happy for God to send the price up....and at the same time enable buyers to have sufficient monetary reserves to pay a premium price.

In the arena of economic supply and demand, the invisble hand of the market determines the price of commodities....at least Adam Smith seemed to think so in his work, The Wealth of Nations.....perhaps if intercessory prayers were directed to Mammon instead of the Big Fella upstairs....consumers may possibly get a better deal.

In a capitalistic system...the market is god...and god is the market.


the closest god gets to gasoline prices is to give you the means to pay for gas IF you walk a close walk with god and do things that are not illegal, like deal coke, or cut corners on building supplies I.E. leaky condos in vancouver.


I doubt that your average mafia don, ever has difficulty paying for his gasoline.....but then again, I suppose the devil looks after his own.....while the poverty stricken righteous take their chances with God Lotto.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 32 (view)
 
Today I met an...Angel?
Posted: 6/15/2009 4:22:47 AM
Who knows the actual truth of the story? It does sound like a very inspirational example of glurge, encouraging the faithful in offering praises, hallelujahs and amens.

The OP is no longer a member of POF, so it's a little difficult to get a verification of the story. It does bear some resemblance to the kind of urban myth that often finds its way to the Snopes web-site.

for a somewhat similar story refer to "In The Cards" http://www.snopes.com/glurge/welfarecard.asp

I sometimes get these kind of stories from well meaning, but generally uncritical acquaintances who are inclined to spam such stories forward to "true friends" who will themselves forward them on to 3-10 (or whatever number recommended in the spam e-mail) "true friends" lest the chain break, and some poor starving child in Ethiopia will miss the 1cent per e-mail forwarded donation to be made by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (or some other charity).

The glurge seems to smell strongest when the agency for the amazing outcome of the story rests with angels and other supernatural entities. Random acts of kindness may not perhaps be frequently experienced in day to day life by individuals, however, they do happen frequently enough in the larger population not to be an uncommon event. If one tenth of the population of the USA was to experience 1 random act of kindness each year, there would be some 30.6 million random acts of kindness per year. As has been observed earlier, what we seem to have in this story is a random act of kindness from one individual to another. Draw what conclusions you will from the ethical and moral implications of the narrative told by the OP, even if the story itself may be apocryphal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_act_of_kindness

For an explanation of glurge
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-glurge.htm
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 65 (view)
 
Do you believe in Ghosts?
Posted: 6/15/2009 12:47:16 AM
Message #63

All that was necessary in responding to the OP was a Yes, No, or Undecided, and an explanation supporting why you arrived at your conclusion. A regurgitation of aspects of some particular faith based mythology was unnecessary.


Do you believe in Ghosts?


I have no belief in ghosts, for much the same reason that I have no belief in a number of other paranormal phenomena, namely, a lack of credible evidence supporting the existence of such phenomena. There is however a body of evidence supporting naturalistic explanations for some paranormal phenomena, and where there are presently no known naturalistic explanations....it is entirely possible that such a naturalistic / scientific explanation may be forthcoming as knowledge about the universe and how it works increases. There is also a body of evidence demonstrating that some allegedly paranormal phenomena are in fact fraudulent contrivances designed to take advantage of the gullible. I am therefore, pretty much a ghost skeptic.

As to the alleged existence of ghosts, it may perhaps be a matter of perception and belief rather than any objective existence. "I'll believe it when I see it" is usually the utterance of a skeptic...(usually with the notion that what is expected to be seen is unlikely to be what is actually experienced). "You'll see it when you believe it" is usually the utterance of a proponent of a faith based proposition, with the rider that if the promised phenomena fails to materialise, it was because one didn't have sufficient belief. Perhaps people who claim to see ghosts are people who have at least an unconscious belief in the positive existence of ghosts, and may interpret perceived phenomena in terms of the schema that they already have in their own mind about seeing or experiencing ghosts.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Proud of your own humility?
Posted: 6/13/2009 2:28:40 AM
It is said that pride goeth before a fall. If one is proud of one's own humility, then the fall that one goeth for such pride will probably be minimal.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 103 (view)
 
Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted?
Posted: 6/10/2009 1:52:55 PM
Message 101


Problem is that there are people who are very bigoted against the copying of Bible Verses on POF


I don't have any problem people quoting verbatim, selected passages from sacred texts, provided that they are pertinent to supporting or detracting from a proposition being introduced into the debate in a thread discussion.

I have quoted verses from the bible to support my own arguments on bible topics, as a way of dealing with the absurdity of some theistic propositions....and have entered into spirited (yet generally civil) debate with proponents of alternative views.

What I do find irksome is when individuals use the forums as a platform for proselytising their own faith with quotations that are irrelevant to the topic being discussed, and with irrelevant commentary interspersed with threats of dire consequences in the afterlife if we rebellious benighted sinners refuse to accept this or that diety as our spiritual overlord.

If people do choose to introduce biblical quotations into a debate / discussion, they should neither be surprised nor feel hurt if the quotations are not merely taken as read, but may be challenged and critiqued. Nothing is so sacred that the essence of what a textual quote is conveying cannot be analysed and debated robustly. If one chooses to support a weak argument with valueless quotation, then it may be a good idea to be a little more discerning in what one chooses to quote.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 15 (view)
 
Group: Salvation Army-run homeless shelter might cross separation of church, state
Posted: 6/8/2009 2:21:42 AM
Sensible arrangements can be made to protect the godless indigents from religious exploitation. Governments have recognised the danger to public health of citizens with regard to passive smoking. They designate by regulation where smoking may be permitted and where it may not be permitted. Perhaps religiously based social services may give some thought to providing for "proselytising free zones" and staggering meal sessions into shifts, to be accompanied with happy clapping tambourine ensembles for those inclined to give thanks to the "big fella" and sessions free of hymns and homilies for those of more secular inclinations and interests.

As to the relationship between church and state....as Karl Marx was once said to have observed...."Religion is the opiate of the people"........so too in my opinion are faith based social service providers an opiate of governments. Governments get the delivery of social services on the cheap by subsidising at a significant discount, services that they would otherwise have to bear the full cost of providing. The implicit offset for this cosy arrangement is that governments don't concern themselves too greatly with the faith based delivery of religious programs aimed at the clientele of such services.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 166 (view)
 
Satanism
Posted: 6/7/2009 6:06:14 AM
A true satanist? Like a true christian, a true atheist or a true scotsman.....An idealised fiction to support arguments of the fallacious variety.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 70 (view)
 
Other Sheep
Posted: 6/6/2009 8:50:08 PM
The thing to remember is that relatively few sheep live to an old age as pets or as rural lawnmowers......most have an appointment at an abbatoir.....sure they pass through the abattoir to the other side...but as sausages and other cuts of meat. I wonder if God also inspired another book "How to Serve Man"?


<div class="quote">sheep needs a herder

Some sheep farmers have found that donkeys make very suitable shepherds (low maintenance, have no special dietary requirements, and don't get on the grog and sleep on the job, and the sheep feel very comfortable being led by a donkey)


<div class='quote'>http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/03/nyregion/follow-up-on-the-news-using-donkeys-as-shepherds.html?n=Top%2FNews%2FScience%2FTopics%2FAnimals
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 38 (view)
 
Why do Christians take away the personal name of God?
Posted: 6/3/2009 1:58:24 PM

Actually Jesus Christ was either God or He was liar and/or insane. He left no room for error.
John 10:30 "I (Jesus) and the Father are One."


There exists the possibility that the words attributed to Jesus were not in fact uttered by the putative person. The collective authors of the "New Testament" may. like good mythology programmers for the nascant "Jesus" sect..... have made Jesus backwards compatible with the earlier faith Program, Judaism. By Crafting stories and fables that fit the jigsaw of prophecies laid out in the Torah, et al, the early christian church creators were able to clothe their creator in the rainments already specified in earlier works of speculative literature.

It's a bit like computer programs that junk parts of older versions of a computer program that they don't want, to produce an improved version of a program, but ensure that parts of the "improved" program are backwards compatible to the bits of the program that program users still find important. In God programs....a new product project team in the faith field will find it ever so much easier to appropriate authority from an existing god, than it would be to create an authority for their own god in competition with an existing dominant god. What better way but to claim a filial relationship, regardless of whether gods Mk I or MkII actually exist or not.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
The ever-revolving 'God' routine
Posted: 6/2/2009 5:55:02 AM
Rubber Soul,

The difficulty is that you are asking people, not just to think, but to REALLY think....which is possibly more of a challenge than some are prepared to accept. It is easier for some to embrace the certitude of this or that verse of a holy text as providing the only explanation necessary for what they choose to believe.

It is easier to follow the well worn path of doctrinal orthodoxy than it is to think rationally and blaze a trail that may risk, at least in the past, one's own destruction. These days, at least in Western pluralistic democracies, there are no grand inquisitors to stamp out heresy, apostacy or any other perceived threat to the many "one true faiths". However, there are theocratic polities on this planet with a dark agesmentality that would prefer the gains of reason be clawed back to ineffectuality in challenging religious orthodoxy.

The wedge is useful in pursuing the aims of one's faith position. It divides the world into the us.....the exclusive ones, and the thems, who are the excluded, unless of course they adopt what we believe and make a commitment to being an us by converting to us. Then they are no longer a them. It's all about sheep and goats. As Cake quite eloquently put it....Sheep go to heaven.......and goats go to......Hell
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
Child witches: accused in the name of Jesus
Posted: 5/30/2009 9:27:38 AM
Message #1


Has anyone ever heard of anything so horrific?


The persecution of individuals and groups accused of witchcraft dates back, most likely to pre-history. Certainly, sanctions against “witches” were formally codified in law as far back as Ancient Egypt and Babylon. “Witches” were seen as competitors in the arena of supernatural belief, and religious leaders of the monotheistic faiths were sanguine about removing the perceived threat to their own religious hegemony. Hence, in the Torah in Deuteronomy, and Exodus exist verses that describe witchcraft as an abomination, and exhortations that
"thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"
. Christianity in its zeal (both Catholic and protestant), has at times used these “Old Testament” commands to justify some of the most abominable acts of cruelty imaginable against humanity.

Accusations of witchcraft, have been usually made against people least able to defend themselves, (children, women, the poor, the elderly, the infirm, the insane) though when the power of accusers and beneficiaries of “witch” persecution is sufficiently secure, even the wealthy and normally well connected are not safe from persecution.

Without discounting the tragedy and dire hurt visited upon children in third world countries accused of being witches, literally hundreds of thousands, and possibly some millions may have perished, often in excruciating agony in Europe during the main period of witch hysteria from approximately 1480 to the early 1700s.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki


The self sustaining dynamic of the witch accusations at the height of the witch hysteria in Europe, bears close resemblance to the kind of processes involved in child witch accusations presently evidenced in Africa. Chapter 7 of of Carl Sagan’s book “The Demon Haunted World – Science as a Candle In The Dark” describes this self sustaining dynamic quite chillingly.


It quickly became an expense account scam. All costs of investigation, trial and execution were borne by the accused or her relatives, down to per diem for the private detectives hired to spy on her, wine for her guards, banquets for her judges, the travel expenses of a messenger sent to fetch a more experienced torturer from another city, and the faggots, tar and hangman's rope. Then there was a bonus to the members of the tribunal for each witch burned. The convicted witch's remaining property, if any, was divided between Church and State. As this legally and morally sanctioned mass murder and theft became institutionalized, as a vast bureaucracy arose to serve it, attention was turned from poor hags and crones to the middle class and well-to-do of both sexes.
The more who, under torture, confessed to witchcraft, the harder it was to maintain that the whole business was mere fantasy. Since each `witch' was made to implicate others, the numbers grew exponentially.



Why is the phenomenon of child witchcraft accusation happening? There is no single, simple answer to that question. For a detailed analysis of the issue, I recommend that you take the trouble to read a paper delivered by Gary Foxcroft, Program Director of Stepping Stones Nigeria (A secular NGO) to UNHCR (2009) called “Witchcraft Accusations: A Protection Concern for UNHCR and the Broader Humanitarian Community?”
http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/files/UN_doc.pdf



As far as I can see, some of the major contributing factors of the problem (and this is by no means an exhaustive list) are as follows.

* Dire Poverty (of individuals, families, communities and nations)
* Superstitious belief systems that are deeply rooted in the popular mentality of the people (there and elsewhere)
* Legal and political institutions that don’t have the resources and/or the will to protect its citizens against the predatory practices of witch accusers
* Lack of literacy and education in general
* Ignorance (Irrational explanations for natural phenomena as opposed to rational evidence based explanations i.e. science)
* Greed
* Corruption at various levels of government
* Evangelism that is poorly governanced by its sponsors
* Individuals and groups who have grudges and scores to settle
* Individuals and groups who gain a direct or indirect benefit by making witch accusations (step-parents wishing to dispose of step-children, relatives and others who hope to sequester confiscated money / property, etc)Confidence tricksters,
* charlatans and carpet baggers intent on extorting money by “bogus” exorcisms etc.


Any thoughts? Any ideas on what should be done?

* Improve the standards of living of societies that are plagued by superstition.
* Improve the political and legal institutions that at present are ineffectual in mitigating the harm caused by witch accusers.
* Improve child and adult literacy, numeracy and education in general
* Oversight evangelistic missionaries, making them – their sponsoring organisations accountable for the conduct of their priests in the same way that churches in western societies are made accountable for the conduct of their clerics that abuse positions of authority e.g. paedophile priests etc.
* Support the enforcement of international conventions for the protection of children and human rights generally.
* Remove incentives for people to make child witch accusations against others with impunity.
* Support NGOs that are working in the field of mitigating the harm made against those accused of being witches.
* Embarrass governments into doing something about the problem.


Message #2 Csonka


asking for help from Benny Hinn and Reinhardt Bonnke, also Kenneth Copeland and powerful, firm, popular ministers


Benny Hinn????? Are you serious??? I’m surprised that you didn’t mention the very accomplished Elmer Gantry in the pantheon of all time poweful, firm, persuasive evangelists. The last thing that the victims of these abusive priests need is for their persecutors to become more professional and polished in their abilities at fleecing their flock.

Just as it has been suggested that Intelligent Design is just Creationism in a cheap tuxedo….I view so called “christian” priests stigmatising children with witchcraft as just witchdoctors in cheap surplices and cassocks.


Message #4 Scorpiomover


Maybe one day, we can convince our countries to act like human beings.


Perhaps a more realistic goal might be to persuade our fellow human beings to act like human beings, then families, communities, and states might incrementally improve as a consequence. One needn’t force beliefs on others…that is what dictators try to do, and usually it doesn’t achieve any significantly sustainable success. It is better to offer better options and alternatives to people having to deal with witch hysteria and its consequences. One would hope that rational beliefs, will, with time and resourcing, overcome irrational beliefs. It took the Enlightenment and the weakening of church power by nationalism, among other things to start Europe on the road to controlling witch hysteria….perhaps the enlightenment by education and the improvement of economic, political, legal and social institutions might have the same effect in African nations plagued by witch hysteria. One can but hope…or one can do something about it…if only by donating to charities which are trying to mitigate the harmful effects of witch hysteria.



Message #5 Misfit


what about missionaries. they have done much to enlighten and effect change.
can they do more?


Missionaries have undoubtedly effected change for the worse rather than better, in a number of ways.

* Practitioners of “child witch “ stigmatisation, have been given a veneer of respectability by being able to identify themselves with religious authoriies with greater perceived Ju-Ju than any local tribal witchdoctor could ever hope to have.

* Religious institutions that sponsor priests who practice child witch stigmatisation, are as like to offer the same kind of institutional protections that have been instrumental in the shielding of paedophiles and other abusers in mainstream western churches.

* Superstitious references to sorcery and witchcraft in sponsoring religion / churches’ sacred texts and doctrines overlay and reinforce local tribal superstitions concerning sorcery and witchcraft, and thereby legitimise and give authoritative sanction to the activity of witch stigmatisation.


If missionaries and religious sponsoring institutions wish to do anything about combating witch hysteria, and reining in the “priests” that practice the vile practice of witch stigmatisation….they should earnestly abide by the “Guiding Principles and Best Practice for Working with Children Stigmatised as Witches” as recommended by Steppingstones Nigeria. I encourage you and other readers of this thread to read it. AND encourage your church missions to endorse and act on the recommendations
http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/files/ing_with_children_stigmatised_as_witches_doc.pdf



Perhaps there is some light at the end of the tunnel of ignorance and darkness…..Legislation is being enacted to stamp out child witch stigmatisation in Nigeria…hopefully other countries will follow suit

http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/news/article10//indexn3_html?pdate=071208&ptitle=Child-Witch:%20Akpabio%20Outlaws%20Stigmatisation%20of%20Children&cpdate=071208


It remains to be seen, whether the measures taken are merely appeasing rhetoric, or a sustained concerted effort to stamp out a vile practice.

For a graphic exposition of the phenomenon of witch stigmatisation…have a look at
African Witch Children Part1 (2008)
on You Tube. It is not for the faint hearted and some scenes may be disturbing.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Group: Salvation Army-run homeless shelter might cross separation of church, state
Posted: 5/27/2009 7:32:10 AM
Southernlass,

You are absolutely right....how dare those God haters interfere with the interests and prerogatives of faith based charitable institutions. Charity, both zakat and sadaqa, is one of the 5 pillars of Islamic faith.....A Wahhabist outreach to provide succour to hungry, poor, homeless US indigents would be a marvellous idea....and who could object if the clients of Wahhabist refuges were invited to participate in the several times daily calls to prayer? Who could object to clients being introduced ...purely on a voluntary basis of course, (whilst waiting to be fed in the communal dining room), to Immams sharing some readings of the Qur'an and maybe a little Qur'anic tafsir? It wouldn't be too much to ask for, in exchange for a hot meal and a bed to sleep on during a cold, harsh, winter's night surely? Naturally, such refuges would be eligible for State subsidisation on the same equitable basis as their co-religionists. Perhaps as a gesture towards ecumenical solidarity, The Salvation army shelter in question, might welcome occasional celebration of Islamic prayer, well, at least...ensuring that some of the food provided is halal and some of it is kosher, out of respect for the religious sensitivities of its clients so affiliated.

Wahhabist clerics are doing an excellent job of charitable works in the various US penal systems....why wouldn't they do an equally splendid job serving the starving, sick and homeless in the shelters, refuges and soup kitchens of the United States of America, and who could reasonably object to it??? Yes....God's good works need all the help that can be given....God isn't all that fussy who does the helping...and nor can the clients of these charitable service providers afford to be fussy either! Yes....who needs PC Crap!!!!:wink:
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 48 (view)
 
He/She/It/Them/Me/You/Us - Yes/No/Maybe/Don't Give a Rat's Fundament
Posted: 5/24/2009 7:49:18 AM
Message #47

If a construct is the most that god(s) can be, then multitudes of humanity have suffered unimagineable cruelty and died pointlessly for figments of imagination.

That clerics and others have made an industry out of peddling the idea of god, doesn't demonstrate that god(s) exist(s), only that they may possibly believe it so (and possibly that they may not believe it so, but it being such a good little earner, it is profitable to affect that they do). That others may contend against the idea of god(s), doesn't give life to the existence of god(s)....only life to the debate about the idea of god(s)existing, being at best, a dubious proposition.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 46 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 5/23/2009 3:12:46 PM
Message #45

Interesting crime scene photography...........where are the mug shots of the suspect??

The graphic images that you tender as evidence provide no proof of the existence of a god or gods, at least as are claimed to exist by the various religions and sects that curse this planet. As awesome and as beautiful as the images are, they represent parts of the cosmos that were in existence well before the putative 6,000 or 7,000 years atrributed by the biblical literalists to the beginning of the "creation" as recorded in the Judaic creation myth.

It is difficult to credit that a God with the power to create such a splendid spectacle could be so easily satisfied with the adulation of such puny and pissant creatures as homo sapiens, and even more amazingly, that he has a personal prurient interest in my sexual behaviour!!!!! yet, remakably, many humans do believe that this is so....go figure.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
The Last Question
Posted: 5/22/2009 7:01:14 PM
I think Asimov was being overly optimistic in his short story, but that is the nature of science fiction, it is not bound by anything but one's imagination. The story is no less plausible than the creation myth of a creater with a liking for the aroma of burning goat flesh (and latterly the burning human flesh of heretics, apostates and other enemies of the faith). None the less, without a doubt, he writes a splendid science fiction story (his non-fiction isn't too shabby either).


http://www.asimovonline.com/oldsite/asimov_catalogue.html


Undoubtedly we as a species will, resources permitting, explore beyond the outer reaches of our solar system, and may also, resources permitting, colonise some of the nearer planets with the potential for habitation. As to travel beyond the solar system, that would require technologies and fundamental discoveries in physics way beyond what we are possibly capable of in the foreseeable future. Even if such possibilities were practical, it is likely that our intelligent species' penchent for stupidity(and an irrational belief in dieties is but one and not the least of such stupidities) will probably see homo sapiens extinct much sooner in our epoch than the dinosaurs were in their epoch.

It is as if all the species on this planet is stranded upon a lifeboat, hundreds and thousands of light years away from the nearest landfall. And yet, there are those who would kill off all those passengers who would not agree with them on how to get to the ultimate destination, and there are others who are happily destroying the lifeboat, the sooner to reach the fabled treasures of Davy Jones's locker!

Asimov was not greatly in favour of religion / irrational thought.

I leave you with two quotes of his that are as instructive as any of the fiction or non-fiction that he wrote:


"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."


the second, quote....is particularly apt to this thread, and to the Asimov short story featured within it. Vale Isaac Asimov (1920-1992).


"To rebel against a powerful political, economic, religious, or social establishment is very dangerous and very few people do it, except, perhaps, as part of a mob. To rebel against the "scientific" establishment, however, is the easiest thing in the world, and anyone can do it and feel enormously brave, without risking as much as a hangnail. Thus, the vast majority, who believe in astrology and think that the planets have nothing better to do than form a code that will tell them whether tomorrow is a good day to close a business deal or not, become all the more excited and enthusiastic about the bilge when a group of astronomers denounces it."
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 39 (view)
 
Eckhart Tolle
Posted: 5/22/2009 12:23:07 PM
message #38

Not that I was interested, I was however inquisitive....and wasn't disappointed.

The website was anything but, the oxymoronic name it eponymously suggested.

The essence of the blogg is that Tolle is some kind of flim flammer , using his woo woo spiritualist ideas as exclusive truths, (not recognising the delicious irony of the accusation).

I suspect that the real issue is that the traditional faiths are losing market share to the new age spiritualists, and the traditional faiths aren't going to give up their market hegemony without some kind of fight. Some Old Age believers apparently aren't averse to rubbishing their New Age competitors with the very same arguments that their own belief systems could readily be challenged by.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Social Justice vs. Salvation
Posted: 5/22/2009 8:23:45 AM
^^^^^^

Not that it wasn't noticed, Trippy, just that it didn't merit any attention....just that it fell, like much theistic debate, somewhere in the realm of how many angels can stand upon a pin head kind of dialectic......of no real relevance to much of humanity except to those who are inclined to superstition or pointless argument.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 89 (view)
 
What’s the reasoning of sacrificing -- to the God / gods..
Posted: 5/19/2009 2:20:55 PM
Message #88

I am not convinced that suicidal /filial homicidal sacrifice is morally any more meritorious than ritualistic sacrifice in the scheme of things....but I guess theists hold their gods less accountable for their immoral acts and behaviours than they do their own fellow mortals.

Most mortals who would sacrifice their children to some belief...however morally noble, if their crimes be proven, would be convicted of child abuse/ manslaughter / murder...and depending on the jurisdiction, jailed for life or executed. A person who commits suicide, would be more than likely be considered to have had a disordered mind...than a sane one....but again, behaviours which would be more reasonably attributed to a sociopath or psychopath or some other psychopathology, are readily acceptable as quite normal for the gods that are believed in.

To give satan, his / her / it's /their due.....he / she / it / their behaviour seems to at least be a bit more consistent than the gods that he / she /it /they are trying to depose. Though even so...it is entirely possible that even Satan gets jaded enough to do something good for for goodness sake from time to time, though such random, and perhaps rare acts of kindness as are performed are as like to go unacknowledged. I guess that is the lot of evil entities who are evil by definition, and even more so when it is the theists that do the defining.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 46 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/16/2009 10:18:25 AM
Message #39


Reasons for divorce has little to do with the OP topic, which was to do with sanctimonious sex. But as you have raised divorce as an issue, there are some aspects of your post that invite a reply.
you said

No my point was that wanting two persons in one body was one of the most over looked reasons for divorce.....
Perhaps it is an overlooked reason because it is probably not an actual reason of divorce, or at best, not a statistically significant reason as far as any serious social research is concerned.

you said

....or as another put it the Wendy-Tinker Bell to his Peter Pan....
Are you serious??? Is there a little Freudian fantasy projection happening here??? I mean to say....how dare you defame Tinkerbell, one of my all time favourite fictional characters, suggesting that she is some kind of slatternly strumpet!!!!!

you said

....If you read most books about the men from the me generation to the X generation you will see the duality of their ideal woman......
care to reference these books??? Or is this another amorphous generalisational paintbrush being wielded yet again??

you said

Survey after survey alter call after alter call I have seen it.
argumentum ad nauseam, and galloping hyperbole don't strengthen your thesis.

you said

I'd advise the Wild at Heart curriculum for deeper understanding
A bit naughty spamming of a commercial product....even if it is available at a discounted price.

you said

there are also a truck load of books on the subject.
It matters not whether there are truckloads, plane loads...or indeed ship loads....if the contents thereof merely represent the voodoo psychology....and pop sociology genres of tabloid publishing....the quantity is quite irrelevant...show me reputable research evidence....not the pontifications of some carpet bagging "how to tell if your husband is cheating on you" self help authors.

e.g. Cheating Husbands 101

#1 does a husband, reference Wendy- Tinkerbell in his pillow talk as an example of unrequited sexual dualistic fantasies???????

you said

OK I made a very broad statement so I will make it even broader people want to have it both ways a woman who wants a reliable man who as one writer put it "At least has the look of some one who could be bad."


Having made an invalid argument in the first place, you then proceed to Tu quoque your own argument with a further invalid argument of the same gormless kind........pretty much like a football goal keeper....willfully kicking an own goal, not just once, but twice, thinking that it is helping their own side...against their opponent

I will offer one useful reference concerning some of the actual reasons why people divorce....that is actually referenced by verifiable supporting evidence. The research was authored by Ilene Wolcott and Jody Hughes under the auspices of the Australian Institute of Family Studies. And is titled:


Working paper No. 20 June 1999
Towards understanding the reasons for divorce


http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/WP20.html#perceived


The Australian Institute of Family Studies (the Institute) is an Australian Government statutory agency in the portfolio of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It was established in February 1980 under the Australian Family Law Act 1975. The Director of the Institute is Professor Alan Hayes


The research makes for interesting reading, and, although the reseach was conducted in Australia, it is reasonable to suggest that the findings could probably be extrapolated to societies with similar cultural norms. I don't think Wendy, Tinkerbell or Peter Pan got a mention though

Google "reasons for divorce" and you will find reasons that are not different to any significant degree to the reasons cited in the paper authored by Woolcott and Hughes.

Getting back to the OP topic.......sanctimony and sex......

I don't expect perfection from a christian, a hindu, a moslem or a pastafarian in respect of the observance of their sacred beliefs.....however, should it come to a clandestine adulterous relationship with a spouse of mine.....I'd expect them to keep their pants on...and failing that....I'd expect that they'd at least fail to be as scrupulous with those "sacred" beliefs as to, at the very least, use a freakin' condom!
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 42 (view)
 
Taoism:Hidden third path
Posted: 5/14/2009 9:02:11 AM
post #40

Am not quite sure what to make of your brain snap in post #40 If you and Seattlerain1 have some previous jousting history, and what he says sticks in your craw, That's pretty much between you and him, just as what you say about him and others is pretty indigestable also, and is simply a matter of your opinion, not necessarily matters of fact.

A reasonable comprehension of post #1 in its totality......thread title
Taoism:Hidden third path
PLUS
as of yet, I have yet to see any faith more convincing in logical reasoning of the universe. Any questions/counter arguements/supporters?


would conclude that the OP was merely saying that he has YET to see evidence that any other faith was more convincing than Taoism in providing logical reasoning of the universe. He made no exclusive claims that Taoism was the only or best faith in that endeavour....only that he has YET to find a faith that could do better at that. It is an admission that he does not possess all the information necessary to make a definitive statement of fact on the matter and, that it was entirely possible, that if he found compelling evidence from another faith to the contrary, then he may perhaps alter what is clearly a PROVISIONAL assessment.

He invited any input that may support, clarrify , or challenge the proposition that he put forward. That you and others have failed to comprehend that very simple proposition, and have interpolated all sorts of extraneous and irrelevant discussion says less about the OP and much about the inability of some people to comprehend the english language, and an inability to frame responses that ANSWER the substantive matter that OP has introduced in his opening post.

If the opening post was an highschool examination question....most respondants in this thread would have failed miserably, because they had FAILED TO ANSWER THE PROPOSITION. Provide evidence that supports, clarrifies, or challenges the OP's statement.....what is so difficult about that? Doing a charming presentation on comparative religion, indicating when different religions started, and which ones are monotheistic and which ones are polytheistic etc, may be scintillating and rivetting stuff...but quite irrelevant. Provide evidence that supports the notion that religion "X", or cult "Y"or crazy , zany loony belief system "Z" is more convincing than Taoism in logical reasoning of the universe ( whatever that may mean), then we may actually be getting somewhere close to what the OP was after....if indeed he is still around to read it and respond.

If you are feeling a little exasperated by it all, SM...perhaps you may benefit from reading a little taoist philosophy....read it in the original vernacular....or in a good current translation as you wish....either way, like chicken soup for the soul....it can't hoit
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 39 (view)
 
Taoism:Hidden third path
Posted: 5/13/2009 7:15:14 AM
Posts #1, #35, #36#37

I can sympathise with Settlerain's concerns and frustrations, regarding the tendancy of some posters to use a thread topic as a platform for promoting and proselytising their own preferred belief system, and not addressing the substantive issue/s raised in the opening topic.

The op did indeed put forth a challenge, inviting supporters and opponents to comment upon the proposition that
as of yet, i have yet to see any faith more convincing in logical reasoning of the universe
. It is not unreasonable for believers of any faith based belief system that can argue cogently that its faith IS more convincing than Taoism in "logical reasoning of the universe" to cite evidence that supports its argument. In the case of post #35, a_theist chose not to answer the OP's challenge, but to do a potted presentation on camparative religion, pointing to the main differences between the abrahamic monotheistic religions and Taoism. a_theist's post though arguably of tangental interest, was not germain to the Op's question, unless a flimsy case was being made that the Judeo/Christian camp is the bestest, because they were the firstust before the taoist.

Looking through the thread's posts, few if any have actually responded to the OP's invitation to support or challenge the proposition put forward by him, so a_theist shouldn't be too harshly judged for the irrelevancy of his post, nor should he be vigourously defended for the irrelevancy either.

Having said that...I can't say that I look forward to reading a quote fest of references to this or that "sacred" text cited as evidence of superiority or inferiority of one belief over another. Wisdom is hard enough to discover for oneself, withought dredging through the bovine excreta of partisan interpretation.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 11 (view)
 
If possible, so far as it depends on you, live in peace with all people.
Posted: 5/12/2009 7:11:10 AM
Ameera


In the bible, that is how Romans 12:18 reads. Is this a tenet that can be achieved?


The tenet is a guiding principle by which, people may conduct themselves towards harmonious relationships within their community, and between communities, be they families, neighbourhoods, or nations. It is a variation of the Golden Rule.

It is a noble principle, which is worthy of aspiring to. The reality is, however that not all people may wish to co-exist peacefully with you, and, recognising that reality, the principle provides for two allowable modification of the principle, namely:

1.
If it is possible.


It is not possible in all circumstances to live peaceably with all people, but where possible one ought to endeavour to do so. If one is being assaulted or attacked, one is entitled to defend oneself against harm. There are ways and means of defending oneself, however, one is expected to use the minimum force necessary in achieving that objective.

Where there are viable alternatives to force in resolving a breach of the peace, one is expected to use them, whether they be negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or resort to legal or regulatory processes.

2.
So far as it depends on you.


There are expectations and obligations placed upon individuals to live peaceably with others for the maintenance of civil order within a society. We do what we can towards that objective by obeying just laws and being civil to others. Where others may cause offence to us, there is the option of ignoring the offence if it is minor, or withdrawing from those who would provoke one to breaking the peace. If maintaining the peace is outside of one's ability or prerogative to achieve, but dependant on some other agency, then modifier #1 applies.

As to the question of whether the tenet can be achieved, there is no end point for a guiding principle. It is something to direct one's efforts towards, and in so doing, we become better as individuals and better as a community / society. In the same way that channel markers in a shipping lane are guides to negotiating hazards upon one's voyage, guiding principles help us negotiate the hazards of life. The channel markers are not mere ends, nor objectives in themselves, their value and importance is in the ways they help us to navigate our way upon our voyage...and if we ignore them, we do so at our peril.



I'm talking more of running into a psychopath/sociopath! How do you live at peace with one of those?


With one eye open 24/7 and a finger hovering over the 911 speed dial

The serious answer is that it is unlikely that one is able to live at peace with a psychopath / sociopath. Though I guess, it doesn’t necessarily prevent potential organ donors from trying. Avoidance is probably the best and safest option. Modifier #1 and #2 will most probably apply in such cases.


a_theist


There are people in this world who just hate the truth



I’m not sure what kind of truth you are alluding to in post #9 . Are you alluding to the kernal of truth to be found in the quotation used by Ameera in her OP;The truth as a generic concept; or the exclusive and inerrant truth of the faith that you follow? Correct me if I am wrong, but the context of your response seems to have more of a reference to the ability to proselytise one’s faith in peace to all people, rather than living in peace with all people.

I am perhaps Ill equipped to offer counsel to Ameera on the the questions of

Whether it[Quote]Is this spiritually possible? In this world? (to
live in peace with all people
)

And


What are the spiritual steps to attaining this peace?


and have therefore chosen not to do so, however, I don’t think Ameera had in mind, a checklist for cold canvassing prospects for conversion to one’s faith.

Having read your response, I find the second sentence of the following line from your post, very instructive.


There are people in this world who just hate the truth. And there is nothing we can do about them.


You seem a little too ready to discount and discard those who hate ”the truth” whatever you mean by “the truth”. As has been pointed out elsewhere in this and other threads, we may have the opportunity of perhaps being an agent for influence, if the opportunity of being open to others exists. At the very least we may influence by exemplifying by personal observance the essence of the “truth” that we wish to convey. If that truth is living in peace with all people, then we should make an honest and unostentatious effort in doing so for its own sake, rather than from what benefits one may accrue as a consequence. Perhaps if we seek, without ulterior motive, to understand why people may hate “the truth” as they do, then it is possible that there may be something that may be achieved in the direction of living peaceably with them.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 29 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/8/2009 1:09:02 PM
^^^^^^

Welcome to the religion forum, Sara,

You must not have come across the rhetorical device, "argumentum tangentum" before. It gets regular usage by the usual suspects here

Getting back to the subject, I am not surprised, and don't experience any mock indignation when I discover that a person's personal application of their moral code is at odds with the "official party line" of the faith that they profess an affiliation to. Such dissonances are common enough in other areas of our life, why should the range of human behaviour be markedly different in this particular domain. Maybe it has more to do with our own sense of moral superiority and a slight frisson of pleasure when we do the schadenfreude trip, than a sense that these people should conform to the tennnets of their God, and, godamnit...they aren't.....that is of course unless we are the victim of a sanctimonious adulterous, lying, cheating **stard, in which case, the hypocracy of the betrayal, has a somewhat sharper and more painful edge.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 24 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/7/2009 4:38:45 PM
Message #21


give the initial of the first names of 5 men you know personally who are straight single men who will/did not have sex birth to wedding night or shut up on that point.


VVendy,

You are asking me to put up or shut up on terms that are even more absurd than your original statement.

You said in message #16


Men want a woman who they can trust on one hand but they want her to be easy on the other.


Now, you made no qualification. You didn't say...most men, you didn't say many men, you didn't even say some men....you just said Men...which , logically means the total population of men, if we are to comprehend your statement according to normal English grammatical usage.

I have merely called you to account for the illogical tarring of the whole male population with your prejudicial generalising. Logically, in a population the size of The United States of America...even if 99% of males were not virgins before they were married.....it would still leave a statistically sizable enough population of pre-marital virginal males to make a nonsense of your assertion. Admittedly, they may, perhaps be mostly Mormans who have faithfully worn their magical chastity underpants, but if a woman is heaven bent on marrying a male virgin…I guess they can’t afford to be too fussy.

The second thing I called you for, was the use of a non sequiter, inferring THE causal relationship between divorce and the notion that "men" (in their totality) have a double standard when it comes to sex. You have offered no evidence that demonstrates that this is so, other than your own prejudicial, and eminently discountable opinion.


Your statement makes as much sense as the following statement


Kinsey, et al, found that in their research (Sexual Behaviour of the Human Female 1953), 1.5% of the female population had some sort of sexual relation with other (non-human) animals in pre-adolescence, and 3.6% had sexual contacts with another type of (non human) animal after they had reached adolescence. We wonder why divorce happens.

In both cases, yours and the one I put forth, the second proposition doesn’t follow logically from the first. In both cases, there are many reasons for couples becoming divorced, few of which have to do with some males having double standards regarding ese of sexual access and relationship trust, nor for some females’ preferences for having sexual experiences with species other than their own.

I thank you for encouraging me to explore Kinsey's research in refuting your assertions. One thing of interest that I did discover was that


.....50% of the women had engaged in pre-marital coitus, and there was a marked correlation between experience of orgasm obtained from pre-marital coitus and the capacity to reach orgasm after marriage....


It would seem that not being a female virgin at the point of marriage has its benefits for some women also
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 17 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/4/2009 10:13:39 PM

Men want a woman who they can trust on one hand but they want her to be easy on the other.


Some men may follow that logic, as do some women, but not all men, and not all women do. Nice try at draggiing the paint roller of generalisation across most of half of humanity.


We wonder why divorce happens.


No need to wonder. There is probably enough published research literature upon the subject. Couples get divorced for a diversity of reasons, few of which have anything to do with the too easily surrender of one's sexual virginity, nor participating in try before you buy rolling in the hay. Nice try at dragging the paint roller of generalisation again.

The second paint-rolling doesn't quite follow from the first....I guess you must like the non sequiter paint scheme
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 11 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/3/2009 7:05:26 PM
Message # 6

I have no expectation of perfection of any believer, indeed, It could be argued that God, if he, she, it, they exists...lacks perfection also. Why expect more from mortals than what may be expected of god?

Having said that, I do expect some consistency and congruency between what is professed, and what one practices. If one professes to have certain religious beliefs, and the moral values that go with those beliefs, then hopefully one ought to know where they stand with them....however, if their beliefs and their practical application of those beliefs in daily life is inconsistent and corrupt...then...how much trust can be given to those individuals. If application of the doctrine of chasteness outside of marriage is somewhat flexible, then one may wonder what other moral dimensions of their faith are also "flexible" within a marriage i.e. expectations of monogamous fidelity?
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/3/2009 6:36:39 PM
Ah Sass,

you spoiler you

One can be a fornicator, before, during and post marriage.

Married people can absolutely be fornicators, whilst married....if they are having voluntary sexual ralations with one or more persons to whom they are not lawfully married. They, by definition cannot be a fornicator with the one that they are lawfully married to!
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
religious until it comes to sex
Posted: 5/1/2009 2:29:52 PM
Salad bar believers

There are some who talk the talk,
But don't walk the walk,
There are some that talk the talk,
AND walk the walk,
There are salad bar believers,
That pick and choose,
The greens are for righteousness,
For a soul they wish not to lose,
But when it comes to things carnal
They also like to pork.


I would seem that their belief and commitment to some of the doctrines of their faith may be patchy and inconsistent. Using the Saint Augustine defence of "Lord make me perfect, but just not yet" seems to indicate that they feel that some sins are venial, even though they be venerial
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 260 (view)
 
Do christians have the right to impose their views/values on the larger society ?
Posted: 4/21/2009 4:30:37 AM

Jesus is the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father but through Him! Dont die in your sins or you will burn in hell for eternity....This is a warning because I care for all of your souls....


Thank you for your concern, but I no longer have a soul to be concerned about....I sold it to some fellow with horns and a tail for a packet of crisps and a bottle of caffeinated drink that has a registered trade mark. I got the better part of the deal.

I really should be investing in some asbestos garments, if what you are saying has much credence, but I'd probably just contract mesothelioma....not sure which would be worse, burning in hell for eternity, or hearing for an eternity that I'm going to burn in hell...tough call I think.

In the mean time, I'd be very happy if church and state were well and truly separated, if only to limit the power of religiose nutters to interfere with my life be imposing their values upon me by way of legislation and regulation.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 29 (view)
 
Pope visits Africa, reaffirms ban on condoms
Posted: 4/21/2009 12:05:16 AM
^^^^^^^^


Thank GOD for Pope Benedict XVI and his restoration of the Traditions of The Holy Roman Catholic Church.

Ours is a Golden Age of the fruition of Christendom.

God knows his own.


As fine a piece of proselytisng and shameless promotion of a particular sectarian belief system as I have seen in this forum for a while, that is unless of course you were being tongue in cheek sarcastic. In either case it contributes little to the discussion on the present Pope's, penchent for poohpoohing the use of condoms as a useful (and necessary) element in limiting the spread of HIV/AIDS.

I would suggest that the Pope's opposition to the use of condoms is about on a par with the notion that wet dreams are caused by the agency of incubbi and succubi.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/incubus.htm
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 29 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 4/18/2009 7:40:35 AM
Vancer.....the journey is the thing....and enjoying the experience while one may.

Some people get hung up on who packaged this trip, and who's Travel Guide is the best for getting to some unimaginably dreary and boring imaginary destination, and obeying the minutae of the travel operator's rather bizarre inconsistent whims in fear of ending up stocking the furnace instead of enjoying the first class passenger's upper deck.

No need to fight the journey, whether one chooses to be a passive passenger on the conveyer belt to oblivion, or a courageous adventurer making the most of their time on the conveyer belt, that is the existential conundrum. The choice is always ours. What happens after we get tipped off the conveyer belt, is pretty moot.

I am unconcerned as to whether God exists or not, though I tend to think that if a god, or gods exist; he, she, they or it are probably unlike any diety that has been conceived by any religion / cult / sect on this 3rd rock from the sun.
 chelloveck
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 27 (view)
 
Your case for/against God.
Posted: 4/18/2009 12:51:07 AM

Surely it is as much a crime for you to exist, as for G-d to exist? Should we lock you up?


If my existence is a crime, it is an involuntary one, and though I may negate the crime by depriving myself of that existence, in so doing, in some places, an unsuccessful attempt at extinguishing one's own existence is also a crime.

Existence is a bit like being on remand for some mishap that was not of your own making. You can do the time hard, or you can do the time easy, until your remand expires, and you return from whence you came.....oblivion.

Whether existence is a reward or a punishment..or some mix of the two, is a matter of personal experience and personal philosophy.....
 
Show ALL Forums