What is your Religion? [Archive] - Literature Network Forums

mono

05-10-2006, 08:51 AM

What is your religion?
I think I tend to see this question a lot more than questions like "what do you believe?" or more specific questions like "do you believe in a God(s)/Allah/Yahweh/Krishna/Buddha/Supreme Being?"
Even if different individuals considered themselves of the same religion, including something as confined as cults (merely a religion/belief system with less followers), each individual would hopefully carry his/her own perspective of religious texts, preachings, etc. Please, pardon my seeming harsh, but someone who believes every word-for-word (through every translation) of any religious text, and swallows word-for-word everything a person of validation speaks of, he/she ought to ask "what do I think for myself?" Interpretations of religious texts and preachings, I think, have drastically more possibilities than the actual texts and teachings themselves, relying much more personal perspective; one can only hope that almost everyone at least derives something good.
As for myself, to answer the question, I answered "Other," probably considering myself in the not-so-religious-but-spiritual sect of skepticism.

RJbibliophil

05-10-2006, 09:48 AM

see, I did this just to get a basic idea of people's worldviews, because pantheists believe totally different things than atheists, you get the point

Pendragon

05-10-2006, 03:19 PM

Bandini

05-10-2006, 03:39 PM

Green Lady, I accidently misspelled Mormon, and the line would have been really long if I put the whole name. I grouped Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons together because they all resemble Christianity but are like twisted versions of it. (please note, I am not trying to offend anyone. this is just my view)

Claes, I do not live in Suomi, it is a real nickname for where I live.

Bandini, everyone has a worldview. Everyone believes something is right and something else is wrong. Even if they believe that everything is right, and that some things are wrong is wrong. Claes for example, believes that is no god or gods. This affects what he believes about everything from what the meaning of life is to the nature of human beings, from law and government to history. Some have blury worldviews, because they have not really established it, but everyone believes something. Face the truth. It will catch up with you someday.

Don't patronise me please. You sound like a young, dogmatic Christian (not trying to offend you. This is just my view) - the last person I would look to for any kind of wisdom - ta! Nothing is going to 'catch up' with me, and I don't have a blurry world view. I have travelled, lived a full intellectual life and have a degree in Philosophy (well, 1/2 I did a joint degree!) - I just choose not to hamper my understanding of the world by adopting a delusional belief system, that I arrogantly believe is objective truth - as oppose to the 'twisted' religions of others.

Catma not dogma.

Green Lady

05-10-2006, 04:10 PM

contorted? I don't know. From what I know of all three, they are sort of strange, but you have not voted, have you?

Strange and contorted are two very different things. I have to agree that they are strange though. In the mormon religion, which happens to be my belief, we have said ourselves that we are a peculiar people. One of my teachers once told us that if we felt weird, then we were probably on the right track. :D It's because while the views of the world are changing about us, we keep our same beliefs constant. This doesn't refer to issues like politics and science though. We try to keep those out of religion as much as is possible so it doesn't turn into a big issue. It's pretty much up to the individual in those matters.

I have now voted, but I didn't before just because... I don't know, just didn't.

Loqurent

05-10-2006, 04:47 PM

The real name is actually Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints too, or LDS for short.

I wanted to make a really immature joke just then.
Is LDS the church who venerate the 'prophet John Smith'? If so, was he a polygamist? If so again, does LDS support the idea of polygamy? Finally, If so, then surely perversion is the right word?

Green Lady

05-10-2006, 04:56 PM

I wanted to make a really immature joke just then.
Is LDS the church who venerate the 'prophet John Smith'? If so, was he a polygamist? If so again, does LDS support the idea of polygamy? Finally, If so, then surely perversion is the right word?

Immature joke?

He was a polygamist, but the church no longer supports polygamy. It's no longer required.

Boris239

05-10-2006, 05:03 PM

Most of my knowledge about LDS comes from Conan Doyle's book "A Study in Scarlet", although I realize it is not accurate

Green Lady

05-10-2006, 05:12 PM

I haven't read that, what does it say?

Boris239

05-10-2006, 05:18 PM

It's the first case of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson together. There are a couple of guys murdered in London and later we find out that they were mormons before. After the case is over and the man who did it is caught, we listen to his story- it is almost as big as the first part of the novel. He tells us the story about a guy and his adopted daughter who were lost in the desert and then saved by mormons. They became mormons too- the guy became succesful and rich, so a lot of guys wanted to make his daughter their 4th or 5th wife, but she was in love with a future murderer who was not a mormon. It wasn't allowed, so they decided to run away. During the escape they were caught- girl's father was killed and she was firced to marry and died form grief soon. So her fiance took his revenge

RJbibliophil

05-10-2006, 06:11 PM

Pendragon- you say you are an ordained minister, are you pastoring a Church? just out of curiosity, what denomination do you indentify with? I agree that many of the bickerings within the Church are absolutely ridiculous. All are partly in the wrong, and partly in the right. No earthly Church is perfect.

Bandini- You are absolutely correct. I never said you had a blury worldview. It is only that some really do not know what they believe. I only wish this was the "insult the PAM" thread so that I could tell you my opinion.

Green Lady-What i meant to say was that all three religions are pseudo Christian religions. Mormons believe in polytheism, that there is more than one god. They also believe in tritheism. They also believe that people can become gods.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe in unitarianism, that God the Father is God, that God the Son(Jesus) is the archangel Michael, a created being, and that God the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force. The Book of Mormon (claims) to tell the story of a lost tribe of Israel that came to America before the time of Christ. God is an exalted man. It claims the book was written 500 years before Christ. It contains large sections from the King James Bible, which dates from 1611 A.D.

Christian Science teaches something like this: God is spirit, and did not create matter. Matter is evil. People only imagine sin, sickness, and death, they really aren't capable of it. everything here on earth is an illusion, including your ailments. You don't need doctors or medicines. (try to believe this if you have a broken arm)

like I said, they are all pseudo-christian. Deism would fit under this box too. the Unification Church too.

Mililalil XXIV

05-10-2006, 11:28 PM

I was wondering, why did you put Christian Science/Morman/Jehovah's Witness all in the same options when they are pretty different from each other. And it's Mormon, not Morman. The real name is actually Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints too, or LDS for short. Mormon's just a nickname.
Ah! But she must have meant that a Morman is like the others. You do not object to that, do you? It appears that a Mormon would fall under "Other" or under yet some other category.

The fact is, those groups all sort of sprung up together like different branches of one fringe English movement of the times. They even borrowed from the same antecedant sects the same terms, such as "Christendom", as a negative term, among others. People from "Christian Science" may not fit in with the following, but out of one English millieu of anti-Catholicism, Mormons and Jehovah's witnesses both used the non-biblical popular term "the whore of Babylon". That such a term is not the exact wording of Scripture, yet is in common between the two groups, and existed amongst anabaptist sects that peopled by persons that left the Catholic Church (a historical fact), shows that both the two later sects (Mormons and J. w.s) borrowed religious terms important to their sermons not by prophetic means, but from the popular extrabiblical nomenclature of an English movement that claimed to be Biblical literalists. (I was born into the Jehovah's witnesses, my mother was earlier a Mormon for a while, whom other Mormons - even the elders and "bishop" -looked up to, and my brother and sister were baptised as anabaptists, while I myself was very anti-Catholic.) I simply notice the transmission of things from movement to movement, and cannot pretend not to see under what circumstances, and how very recently groups from the 1800s on, which had similar parent groups in common before their run for independance, evolved. I think that this is what links certain groups together in many minds.

Green Lady

05-11-2006, 12:07 AM

Green Lady-What i meant to say was that all three religions are pseudo Christian religions. Mormons believe in polytheism, that there is more than one god. They also believe in tritheism. They also believe that people can become gods.

I'd just like to explain a few of these so that people don't think wrongly of mormons. We don't believe in polytheism. There is God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. Jesus is the son of God and our savior. The Holy Ghost is servant of God that helps guide us. We do believe that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three separate beings but not all gods.

And the people becoming gods, people tend to look at me like I have three heads when this comes up in conversations. We believe that God wants us to strive to be like Him, which would mean that we are to do everything He has done. This does not ever put us on the same level as Him though, because He'll always have more experiences than us. If you look at it as Him being our father(which He is), it seems only sensible that He would want us to become like Him and so we would become fathers(or mothers :D ) but He would now be a grandfather and the pattern continues.

Mililalil XXIV

05-11-2006, 12:22 AM

I'd just like to explain a few of these so that people don't think wrongly of mormons. We don't believe in polytheism. There is God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. Jesus is the son of God and our savior. The Holy Ghost is servant of God that helps guide us. We do believe that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three separate beings but not all gods.

And the people becoming gods, people tend to look at me like I have three heads when this comes up in conversations. We believe that God wants us to strive to be like Him, which would mean that we are to do everything He has done. This does not ever put us on the same level as Him though, because He'll always have more experiences than us. If you look at it as Him being our father(which He is), it seems only sensible that He would want us to become like Him and so we would become fathers(or mothers :D ) but He would now be a grandfather and the pattern continues.
This was, of course, all a later idea of Joseph Smith, whose ideas in the book of Mormom were much closer to common protetstant ideas. The Doctrines and the Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price are the place the ideas you laid out begin to be published in print for all to read.

I once considered whether it were possible for the book of Mormon to be true, but the latter two books really turned me against the whole development of Mormon ideology. Gradually Joseph's Methodist roots fell away from him, as he kept modifying. Those after him, after Brigham Young started to modernize almost right away.

mono

05-11-2006, 12:45 AM

Well, my little Piglet, I did vote. I am a Christian, an Ordained Minister since about 1982. That I disagree with many other Christians is a matter of my own vision of how the Bible says things. It does not make me always right, nor does it make the other party wrong. The problem often lies in that people refuse any communication across denominational lines or that may lie outside of what they believe. I ask why? If you are sure of yourself, bound by your convictions, then you cannot be easily swayed. If you can be easily swayed, then you may want to examine yourself to see if you are as grounded as you think you are. The Bible says "Let everyman be fully persuaded in his own mind." Romans 14:5. Think before you speak, and then think again. God bless you! :angel:
I cannot agree more, nor could I have phrased it better, Pendragon. :)
No matter how objective a belief system, a religious text, or a preacher-of-some-kind's teachings seem, one cannot avoid the subjectivity of individual perspective, regardless of how 'devout' the person claims. Merely because I consider myself of the skepticism-sect does not imply that I agree nor disgree with a plethora of religions' common beliefs, yet, in faith or reason, one believes what one believes, and nothing quite sounds worse than obeying the faithful perspective of another person.

Pendragon

05-11-2006, 07:13 AM

Pendragon- you say you are an ordained minister, are you pastoring a Church? just out of curiosity, what denomination do you indentify with? I agree that many of the bickerings within the Church are absolutely ridiculous. All are partly in the wrong, and partly in the right. No earthly Church is perfect.

I was ordained Pentecostal Holiness, but we were actually non-denominational. I was the Assistant Pastor of a church until I became disabled. Then, sad to say, everyone walked away from me. Sometime people cannot deal with what they cannot understand, as you may read in the book of Job. I currently teach Bible studies from my home on Sunday Evenings. People come to me, and I don't reject anyone. God doesn't reject people-- people reject people. Remember in the Garden it was God asking "Adam, where art thou?" and not Adam, who had committed a wrong who had to run around screaming "God, where are you?" If people don't mind my preaching and continue to come, as they do, considering that I will not back up on anything I believe, I will not be the one to show them the door. If they wish to leave and not return, it hurts, but I let them choose the path.

Don Francisco wrote these words:

"I can show you where to look but you've got to seek and find:
You've got to take the step across the line."

In my eyes, a Minister is not a higher power, but a servant to the people. He is there for them in any situation. I've been up all night with people on the phone or in person. Many things I used to do I cannot now, but I wish I still could. God bless you! :angel:

Green Lady

05-11-2006, 04:32 PM

Mililalil, what do you mean by modernized?

Loqurent

05-13-2006, 03:31 AM

He was a polygamist, but the church no longer supports polygamy. It's no longer required.

Its no longer required? As in it used to be?
The whole idea of us becoming gods sounds funny. If he then becomes the grandfather as you say and the pattern continues, do you mean that we then become grandfathers and he becomes the great-grandfather? If so, who are left to be the children and the fathers? And, assuming this continues in a never ending line, what is the whole point of it? It sounds to me slightly like a wacky version of reincarnation; if reincarnation isn't already a wacky idea, but even that has a final point at which the reincarnation stops and happiness is achieved.

RJbibliophil

05-13-2006, 10:59 AM

People come to me, and I don't reject anyone. God doesn't reject people-- people reject people. Remember in the Garden it was God asking "Adam, where art thou?" and not Adam, who had committed a wrong who had to run around screaming "God, where are you?"May I add here that, God accepts those accept Him, but will on the day of Judgment reject those who rejected Him. I can't think of any good verses right now.

I'd just like to explain a few of these so that people don't think wrongly of mormons. We don't believe in polytheism. There is God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. Jesus is the son of God and our savior. The Holy Ghost is servant of God that helps guide us. We do believe that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three separate beings but not all gods. I am sorry if I was not clear. I was trying to be breif. When I said Mormons believe in Polytheism, or more specifically Tritheism, I was referring to the belief that God is an exalted man and the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three distinct personages and three gods. If you wish I will find my quotes of Joseph Smith to back this.

It's the first case of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson together. There are a couple of guys murdered in London and later we find out that they were mormons before. After the case is over and the man who did it is caught, we listen to his story- it is almost as big as the first part of the novel. He tells us the story about a guy and his adopted daughter who were lost in the desert and then saved by mormons. They became mormons too- the guy became succesful and rich, so a lot of guys wanted to make his daughter their 4th or 5th wife, but she was in love with a future murderer who was not a mormon. It wasn't allowed, so they decided to run away. During the escape they were caught- girl's father was killed and she was firced to marry and died form grief soon. So her fiance took his revenge.I as well have read this book. Your explanation is a little confusing, but I remember it now. It is all of Sherlock Holmes I have read.

Ah! But she must have meant that a Morman is like the others. You do not object to that, do you? It appears that a Mormon would fall under "Other" or under yet some other category.
Yet you did not notice that Scheherazade edited the poll so it doth say Mormon, and it said Mormon when you posted this as well.

Bandini

05-13-2006, 12:33 PM

May I add here that, God accepts those accept Him, but will on the day of Judgment reject those who rejected Him.

It's a shame for all thos epeople who have never heard of him or were born into a country with different belief system isn't it? Burning in hell for eternity. But then they deserve it for rejecting God don't they? Eternal damnation for all who do not follow my creed. Gee - how lovely and sweet. I find it very sinister.

RJbibliophil

05-13-2006, 04:50 PM

Well, I am not trying to be mean, but it is something to think about.

Bandini

05-13-2006, 04:53 PM

So Heaven only exists for Christians. OK. Nice God! What about the people who have never heard of him - do they deserve to burn for all eternity?

What if you had been lost in the woods as a child and had no contact with humanity. Would you burn in Hell for all eternity? If so, how can you reconcile this with the concept of a loving God?

ShoutGrace

05-13-2006, 04:56 PM

It's a shame for all thos epeople who have never heard of him or were born into a country with different belief system isn't it? Burning in Hell for eternity.

What I find to be 'a shame' is how many atheists believe this fallacy, when the Bible clearly teaches something completely different. We all fortify ourselves with the things we want to believe, I suppose. I try to "Critically examine everything. Hold on to the good." First Thel. 5:21. However, I will admit that I always fail in this regard. I do hope that if I have come to apprehend something, I did so with a certain amount of research and a full amount of honesty.

RobinHood3000

05-13-2006, 05:01 PM

If I recall, many Christians feel that those who never have the opportunity to "find God" can still be saved if they follow Christian morals.

Those who follow Christian morals but reject God outright, that's another story altogether. In this case, ignorance is bliss, I suppose...

Bandini

05-13-2006, 05:02 PM

Sorry what? I just want somebody to answer my question in a non-cryptic fashion. Do non-believers who have never heard of God burn in Hell for all eternity?

RobinHood3000

05-13-2006, 05:03 PM

Assuming they're moral people, no.

Bandini

05-13-2006, 05:06 PM

Thank you. So by 'moral people', you mean they adhere to Christian morality? Unlikely if they have not been brought up in that society. As I've said before, "Thank the Lord I live in a secular society." It just sounds so mean spirited.

ShoutGrace

05-13-2006, 05:22 PM

"Thank the Lord I live in a secular society."

That's funny. I hope that works out for you.

Do non-believers who have never heard of God burn in Hell for all eternity?

This was discussed in the 'Christianity and Salvation' thread just a short time ago. Would you kindly check it out? And then post some more questions here.

It just sounds so mean spirited.

By what standard? On what grounds? Do you somehow have a greater moral enlightenment than any Christian theist? Or of the millions around the globe today and for the past 20 centuries who have been Christians? Why is it that only a select percentage of the population feels this way? How can there be two Bible scholars who both study the Bible their entire lives, yet come away with opposite feelings/interpretations? I'm sorry, but the idea that God is simply "The opiate of the people", a refuge for the weak-minded/willed, is an idea which is both outmoded and narrow.

Belief in God is not contingent on finances, intellect, offability, need, or alleged 'moral awareness'. It does depend on many different internal levels, some of which are intangible. Some can accept the idea of a God and some cannot. This is topic for another thread, one which may already be around or should be started. The thread 'Why do you need a God' was awfully general.

Have fun with your research.

RobinHood3000

05-13-2006, 05:25 PM

Some can accept the idea of a God--and refuse to.

ShoutGrace

05-13-2006, 05:36 PM

Are you talking about as it relates to other people or an individual, personally?

cuppajoe_9

05-13-2006, 05:47 PM

Marxism is not a religion any more than anarchism or conservatism or liberalism are religions.

Bandini

05-13-2006, 05:57 PM

Quite right - although they are all socially constructed belief systems.

Pendragon

05-14-2006, 09:45 AM

May I add here that, God accepts those accept Him, but will on the day of Judgment reject those who rejected Him. I can't think of any good verses right now.

RJ, I'm begining to really like you for some reason. I think it's because you truly believe and would rather not quote something than quote it wrong. That will be a strength for you, not a weakness. But read 2 Peter 3:9. That is what I meant by people reject people, not God. Someone has to tell them, (Mark 16), else how will they know? But if people reject them for various reasons and forget this scripture I Corinthians 6:9-11, that at one time we weren't the people we are now, then who will reach them? If I may not talk to anyone I choose without condemning them to hellfire and present something, then I need to return to an altar myself, for I have become indifferent to the needs of people. God bless. :angel:

Bandini

05-14-2006, 11:17 AM

RJ, I'm begining to really like you for some reason. I think it's because you truly believe and would rather not quote something than quote it wrong. That will be a strength for you, not a weakness. But read 2 Peter 3:9. That is what I meant by people reject people, not God. Someone has to tell them, (Mark 16), else how will they know? But if people reject them for various reasons and forget this scripture I Corinthians 6:9-11, that at one time we weren't the people we are now, then who will reach them? If I may not talk to anyone I choose without condemning them to hellfire and present something, then I need to return to an altar myself, for I have become indifferent to the needs of people. God bless. :angel:

Good point well made Pendragon.

RJbibliophil

05-16-2006, 11:11 AM

Yes, Pendragon, you have "spoken the truth in love" again and very well. God has every desire for us to be saved, but do not forget that He is also a God of justice. We are all guilty of sin against Him. If we do not clothe ourselves with Christ's righteousness through grace(Galatians 3:26-27), we will have only our own sinful selves to show to the Judge. (@ Pen, I like that avatar, it is the one you had when I joined, and thank you for your compliment)

Bandini-
What if you had been lost in the woods as a child and had no contact with humanity. Would you burn in Hell for all eternity? If so, how can you reconcile this with the concept of a loving God? I have an answer for you. Asuming in this scenario, that the child in question grows up, and has had no human contact since a young age. If he sees that which is around him, and understands that someone intelligent, loving, and beautiful has created the order he sees in nature, that is to say that he is saved. I also need to add here that I do not know everything. Only God knows some things, but if I knew everything I would be God, or at least like Him, and I would rather follow a good God than be one.

Cuppajoe, I included marxism as an option because they have unique beliefs all their own, of course being similar to secular humanists in believing there is no God(s).

Bandini

05-16-2006, 03:04 PM

I grouped Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons together because they all resemble Christianity but are like twisted versions of it. (please note, I am not trying to offend anyone. this is just my view).

You're not alone - it was also the view of the German National Socialist Party (they weren't trying to offend anyone, just exterminate all undesirables - hey, just thought - I suppose Hell is just one big concentration camp for those who don't believe? Do fundamentalists have a problem with Hitler torturing and exterminating the Jew's - after all, they may as well get used to it eh? They got all of eternity to go! Them and all the other non-believers, poofs, people who have never heard of God etc. etc. etc.), who made the Jehovah's Witnesses wear purple arm bands. Heard it on the radio today.

ShoutGrace

05-16-2006, 03:19 PM

They got all of eternity to go! Them and all the other non-believers, poofs, people who have never heard of God etc. etc. etc.)

I thought that I explained this matter to you earlier. If you will not educate yourself and research this point, but instead intend to remain fast in your unlearned, invalid animosity, at least stop espousing it publicly over and over again.

I suppose Hell is just one big concentration camp for those who don't believe?

You're allowed to think of Hell in any way you want to.

Do fundamentalists have a problem with Hitler torturing and exterminating the Jew's - after all, they may as well get used to it eh?

Your prejudiced hatred never ceases to amaze me. Your twisted and dark interpretation of these issues is truly disturbing. It is saddening for me to imagine that there is actually someone out there who believes that any person who is fundamentally adhereing to Christian principles would not have a problem with the Holocaust.

Bandini

05-16-2006, 03:45 PM

Don't patronise me. I am far from uneducated, and I have read the bible. I am not talking about the bible or the beliefs of many Christian's - there are many different interpretations. I am talking about the ideologically right wing fundamentalist Christian beliefs that are popular in the US. If you believ in something defend it - don't attempt to question my intelligence or call me prejudiced. You're on shaky ground matey.

OK so let me express what I think you believe using a truncated syllological argument:

First Premise: Fundamentalist Christians believe that non-believers burn in Hell.

Second Premise: Jews are non-believers.

Conclusion: Jews will suffer in eternal torment.

and another:

1st: Hitler condemned the Jews to death

2nd: Fundamentalist Christians believe that God abandons non-believers to eternal torment.

Conclusion: Hitler causes less torment than a Fundementalist Christian's God.

Isn't there something wrong there? Jesus preached love and compassion. I don't get it.

ShoutGrace

05-16-2006, 03:59 PM

OK so let me express what I think you believe using a truncated syllological argument:

First Premise: Fundamentalist Christians believe that non-believers burn in Hell.

Second Premise: Jews are non-believers.

Conclusion: Jews will suffer in eternal torment.

Until you can prove to me that non-believers will "burn", this will be your own conclusion, not mine. Until you can prove that the eternal torment suffered by non-believers is not entirely spiritual in nature, then this will be your interpretation, not mine.

Conclusion: Hitler causes less torment than a Fundementalist Christian's God.

If you are taking this statement to be true, then you are acknowledging the Christian view that God is the creator of all things and worthy of worship. Why else would it be torment to be separated from him for all eternity? I agree with your statement - An eternity of separation from God is unbelievably more agonizing than any finite physical or emotional pain.

Isn't there something wrong there? Jesus preached love and compassion. I don't get it.

This is more than likely due to your preconceptions. If you believe there is an incongruity here, which is more likely : That your view is ultimately correct, or that there is a logical explanation? How can you be certain unless you have examined the full scope of the evidence?

Don't patronise me. I am far from uneducated, and I have read the bible.

I do not intend to patronize you. I will take your word that you are educated. However, this should not in any way deter me from pointing out either the flaws in your reasoning or the blatant fallacies in your conclusions. I do not wish to engage in ad hominems. I apologize if I did earlier or if you interpreted my post that way.

Bandini

05-16-2006, 04:15 PM

Straw man after straw man after straw man with you isn't it?

Incidentally, is spiritual torment 'ok'?

It was not 'my interpretation' - you indulged in ad hominems, but then I expect ad hominems (whether implicit or explicit) from people with rigid, dogmatic, hurtful belief systems. Just as I expect 'straw man' arguments.

So, does your fundamentalist, ideologically Right Wing, socially constructed God punish non-believers by condemning them to eternal spiritual torment?

And you can forget going through what I have said section by section and making patronising comments. You are fooling no-one - well no one with any discernible intellect.

And it's adhering.

And I don't hate.

Oh - and just in case:

A straw man argument is a rhetorical technique based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, since the argument actually presented by the opponent has not been refuted.

ShoutGrace

05-17-2006, 12:08 AM

It was not 'my interpretation' - you indulged in ad hominems, but then I expect ad hominems (whether implicit or explicit) from people with rigid, dogmatic, hurtful belief systems. Just as I expect 'straw man' arguments.

Those are some interesting opinions. I know you have a low opinion of 'dogma', so maybe it would be best to clarify this term.

"1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
3. A principle or belief or a group of them: “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present” (Abraham Lincoln)."

Well this in and of itself does not seem too dreadful. I guess the crucial premise to consider is whether the established tenents and moral/faith doctrines are essentially 'good', or 'right'.

It is not at all suprising that you denigrate 'dogma' - you personally detest the faith and it's peripherals. I have no problem stating that I am dogmatic. I believe that something is right and I adhere to that standard. Sometimes this includes stated doctrines, each stemming from Jesus' moral teachings. Surely, I am dogmatic. I attempt to operate within a set of principles and beliefs - I think in that way we are all dogmatic.

You can expect anything you want. Just try to properly evaluate what you get.

So, does your fundamentalist, ideologically Right Wing, socially constructed God punish non-believers by condemning them to eternal spiritual torment?

Wow! Another impressive string of assertions. I guess I will have to assess these one at a time.

Fundamentalist - I am only too glad to report that I have an attitude which stresses strict and literal adherence to a set of principles.

ideologically Right Wing - I don't follow politics much, but this means conservative, am I right? Okay. I'm fine with that.

socially constructed - Whoops. I would contend that is a misnomer. Here you mean derived and sourced entirely from people, correct? In responding to your question I'll strike this from the record. If someone could prove this idea to me someday it would be awfully convincing.

God punish non-believers by condemning them to eternal spiritual torment?

Here I think your premise is wrong. God Himself is not in totality punishing anybody - He is not the only one doing the condemning. Right now you are internally rejecting Him. You and you alone are building your case against yourself in His eyes. We reap what we sow. God may theoretically have the ability to do otherwise - but so do we.

If you freely choose to reject Him, then the ramifications of such an action lie soley with yourself. Some atheists don't have a problem with this notion. I had an interesting conversation with one some time ago. He informed me that if God were real, and he faced Him after death, that he would stand before Him unworried. Something about how he was convicted not to believe and that he couldn't be faulted for it.

As far as spiritual torment goes . . . Not very many people claim to have an understanding of this affliction. Jesus compared it to raging flames, likely because that is how awful it would be for Him to be away from God. This idea shouldn't bother you at all because you don't wish to believe in God anyway. Meaning, you do not wish to know God - and there is a special place where you can have your beliefs and convictions respected and dignified for all eternity.

And you can forget going through what I have said section by section and making patronising comments. You are fooling no-one - well no one with any discernible intellect.

Now here you are implying that I am either deliberately or unintentionally 'fooling' people. I take objection to this statement. I trust that any reader who happens to stumble across this dialouge will have 'discernable' intellect. It is not my intention to 'fool' or 'trick' anybody. I merely wish to firmly oppose your somewhat qualified statements and expose your fallacies, all for the edification of any possible future reader.

And I don't hate.

Here you are implying that you do not hate, but that someone else does. I can only assume you are talking about myself. I apologize if you received this feeling from what I've written - I assume it is the subject matter. I hate not one thing in this life, not even sin. Not pain or wrongs. I don't know how to. In the Bible it is written that God abhors sin. I should only hope to someday be roused to that level of passion towards something so worthy of enmity.

A straw man argument is a rhetorical technique based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, since the argument actually presented by the opponent has not been refuted.

Thanks for the definition! If you can prove that I've done this, I will gladly go back and ask you specifically what your questions or arguments were and how I dodged them. At that very hypothetical point we could get past the straw and talk about what you really want to.

cuppajoe_9

05-17-2006, 12:12 AM

Cuppajoe, I included marxism as an option because they have unique beliefs all their own, of course being similar to secular humanists in believing there is no God(s).Marxists do indeed have unique beliefs, but they are not relgious ones. I could be considered a Marxist, but I would never call it a religion. (I checked the secular humanist box).

Happy Norway's Constitution Day.

Mililalil XXIV

05-17-2006, 12:19 AM

Mililalil, what do you mean by modernized?
Those that are strict about tradition, try to match their custom to it as perfectly as possible. If one does not throw out identification with a religious body, despite differing from the original form of that sect's tradition, he accepts modification of what was first handed on. The LDS leadership, as time moved forward but a few short steps, already saw a world in unbelievable change. In order to not be snuffed out at once, many modifications were resourcefully given acquiescence.

The Unnamable

05-17-2006, 02:37 AM

I do not wish to engage in ad hominems. I apologize if I did earlier or if you interpreted my post that way.

your unlearned, invalid animosity,

Your prejudiced hatred never ceases to amaze me. Your twisted and dark interpretation of these issues is truly disturbing.

I will take your word that you are educated.

you personally detest the faith

Come on, Bandini, how could you possibly make the mistake of assuming that you were being personally attacked in these statements?

you do not wish to know God - and there is a special place where you can have your beliefs and convictions respected and dignified for all eternity.

You’re going to Hell, Bandini – that’s not a threat; it’s a promise.

Shout Grace, perhaps you should change tactics and reinvent yourself as ‘Whisper Grace’? Just a thought.

And, as you consider education to be important, you could do worse to understand the position of unbelievers like me than read the following from The Brothers Karamazov:

I want to see with my own eyes the hind lie down with the lion and the victim rise up and embrace his murderer. I want to be there when everyone suddenly understands what it has all been for. All the religions of the world are built on this longing, and I am a believer. But then there are the children, and what am I to do about them? That's a question I can't answer. For the hundredth time I repeat, there are numbers of questions, but I've only taken the children, because in their case what I mean is so unanswerably clear. Listen! If all must suffer to pay for the eternal harmony, what have children to do with it, tell me, please? It's beyond all comprehension why they should suffer, and why they should pay for the harmony.

I understand, of course, what an upheaval of the universe it will be when everything in heaven and earth blends in one hymn of praise and everything that lives and has lived cries aloud: 'Thou art just, O Lord, for Thy ways are revealed.' When the mother embraces the fiend who threw her child to the dogs, and all three cry aloud with tears, 'Thou art just, O Lord!' then, of course, the crown of knowledge will be reached and all will be made clear. But what pulls me up here is that I can't accept that harmony. And while I am on earth, I make haste to take my own measures. You see, Alyosha, perhaps it really may happen that if I live to that moment, or rise again to see it, I, too, perhaps, may cry aloud with the rest, looking at the mother embracing the child's torturer, 'Thou art just, O Lord!' but I don't want to cry aloud then. While there is still time, I hasten to protect myself, and so I renounce the higher harmony altogether. It's not worth the tears of that one tortured child who beat itself on the breast with its little fist and prayed in its stinking outhouse, with its unexpiated tears to 'dear, kind God'! It's not worth it, because those tears are unatoned for. They must be atoned for, or there can be no harmony. But how? How are you going to atone for them? Is it possible? By their being avenged? But what do I care for avenging them? What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured? And what becomes of harmony, if there is hell? I want to forgive. I want to embrace. I don't want more suffering. And if the sufferings of children go to swell the sum of sufferings which was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price. I don't want the mother to embrace the oppressor who threw her son to the dogs! She dare not forgive him! Let her forgive him for herself, if she will, let her forgive the torturer for the immeasurable suffering of her mother's heart. But the sufferings of her tortured child she has no right to forgive; she dare not forgive the torturer, even if the child were to forgive him! And if that is so, if they dare not forgive, what becomes of harmony? Is there in the whole world a being who would have the right to forgive and could forgive? I don't want harmony. From love for humanity I don't want it. I would rather be left with the unavenged suffering. I would rather remain with my unavenged suffering and unsatisfied indignation, even if I were wrong. Besides, too high a price is asked for harmony; it's beyond our means to pay so much to enter on it. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket, and if I am an honest man I am bound to give it back as soon as possible. And that I am doing. It's not God that I don't accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return him the ticket."

Fyodor Dostoevsky The Brothers Karamazov

Bandini

05-17-2006, 03:28 AM

Superb quote. I am waiting for yer man to 'straw man it' sentence by sentence. What amazes me about these people is they call us the haters! If it isn't delusional I really don't know what is!

RobinHood3000

05-17-2006, 05:58 AM

...and so Unnamable looses his might once more.

Logos

05-17-2006, 08:02 AM

*global message to everyone*

Ah yes, I'm seeing the same old, same old.. when someone disagrees with you, I see defensiveness and degeneration into personal insults. Passive aggressive tactics might just get this topic closed. If you're going to post here you're going to have to accept the fact that someone is going to disagree and call you on it.

As I don't think any of you here are God, you're all just expressing your opinion and interpretations of religious texts, which you're all entitled to. Just please try to keep the personal stuff out of it :)

mono

05-17-2006, 10:50 AM

As I don't think any of you here are God, you're all just expressing your opinion and interpretations of religious texts, which you're all entitled to. Just please try to keep the personal stuff out of it :)
Indeed, very strongly agree, Logos. :)
I love how you use the words 'opinions' and 'interpretations,' rather than how people express what allegedly seem 'facts.' Knowing 'facts' requires the objectivity unattainable by the inevitable subjectivity of humans.

ShoutGrace

05-17-2006, 02:45 PM

Knowing 'facts' requires the objectivity unattainable by the inevitable subjectivity of humans.

I personally agree with this opinion. My original intent in posting on this topic was to dispel the notion that either the Bible or the Christian faith teaches that people who never hear about either God or Jesus will necessarily "Go to Hell". My personal acceptance or rejection of that notion shouldn't have had anything to do with it (though it could be easily infered).

If any theist or atheist could prove their cases 'factually', I think there would be a lot less talk about the subject.

As I don't think any of you here are God, you're all just expressing your opinion and interpretations of religious texts, which you're all entitled to. Just please try to keep the personal stuff out of it

I apologize to one and all for getting off topic. Thank you for being such a conscientious moderator, Logos. I'm sure we all greatly appreciate it.

You’re going to Hell, Bandini – that’s not a threat; it’s a promise.

Again I likely misworded myself here. My comment is intended to show what the Bible postulates as truth. I will in the end have nothing to do with how anybody reacts to it. The idea of whether a person should believe such a comment is entirely up to themselves. 'Promise' doesn't enter into the equation. Neither does 'threat'. The Bible testifies that people have a choice : it was my intention to relate that Christian maxim (theoretically regardless of what I thought of it).

Shout Grace, perhaps you should change tactics and reinvent yourself as ‘Whisper Grace’? Just a thought.

Well it is a thought. But then it would take time and effort to tell other members what my new moniker is. Besides, I am still attached to my first and only. ;) I do appreciate your suggestion.

And, as you consider education to be important, you could do worse to understand the position of unbelievers like me than read the following from The Brothers Karamazov:

I too hold the words you have posted dear to me. I have loved Dostoevsky's novels for precisely this reason. He struggles with theological issues all throughout. I agree with you - understanding both sides is more than important - it is likely necessary. Thank you for taking the time to post those words.

Green Lady

05-17-2006, 04:23 PM

Its no longer required? As in it used to be?
The whole idea of us becoming gods sounds funny. If he then becomes the grandfather as you say and the pattern continues, do you mean that we then become grandfathers and he becomes the great-grandfather? If so, who are left to be the children and the fathers? And, assuming this continues in a never ending line, what is the whole point of it? It sounds to me slightly like a wacky version of reincarnation; if reincarnation isn't already a wacky idea, but even that has a final point at which the reincarnation stops and happiness is achieved.

Reincarnation is the rebirth of a soul in another body, which I can see now could be compared to ressurection and eternal progression in a way. When a person in ressurected they are changed, their bodies no longer dependent on sleep and food but they don't recieve an entirely different body or even shape. The whole point of this continuing line of fathers, grand-fathers, children is the point of eternal life. We live on forever through our children, who remember us and pass on stories and knowledge that we gave them. It also wouldn't seem very fair for one generation to have the opportunity to have children, while the next doesn't.

The whole thing about polygamy...read this: http://www.mormon.org/question/faq/category/answer/0,9777,1601-1-114-3,00.html

So Heaven only exists for Christians. OK. Nice God! What about the people who have never heard of him - do they deserve to burn for all eternity?

What if you had been lost in the woods as a child and had no contact with humanity. Would you burn in Hell for all eternity? If so, how can you reconcile this with the concept of a loving God?

If you have never heard of God, you're not at fault. In my religion, those that die before they had a chance to learn the gospel and either accept or reject it are given the chance to learn it in the afterlife.

Those that are strict about tradition, try to match their custom to it as perfectly as possible. If one does not throw out identification with a religious body, despite differing from the original form of that sect's tradition, he accepts modification of what was first handed on. The LDS leadership, as time moved forward but a few short steps, already saw a world in unbelievable change. In order to not be snuffed out at once, many modifications were resourcefully given acquiescence.

Please name those things that were modified, and I may be able to shine some light on this issue.

RJbibliophil

05-18-2006, 02:19 PM

@Bandini

Second Premise: Jews are non-believers. Jews are not non-believers and they don't stop being Jews if they believe in Christ. They become completed Jews.

What Hitler did was not right. I do not ever want to say what he did was right. It is sin to kill human beings. God is a God of Justice. His wrath shall not always be silent. He shows us mercy and compassion, but He will one day judge all people. It is not my place to judge others. That is for God to do.

I am not implying that I think you hate, but it would be easy to come to that conclusion from your posts.

@ShoutGrace- I am so glad you are here to shout your beliefs to the world! Be careful to always speak the truth in love, but know that I appreciate your posting here. "Two are better than one, if one falls down, his friend can help him up."

@cuppajoe- You may choose to believe whatever you like, and you may vote as you choose. I do not mind. I merely included marxism in case someone would desire that option.

Boris239

05-18-2006, 11:42 PM

Unnamable- this piece from "Brothers Karamazov" is the best piece of literature ever written in my opinion. This together with the story of Great Inquisitor alone make the novel a msterpiece and worth reading.
Ok Rjbibliophil- no,a Jew believing in Christ doesn't become completed Jew. He doesn't need to believe in him to become complete. It wll be the same as if a muslim guy will tell you that in order to become a completed christian you should believe in Mohammed. Personally I dislike the whole "Jews for Christ" organization( as culturally Jewish, but an atheist by beliefs)- either you are a christian or jewish.
Bandini- you'll sure get some good company in Hell, so don't worry. I remember a good site that will tell you where will you go after death based on the Divine Comedy. I will most likely be among heretics and if I'm really lucky I'll be among virtous nonbelievers.

Bandini

05-19-2006, 07:17 AM

[QUOTE=RJbibliophil]@Bandini
Jews are not non-believers and they don't stop being Jews if they believe in Christ. They become completed Jews.

'Completed Jews'! Sheesh!

What Hitler did was not right. I do not ever want to say what he did was right.

Straw man! Straw man! Straw man! I did not say that you thought that Hitler was right. This kind of disingenuous response merely weakens your argument. If you want to be taken seriously you really need to stop using this rhetorical technique. In any kind of academic/intellectual discussion you must respond to what is being said; if you can't refute it don't take it out of context/equivocate etc.

God is a God of Justice. His wrath shall not always be silent. He shows us mercy and compassion, but He will one day judge all people. It is not my place to judge others. That is for God to do.

Wrath? For what - peopel who don't believe in him? Sounds like vanity/arrogance/pride to me. Please explain his 'wrath' - how is it incurred?

I am not implying that I think you hate, but it would be easy to come to that conclusion from your posts.

An oxymoronic statement! "I am not implying but..." - so you are implying! You are being obtuse, or you are confused, or you are so used to equivocation and straw man that reality is somewhat blurred? Please show me a comment that indicates 'hate'? I believe that your views seem to match that definition much more closely. But, please, provide me with a quote that evidences my hate, and I will respond.

Incidentally, couldn't your views, and the way that you express them be seen as arrogance? Pride? Be careful that you don't end up broken on the wheel - the punishment for the 'proud' I believe.

blondeatheart

05-19-2006, 07:28 AM

i'm soo jedi! lol

Pendragon

05-23-2006, 08:35 AM

Bandini, mon ami, let me see if I can read you correctly.

You are by nature a bit cynical when it comes to matters concerning religion. You have a problem balancing God as a God of Love with all the negative things that happen in this world, often to people who proclaim Christianity or other religions. You find it hard to see a loving God sending His creations to Hell for breaking commandments that you feel that they may not even know. Do I begin to close on your viewpoint in anyway? I am not clairvoyant; indeed, I question whether anyone is.

Let me tell you a true story. There was a shooting during a botched robbery in Atlanta. A man died because of that shooting. But the police ran out of leads, and the case grew cold. A new innovation, cold case detectives, has been set up to cover the massive mounds of evidence of unsolved crimes in many cities and states. In Atlanta, detectives pulled this case 25 years after the fact. They found a piece of evidence that had been overlooked. It lead them to one man, now in prison for another crime. He said his cousin was with him that night and had the gun. They tracked the cousin down to find he was a preacher. He had often told this story of his misspent youth to inspire others to walk the straight and narrow. The problem: Neither he nor his cousin in prison knew anyone was even hit by a bullet, much less killed, as they had skipped town the very night of the incident. The preacher gladly cooperated with police. When told a man had been killed, he almost fainted.

Now, this man was unaware of the fact he had killed someone. For 25 years he has lived as a peace-abiding, solid citizen and kept others from walking the wrong road. Should he then go to prison for a crime he has no idea he committed? The law thought so. So did the preacher. He was quoted as saying "If you take a life, you have to pay for it. I did not know I had killed anyone. But since they have shown me I did, I must pay for it." I believe he received a very lenient sentence, due to circumstances.

Breaking it down, though, the man sent himself to jail, when he took the gun to a crime, and fired it. Think of God that way. He is not willing that any should perish. But not everyone will listen. When man breaks the laws of God and never makes it right, man becomes the one who sends himself to hell, for God is faithful and just to forgive. I am speaking from a broad viewpoint here, for my personal beliefs are just that, what I believe. I am not responsible for how another sees things, they will have to see it for themselves and my browbeating them or stuffing down their throat is useless. God bless.

Bandini

05-23-2006, 12:11 PM

Nah - sorry - I don't buy it. The analogy is not valid - that analogy only serves to dilute the enormity of what you subscribe to if you are a fundamentalist Christian. . Let's in 'real terms' take the case of a homosexual man:

A homosexual lives a good life, never hurting others - but he is sexually attracted to other men. He lives with another man in a loving relationship. He suffers eternal torment. He sends himself to hell. So that's OK then.

Isn't that analogous to a father saying, "Don't jump into that fire." and then allowing the child to jump into the fire whilst standing there and saying, "Well, I did tell him not to jump into that fire - his fault."

I know you will refute the above and we can go on forever, but I am afraid that I will always see the social constructs that we call organised religion (not spirituality necessarily, or much of the morality associated with religion) as a method of social control; and for many it is, undoubtedly, a way of asserting superiority over others.

Personally, I think that Christianity can be good, if it gives some kind of morality to the immoral - perhaps it can (in an earthly sense) 'save' people. Particularly those who are mentally weak/need to fear in order to avoid harming others (perhaps those who enjoy harming others - which would explain the large number of people who have killed in the name of religion; they found a way around it!).

However, as an intelligent, aware individual, I don't need to be told I'll burn in hell - I don't hurt others because it cases me pain not pleasure; not because I am scared of God's wrath.

Christianity seems to be largely about the propagation of power and control - from the Catholic Church to the Right Wing Fundamentalism of contemporary USA. I don't believe Christ himself would have seen Christianity in it's current form as synonomous with his beliefs. It seems largely about power and, indeed, hatred. Take a look at the tone of most of the Christian posters on these message boards, (you seem to be something of an exception)it is not one of genuine pity for the 'faithless', it is not loving and compassionate; instead the tone is intolerant and self righteous.

You are partly right about my cynicsm, but let' sface it if you were born in another time and place would you believe in the bible? Of course not. It is a socially constructed mass delusion. Read about an unfamiliar African belief system - are you going to subscribe to it? Of course not. Why are you Christian? Because of an accident of birth. Are you, therefore, a 'chosen one'? How nice for you. Shame for all those Godless peasants and those who worship the wrong God. Feeling good? You bet!

rachel

05-23-2006, 01:31 PM

I never come on these threads because personally I think aruging about this stuff is pointless and hurtful at the very least.
I have struggled on just these points for years. I who fight for children because no one fought for me have screamed at God, whom I believe exists, challenged Him. accused Him, told HIm he indeed was my God, for he made all things, but He was NOT my Father, because of the children. I understand freedom of thought and will, but I pointed out that my Lord Himself Christ Incarnate , enjoyed at least thirteen years of love and devotion from parents good and kind and that provided for Him. So I have been there.
I don't pretend to know the answer except to say that I believe, from the beginnning all m ankind was given a divine mandate to be our brother's keeper and given the freedom we have we have chosen not to. I personally own very little, for I cannot bear the thought that someone else has not and I have so I give it away. Better that we both have some. I believe that is Exactly what Jesus the Christ personified, the perfect love of the Father and expected us to follow. .......love your neighbor as yourself.
In the matter of who goes to hell, I honestly think nearly one hundred per cent of so called Christians, I am no judge, I am nothing and a very poor example myself, I belief that most have not a clue who God is , never took the time to actually find Him, get to know Him. "Come, let us reason together" He invites. I don't care if He strikes me dead, I EXPECT him to answer when I call or don't call me His child, I EXPECT answers for my questions or else He is a cruel dictator. I yes I WILL DARE TO DEFY HIM for the causes I believe in if He doesn't come along side of me. I expect the very God of the universe to do better than a nothing like me.
I think the key to who will be there and who won't, and I believe passionately many of the most enthusiastic atheists and agnostics will have chosen and honored seats beside God one day, I think it all comes down to that little parable about the talents. if God, gives one person only one talent, a deep knowing in his heart that he should be his brother's keeper, and to the best he could he does, whether Hindu, atheist or whatever, he had kept the whole law..........Jesus said " what you have done to the least of my brothers, you have done to me" and those ESPECIALLY MOUTHY KNOW IT ALL so called CHRISTIANS SO FULL OF HATE AND SPITE AND CONDESCENSION AND MANIPULATION AND SEXUAL PERVERSITY IN THEIR HEARTS will be out in the cold. For they had the wealth of everything and were jerks and proved themselves worthless.
And yes it absolutely says that homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God, so too liars and all sorts of people. Who has not lied.......a lot at times?
But for those who like to pick and choose from the Bible to break the hearts and spirits of others it somes it all up in these words:"LOVE COVERS A MULTITUDE OF SINS'Some of my best friends are gay and are like Christ in many ways. That is betweenthem and God and He understands what we don't. And they don't put me down for my faults and fears.Many Christians do.
'but the greatest of these..........is love."
So, in the end it is that which is done from the heart for another that decides. Not rules, not regulations, not wealth of knowledge, not thinking you are holiest.It is a personal relationship with God just like a human one.
That is why the prostitute that crashed the party Jesus was at and wiped his feet with her hair after washing them with her tears, that is why upon condemnation from the others(if he KNEW who she was-the hyprocrites, many had probably slept with her)
Jesus was not offended. ON the contrary He said " her love has removed her sins."
That is all I have to say. I hate and despise these threads. All I know for sure is that God has proven to me He is love, no matter that I don't understand why I was tortured as a child, etc. I myself, just me Rachel, have found Him worthy. But I don't judge those who cannot see it and I FIRMLY BELIEVE NEITHER DOES HE. only proud and foolish and judgmental humans do. And I believe there is so much more to it all and we all shall see by and by. I don't throw my children away and one has told me of her hatred for me for years. And why don't I , I am her mother and God taught me to love her unconditionally and without strings.

Shanna

05-23-2006, 02:10 PM

Bravo, Rachel.

I wish no one would respond to that, and just let it stand as the last word.

But of course it'll have to be torn to pieces. Its only proper.

rachel

05-23-2006, 02:23 PM

thanks babe. Love you. get some real sleep.

Bandini

05-23-2006, 02:24 PM

Excellent. So refreshing to hear that view of what Christianity is. Despite being a non- believer, I wholly respect a Christian of that ilk. That sort of morality is, I am sure, what Christ the man was about. I think being a 'follower of Christ' in this sense is an admirable thing. Unfortunately, I think that the Right Wing 'hating' Fudamentalism that appears to dominate appears more like Satanism to me.

I just did a google to find something - but clicked on this:/ There's some cracking extrapolation - but, hey, the man could be right! Entertaining!

I nearly said 'bravo' myself. That's a message worth spreading Rachel.

Boris239

05-23-2006, 02:48 PM

If all the christians thought like Rachel, our world would most certainly become a better place. For me, being not as selfless and altruistic as Rachel, it's still great to know that such people do exist.

ElizabethSewall

05-23-2006, 02:55 PM

This thread ought to be closed on your words, Rachel, darling.

rachel

05-23-2006, 02:59 PM

Well it is just people like you and Shanna that prove all false words to be just that.......false.And how can you, being kind like God, not be treasured by Him? That is ludicrous.In my opinion anyway.There is a scripture that says "though He slay me, yet will I trust Him" I stand on that principal. I will say these things that I believe to be true and if I fall , if I am thrown away from His side, I will trust His judgment in doing so.But I don't believe it. I believe that He loves me for the wretch I am , just as I love him though I am very angry at Him sometimes. Just like baby Hasia punches me when I say things she thinks are cruel and doesn't understand, she still loves me fiercely. That is what love is isn't it........unconditional, not think as I tell you or you're out.

ElizabethSewall

05-23-2006, 03:07 PM

Darling, I love you so much and baby Hasia too...
Actually, I do believe in love, which, somehow, does not seem that far from the definition of God...

But, if God there is, then I do not think either He would mind who believed or not, but rather how you lived and loved...

Bandini

05-23-2006, 03:33 PM

But hey - catma not dogma - it might be all true!

Virgil

05-24-2006, 01:16 AM

Rachel

I hate to be the stinker at the party, but you sound like everyone can eat their cake and not gain any weight. You seem to be saying, just love your neighbor and we'll all go to heaven, whether we're atheists or not.

Let me just say I am not critisizing anyone's beliefs nor am I a model Christian: absolutely not. But Christianity is Christianity and you can't just make it up.

We can say that Christ conflates the ten commandments down to two, and one of them is love your neighbor. Well, there is a second fundamental commandment that some seem to conveniently forget. The whole verse is from Matthew, chapter 22.

36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

The second commandment is to love God, and that is in essence impossible for atheists. It would be contradiction of definition, a circle which cannot be completed. Actually this is not the second commandment, but the first.

Now God in his infinite mercy can do anything he likes and let whomever into heaven he wishes. This has to do with the concept of Grace and is rather complex and I don't recall the details. And while in the Judeo-Christian tradition (and perhaps others too, I just don't know enough about them) God is a being of love, God is also a God of justice. How just would it be that you, who are by far more sacrificing and loving of their neighbor than I, being a sinner and one who doesn't exactly sacrifice in any meaningful way, are allowed the same reward? And how just would it be if atheists were allowed the same salvation as those who prayed and loved God? If there is any meaning to this, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

RobinHood3000

05-24-2006, 05:38 AM

And how just would it be if atheists were allowed the same salvation as those who prayed and loved God? You tell us, Virg.

Bandini

05-24-2006, 06:38 AM

Rachel

I hate to be the stinker at the party, but you sound like everyone can eat their cake and not gain any weight. You seem to be saying, just love your neighbor and we'll all go to heaven, whether we're atheists or not.

Let me just say I am not critisizing anyone's beliefs nor am I a model Christian: absolutely not. But Christianity is Christianity and you can't just make it up.

We can say that Christ conflates the ten commandments down to two, and one of them is love your neighbor. Well, there is a second fundamental commandment that some seem to conveniently forget. The whole verse is from Matthew, chapter 22.

The second commandment is to love God, and that is in essence impossible for atheists. It would be contradiction of definition, a circle which cannot be completed. Actually this is not the second commandment, but the first.

Now God in his infinite mercy can do anything he likes and let whomever into heaven he wishes. This has to do with the concept of Grace and is rather complex and I don't recall the details. And while in the Judeo-Christian tradition (and perhaps others too, I just don't know enough about them) God is a being of love, God is also a God of justice. How just would it be that you, who are by far more sacrificing and loving of their neighbor than I, being a sinner and one who doesn't exactly sacrifice in any meaningful way, are allowed the same reward? And how just would it be if atheists were allowed the same salvation as those who prayed and loved God? If there is any meaning to this, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

But you are setting up a false dichotomy. I can be sacrificing and loving of my neighbour and not believe in God. You could be a devout Fundamentalist Christian and wave a placard saying "Fags burn in Hell" and be an advocate of death camps for homosexuals - as with the infanous American preacher. Come on. Who's good and who's bad here?

So: live like Christ in every way + not worship God = Hell.

Or: Hate Muslims, Homosexuals, Liberals(!) or whatever + worship God = Paradise.

I think not.

Strange that a God should be so 'egotistical'. Sounds more like a human thing to me. Wait a minute - could this be related to the churches historical need for power?

Virgil

05-24-2006, 06:47 AM

Can I ask why, if you're an atheist, do you care? I'm sorry you can't have your cake and eat it too. I'm making a philosophic point. I don't know if you're going to hell or not or if hell even exists, but Christ says love God as primary commandment.

And let's have the decency to not start insulting people's churches. This is why people avoid these threads.

Shield&Sword

05-24-2006, 07:43 AM

I some how agree with virgil.
I am not christian, i am muslim, i dont believe in salvation, i believe that keeping the commandments is the way to heaven as Jesus pbuh said.
But knowing God come in first and then all other things are relaited to to it.

Loving peace and loving neighbers is something that human nature agree with, its created on this form. An athiest love his neighber a budhist love his neighber a hindu love his neighber, a christian love his neighber and a muslim love his neighber and a jew does, its the human nature, but religioun make this love stronger (after knowing God) by saying love your neighber and honor him, by saying that God love the one who love his neighber.
But does loving your neighber mean entering paradise? Dont think so. Animals love thier children and they are ready to sacrifice for them, so and we, but we have something more important which is brain. This brain is to know God, to watch his creation and to praise him, to agree with your nature or to deny it, the main thing is to know God, this is the main thing, alot of people love thier neighbers but they insult God and talk bad about him, are they going to heaven?
Loving God is not only a feeling but it need action, if you love God then do as he asked, you cant say: "sometime i get angry with God, but i know he love me" loving God mean loving him more than any other thing, loving God mean accept every thing happen to you in this life, we muslims say every thing is good even if it seems bad for us because it comes from God and God know better and perhaps a bad thing for us will be good in future, we believe that any thing hurt happen to us will be good for us in other life because God is justice and he love us and he will forgive us things with this hurting thing, and will be good in judgment day, so we accept every thing from him and say always Thank Allah we will go back to him. This is (i dont know in english so i will write it in arabic حسن الظن ) The good thinking of God and praising him and loving him. He is not someone to get angry with, because if you agree he ove you and want all good for you then you must accept that all what heppen to you is for your good, and no reason will make you angry with him he is not your friend or your neighber he is your creater and your purpose in life.

So the main thing is knowing God and then come other things which make us closer to God like good deeds.

My english is bad i know, hope you will understand what i wrote.