“What mean and cruel things men can do for the love of God” (W. Somerset Maugham)

[Regina61285]

“What mean and cruel things men can do for the love of God” (W. Somerset Maugham)

Ironically, throughout history, many things that were done in the name of God would be abhorrent to Him; for example, in the bible it is said 'thou shalt not kill' but more people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason. Absurdly, a great number of people and societies have committed heinous crimes like torturing and killing by using in justification the Holy name of God, who actually must be related to love, caring, mercy, comprehension, tolerance and forgiveness. Enigmatically, fanatics and fundamentalists have repeatedly been sowing panic, terror, pain and death in the world in the name of God. "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence his soul hates." (Psalms 11:5)

Admittedly, some people claim that punishing sinful people and societies is the way of cleaning the world from the impiousness. Besides, in the Holy Scriptures it is written in several passages of the Old Testament different kind of God’s punishment for the heathen people, so it’s not very much mistaken to follow Scriptures blindly to the letter in order to please God. However, if we were to kill every sinful person, the world would be empty of human beings at all. No one is pure enough to judge a soul; what is more, how much pure can somebody be while his/her hands are blood-stained? The Old Testament was written by men of other times, when the beliefs were different and quite more primitive as well as their sense of justice. Additionally, there was a change in the New Testament from the avenging God to a loving and caring Father who does justice taking into account our hearts’ intentions. "Every man's way is right in his own eyes, But the LORD weighs the hearts." (Proverbs 21:2)"Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts..." (1Corinthians 4:5)

To begin with, it is unbelievable the atrocious cruelty men are able to achieve while naming God as their Lord and Master. Since very old times, Heaven was the common goal of everybody but the means to such goal were extremely odd and monstrous. A very well known phrase from Crusades’ time was “To kill an infidel is not murder. It's the path to Heaven” is enough evidence of how crooked the view of religion and of God’s true will was. The Holy war had as a result many corpses floating in the river where Jesus was baptized, so where is the logic in this view of holiness? Bloody-mindedness, barbarity, outrage and inhumanity were what stood out in this war from both sides. Like the Crusades, the Inquisition was another black stain in the Catholic’s history, when people were accused of any kind of sin and tortured till they confessed to then be sentenced to death. Moreover, the incredible imagination and developed technology applied to create torture instruments, which were able to cause a lot of pain without taking the prisoner’s life, was appalling, repellent and evil. In addition, the torturers were monks and priests, whose aim was to clean the world from infidels and paganism, but they should have been preaching by words and actions exactly the opposite of what they were doing.

In the present days, the Lord’s name is still being used for atrocious crimes against life and peace. The unforgettable the Twin Tower event is a remaining of how sickly a Love image can be distorted to a terrorist demonstration of power. The bloodshed and sorrowful victims’ families is far away from God’s commandments which most important are “love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind” and “love others as much as you love yourself.” Furthermore, wars and violence still exist in the Middle East, Jews against Muslims is a constant problem, which involve killing of men, women and children indifferently. Where is the love, the mercy and the brotherhood?
In conclusion, who are we to name God as the reason for our crimes? He is love, peace, fraternity; we cannot use His name even to swear, but it has been used as an excuse to take somebody’s life, to cause affliction, horror and despair. It’s not difficult to assume that hate and evilness are behind all this but not God. His name has being badly used for cold- hearted people who do not understand the true image of God. Thus, fanatics and fundamentalists also have to understand they are not pure enough to judge somebody else’s soul. “You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will see clearly enough to remove the speck from your brother's eye." Matthew 7:5

[oopsycandy]

Your sure of this?

Because isn't that the point? You have your interpretation of religious scripture and so do billions of other people.

There will probably always be different factions or groups of people who use religious writings as justification for their actions. That does'nt make it morally right or wrong.


Organised religion is big business and that will attract corruption. Personally I'm glad that they don't have the same level of authority and power that they once had.

I think people are just people and the idea that there is a God and that some 'special' people are better able to understand this God, or are more qualified to decide which God is the real one, or what this God meant in the teachings or writings that have been historically attributed to them just baffles me.

Actually lots of things confuse me LOL It's not difficult :)

[Regina61285]

Your sure of this?

Because isn't that the point? You have your interpretation of religious scripture and so do billions of other people.

There will probably always be different factions or groups of people who use religious writings as justification for their actions. That does'nt make it morally right or wrong.


Organised religion is big business and that will attract corruption. Personally I'm glad that they don't have the same level of authority and power that they once had.

I think people are just people and the idea that there is a God and that some 'special' people are better able to understand this God, or are more qualified to decide which God is the real one, or what this God meant in the teachings or writings that have been historically attributed to them just baffles me.

Actually lots of things confuse me LOL It's not difficult :)

Well, almost all religions believe there is only one God and you don't need to be that "qualified" to know that.Religion has more to do with faith than with "being special", but if your faith says you should love and forgive why you hate and kill? That was my point, the contradiction between what they say and what they do.

And yes I'm sure about what I wrote

[Regina61285]

Your sure of this?

There will probably always be different factions or groups of people who use religious writings as justification for their actions. That does'nt make it morally right or wrong.







And how would you call it? :confused::confused::confused::confused:I'm not talking about different religions and their point of view.I'm talking about terrorism, in the past and in the present.

Thanks a lot for giving your point of view. I'm practicing my "abilities" (hhahaha) to write and defend my ideas. :blush:I hope you don't take things to a personal level :)

[billyjack]

There will probably always be different factions or groups of people who use religious writings as justification for their actions. That does'nt make it morally right or wrong.


i'm gonna go ahead and say that if an action requires justification after its made, then it perhaps should not have been done. there's always exceptions to this but i disagree with your neutral stance in saying that basically we cant judge if an action is morally right or wrong due to the relativity of morality or that of religious morality.


Bertrand Russell
What the world needs is not dogma but an attitude of scientific inquiry combined with a belief that the torture of millions is not desirable, whether inflicted by Stalin or by a Deity imagined in the likeness of the believer.

we know right and wrong. all we have to do is think about it, but...



Martin Heidegger
The most thought-provoking thing in our thought-provoking time is that we are still not thinking.

[Pendragon]

The love of God does not kill, however many do kill in the name of God. This doesn't invalidate scripture, this shows the evil temperment of men's hearts.

[billyjack]

well god made men's hearts, so say the scriptures, and he made the scriptures too. why the incompatibility?

[oopsycandy]

Ha I won't take it personally :)


When I said are you sure? I meant are you sure you are right, because you say in your OP

*Ironically, throughout history, many things that were done in the name of God would be abhorrent to Him

* He is love, peace, fraternity; we cannot use His name even to swear, but it has been used as an excuse to take somebody’s life, to cause affliction, horror and despair. It’s not difficult to assume that hate and evilness are behind all this but not God. His name has being badly used for cold- hearted people who do not understand the true image of God.

My point was what makes you more qualified to make such a statement? This is what you believe the scripture says but how is your opinion more valid than anyone elses? Is your opinion more valid becaus it is the best interpretation morally according to modern society?

See I bet the people who use God to justify there atrocities believe they are right just like you do.

So who gets to decide?

[oopsycandy]

i'm gonna go ahead and say that if an action requires justification after its made then it perhaps should not have been done.


I agree :)



there's always exceptions to this but i disagree with your neutral stance in saying that basically we cant judge if an action is morally right or wrong due to the relativity of morality or that of religious morality.


Of course we can judge actions morally right or wrong based upon our own life experience/modern society and all the rest of it but the point I was trying to make was that calling people terrorists or fundamentalists because they do not subscribe to your interpretation of scripture is exactly the thing that the people being called terrorists do to justify there actions.


The suffering and misery that have been caused over the centuries across the world in the name of God is absolutely abhorrent.


(devils advocate moment) These atrocities and wars have shaped practically every modern civilization to some extent and if God is omnipotent and omnipresent, is it not part of the plan?

[Tyler Self]

Remember that the old testament laws were meant to prepare the world for the coming messiah. God did not change, that is a logical absurdity. If you believe in the perfect God of the Bible, then if you take into account that the concept of perfect cannot be changed or else it ceases to be perfect, then you must believe that God doesn't change. And this is true, he does not change, his dealings with men changes. It is people who change.

I completely agree that we can never use God to justify exactly what he tells us not to do. The crusades, witch hunts, and the westboro baptist church come to mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

[Regina61285]

Remember that the old testament laws were meant to prepare the world for the coming messiah. God did not change, that is a logical absurdity. If you believe in the perfect God of the Bible, then if you take into account that the concept of perfect cannot be changed or else it ceases to be perfect, then you must believe that God doesn't change. And this is true, he does not change, his dealings with men changes. It is people who change.

I completely agree that we can never use God to justify exactly what he tells us not to do. The crusades, witch hunts, and the westboro baptist church come to mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

I absolutely agree. God didn't change but our view regarding Him. And I do respect His name and i feel really upset when His name is used as a justification for doing what He said not to do.
I didn't kow about the Westboro baptist church. Thanks for the link

[Pendragon]

well god made men's hearts, so say the scriptures, and he made the scriptures too. why the incompatibility?
If you have children, ask them why they break the household rules...

[Redzeppelin]

well god made men's hearts, so say the scriptures, and he made the scriptures too. why the incompatibility?

No incompatibility because you're leaving out the component of free will. Free will is what allows human beings to choose that which is evil rather than that which is good.

Furthermore, part of the problem is this: God is limited in that He must deal with finite, fallen, flawed, and selfish creatures. As well, His adversary - Satan - actively works in the hearts of mankind to warp and distort their understanding of God. It's not as simple as many of you are making it - and it's certainly not God's fault.

[weltanschauung]

No incompatibility because you're leaving out the component of free will. Free will is what allows human beings to choose that which is evil rather than that which is good.

Furthermore, part of the problem is this: God is limited in that He must deal with finite, fallen, flawed, and selfish creatures. As well, His adversary - Satan - actively works in the hearts of mankind to warp and distort their understanding of God. It's not as simple as many of you are making it - and it's certainly not God's fault.


if freewill is to be held accountable for our mistakes, why are you saying satan is the one who "works in the hearts of mankind to warp and distort their understanding of god"? it is satan or is it my mind, you gotta chose. and if it is satan, indeed, that corrupts my comprehension, why is it my fault then, when i commit a mistake?
youre saying when i dont understand something properly it is because satan is interfering in my judgement, so i can allow myself to profess that i am never guilty since there is a much powerful and intelligent transparent being pulling my strings and changing my thoughts?
and if god is limited in any aspect, how could he be held responsible for the proper functioning of our world, since none is higher and wiser?

[Redzeppelin]

if freewill is to be held accountable for our mistakes, why are you saying satan is the one who "works in the hearts of mankind to warp and distort their understanding of god"? it is satan or is it my mind, you gotta chose. and if it is satan, indeed, that corrupts my comprehension, why is it my fault then, when i commit a mistake?
youre saying when i dont understand something properly it is because satan is interfering in my judgement, so i can allow myself to profess that i am never guilty since there is a much powerful and intelligent transparent being pulling my strings and changing my thoughts?
and if god is limited in any aspect, how could he be held responsible for the proper functioning of our world, since none is higher and wiser?

I am saying this:

1. Free will is not "accountable" for our mistakes; we are, via our choices. Free will is the component of our existence that allows us to make that choice.

2. It is not Satan's fault I choose evil - but he and his demonic angel followers do not sit around the universe doing nothing. They work actively to destroy God's creations. I believe that Milton got it right when he portrayed Satan as knowing that he cannot take on God (his creator) but that (like most tyrants) that the best way to get back at a powerful person is to hurt the ones he loves. As such, Satan actively works to snare us by influencing us to use our free will to make that bad choice. Satan is the "king of lies" and his first appearance in the Bible shows him lying to Eve: "You shall not die" - when God made it clear that Adam and Eve would die if they ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Satan can warp my understanding by influencing me to turn away from God and then turn to myself for governance. Once that happens, my fallible human logic and selfish desires come into play and I start doing terrible things - sometimes mistakenly in the name of God. Satan doesn't "pull my strings" unless I give him permission to do so.

God is limited in that He has chosen to honor our free will - which means that certain actions on his part cannot be taken in order to honor our freedom.

[Ohmyscience]

I don't its fair to attribute so much harm cause by the religious and then to infer it was inspired by god mainly because god may or may not exist. Its safer to conclude those that wish to do harm are actively looking for excuses and scapegoats regardless.

Before the dominance of mono theism, those stemming for the abrahamic religions, people did not use excuses at all. They purposefully killed to conquer.

Which position is really better; to be honest about your ill intentions or convince others that your position is justifiable?

[mtpspur]

I have rejected the notion of 'free will' for years primarily as it's popularly used to reflect a person's choice to accept or reject slavation form the hands of God through His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. I have observed too many Christians or might be Christians rely on their free will and take it to a point where they are almost partners with God and doing Him a huge favor by giving their assent. They tend to grow out of it after a stumble or two and the longer thye walk with God themore they relaize it s all of grace. For myself my exercise of 'free' will has ALWAYS gotten me into trouble. Yes there are active decisions to be made but the powr and ability to peform comes fromGod as a free gift which elimiates unnecessary boasting and discrimination amongst brethren. If only.

[lupe]

2. It is not Satan's fault I choose evil - but he and his demonic angel followers do not sit around the universe doing nothing. They work actively to destroy God's creations.

This really looks out of the Fantasy sub-forum. Are-there really people out there who believe this stuff in the 21st century?


I have rejected the notion of 'free will' for years primarily as it's popularly used to reflect a person's choice to accept or reject slavation form the hands of God through His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. I have observed too many Christians or might be Christians rely on their free will and take it to a point where they are almost partners with God and doing Him a huge favor by giving their assent. They tend to grow out of it after a stumble or two and the longer thye walk with God themore they relaize it s all of grace. For myself my exercise of 'free' will has ALWAYS gotten me into trouble. Yes there are active decisions to be made but the powr and ability to peform comes fromGod as a free gift which elimiates unnecessary boasting and discrimination amongst brethren. If only.


I think you've actually found the perfect way to become a believer: not exercising your free will. Your free will to think.:brickwall

[Redzeppelin]

This really looks out of the Fantasy sub-forum. Are-there really people out there who believe this stuff in the 21st century?

Sure. On what authority do you insist that this is not possible? Your eyes and ears? What science tells you? Our limited human senses and the limited instruments we create cannot measure all aspects of reality.

What does the 21st century have to do with it? Is this the century where we figured everything out and there are no more mysteries in the universe? When did this happen?


I think you've actually found the perfect way to become a believer: not exercising your free will. Your free will to think.:brickwall

Spare me your condescension. I think as freely as you do - if not more. Come up with something better than the same old thing I've heard time and again from atheists and agnostics alike - as if YOU ALL are the standard of "free thinkers." Doubtful. By choosing to deny that there may be facets of reality that exist beyond what we can perceive, perhaps you are the limited thinkers - perhaps you have simply "swallowed" the ideology of secular humanism that has been fed to the world since the Enlightenment. Your sword - in the words of Dostoyevsky's inspector Porfiry - "cuts both ways." IMO you've choosen to turn off your critical thinking ability by limiting your view of reality to that which you can see.

Please, if you're going to quote me, give me the dignity of a real argument rather than a tired attack on my intellect. Certainly you're capable of better - being the free thinker you must see yourself to be.

[weltanschauung]

I am saying this:

1. Free will is not "accountable" for our mistakes; we are, via our choices. Free will is the component of our existence that allows us to make that choice.

2. It is not Satan's fault I choose evil - but he and his demonic angel followers do not sit around the universe doing nothing. They work actively to destroy God's creations. I believe that Milton got it right when he portrayed Satan as knowing that he cannot take on God (his creator) but that (like most tyrants) that the best way to get back at a powerful person is to hurt the ones he loves. As such, Satan actively works to snare us by influencing us to use our free will to make that bad choice. Satan is the "king of lies" and his first appearance in the Bible shows him lying to Eve: "You shall not die" - when God made it clear that Adam and Eve would die if they ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Satan can warp my understanding by influencing me to turn away from God and then turn to myself for governance. Once that happens, my fallible human logic and selfish desires come into play and I start doing terrible things - sometimes mistakenly in the name of God. Satan doesn't "pull my strings" unless I give him permission to do so.

God is limited in that He has chosen to honor our free will - which means that certain actions on his part cannot be taken in order to honor our freedom.

that sounds hilarious, and christianity, explained with such depth, looks like the schizophrenic fight between the two imaginary friends.
so satan needs your telephathic permission to assist you in your decisions? http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/78.gif

im sorry, but i just cant process that sort of justification. i dont accept and recognize any exterior influence in the world, and i can always trace the source of reality phenomena around me... and if satan is out there tormenting mankind, he's certainly made sure to never let me find him, because the whole thing sounds like a story made up by an 8 year old child tormented by his fear of the dark, seeing monsters in his hanged coat through the open closet door.

[Ohmyscience]

I do not think lupe meant to insult you, red, personally but that statement just raises eyebrows. People have said stranger things concerning aliens and paranormal activities but I bet you are not willing to defend them as comfortably as you defend yourself. I think you will even find skeptics of your statement among Christians.

To say that people are capable of evil hence acting as if they were devils is not the same stating a clear entity beyond comprehension is persuading people to do harm rather than good. What you stated sounds like an affirmation of the existence of cupid, angels, fairies, and the like.

[lupe]

Actually, I didn't quote you but mtpspur... so your attack on humanism and Enlightenment was misplaced. I did enjoy it though, as it reveals each one's luggage...

As far as demonic angel followers are concerned, well, I'm ready to listen to any argument on their existence, and indeed ready to be convinced. As I wrote on the other thread, the responsibility to prove that something exists lies with the one who argues that it exists. It's not me to argument against their existence, nor you to argument against the existence of the magic cream in my fridge...

[mono]

This entire thread appears to explore one of the most common arguments in philosophy, 'the problem of evil' - heinous crimes committed in the name of God, seemingly justified, big and small, the worst so-called 'luck' coming to once-blessed rivers (someone gave the analogy of corpses floating in the river where Jesus got baptized) and lands, two innocent individuals, Adam and Eve, getting swayed by two opposing forces, God and Satan, etc.
I feel as though every reply I post in the 'Religious Texts' and 'Philosophical Literature' sections references Objectivity vs. Subjectivity, but the problem of evil to me has always seemed absurd. Many individuals follow The Bible religiously, accepting it as the text of God, but humans, like us, wrote these texts, allegedly 'inspired' by God, and, as others discussed early in this thread, interpretations can differ. How many more variables can we add? Multiple individuals have written The Bible, even more have translated it, and even more have interpreted it. Friedrich Nietzsche wrote it best from Beyond Good and Evil:

Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule
Indeed, I consider murder an unjust act, possibly because of my Catholic upbringing and studies on The Bible, my American culture that has created laws against it, or because it 'just plain seems wrong.' How nations and religions can basically allow murder 'in the name of God' baffles me, but I see it as no more or less ridiculous than a man committing homicide because Jody Foster told him to do it.
Seeing that a Superior Being seems the ultimate judge of all, as regarded by most religions, could it seem possible that our judgments seem faulty, based upon what seems 'good' and what seems 'evil'? Though I would never commit murder, and find it unworthy of justification in almost any circumstance (perhaps self-defense), we consider it wrong because religions and laws deem it wrong; vice versa, we consider it right when religions and laws deem it right, for example, in so-called 'holy' wars. Could this make the perception and judgment of 'good' and 'evil' subjective? In my opinion, yes.
David Hume, one of the kings of skepticism, in my opinion, wrote of the problem of evil at length in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, and, for reasons of subjectivism, found good and evil nothing besides imaginary, a castle in the sky, and that 'good and bad' others have established as a whole, ruled by majority, in my very rough, elementary summary. Getting shot in the abdomen by a foresworn enemy will always feel 'bad,' but whether regarded as an 'evil' action depends, not partially, but fully upon why the enemy committed the so-called 'evil' action - did an interpretation of a religious text, a country, or a book like The Catcher in the Rye (like in John Lennon's shooting) tell the shooter to do it?
Personally, just as an individual can shunt Satan out of his/her life, refusing his evil temptations to commit evil deeds, I can, too, because I do not believe in a fallen angel with horns, trying to get revenge on an old man with a white beard by swaying what 'He' loves most, 'His' creations of people. I have never murdered anyone, and intend not to in my life, but whether everything else I do seems 'good' or 'bad,' seems just or unjust to me, and, if I continue these acts, I have no chance of going to prison, nor getting crucified on a cross, nor getting involved in a 'holy' war - good enough for me.

[Redzeppelin]

I do not think lupe meant to insult you, red, personally but that statement just raises eyebrows. People have said stranger things concerning aliens and paranormal activities but I bet you are not willing to defend them as comfortably as you defend yourself. I think you will even find skeptics of your statement among Christians.

Are you speaking for lupe? How is your "I do not think" any more authoritative in nature than my "I believe"? I find it interesting that many people challenge my "belief" statements, but have no problem giving me their "I think" statements and I'm supposed to accept those.

I don't mind raised eyebrows - what is bothersome are glib little replies that suggest that I'm not thinking for myself while my accuser offers nothing of substance to challenge my position.


To say that people are capable of evil hence acting as if they were devils is not the same stating a clear entity beyond comprehension is persuading people to do harm rather than good. What you stated sounds like an affirmation of the existence of cupid, angels, fairies, and the like.

Angels do exist. Fallen angels are what we call "demons." You're not required to believe in them for them to be real. I mentioned nothing about cupid or fairies.

[Redzeppelin]

that sounds hilarious, and christianity, explained with such depth, looks like the schizophrenic fight between the two imaginary friends.
so satan needs your telephathic permission to assist you in your decisions? http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/78.gif

You're not reading my posts very carefully. We sin through the exercise of our free will. Satan makes suggestions - so that we are influenced to use our free will to choose something which is bad for us. But we choose sin.


im sorry, but i just cant process that sort of justification. i dont accept and recognize any exterior influence in the world, and i can always trace the source of reality phenomena around me... and if satan is out there tormenting mankind, he's certainly made sure to never let me find him, because the whole thing sounds like a story made up by an 8 year old child tormented by his fear of the dark, seeing monsters in his hanged coat through the open closet door.

You recognize no external influence? Hardly. You obey all laws because you're a good person? Or are there some you obey because you don't want to go to jail? Please - the external world has influence on us all - including you.

Satan is not apparent to those whom he is not worried about. We are all either heading towards a relationship with God or away from Him - there is no neutral ground. Those who are heading away from Him (by their choice) are "left alone" by Satan because he considers them "safe." But, suppose you woke up tomorrow and suddenly realized that your life wasn't going the way it should and you ended up committing your life to God - trust me, Satan would become very real, because no move towards God is unopposed by Satan. He will not willingly let go of anyone who has been drifting away from God. If you're really as open-minded as you suggest, why don't you check out a copy of CS Lewis's book The Screwtape Letters. It's very short, but it does a good job of laying out the mechanics of temptation.

[mtpspur]

Well Lupe your comment back to me was appreciated. Freedom to think being surrendered by me--very far from it. I actually stive very hard NOT to take credit away from the Lord Christ for anything involving my spiritual welfare. I further plead guilty for a sloppy presentation but mostly religious arguments tend to bore me in the long run. I believe in the Lord Christ (though serving Him very poorly) and was actually a little disappointed in giving cause for that old cliche of dumb and blind followers which I suspect was at the heart of your comment. If I am wrong I apologize at this point if I have misinterpreted you. I just believe free will gets too much credit when it's really rampaging ego in action. And absolutely no offense has been taken.

[Redzeppelin]

As far as demonic angel followers are concerned, well, I'm ready to listen to any argument on their existence, and indeed ready to be convinced. As I wrote on the other thread, the responsibility to prove that something exists lies with the one who argues that it exists. It's not me to argument against their existence, nor you to argument against the existence of the magic cream in my fridge...

I cannot prove they exist. You cannot prove they do not exist. We are caught at impasse. I don't see why you think I'm compelled to prove to you anything I believe in exists. Why should I have to do that? Of what benefit would it be even if I could prove it? I've already made it clear that there is a spiritual realm that exists outside of the natural world you and I exist in. Just because you cannot perceive it you choose to believe it doesn't exist. I'm OK with that. I don't recall anywhere that I stated you needed to agree with me or believe as I do. The difference between your fanciful cream and the spiritual world is that my belief is based on a book that is the revelation of God's character - a book that has stood the test of time in many ways, a book that reveals truth. If you choose not to believe that, well, what am I supposed to do about that?

And no - you're not really "ready to be convinced." That's not even close to being true. People who dismiss the spiritual world would manage to come up with plenty of excuses (including "I must have hallucinated that") even if a demon appeared right before your eyes. You and I both know that.

[lupe]

So, you agree with me that there is no point of discussion, if we take away logical arguments, tangible proofs, human knowledge and THE REAL WORLD. We are indeed in impasse.

I could make it easier for you: who told you to apply the laws of physics for my cream? You cannot understand my cream, because you don’t believe in it, because you cannot access or comprehend its magical effects. Even if you were to apply it on your skin, you wouldn’t become invisible, because you are not ready for the cream to be revealed to you. But, I know. I have taken the right attitude and I have faith to the cream’s metaphysical effects. I know because I read it in the manual. ;)

[billyjack]

But, suppose you woke up tomorrow and suddenly realized that your life wasn't going the way it should and you ended up committing your life to God - trust me, Satan would become very real, because no move towards God is unopposed by Satan.

i completely agree bc i have a few psuedo buddies who committed their lives to god relatively recently. once they got "saved" delusion took on a whole new realness for them. the annoying thing was that they couldnt shut up about their new found "infirmity of the intellect" (emerson in regards to religious creeds)

[Redzeppelin]

So, you agree with me that there is no point of discussion, if we take away logical arguments, tangible proofs, human knowledge and THE REAL WORLD. We are indeed in impasse.

You capitalize "Real World" as if you're the authority on what that is. The message of the Gospels (and the greatest literature of the world including Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Steinbeck, et al) is that what you think reality to be might be very, very different than what it is. You assume that your knowledge of reality is the correct one because you're comfortable with the "basis" of it (science and empiricism) - yet science and empiricism are not the arbiters of all reality - only the material reality. Science and empiricism cannot fathom the matters of the human heart and our emotions. As I said - Christianity is about a RELATIONSHIP, not about a theory to be proven to others. You cannot "prove" to me that your friends, spouse, children, whatever LOVE you. All their actions and words could be faked - you take it on faith that they love you. God is not an event to be proven - He is an Being that desires to be in relationship witht the creatures He created.

And frankly, your list of things dismissed (a subtle slap at me) as the measurements of the REAL WORLD really don't work much once God's gotten rid of. Since the odds of abiogenesis are about 1 in 10 to the 13,333 power, you cannot tell me that that is logical, or that you have any tangible proofs that that is how life came about. If it's not God, then it's chance - and logic goes out the window when you base reality on that.


I could make it easier for you: who told you to apply the laws of physics for my cream? You cannot understand my cream, because you don’t believe in it, because you cannot access or comprehend its magical effects. Even if you were to apply it on your skin, you wouldn’t become invisible, because you are not ready for the cream to be revealed to you. But, I know. I have taken the right attitude and I have faith to the cream’s metaphysical effects. I know because I read it in the manual. ;)

If I trusted you, and you were my friend, I would take your word on faith and try the cream out. The same is true about God - He doesn't ask you to come to Him until you're ready. At that point, you might be surprised what happens.


i completely agree bc i have a few psuedo buddies who committed their lives to god relatively recently. once they got "saved" delusion took on a whole new realness for them. the annoying thing was that they couldnt shut up about their new found "infirmity of the intellect" (emerson in regards to religious creeds)

Well, I'm sure they consider themselves lucky to have you around, grounded firmly in "reality" as you are. What interests me is why all of you enlightened individuals with "open minds" bother engaging in conversation with we ignorant, deluded robots. Surely you have bigger fish to fry - like explaining how we got here, the basis of morality, the explanation of suffering in this world and the solution to it? Why bother with those of us are deluded? Who is crazier: the crazy man or he who engages the crazy man in conversation? Your willingness - both of you - to keep hammering away at me and others like me, reveals that our arguments are worthy of your attention - which means either

a) the arguments are substantial enough to warrant your attempted rebuttal, or
b) you're just as crazy as you assume us to be

You choose. :)

[lupe]

Well lupe your comment back to me was appreciated. freedom to think being surrendered by me--very far from it. I actually stive very hard NOT to take credit away from the Lord Christ for anything involving my spiritual welfare. I further pleade guilty for a sloppy presentation but mostly religious arguments tend to bore me in the long run. I believe in the Lord Christ (though serving Him very poorly) and was actually a little disappointed in giving cause for that old cliche of dumb and blind followers which I suspect was at the heart of your comment. If I am wrong I apologize at this pointif I have misunterpreted you. I just beleive free will gets too much credit when it's really rampaging ego in action. And absolutely no offense has been taken.

I see what you mean - much better that in the first post. It still seems to me quite sad (almost tragic) for anybody in this world to reject his free will; to believe that we are not and we can not be in control of our acts and that instead everything is somehow directed by an invisible power. Apart from sad is also dangerous: some will use it to take away all responsibilities for all the harm they do. History is full of such examples.

A last word on dumb and blind followers: the Christian gospel itself calls the faithful "sheep" (poimnion, in Greek) and the prophet "Sheppard" (poimin)...

[lupe]

Redzeppelin, your arguments about the proof of the love of our families (which is perceivable by their acts ) and the abiogenesis (don't forget that science is looking for answers, in comparison to religion who knows the answers) have been answered by the philosophical literature so many times that I'm sure you would also be bored to read it again.

[skasian]

Lupe, it is true that God said that we must be like sheep, being obedient, therefore following the Words of God, aiming for PERFECTION and ALL RIGHTEOUS. Why do you think that people who aim for ultimate perfection is dumb and blind? Out in the world today are people that rebuke God, commit evil in society. They do not have the spirit of God therefore they are foolish which are the ones who are truly dumb and blind.

[skasian]

Science looking for answers and religion knowing it.. The reason for this is science is entirely built on people power, which is hugely limited and uncertain, we cant to do anything but continue attempting to discover answers to questions that is out of reach.

Religion is based on God, and for example the Bible as being Words of God, God knows everything thus there is no necessity for Him to discover anything else.

[Pendragon]

Science looking for answers and religion knowing it.. The reason for this is science is entirely built on people power, which is hugely limited and uncertain, we cant to do anything but continue attempting to discover answers to questions that is out of reach.

Religion is based on God, and for example the Bible as being Words of God, God knows everything thus there is no necessity for Him to discover anything else.
But people will always search for answers and those that accept and believe in God still don't have all the answers even though God does. We must search, for without questions there would be no answers...

[mtpspur]

Back to Lupe. First off I corrected all my spelling errors. I simply was in a bit of a hurry when I posted as I was work--by the time I get home I'm a bit tired for rational thought. I think I need to clarify my thoughts about free will much better then I have. I believe God has given a will -- and the responsibility for using it properly. Where I disgress is in the ABILITY to have power in the will separate from the helpful hand of God. Much like the person who told the Lord Christ--Lord I believe, help my unbelief. On a personal note I am one of the most stubborn, hard headed believers I know and feel great kinship for Jonah and 'Doubting" Thomas. But I believe in spite in everything. Hope this helps. Oh and one more add-on--I am personally very aware of my faults and acts of commission and omission and at least hope to escape the accusation of hypocrity. My sins are my own and freely if reluctantly confessed.

[Nightshade]

A last word on dumb and blind followers: the Christian gospel itself calls the faithful "sheep" (poimnion, in Greek) and the prophet "Sheppard" (poimin)...
Ahhh didn't Jesus come from dessert country? The association of sheep with stupidity and blind obedience is not as far as I know a universal association. shepherd's had multifaceted roles back then one of the major ones ( seeing as livestock were such an important commodity) was to protect and steer the herd ( is it a herd of sheep?) from danger. I think the sheep and shepherd analogy of the bible may well refer to this.

Also I would like to add a friendly mod reminder at this point:


Please remember to respect other people's beliefs and please DO NOT make personal comments or discuss other members.
thanks :D

[Redzeppelin]

Redzeppelin, your arguments about the proof of the love of our families (which is perceivable by their acts ) and the abiogenesis (don't forget that science is looking for answers, in comparison to religion who knows the answers) have been answered by the philosophical literature so many times that I'm sure you would also be bored to read it again.

You've not read Hamlet, have you? All those observable acts are not definitive proof, because those things could all be FAKED, or done for reasons other than love (self-interest, manipulation, etc).

The only answers Christianity claims to have come from what God told us - and those answers are only incidental to knowing the God who gave them. Since science's authority comes from humanity, of course it's got to keep searching; it's field of understanding is incredibly limited, and its ability to understand the universe severly compromised by our limited existence.

[billyjack]

Well, I'm sure they consider themselves lucky to have you around, grounded firmly in "reality" as you are. What interests me is why all of you enlightened individuals with "open minds" bother engaging in conversation with we ignorant, deluded robots. Surely you have bigger fish to fry - like explaining how we got here, the basis of morality, the explanation of suffering in this world and the solution to it? Why bother with those of us are deluded? Who is crazier: the crazy man or he who engages the crazy man in conversation? Your willingness - both of you - to keep hammering away at me and others like me, reveals that our arguments are worthy of your attention - which means either

a) the arguments are substantial enough to warrant your attempted rebuttal, or
b) you're just as crazy as you assume us to be

You choose. :)

you're right. there are bigger fish to fry such as abiogenesis, morality, ect...but in order to do so, the zealots who would like to arrest the development of said fish fries (by way of non-sensical filibustering ) need to be addressed.

as far as your fallacious reduction of my reasons for arguing with you, thanks. it gave me a nice chuckle. your arguments are worthy of attention. not due to substance, but to sheer number of people who believe what you believe

[Lust Hogg]

The very fact of that matter is, that you choose to argue over Zeppelins assertion. So, if in your infinite wisdom you thought that such a nonsensical set of hollow and unsubstantiated assertions were so inconsequential to you, then why did you respond ? it seems as though you disposition towards such an impassioned response to Zeppelin is nothing but the manifestation of fear and aggression towards sound reasoning. I am not agreeing with anyone here, but do not out right contradict yourself be suggesting that this line of reasoning is so far below you that it is comical. You obviously had the compunction to respond, and by that response, your lending credence to the merit of zeppelins argument.

[billyjack]

dude, no offense but you're out of your element. my responding to ridicule such as yours doesnt legitimize your argument, it only proves my boredom and inability to find a girlfriend.

you come off as very condescending. and as far as fear and aggression on my part due to red's reasoning, wha?????. are you sure you're talking to me, bc i never took a position of aggression (if you have a beef with me, at least let it be with a position i took and not one that you've generalized onto every atheist regardless of what they've actually stated). i attempt to be cordial in my dealings with what i consider to be delusion.

[Regina61285]

:smash: Order! Order! :smash:
:) I'm glad you found intresting the topic, for I've learnt a lot from all you. It's amazing how many points of view you can find about a single issue. I love diversity and I want to thank you all.

I just want to say that I'm Catholic and I practice my religion. The church had committed mistakes and serious ones like human does. That doesn't mean that my faith will disapear for I follow Jesus not ppl...

And as for sheep, sheep is related to inocence, purity and of course, they RECOGNISE and FOLLOW the sheeperd (sorry I'm not sure how to spell it:sick:)

love you all,

Regy

[Lust Hogg]

i just don't think its fair they way everyone was tag teaming zeppelin. i don't mean to be antagonistic towards you, it just seems as though you were mocking Zeppelin and i thought that was unfair. A fair question is what you mean by "Delusion"

[mono]

Yikes, this thread has gone way left field. :eek2:
Simply said, I think what everyone has floated to regards the 'faith vs. logic' argument. Getting back on topic, indeed 'what mean and cruel things men can do for the love of God,' but some heated debates have suggested me not only that (the Maugham quote), yet also 'what mean and cruel things men can do' for the love of logic and reason.
'Faith vs. logic' . . . blah, blah, blah, Bible, Plato, Dostoevsky . . . yadda, yadda, yadda. Especially without pointing fingers in politics, individuals and epochs alike have committed inhumane acts both in the name of a religious figure (God, Allah, Yahweh, Satan, even the Pope) and 'what seems the best idea' (so said) according to reason; we can even use the 'Religious Texts' and 'Philosophical Literature' areas of the forum as prime examples of word-wars regarding, among other debates, faith vs. logic.
Any takers, anyone? (http://parenting.leehansen.com/downloads/coloring/posters/peace-rainbow-poster-clr.gif)

[Redzeppelin]

The very fact of that matter is, that you choose to argue over Zeppelins assertion. So, if in your infinite wisdom you thought that such a nonsensical set of hollow and unsubstantiated assertions were so inconsequential to you, then why did you respond ? it seems as though you disposition towards such an impassioned response to Zeppelin is nothing but the manifestation of fear and aggression towards sound reasoning. I am not agreeing with anyone here, but do not out right contradict yourself be suggesting that this line of reasoning is so far below you that it is comical. You obviously had the compunction to respond, and by that response, your lending credence to the merit of zeppelins argument.

Thank you for your words here. Much appreciated.


dude, no offense but you're out of your element. my responding to ridicule such as yours doesnt legitimize your argument, it only proves my boredom and inability to find a girlfriend.

Then do me a favor and don't engage me unless you wish to accord me the dignity of your sincere response. This post tells me that I should not bother responding to anything you say because you are only engaging me for entertainment value. I do not engage people simply out of lack of something better to do - because to do so means using people as a means to an end - which is IMO a particulary vicious thing to do. I'll assume we have nothing more to say at this point, since you've made it clear you're not really interested in learning anything or having a real discussion. Find a girlfriend then rather than patronize people who come here to enter into real intellectual discussions.


you come off as very condescending. and as far as fear and aggression on my part due to red's reasoning, wha?????. are you sure you're talking to me, bc i never took a position of aggression (if you have a beef with me, at least let it be with a position i took and not one that you've generalized onto every atheist regardless of what they've actually stated). i attempt to be cordial in my dealings with what i consider to be delusion.

Nothing condescending there, bill. LH actually came off far more controlled than I do in dealing with posts such as yours.

[weltanschauung]

Science looking for answers and religion knowing it.. The reason for this is science is entirely built on people power, which is hugely limited and uncertain, we cant to do anything but continue attempting to discover answers to questions that is out of reach.

Religion is based on God, and for example the Bible as being Words of God, God knows everything thus there is no necessity for Him to discover anything else.

http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/35.gif
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/facist_jockitch/shts/lsakfjlakjdflakdlfk.jpg
MARCH!
http://attheflicks.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/pink_floyd_the_wall_still.jpg



dude, no offense but you're out of your element. my responding to ridicule such as yours doesnt legitimize your argument, it only proves my boredom and inability to find a girlfriend.


http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/78.gif
i feel your pain, brother.