I don't think many are down on Jesus, rather, we're all down on the religious leaders who a) in Christianity confuse their followers morality, or b) in Islam incite their followers to violent acts of payback.
a) ie. Thou Shalt Not Kill- but you can kill to protect your country, Thou Shalt Not Steal - how many bankers are reading this?, Thou Shalt no be vain, selfish, and envious (paraphrasing) - yet prayer is used often to focus on what the follower wants rather than what the follower needs.
b) Yeah, one word... Jihad.
Bad men rule religions. Just like Bad men rule politics. 'Cause violence and fear rule primitive men (suckers, ie believers in bad things... creationism for one). We haven't yet evolved past these tribal situations, but at least the more we discuss this the closer we are to transforming our virtues and values.
Ahem - A Moving Train - politics forum? I don't believe it.
Could it be that religion - a system to control the docile, is the very same as politics - also a system to control the docile? And that by discussing all this, we're reaching something beyond politics, we're assuming control over our political world, that control it's not quite politically correct, but it represents will-power, its important but often not recognized.
How do we separate church and state when they are one and the same?
My favourite piece of logic is "To know that we know what we know and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge." Copernicus.
Quite good. It triggers this one: "He who knows not, but knows not that he knows not, is a fool."
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I don't think many are down on Jesus, rather, we're all down on the religious leaders who a) in Christianity confuse their followers morality, or b) in Islam incite their followers to violent acts of payback.
I agree. I'm not at all down on Jesus. For his time and place, he was quite the revolutionary, and people who move us forward in our thinking and introduce new ways of seeing the world are admirable and very much needed. The problem with organized religion as it exists today is that it often does quite the opposite.
I recently came across this quote from Kurt Wise, Ph.D., who earned his doctoral degree in paleontology at Harvard, studying under Stephen Jay Gould.
"Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand."
First I want to say that I am not attempting to turn this into another creation/evolution thread, we already have plenty of those. That is not the point. What I find disturbing about the quote is the larger issue of people being encouraged to reject solid evidence, people refusing to change their way of looking at the world, refusing to even consider viewpoints that conflict with their holy book. I see this as a very dangerous thing.
If someone wants to live their life that way, that's fine. How people conduct their personal lives is no concern of mine. My problem is when someone wants to base public policy around a philosophy that doesn't allow for growth and change.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Um, thats mostly true. As a practice of reading the Torah (which is done as part of services every week) we read from the Torah which is the Pentateuch. It is also what is generally studied and reffered too. However, there are some scholars and students who read other versions as a frame of comparison, but in general the Pentateuch is what is read.
However, when you say Pentateuch, that is only referring to the Torah, or the 5 Books of Moses. Jews also read Prophets and Writings.
Wow.
Hey Ive always wondered then, I know you stick to the hebrew scrips and avoid the greek scrips. So- what is the philosiphy in the Jewish faith as far as how or why the two scrolls were combined together?
Wow.
Hey Ive always wondered then, I know you stick to the hebrew scrips and avoid the greek scrips. So- what is the philosiphy in the Jewish faith as far as how or why the two scrolls were combined together?
The two scrolls? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane.
I have read the Bible. I don't understand most of it.
And here is the problem that I... personally... have with it...
It was written by Man.
It was in the hands of the Church for a long, long time.
Gutenberg's printing press allowed for its mass production, allowing the common people to have their own copies... but Gutenberg's Bible was 1455. And it was expensive, so only rich people could buy them. It wouldn't be until the 1500s that the Bible makes its way into commoner's homes.
Prior to that, the Bible remained in the custody of the Church. Monks hand copied them.
And who decided when the Bible was a complete work? Who decided which books were included and which ones omitted? And were the books included in their entireties... or were they edited to keep certain things from the public at large? Maybe the parts that appear in the Bible are true, but are we getting the whole picture?
Today... some guy in a robe reads a passage and explains to me what it means... well, I've got questions. Mainly, how does he know that's what it means? It is his interpretation of the passage... how do I know it is actually what it is supposed to mean? Because of his authority in the Church? It's like us trying to interpret Pearl Jam songs... unless Ed himself tells us what he meant or what the lines are about... it is left to our own interpretation. My interpretation of 'Yellow Ledbetter' is not the definative truth. My interpretation does not apply to anyone but me.
I question the Church because it is basically a governing body run by Man.
I don't trust Man to tell me the truth... the absolute truth. He will tell me his relative truth, but not the absolute truth. He tells me that his relative truth is called 'Faith' and that I just supposed to shut up and accept it.
...
And I don't think people are down on Jesus Christ... if anything, we disrespect Him by disobeying Him.
Although... I have to say that I stand in awe of the was the Amish have handled this tragedy in their community and we should ALL take a page from their book. THAT IS the teaching of Christ. Not justice tempered with anger and revenge... but, forgiveness and acceptance. Not exclusion, but inclusion. Maybe they got it right and te rest of us are the ones left out in the cold.
...
Anyway... I don't need religion or church doctrine to talk to God for me. And all I can do is read what the Bible says Jesus said and go with that.
But, just because I feel this way, I don't expect everyone else to. You have your own row to hoe. If you find comfort and faith and hope in your religion and your church, that is the path you should take. I believe that faith is personal and that you should concern yourself with your own journey. When you achieve the same status as Jesus... then, come see me and I will follow. Until then... have a safe trip... but, I'm taking this other road.
And that is the post of the day.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.--Genesis 3:16
By this third chapter of Genesis, woman lost her rights, her standing--even her identity, and motherhood became a God-inflicted curse degrading her status in the world."
That site's just a tad bit biased. When looking at how the Bible addresses gender roles, it's important to remember the sociocultural and historical context. Remember the audience.
It takes the ultimate in legalism to reduce a woman's rule to nothing and base it on Scripture. Let's not forget the Bible is full of strong women figures as well, like Sarah, Rahab, Esther, Ruth, Mary, and more.
i have never read the bible cover to cover, but i have read huge amounts of it in my youth during religious studies, went to catholic school, etc. however.....does one need to read the bible to discuss organized religion?
i didn't think the bible alone representative of all organized religion, and there are other 'holy books' out there as well. should we all read the qu'ran too? i mean sure, i bet it would be just as informative/enlightening to a degree...but for many of us who religion is simply not in the forefront of our lives, beyond being interested in others and/or historical interest to some degree......why?
i personally have not seen how 'everyone is down on Jesus'...i find most, even if they are not religious, or not christian, at least see him as a good man, a spiritual man, a man who worked for good in the world, etc. point is, if it's not one's faith, what difference does it make? we all have different beliefs, points of view....to me, as long as people are respectful/tolerant or mine or anyone else's beliefs...i'm cool with it. and yea, obviously, we have a LONG way to go on that one.
besides, i don't blame religion for evil...i blame the twisted minds who use religion, or anything really, as a handy *excuse* for their own agendas of evil.
That site's just a tad bit biased. When looking at how the Bible addresses gender roles, it's important to remember the sociocultural and historical context. Remember the audience.
It takes the ultimate in legalism to reduce a woman's rule to nothing and base it on Scripture. Let's not forget the Bible is full of strong women figures as well, like Sarah, Rahab, Esther, Ruth, Mary, and more.
It would be a whole lot easier to accept the book within a "sociocultural and historical context" if no one was claiming that it is the divinely revealed and infallible word of god himself. What happened, did god change his mind? And if so, why wasn't THAT recorded in the bible?
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
What happened, did god change his mind? And if so, why wasn't THAT recorded in the bible?
God can't change "Its" mind becuase it is the ultimate perfect being. Therefore it never makes a decision that need to be changed since it was the perfect decision. So if the bible is not how it was when it was first written then it is wrong and going against the intention of God. God does not want people to change the bible to better suit their lifestyles because then the bible would have to be rewritten (like it already has been).
I have no idea why god wrote a book that applied to when it was written but was too nearsighted to see into the future to look at how the world would develope. That doesn't make any sense to me, but then again, very few things in religion do.
I have no idea why god wrote a book that applied to when it was written but was too nearsighted to see into the future to look at how the world would develope. That doesn't make any sense to me, but then again, very few things in religion do.
Honestly, this boggles my mind when I hear this argument.
People are EXACTLY the same as they were in the bible. Their conduct, intentions, fears, etc. Just because in the last 2000 years technology has come so far - that has nothing to do with the fact that the principles on how to live your life to be a happy, loving, successul person apply exactly the same today as they did then I believe.
God can't change "Its" mind becuase it is the ultimate perfect being. Therefore it never makes a decision that need to be changed since it was the perfect decision. So if the bible is not how it was when it was first written then it is wrong and going against the intention of God. God does not want people to change the bible to better suit their lifestyles because then the bible would have to be rewritten (like it already has been).
But there are many instances of god changing his mind within the bible itself.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
It's Saturday night, so I'm not going to dig up a Bible and start doing research, but off the top of my head ... any instance where god grants a prayer request would be an example of god changing his mind. And of course there's the commandment against killing, contrasted with numerous orders to go forth and slaughter this tribe or that. And if I'm remembering correctly, god brought the flood because he regretted having created humans.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
It's Saturday night, so I'm not going to dig up a Bible and start doing research, but off the top of my head ... any instance where god grants a prayer request would be an example of god changing his mind. And of course there's the commandment against killing, contrasted with numerous orders to go forth and slaughter this tribe or that. And if I'm remembering correctly, god brought the flood because he regretted having created humans.
i was actually going to buy it once and i had the choice between the Bible and Jurassic Park........ i wanted something that was realistic, believable and most of all, would mention dinosaurs... so i got Jurassic Park
no dinos in the Bible.... why is this?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
It's Saturday night, so I'm not going to dig up a Bible and start doing research, but off the top of my head ... any instance where god grants a prayer request would be an example of god changing his mind. And of course there's the commandment against killing, contrasted with numerous orders to go forth and slaughter this tribe or that. And if I'm remembering correctly, god brought the flood because he regretted having created humans.
The God of the Bible is a loving God who has very real feelings. Hes not a dictator who demands that people do it his way or they die.
When he brought the flood, he was "hurt at his heart" which to me conveys that he has deep feeling, and thats comforting.
The main reason it says that he brought the flood is because the angels had come down from heaven and mated with human women and the spawn of this were "Nephilim" -very wicked and giant offspring who some scholars believe were actually the Gods and Demi-gods of Ancient Greek Mythology.
He chose Noah to warn the people for 40 years of what was coming but in the end only Noah and his sons and their wives survived. Shem -(where Semitic people descended from such as Jewish) Ham- (Hamitic peoples such as the Black race) and Japeth -(Japethic people are Eastern Europeans, Anglo's)
It's Saturday night, so I'm not going to dig up a Bible and start doing research, but off the top of my head ... any instance where god grants a prayer request would be an example of god changing his mind. And of course there's the commandment against killing, contrasted with numerous orders to go forth and slaughter this tribe or that. And if I'm remembering correctly, god brought the flood because he regretted having created humans.
Im curious too, why you view him "changing his mind" as a contradiction and proof of his non-existance instead of a sign of an incredibally loving God who made allowances for peoples feelings and who actually referred to humans as his "Friend" (Abraham).
i was actually going to buy it once and i had the choice between the Bible and Jurassic Park........ i wanted something that was realistic, believable and most of all, would mention dinosaurs... so i got Jurassic Park
no dinos in the Bible.... why is this?
In the first few Chaps. of Genesis it describes the 7 creative "days" which actually spanned thousands and thousands of years, it describes Great wild beasts roaming the Earth...Bible scholars believe that these were the Dinosaurs and that he created them for a purpose (oil, etc.) but obviously killed them off before creating Humans.
The main reason it says that he brought the flood is because the angels had come down from heaven and mated with human women and the spawn of this were "Nephilim" -very wicked and giant offspring who some scholars believe were actually the Gods and Demi-gods of Ancient Greek Mythology.
the angels... :eek:
mating with human women :eek:
Lysergic acid diethylamide :cool:
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Im curious too, why you view him "changing his mind" as a contradiction and proof of his non-existance instead of a sign of an incredibally loving God who made allowances for peoples feelings and who actually referred to humans as his "Friend" (Abraham).
I don't take it as proof of his non-existence, although I think it puts a dent in claims of infallibility. I don't think it's possible to prove that something doesn't exist. I don't believe in the bible for numerous other reasons.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Comments
a) ie. Thou Shalt Not Kill- but you can kill to protect your country, Thou Shalt Not Steal - how many bankers are reading this?, Thou Shalt no be vain, selfish, and envious (paraphrasing) - yet prayer is used often to focus on what the follower wants rather than what the follower needs.
b) Yeah, one word... Jihad.
Bad men rule religions. Just like Bad men rule politics. 'Cause violence and fear rule primitive men (suckers, ie believers in bad things... creationism for one). We haven't yet evolved past these tribal situations, but at least the more we discuss this the closer we are to transforming our virtues and values.
Ahem - A Moving Train - politics forum? I don't believe it.
Could it be that religion - a system to control the docile, is the very same as politics - also a system to control the docile? And that by discussing all this, we're reaching something beyond politics, we're assuming control over our political world, that control it's not quite politically correct, but it represents will-power, its important but often not recognized.
How do we separate church and state when they are one and the same?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I recently came across this quote from Kurt Wise, Ph.D., who earned his doctoral degree in paleontology at Harvard, studying under Stephen Jay Gould.
"Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand."
First I want to say that I am not attempting to turn this into another creation/evolution thread, we already have plenty of those. That is not the point. What I find disturbing about the quote is the larger issue of people being encouraged to reject solid evidence, people refusing to change their way of looking at the world, refusing to even consider viewpoints that conflict with their holy book. I see this as a very dangerous thing.
If someone wants to live their life that way, that's fine. How people conduct their personal lives is no concern of mine. My problem is when someone wants to base public policy around a philosophy that doesn't allow for growth and change.
Wow.
Hey Ive always wondered then, I know you stick to the hebrew scrips and avoid the greek scrips. So- what is the philosiphy in the Jewish faith as far as how or why the two scrolls were combined together?
The two scrolls? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
And that is the post of the day.
It's too outdated for me anyways, plus I don't like how it demeans women: http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/women.php
"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.--Genesis 3:16
By this third chapter of Genesis, woman lost her rights, her standing--even her identity, and motherhood became a God-inflicted curse degrading her status in the world."
That site's just a tad bit biased. When looking at how the Bible addresses gender roles, it's important to remember the sociocultural and historical context. Remember the audience.
It takes the ultimate in legalism to reduce a woman's rule to nothing and base it on Scripture. Let's not forget the Bible is full of strong women figures as well, like Sarah, Rahab, Esther, Ruth, Mary, and more.
go book of morman.
and go padres.
i put all my stock in the latter.
and have nothing to show for it.
except, there's always next year.
http://www.myspace.com/brain_of_c
God can't change "Its" mind becuase it is the ultimate perfect being. Therefore it never makes a decision that need to be changed since it was the perfect decision. So if the bible is not how it was when it was first written then it is wrong and going against the intention of God. God does not want people to change the bible to better suit their lifestyles because then the bible would have to be rewritten (like it already has been).
I have no idea why god wrote a book that applied to when it was written but was too nearsighted to see into the future to look at how the world would develope. That doesn't make any sense to me, but then again, very few things in religion do.
Honestly, this boggles my mind when I hear this argument.
People are EXACTLY the same as they were in the bible. Their conduct, intentions, fears, etc. Just because in the last 2000 years technology has come so far - that has nothing to do with the fact that the principles on how to live your life to be a happy, loving, successul person apply exactly the same today as they did then I believe.
...
Esther's here and she's sick?
hi Esther, now we are all going to be sick, thanks
Really? Can I have an example of that?
I have no idea man.
good points. what times is it where you are?
Esther's here and she's sick?
hi Esther, now we are all going to be sick, thanks
i was actually going to buy it once and i had the choice between the Bible and Jurassic Park........ i wanted something that was realistic, believable and most of all, would mention dinosaurs... so i got Jurassic Park
no dinos in the Bible.... why is this?
The God of the Bible is a loving God who has very real feelings. Hes not a dictator who demands that people do it his way or they die.
When he brought the flood, he was "hurt at his heart" which to me conveys that he has deep feeling, and thats comforting.
The main reason it says that he brought the flood is because the angels had come down from heaven and mated with human women and the spawn of this were "Nephilim" -very wicked and giant offspring who some scholars believe were actually the Gods and Demi-gods of Ancient Greek Mythology.
He chose Noah to warn the people for 40 years of what was coming but in the end only Noah and his sons and their wives survived. Shem -(where Semitic people descended from such as Jewish) Ham- (Hamitic peoples such as the Black race) and Japeth -(Japethic people are Eastern Europeans, Anglo's)
Im curious too, why you view him "changing his mind" as a contradiction and proof of his non-existance instead of a sign of an incredibally loving God who made allowances for peoples feelings and who actually referred to humans as his "Friend" (Abraham).
In the first few Chaps. of Genesis it describes the 7 creative "days" which actually spanned thousands and thousands of years, it describes Great wild beasts roaming the Earth...Bible scholars believe that these were the Dinosaurs and that he created them for a purpose (oil, etc.) but obviously killed them off before creating Humans.
the angels... :eek:
mating with human women :eek:
Lysergic acid diethylamide :cool:
Huh? Lol!
Even perfect Angels couldnt resist the power of a beautiful woman I guess
If angels were chicks he'd have to drown us again because of my sexiness.
You are too much dude