Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

mattyrm wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I think we need a new thread titled "what does Bible say/mean?".

Lets have a more interesting thread, something like "The gripping world of tile grouting" or something.

I'd be down for this. In fact, I am a master caulksmith.

Melissia wrote:Of course we don't know. If we knew everything, science would stop.

Unfortunately, many of the zanier deeply religious people believe that they DO know everything-- and it's all in their little book.

And they are wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bromsy wrote:

mattyrm wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I think we need a new thread titled "what does Bible say/mean?".

Lets have a more interesting thread, something like "The gripping world of tile grouting" or something.

I'd be down for this. In fact, I am a master caulksmith.

You're a porn star? Oh wait you said caulksmith, not....

Relapse wrote:

blood reaper wrote:So, my life should be based around a blood sacrifice committed by a man (Zombie!) in the middle east who I have never met, have little evidence of knowing existed and should obey his rules designed by a man in the desert trying to deal with a early society after being talked to by a bush of weed on fire.

Seems legit.

Lets not forget that by the laws of creation, the Earth is six thousand years old, despite this has been proved incorrect. We would all technically be the product of incest, due to the fact God denied knowledge from two innocent people, who had no idea of good nor evil who where told by a talking snake that they should eat the knowledge, also knowledge is in the form of an apple.

Seems legit.

Also, the world was flooded after God decided that everyone was "EVIL", including the blind, the disabled, the deaf, the children, the babies and mentally disabled, and in order to start over, God got his garden hose and told a six hundred year old man to gather two of every animal on earth. There are currently 20,000 species of fish, 6,000 species of reptiles, 9,000 birds, 1,000 amphibians, and 15,000 species of mammals, however, he only took the 21,000 reptiles and mammals with him, then he built the boat and went a rowing, but ignoring food supplies, the fact he's six hundred and has crossed the entire planet, and the current life time of a man in his age was a maximum of 25 on average, survived. Also, if rain water and salt water mix, they form a deadly chemical which would have wiped out all fish life, so they would have had to held their breath. Then Noah, and his six wives and his 3 sons, got busy and made the entire human race again, with incest.

Seems legit.

First off, look at it this way. You see death as a removal from the stage, but with God's view, death is merely moving people around. They are still alive, but in a different place. As far as the morality of the people goes, I'll take it on faith that it must have been pretty bad, except for the children under a certain age, since children have no concrete concept of good or evil the same goes for mentaly disabled. Those children and mentaly disabled who died will have a ticket straight into God's presence, as they died innocent. Their parents, however would have a lot to answer for since they knew what was right, yet did not raise their children accordingly.
As far as scientific impossibility goes, even Einstein admitted he didn't know everything or every possibility in the universe. Look at the Mars Curiosity mission. Most people at the turn of the last century would have said that was impossible and could never happen, yet here we are, looking close up at the surface of that planet.

When did I ever say anything was impossible? It just seems highly unlikely.

Then our views of morality are different.

I just see it as a myth started by earlier Religons, then formed into new ideals by people wanting to explain things, but I still see it as immoral and wrong.

Also, until I have evidence, scientific, liable evidence, then I won't believe, but god hasn't made it at all obvious.

Also, how out of the thousand or so Relgions do you know you are correct? What will you do if you find yourself before Zeus or Allah?

How do you mean our views of morality are different?

Squigsquasher wrote:So according to you, if a person is a good, kind, caring person, has done nothing wrong in their life and leads a good existence, helping other people and making the lives of others better, but doesn't believe in Jesus...He deserves to burn in hell?

You are looking at this from the wrong point of view.

"Servants, obey in all things [your] masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: And whatsoever ye do, do [it] heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men" Colossians 3:22-23

From a Christian perspective, unless man does "good works" for the glory of God, then they will crumble away and be pointless. People do "good" because they want to to "good" for the sake of doing "good", or because it makes them feel good, or because they want to get something out of it.

A Christian does what he does for the glory of God... or at least that is what we strive to do.

Also, the problem isn't works, it is the inherent sinful nature of man. God being perfect was separated from man when sin entered our hearts. Being perfect and pure, He could not be with us because of our sinful nature, it would not be according to His nature. Jesus bridges that gap between God and Man, but only for those who choose to accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Works have no play in the matter.

Squigsquasher wrote:Whilst a man can be a complete tosser and make other people's lives miserable and generally be a hateful, malicious bastard, but be utterly faithful, and he will go to heaven?

If he acts like that I would doubt his faith... but yes, he would still go to heaven if he had any faith.

There is a lot of controversy about the importance of works in one's salvation in the Church as a whole. I recently talked to someone who gave an excellent point, and I completely agree with it:
We are called to glorify God as Christians... our entire focus should be on God, so why should we worry if our works matter in our salvation? As long as we aim to glorify God and as long as we aim to become more like him, the fruits of the spirit will be shown in our daily actions, and the importance of works in one's salvation won't make a difference.

Those who focus on whether or not works have a play in one's salvation are missing the point: that it shouldn't make a difference.

Paganism was the very first religion. Always good to tilt back a beer and say "thanks to Zues" watching a good thunderstorm behind the grill with overhead cover.

Relapse wrote:How do you mean our views of morality are different?

You see it acceptable to let a being judge the entire human race on what would seem it's view of a majority doing bad things, then committing mass genocide instead of coming down, going "Hi, I'm God, so if you don't stop, your fethed" but in a more serious manner.

In all respects, I'm not going to convince anyone that I'm right, nor are you but in all respects, Religon has little factual back up to support it.

I don't think their is no possibility of God, but I doubt the Bible would be a good source for morality nor is it's source.

blood reaper wrote:

Relapse wrote:How do you mean our views of morality are different?

You see it acceptable to let a being judge the entire human race on what would seem it's view of a majority doing bad things, then committing mass genocide instead of coming down, going "Hi, I'm God, so if you don't stop, your fethed" but in a more serious manner.

In all respects, I'm not going to convince anyone that I'm right, nor are you but in all respects, Religon has little factual back up to support it.

I don't think their is no possibility of God, but I doubt the Bible would be a good source for morality nor is it's source.

There were warnings from God through his prophets, though, but the people ignored them. Even if God were to do a face to face, as he did with Adam and Eve, or perform any of his biblicaly recorded miricles, free will does not guarantee he'd be listened to.
In any event, as I said earlier, what is death to you is merely a transition from one state of living to another from God's view.

Indeed.

However, Adam 'n Eve, where at best children who where convinced by a talking Snake to take a bite from an Apple containing the knowledge of morality and such.

So they could not of known right from wrong, and God had only said, "Don't eat them Apples"

How where they supposed to know it's going to end badly, they where spoiled children who knew little of consequence.

And yes, I don't think I'd listen to the guy who drowned the world cause he's judged everyone on a majorites actions, and quite vilontley I imagine.

Also, how do you know this transaction thing is true? So, what death is meaningless ? All the deaths in the history of man mean nothing? They just go onto the next life?

Also, could I see some evidence?

God did tell them they would die if they partook. I don't know what was being talked of. It was just described as fruit of the tree, but what tree, what fruit?
Perhaps the tree was desciptive of an action and the fruit was the result of that action, I honestly don't know.
As far as God's judgement on the people of Noah's, or any time goes, he is the creator and sees the entire picture where as we only see infintisimal bits that. We know that he is merciful and as his children, he will correct us in the way a loving father would correct his children.
I figure by now your thinking what loving father kills his children? For God, our concept of death is nothing more than someone in one room calling for someone in another room to join him.
Death is meaningless in the sense that it is not an obliteration of someone's existence. We just didn't pop into existence at birth, we existed before the world began as spirit children of God. This life on Earth is a part of our learning experience to one day be able to inherit the things God has for us.
As far as proof goes, it's like radio waves, there was some evidence for the early scientific pioneers they existed, but most people scoffed at the idea. As knowledge increased, though, everyone came to know of their existence.
Has God revealed everything to us yet? No, we need to absorb and understand what we've been given so far.
Perhaps one day in this lifetime, you'll get the evidence you seek, but faith is important for a reason.
My best advice in this regard is to have an open mind and honestly seek for your answers.

The Bringer wrote:

Squigsquasher wrote:So according to you, if a person is a good, kind, caring person, has done nothing wrong in their life and leads a good existence, helping other people and making the lives of others better, but doesn't believe in Jesus...He deserves to burn in hell?

You are looking at this from the wrong point of view.

"Servants, obey in all things [your] masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: And whatsoever ye do, do [it] heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men" Colossians 3:22-23

From a Christian perspective, unless man does "good works" for the glory of God, then they will crumble away and be pointless. People do "good" because they want to to "good" for the sake of doing "good", or because it makes them feel good, or because they want to get something out of it.

A Christian does what he does for the glory of God... or at least that is what we strive to do.

Also, the problem isn't works, it is the inherent sinful nature of man. God being perfect was separated from man when sin entered our hearts. Being perfect and pure, He could not be with us because of our sinful nature, it would not be according to His nature. Jesus bridges that gap between God and Man, but only for those who choose to accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Works have no play in the matter.

Squigsquasher wrote:Whilst a man can be a complete tosser and make other people's lives miserable and generally be a hateful, malicious bastard, but be utterly faithful, and he will go to heaven?

If he acts like that I would doubt his faith... but yes, he would still go to heaven if he had any faith.

There is a lot of controversy about the importance of works in one's salvation in the Church as a whole. I recently talked to someone who gave an excellent point, and I completely agree with it:
We are called to glorify God as Christians... our entire focus should be on God, so why should we worry if our works matter in our salvation? As long as we aim to glorify God and as long as we aim to become more like him, the fruits of the spirit will be shown in our daily actions, and the importance of works in one's salvation won't make a difference.

Those who focus on whether or not works have a play in one's salvation are missing the point: that it shouldn't make a difference.

That is just stupid.

If God is supposedly omnipotent and our inherent sinfulness is a problem as far as God is casting concerned, why didn't God just remove our ability to be sinful? And why does this same omnipotent God need glorifying so much? Could it be that he is just an attention seeking tantrum throwing narcissist? God doesn't NEED glorifying, unless he withers and dies without worship. Fellow humans need help and kindness. I refuse to bend to the will of a tyrannical deity who demands attention just so he can feel better about his own utter lack of redeeming features.

Mainly because he doesn't exist.

Relapse wrote:God did tell them they would die if they partook. I don't know what was being talked of. It was just described as fruit of the tree, but what tree, what fruit?
Perhaps the tree was desciptive of an action and the fruit was the result of that action, I honestly don't know.
As far as God's judgement on the people of Noah's, or any time goes, he is the creator and sees the entire picture where as we only see infintisimal bits that. We know that he is merciful and as his children, he will correct us in the way a loving father would correct his children.
I figure by now your thinking what loving father kills his children? For God, our concept of death is nothing more than someone in one room calling for someone in another room to join him.
Death is meaningless in the sense that it is not an obliteration of someone's existence. We just didn't pop into existence at birth, we existed before the world began as spirit children of God. This life on Earth is a part of our learning experience to one day be able to inherit the things God has for us.
As far as proof goes, it's like radio waves, there was some evidence for the early scientific pioneers they existed, but most people scoffed at the idea. As knowledge increased, though, everyone came to know of their existence.
Has God revealed everything to us yet? No, we need to absorb and understand what we've been given so far.
Perhaps one day in this lifetime, you'll get the evidence you seek, but faith is important for a reason.
My best advice in this regard is to have an open mind and honestly seek for your answers.

A loving father would drown his children? You can assume it's fine, but it's not in my opioin! It's evil and insane!

I need evidence, faith is being blind and foolish.

I need evidence, not "radio ways", that's why I am an Athiest, I serched an found no evidence to such a thing and have decided that until god is proved, then I will not believe so blindly.

You are deluded.

I'm not Athiest. I perfer the roman/greek gods. They're much fun

@Squig,

We've been put here to learn morality and how to choose between good and evil, among other things. If our free will were removed, we be in a worse position than, say, people living in Norrth Korea. The fact you've been given free will proves he is not a Tyrant.
To put it into another context, I imagine you believe moral codes as laid down by organized religion are restrictive and no way will you follow them. What then if you were given a drug or treatment that removed your ability to not comply to the letter what was dogma?

@Blood, I direct you to the part of my previous post answering your question about a father drowning his children.

Relapse wrote:@Squig,

We've been put here to learn morality and how to choose between good and evil, among other things. If our free will were removed, we be in a worse position than, say, people living in Norrth Korea. The fact you've been given free will proves he is not a Tyrant.
To put it into another context, I imagine you believe moral codes as laid down by organized religion are restrictive and no way will you follow them. What then if you were given a drug or treatment that removed your ability to not comply to the letter what was dogma?

@Blood, I direct you to the part of my previous post answering your question about a father drowning his children.

I did, but I disagree in the extreme.

I feel like its time to give up these discussions because they are way off topic by now and are getting heated.

Relapse wrote:@Squig,

We've been put here to learn morality and how to choose between good and evil, among other things. If our free will were removed, we be in a worse position than, say, people living in Norrth Korea. The fact you've been given free will proves he is not a Tyrant.
To put it into another context, I imagine you believe moral codes as laid down by organized religion are restrictive and no way will you follow them. What then if you were given a drug or treatment that removed your ability to not comply to the letter what was dogma?

@Blood, I direct you to the part of my previous post answering your question about a father drowning his children.

It merely proves that he wishes to feel more glorious by recieving worship from creatures with "free will".

Still waiting for "God Wills It" because then I equate that to "Allah Ackbar"

@ Squig and Blood,

Cleaely we are opposites on this, but I a m enjoying a lot the idea exchange. Unfortunatly, I have other things I need to do right now and have to leave.
I'd like to take this up later with both of you though, because it is an interesting topic to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Bringer wrote:I feel like its time to give up these discussions because they are way off topic by now and are getting heated.

I don't feel heated, and I don't think Squig or Blood is, either. You, yourself bring a lot of good to the table, and I hope you aren't feeling attacked.

Commenting on the original cheerios movie, I have to say that it was rather underwhelming. For it to be really screwed up, the guy should have been consumed by the cheerios fire.

Relapse, Bringer, I appreciate you both being patient and keeping it polite and constructive.

Blood reaper, squigsmasher, you can disagree with them without insulting them. Vigorous disagreement is one thing, but there's no need to be rude, and it's a violation of the website's rules if and when you are. I've had to delete a couple of posts that were nothing more than pure bashes and I'd rather not have to do so again.

As a religious person from outside the Judeo-Christian framework, I have the privilege of a somewhat less-common perspective, disagreeing with all four of you on many points, and agreeing with all of you in some places.

We are best able to expand our own minds and those of others if we keep the idea exchange friendly and don't dismiss or look down on one another.

Mannahnin wrote:

We are best able to expand our own minds and those of others if we keep the idea exchange friendly and don't dismiss or look down on one another.

So we can't look down on someone who uses there personal beliefs as an excuse for there discrimination towards others?

So we can't look down on someone who uses there personal beliefs as an excuse for there discrimination towards others?

See thats the issue I have. Thats one step above being considered a "hater" or part of "a hate group"

I admit that I rather like Jesus' philosophy. Humility, love, acceptance, charity, forgiveness, and honesty are the virtues he spoke for, and they're all noble virtues which help make our society a better place for everyone.

But I see so many prideful, arrogant schmucks within the religious community that it makes me wonder... how do THEY know who will be saved? Someone who is prideful is just as sinful as someone who is lustful... yet the former is embraced while the latter is demonized. That said, as a personal thing I can't help but hate. It's one of my personal demons, as it were. But I struggle to control it the best I can-- no one likes a psychopathically violent person, after all, and I don't want to become one-- but these people... I wonder if they struggle iwth their own pride? Do they notice their prideful nature?.

And thus pride sneaks up on myself, as well. It's a rather insidious thing. Still, I do worry that people get so caught up in spreading the message that they lose track of its meaning. Trying to spread the word of Christ through spouting hate is like... trying to show hospitality by throwing someone out the door naked in to the snow.

@Melissa
John 8:44: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
Truly a message of peace.

Just forget the fact pride is a human emotion, it seems like all Religon has to suppress human emotion?

It isn't always bad ether.

When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

Cheesecat wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:We are best able to expand our own minds and those of others if we keep the idea exchange friendly and don't dismiss or look down on one another.

So we can't look down on someone who uses there personal beliefs as an excuse for there discrimination towards others?

A) That's not what I said.
B) Dakka rules don't permit you to be nasty to someone on here, even if they engage in behavior or speech you find immoral and objectionable.

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse.

blood reaper wrote:

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

So you're saying that I shouldn't suppress the emotional desire to rip someone's throat out with a pencil whenever I feel it next?

blood reaper wrote:

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

That depends on the expression of the emotion. It's not a good thing to let a child run wild with his emotions and less so with an adult.