An intelligent Christian Self-Observation [Archive]

phixion

12-14-2006, 12:36 PM

but quoting bible passages is just essentally propelling the myth and humanity cannot change if those lies keep getting passed down but what if u know the bible is a fairy tale? can u still quote it? i never thought dinosaurs and man lived together but that doesnt mean there arent valuable lessons in it.  like loving your enemythats a valuable lesson, to let go of hate and anger, i havent ever learned that lesson, but i know its an important one. and i mean no where not in any other literature i have ever run across do they say LOVE your enemy, sure they may say forgive or turn the other cheek but actually love your enemy? wait now that im thinking about it Enders Game does but he talks about knowing the enemy so completely that u cant help but love him, but int he next breath he talks about using that to grind his enemies to the point that their will do to harm is destroyed. so im not sure that counts, just philosophizing.......

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 12:53 PM

We don't have to teach "love your enemy" or "love your neighbor as yourself" by pointing out that some book said it.When I say WE, I mean us you don't have the restrictions our parents did.  We're smarter.We can teach our kids those same lessons without claiming some made up entity claimed it be done.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 01:04 PM

phixion wrote:  but quoting bible passages is just essentally propelling the myth and humanity cannot change if those lies keep getting passed down  but what if u know the bible is a fairy tale? can u still quote it? i never thought dinosaurs and man lived together but that doesnt mean there arent valuable lessons in it. like loving your enemythats a valuable lesson, to let go of hate and anger, i havent ever learned that lesson, but i know its an important one. and i mean no where not in any other literature i have ever run across do they say LOVE your enemy, sure they may say forgive or turn the other cheek but actually love your enemy? wait now that im thinking about it Enders Game does but he talks about knowing the enemy so completely that u cant help but love him, but int he next breath he talks about using that to grind his enemies to the point that their will do to harm is destroyed. so im not sure that counts, just philosophizing....... I wouldn't say its a fairy tale, but I think you can look at it in two ways.    There is the faith angle and that's what bothers everyone, but often the entire book gets disregarded because of that.  If you can't read it and say it can be construed as a philosphy, you aren't objective. The principles are based on absolutes just like Plato.  You are exactly right that ingrained in the bible are morals and values we promote today and cannot be seperated from everyday life.  I'm not trying to be mean furtherman, but there are some morals that can be seperated as a fictious "myth" as you call it, there are others that cannot.   Deeply ingrained in the bible are notions of justice, love like phixion mentioned, and other ideas reenforcing what they think is a more perfect society.      Like almost any type of philosphy or religion there is almost conflicts about what a specific section means and many people disagree.  I could be like this kid and quote corinthians from the new testament and from the philospher paul and try to make that the overarching theme of the bible.  Literalits and other interpretors are never going to agree, it doesn't make one side right, but its completely unfair to generalize one interpretation as the problem with a philosphy.  Gay marriage is a conflicting problem with some of the bible's messages, whoa stop the presses.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 01:11 PM

Furtherman wrote: We don't have to teach "love your enemy" or "love your neighbor as yourself" by pointing out that some book said it.When I say WE, I mean us you don't have the restrictions our parents did. We're smarter.We can teach our kids those same lessons without claiming some made up entity claimed it be done. That's really what angers me the most.   I think its completely arrogant to think we have figured it out after 2000 years of people thinking about what is the best society.   I'm not being an ass, but where are you getting these lessons and ideas.  Its not our founding fathers who came up with this stuff.  All i'm saying is that the more you want to come up with your own ideas and lessons and morals tinged with religious ideas because of this outlandish idea that anything that has to do with religion is a myth then go ahead and reject over 2000 years of thinking.

phixion

12-14-2006, 01:13 PM

yeah but again using the bible as a fairy tale that cant work? aesops fables are great at teaching kids things without ever playing them off as literally true. y cant it the bible be used the same way? if u read the bible purely as literature its not a bad piece of work. and i think that i can still be valuable even if its subtracted by all the crap the church likes to attach to the bible.like the exodus story: there is no doubt in my mind that those events actually happened, but put them into context and show how a volcano. an eathquake,a nd a tidal wave all resulted in the jews escaping the egyptians, but if you display it purely as 'thsi is gods power' then ur doing ur kids a disservice.  and also you have to teach that the bible is literaly one obscure text away from revealing that jesus was the devils son ie: moses never crossed the Red Sea, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls whow that they crossed the REED sea, which is little more than a swamp making the crossing much more mundane than miraculous.

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:14 PM

johnniewalker wrote:  I wouldn't say its a fairy tale, but I think you can look at it in two ways.    There is the faith angle and that's what bothers everyone, but often the entire book gets disregarded because of that.  If you can't read it and say it can be construed as a philosphy, you aren't objective. The principles are based on absolutes just like Plato.  You are exactly right that ingrained in the bible are morals and values we promote today and cannot be seperated from everyday life.  I'm not trying to be mean furtherman, but there are some morals that can be seperated as a fictious "myth" as you call it, there are others that cannot.   Deeply ingrained in the bible are notions of justice, love like phixion mentioned, and other ideas reenforcing what they think is a more perfect society.      Like almost any type of philosphy or religion there is almost conflicts about what a specific section means and many people disagree.  I could be like this kid and quote corinthians from the new testament and from the philospher paul and try to make that the overarching theme of the bible.  Literalits and other interpretors are never going to agree, it doesn't make one side right, but its completely unfair to generalize one interpretation as the problem with a philosphy.  Gay marriage is a conflicting problem with some of the bible's messages, whoa stop the presses. I'm not entirely sure of your point, but I think you could name ANY moral and my point would be that moral could be taught to our children WITHOUT having to use the bible as a source and an example.The bible is a fairy tale.  Creation in 7 days.  The great flood.  Water into wine.  All things that did not happen.  All things made up to explain, then use for fear to control and bring in some cash and land to boot.I guess my perfect dream would be if we eliminated all orginized religion.  Burn the churchs, temples and mosques.  And each child born after that day, we teach the morals and common sense of decent, civilized people.  It would take generations to have it fully take effect and for all superstitions to fade but it could be possible for a majority of the planet to be better off than to base what they feel is right and wrong based on a book or prophet as an example.  We've evolved too far to count on such primitave methods.

Yerdaddy

12-14-2006, 01:17 PM

One of the biggest differences between Yemen and Egypt is that Yemenis still have a culture that expects one guy to be keeping an eye on his neighbor and making sure he doesn't violate anything they think is Islamic law. There's not a whole lot of pre-marital sex, drinking of alcohol, drugs, even fucking with tourists. Doing all that shit is seen as against Islam, your neighbor will punish you do it, so you don't do it. Egyptians have so many vices, (so many of them drink and fuck tourists - 99.9% women because they largely keep their women out of sight so they can't do with me what the men are doing with the chick next to me), that they've more-or-less developed a view towards Islam that's personal. "I've done so much shit that who am I do judge you?" That's the way alot of Egyptians will describe Islam as they see it. It's not only led to tolerance for each other in general, but for shit like secular politics - assuming Mubarak would ever tolerate it - and education. Yemenis fear that shit, for the most part. Everything's got to conform with religion, so if it don't fit, it's probably not going to get in. So they'll stay in the stone ages and 15 years from now they run out of water and they're fucked.So what is American Christianity doing - the "Christian right" as opposed to most mind-my-own-business Christians? They've decided that they want to influence politics, and Bush is the man to do it. They want to impose their "Christian values" on the rest of us. Then things will be better for everyone. Bullshit. They want to be Yemenis, but with them in charge. Truth is, vice is a virtue. You like to shoot crystal meth and take it up the poop shoot? Great. But that means, leave everyone else the fuck alone. Bang some hookers Reverend and then you, me and the Rabbi over there will get together and watch the game. Nobody's shutting down your churches. You're not cutting off my sister's clitoris because you found some obscure passage in the book and you got your senator to make a law. Everybody's a winner.Oh, and I'm an atheist, but seriously, I'm not going to say everyone's got to be one in order to get along or get shit done. That would be the same pipe dream that Christians and Muslims and all the religious folks have been and are killing each other for. If you believe that all you have and all you need is reason, then prove it.

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 12-14-06 @ 5:20 PM

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:19 PM

johnniewalker wrote: Furtherman wrote: We don't have to teach "love your enemy" or "love your neighbor as yourself" by pointing out that some book said it.When I say WE, I mean us you don't have the restrictions our parents did. We're smarter.We can teach our kids those same lessons without claiming some made up entity claimed it be done. That's really what angers me the most.   I think its completely arrogant to think we have figured it out after 2000 years of people thinking about what is the best society.   I'm not being an ass, but where are you getting these lessons and ideas.  Its not our founding fathers who came up with this stuff.  All i'm saying is that the more you want to come up with your own ideas and lessons and morals tinged with religious ideas because of this outlandish idea that anything that has to do with religion is a myth then go ahead and reject over 2000 years of thinking.    There was a time people were burned at the stake for practicing "witchcraft" or "dealing with the devil".We're smarter than that now.Some parts of the world, people still kill for witchcraft.  Stories of ghosts can still throw villages into fear and blood is shed.We're smarter than them now. Education is important.  There are plenty of great innovations of human thinking that we still hold on to after 2000 years.  But religion is an outdated, primitive form and a easy out to all the "why" questions we have.I'm not saying we have it figured it out.  We most likely never will.  But what makes more of a difference?  Praying for something to happen, or going out and doing something about it?

Mike Teacher

12-14-2006, 01:26 PM

I'm not entirely sure of your point, but I think you could name ANY moral and my point would be that moral could be taught to our children WITHOUT having to use the bible as a source and an example.=We see cooperation and altruism in nature, seemingly aginst what the 'cruel heartless' nature of nature. OK I used the word nature way too much there.Anyway, long before religions existed, we had to survive, and that meant cooperation, and perhaps, sometimes, altruism. So humans have had some forms of a social contract all along.Animal example: Some members of a group will signal that danger is near. This would seem to go against what we think an aminal would behave: hey, screw those guys, I can see that Hyena and I am out of here. In fact, I'll slip away quietly while the Hyena gets someone else. Why? I'm guessing survival of the Most trumps survival of the Fittest for many higher species, which is a crappy tautology Darwin never even used. Beats me, but it's there, all over the place in El Mundo Animal.Now maybe i should read that link and see what the thread is about.

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:26 PM

phixion wrote: yeah but again using the bible as a fairy tale that cant work? aesops fables are great at teaching kids things without ever playing them off as literally true. y cant it the bible be used the same way? if u read the bible purely as literature its not a bad piece of work. and i think that i can still be valuable even if its subtracted by all the crap the church likes to attach to the bible.like the exodus story: there is no doubt in my mind that those events actually happened, but put them into context and show how a volcano. an eathquake,a nd a tidal wave all resulted in the jews escaping the egyptians, but if you display it purely as 'thsi is gods power' then ur doing ur kids a disservice.  and also you have to teach that the bible is literaly one obscure text away from revealing that jesus was the devils son ie: moses never crossed the Red Sea, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls whow that they crossed the REED sea, which is little more than a swamp making the crossing much more mundane than miraculous.Fantastic idea about comparing the bible to Aesop's fables.  If only people would teach it that way. As for the exodus, don't be too sure.  There have been some prominate Jewish archeologists over the years that have been banned from teaching in Israel because there is absolutely no archeological evidence of the exodus and they write it up as another story, based on some fact, but greatly exaggerated (like the crossing of the reed sea - which people had done for thousands of years).Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater.  The natural effects you describe are what happened to cause the 10 plagues.

phixion

12-14-2006, 01:29 PM

The great floodhow do u explain the correlation of the christian-judaic- version of the great flood and the great flood in gilgameshs epic poem? now imnot saying that god purposefully made it rain for forty days and forty nights, shit im not even saying it rained for forty days and forty nights, im just saying that there are natural events that may have occurred and human's primitive need for a greater being made them put the story in that context, but to say it never happened? how do you know?you want to destroy the ark of it? the two animals of every species? fine ill help u tear that shit down but to say it never happened just because of the context its presented in? that i have a problem with. again in closing im not saying i believe it as afar as gods righteousness is concerned i just believe that it rained alot in the middle east unexpectedly for awhile, nothing more than that. but these virtually identical accounts from completely different cultures? more often than not there is a kernel of truth under all that crap.

SouthSideJohnny

12-14-2006, 01:30 PM

phixion wrote:i never thought dinosaurs and man lived together but that doesnt mean there arent valuable lessons in it. I always believed that dinosaurs and man lived together but that it was a LONG time ago.  I didn't realize that baby dinosaurs were still around and on Noah's ark a few thousand years ago until I heard Earl's report a few months back.

Mike Teacher

12-14-2006, 01:32 PM

OK read the thing, Baker's son, right.The theologens [sp?] that resonate with me have taken the 'what happened to Christianity to a point that goes something like, and I forget who said this and what exactly it was but:'The idea that God is some entitiy that is to be cultivated and worshipped by his creation, prayed to in hopes of some eternal reward, and to avoid some form of eternal damnation is quite simply, an abomination.'

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:35 PM

phixion wrote: The great flood how do u explain the correlation of the christian-judaic- version of the great flood and the great flood in gilgameshs epic poem? now imnot saying that god purposefully made it rain for forty days and forty nights, shit im not even saying it rained for forty days and forty nights, im just saying that there are natural events that may have occurred and human's primitive need for a greater being made them put the story in that context, but to say it never happened? how do you know?you want to destroy the ark of it? the two animals of every species? fine ill help u tear that shit down but to say it never happened just because of the context its presented in? that i have a problem with. again in closing im not saying i believe it as afar as gods righteousness is concerned i just believe that it rained alot in the middle east unexpectedly for awhile, nothing more than that. but these virtually identical accounts from completely different cultures? more often than not there is a kernel of truth under all that crap. No, you are right.  I meant the story of the Ark and I should have prefaced that.  A great flood DID occur - in the Mediterranean - where most of our ancestors lived on the shores, near water.Well once day a tsunami slammed into these shores and wiped out most of humanity.  This was about 8,000 years ago.  There was a basin that crumbled at the Black Sea, which flooded a valley where many people lived.There is proof of this today.  There are settlements under the Black Sea, and recent sea fossils on mountain sides.This was a pimitive culture.  What the fuck was that all about they were most likely thinking.  We must have angered the gods.And it was passed on from there.But a global flood that the bible describes?  Impossible.

This message was edited by Furtherman on 12-14-06 @ 5:36 PM

phixion

12-14-2006, 01:38 PM

Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater.  but only because the cave isnt being currently inhabited. the middel east has never been uninhabitited. there are cities built upon cities there, so most evidence of everything will be erased, or supplanted by the newer evidnce of people living there. and the aesops fable thing is why i bring this up, ill never forget my first day at my catholic hs. my religion teacher, mr keady, stood up and holding the bible said loud and clear: this book i hold in my hand, guess what? 95% of it is lies. but that doesnt mean that 5% that actually is the truth isnt worth knowing. st franci prep, they never shoved god down my throat, they taught it completely with an ear in science and an ear in the tabernacle, they taught me that the bible is one obscure text away from meaning the opposite of waht it does now.

Mike Teacher

12-14-2006, 01:42 PM

SouthSideJohnny wrote: phixion wrote: i never thought dinosaurs and man lived together but that doesnt mean there arent valuable lessons in it. I always believed that dinosaurs and man lived together but that it was a LONG time ago.  I didn't realize that baby dinosaurs were still around and on Noah's ark a few thousand years ago until I heard Earl's report a few months back.The time scales used are easy to discuss but impossible to really fathom. It's easy for me to reel off that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years old, but no one, no one can really sense what kind of deep time that is. What a billion years really is. Much less a million. The dinos left us about 65 million years ago, we showed up in even out most primitive forms only a few million.But even those times are unfathomable, so it's difficult for me and I have to go through the sequence in my mind, but all the numbers mean almost nothing, really.What's important is that we now know about deep, deep time, a pretty good idea of the chronolgy of events that occurred once Earth showed up and for me, it's just utterly endlessly marvelously stupifyingly fascinating to even hold the Trilobite fossil I have and think that Mr. Trilobite was hanging out at least 250 million years before us. Amazing.

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:42 PM

phixion wrote: Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater.   but only because the cave isnt being currently inhabited. the middel east has never been uninhabitited. there are cities built upon cities there, so most evidence of everything will be erased, or supplanted by the newer evidnce of people living there. and the aesops fable thing is why i bring this up, ill never forget my first day at my catholic hs. my religion teacher, mr keady, stood up and holding the bible said loud and clear: this book i hold in my hand, guess what? 95% of it is lies. but that doesnt mean that 5% that actually is the truth isnt worth knowing. st franci prep, they never shoved god down my throat, they taught it completely with an ear in science and an ear in the tabernacle, they taught me that the bible is one obscure text away from meaning the opposite of waht it does now.  But there is no evidence of a massice group of people wandering through the desert.  There should be.  Hey, maybe it hasn't been found yet, but as of right now there is zero evidence. And you went to a good school, or at least had a great teacher.  I had one like that in high school as well who opened my eyes.  Until then, I actually feared of a smite from god.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 01:44 PM

Furtherman wrote: johnniewalker wrote: Furtherman wrote: We don't have to teach "love your enemy" or "love your neighbor as yourself" by pointing out that some book said it.When I say WE, I mean us you don't have the restrictions our parents did. We're smarter.We can teach our kids those same lessons without claiming some made up entity claimed it be done. That's really what angers me the most. I think its completely arrogant to think we have figured it out after 2000 years of people thinking about what is the best society. I'm not being an ass, but where are you getting these lessons and ideas. Its not our founding fathers who came up with this stuff. All i'm saying is that the more you want to come up with your own ideas and lessons and morals tinged with religious ideas because of this outlandish idea that anything that has to do with religion is a myth then go ahead and reject over 2000 years of thinking. There was a time people were burned at the stake for practicing "witchcraft" or "dealing with the devil".We're smarter than that now.Some parts of the world, people still kill for witchcraft. Stories of ghosts can still throw villages into fear and blood is shed.We're smarter than them now. Education is important. There are plenty of great innovations of human thinking that we still hold on to after 2000 years. But religion is an outdated, primitive form and a easy out to all the "why" questions we have.I'm not saying we have it figured it out. We most likely never will. But what makes more of a difference? Praying for something to happen, or going out and doing something about it? What i am trying to say is that their are two values you get out of religion.  You get a philosphical value and an element of faith.  I think your focusing too much on the faith angle.  You are right you could go to other sources, but essentially I still think you are cutting out the bible not for it lacking philosophical value, but rather because of its potential dangers.    I think you also think its easy to just say something is religious and this is useless and something that is not is.  Its a dangerous way of thinking because of how tied to morals and values we are in this country.  I wouldn't say absolutes such as justice and liberty, and equality are simply easy outs to all the why questions.    That is exactly what many aspects of the bible teach.   In many cases its rationalizations for these ideas.   When you start to tear down some morals as just religious and disregard them, you start tearing at the justifications of many aspects of this country that are extremely well founded.    It really seems to push towards whether morals or values are even relevant in today's society based on the supposed danger of the inability to seperate faith from religious values.

phixion

12-14-2006, 01:49 PM

or at least had a great teacherno see i hated that fucker. hes kind of famous actually he tried suing nike because he was an assistance coach on st johns national championship soccer team. anyway he did a report on the way nike treats their workers in the third world, then told st johns that he wouldnt wear the nike emblem anymore. nike was their sponsor at the time, so st johns fired him and he tried to sue nike for getting him fired. i never found out how that turned out. even more funny in that story he was teaching at my school in his first year, half way through his second year teaching there he was fired for forcing his students to attend a nike protest or fail. yeah fuck him for trying to make me feel bad. i still remember that time he was on sprtscenter i almost threw up.

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:53 PM

johnniewalker wrote:  What i am trying to say is that their are two values you get out of religion.  You get a philosphical value and an element of faith.  I think your focusing too much on the faith angle.  You are right you could go to other sources, but essentially I still think you are cutting out the bible not for it lacking philosophical value, but rather because of its potential dangers.    Point taken.  I do focus on "faith" more than the philosphical angle.And yes, I do personally think that a book such as the bible, or the koran, or the torah, or the book of mormon, or the vedas... all of them have created too much danger and predjudice over the year.We're better off without them.I guess that's my point.  Flush 'em all.

mikeyboy

12-14-2006, 01:54 PM

Furtherman

12-14-2006, 01:55 PM

Nice Mikeyboy!

phixion

12-14-2006, 01:57 PM

I guess that's my point.  Flush 'em all see i agree with you up to a point. i have no problem with religion, but organized religion fuck all thsoe people. ill help u brun down every church temple synagogue and mosque but i cant ever blame a book, i blame the interpreters.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 01:57 PM

Mike Teacher wrote: I'm not entirely sure of your point, but I think you could name ANY moral and my point would be that moral could be taught to our children WITHOUT having to use the bible as a source and an example.=We see cooperation and altruism in nature, seemingly aginst what the 'cruel heartless' nature of nature. OK I used the word nature way too much there.Anyway, long before religions existed, we had to survive, and that meant cooperation, and perhaps, sometimes, altruism. So humans have had some forms of a social contract all along.Animal example: Some members of a group will signal that danger is near. This would seem to go against what we think an aminal would behave: hey, screw those guys, I can see that Hyena and I am out of here. In fact, I'll slip away quietly while the Hyena gets someone else. Why? I'm guessing survival of the Most trumps survival of the Fittest for many higher species, which is a crappy tautology Darwin never even used. Beats me, but it's there, all over the place in El Mundo Animal.Now maybe i should read that link and see what the thread is about. My main problem with that argument is the consequences that come from attempting to completely seperate religious morals from societal morals.   Where do you draw the line?  The abortion argument is a great example that the kid brought up in the article.   To many nonreligious people, they want abortion banned as a protection of possible life.  However it gets casted as a religious moral, when many people think its a path to a more enlightened society.   Can we simply chuck the argument because it has a regious tinge to it?  Its a very fine line when you want to start saying some morals are ok and some aren't because they are simply religious.

phixion

12-14-2006, 02:47 PM

Can we simply chuck the argument because it has a regious tinge to it?  Its a very fine line when you want to start saying some morals are ok and some aren't because they are simply religious.   but morality is and always has beena  very personal thing. for example im sure its immoral that i find every narcotic available and throw it in my body like popcorn, but i dont see in any way how that imposes my will upon you, as long as i keep to myself.in ur abortion argument then u are imposing your will onto me. now im sure it may be the moral thing in your eyes to say it is life, but what you are doing expands past morality, into my civil liberties. u are imposing your will on me, and i do not share your moral views.now when i get my hands on three hits of acid, as long as i keep to myself then im not imposing my will on to you and u dont have to live by my rules. if its legal then its a matter of choice and you can protest outside an abortion clinic just like peta can protest outside of a fur store, but you cant close down the fur store just because you against animal pelts, because then your depriving someone else of their right to own fur.

Bulldogcakes

12-14-2006, 04:49 PM

FMJeff wrote: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html</a>It is SO refreshing to see Christians looking inward and questioning popular opinions. It's actually kind of relieving to know there are some Christians out there that do not approve of modern christianity and how offmessage it has become. Interesting stuff.Glad to see your "so refreshed" by those silly Christians actually thinking for themselves!  Wonders never cease! Must be one of those "miracles" that Jesus guy did! Not only refreshed but "relieved" as well! You know Jeff, there's a world out there outside of the leftist bubble you live in. You might want to get out more.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 04:51 PM

phixion wrote:  Can we simply chuck the argument because it has a regious tinge to it? Its a very fine line when you want to start saying some morals are ok and some aren't because they are simply religious.  but morality is and always has beena very personal thing. for example im sure its immoral that i find every narcotic available and throw it in my body like popcorn, but i dont see in any way how that imposes my will upon you, as long as i keep to myself.in ur abortion argument then u are imposing your will onto me. now im sure it may be the moral thing in your eyes to say it is life, but what you are doing expands past morality, into my civil liberties. u are imposing your will on me, and i do not share your moral views.now when i get my hands on three hits of acid, as long as i keep to myself then im not imposing my will on to you and u dont have to live by my rules. if its legal then its a matter of choice and you can protest outside an abortion clinic just like peta can protest outside of a fur store, but you cant close down the fur store just because you against animal pelts, because then your depriving someone else of their right to own fur.  I think that is very true, we all have a very personal morality, but there is a general morality forced on us on a daily basis.  Our government has a right to say which moralities it approves of.  Our civil liberties are not absolute.   Can parents choose to put their kids into an all white college?   The government doesn't give us a choice, rather saying the moral of diversity overrides this choice.  If a study came out tomorrow that said diversity results in poorer test scores, would the moral outweigh the study?   I think in today's society it would.  How does this get back to religion...I guess my point is when you belittle everything about religion you may be rightly or wrongly showing that too faith is dangerous, but you are also weakening the argument of morals tied to religion.  In my mind many of those morals are tied so closely to many of today's existing practices that we send a confusing message of the worth of morals in our society.  We still put faith in many of them and tearing down the foundation of their worth really hurts our society rather than helps.

johnniewalker

12-14-2006, 04:52 PM

Team_Ramrod

12-14-2006, 04:56 PM

What does Edge think about This?If he knew this was how Christian was acting he'd give him a conchairto.

scottinnj

12-14-2006, 07:51 PM

Furtherman wrote: We don't have to teach "love your enemy" or "love your neighbor as yourself" by pointing out that some book said it.When I say WE, I mean us you don't have the restrictions our parents did.  We're smarter.We can teach our kids those same lessons without claiming some made up entity claimed it be done. But How?  Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose?  If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother?  Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person.  It doesn't matter.  If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter?  Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell?  You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper?If you stop to think about it, what would be the point of anything at ALL?  Even if we were to record all of mankind's history, put those records on every type of media possible, backed up those records and put them in the safest most secure areas, it would still break down, and eventually those storage areas would be destroyed by nature, man or some sort of supernova by the sun.  Every record of humanity's existence here in this galaxy would be wiped away, never to be recovered or known again.  We would be in all intents and purposes, never here.  Everything we do, have done, or accomplish in the future means NOTHING in this dimension for eventually, it all disappears.  What is the point of curing cancer?  The patient is going to die eventually anyway. And the doctor trying to cure the patient is going to die, and all his accomplishments and knowledge will only live on through a few more generations and then will be lost to time and the universe itself, disappearing forever.If you teach your children to live for themselves and that there is no higher entity, you deprive them of purpose, meaning and their very soul.  They will go through life with a burning question in the back of their mind:  "Is this all that there is?  Is this as high as I can go?  What is the point to this daily routine?"  With nothing to lead them with, they will have a life of darkness and despair, with no hope for the future.

FMJeff

12-14-2006, 09:02 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: Oh, and I'm an atheist, but seriously, I'm not going to say everyone's got to be one in order to get along or get shit done. That would be the same pipe dream that Christians and Muslims and all the religious folks have been and are killing each other for. If you believe that all you have and all you need is reason, then prove it.This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 12-14-06 @ 5:20 PM Demonstated, in my opinion, in this season's most insightful South Park episodes...atheists killing athesits over which scientific viewpoint is more valid. There will always be people who are convinced thier viewpoint is the most valid one and there will always be people within that group who will fight to ensure the survival of that viewpoint. It's what happens when your entire life is your particular dogma and you have nothing else.I am proud to consider myself completely clueless in most areas of love, finance and life in general. I can thank my parents for that. They very rarely questioned the world around them, and for some reason, be it nature or whatever, that level of ignorance was completely unacceptable to me. By never subscribing to a singular modality of thought, I'm free to pick and choose what works for me. I find comfort in the freedom. Many people do not. They need that rigidity.There are countries where people get along in relative piece and harmony. The Netherlands and Switzerland come to mind, although I'm only going on my personal experince with the former and heresay of the latter, so I can't say what I just said is compeltely accurate, but I'd like to think so. Why it works for there and not here, I can't really say.

Kevin

12-14-2006, 10:25 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: Oh, and I'm an atheist, but seriously, I'm not going to say everyone's got to be one in order to get along or get shit done. That would be the same pipe dream that Christians and Muslims and all the religious folks have been and are killing each other for. If you believe that all you have and all you need is reason, then prove it. This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 12-14-06 @ 5:20 PM AS an Atheist do you believe that you die and there is nothing? If so, do have have proof that, that is the case?or do you believe that there is something out there, but not what religions have taught? Just wonderin.

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 02:18 AM

Kevin wrote: Yerdaddy wrote: Oh, and I'm an atheist, but seriously, I'm not going to say everyone's got to be one in order to get along or get shit done. That would be the same pipe dream that Christians and Muslims and all the religious folks have been and are killing each other for. If you believe that all you have and all you need is reason, then prove it.This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 12-14-06 @ 5:20 PM AS an Atheist do you believe that you die and there is nothing? If so, do have have proof that, that is the case?or do you believe that there is something out there, but not what religions have taught? Just wonderin.  Simple answer, (as simple as I can make it): I believe there's nothing. I don't have proof. I think there's a lack of evidence for something or nothing. So default position is nothing. I went through a  years-long phase of wanting to know which religion was right because I didn't want to pick the wrong one and go to hell. Seemed to me, alot of these religions were saying "we're going to heaven and the rest to hell." So it seemed pretty important to me to get it right. So over the years I read all kinds of religious books and historical books about the religions and they all started to look the same. First of all they seemed pretty cryptic. Didn't seem to me that you could really determine if one was the "word of god" and another wasn't based solely on the text. When you're interested in a religion it's inevitable you'll be talking to church leaders and they're trying to convince you to believe what they believe but they end up sounding like used car salesmen. They WANT you to believe. But they can't answer a true skeptic, even if the skeptic wants to believe the truth. That's because what you eventually come down to is faith. And faith is, essentially, a retirement from logic. Usually it's: "I've seen a certain amount of evidence and I'm done questioning it." Well, for me my "eternal life" was too fucking important to stop questioning my faith, and, honestly, no religious expert ever even got me past the basics. Like why should I believe The Bible is the word of God and not all the others that claim the same thing? Why should I believe in the virgin birth when, if some woman told me she got pregnant but had never had sex I'd say "Black guy, eh?" And lots of ancient texts have virgin births, global floods, 900 year old guys (Yoda!), miracles, creation myths, etc. I've never seen a good case made for one to be believed over the others, or even why any of them should be believed, especially since whenever someone makes a claim of any of this shit happening now we point and laugh. But when I started looking at these books as a whole, and the other ancient texts available to me, it starts to be clear that supernatural explainations for shit was about the only way people understood the world. The Greeks and others were exceptions, but that's the start. In fact, the logical understanding the Greeks came up to was eventually rejected for mythology and only recovered by the west from Islamic empires centuries later. But the earliest explainations for natural phenomena was, by our standards, supernatural. Scientific discovery is an evolutionary process, so I'm not knocking the ancient faithful. But, to me, it's evidence that religion is human, not divine.The reason these myths have remained with us is that complexity is scary, especially when a nigga gotta eat! Leisure time to ponder the meaning of life, life after death, where did it all begin, etc. isn't really common for most of human history - and it's not even all that common for most of the world. So, dying scares us and the afterlife myths tell us we don't die. OK. Mos

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 03:19 AM

But How?  Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose?  If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother?  Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person.  It doesn't matter.  If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter?  Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell?  You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper?Here's what I don't get: why is the default human desire, absent an omnipotent god, often only killing and raping and doing all kinds of horrible shit? Why is it never "When you think about it, without god, nothing has any meaning and you could just... run off to Africa and try to cure Gunea worm disease! Do you really desire to go on killing sprees, but you think it will piss off God so you restrain yourself? I know it's more a rhetorical point; you're really saying without religious values, COULD'NT you do that and not feel bad - theoreticaly.  At least the more thoughtul of the faithful express it this way. But it shows more the predjuce of the asker of such questions to assume that the faithless would even ponder such horrible shit. Why would we? Why would you assume we experience happiness and pain any different from you? Why would you assume we would WANT to do bad shit because Dad's not watching? It's not like there's any evidence that atheists do horrible shit more than the faithful. So why start a serious inquiry with us about why we're atheist or what it means to be an atheist with such assumptions that we have to battle back from before we can even get to your question. My family does the same thing to me all the time. I've come to the conclusion that they don't really want to know. I think they ask questions that way because they're afraid of atheism. And that's fine. They want to believe that their god is what's keeping them in line; that their religious system is devised by their god to give us our moral values. Whatever. But it's extremist to think that it's the only source of morality is your god's religion. Humans are social creatures and we all have impulses to react with love or anger based on our surroundings. You've adopted what you think is a moral code to base decisions on. Fine. But don't ignore my own good or bad conduct in judging me in order to bolster your own faith. Don't let your faith take away from your own powers of observation and assessment of other people. If you do that then it's you who's inability to get along with others is hampered by your faith. [Insert the obligatory analogy of religious conflicts throughout history.]"If you think of it" is usually an awful expression for getting at real understanding as well. If you think about it, it's you believers who have some 'splaining to do. You guys have all attatched yourselves to books with crazy hateful shit in it. ALL of you. For example:<a href="http://bible.cc/2_chronicles/15-13.htm" target="_blank">2 Chronicles 15</a> - That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.OK, so you tell me: why are you not stomping my guts out? That's the word of God, right? So why is it you're not off on an infidel killing spree?<a href="http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/dt/22.html#5">Deuteronomy 22:5</a> - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. Why are you not stomping the guts of chicks in pants?[quote]Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman marri

sailor

12-15-2006, 04:05 AM

Furtherman wrote: phixion wrote: yeah but again using the bible as a fairy tale that cant work? aesops fables are great at teaching kids things without ever playing them off as literally true. y cant it the bible be used the same way? if u read the bible purely as literature its not a bad piece of work. and i think that i can still be valuable even if its subtracted by all the crap the church likes to attach to the bible.like the exodus story: there is no doubt in my mind that those events actually happened, but put them into context and show how a volcano. an eathquake,a nd a tidal wave all resulted in the jews escaping the egyptians, but if you display it purely as 'thsi is gods power' then ur doing ur kids a disservice. and also you have to teach that the bible is literaly one obscure text away from revealing that jesus was the devils son ie: moses never crossed the Red Sea, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls whow that they crossed the REED sea, which is little more than a swamp making the crossing much more mundane than miraculous.Fantastic idea about comparing the bible to Aesop's fables. If only people would teach it that way. As for the exodus, don't be too sure. There have been some prominate Jewish archeologists over the years that have been banned from teaching in Israel because there is absolutely no archeological evidence of the exodus and they write it up as another story, based on some fact, but greatly exaggerated (like the crossing of the reed sea - which people had done for thousands of years).Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater. The natural effects you describe are what happened to cause the 10 plagues.  ok, you don't believe in god or follow some set religion, but do you need to continually insult those who do?  that doesn't make it seem like you've learned these lessons from any source.  people believe this stuff, what gives you the right to call it a fairy-tale or fable?

A.J.

12-15-2006, 04:20 AM

Kevin wrote: AS an Atheist do you believe that you die and there is nothing? If so, do have have proof that, that is the case?or do you believe that there is something out there, but not what religions have taught? Just wonderin. As I posted somewhere else before, my thoughts on the afterlife are scientific rather than religious.  I believe the spirit/soul/katra/consciousness/whatever will exist in another plane of thought or another dimension rather than in "heaven".  Maybe we exist as pure thought or pure energy.  It's no more ridiculous a notion than spending eternity on getting wings and playing a harp on some cloud in the heavens.

phixion

12-15-2006, 04:24 AM

what gives you the right to call it a fairy-tale or fable? for me? 12 years of catholic school. i dont believe in the specifics about jesus wanna know why? because the info we ahve on him is all second hand, and all the people who wrote that second hand stuff loved jesus. and if i love someone i wont fill u in on the time he fucked a goat just to find out if it would have half goat half human baby. and teh creation story? sorry even in catholic school they teach evolution. but i do believe in god, there are just too many coincedents in life to say there is a higher power. but the holy trinity being the basis for the 'one true god' thats just bullshit. the idea that any one people get to corner the market on divinity is fuckin laughable. i believe jesus was the son of god, but i also believe buddha sat under a tree or whatever. and mohammed and moses and abraham were all prophets. and shit you give me enough mushrooms and ill say we are controlled by body thetans. and hey since your all pretentious about the idea that we shouldnt belittle peoples religion because its their RELIGION. how do you feel when people talk about greek MYTHOLOGY? mythology is just another way to say fable, and that was the religion that was the basis for european civilization. the founders of democracy believed that the sun was apollos chariot. do u discount that idea? but its a RELIGION.

Furtherman

12-15-2006, 07:08 AM

bronxmarc wrote: Furtherman wrote: phixion wrote: yeah but again using the bible as a fairy tale that cant work? aesops fables are great at teaching kids things without ever playing them off as literally true. y cant it the bible be used the same way? if u read the bible purely as literature its not a bad piece of work. and i think that i can still be valuable even if its subtracted by all the crap the church likes to attach to the bible.like the exodus story: there is no doubt in my mind that those events actually happened, but put them into context and show how a volcano. an eathquake,a nd a tidal wave all resulted in the jews escaping the egyptians, but if you display it purely as 'thsi is gods power' then ur doing ur kids a disservice. and also you have to teach that the bible is literaly one obscure text away from revealing that jesus was the devils son ie: moses never crossed the Red Sea, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls whow that they crossed the REED sea, which is little more than a swamp making the crossing much more mundane than miraculous.Fantastic idea about comparing the bible to Aesop's fables. If only people would teach it that way. As for the exodus, don't be too sure. There have been some prominate Jewish archeologists over the years that have been banned from teaching in Israel because there is absolutely no archeological evidence of the exodus and they write it up as another story, based on some fact, but greatly exaggerated (like the crossing of the reed sea - which people had done for thousands of years).Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater. The natural effects you describe are what happened to cause the 10 plagues.  ok, you don't believe in god or follow some set religion, but do you need to continually insult those who do?  that doesn't make it seem like you've learned these lessons from any source.  people believe this stuff, what gives you the right to call it a fairy-tale or fable? And just where did I insult you?  Calling the bible a fairy tale?  That insults you?  Why?  Is you belief so deep seeded that ANY question of it give you that little pain in your chest?  A bump in your ego?  That's not because of an insult.  Maybe because you haven't questioned it.  The Human ego is a dangerous thing.  We think we're so special to be good will grant us everlating life, in eternity, with our relatives.Quote: Scottinnj said:But How?  Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose?  If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother?  Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person.  It doesn't matter.  If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter?  Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell?  You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper?If you stop to think about it, what would be the point of anything at ALL?  Even if we were to record all of mankind's history, put those records on every type of media possible, backed up those records and put them in the safest most secure areas, it would still break down, and eventually those storage areas would be destroyed by nature, man or some sort of supernova by the sun.  Every record of humanity's existence here in this galaxy would be wiped away, never to be recovered or known again.  We would be in all intents

FMJeff

12-15-2006, 07:14 AM

we're bipedal homminids.  hey speak for yourself, i like chicks.

Furtherman

12-15-2006, 07:18 AM

FMJeff wrote: we're bipedal homminids.  hey speak for yourself, i like chicks. no homoerectus.

Dougie Brootal

12-15-2006, 07:19 AM

Furtherman wrote: johnniewalker wrote:  I wouldn't say its a fairy tale, but I think you can look at it in two ways.    There is the faith angle and that's what bothers everyone, but often the entire book gets disregarded because of that.  If you can't read it and say it can be construed as a philosphy, you aren't objective. The principles are based on absolutes just like Plato.  You are exactly right that ingrained in the bible are morals and values we promote today and cannot be seperated from everyday life.  I'm not trying to be mean furtherman, but there are some morals that can be seperated as a fictious "myth" as you call it, there are others that cannot.   Deeply ingrained in the bible are notions of justice, love like phixion mentioned, and other ideas reenforcing what they think is a more perfect society.      Like almost any type of philosphy or religion there is almost conflicts about what a specific section means and many people disagree.  I could be like this kid and quote corinthians from the new testament and from the philospher paul and try to make that the overarching theme of the bible.  Literalits and other interpretors are never going to agree, it doesn't make one side right, but its completely unfair to generalize one interpretation as the problem with a philosphy.  Gay marriage is a conflicting problem with some of the bible's messages, whoa stop the presses. I'm not entirely sure of your point, but I think you could name ANY moral and my point would be that moral could be taught to our children WITHOUT having to use the bible as a source and an example.The bible is a fairy tale.  Creation in 7 days.  The great flood.  Water into wine.  All things that did not happen.  All things made up to explain, then use for fear to control and bring in some cash and land to boot.I guess my perfect dream would be if we eliminated all orginized religion.  Burn the churchs, temples and mosques.  And each child born after that day, we teach the morals and common sense of decent, civilized people.  It would take generations to have it fully take effect and for all superstitions to fade but it could be possible for a majority of the planet to be better off than to base what they feel is right and wrong based on a book or prophet as an example.  We've evolved too far to count on such primitave methods.FURTHERMAN FOR PERMANANT PRESIDENT!

Dougie Brootal

12-15-2006, 07:22 AM

wow, there's too many words in this thread.

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 07:23 AM

"Anyone found bipedal in 5 wears his ass for a hat!"Where's it from you heathens? Hint: It's one of Ronny's favorites.

johnniewalker

12-15-2006, 08:25 AM

Yerdaddy wrote:  But How? Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose? If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother? Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person. It doesn't matter. If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter? Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell? You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper? Here's what I don't get: why is the default human desire, absent an omnipotent god, often only killing and raping and doing all kinds of horrible shit? Why is it never "When you think about it, without god, nothing has any meaning and you could just... run off to Africa and try to cure Gunea worm disease! Do you really desire to go on killing sprees, but you think it will piss off God so you restrain yourself?  "If you think of it" is usually an awful expression for getting at real understanding as well. If you think about it, it's you believers who have some 'splaining to do. You guys have all attatched yourselves to books with crazy hateful shit in it. ALL of you. For example: <a href="http://bible.cc/2_chronicles/15-13.htm" target="_blank">2 Chronicles 15</a> - That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.OK, so you tell me: why are you not stomping my guts out? That's the word of God, right? So why is it you're not off on an infidel killing spree?<blockquote style="background-color: #ffff00"><a href="http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/dt/22.html#5">Deuteronomy 22:5</a> - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. Why are you not stomping the guts of chicks in pants?<blockquote style="background-color: #ffff00">Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.[/quote]Why are you not stomping Jude Law and his nanny's guts out? This is random shit. I could pull crazy quotes out of the Bible all day. The point is, if this shit were in any other book - the charter of any other club than Christianity - and a politician were to associate themselves with these ideas, their political career would be dead in the water. But because it's Christianity, you can't get elected if you don't declare yourself associated with the crazy-talk inside it. Nobody ever questions you on it. Faithful are allowed to go on believing that thier books, which all contain crazy, hateful shit by normal standards of appropriate conduct, are the word of God. Yet atheists are assumed by many religious people to be capable of mass murder at any second. It really should be the other way around, if you think about it.[/quote] Who was calling out Crichton for cherry picking?   Wow, its fine to pick quotes and try to show a little hypcrisy, its another to say some quotes in the old testament are the theme.   Scholars would be lucky if they could find one theme to the bible.  If you just figured it out its "crazy" or "hateful" they have been wasting their time on research.  It'd be red

phixion

12-15-2006, 08:37 AM

i hate to side with mr black label but hes right. you cant just pick out lines here and there because you take it out of context. and once u take something out of its context you can shade it with whatever meaning you want. and thats how the news works today, they take a quotation quote it out of context and expect u to just gloss over the fact that itsnotin context. but that being said the bible itself is put together out of context. they CHOSE what books were worthy gospels, they chose what was included in the bible. and again once u pick and choose what facts your presenting and hide away the other facts then how isnt that cherry picking as well? the bible like most religious books are valuable lexicons of information, they show history froma peoples perspective, they tell parables, they explain certain things for the uneducated. and thats the problem, religions like to keep the people uneducated. the poor and stupid are almost always conservative (see the middle of this country.)  and religions always lean toward conservatism, but they forget one fact jesus like most real (real as in actually alive, and not a deity) religious idols are actually liberals, who attack the standards around them.

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 08:57 AM

You both missed my point. I said it's a bad way to have an honest discussion, then I did it. The point was in that. The other point is: isn't this the word of God? You actually should be able to cherry-pick the word of God should'n't you? Being perfect and all?

phixion

12-15-2006, 09:07 AM

You actually should be able to cherry-pick the word of God should'n't you? but i dont believe it is the word of god, thats MY point. i just think its a book that chronicles the history of a people in the old testament, and the new testament has this great hippie in it named jesus who tries to explain everything in parables, thats how i see the bible, more so as a piece of literature than a cornerstone to a few religions.

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 09:14 AM

I can get behind that. I wasn't staking a position, I was posing questions. Questions I really didn't want to answer is all.

UnknownPD

12-15-2006, 09:34 AM

I get really concerned when people tell me what I'm supposed to think. Whether it's you guys or the Christians.

johnniewalker

12-15-2006, 09:45 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: You both missed my point. I said it's a bad way to have an honest discussion, then I did it. The point was in that. The other point is: isn't this the word of God? You actually should be able to cherry-pick the word of God should'n't you? Being perfect and all?  So by missing your point, did i agree with you?   To your other thing, it may be ok personally for you to believe some of those things, but how they apply to an imperfect world.   Again it goes to how literal you want to take it,  I don't think it would be correct to say the old testamant perfectly correlates with the new testamant.   You can probably read millions of contradictions and people refuting them with context, but to me it misses the justifications for values.  I'm not trying to argue that god is real or that religion is the best, just that there is worth in it.

angrymissy

12-15-2006, 10:56 AM

Bulldogcakes wrote: FMJeff wrote: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html</a>It is SO refreshing to see Christians looking inward and questioning popular opinions. It's actually kind of relieving to know there are some Christians out there that do not approve of modern christianity and how offmessage it has become. Interesting stuff.Glad to see your "so refreshed" by those silly Christians actually thinking for themselves! Wonders never cease! Must be one of those "miracles" that Jesus guy did! Not only refreshed but "relieved" as well! You know Jeff, there's a world out there outside of the leftist bubble you live in. You might want to get out more.  Jeff is married to me, a (former) Catholic.  Deals w/ my catholic family on a regular basis.  Had no problem with incorporating Catholic themed shit into our wedding, or having a minister.  He's not living in a "lefist bubble, wayyyyy to overgeneralize.As someone who was raised Catholic I am ALSO refreshed to see this article.  Christians seem to be moving further and further into crazy land and trying to push their beliefs on everyone else, I've seen it first hand in the church many, many times.

phixion

12-15-2006, 11:27 AM

Glad to see your "so refreshed" by those silly Christians actually thinking for themselves! Wonders never cease! Must be one of those "miracles" that Jesus guy did i cant believe i just glossed over this. now im not sure about any other religion, but as far as catholicism goes you arent supposed to think for urself. the pope is divine he's never wrong he is god personified on earth, thats what catholics believe, and thats the oath we take once confirmed into the catholic church. now if the pope says its okay that priests fuck children then guess what according to catholic doctrine we have to agree with him. if he says its wrong to have an abortion then guess what all catholics are supposed to oppose abortion. and its also why excommunication worked so well in the middle ages, everyone had to agree witht the pope that this person will never be spoken to again. thats the oath, so yeah the idea that catholics anywya thinking forthemselves that is a new idea.

UnknownPD

12-15-2006, 12:31 PM

angrymissy wrote: Bulldogcakes wrote: FMJeff wrote: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html</a>It is SO refreshing to see Christians looking inward and questioning popular opinions. It's actually kind of relieving to know there are some Christians out there that do not approve of modern christianity and how offmessage it has become. Interesting stuff.Glad to see your "so refreshed" by those silly Christians actually thinking for themselves! Wonders never cease! Must be one of those "miracles" that Jesus guy did! Not only refreshed but "relieved" as well! You know Jeff, there's a world out there outside of the leftist bubble you live in. You might want to get out more.  Jeff is married to me, a (former) Catholic.  Deals w/ my catholic family on a regular basis.  Had no problem with incorporating Catholic themed shit into our wedding, or having a minister.  He's not living in a "lefist bubble, wayyyyy to overgeneralize.As someone who was raised Catholic I am ALSO refreshed to see this article.  Christians seem to be moving further and further into crazy land and trying to push their beliefs on everyone else, I've seen it first hand in the church many, many times. Definite generalization. How do you define crazy. If the church disagrees with your opinion on something does that make them crazy? Does belief in the Bible or any religion make them crazy? Orthodox Jews have walked hand in hand with the Christian right. Are they crazy too? I can't stand fanatics and the Christian right makes my stomach turn, but I would rather hear them espousing their opinions than everyone walking in lockstep with some universal opinion.

angrymissy

12-15-2006, 12:39 PM

UnknownPD wrote: angrymissy wrote: Bulldogcakes wrote: FMJeff wrote: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html</a>It is SO refreshing to see Christians looking inward and questioning popular opinions. It's actually kind of relieving to know there are some Christians out there that do not approve of modern christianity and how offmessage it has become. Interesting stuff.Glad to see your "so refreshed" by those silly Christians actually thinking for themselves! Wonders never cease! Must be one of those "miracles" that Jesus guy did! Not only refreshed but "relieved" as well! You know Jeff, there's a world out there outside of the leftist bubble you live in. You might want to get out more.  Jeff is married to me, a (former) Catholic.  Deals w/ my catholic family on a regular basis.  Had no problem with incorporating Catholic themed shit into our wedding, or having a minister.  He's not living in a "lefist bubble, wayyyyy to overgeneralize.As someone who was raised Catholic I am ALSO refreshed to see this article.  Christians seem to be moving further and further into crazy land and trying to push their beliefs on everyone else, I've seen it first hand in the church many, many times. Definite generalization. How do you define crazy. If the church disagrees with your opinion on something does that make them crazy? Does belief in the Bible or any religion make them crazy? Orthodox Jews have walked hand in hand with the Christian right. Are they crazy too? I can't stand fanatics and the Christian right makes my stomach turn, but I would rather hear them espousing their opinions than everyone walking in lockstep with some universal opinion. First of all, I said "crazy land" as a figure of speech.  I think the person who wrote that article has the right idea.  I don't care what ANYONE wants to believe in, as long as they don't try to push it on me. I think it varies from church to church.  Some churches I have been to are more laid back and don't try to push their views on others, some recruited people I knew and had them going to bible studies 4 hours a day after work and agreeing to tithe 20% of their income.  Telling them they can't be friends with anyone who is not a member of the church.  When I see the leaders of some sects of Christanity and the absolute hate they spew for homosexuals and women it disgusts me.  Which is why I think the WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE is doing a GOOD thing for Christianity.

sailor

12-15-2006, 12:47 PM

Furtherman wrote: bronxmarc wrote: Furtherman wrote: [quote]phixion wrote: yeah but again using the bible as a fairy tale that cant work? aesops fables are great at teaching kids things without ever playing them off as literally true. y cant it the bible be used the same way? if u read the bible purely as literature its not a bad piece of work. and i think that i can still be valuable even if its subtracted by all the crap the church likes to attach to the bible.like the exodus story: there is no doubt in my mind that those events actually happened, but put them into context and show how a volcano. an eathquake,a nd a tidal wave all resulted in the jews escaping the egyptians, but if you display it purely as 'thsi is gods power' then ur doing ur kids a disservice. and also you have to teach that the bible is literaly one obscure text away from revealing that jesus was the devils son ie: moses never crossed the Red Sea, the discovery of the dead sea scrolls whow that they crossed the REED sea, which is little more than a swamp making the crossing much more mundane than miraculous.Fantastic idea about comparing the bible to Aesop's fables. If only people would teach it that way. As for the exodus, don't be too sure. There have been some prominate Jewish archeologists over the years that have been banned from teaching in Israel because there is absolutely no archeological evidence of the exodus and they write it up as another story, based on some fact, but greatly exaggerated (like the crossing of the reed sea - which people had done for thousands of years).Today archeologists can tell when two cavemen had a campfire at one spot at one time and now that spot is underwater. The natural effects you describe are what happened to cause the 10 plagues. ok, you don't believe in god or follow some set religion, but do you need to continually insult those who do? that doesn't make it seem like you've learned these lessons from any source. people believe this stuff, what gives you the right to call it a fairy-tale or fable? And just where did I insult you? Calling the bible a fairy tale? That insults you? Why? Is you belief so deep seeded that ANY question of it give you that little pain in your chest? A bump in your ego? That's not because of an insult. Maybe because you haven't questioned it. The Human ego is a dangerous thing. We think we're so special to be good will grant us everlating life, in eternity, with our relatives.Quote: Scottinnj said:But How? Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose? If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother? Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person. It doesn't matter. If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter? Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell? You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper?If you stop to think about it, what would be the point of anything at ALL? Even if we were to record all of mankind's history, put those records on every type of media possible, backed up those records and put them in the safest most secure areas, it would still break down, and eventually those storage areas would be destroyed by nature, man or some sort of supernova by the sun. Every record of humanity's existence here in this galaxy would be wiped away, never to be recovered or known again. We would be in all intents and purposes, never here. Everything we do, have do

FMJeff

12-15-2006, 12:47 PM

Jeff is married to me, I am? Is that why I keep waking up and you're there? I just thought you liked my thick one down below.

Dougie Brootal

12-15-2006, 12:49 PM

FMJeff wrote: Jeff is married to me, I am? Is that why I keep waking up and you're there? I just thought you liked my thick one down below.no one likes you, jeff!

Furtherman

12-15-2006, 12:55 PM

bronxmarc wrote:  i'm more agnostic than anything, so no, i haven't followed blindly, and that's not where my criticism of you comes from.  if you want to live your life by a code of ethics, fine.  why can you not accept that others might want to live their lives based on a code of morals, using the bible or church or whatever?  why does that hurt you so that you have to name call?  you don't believe in the bible fine.  couldn't bother me less.  calling it a fable is disrespectful, and if you can't see that, no amount of arguing will change that. I still don't see where I insulted and I certainly don't see where I name-called.  But you are right.  I don't see how calling the bible stories a fable is disrespectful, when even the church itself came out in October of last year stating that not all of the parts of the bible are true.  That was a step the church made that actually impressed me.  So if not all are true, what would you call them?  I think it's a crutch that people don't need.  Common sense dictates what is right and wrong.

Chuck

12-15-2006, 01:06 PM

Furtherman wrote: bronxmarc wrote:  i'm more agnostic than anything, so no, i haven't followed blindly, and that's not where my criticism of you comes from.  if you want to live your life by a code of ethics, fine.  why can you not accept that others might want to live their lives based on a code of morals, using the bible or church or whatever?  why does that hurt you so that you have to name call?  you don't believe in the bible fine.  couldn't bother me less.  calling it a fable is disrespectful, and if you can't see that, no amount of arguing will change that. I still don't see where I insulted and I certainly don't see where I name-called.  But you are right.  I don't see how calling the bible stories a fable is disrespectful, when even the church itself came out in October of last year stating that not all of the parts of the bible are true.  That was a step the church made that actually impressed me.  So if not all are true, what would you call them?  I think it's a crutch that people don't need.  Common sense dictates what is right and wrong.Based on what?  Is this absolute or relative?  What is the purpose of choosing to do right or wrong?

sailor

12-15-2006, 01:06 PM

Furtherman wrote: bronxmarc wrote: i'm more agnostic than anything, so no, i haven't followed blindly, and that's not where my criticism of you comes from. if you want to live your life by a code of ethics, fine. why can you not accept that others might want to live their lives based on a code of morals, using the bible or church or whatever? why does that hurt you so that you have to name call? you don't believe in the bible fine. couldn't bother me less. calling it a fable is disrespectful, and if you can't see that, no amount of arguing will change that. I still don't see where I insulted and I certainly don't see where I name-called. But you are right. I don't see how calling the bible stories a fable is disrespectful, when even the church itself came out in October of last year stating that not all of the parts of the bible are true. That was a step the church made that actually impressed me. So if not all are true, what would you call them? I think it's a crutch that people don't need. Common sense dictates what is right and wrong. you said "fairy tale" which i'm pretty sure was used to be insulting. if not, i apologize for assuming it was. and common sense CAN dictate right and wrong, but why would it bother you if other people use a different means to right and wrong than your common sense? and you can't say it's because you disagree with their results, because even if everyone used common sense, the results would ALL be different.edit: love your updated sigpic.  just noticed it! 

This message was edited by bronxmarc on 12-15-06 @ 5:07 PM

Gvac

12-15-2006, 01:18 PM

All of these posts are way too long.Brevity, people.BREVITY!I have a very short attention span.

Yerdaddy

12-15-2006, 01:22 PM

Gvac wrote: All of these posts are way too long.Brevity, people.BREVITY!I have a very short attention span.   Yeah! C'mon guys!

sailor

12-15-2006, 01:24 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: Gvac wrote: All of these posts are way too long.Brevity, people.BREVITY!I have a very short attention span. Yeah! C'mon guys! hilarious!  :)

FMJeff

12-15-2006, 01:37 PM

douggrasso wrote: FMJeff wrote: Jeff is married to me, I am? Is that why I keep waking up and you're there? I just thought you liked my thick one down below.no one likes you, jeff!<img src="http://k41.pbase.com/v3/90/494590/1/51321746.SadClown_sat.jpg" border="0" width="606" height="782" />

lintpit

12-15-2006, 01:56 PM

The bible is a fairy tale.  Creation in 7 days.  The great flood.  Water into wine.  All things that did not happen.  All things made up to explain, then use for fear to control and bring in some cash and land to boot.This statement really bothered me. I pondered on it for a while and tried to come up with an arguementfor it. Here goes...man can recreate life in a lab with millions of dollars ,computers and man hours. God can create life in a nanosecond . Try as we might, we have no answers for lifes most basic questions,yet here we are through the workings of God, getting to ask the questions.as far as the fairy tale idea, I wasn't there. Nor were any of us. Could it be true? absolutely. could these words of man be simplistic to facilitate better comprehension? probably.Is there a God named Jesus who died on a cross so I can go to heaven...God, Ihope so.

phixion

12-15-2006, 02:16 PM

bronxmarc i was the one who said the bible is still useful if usedmore like aesops fables, and its not insulting. go to the kids section in ur local bookstore pick up aesops fables and tell me one single fable that isnt trying to say something similar to what the bible has said.  Could it be true? absolutelynow i have ginormous problem with that statement. lets start in the beginning of the bible, genesis. do you really believe that man and woman were born from clay? fine whatever. and heres an odd question for you in the garden of eden how much water was there? hear me out you see, there would have to be significant bodies of water, one salt and fresh. and in this body of water you have to have a couple of each species of animal, imagine the size needed for a blue whale? hard to imagine that a body of salt water that large and land locked would simply disappear. oh and noahs ark? how did noah get to the antarctica to put all the creatures from there onto the ark. do you get my point yet? blind faith serves no purpose besides laziness. the bible can be philosophically true and not have to be literally true. and please explain to me how the molecule H2O changes into COOH, because it takes more than a miracle to whipe carbon out of nowhere, it takes breaking every law of physics that your creator has provided. look at exodus thats my best argument. there are a bunch of geological and biological events that produced those 'miracles' and 'plagues' now id like to believe god is playing by the same rules we are, why because it helps provide an arguemtn to an intelligent goda god that simply goes *poof* and the earth was created? sorry i have to believe taht god is more creative than that.

scottinnj

12-15-2006, 03:47 PM

Yerdaddy wrote:  [quote]But How? Why bother to teach children to "Love thy Neighbor" if there is no higher meaning or purpose? If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother? Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person. It doesn't matter. If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter? Those you killed have simply ceased to exist, and what the hell? You were only going to live to 70 or 80 years old anyhow, so why not go out with a bang instead of in a diaper? Here's what I don't get: why is the default human desire, absent an omnipotent god, often only killing and raping and doing all kinds of horrible shit? Why is it never "When you think about it, without god, nothing has any meaning and you could just... run off to Africa and try to cure Gunea worm disease! Do you really desire to go on killing sprees, but you think it will piss off God so you restrain yourself? I know it's more a rhetorical point; you're really saying without religious values, COULD'NT you do that and not feel bad - theoreticaly. At least the more thoughtul of the faithful express it this way. But it shows more the predjuce of the asker of such questions to assume that the faithless would even ponder such horrible shit. Why would we? Why would you assume we experience happiness and pain any different from you? Why would you assume we would WANT to do bad shit because Dad's not watching? It's not like there's any evidence that atheists do horrible shit more than the faithful. So why start a serious inquiry with us about why we're atheist or what it means to be an atheist with such assumptions that we have to battle back from before we can even get to your question. My family does the same thing to me all the time. I've come to the conclusion that they don't really want to know. I think they ask questions that way because they're afraid of atheism. And that's fine. They want to believe that their god is what's keeping them in line; that their religious system is devised by their god to give us our moral values. Whatever. But it's extremist to think that it's the only source of morality is your god's religion. Humans are social creatures and we all have impulses to react with love or anger based on our surroundings. You've adopted what you think is a moral code to base decisions on. Fine. But don't ignore my own good or bad conduct in judging me in order to bolster your own faith. Don't let your faith take away from your own powers of observation and assessment of other people. If you do that then it's you who's inability to get along with others is hampered by your faith. [Insert the obligatory analogy of religious conflicts throughout history.]"If you think of it" is usually an awful expression for getting at real understanding as well. If you think about it, it's you believers who have some 'splaining to do. You guys have all attatched yourselves to books with crazy hateful shit in it. ALL of you. For example: <a href="http://bible.cc/2_chronicles/15-13.htm" target="_blank">2 Chronicles 15</a> - That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. OK, so you tell me: why are you not stomping my guts out? That's the word of God, right? So why is it you're not off on an infidel killing spree? [quote]<a href="http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/dt/22.html#5">Deuteronomy 22:5</a> - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Snacks

12-15-2006, 07:57 PM

Gvac wrote: All of these posts are way too long.Brevity, people.BREVITY!I have a very short attention span.   I agree I think I have a headache from trying to read them all!

sailor

12-15-2006, 11:05 PM

phixion wrote: bronxmarc i was the one who said the bible is still useful if usedmore like aesops fables, and its not insulting. go to the kids section in ur local bookstore pick up aesops fables and tell me one single fable that isnt trying to say something similar to what the bible has said.  Could it be true? absolutelynow i have ginormous problem with that statement. lets start in the beginning of the bible, genesis. do you really believe that man and woman were born from clay? fine whatever. and heres an odd question for you in the garden of eden how much water was there? hear me out you see, there would have to be significant bodies of water, one salt and fresh. and in this body of water you have to have a couple of each species of animal, imagine the size needed for a blue whale? hard to imagine that a body of salt water that large and land locked would simply disappear. oh and noahs ark? how did noah get to the antarctica to put all the creatures from there onto the ark. do you get my point yet? blind faith serves no purpose besides laziness. the bible can be philosophically true and not have to be literally true. and please explain to me how the molecule H2O changes into COOH, because it takes more than a miracle to whipe carbon out of nowhere, it takes breaking every law of physics that your creator has provided. look at exodus thats my best argument. there are a bunch of geological and biological events that produced those 'miracles' and 'plagues' now id like to believe god is playing by the same rules we are, why because it helps provide an arguemtn to an intelligent goda god that simply goes *poof* and the earth was created? sorry i have to believe taht god is more creative than that.  i have no problem with anyone believing anything.  i just had a problem with the specific wording of a specific (other) poster.  i also don't like anyone on ANY of these various sides telling everyone else what they must believe.  believe what you will, it's cool with me.

Yerdaddy

12-16-2006, 04:27 AM

scottinnj wrote:First off, atheists are good people.  There is a diffenrence between an atheist who rejects the existence of a higher power, and an evil person.  BIG, HUGE mistake for Christians pointing out atheists and calling them the boogeyman.  So sorry on behalf of Christianity if one of us pointed you out and tried to personally attack you.  Apology accepted, but not at all necessary. I didn't assume you were insulting me, and even if I had thought that my atheism is probably the thing I'm least sensitive about. I posted the big long tome because I find the usual phrasing of questions to me as an atheist by Christians (especially by my own family members) to be a fascinating reflection of the common view held by believers of nonbelievers, and of human nature itself. You asked (someone) what they've always asked me, (sincerely), "If there is no God, no accountability or consequence, why bother?  Just do whatever you want to do, no matter how horrendous or hurtful it is to another person.  It doesn't matter.  If you go off on a killing spree at the age of 35, and get gunned down in the middle of it, what does it matter?"First of all, you equate "no God" with "no accountability or consequence". In discussions of faith with believers - both Christians at home and Muslims here - this frame of reference kicks in most of the time, and that's what fascinates me. Obviously God or no God, there are very real consequences for my actions if I would choose to do something hurtful to others. That's our physical reality that is at once forgotten in these discussions, making the honest inquiry by the believer really hard to answer by the faithless. I mean, wer're trying to get at the question of "so where do you get your morals and values from, then?" aren't we? But, if I answer that question I have to battle back from the assumption that the lack of religious morality = immorality. If I simply answer that the consequences of jail or revenge by the people I hurt keep me from doing those things, then I haven't even gotten to the question of where my moral values come from, and my moral values - wherever they do come from - are the real reason I don't do those things. I don't WANT to do those things, not because I don't want to go to jail, (I don't. I'm kind of purty), but because I have no desire to hurt anyone else.So my big-ass reponse was really the extended version of "What's up with that question?" The Bible quotes you have are from the Old Testament.  Christians believe that the world historically has two phases:  The world under the law and the world under grace.  The world that was under the law was the world we know of B.C. or the Old Testament world.  Jesus had not yet come down to earth and gave His sacrifice.  Therefore God had set up the Ten Commandments for the Jews to live by, so there would be some order in the ranks.  These passages you quote were written by the priests and judges of Israel.  When Jesus came, the moment He died, the cloth that separated the general meeting area and the Holy of Holies was ripped in two from top to bottom.  We entered into the age of grace, where the old laws no longer applied.  The only way to salvation from then on was belief that Jesus was the Messiah. Everything else is held accountable by God after we die and face His judgement.It's kind of complicated, but basically the old laws are no longer needed and the new way is "love thy neighbor"With this I'm fucking impressed! I've posed that question to the pros - the church elders of Mormons, Babtists and Muslims that have been called to answer me by their followers whom I've freaked out by my questions of them. I ask the question, not

NewYorkDragons80

12-22-2006, 08:49 PM

I've actually spent time in the middle of the country and I can tell you that there are scores of people that hold these same views.  Surely you're not under the impression that these views have only originated from the spawn of Tammy Faye?

scottinnj

12-22-2006, 09:44 PM

Hey Yerdaddy,It is all about faith.  I'm getting tired of my leaders trying to legislate our form of morality down your throat.  This Baker kid is getting a lot of attention, but in reality, a lot of Christian conservatives are questioning the moral basis of where we stand.  We believe in all of this, but as the great C.S. Lewis once said, it is not for us to cram our beliefs down the throats of those who disagree with us, it is for us to follow our faith and to be a beacon for those who are looking for hope.  In as much as being a sinner, I am equally bad in God's eyes as those who Pat Robertson wags his finger at in condemnation.I smoke-therefore I am a sinner.I swear-therefore I am a sinner.And so on, and so on.Therefore, since I am a sinner, I am condemned.  How then do I have the right to point to another person and say "you are an immoral wicked person and you are going to Hell"?  I can't because I am in the same boat.  It is only my faith in the death and ressurection of Christ I believe I am forgiven.  That's it in a nutshell.  Everything else is a moot point.  Even Jesus said it:  "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself, love your God as would love yourself, and all other commandments and laws shall fall into place."  In other words, the Golden Rule if perfectly executed, would eliminate the need for natural law.  When Pat Robertson started talking about having conversations with God, that God told him about election results and other nonsense, I knew he was full of crap because that ended with the Apostles at Pentecost.  Those early Christians were given special gifts from the Holy Spirit in order to get the church moving forward-a "jump start" so to speak.  And as an American, I believe the Constitution was one of the most brilliantly inspired documents written by men.  My logic tells me that it was partially inspired by God-follow me on this-these old "dead white dudes" were scallawags and slave owners.  It would have been easy for them to write a set of laws to fully encompass their personal comforts and protect them from the citizenry.  Instead, these owners of slaves, traffickers of human misery, actually put into place the amendment process that would ultimately end this nightmare of our national sin.  Also to put in there as the very first item in the "Bill of Rights" freedom of speech?  Unheard of!  To call this revolutionary for its time doesn't begin to do the first amendment justice.  Up until then, you so much as gave the stinkeye to a "gentleman" you could be jailed.  And to protest the government?  King George would have had you hanged.  Why that diatribe?  To explain my recognition that these rights truly were God-given, as the founding fathers declared.  And to tie this into my last post, about living in the age of grace, if Jesus is allowing us free will and to make our own decisions, then if its good enough for Him, then its good enough for me and it damn sure better be good enough for the government. I am a conservative because I believe in small government.  It is supposed to keep my kids safe, make sure our companies here in America are on an equal footing with companies in other countries, educate my kids and make sure every citizen is given the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  That's it.  I would be a Constitutionalist instead of a Republican, but they will never gain ground plus the fact if you think the Republicans are a bunch of Right Wing Wackos, go check out the Constitution Party.  They make the Republicans look like the Senator Kennedy party.Am I going to oppose certain legislation based on my religious beliefs?  Sure I am.  But I AM tired of having my religious beliefs used to threaten others.....e.g. the anti-gay marriage amendme

reeshy

12-22-2006, 09:48 PM

This thread started with a guy who is Jewish?????????????

Yerdaddy

12-25-2006, 05:36 AM

Hey Scott, you're exactly the kind of Christian that founded this country. And that have and will have presevered both its democratic and Christian values. I'm proud to be counted as a friend of yours. From a repectful atheist, Seasons Greetings!And Merry Christmas!What the hell, I'm about 100 miles from Bethlehem... Happy Birthday Jesus!

phixion

12-26-2006, 10:21 AM

My logic tells me that it was partially inspired by God-follow me on this-these old "dead white dudes" were scallawags and slave ownerswhile agree that the constitution is greatest document ever written, yeah better than the bible too, your 'logic' isnt really there.if you read the personal journals of our founding fathers the great majority were face saving christians. they went to church because everyone else did. there personal religious beliefs hinged on the idea that god created this world then left the planet to its own devices. so in this sense i think our founding fathers were agnostic, not christian, and that in no small part is why the constitution is as great as it is. and the roots of the consititution can be found in magna carta, englsih common law, englsih bill of rights, the ideas of john locke, the mayflower compact, and new england town hall meetings. what made our constitution so great is the men who wrote looked at history found ideas that worked and used them, foudn ideas that didnt work, and improved them. not a single original thought was put into the constitution. not divine simply intelligent

Yerdaddy

12-27-2006, 02:38 AM

phixion wrote: My logic tells me that it was partially inspired by God-follow me on this-these old "dead white dudes" were scallawags and slave ownerswhile agree that the constitution is greatest document ever written, yeah better than the bible too, your 'logic' isnt really there.if you read the personal journals of our founding fathers the great majority were face saving christians. they went to church because everyone else did. there personal religious beliefs hinged on the idea that god created this world then left the planet to its own devices. so in this sense i think our founding fathers were agnostic, not christian, and that in no small part is why the constitution is as great as it is. and the roots of the consititution can be found in magna carta, englsih common law, englsih bill of rights, the ideas of john locke, the mayflower compact, and new england town hall meetings. what made our constitution so great is the men who wrote looked at history found ideas that worked and used them, foudn ideas that didnt work, and improved them. not a single original thought was put into the constitution. not divine simply intelligentI think the argument that the founding fathers were overwhelmingly Deist - believing in the "watchmaker in the sky" theory of God; that he created the universe and it's laws but that revealed or organized religion wasn't necessarily divine or true - is often overstated. I used to overstate it in fact. This is based on the assumed religious views of only four of the founding fathers, as far as I know:Jefferson was subtly contempible of organized religion. He pushed hard for the separation of church and state and got it into the Virginia state constitution and counted that achievement as one of the three he wanted to be rememered for. But he did seem to believe in God and wrote it into documents, such as the Declaration of Independence, for either personal or political reasons. Speculation that he was a Deist is inconclusive.Franklin was most likely a Deist. He had a hostile relationship with organized religion his whole life.Washington was very vague about his religious beliefs and his attendence of church was irregular leading to speculation that he was a Deist. I highly doubt he was. I think he was just a pragmatist who kept his religious beliefs personal but had more important concearns, like winning wars and getting this new form of government on its feet.Tom Paine was very possibly a Deist. He was hostile to most authority and certainly organized religions. Possibly agnostic or atheist. That was in line with his rebel nature. Other than that I don't remember hearing that any of the other many founding fathers were anything other than church-going God-fearing Christians of one denomination or another. But keep in mind this is before Darwin and before Einstein. There weren't alot of challenges to religiosity at the time and atheists and agnostics were rare and in fact generally feared. They still are to a frightening degree, but it was pretty much universal at the time.The constitution, however many references to God it may contain, is in fact an entirely secular document. There are only two and a half of the 10 Commandments enshrined in US law, and those are in every legal code in modern government - no killing or stealing, and adultery is grounds for divorce so it gets 1/2. The fact that such religious men were able to bind themselves to such practical and secular values is a testament to their spirit of free thinking and progressive principles.