if they read the gospel...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-12-2014, 07:59 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 07:37 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  You think there are moral bones too?

Yes, once you grind them down into powder, and examine the substance under a microscope, you start to see they are made of star dust, the same makeup of morality.

Quote:Also; no word on how morality is in the heart, then? Typical. Nobody ever answers those questions. Dodgy

Yes, right there in the same vessel that keeps life beating and dancing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2014, 08:10 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 01:21 AM)microterf Wrote:  You sir are delusion. We are animals. If you look at how we have acted in the past, it makes perfect sense. We evolve over time socially to better suite our need as a species to survive. What was acceptable 5000 or even 200 years ago isn't accepted now. If you're theory was correct, then that would not be the case. You think in the wild west when they shot someone for cheating at poker they thought twice about it? No. Because it was acceptable. 20000 years ago when men raped women or killed other men that threatened their sex life they didn't think twice. If morals were built into their heart ( or more accurately their brain) we wouldn't have seen these things. That's why you need education to show people what is wrong and right and acceptable in today's society. Not just to teach them math.

Your appeals to education, are appeals to revelation, are appeals for folks to see the essence of moral life more clearly as the direction they are to move towards. You spectrum views the past discretions of humanity as a product of ignorance, which clear sightedness would have steered them away from.

It's not that you want to show people what is acceptable and not acceptable, but you want them to drink from the cup of acceptability, which they know in the inner most fabric of their being is what they should be drinking in the first place.

Your lense is one in which Evil is not another way of saying Good, but rather a product of ignorance, shortsightedness, delusion, and never the act of someone who knows the truth. In your view the truth has a moral direction. And ignorance is what leads to moral failings, past and present.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2014, 08:10 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(01-12-2014 07:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-12-2014 04:23 AM)shallwechat71 Wrote:  Im typing this on a smartphone, so there will be typos. Lately a new orleans saints player. (Tight end) makes a facebook comment. If the brown family, the martin family, the garner gamily etc were exposed to the gospel more of then education, the whole furguson and trayvon martin tragidys would not happen.

I dont understand in how reading the gospel would of made any difference. Who is this football player to know if exposure to the gospel would of made a difference? I suspect these families read the gospels frequently. This player forgets that an education plays a great role in lifting people out of poverty and preventong these cop confrontations.

No, that's not what he said, in fact his post was directed to everybody, on all sides of the Ferguson issue, and appears to be sympathetic with all parties, and critical of all parties as well. This is likely why the response to his remarks have been overwhelmingly positive by all sides of the debate. The only ones who appear to be offended by his remarks are a handful of atheists.

And he never said "reading" the Gospel is the cure, but that Gospel itself is the cure, in its message of hope and redemption in the face of man's sin. All this involves more than just reading the text, but accepting it as well. You can disagree with this all you like, but don't mischaracterize what he said, and who he was saying it to.

Here's his post in full:

"At some point while I was playing or preparing to play Monday Night Football, the news broke about the Ferguson Decision. After trying to figure out how I felt, I decided to write it down. Here are my thoughts:

I'M ANGRY because the stories of injustice that have been passed down for generations seem to be continuing before our very eyes.

I'M FRUSTRATED, because pop culture, music and movies glorify these types of police citizen altercations and promote an invincible attitude that continues to get young men killed in real life, away from safety movie sets and music studios.

I'M FEARFUL because in the back of my mind I know that although I'm a law abiding citizen I could still be looked upon as a "threat" to those who don't know me. So I will continue to have to go the extra mile to earn the benefit of the doubt.

I'M EMBARRASSED because the looting, violent protests, and law breaking only confirm, and in the minds of many, validate, the stereotypes and thus the inferior treatment.

I'M SAD, because another young life was lost from his family, the racial divide has widened, a community is in shambles, accusations, insensitivity hurt and hatred are boiling over, and we may never know the truth about what happened that day.

I'M SYMPATHETIC, because I wasn't there so I don't know exactly what happened. Maybe Darren Wilson acted within his rights and duty as an officer of the law and killed Michael Brown in self defense like any of us would in the circumstance. Now he has to fear the backlash against himself and his loved ones when he was only doing his job. What a horrible thing to endure. OR maybe he provoked Michael and ignited the series of events that led to him eventually murdering the young man to prove a point.

I'M OFFENDED, because of the insulting comments I've seen that are not only insensitive but dismissive to the painful experiences of others.

I'M CONFUSED, because I don't know why it's so hard to obey a policeman. You will not win!!! And I don't know why some policeman abuse their power. Power is a responsibility, not a weapon to brandish and lord over the populace.

I'M INTROSPECTIVE, because sometimes I want to take "our" side without looking at the facts in situations like these. Sometimes I feel like it's us against them. Sometimes I'm just as prejudiced as people I point fingers at. And that's not right. How can I look at white skin and make assumptions but not want assumptions made about me? That's not right.

I'M HOPELESS, because I've lived long enough to expect things like this to continue to happen. I'm not surprised and at some point my little children are going to inherit the weight of being a minority and all that it entails.

I'M HOPEFUL, because I know that while we still have race issues in America, we enjoy a much different normal than those of our parents and grandparents. I see it in my personal relationships with teammates, friends and mentors. And it's a beautiful thing.

I'M ENCOURAGED, because ultimately the problem is not a SKIN problem, it is a SIN problem. SIN is the reason we rebel against authority. SIN is the reason we abuse our authority. SIN is the reason we are racist, prejudiced and lie to cover for our own. SIN is the reason we riot, loot and burn. BUT I'M ENCOURAGED because God has provided a solution for sin through the his son Jesus and with it, a transformed heart and mind. One that's capable of looking past the outward and seeing what's truly important in every human being. The cure for the Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and Eric Garner tragedies is not education or exposure. It's the Gospel. So, finally, I'M ENCOURAGED because the Gospel gives mankind hope."

http://www.khq.com/story/27489010/nfl-pl...goes-viral

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen it.

Beautiful poetry ... up to the last paragraph which demonstrates a lack of awareness / education.

But I'm sure it's meant well.

Yes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
02-12-2014, 08:47 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 07:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-12-2014 04:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once you realize this, you can intelligently enter into the discussion and help mold societal moral standards as they change over time (see the sea change that is the gay rights movement over the last decade). Or you can be an unintelligent moral dinosaur who clings to a supposedly 'objective' morality that they've subjectively divined from their particular interpretation of their god.

But hey, at least you can pretend you have a 'moral backbone', right?

You have to be a moral dinosaur, or else you end up being a squishy little mouse. Your views amount to a moral protest that merely claims that whats evil, and wrong just offends your particular sensibility, like someone's choice of wardrobe, or a distastefully cooked steak.

It's not that you merely lack a moral backbone, but that you believe that morality has no backbone, that the end of the day it's all squeak and no bite.

No they don't. They are the thing that DECIDES what is evil/wrong, not how to act towards an evil/wrong action.

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2014, 09:14 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 08:47 AM)SunnyD1 Wrote:  No they don't. They are the thing that DECIDES what is evil/wrong, not how to act towards an evil/wrong action.

Who decides what is evil/wrong? The Taliban? Obama? Are these decisions akin to deciding whether it's appropriate for men to have hair buns, and how much chill powder is right for the soup?

Or akin to recognizing the answer to a mathematical equation, how the laws of physics work. Are they actually decisions on what is good and evil, or are they recognitions of what is good and evil, like one recognizes his face in the mirror, realizes a particular truth?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2014, 09:35 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 09:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-12-2014 08:47 AM)SunnyD1 Wrote:  No they don't. They are the thing that DECIDES what is evil/wrong, not how to act towards an evil/wrong action.

Who decides what is evil/wrong? The Taliban? Obama? Are these decisions akin to deciding whether it's appropriate for men to have hair buns, and how much chill powder is right for the soup?

Or akin to recognizing the answer to a mathematical equation, how the laws of physics work. Are they actually decisions on what is good and evil, or are they recognitions of what is good and evil, like one recognizes his face in the mirror, realizes a particular truth?

Stop asking the same questions over and over again that people have answered. You're only showing ignorance and lack of consideration. Dismissing all views that are not of the same sadomasochistic substance as your own.

Not that there's anything wrong with a bit of sadomasochism now and again.

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-12-2014, 09:54 AM (This post was last modified: 02-12-2014 11:06 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 07:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-12-2014 04:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once you realize this, you can intelligently enter into the discussion and help mold societal moral standards as they change over time (see the sea change that is the gay rights movement over the last decade). Or you can be an unintelligent moral dinosaur who clings to a supposedly 'objective' morality that they've subjectively divined from their particular interpretation of their god.

But hey, at least you can pretend you have a 'moral backbone', right?

You have to be a moral dinosaur, or else you end up being a squishy little mouse. Your views amount to a moral protest that merely claims that whats evil, and wrong just offends your particular sensibility, like someone's choice of wardrobe, or a distastefully cooked steak.

It's not that you merely lack a moral backbone, but that you believe that morality has no backbone, that the end of the day it's all squeak and no bite.

Yeah, because morality is not objective. Morality only has as much bite as people are willing to give it, it's supposed 'backbone' shifts and changes, it is not rigid. Case in point, once again with the gay equality movement, those arguing for equality have been gaining more and more bite to back up their bark because they're making the better case than the 'moral fossils' they're replacing. The zeitgeist in changing, they are initiating a paradigm shift; morality is not objective.

Welcome to the real world. Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
02-12-2014, 10:35 AM
RE: if they read the gospel...
(02-12-2014 09:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-12-2014 08:47 AM)SunnyD1 Wrote:  No they don't. They are the thing that DECIDES what is evil/wrong, not how to act towards an evil/wrong action.

Who decides what is evil/wrong? The Taliban? Obama? Are these decisions akin to deciding whether it's appropriate for men to have hair buns, and how much chill powder is right for the soup?

Or akin to recognizing the answer to a mathematical equation, how the laws of physics work. Are they actually decisions on what is good and evil, or are they recognitions of what is good and evil, like one recognizes his face in the mirror, realizes a particular truth?

Please enlighten us as to the definitions of sin, right and wrong, and morality. Also as to their sources - is morality objective? Absolute? Unchanging?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: