the God term
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-04-2013, 01:40 PM
RE: the God term
Quote:edit: ^^ just realised that the comparison above might be taken to imply that gay sex was immoral. Totally not zee intention. Intention was to highlight that positive, obvious morals mixed with negative crap and dogma is still extremely bad.

Agreed.

I was trying to imply that perhaps we could take the positive morality in religious scripture and apply it to secular society, but I agree that it's distasteful to do so considering the xenophobic, homophobic etc. messages found throughout. We could therefore apply 'similar' morality without having to reference religion at all...

'The four most over-rated things in the world are champagne, lobster, anal sex and picnics.' - Christopher Hitchins
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mitchelljames87's post
16-04-2013, 01:43 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 01:30 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 11:32 AM)Chas Wrote:  They are arguably happier. Even more ethical.

But dey gotz no interwebz. Checkmate, expatriate!

Sad humans haz interwebz porn
Happy Bonobos are too busy fucking.

Big Grin

Oh, sure. Beat the checkmate by tearing off your clothes, kicking over the table, and jumping up and down.

You win. Weeping

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-04-2013, 01:48 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 12:48 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 12:00 PM)childeye Wrote:  I am a Christian, and you are not. Who would know more about what it means to be a Christian?

See, this is what I am talking about. You say things about the bible and the God therein, which you clearly know nothing about.

In the Spirit of Christ there is no condemnation.

OI Angry Don't go telling me what I do and do not know about Christianity. I was one for a good long while. I sang the songs. I read the book. You clearly skipped all the sections where God says "kill my enemies with extreme violence". Who doesn't know his Bible ? Christ himself says "if you don't follow a bunch of totally arbitrary and stupid rules, and believe in MEEEEEEEE, then you can go burn in hell". Spirit of no condemnation my hairy ass.
Peace Sir. Please don't take offense at me that I try to correct you. I believe we both can be reasonable. First off let me address this, Christ himself says "if you don't follow a bunch of totally arbitrary and stupid rules, and believe in MEEEEEEEE, then you can go burn in hell". Spirit of no condemnation my hairy ass. Respectfully sir, nowhere does Christ say what you have quoted him as saying. This is what scripture cites as what Jesus actually said:
John 3:17

New International Version (NIV)

17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

And please Sir, consider here is what Paul the apostle taught:
Romans 8:1

New International Version (NIV)
8 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,

And now sir, I would like to address this following statement.
You clearly skipped all the sections where God says "kill my enemies with extreme violence".

I didn't skip it just because I didn't mention it. I would point out that this would be an Old Testament scripture you are refering to which was when Satan was the guardian Cherub in heaven and had the power of death according to scripture. Therefore this has nothing to do with The Kingdom of God wherein is Christ's Kingdom. For according to scripture, there was a very substantial change in the order of heaven after the crucifying of the Christ.

Revelation 12:3-11

New International Version (NIV)


3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”[a] And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

7 Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say:


Now have come the salvation and the power
and the kingdom of our God,
and the authority of his Messiah.
For the accuser of our brothers and sisters,
who accuses them before our God day and night,
has been hurled down.

So you see sir, the Kingdom and authority of Christ was not happening in heaven when the devil was in charge during the Old Testament. That is why I said earlier that what you were saying sounded like the devil.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:05 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 12:17 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  What does the bible say about hell and salvation, since we clearly know nothing about it? That is where you got your information about 'the Christ' and salvation, yes? If not, please share your sources.
Thank you for your response. I received my knowledge through revelation rather than through scripture, although scripture did verify that which I received. To elaborate further would require I give my testimony as to how I came to Christ. That would take much time for which I am not prepared to spend at this moment.

I hope you understand that you have asked me to explain much. Even bible scholars debate what scripture means regarding the terms salvation and hell. In short, salvation is being saved from a fate that would be described as being thrown away as worthless. Hell has two different meanings as to where the word is used. One meaning is death as in a place the soul goes after death of the corporeal body. The other is a lake of fire where the soul and death itself is destroyed. That is my understanding of it, but I may be wrong. I think the important thing here is to understand that the body and soul is considered a vessel of spirit, and that spirit is characterized in terms of the soul being either filled with Light or filled with darkness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:14 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 12:21 PM)mitchelljames87 Wrote:  The word 'God' is, quite simply, a word used in the English language, to name, not to define, the cause of the universe in a religious concept.

the difficulties arising from this thread I believe are that childeye has asked us to define God. It is not a slight on your religious belief, childeye, but the reason as to why atheists can not define God as a physical entity is because one can not define that which does not exist. Nor can one define something into existence. As is always the case in philosophy, we must be careful with the words we use to describe our arguments as to stop misinterpretation or confusion.

We could, however, define God as a name given to the 'cause of the universe in a religious concept' (the reason why we must add 'in a religious concept' is because we wouldn't refer to the big bang theory as 'God', because of it's inclinations to religious belief).

I hope this is more of a help than a hindrance,

regards
I appreciate what you say here. I certainly understand the problem of defining that which would not exist. However, we know that Love exists and scripture identifies Love as that moral goodness in mankind that is God. Having said that I like what you said in regards to the term god in naming the cause of the universe. I would only add both the cause and the purpose of the universe. You wrote an excellent post.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:20 PM (This post was last modified: 16-04-2013 03:36 PM by childeye.)
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 12:36 PM)mitchelljames87 Wrote:  Apologies, but may I also add a note as to the notion of 'God as a source of morality'.

An atheist would not disagree that religion is a source of morality, because it's clear that the Bible, Qur’an, Torah, etc., give guidance as to a 'construct of moral belief'.

The issues we would have regarding religious scripture as a source of morality is that it often comes part-and-parcel with religious belief, to which we do not subscribe.

An atheist (or perhaps more appropriately, a humanist) finds morality in social constructs (friends, family, personal & social experiences) or through reading ethical theory and philosophy, such as 'The Good Life' set out by Aristotle in the Nicomachean Ethics, of which has no religious connotations.

It's not necessarily true that atheists believe that religious morality is invalid; rather, that we cannot associate ourselves with anything religious.

Yet, as Alain de Botton points out quite excellently in his latest book, perhaps an athiests morality could be informed by religious morality, i.e., do not kill, treat others as you would be treated, yet without the subsequent belief in God.
Very good explanation. Ironically, to a true Christian, Christ is meant to end all religion, wherein atheism would be considered a religous belief that there is no God. Religion in this context would be defined as a man's perspective or opinion of God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 12:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 12:36 PM)mitchelljames87 Wrote:  Apologies, but may I also add a note as to the notion of 'God as a source of morality'.

An atheist would not disagree that religion is a source of morality, because it's clear that the Bible, Qur’an, Torah, etc., give guidance as to a 'construct of moral belief'.

The issues we would have regarding religious scripture as a source of morality is that it often comes part-and-parcel with religious belief, to which we do not prescribe.

An atheist (or perhaps more appropriately, a humanist) finds morality in social constructs (friends, family, personal & social experiences) or through reading ethical theory and philosophy, such as 'The Good Life' set out by Aristotle in the Nicomachean Ethics, of which has no religious connotations.

It's not necessarily that atheists believe that religious morality is invalid; rather, that we cannot associate ourselves with anything religious.

Yet, as Alain de Botton points out quite excellently in his latest book, perhaps an athiests morality could be informed by religious morality, i.e., do not kill, treat others as you would be treated, yet without the subsequent belief in God.

Those basic aspects of morality not only predate the extant religions, they are violated by the extant religions.

As an atheist, I do not reject religious morality because it is mixed with the supernatural;
I reject religious morality because it contains vile, ugly precepts.

The largest three religions are misogynistic, xenophobic, and violent. Their moralities are anti-human, shame-based, and disgusting.

Fuck religious morality.
Ironically, scripture agrees with this sentiment. Scripture says that God hates religion wherein it paints a picture of a whore riding a beast and tells of how religion crucified the Christ.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 02:28 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 01:40 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 12:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  The largest three religions are misogynistic, xenophobic, and violent. Their moralities are anti-human, shame-based, and disgusting.

Fuck religious morality.

Did you mean largest three monotheistic religions?

Hinduism is the third largest religion and I would not describe it as above.

I stand corrected.

Hinduism has its own issues. Mostly it's just weird.

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
16-04-2013, 02:33 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 01:40 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Did you mean largest three monotheistic religions?

Hinduism is the third largest religion and I would not describe it as above.

I stand corrected.

Hinduism has its own issues. Mostly it's just weird.

The cows and rats seem to like it.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2013, 03:31 PM
RE: the God term
(16-04-2013 01:08 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(16-04-2013 12:00 PM)childeye Wrote:  See, this is what I am talking about. You say things about the bible and the God therein, which you clearly know nothing about.

In the Spirit of Christ there is no condemnation.

childeye, I'm seriously done messing with you about the god dog thing. So, you can stop ignoring me.

What I want to address is your language... specifically, the bolded part.

Who are you talking about that have no condemnation? Christians? Unbelievers?

Also, you are very wrong... there is condemnation by God. God does condemn... and it doesn't matter who you are or what you do... God condemns who He wants to.

Read Romans 9 for the most blatant example in the Bible.

Condemnation is no ones fault but God's. No one can choose condemnation or salvation; according to the Bible, God chooses this and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

If you don't agree, please prove me wrong with scripture.
Perhaps I have missed some posts you wrote. I have spent the entire day yesterday writing till I got a headache trying to keep up with everyone's responses. I apologize if it appears that I am ignoring you. Thank you for leaving the god\dog thing behind. It is a waste arguing degrees and semantics.

I must say, you have written an excellent post here. You surprised me for which I am glad. First let me address this statement: Who are you talking about that have no condemnation? Christians? Unbelievers?
True Christians are not condemned even because they don't condemn others. Hence we see the Lord's prayer forgive me my tresspasses even as I forgive those who tresspass against me. It is therefore seen that condemnation comes upon those who condemn others, because such condemnation is hypocrisy which cannot be allowed in the Kingdom of God where no deceipt can enter. Hence we read in Romans 2:1; You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

Now I would like to address the excellent point you made here: Also, you are very wrong... there is condemnation by God. God does condemn... and it doesn't matter who you are or what you do... God condemns who He wants to.

Read Romans 9 for the most blatant example in the Bible.


Romans 9 is dealing with a view of eternal things from a temporal perspective. Essentially it is dealing with a purpose that God is accomplishing through a means of a flesh existence wherein a certain vanity is to be destroyed by it's own hands. That vanity started in heaven with Satan but is manifested as the corruption seen in mankind. Hence men can be counted as blameless when they don't blame others. This gets into the deepest of Christian knowledge and Truth and this in efect is the whole big picture and purpose of all temporal existence as corporeal beings. That is to reveal what is vanity, how it came about, and what is the end of it. In the simplest of explanations so as to avoid semantics, I describe this as a virgin who has to lose her virginity to find out what a virgin was. Such are the things of Holiness and purity. This temporal existence therefore creates the opportunity to come to know what is Holy through experiencing corruption. Once the value of that Holiness is seen for what it is, it can then be restored unto us with a newfound appreciation for that which we had always possessed but never properly esteemed.

Having said that, I must get into some semantics here. In order to restore us back to a state of being pure of heart, we must come to admit a certain Truth we could not acknowledge when we were in ignorance. And that is that there is a Spirit called Love that is the treasure we took for granted. For our love to be altruistic in intent it must be acknowledged as thus and not of ourselves. So as to say if I gave charity so as to be seen as good in a religious spirit, that is not an altruistic love. It is vanity. It is not the same as that altruistic Love out of which I give charity purely because I wanted to see an end of someone's suffering.

So here is where semantics come in. God had to condemn all men as sinners as a condition of acknowledging that we are corruptible in our own endeavour to be good apart from Him\Love. At the same time God is justifying our being sinners because we could not help our ignorance of His Spirit in us which made us good.
Hence Roman 9 says, He has mercy upon whom He will have mercy, but that does not mean He will not have mercy upon all. For elsewhere scripture says that God desires that all men come unto the knowledge of thr truth of God. That simple Truth is that God is Love, which I have brought up for consideration on this forum.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: