Time to regulate Bible and samurai sword ownership

[nikimcbee]

I guess god and samurai swords don't mix:o. What a nut.


http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-samurai-sword-son-mother,0,490069.story

[Platapus]

That has got to be a bad way to die. You really have to hate someone to kill them with a sword.

[Buddahaid]

I'd say get rid of the Bible. It's by far the deadlier weapon.

[Ducimus]

What i wonder is.....why is it, whenever some whackjob goes after someone with a sword, the sword involved is almost always called a "samurai sword" by the media?

[the_tyrant]

What i wonder is.....why is it, whenever some whackjob goes after someone with a sword, the sword involved is almost always called a "samurai sword" by the media?

People like to picture a crazy samurai
not an old man brandishing a steak knife

[NeonSamurai]

What i wonder is.....why is it, whenever some whackjob goes after someone with a sword, the sword involved is almost always called a "samurai sword" by the media?

Cause people in the media are, in general, a bunch of clueless numbnuts who know nothing about this sort of stuff. I can remember Wolf Blitzer (sp?) as news anchor for CNN when he would time after time after time get absolutely everything wrong about what ever form of weapon or hardware he was discussing at the time.


Anyhow I agree, ban all the holy books as they are constantly used by people as an excuse to be real <censored> to each other.

[Platapus]

What i wonder is.....why is it, whenever some whackjob goes after someone with a sword, the sword involved is almost always called a "samurai sword" by the media?

For the same reason someone shoots someone with a semi-automatic rifle that looks like a military weapon and they call it an "Assault Rifle"

Ignorance.

And deliberate ignorance because they refuse to learn the proper meanings in order to instill an emotional response.

[frau kaleun]

Baka gaijin. :nope:

[Castout]

Frau could use the sword though the man obviously still needs his bible:DL

[frau kaleun]

Frau could use the sword though the man obviously still needs his bible:DL

Live by the sword, die by the sword, or so the good book says. More or less. Maybe he hadn't read that far yet.

Actually I have the crazy archaic notion that there is something intrinsically preferable about a bladed weapon that must be used all up close and personal, since I think if one is going to take it upon oneself to just up and kill another human being, one ought to have to be up close and personal (and ideally look the other person in the eye first) in order to do it.

But that assumes that the person wielding the weapon is actually the kind of person to whom that might make a difference, which - sadly - is often not the case.

[Castout]

Live by the sword, die by the sword, or so the good book says. More or less. Maybe he hadn't read that far yet.

Having the book doesn't mean understanding nor believing nor applying it. But the man seemed to be mentally disturbed. He might not be taken fully accountable for his action.


Actually I have the crazy archaic notion that there is something intrinsically preferable about a bladed weapon that must be used all up close and personal, since I think if one is going to take it upon oneself to just up and kill another human being, one ought to have to be up close and personal (and ideally look the other person in the eye first) in order to do it.

But that assumes that the person wielding the weapon is actually the kind of person to whom that might make a difference, which - sadly - is often not the case.

The safest weapon is conformity by agreement or bought cooptation through money or sex! :arrgh!:

Have always wondered when somebody's going to bribe me some money or sex LOL.

[Gargamel]

I'd say get rid of the Bible. It's by far the deadlier weapon.

Along with all the other religious texts.

[Penguin]

Was the "swords into plowshares" passage ripped out of the guy's bible? :DL

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/22/UN_Swords_into_Plowshares_Statue.JPG



Anyhow I agree, ban all the holy books as they are constantly used by people as an excuse to be real <censored> to each other.

Nahh, better than banning books is banning the idiots who use the books for their ****ed up behaviour!

[Penguin]

For the same reason someone shoots someone with a semi-automatic rifle that looks like a military weapon and they call it an "Assault Rifle"


Granted. However it is easier to convert a semi-auto into full-auto than to convert a cheap junk blade into a katana! :03:

[TarJak]

Banning nutjobs would be easier.

[antikristuseke]

Banning nutjobs would be easier.

Not really, we have been at it for centuries without much success.

[Castout]

You know I grew up in a country which taught tolerance among different faiths.

As a believer in God I can accept people from other faiths fairly well especially when theirs is a monotheistic one.

I don't even in the slightest hate atheists.

But what I don't get is that many atheists seem to share a passion of hating anything religious. I mean they don't have tolerance towards anything religious.

I for one think even atheism is just another belief but this will anger too many atheists.

Tolerance is not taught in schools abroad? and taken as a value? Or is it because atheism attracts too many fundamentalists and view anything religious as hostile? Could it be guilt masquerading as aggression? or fear? or pas disappointment that resulted in blaming God? For one if one day I found that God didn't exist I'd just happily stop believing simple and square.

I may draw flaks from this post but at least I expressed myself on the way this thread has been used.

[Armistead]

About 400 AD, the Romans realized they couldn't defeat the Christian movement, so rather than fight em, join them. Before this the church as a whole didn't believe in hell or torture. As the church and government joined they needed tools to control the masses, thus the tools of fear and guilt became common doctrine. Along comes men peod like Dante and whips hellfire and torture into doctrine. The church now backed by the government became agents of torture, after all, if God could torture for eternity, why not man in his name. Sadly torture in God's name became a mainstay until secular law put it aside in most parts of the world. I myself couldn't accept a God that would torture the mass of his creation for eternity. As bad as Hitler is, man has made God a worse monster.

Nothing can be worse that a man claiming God with a bible in one hand and a sword in the other, just ask the indians...

One thing I fear is all these that say they want God back in government. Could it be they want to bring back the fear and guilt tactics of the past.

I think some would if they could. This is what most atheist fear. I don't declare myself to be one, but I certainly understand their fear.

[August]

I'd say get rid of the Bible. It's by far the deadlier weapon.

Bibles don't kill people.
People kill people.

[Armistead]

People don't kill people, you could put two people beside each other without a brain and they would do nothing.

Belief systems kill, hate, racism, greed, religion.

You think radical muslims just kill people for the heck of it.

[Dowly]

Banning nutjobs would be easier.

Nope, banning the source would be more efficient and easier on the long run.

[the_tyrant]

Trade your bibles in for porn!

[August]

People don't kill people, you could put two people beside each other without a brain and they would do nothing.

Belief systems kill, hate, racism, greed, religion.

You think radical muslims just kill people for the heck of it.

People kill other people without a reason all the time. Religion might provide a handy excuse but if that weren't available any other excuse would do just as well.

As the song says: "I once killed a man in Reno just to watch him die".

[Penguin]

As the song says: "I once killed a man in Reno just to watch him die".

Heretic! Burn him! You twisted the words of my prophet, Holy Johnny! The sacred record says "I shot a man in Reno".

:O:

[Penguin]

You know I grew up in a country which taught tolerance among different faiths.

As a believer in God I can accept people from other faiths fairly well especially when theirs is a monotheistic one.

I don't even in the slightest hate atheists.

But what I don't get is that many atheists seem to share a passion of hating anything religious. I mean they don't have tolerance towards anything religious.

I for one think even atheism is just another belief but this will anger too many atheists.

Tolerance is not taught in schools abroad? and taken as a value? Or is it because atheism attracts too many fundamentalists and view anything religious as hostile? Could it be guilt masquerading as aggression? or fear? or pas disappointment that resulted in blaming God? For one if one day I found that God didn't exist I'd just happily stop believing simple and square.


Short answer: disrespect/animosity could root in 100's of years of oppression and persecution of atheists...

longer:
Ok, first of all I speak for no group, only for myself as an individual. I am an agnostic, most of my friends are non-believers, but I have friends of nearly any belief - except maybe the antique Greek Gods ;) I respect their faith but I make jokes about their beliefs as I make jokes about nearly anything.
The problems I have are msotly with organized religion, here are some points:

- a special treatment of religions: blasphemy laws are bs, why should religion have more rights than for example a musician, a comic book character or a tree? When I pee on a tree I could maybe hunted by people who worship trees...

- derivating from this point is my 2nd point: secularism is mostly just a word - in most of the states of the world! We need a strict seperation of church and state everywhere.

- I can only tolerate individuals, no group gets my special respect. Why should I respect a religion, for example, which states that atheists are lower than animals? Lower because animals cannot believe, but humans can.

- I can not tolerate anyone who wants to tell me how to think, what to think

- I have a deep contempt for anyone who wants to take away my freedom, in whatever name

- interpretation of the writings; by this I mean the fact that you can read nearly anything out of the books - especially when taken out of a conrtext. Like my plowshares example said, you can use the bible as a root for pacifistic behaviour, the guy mentioned in the op used it for an agressive one. The explanation monopole is mostly in the hands of the church, and by this again in the hands of an elite, using it for their "right" way of thinking and acting - of course depending on the cultural, political and sociological context.

so I am cool with you :salute: , your beliefes don't mind me, just don't try to take my freedom away!

...and atheism is not just another belief, it is the lack of belief :03:

[DarkFish]

As a believer in God I can accept people from other faiths fairly well especially when theirs is a monotheistic one.Well there you are doing exactly what you accuse atheists of: being less respectful towards differing belief systems. Towards my belief system (Germanic Paganism). Yet I don't give a damn. So why do you christians often do? TBH, I barely hear any atheists complaining about christians, while I quite often hear you christians complain about atheists.

I don't even in the slightest hate atheists.And only few atheists hate religious people. At most, they hate the religion, not the people.

But what I don't get is that many atheists seem to share a passion of hating anything religious. I mean they don't have tolerance towards anything religious.And with good reason. I hate your god. Yes, I hate him with a passion. For all that has been done in his name. For the way he screwed up the life of my people for centuries.

As the Frisian king Radboud once said, I'd rather spend eternity in hell with my friends, than in heaven with my enemies.
And like this king, I will not be a traitor to my people. A traitor to my belief. A traitor to what I feel is right. And if that costs me eternity in hell, so be it.

If your god chooses to judge people on their beliefs rather than on their deeds (and for what I know of the bible, he does), he's not worth being called a god. He'd just be another selfish megalomanic massmurderer. Hitler or Stalin, anyone?


Tolerance is not taught in schools abroad? and taken as a value? Or is it because atheism attracts too many fundamentalists and view anything religious as hostile? Could it be guilt masquerading as aggression? or fear? or pas disappointment that resulted in blaming God? For one if one day I found that God didn't exist I'd just happily stop believing simple and square.Like the tolerance your god teaches?:lol: Don't you think it's slightly hypocritical that a christian like you accuses other "beliefs" of having no tolerance?

Unfortunately the aforementioned king Radboud was unsuccessful in his attempts to prevent christianism from infecting Frisia. But the Pagans combated christianism in a civil way. Nothing like the violence with which christians often attacked other beliefs.

You've suppressed people for ages. So if you christians feel attacked by atheists, it's only what you rightfully deserve.

Heilir Æsir! Heilar Asýnjur!

[Armistead]

I spent a lot of time and hours studying issues of faith. I was brought up in a Ind. Bapt. Church and of course taught never to question God or baptist doctrine. I spent 3 years in a Bap. college. In my third year studying greek, all sorts of question arose. At that time I didn't put my faith aside, but put my beliefs aside and studied with an open mind. Much of what I believed came apart.

When you study any religion you must study it based on historic and cultural perspective. You must simply use their lingo, understand their words and how they're used in their culture. Sadly, anyone can clearly see
mans hands on all doctrine in one fashion or another, why we have so many denominations and thousands of different doctrines....all claiming to be right of course.

I honestly don't know how any man could be sure of any church doctrine because it's changed so many times for so many reasons to suit the greed of man.

I sat in several atheist groups meetings. The fact is most are sincere. Most want to see the real teachings of Christ even though they may not believe in him, help others, care for the suffering, the poor, the ill.

Whatever God is or isn't, all I can say is I simply don't know. I'm more agnostic now, but if God exist I would expect him to honor my search for him and where it led me.

[Growler]

Humanism, ftw.

As an atheist, I don't hate religion or faith; I hate what people do to each other because of, or for them.

A Holy War is a contradiction in terms in almost every modern faith, yet radicals in every camp can find some justification for the wholesale subjugation or slaughter of non-believers. (Notice: I used the word radicals for a reason.)

[Ducimus]

But what I don't get is that many atheists seem to share a passion of hating anything religious. I mean they don't have tolerance towards anything religious.


I'm not an athiest (more of an spiritual agnostic), but i do understand why atheists don't have a tolerance for anything religious, because i've experienced some (ok, alot) of what gets them all fired up.

In a word,

Ramrodding.

Christians, Evangelicals in specific, love to force their ideals upon others. It's as if they're lifes philophsy is, "my way is the right way". From my experience, theirs is a faith that preach's tolerance, and yet has none. This constant ramrodding and hypocracy gets people at varying degrees of anger. Some people become so angry infact, that they end up doing exactly that which they loath - forcing their ideals upon others. So this see-saw battle of atheists and christans ensues.

[nikimcbee]

I'm not an athiest (more of an spiritual agnostic), but i do understand why atheists don't have a tolerance for anything religious, because i've experienced some (ok, alot) of what gets them all fired up.

In a word,

Ramrodding.

Christians, Evangelicals in specific, love to force their ideals upon others. It's as if they're lifes philophsy is, "my way is the right way". From my experience, theirs is a faith that preach's tolerance, and yet has none. This constant ramrodding and hypocracy gets people at varying degrees of anger. Some people become so angry infact, that they end up doing exactly that which they loath - forcing their ideals upon others. So this see-saw battle of atheists and christans ensues.

My thougths exactly!:D The hypocracy and the interest in ones wallet is what gets.:shifty: Before I hijack my own thread, I worked around mentally ill people that were hyper religious, and it can be a scary combination. I don't have a problem with religious people (grew up around it), but when it dominates every fasit (sp?) of your life, you need to chill out.

[Kongo Otto]

People kill other people without a reason all the time. Religion might provide a handy excuse but if that weren't available any other excuse would do just as well.

As the song says: "I once killed a man in Reno just to watch him die".

Gret song btw!

but if you kill a guy in Reno just to watch him die, the reason was "to watch him die"
So yes, there is always a reason.

[Castout]

About 400 AD, the Romans realized they couldn't defeat the Christian movement, so rather than fight em, join them. Before this the church as a whole didn't believe in hell or torture. As the church and government joined they needed tools to control the masses, thus the tools of fear and guilt became common doctrine. Along comes men peod like Dante and whips hellfire and torture into doctrine. The church now backed by the government became agents of torture, after all, if God could torture for eternity, why not man in his name. Sadly torture in God's name became a mainstay until secular law put it aside in most parts of the world. I myself couldn't accept a God that would torture the mass of his creation for eternity. As bad as Hitler is, man has made God a worse monster.

Nothing can be worse that a man claiming God with a bible in one hand and a sword in the other, just ask the indians...

One thing I fear is all these that say they want God back in government. Could it be they want to bring back the fear and guilt tactics of the past.

I think some would if they could. This is what most atheist fear. I don't declare myself to be one, but I certainly understand their fear.

No no yes the Catholic church doctrine has shifted some aspect of the early church teaching that has its effect until today even in non Catholic denominations. But Heaven and hell teaching are there in the scriptures. Of course it's up to the person whether to believe the scriptures or not.

If you would like to know what changed, the bible never teaches immediate life after death nor does it teach immediate judgment after death. Well there's the story of the rich man and Lazarus but against that the whole other verses written by many different people. The bible is NOT perfect I've noted one obvious rather critical fault in it that may have been caused by unintentional mis-interpretation caused by a missing punctuation. But the will to correct it is not there as it's a convenient verse which back the now common Christian doctrine of immediate judgment after death and that of immediate life after death.

Truth is no one can represent Jesus but what is important is that God doesn't NEED anyone to represent him. As a Catholic I've seen lesser educated people who worship his religion than actually trying to grow his spirituality. Spirituality doesn't exist in rituals or long worded or even beautiful prayers but spirituality lies in the heart intention and action of the person. It's about a whole attitude towards the realization of God and what the realization brings to how he treats his fellow man.

Again because of man's fallibility religion or rather faith in God are abused from time to time resulting in fundamentalism and evil committed in the name of God.

What people need to realize is that many people who often call themselves belonging to certain religious group don't always know what is required of them from their holy book( or scriptures).

If the whole world turned into Christians that would only mean that hell would be populated with Christian sinners and so too with any other religions.

Religious people are not always spiritual people. Spiritual growth is a personal thing which doesn't depend on one's religion or his religious commitment!





Short answer: disrespect/animosity could root in 100's of years of oppression and persecution of atheists...

longer:
...........

so I am cool with you :salute: , your beliefes don't mind me, just don't try to take my freedom away!

...and atheism is not just another belief, it is the lack of belief :03:

If atheist hated the history of persecution and oppression why would they take it on the people? It was probably the Catholic church who did those oppression and persecution.

I don't mind your atheism as well not even in the slightest. I'm not even going to try to convince you to convert you.

As for atheism being a belief well I have a perfectly good reason to saying that. Yes atheism is a lack of belief that is true but it is a belief of lack of belief. But the people who could understand this are the people who know God exists. So that would probably exclude many religious people(and no I don't hate religious people either, I'm simply telling a fact). In simple word a positive belief is confirmed when that belief is truly known to be true even on the personal level while a belief in the negative cannot be justified at all and can only be proven wrong when the contrary is known to that person even while only on the personal level.




Well there you are doing exactly what you accuse atheists of: being less respectful towards differing belief systems. Towards my belief system (Germanic Paganism). Yet I don't give a damn. So why do you christians often do? TBH, I barely hear any atheists complaining about christians, while I quite often hear you christians complain about atheists.

And only few atheists hate religious people. At most, they hate the religion, not the people.

And with good reason. I hate your god. Yes, I hate him with a passion. For all that has been done in his name. For the way he screwed up the life of my people for centuries.

As the Frisian king Radboud once said, I'd rather spend eternity in hell with my friends, than in heaven with my enemies.
And like this king, I will not be a traitor to my people. A traitor to my belief. A traitor to what I feel is right. And if that costs me eternity in hell, so be it.

If your god chooses to judge people on their beliefs rather than on their deeds (and for what I know of the bible, he does), he's not worth being called a god. He'd just be another selfish megalomanic massmurderer. Hitler or Stalin, anyone?


Like the tolerance your god teaches?:lol: Don't you think it's slightly hypocritical that a christian like you accuses other "beliefs" of having no tolerance?

Unfortunately the aforementioned king Radboud was unsuccessful in his attempts to prevent christianism from infecting Frisia. But the Pagans combated christianism in a civil way. Nothing like the violence with which christians often attacked other beliefs.

You've suppressed people for ages. So if you christians feel attacked by atheists, it's only what you rightfully deserve.

Heilir Æsir! Heilar Asýnjur!


That's a lot assumptions you have about God. Or did those come from personal acquaintance with God? Just because some people believe God is this or that or just because you believe that God is this or that it doesn't make it true though it might be perceived true even by the whole world.

I also didn't mean I disrespect people who believe in other belief aside from monotheistic ones. I truly mean it when I said that I don't hate people with any other belief. Well maybe except satanism at least the real one.

Before you think that Christians desrve to be attacked you need to differentiate between
1. The religious body: the physical organizational church
2. The scriptures or the basic teaching. Much akin to the constitution of a state
3. The doctrines which supposedly is based on the scriptures but more actually made by the religious body claiming authority
4. The people who believe in the scriptures and or
5. The people who believe in the doctrines and or
6. The people who worship God and or
7. The people who worship their religion and or
8. People who have been mislead to commit violence in the name of God.

Generalization and labeling is the root of all misunderstanding.
Again I'd like to repeat that Religious people are not always spiritual people and that religion saves no one yes no one and

that personal spiritual growth is the rights of every man who wish for it and thus should be given freedom to pursue it in ways that he sees fit as long as he's not endangering other people.

To share my opinion majority of mankind are very much akin to a 2 year old when it comes to spirituality. Trying to teach majority of people of spirituality and God is like trying to teach a 2 year old to the concept of biology. Most 2 year old would just resent it and the attempt to teach him or her too.
But the catch is if our intellectual development comes at the price of our spiritual growth then you can guarantee that we will bring a lot of suffering to our fellow man and even end up annihilating each other. This is not an exaggeration. People will simply regress without spiritual growth and become dwarfed and selfish and in return bringing chaos which is an unsustainable level of existence. All that would happen simply because we don't understand ourselves thus we don't understand our fellow men and all that is because we don't put the effort to know God and to grow spiritually. Because we never bothered to look INSIDE for answers to our most crucial and fundamental questions. Because we convinced ourselves the answers to everything must have laid outside of us or in things that never held the answers in the first place or that it never occurred to us to even begin to look inside so that we know much but not ourselves. Don't you know so many evils IF NOT ALL thrive because of ignorance and selfishness and lack of knowledge? In another perspective we may be deserving all the suffering in this world and even responsible for them to a degree personally and wholly collectively!

yes we may be responsible for Hitler or for Stalin or for any other people that proved to be a monster in their time for many other people.

[Buddahaid]

Bibles don't kill people.
People kill people.

People whose faith must be suspect if they believe their omnipotent God needs their help so badly. That seems an ultimate conceit to my eye, but is more likely a manefestation of mental illness.

[Armistead]

Castout

I understand why you feel the way you do. I once had solid beliefs in the doctrine of the Baptist as you feel towards the catholic church.

My studies are years of greek from a historical and cultural perspective. The early church for 400 years actually taught universal salvation for all man, that the work of the cross would reconcile all of God's creation back to him.... There were six large schools of religion, 4 taught universal salvation, one soul death and one hellfire. The one that taught hellfire was full of pagan leaders.

Anyone can study the history of the church and see it adopted torture when it adopted eternal hell. Most of the doctrines men accept today were written by early Popes that tortured men at will, so they would be suspect to me on that alone.

If God exist I would believe based on scripture and logic that he would redeem his creation, all of it. If it were his goal to torture most of mankind for eternity, I would find that a deranged God and couldn't serve him. Most today that come to God do so out of fear. It's like holding a gun to someones head and say "tell me you love me or I shoot"...people will do anything out of fear.

God would have to be responsible for creating good and evil, both are his and both are his to reconcile. However, many find it easier to blame fate on the random good and evil that happens to man. It seems reasonable to say fate let a child get raped and murdered than God allowed it to happen.

[TarJak]

That's the same for any obsession. Balance is what keeps you sane.

[Castout]

Actually much of the concept of hell is written according to the book of revelation and as far as that it's biblical and Jesus gave mention of it too(the burning of dead branches). But hell and heaven solely depend on God's judgment instead anybody's.

However the church changed the teaching of resurrection to immediate resurrection and immediate judgment and adds to the confusion which surprisingly draws only little protest. Bible scholars however would admit that the Catholic doctrines of these(which are man inspired teachings) don't reflect that of the bible or scriptures. Fascinatingly the bible is very consistent in its view of death and resurrection and judgment taking into the fact that it's written by many different men in different period of time that spans more than hundreds of years neither of which knew about the other writing. The Catholic church also teaches about physical resurrection which is TOTALLY UNBIBLICAL. Yes I believe Jesus was raised and that his body was missing(I know Jesus is living and that while man he was sinless but I believe He was raised wholly by God from among the dead including that of His body) but that doesn't change the fact that St. Paul clearly wrote that there IS NOT going to be a physical resurrection. Thus I came to the conclusion that man inspired doctrines have indeed twisted the original scripture teaching and change the concept of after life to that of the Greek one!

As for eternity in hell well most people judge God as they judge another man but forgetting God is not a man. The main trait of God is that He is holy which is the source of his authority over all things living and non living, seen and unseen. A holy God WILL NEVER EVER DO something which is NOT HOLY or UNFAIR or evil but the holiness which is God's throne is also what made Him obligated to act as He is, a holy God that judge all men. We cannot blame God for anything not because we should not but because there will be nothing to blame unless we're being conceited and making a fool of ourselves but the universe will prove that God is blameless! Because if there was a spot in God that moment God would cease being God and God would have lost his authority over all things!

The other characteristic of God that I've personally known is that of loving and merciful. The first made God to love (literally love) even men who do not know Him because He holds each person very very intimately. So God could love even a person who didn't know him at all and who involved himself in the occult and who is largely a small person in society. The latter trait enable God to forgive sins. And God even sometimes forgives a person whole sins without being asked! It really doesn't get better than this! And that when God forgives a man he will be compelled to forgive his fellow men also without being asked simply because that would be the very least that he could repay the grace that he had been given or the only way to show his gratitude. Not I'm not preaching or telling you a fairy tale but I'm telling you my EXPERIENCE and insight and not merely my beliefs. Then again people who don't understand will probably not able to appreciate all this. My final word is that God is personal and He will deal with each person personally as such God can only be experienced on the personal level. Either one knows God or He doesn't. Writings will not bring any good unless it is taken with faith. The only way to experience God is to know God (no matter how little.) and to see the scriptures becoming alive in one's life and thus able to know the truth in his faith. Then again there's the problem you don't come to God unless God comes to you first.

[Castout]

That's the same for any obsession. Balance is what keeps you sane.

Knowing what is right and what is wrong is what keeps you sane. :DL

The most balanced person in mental prison is probably still too insane for the sane.

[Armistead]

If God didn't want evil on the earth, if you believe the literal story, when Satan fell why didn't God destroy him? Seems to me he would've at least taken his power away, but what did God do with him, he gave him dominion over the earth. Then that dang tree, they never ate of it until guess who showed up with enough power to convinve them to eat. Why put a tree full of beautiful fruit in front of someone and tell them not to eat it? Why place a evil creature on earth beside man to start with. I would've destroyed Satan or at least taken his power away. Why not put him on Mars instead of Earth?...seemd God had a job for the old devil.

When you have all power and all knowledge of all things for all time over all your creation, that would make you somewhat responsible for it...

The only place in the bible of a possible lake of fire is in Rev, but what is it.
Fire in the bible was a tool to define. Take the world torment, in the greek a torment was a stone used to beat something into perfection, not punishment. Sulfer and Brimstone, both cleansing agents. Our english words change all of these to evil things.

Regardless of the possibility of what God is or isn't, man created a God to use for their benefit to control people out of guilt and fear, then call it love.

[DarkFish]

That's a lot assumptions you have about God. Or did those come from personal acquaintance with God? Just because some people believe God is this or that or just because you believe that God is this or that it doesn't make it true though it might be perceived true even by the whole world.The only assumption I made about the christian god is that he judges people (partly) according to their beliefs (see the 10 commandments for example).
You obviously know the christian religion a lot better than I do, so if I'm wrong here, please say so.

I also didn't mean I disrespect people who believe in other belief aside from monotheistic ones. I truly mean it when I said that I don't hate people with any other belief. Well maybe except satanism at least the real one.And neither do I disrespect people of other beliefs. I only disrespect the religions itself.

Also, you might want to look into what satanism actually is. It seems that you've got a completely wrong image of it.

Before you think that Christians desrve to be attacked you need to differentiate between
1. The religious body: the physical organizational church
2. The scriptures or the basic teaching. Much akin to the constitution of a state
3. The doctrines which supposedly is based on the scriptures but more actually made by the religious body claiming authority
4. The people who believe in the scriptures and or
5. The people who believe in the doctrines and or
6. The people who worship God and or
7. The people who worship their religion and or
8. People who have been mislead to commit violence in the name of God.Maybe I should have made this more clear. I'm saying that christianism (so the religion, not the people) deserves to be attacked. So in your list that's just 1, 2 and 3 (and 8 but for a different reason).

But the catch is if our intellectual development comes at the price of our spiritual growth then you can guarantee that we will bring a lot of suffering to our fellow man and even end up annihilating each other. This is not an exaggeration. People will simply regress without spiritual growth and become dwarfed and selfish and in return bringing chaos which is an unsustainable level of existence.This is a part where I couldn't disagree more with you. Atheists aren't dwarfed and selfish. They aren't any less friendly than the average religious person. Letting other people suffer doesn't depend on spiritual development, but on social development.

All that would happen simply because we don't understand ourselves thus we don't understand our fellow men and all that is because we don't put the effort to know God and to grow spiritually. Because we never bothered to look INSIDE for answers to our most crucial and fundamental questions.Euhm, and what about science? It makes you understand yourself, others and the world around you better than any god ever could.

Because we convinced ourselves the answers to everything must have laid outside of us or in things that never held the answers in the first place or that it never occurred to us to even begin to look inside so that we know much but not ourselves. Don't you know so many evils IF NOT ALL thrive because of ignorance and selfishness and lack of knowledge? In another perspective we may be deserving all the suffering in this world and even responsible for them to a degree personally and wholly collectively!I agree with you that we deserve suffering and that we are responsible for it. I don't see however what religion has to do with it.
I also agree with you that many evils thrive because of ignorance (lack of knowledge) and selfishness. But even without those, there would still be evil.

yes we may be responsible for Hitler or for Stalin or for any other people that proved to be a monster in their time for many other people.I was comparing god to Hitler based on the assumption that god judges people based on their belief. If there's a god that puts people in hell because they are not christian, how is it different from Hitler who put people in "hell on earth" because they were jewish?
Again, if I'm wrong here, please correct me and I'll happily retract my statement.

[August]

I believe that people do need spirituality. It's important to believe in something greater than oneself.

Organized religions are attempts to provide a path to achieving that spirituality. Unfortunately they do it by providing a set of societal rules and procedures to follow making them handy frameworks for controlling populations. Potentates have been using that vehicle for thousands of years with great success (both good and bad).

The essential flaw though of all organized religions is the fact that they are trying to describe a concept that is not and may never be within mans ability to understand.

God is not definable, he cannot be categorized or dissected and that can be maddening for those who believe they need a rule book to follow in order to achieve the spirituality they so desperately desire.

[NeonSamurai]

Castout I would strongly suggest you do some research into the origins of your religion, and the history of text you refer to as scripture. You seem to have this notion that the bible is a whole and unchanging entity; it is not so, and has changed quite a bit, especially during the inception of the roman catholic church where most of the old scriptures from before were destroyed for being heretical according to the catholic church (which was trying to set up a power base). We know about some of these lost scriptures thanks to finds like the dead sea scrolls. Also a lot of teachings espoused by christians are not found in scripture, but were literally invented by the various saints that came later (like birth control, sexual pleasure as sin, etc) and were worked into what you call scripture today. You may also find this interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Q

I have to say, I do find it very difficult not to ridicule people who believe that the bible is the absolute word of god, unchanging and perfect. Anyone who has studied christian theology seriously and open-mindedly has to draw the inescapable conclusion that this is a entirely human book, full conundrums, faulty logic, inconsistencies, hypocrisy, conflicting statements, etcetera ad nausium. This doesn't mean that there is nothing worth listening to in this text and possibly adopting, just that it is imperfect, as all human creations are (including the gods we create to worship). There may well be a creator (god), but if there is, we can never hope of even beginning to grasp what such an entity would be.

Btw the concept of God having a sex is equally funny imho, all this he and his stuff. :P

[sidslotm]

Religious people are not always spiritual people. Spiritual growth is a personal thing which doesn't depend on one's religion or his religious commitment!



It is nessassary to disagree with everyone who would control your Spirit. This is the essance of freedom.

Freedom:- the right to say and think as you like, but without being controlled.

Unfortunately for the world, Edward Bernayes in 1920s USA discovered that to decieve rather than lie is an acceptable condition for for treating the popular masses. For most of us decerning truth these day's is very hard as deception and lie are by there nature are Spiritual matters.

The snake bit is deadly , but it's not the actual bit that is kills you.

This is why we need Spiritual guidance in our lives, Churchill and Roosevelt understood this concept, they both had the servant heart, the abilty to put personal ambitions to one side for their Country, it made these men giants among there peers and able to stand when others fell.

All Religion is of man, fullstop. Freedom is Spirit in action and in the heart of every believer that has ever lived.

sid, "creator of fine slots":yeah:

[sidslotm]

People whose faith must be suspect if they believe their omnipotent God needs their help so badly. That seems an ultimate conceit to my eye, but is more likely a manefestation of mental illness.


God is Spirit, Jesus.

[antikristuseke]

I believe that people do need spirituality. It's important to believe in something greater than oneself.



Why?
I am genuinely curious as to why you think that.

[Platapus]

Why?
I am genuinely curious as to why you think that.

I too would be interested in this. Also why would believing in something greater than yourself equate to spirituality? Are the two really the same?

[the_tyrant]

Why?
I am genuinely curious as to why you think that.

It gives you something to fear, makes you easier to control
a common misconception is that north korean people don't have faith/religion, it is incorrect. Kim Jiong Il is their god.
(some)People don't do sinful things because they are afraid of going hell. North korean people don't sin(by north korean standards) because they are afraid of "disappearing"

If you fear nothing, you are a danger to society. That is why you need to have faith in something. whether its laws, force, god, the great leader, big brother etc

[Dowly]

I'm sorry tyrant, but I believe what you just said is called BS. :doh:

Peole don't have to have faith/believe into something to be better person or more lawful. It's called common sense, you break the rules of society you are punished, by not breaking them you make life easier for yourself.

[the_tyrant]

I'm sorry tyrant, but I believe what you just said is called BS. :doh:

Peole don't have to have faith/believe into something to be better person or more lawful. It's called common sense, you break the rules of society you are punished, by not breaking them you make life easier for yourself.


what if you don't believe in the justice system? you think you can get away with it?
what if you don't fear punishment?

I have faith in the system justice system. I believe that if i am a mass murderer i can't get away with it. Therefore, i don't kill people.

BTW, when you have reached the top(like adolf hitler), you need to fear something even higher than the law to keep you from doing bad things

[CCIP]

what if you don't believe in the justice system? you think you can get away with it?
what if you don't fear punishment?

I have faith in the system justice system. I believe that if i am a mass murderer i can't get away with it. Therefore, i don't kill people.

BTW, when you have reached the top(like adolf hitler), you need to fear something even higher than the law to keep you from doing bad things

So basically, you take the assumption that by our nature, inside our mind we're all mass murderers, repressed only by authority and the threat of violence? Wow...

[the_tyrant]

So basically, you take the assumption that by our nature, inside our mind we're all mass murderers, repressed only by authority and the threat of violence? Wow...

Find me one person with unlimited power(emperors, dictators etc) that didn't use his/her power to enforce his/her will on others

Hey, read the bible. Even god uses the threat of going to hell to make us not sin and worship him

evolution has left a feature in us. We are always working for ourselves, trying to maximize our benefits.
Fear is the only thing keeping us from turning into a group of savages that kill the weak

[Dowly]

No, that's just not true.

By what you said, I should be on a killing spree right now, because for one, I don't believe in any higher force hence I don't fear it and second I don't really have all that much faith in our juridical system either.

Why I'm not out there killing anyone? Because I don't want to, much like I don't want to wake up early or eat food that tastes bad. It's all about choices you make, there's no faith or fear involved for me.

[antikristuseke]

Find me one person with unlimited power(emperors, dictators etc) that didn't use his/her power to enforce his/her will on others

Hey, read the bible. Even god uses the threat of going to hell to make us not sin and worship him

evolution has left a feature in us. We are always working for ourselves, trying to maximize our benefits.
Fear is the only thing keeping us from turning into a group of savages that kill the weak

Humans are social creatures, there is more that governs our behaviour than fear. Empathy plays a large part in it as does mutualy benefitial cooperation. Then there is gain, waht would a rational person stand to gain from murdering all that are within his or her ability to kill?
You are boiling down complex behaviours to a singular, and wrong, simple answer. The world is rarely, if ever, that simple.

Edit: If people would be as you describe them, more would be capable of real violence, yet most people do not get into a fight in their entire life. By a fight I do not man a schoolyeard bawl where a couple of weak punches are thrown and then it degrades into a wresling match, I mean a fight where you go for another persons throat, go for their eyes, try to break a joint or kill hte person. Most people are only capable of killing another when forced to or it is trained int oa conditioned reflex and even then the vast majority have serious problems living with the consequences of their actions, if the sole motivator for avoiding violence was fear of punishment, that would not be the case.

[August]

Why?
I am genuinely curious as to why you think that.

Because people who believe that there is nothing greater than themselves tend to be, in my experience, narcissistic, self centered and anti-social.

[the_tyrant]

No, that's just not true.

By what you said, I should be on a killing spree right now, because for one, I don't believe in any higher force hence I don't fear it and second I don't really have all that much faith in our juridical system either.

Why I'm not out there killing anyone? Because I don't want to, much like I don't want to wake up early or eat food that tastes bad. It's all about choices you make, there's no faith or fear involved for me.

Ok, my philosophical understanding comes from history and movies, so it might not be a good idea to listen to my ranting.

anyways. I believe that we all have a threshold regarding what we are willing to do
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs973.snc4/76619_157693524275151_100001035136448_320281_61071 41_n.jpg

Imagine the x-axis as the amount that a specific event would benefit you
the x-axis is what you would do
the y-axis and y-axis is a positive correlation. when x increases, y increases too
Now the horizontal line is you limit for killing. I understand that you are a nice guy. However, there is still a point when even you would think that killing somebody is worth it.
Now being religious, fearing the law, having morals etc would raise the line.

I hope that this would make my opinion more clear. And no, I am not a crazy killer.

Through what I have seen in real life, heard about, and witnessed in art, I no longer believe in the people who "won't hurt a fly". I simply believe that they have not come in contact with a situation when they think hurting flies are "worth it"

[Sailor Steve]

Because people who believe that there is nothing greater than themselves tend to be, in my experience, narcissistic, self centered and anti-social.
That also seems to be true of many people who do claim to believe in something greater than themselves. The difference I observe is that most of them act that way about their belief rather than their own selves, but they still act that way. Believers aren't annoying in and of themselves, and neither are non-believers. Arrogant people of any stripe are.

Many believers try to be truly humble, but for many more it's not really about God, but about MY God. There are also many like me, who don't actively believe there is nothing greater, just passively acknowledge that we don't know for sure one way or the other, and can't see that anyone else does either.

[Castout]

Regardless of the possibility of what God is or isn't, man created a God to use for their benefit to control people out of guilt and fear, then call it love.

Men don't create God. God still exists even when all men reject the possibility of God existing. I know this I saw God. And I dare to say I'm not the only one. I even dare to say this and making myself vulnerable to mockings. :DL.
m fully aware mys statement may draw flaks and I know it's not a proof in itself but I'm compelled to testify what I know even when no one could accept it not because I want to draw flaks on myself or trolling but because I believe the truth is a force to be reckoned with in itself that it needs neither acceptance nor approval from any people to be what it is, the truth.

The only assumption I made about the christian god is that he judges people (partly) according to their beliefs (see the 10 commandments for example).
You obviously know the christian religion a lot better than I do, so if I'm wrong here, please say so.


Well I think I wrote whatever I felt need to. I just want to add that our life is so short. A decade is like a blink of an eye and we only live a few decades 6 , 7 , or 9 if we are lucky. I say live this life to the fullest. What is beyond our understanding is meant to be beyond our understanding. Talking about it won't change anything because the understanding is limited. Our understanding is limited because our experience is limited. Go out, drink beer, find the women you love, make a family, be happy at work and die peacefully. Live well die well! After all life is exciting! It is! After all we are each our own consciousness! The witnesses and flavors of this whole grand spatial universe, created or not, what a spectacle:)

[Dowly]

Men don't create God. God still exists even when all men reject the possibility of God existing.

:03:
http://thedevilsdoor.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/atheism_motivational_poster_18.jpg


@Tyrant

I guess we just have to agree to disagree on the issue. Really, there's no right answer to the issue, it tends to be different for everyone. :salute:

[kiwi_2005]

Men don't create God. God still exists even when all men reject the possibility of God existing. I know this I saw God.

Umm sorry mate but if you saw God you would be dead.

Moses speak to God face to face. But Moses did not see God in all his Glory otherwise Moses would be destroyed at the sight of him.

In our fallen human condition, if God were to fully reveal Himself to us, we would be consumed and destroyed.

Maybe you saw an angel or an evil spirit pretending to be God:hmmm:

Just like many have said Jesus is here or over there or I seen Jesus they are liars or tricked by an evil spirit. No one will see Jesus until the 2nd coming.

[Castout]

Umm sorry mate but if you saw God you would be dead.

Moses speak to God face to face. But Moses did not see God in all his Glory otherwise Moses would be destroyed at the sight of him.

In our fallen human condition, if God were to fully reveal Himself to us, we would be consumed and destroyed.

Maybe you saw an angel or an evil spirit pretending to be God:hmmm:

Just like many have said Jesus is here or over there or I seen Jesus they are liars or tricked by an evil spirit. No one will see Jesus until the 2nd coming.


Yes it is said that if one looked at the face of God one would die. Moses saw God's back and his face shone for weeks.

But to tell me that I didn't see God would not be exactly right too. But understandable since you do not know what exactly that I saw. And yes I'm impressed by that conclusion that proved you know what you believe in Frank.

I'd cite the following two verses but I won't explain anything. I'm too tired to explain anything. I'm just saying the following verses are true:

Only God lives forever! And he lives in the light that no one can come near. No humans has ever seen God or ever can see him. God will be honored, and his power will last for ever. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:15-16).

Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the people of Israel: you shall say to them, "The LORD bless you and keep you; the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace." So shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them. (Numbers 6:23-27, ESV)


I only seek to share a little something not cause argument. Again these things are personal. Writing this is not proof unto itself but a mere sharing. No you don't have to believe anything. I'm just clarifying. I don't need anyone to believe this I'm just telling you I saw Christ when I was a kid so I know God is real. Don't believe it it's okay. Can't accept it it's okay. No it wasn't angel Frank nor it was Satan the deceiver. I can tell this because God gave me love an out of the world love for Jesus and only then I asked to be allowed to see Jesus and those verses explained what I saw. I was expecting a bearded man but seemed Christ is too much for me(obviously). No I'm not looking for attention but obligated to testify any time I can to people who think that men created God or that God was fictitious. I'm not forcing anything but just presenting my little testimony when it fits. And no this doesn't answer all questions about God either.



A little something(light really and hopefully inspiring and no not religious)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGmAGTS1nuw

[the_tyrant]

@Tyrant

I guess we just have to agree to disagree on the issue. Really, there's no right answer to the issue, it tends to be different for everyone. :salute:

of course mate, lets keep it as a Modus vivendi
:salute:

[CCIP]

I honestly think that the focus on believing in something greater than oneself misses one important catch: the fact is that the much more important belief is that in the connected-ness of everything (and it's not even a belief per se - unlike God it is very directly observable). At any level - great or small - the same basic principles work. Universally-speaking, every action requires energy, transforms something, and has a proportionate reaction. We might not know all of the laws involved in this, but thus far I don't think anyone can reasonably find evidence that the universe is anything but a closed, equivalent-exchange system. And that's what allows people to be perfectly reasonable and, in effect, moral without believing in something necessarily greater, but believing that everything has consequences. You can hide from them, but everything is so connected that in reality, you actually can't. Karma's a bitch, as the saying goes. You can only pretend by denying you're connected to anything, or deferring to authority.

The fallacy of "something greater than oneself", IMHO, is that it allows people to deny responsibility for their actions and deny connections that make their actions have essentially universal (if small) effects. But the fact is that every single thing you do every day is no less an act of God than some big, impressive miracle. And God may be purported act at a different level, but does that really mean "greater"? Has anyone really observed something that goes beyond the simplest laws of matter and energy transfer? I mean sure a bulldozer can move a bigger rock than you can. Sure a computer can solve a bigger equation than you can. Does that make the bulldozer and the computer 'greater' than you and therefore little gods of a sort?

I think there's only three possibilities that exist with God involved (1) ignore the whole-ness of existence, defer to God as something free of the system and something that releases you from responsibility to abiding by equivalence rules. The system, meanwhile, works independently of what you actually believe, within its observable balance whether you believe God can break it or not. (2) suggest that God is a higher-level actor within the system than you are, following the same fundamental equivalence. But doesn't that make greatness superficial, at least as an object of worship? (3) suggest that God IS that system, and God is essentially everything. But that doesn't make God greater than you. It makes you [a small piece of] God, acting no less on behalf of God than God acts on his own behalf. Then why the distinction?

In any case, the sign of a moral person is not doing as God [supposedly] says. It's doing as God does, and respecting the universal, unfailing connections to all existence that we inevitably live in. And that doesn't really require a view that elevates God above anything.

[Armistead]

If you study history, you'll find pagan gods were created in mass to control people. Maybe a failure of our evolution that we can't rise up in goodness on our own, maybe God exist and deemed us all born sinners with evil spirits..not sure which is worse.

Polybius, the historian, says: "Since the multitude is ever fickle, full of lawless desires, irrational passions and violence, there is no other way to keep them in order but by the fear and terror of the invisible world;

Livy, the celebrated historian, speaks of it in the same spirit; and he praises the wisdom of Numa, because he invented the fear of the gods, as "a most efficacious means of governing an ignorant and barbarous populace.

Strabo, the geographer, says: "The multitude are restrained from vice by the punishments the gods are said to inflict upon offenders, and by those terrors and threatenings which certain dreadful words and monstrous forms imprint upon their minds...For it is impossible to govern the crowd of women, and all the common rabble, by philosophical reasoning, and lead them to piety, holiness and virtue.

Bible, true or not, an eternal place of torture can't be found in it. Anyone that takes time to study can see all the purposeful mistranslations replacing the grave with an eternal hell. The early church for 400 years taught that Christ came to save people from eternal death, not eternal torture. Once government got involved, it pulled every pagan idea about hell and found a way to put it in the bible and it's been doctrine since.

Whatever is true or not, religion has caused most problems in the world because all religions believe their God or Gods will torture everyone but them. Maybe this is the only way mankind could evolve, in fear, but if we can never get past it man will destroy this world fighting over religion as we've seen in the last few years.

[Armistead]

Castout, if you've truly seen God, I guess you no longer operate ..."by faith." I thought God was no respector of persons, why show himself to you and not the rest of us?

One thing for sure is a verse in proverbs
"As a man thinketh, so is he"

Don't get me wrong, I can't claim great faith. I myself would rather deal with sincere doubt than dishonest faith. Certainly, when I went outside my church doctrine using an open mind to find faith, I was not looking for doubt. However, sincere study led me to doubt. Not that I'm an atheist, I'm not. I find God may be possible in many ways, but I can't prove it, so I operate on doubtful faith and at the same time hate any religion that states only they're right....and that's about all of em.

I actually love the teachings of Christ and in many ways find him credible if studied in the greek outside of mans doctrines. Christ said follow one law, basically to love others and clearly taught we love others by "doing them no harm." All through the bible this is the theme that we love others by doing them no harm, not telling them what to do.

[frau kaleun]

@CCIP: I am http://vancouvercondo.info/images/heart.gifing you so much right now. :yeah:

[August]

That also seems to be true of many people who do claim to believe in something greater than themselves. The difference I observe is that most of them act that way about their belief rather than their own selves, but they still act that way. Believers aren't annoying in and of themselves, and neither are non-believers. Arrogant people of any stripe are.

Many believers try to be truly humble, but for many more it's not really about God, but about MY God. There are also many like me, who don't actively believe there is nothing greater, just passively acknowledge that we don't know for sure one way or the other, and can't see that anyone else does either.

Call it what you want Steve. I'm just stating what my personal observations have been over the half century I have been on this planet.

Human nature is what it is and the religious are no exception. Apparently some people here have evangelists chasing them down in the street trying to get them to convert but that has never been my experience. The only people i've ever met who've come off acting superior or intolerant about their beliefs (or lack of them) are atheists.

[August]

Really, there's no right answer to the issue, it tends to be different for everyone.

If you really believe that then why the Demotivator pic about atheists "Winning since 33 AD"?

What you and Epicurus do realize apparently do not realize is that Gods real gift to humanity is not security but rather free will. You cannot guarantee the former without eliminating the latter.

[Armistead]

Call it what you want Steve. I'm just stating what my personal observations have been over the half century I have been on this planet.

Human nature is what it is and the religious are no exception. Apparently some people here have evangelists chasing them down in the street trying to get them to convert but that has never been my experience. The only people i've ever met who've come off acting superior or intolerant about their beliefs (or lack of them) are atheists.

You'll find your share of them in any group. I once did a paper on "The Bible Belt" down south and it's connection to the southern Civil War era. I grew up in my teens in mostly white country fundie Bap. Churches. Our Pastor actually called blacks the N word from the pulpit. Just four years ago I went to a large church where the person speaking said he saw two gays walking and wanted to run overthem, using "kill a queer for Christ" as a comment. Mass laughter...I walked out, no, not a gay bone in my body, but that should offend anyone. There is a mass intorerant behavior in many churches down south, can't say elsewhere and I have no doubt it's left over behavior connected to the southern heritage down here.

Any group that thinks only they're right poses big problems for me regardless of what they believe.

[Armistead]

If you really believe that then why the Demotivator pic about atheists "Winning since 33 AD"?

What you and Epicurus do realize apparently do not realize is that Gods real gift to humanity is not security but rather free will. You cannot guarantee the former without eliminating the latter.

How do we have free will, aren't we born doomed already?

Do you think man always had freewill, spiritually speaking? If not, when did he gain it?

[Dowly]

If you really believe that then why the Demotivator pic about atheists "Winning since 33 AD"?

The picture had nothing to do with what me and tyrant were talking about, hence I posted it as a reply to Castout's post.

I don't kill because I simply don't want to kill, some other may be held back by fear of "something bigger" punishing him if he/she does so. That's what I mean't by "it's different for everyone".

I'm not here to tell what you can believe into and what not, just bringing my side to the discussion. :salute:

[Sailor Steve]

The only people i've ever met who've come off acting superior or intolerant about their beliefs (or lack of them) are atheists.
I've seen more than one case of self-proclaimed Christians doing that right here on Subsim. No, they weren't trying to convert anybody, but they certainly had their share of disdain for anyone not them, including but not limited to Atheists. I agree it's human nature, but in my experience it applies to all humans, myself included.

If you really believe that then why the Demotivator pic about atheists "Winning since 33 AD"?
I can't speak for Dowly, but I would say "because it's funny".

What you and Epicurus do realize apparently do not realize is that Gods real gift to humanity is not security but rather free will. You cannot guarantee the former without eliminating the latter.
In this I completely agree. If man is not free to choose evil then there is no point in being good, as there would be no "good" or "evil". My only disagreement is whether it actually comes from God or from our innate capacity for reason.

How do we have free will, aren't we born doomed already?
How so? Why would you make that connection?

Do you think man always had freewill, spiritually speaking? If not, when did he gain it?
I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. What is your opinion on the subject?

[DarkFish]

If you study history, you'll find pagan gods were created in mass to control people.If you study history, you will also find that the control Germanic Paganism exercised on its subjects was way less than the control the christian church had in the middle ages.

Once government got involved, it pulled every pagan idea about hell and found a way to put it in the bible and it's been doctrine since.Pagan idea? I'm sorry to tell you but you obviously know nothing about Paganism. You may at the very least want to read the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_%28location%29)about Hel before you make any wild claims.

And to quote from another wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_in_Norse_paganism):
There is reason to assume that the ideas of Hel are coloured by Christian influences which taught that there was a realm of punishment which opposed the paradise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise)Doesn't quite match with what you claim, does it?
Yes, the Pagan Hel has had influences on the christian Hell. But the ideas of Hell as a place of punishment are largely christian.


Because people who believe that there is nothing greater than themselves tend to be, in my experience, narcissistic, self centered and anti-social.Then you've clearly met the wrong atheists.
About 99% of my friends are atheists, and none of them is anything like what you perceive atheists to be.

[August]

Then you've clearly met the wrong atheists.
About 99% of my friends are atheists, and neither of them is anything like what you perceive atheists to be.

"Neither" of them? I'd hardly say a sampling of two indicates a trend. :DL

[DarkFish]

"Neither" of them? I'd hardly say a sampling of two indicates a trend. :DL:oops:
None of them. Not everyone is a native English speaker, you know:stare:

:O:

[Armistead]

Dark,

The concept of hell was embraced by almost every culture and tribe before Christianity. Not that I assume those that we consider pagan any less than other religions, it's certainly a cultural issue often difficult to find exact beginnings for the earliest people. It is strange many cultures have almost this exact belief in man's beginnings, such as the Mayans, Hmong, ect., maybe that points to some earlier connection of man. Most pagan religions
believed in torture, stages of punishment, ect. There are so called several
entry points even now where different tribes entered the hell of their beliefs.

Any study of early Christianity until Roman control can slowly find the past concepts of hell being embraced by sects of Christianity, but it didn't become a doctrine until about 500AD. Anyone that has studied the issue can see Christianity embraced concepts from pagan religions and used them as tools of fear to controll the masses and a place of eternal torture was one. Most of the themes of Christianity existed long before in other religions.

They're atleast 4 men previous to Christ where the theme was the same.
They were born of virgins, wise men followed stars, they died on tree's/crosses to redeem man, were called son of God. Just search Horus or Dionysys, almost the exact story as Christ.

Simply, it's clear to me that much of previous religions were used to create
Christian doctrine.

From wika as an example.
--Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
--He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
--He “rode in a triumphal procession on an donkey.”
--He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
--Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25.
--He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
--He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
--He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
--He was identified with the Ram or Lamb.
--His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.

[the_tyrant]

"Neither" of them? I'd hardly say a sampling of two indicates a trend. :DL

Stop nitpicking already:down:
he meant "none"

[DarkFish]

Dark,

The concept of hell was embraced by almost every culture and tribe before Christianity. Not that I assume those that we consider pagan any less than other religions, it's certainly a cultural issue often difficult to find exact beginnings for the earliest people. It is strange many cultures have almost this exact belief in man's beginnings, such as the Mayans, Hmong, ect., maybe that points to some earlier connection of man. Most pagan religions
believed in torture, stages of punishment, ect. There are so called several
entry points even now where different tribes entered the hell of their beliefs.

Any study of early Christianity until Roman control can slowly find the past concepts of hell being embraced by sects of Christianity, but it didn't become a doctrine until about 500AD. Anyone that has studied the issue can see Christianity embraced concepts from pagan religions and used them as tools of fear to controll the masses and a place of eternal torture was one. Most of the themes of Christianity existed long before in other religions.

They're atleast 4 men previous to Christ where the theme was the same.
They were born of virgins, wise men followed stars, they died on tree's/crosses to redeem man, were called son of God. Just search Horus or Dionysys, almost the exact story as Christ.

Simply, it's clear to me that much of previous religions were used to create
Christian doctrine.

From wika as an example.
--Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
--He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
--He “rode in a triumphal procession on an donkey.”
--He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
--Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25.
--He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
--He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
--He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
--He was identified with the Ram or Lamb.
--His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.It seems that we are talking about different Pagan religions. That's why I try not to use the word "Paganism" but rather "Germanic Paganism", or as in your case "Hellenic Paganism". I assumed you were talking about Germanic Paganism as you were talking about Hell, which gets its name from the Germanic Hel. Apparently you weren't.

While I don't know as much about Hellenic Paganism as I do about Germanic Paganism, I know enough about it to agree with you that the Hellenic Hell bears some similarities with the christian Hell.
It is not nearly as similar to the Germanic Hel though. Which is why I disagreed with you.
Germanic Paganism has definitely had some influences on christianism (christmas being the easiest one I can think of ATM), but Hell as a place of punishment isn't one of them.


You should have made yourself more clear by specifying which Pagan religion you meant, and I shouldn't have immediately assumed you were talking about Germanic Paganism.

[August]

Stop nitpicking already:down:
he meant "none"

Sheesh, who appointed you the forum Feelings Police? It was a joke or didn't you notice the smiley?

[the_tyrant]

Sheesh, who appointed you the forum Feelings Police? It was a joke or didn't you notice the smiley?

sorry, thought that it was a sarcastic smile

[sidslotm]

The fallacy of "something greater than oneself


Surely Freedom is greater than self, belief and faith are the building blocks of the Freedom we enjoy today.

We have replaced Freedom with reason and education. Engand, my country was not built by reasonable or education people, it was built by unreasonable people who refused to lay down and walk into the darkness. The Freedom of the USA was built also by unreasonable people, people who refused to accept the King of England to rule over them.

The great issue that faces the Free world today is faith and belief, because we have neither. What we have is a Bible (reason and education) the thing the early Church did not have, but what they did have was faith and belief.

We all need to believe and have faith in what we believe. Believe this aircraft will fly the atlantic, that we will walk on the moon one day, that we will defeat those who would chain us in darkness. We are Free peoples, believe it beacause Freedom is Gods heart in action and Freedon is Spirit.

Sid "the preacher man":yeah:

[Armistead]

Surely Freedom is greater than self, belief and faith are the building blocks of the Freedom we enjoy today.

We have replaced Freedom with reason and education. Engand, my country was not built by reasonable or education people, it was built by unreasonable people who refused to lay down and walk into the darkness. The Freedom of the USA was built also by unreasonable people, people who refused to accept the King of England to rule over them.

The great issue that faces the Free world today is faith and belief, because we have neither. What we have is a Bible (reason and education) the thing the early Church did not have, but what they did have was faith and belief.

We all need to believe and have faith in what we believe. Believe this aircraft will fly the atlantic, that we will walk on the moon one day, that we will defeat those who would chain us in darkness. We are Free peoples, believe it beacause Freedom is Gods heart in action and Freedon is Spirit.

Sid "the preacher man":yeah:

You can't blame people for using the resources they have, the problem for me comes when you limit yourself to just one resource. It's a great thing to have faith in mankind, but sadly I don't. If history repeats itself the world will weed out the weak so the strong survive... so stay running with the herd.

The early church had the actual letters and almost first hand teaching. Like anything with man it took many roads.

Most fundies today believe only in the King James Version. What they don't realize is our nation actually became founded out of the hate of the KJV. Once the council put it together, many Christians rejected it. The Geneva bible was their bible of choice. The story obvious is longer, but that's where it started, a group of people hated a chosen bible, rejected it and it's king and slowly a new nation was born here in the US.

With all my doubts I still have faith that something more exists, that gives me hope, but most important is love for fellow man...you know, the faith, hope, love thing....love being most important.

[Sailor Steve]

What they don't realize is our nation actually became founded out of the hate of the KJV. Once the council put it together, many Christians rejected it. The Geneva bible was their bible of choice. The story obvious is longer, but that's where it started, a group of people hated a chosen bible, rejected it and it's king and slowly a new nation was born here in the US.
Do you have the slightest documentation for that story? Even the small number who actually came here for "religious freedom" were dissenting groups who institued their own versions of intolerance. Yes, the KJV was the text for the Anglicans, but that wasn't the reason for the dissent nor for their coming here.

[Armistead]

Well yes, but it takes a lot of study. Not saying that was the only reason, but it was at the core base of many of the issues. The Puritans rejected the KJV because the council used many catholic texts for study, often using latin over the greek in translation. Overall they rejected the KJV wholesale. Many moved to Holland, but later came to America for so called religious freedom, although they themselves were of one mindset and one bible.

Some study of the reformation would also be helpful. It is obvious by their writings that the Puritans stood upon the shoulders of men like John Calvin, Martin Luther, Theodore Beza, and other first generation reformers. These in turn stood upon the shoulders of men like Augustine, and Chrysostom. These followed the Geneva bible.

In fact, one of the greatest ironies of history, is that Protestants of all denominations today embrace the King James Version of the Bible even though the King James Version is not a Protestant Bible (it’s Anglican / Church of England). It was produced by John Calvin, John Knox, Myles Coverdale, John Foxe, & other English refugees in ever-neutral Geneva,

"While many Protestants are quick to assign the full blame of persecution to the Roman Catholic Church, it should be noted that even after England broke from Roman Catholicism in the 1500’s, the Church of England (The Anglican Church) continued to persecute Protestants throughout the 1600’s. One famous example of this is John Bunyan (http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/john-bunyan.html), who while in prison for the crime of preaching the Gospel, wrote one of Christian history’s greatest books, Pilgrim’s Progress. Throughout the 1600’s, as the Puritans and the Pilgrims fled the religious persecution of England to cross the Atlantic and start a new free nation in America, they took with them their precious Geneva Bible, and rejected the King’s Bible. America was founded upon the Geneva Bible, not the King James Bible."

Start here..
http://www.greatsite.com/facsimile-reproductions/geneva-1560.html

others

http://answers.yourdictionary.com/history/US-history/why-did-the-pilgrims-come-to-america.html
http://teachers.henrico.k12.va.us/fairfield/saunders_d/homework/colonies/puritans.pdf

We also had a long thread on it in a religious study forum that went over 2000 post. That was a year ago, but I'll try to find it.

[sidslotm]

The early church had the actual letters and almost first hand teaching. Like anything with man it took many roads.


Yeah, letters to help each other out is all, bit like a good forum I know.


Its difficult to expect the same fruits of the early church when we value a book they didnt have more than the Holy Spirit they did have. Bill Johnson.


Getting detracted by which bible to use is law, the very thing Jesus came to Free us from. I suppose the point I see above all, is that Freedom in the UK is being eroded and replace with ever incleasing amounts of law which the law makers break the same as every one else, honour means nothin.

The problem for people is one of control, Church uses the Bible to control us by bringing us under law, continually explaining what this scripture means or what that verse is trying to say. They change verses in Bibles to suite the requirements they expect from the sheep, us, heh. Instead of letting people discover by revalation what life and truth is.

Freedom is Spirit in the heart of everyone, it is under attack in the Freeworld like never before. Leaders lie and deceive their peoples to get them into wars they don't need, but we do not see the deception because we are blind to it, what we see is the law, this is our captivity being engineered. God gave Moses 10 laws to live by, by the time Jesus arrived the pharasees had increased the laws to 650 and people lived under the thumb of leaders and their laws.

sorry about this going on folks, but Freedom is my biggest passion, by far.

sid

[DarkFish]

The great issue that faces the Free world today is faith and belief, because we have neither. What we have is a Bible (reason and education) the thing the early Church did not have, but what they did have was faith and belief.

We all need to believe and have faith in what we believe. Believe this aircraft will fly the atlantic, that we will walk on the moon one day, that we will defeat those who would chain us in darkness. We are Free peoples, believe it beacause Freedom is Gods heart in action and Freedon is Spirit.And why the hell do we need to "believe"? Why is it any issue to the world that "we" don't have "faith and belief"?

[Armistead]

Yeah, letters to help each other out is all, bit like a good forum I know.



Getting detracted by which bible to use is law, the very thing Jesus came to Free us from. I suppose the point I see above all, is that Freedom in the UK is being eroded and replace with ever incleasing amounts of law which the law makers break the same as every one else, honour means nothin.

The problem for people is one of control, Church uses the Bible to control us by bringing us under law, continually explaining what this scripture means or what that verse is trying to say. They change verses in Bibles to suite the requirements they expect from the sheep, us, heh. Instead of letting people discover by revalation what life and truth is.

Freedom is Spirit in the heart of everyone, it is under attack in the Freeworld like never before. Leaders lie and deceive their peoples to get them into wars they don't need, but we do not see the deception because we are blind to it, what we see is the law, this is our captivity being engineered. God gave Moses 10 laws to live by, by the time Jesus arrived the pharasees had increased the laws to 650 and people lived under the thumb of leaders and their laws.

sorry about this going on folks, but Freedom is my biggest passion, by far.

sid

Well, biblcally speaking, believers in Christ don't live under Mosaic biblical law. There's a difference between God's moral law and Jewish Mosaic codes. No doubt religious codes dictated most secular law, don't kill, steal, ect.

Remember, Jewish law was for the Jews only. Certainly every belief system makes up it's own so called codes of conduct for sin. We don't call it breaking the law today, we call it partaking of sin...:D

Christ freed us from the law of sin and replaced it with grace and love. You're correct, man has used many codes to define what is sin. Smart people that think for themselves test things with an open mind, not just believe what someone tells them is right or wrong.

There were lot's of problems with early Jewish and Gentile Christians. Many Jewish christians still followed many customs and laws from the past, the Gentiles didn't. When they came together they argued over what was right. Paul told them they both were right and just to get along and respect each others beliefs.

[sidslotm]

And why the hell do we need to "believe"? Why is it any issue to the world that "we" don't have "faith and belief"?


because to design and make a simple thing like a light bulb takes both

[antikristuseke]

because to design and make a simple thing like a light bulb takes both

This makes sense how?

[DarkFish]

This makes sense how?I think he means you have to believe your invention is going to work, because if you don't you're not gonna work on it and it will never be invented.

Still, this is a totally different kind of "belief" so it doesn't compare.

[sidslotm]

Still, this is a totally different kind of "belief" so it doesn't compare.

Faith and belief go hand in hand and are the same in everyone

A lot of leaders in Church today have trouble in believing, how can that be.
Because the fruits of belief are not there. What are the fruits of believing, light bulbs, mad people flying flimsey aircraft across the Atlantic, the idea of walking on the moon. These events are the fruits of Faith and belief in action, God has given every one of us a portion of this Faith, it's in the bible some where, you'll have to look it up yourself, lol.

The unbeliever or even the athiest believes in God more than he realizes, probable more than most middle class church leaders do today. When Jesus was teaching the people about faith and belief, the example that God gave the people was not a Church leader or elder, but a centurion soldier, a man who understood and practiced faith and belief every day, you don't get more radical than that. The church today is about control and law, the very things that Jesus came to free us from. Every religion is just that, religion nothing more.:yeah: faith and belief are about people

sid: creator of fine slots

[VipertheSniper]

LOL sid :har::har:

going by your logic, if I didn't "believe" in the laws of physics I'd be able to overcome them. I guess I could have superpowers...

[August]

LOL sid :har::har:

going by your logic, if I didn't "believe" in the laws of physics I'd be able to overcome them. I guess I could have superpowers...

No you miss his point. If you don't"believe" in the laws of physics then you can't create and build things that can work under them.

For example: If you don't "believe" in the laws of physics then you don't see the importance of creating a wing that has more surface on top than on the bottom.

[Armistead]

Faith and belief go hand in hand and are the same in everyone

A lot of leaders in Church today have trouble in believing, how can that be.
Because the fruits of belief are not there. What are the fruits of believing, light bulbs, mad people flying flimsey aircraft across the Atlantic, the idea of walking on the moon. These events are the fruits of Faith and belief in action, God has given every one of us a portion of this Faith, it's in the bible some where, you'll have to look it up yourself, lol.

The unbeliever or even the athiest believes in God more than he realizes, probable more than most middle class church leaders do today. When Jesus was teaching the people about faith and belief, the example that God gave the people was not a Church leader or elder, but a centurion soldier, a man who understood and practiced faith and belief every day, you don't get more radical than that. The church today is about control and law, the very things that Jesus came to free us from. Every religion is just that, religion nothing more.:yeah: faith and belief are about people

sid: creator of fine slots

Not gonna look the verse up, but doe's state God has given each man a measure of faith. I guess some he gave very little, so they ended up using logic, so who's faults that.

Faith has much to do with culture, tradition fear, guilt and the way we're raised as it doe's anything. Maybe faith was pushed so much in biblical times due to the lack of science. You have to remember many scientist back then were murdered by the church for using logic over faith.

Sometimes I think faith is confused with fear as most religions see God as the pagans did, standing over us with a big club ready to smash us at will, then torture us forever when we die. Most religions, including Christianity believe the mass of humanity will end up being tortured for enternity.....just for being born.


Many atheist prefer to say " I just don't know." Even though I still find enough faith to say God is possible often my doubtful heart says the same.
Bill Mayer often confuses me, he'll state that theere is no God, but when he gets serious he'll comment..."I just don't know."

It appears to me your talking about man having faith in himself, not God..?

[Sailor Steve]

Not saying that was the only reason...
My objection wasn't to your comments on Anglicanism vs Puritanism vs Catholicism but you your specific comment "...our nation actually became founded out of the hate of the KJV." Only a very few people came here seeking 'religious freedom', and I don't believe that which version of the bible they read had anything to do with it. That is what I asked for documentation on.

[VipertheSniper]

No you miss his point. If you don't"believe" in the laws of physics then you can't create and build things that can work under them.

For example: If you don't "believe" in the laws of physics then you don't see the importance of creating a wing that has more surface on top than on the bottom.

Well I realized that myself and it did cross my mind to edit my post accordingly, but I forgot, as I had some work to do.

[August]

...but I forgot, as I had some work to do.

Hey no probs. I can't count how many times I have done that exact same thing.

[Sailor Steve]

And, agree or disagree, it's nice to see someone post honestly. Viper and August :yeah:.

[Armistead]

My objection wasn't to your comments on Anglicanism vs Puritanism vs Catholicism but you your specific comment "...our nation actually became founded out of the hate of the KJV." Only a very few people came here seeking 'religious freedom', and I don't believe that which version of the bible they read had anything to do with it. That is what I asked for documentation on.

Actually if you study the issue, many of the Puritans {believers in the Geneva bible and Doctrine} were persecuted by the COE, {KJV believers} many tortured and killed.

The actual core of them wanting to come to America was over this. They hated the KJV with it's taint of Rome and the latin vulgate. They refused any KJV bible and brought with them their beloved Geneva. You're wrong to assume people came here for religious freedom per say. More one group of believers left than many with different beliefs. Those that came did so with one religious mindset, not seeking religious freedom for all. All in all, only about a 10% difference between the two, but some big differences.

If you study the links in detail, it's rather clear, but again a long study.

[Sailor Steve]

Actually if you study the issue, many of the Puritans {believers in the Geneva bible and Doctrine} were persecuted by the COE, {KJV believers} many tortured and killed.

The actual core of them wanting to come to America was over this. They hated the KJV with it's taint of Rome and the latin vulgate. They refused any KJV bible and brought with them their beloved Geneva. You're wrong to assume people came here for religious freedom per say. More one group of believers left than many with different beliefs. Those that came did so with one religious mindset, not seeking religious freedom for all. All in all, only about a 10% difference between the two, but some big differences.

If you study the links in detail, it's rather clear, but again a long study.
First, while I'm trying to cure myself of being a grammar nazi, especially when it's someone I'm disagreeing with, I have to point out that the phrase is per se, Latin for "by itself" or "of itself". I apologize, but that's one that drives me crazy.

Again, my exception wasn't that your arguments, it was to your assertion that this argument was responsible for the founding of the United States.

Virginia: Agriculture and wealth.
Delaware: Founded as New Sweden so the Dutch government could gain a foothold in the New World.
North Carolina: Founded by Virginians seeking to expand.
South Carolina: As North Carolina.
New Jersey: Founded as part of the ex-New Netherlands contract. The founders promised new settlers religious freedom, but that was to attract workers for an economic charter. They also promised representative government for the same reason.
New York: Founded by James, Duke of York, as part of the New Netherlands settlement. Economic.
Pennsylvania: Founded so the Quakers could have religious freedom. They had their own bible, but hostility toward the KJV does not seem to be a part of the reason they came here. Pennsylvania was arguably the first colony to guarantee true freedom of worship to all its citizens. The puritans of Massachussetts certainly did not.
Georgia: Founded as a place for those in debtor's prison to start a new life, and as a buffer to the Spanish holdings in Florida.

So of the original thirteen colonies, only two were founded for religious reasons, and only Massachussetts had the Puritans. The US was mostly founded by economic expansionists and the English Government, which wanted their own foothold in the new world.