Worldviews

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Where else would she refer you to but a source written by man? A source written by monkeys?

And glad you acknowledge that the bible is written by man and no more authoritative than Wikipedia. LOL

waitin' for the llightning bolt anytime now LOL

Written by the hand of 'man' (maybe a woman or 2 had a hand in it too), but Christian belief acknowledges that it was inspired by God. Can't say that about Wikipedia.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by gunmum

Christianity is following the teachings of the Bible and following in Jesus' footsteps. Catholicism is listening to a priest and repeating what he says without knowing what's really being taught. It puts a priest in-place of the Lord (idolatry). It's so sad to me that people think that they are one in the same and as such mix them up.

There are over a billion Catholics who would be very surprised anyone does not consider them Christian.

So, just wondering what bible you're reading? You were asking about Deuteronomy 1:7 and my Bible says:"Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all [the places] nigh thereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates." Whereby each comma is separating a different area. Not that the river Eupharates is in Lebanon, but another place to go!

In that case, why didn't the Israelites follow instructions? They never even made it into anything but the south of Lebanon.

So, I took your little quiz. Of course it said that I know more than 92% of people, but not really sure what point you're making here. I was Catholic, then atheist, then agnostic and then Buddhist. I'm familiar with Muslim, Mormon and Hindu as well, but still not sure your point. unless...I must have known more 5 or so years ago when I was atheist than what I know now??

I didn't even notice the quick quiz there until you mentioned it. Congrats on your 92%.

Not that it matters a whole bunch, but here is a screenshot of my results.

[Gust]

I found out about this dude via an opera some years back.
He turned the jews onto monotheism as before that they were polytheists.
here's a little link, didn't read it, may actually suck,,, meh!

http://www.akhet.co.uk/akhena10.htm

[gunmum]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Written by the hand of 'man' (maybe a woman or 2 had a hand in it too), but Christian belief acknowledges that it was inspired by God. Can't say that about Wikipedia.

Thank-you Mistagin, I'm glad you picked up on that I was getting to the point that people are so quick to disprove the Bible and God's word, but seem to think that Wikipedia is the be all and end all of reliable information.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

avb3

Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and was manifested in the flesh?

That would assume one had to believe that the bible represented a literal and historical story, would it not?

And for those that do, and if it gives them comfort, great.

Some of us look for more substantial and verifiable from independent sources before we become enthralled by a philosophy.

After all, you do believe that science has advanced medicine and physics, right? Not many still rely on faith healing.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by tibetanpet

y.

The man written, but God inspired books of the bible ultimately say. "Believe and be saved." The rest of your faith 'works', flow out of 'you' because of your response to His grace.

Who said the bible was inspired by God, but the bible.

I am calling this red ball blue, and because I said it's blue, it is now blue. Circular logic never works.

[gunmum]

In that case, why didn't the Israelites follow instructions?

Why don't you follow instructions? The 10 Commandments were written with God's finger for all of us. Oh, it's because none of us are perfect. We all sin and disobey God. Unless of course you scored higher on a religious quiz.

Not that it matters a whole bunch, but here is a screenshot of my results.

Ok, so you see, we have different worldviews

I used to be bitter and angry towards people and their "religion" too.
I used to think that “Christians” were SO naive! How could you believe in something like Christ or God? Afterall, I knew all about evolution. I studied Science. How could anyone actually believe that silly story about Adam and Eve? Or any other story in the bible?
In School, what we were taught about evolution was FACT. Did anyone think to question the teachers? The Curriculum? The Scientists??
So, Just like everyone else, I was led down this secular path. I became a sheeple. Believing what other people told me to believe.
Because, after all, if we are carnal creatures who just exist and die, then there is no real meaning. There is no ultimate authority. We Live, We f&$@, We die. End of story, Right?

Then I almost died. Three times before the age of thirty! Once in the hospital after surgery, a few months later in a freak storm, and then I was told I had pancreatic cancer (which thankfully turned out to be benign)!
Scared me. I wasn’t invincible. And I began to question my existence and of course, what happens after death?
And I thought, “well, I’m a fairly good person. I know right from wrong. I’ve never killed anyone”. And someone asked me if I thought I’d go to heaven when I die. When I said “yes, cause I’m good” I was asked how I know I’m good enough, where’s the line’?
Then I actually read the Bible, after years of scoffing, and it’s amazing what’s in there!
My life has changed dramatically. I no longer act like the world owes me. I am constantly trying to better myself, humble myself. There is so much pride in the world. Everyone takes such pride in how “smart” they are, how ‘successful’ they are, how ‘kind’ or whatever it is that makes them feel good.
And now I say this:
It’s interesting how most people wouldn’t marry their spouse just so they can live in their house, but for a lifelong relationship... and yet when it comes to the end of your life, you want to be able to go to heaven to live in God’s house without ever having a relationship with him? God isn’t here for when it suits you. You are here because He created you. And how can you even talk about Heaven or Hell if you don’t believe in God?
I know this is bold. I know that you may want to pick it apart or whatever, my journey into this is just beginning, but in the end, this is about you. It’s about how you CHOOSE to live your life.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by gunmum

Catholicism is listening to a priest and repeating what he says without knowing what's really being taught.

I suspect you haven't spent much time inside a Catholic church. Sort of like me saying all Evangelicals idolize Pastor Billy Bob with his silver hair, rings on every finger, and mindlessly donate to his telethon to build another Crystal Cathedral.

This is my fav:
http://www.warriorsofwealth.com/
Lets worship god and make some MOOLAH!

LOL

[Gust]

Originally Posted by gunmum

Why don't you follow instructions? The 10 Commandments were written with God's finger for all of us. Oh, it's because none of us are perfect. We all sin and disobey God. Unless of course you scored higher on a religious quiz.


Ok, so you see, we have different worldviews

I used to be bitter and angry towards people and their "religion" too.
I used to think that “Christians” were SO naive! How could you believe in something like Christ or God? Afterall, I knew all about evolution. I studied Science. How could anyone actually believe that silly story about Adam and Eve? Or any other story in the bible?
In School, what we were taught about evolution was FACT. Did anyone think to question the teachers? The Curriculum? The Scientists??
So, Just like everyone else, I was led down this secular path. I became a sheeple. Believing what other people told me to believe.
Because, after all, if we are carnal creatures who just exist and die, then there is no real meaning. There is no ultimate authority. We Live, We f&$@, We die. End of story, Right?

Then I almost died. Three times before the age of thirty! Once in the hospital after surgery, a few months later in a freak storm, and then I was told I had pancreatic cancer (which thankfully turned out to be benign)!
Scared me. I wasn’t invincible. And I began to question my existence and of course, what happens after death?
And I thought, “well, I’m a fairly good person. I know right from wrong. I’ve never killed anyone”. And someone asked me if I thought I’d go to heaven when I die. When I said “yes, cause I’m good” I was asked how I know I’m good enough, where’s the line’?
Then I actually read the Bible, after years of scoffing, and it’s amazing what’s in there!
My life has changed dramatically. I no longer act like the world owes me. I am constantly trying to better myself, humble myself. There is so much pride in the world. Everyone takes such pride in how “smart” they are, how ‘successful’ they are, how ‘kind’ or whatever it is that makes them feel good.
And now I say this:
It’s interesting how most people wouldn’t marry their spouse just so they can live in their house, but for a lifelong relationship... and yet when it comes to the end of your life, you want to be able to go to heaven to live in God’s house without ever having a relationship with him? God isn’t here for when it suits you. You are here because He created you. And how can you even talk about Heaven or Hell if you don’t believe in God?
I know this is bold. I know that you may want to pick it apart or whatever, my journey into this is just beginning, but in the end, this is about you. It’s about how you CHOOSE to live your life.

so what's your point

[Mistagin]

A few responses:

Originally Posted by avb3

Religious leaders of nations have done such a great job over history, haven't they? Iran - religious leaders run it, Hitler, practicing Catholic, endorsed by Pope Pious the what ever number he was, King Henry the Eight, established Church of England, King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella I of Castile established the Spanish Inquisition.

All religious people. And let us not forget those wonderful religious leaders who sent children on a Crusade to get slaughtered.

Yeah, I feel really comfortable with the precedence set by leaders who are religious and use their religion to run their countries.

See my other post. I would argue there is plenty of precedent to be uncomfortable living under the rule of leaders who govern by the tenets of their atheism too!



Code of Hammurabi was in fact much more comprehensive as a civil law instrument then the 10 Commandments or many of the Moses statements. Much of the 10 commandments and Moses subsequent statements mirror the Code of Hammurabi.
Here is the 'chicken and egg' argument that always comes up in these sorts of discussions. Which came first. God's 'law' didn't come into existence when He gave it to Moses. It articulates something of the nature of God (justice, righteousness, goodness, love) and how humans ought to live in relationship with one another and God. And since God is always concerned for the well-being of people and that we live in good, productive, beneficial society, is it not logical to suggest that things like Hammurabi's Code and the 10 Commandments could have the same inspiring roots? That God communicated His desire for humans to develop good societies, thus the laws / moral codes to do so, to Hammurabi and others as well as Moses?

Your argument falls apart; lots of moral law available prior to the bible, laws that are still applicable today.
I don't think it's true to say my argument falls apart at all, although there are lots of moral law and code 'outside' or 'prior' to the Bible - in your way of thinking about it, it is true to say that 'ours' (Western) moral law and code is still based basically on Judeo-Christian tenets. And, speaking from a comprehensive Biblical Christian worldview, since God - as the Bible says - was 'in the beginning' - and since His law which is presented in the Bible is God's - then - logically - God's law was present 'in the beginning'. So from a Biblical Christian worldview God's law predates any and all humanly defined law or code.



Actually, as I indicated above, yeah, lots of harm is done in the name of religion. Many religious people do good, and so do some of the organizations, but that does not detract from the fact that much of the world's wars are and have been because of religious differences.
We can agree on this one - for sure. However, let's not forget that there are 'just' and right reasons to go to war. Nevertheless, war by it's nature is a breeding ground of evil.



I assume that means you hope to be one of the 144,000?
No, not all Christians hold to the number 144,000 being a literal number. I believe 144,000 is a symbolic number, as are a lot of numbers in the Bible. I believe it is intended to communicate absolute completeness, and refers to the total number of the saved. So in that regard, I don't "hope to be one of the 144,00 - I know I am . But there are others who look at that number literally. Can I offer a word of advice? I will anyway - please grow beyond your hangup on literalism - as I've pointed out, not all of the Bible is literal - or meant to be literal. Taking such a view towards it is extremely superficial and severely limits ones understanding of what God communicates in it.

Wasn't Calvin the one who copied Vlad Dracul of Transylvania and tortured some of those opposed to him, and then put their heads on a stake? Nice guy to model a religion after.

No. You are wrong on so many levels here. Dig deeper and find out who Calvin really was. He wasn't perfect and was complicit in the death of a man he and his community leaders in Geneva considered to be a heretic. Part of that can be attributed to the times. Calvin was a rather reluctant signatory to the order to that event and it was out of his hands.

Also, Calvin had no intentions of creating a 'religion' for others to follow, He, as did many other 'reformers' of his time, seeing the 'wrongs' in the church of his time, sought to reform the church, bring it back to the church as Jesus calls it to be. Calvin stood on the shoulders of godly people that preceded him, taking his understanding of theology right from the Bible and codified it systematically into a theological 'branch' called "Reformed". Today there are over 80 million people worldwide who look to him as a leader God provided in a particular time to help the church be a Christ following 'body' that honours God. Calvin was highly intellectual and logical in his approach and he was instrumental in developing and clarifying particular understandings of a Biblical Christian worldview. I am proud to claim him as part of my theological heritage. And I'm sure God said to him, when he arrived in heaven, "Well done, good and faithful servant!"

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

avb3, I've noticed that you tend to drag up particular people and events as 'models' of Christianity in these discussions, and you seem to have decided they are exemplars of the faith*. You are so wrong, (but you are convinced you are right and Christians are all to be painted with the same brush). Sorry to break it to you, but people like Hitler (who was definitely not a practicing Catholic in any other sense than for reasons of political legitimacy - and there are still lots of people who play that card) is not an example of a true believer. Such people and 'dark' events they perpetrate - sometimes in the name of Christ, are, for sure, a dark stain on Christianity - in so far as they wear that label.

I was only making the point that if one suggests that if someone is of a religious bent, as a leader, that it does not make that leader better then one who is not.

In fact, I think it is totally irrelevant if a leader is religious; in fact, as in Iran, it is down right dangerous, as Christian leaders have been in the past. We have had some very good leaders in many nations who were religious, and some very good ones who were not.

Faith of any kind does not dictate a good leader, nor does it preclude bad ones.

No one would or can logically argue that they are appropriate examples of the Christianity Jesus / God calls people to follow.*

So, would you extend this comment towards the fellow who is the basis of your particular sect of Christianity, Calvin?

Impaling heads of those that oppose your religious view on a stake is not exactly very Christian, is it? You never did answer that. And Calvin IS the father of the Reformed Christian sect you pride yourself of believing in.

To further the discussion, since it is easily 'proven' that religious people have their faults, no matter what their religion is, and that presupposes that since their worldviews are religiously based those worldviews have their faults too, what about atheist / unbeliever leaders and people? Did non-religious leaders like Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao-tze-tung, Kim Jong-il and now Kim Jong-un, and others like them do a better job out of their worldviews than those with religious worldviews? (Yes, I recognize that some of these folks spoke out of one side of their mouths suggesting they held to some sort of 'religious' tenets, but at the same time would say that by their actions they were not serious about following the truth of their 'religion'.)*

The people you list are as much scum as Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders who kill in the name of their religion. Period. Bad people are bad people, some are religious, and do it in the name of their religion (Calvin, perhaps, impaling heads of those opposing him), and some are not religious at all.

How about the atheists on here? Do you have 'faults'? Or are you perfect and are your worldviews perfect? If you think so please explain why.*

I would think your answer would have to be, "No." (example: have you ever told a lie, harboured a grudge, thought badly of someone?)

LOL... if I was perfect, then I could lay claim to being the second coming, couldn't I? Or the first for the Jews.

So what's the problem? Why do people have these faults? Why are there no perfect people, and thus no perfect worldviews (at least not in practice by human beings)?

We can call the problem 'evil'. So where does it come from? ----- Now there's a big worldview question! Why do people - of whatever worldview - religiously based or not - do 'evil'?*

And that leads to the next logical question: What's the solution?

Follow the Code of Hammurabi. It takes out the religious stuff, and deals with the human stuff. It's a bit heavy on stuff involving the death sentence, but that seems to be par for the course in that part of the world anyways... I mean, how often does the God inspired bible talk about stoning people to death. Oh yeah, just as the God inspired OT has laws about slaves, most of those seem to be stolen (borrowed) from the Code of Hammurabi... I think those parts we would want to revise also.

Seriously, as one judge once said, “I can't define pornography, but I know it if I see it”, as a people we know right from wrong. We (at least in the western world) over all are doing a pretty good job at defining a civil society. It would be nice if all people would buy into it, but that just won't happen.

Now, if we could do something about groups like the Westboro Baptists, scammers like Benny Hinn and end times prophet Harold Camping, all who profess to be Christians, wouldn't the world be a better place?

Just as we seen to ask Muslim leaders to expose and denounce their religious wackos, why do we not impose that same standard on Christian ones?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Written by the hand of 'man' (maybe a woman or 2 had a hand in it too), but Christian belief acknowledges that it was inspired by God. Can't say that about Wikipedia.

Because the bible tells you so right? Circular logic.

[avb3]

No, not all Christians hold to the number 144,000 being a literal number. I believe 144,000 is a symbolic number, as are a lot of numbers in the Bible. I believe it is intended to communicate absolute completeness, and refers to the total number of the saved.

So now we are interpreting what the bible means?

What happened to the literalism? What happened to the inerrantcy?

You have to see how this type of picking and choosing of what is real and what is not causes many to look very askew at the whole.

Can't you see that?

So in that regard, I don't "hope to be one of the 144,00 - I know I am*. But there are others who look at that number literally. Can I offer a word of advice? I will anyway - please grow beyond your hangup on literalism - as I've pointed out, not all of the Bible is literal - or meant to be literal. Taking such a view towards it is extremely superficial and severely limits ones understanding of what God communicates in it.

But that is EXACTLY the point... fundamentalist and evangelicals quote chapter and verse on some points and tell the world that it is the inerrant bible that tells us so, and then, when questioned on some points, the rest of us are told not to take it so literally.

You can't have it both ways... either the bible is literal or it isn't.

If it isn't, then doesn't that substantiate my much earlier comment that if it is taken allegorically and metaphorically, that the spiritual message is much stronger then if any part of it is taken literally?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

A few responses:

No. You are wrong on so many levels here. Dig deeper and find out who Calvin really was. He wasn't perfect and was complicit in the death of a man he and his community leaders in Geneva considered to be a heretic. Part of that can be attributed to the times. Calvin was a rather reluctant signatory to the order to that event and it was out of his hands.

Reluctant signatory? Sort of like Hitler's followers were just following orders?

So are you referring to Servetus or Jacques Gruet or? One burned at the stake, one tortured and then off with his head, all on Calvin's orders. Nice guy.

...... Calvin was highly intellectual and logical in his approach and he was instrumental in developing and clarifying particular understandings of a Biblical Christian worldview. I am proud to claim him as part of my theological heritage. And I'm sure God said to him, when he arrived in heaven, "Well done, good and faithful servant!"

With all due respect to your faith, any god that would condone torture, beheadings and burning at the stake is not a god I want to commune with. Mind you, wasn't it Calvin who taught that the NT did not change the teachings of the OT? That would explain his penchant to the disgusting violence.

Seems to me that the Taliban and Calvin had a lot in common.

Please go forward and keep the good part of your faith, but to even attempt to justify this type of violence in the name of religion causes many to be seriously concerned about fundamentalist viewpoints, whether they be Christian, Jew or Muslim.

And that continues to be scary.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by gunmum

Why don't you follow instructions? The 10 Commandments were written with God's finger for all of us. Oh, it's because none of us are perfect. We all sin and disobey God. Unless of course you scored higher on a religious quiz.

Which 10? Seems to be a difference. Exodus 20 or 34?????

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

1. I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

1. Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

2. You shall not make for yourself a graven image. You shall not bow down to them or serve them.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

4. All the first-born are mine.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

5. Honor your father and your mother.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

6. You shall not kill.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

7. You shall not commit adultery.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

8. You shall not steal.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

8. The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

9. The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.

First Tables of Stone (Exodus 20)
("which Moses didst break")

10. You shall not covet.

Second Tables of Stone (Exodus 34)
("the words that were on the first")

10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

BTW, what was the scene where Moses got those tablets? Mount Sinai? Or maybe Mount Horeb as indicated be Kings 8:9, Chronicles 5:10 and Malachi 4:4?

And I already am aware of the argument that the two names refer to the same place. Why sow confusion then?

Ok, so you see, we have different worldviews

I used to be bitter and angry towards people and their "religion" too.

Not bitter at all. If your faith guides you to do good and gives you some spiritual uplifting, hair on you.

Just don't use it to denigrate others who may not be of the same faith/sect, religion or those who may be of no faith. It is YOUR spiritual journey, not everyone else's.

Believing what other people told me to believe.

And now you believe what other people tell you on how you should interpret old script? Or that old script speaks to you in some way?

Either way, it is still someone or thing telling you how to believe

...Scared me. I wasn’t invincible. And I began to question my existence and of course, what happens after death?

Been there, and I emphasize. An acquaintance brought their pastor in, and he asked if he could lead me in prayer.

I told him no, I'll have my own spiritual guidance, and didn't want it influenced. I was later told that the pastor said that was the first time anyone ever turned down a request for prayer.

I thought it was damn presumptuous of both of them to think I needed someone's belief to intervene when they both knew my religious beliefs were not theirs. I mean, would you want a Imman coming to your bedside to lead a prayer?

Then I actually read the Bible, after years of scoffing, and it’s amazing what’s in there!

Don't you just love all that hating and killing and slavery and incest and multiple marriage going on? Amazing shiite, isn't it. Good teachings too!

It’s interesting how most people wouldn’t marry their spouse just so they can live in their house, but for a lifelong relationship... and yet when it comes to the end of your life, you want to be able to go to heaven to live in God’s house without ever having a relationship with him? God isn’t here for when it suits you. You are here because He created you. And how can you even talk about Heaven or Hell if you don’t believe in God?

YOUR faith is YOUR path to the afterlife.

Anyone else's belief system is theirs. We really won't know will we, until we pass on. Up till then, one can only go on one's faith.

If it works for you, great. Again, don't denigrate those who may have a different viewpoint. Which includes Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Shintoists, Deists and others. Their faith has as much validity as yours. Theirs is right for them, yours is right for you.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by avb3

Because the bible tells you so right? Circular logic.

Right. However, because Christians believe the Bible is the inspired word of God and not simply written by the whim of 'man' it carries a lot of weight! But it takes faith to believe.

Thus it also underpins a Biblical Christian worldview.

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Written by the hand of 'man' (maybe a woman or 2 had a hand in it too), but Christian belief acknowledges that it was inspired by God. Can't say that about Wikipedia.

There is about as much proof to support a claim that wiki info is inspired by god as the bible. In both cases its all pure speculation. There is absolutely no way to know. "Believing" and "trusting" doesn't make it so except in one's own mind. If it makes one feel good to believe in the bible and a church leaders interpretation of that book then I'm happy for that person. But the reality is that any one of us will only KNOW the actual truth of any higher power and afterlife when we pass on.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by avb3

I was only making the point that if one suggests that if someone is of a religious bent, as a leader, that it does not make that leader better then one who is not.
Ah, we agree - sort of.

In fact, I think it is totally irrelevant if a leader is religious; well, hmmmm in fact, as in Iran, it is down right dangerous true, as Christian leaders have been in the past. We have had some very good leaders in many nations who were religious, and some very good ones who were not.agree

Faith of any kind does not dictate a good leader, nor does it preclude bad ones.
Let's go out on a speculative limb here: if Jesus were the leader of our country would he, obviously being informed by his religious worldview, be, in your opinion, a good leader? A bad one?



So, would you extend this comment towards the fellow who is the basis of your particular sect of Christianity, Calvin?
I have no problem saying Calvin was overall a good leader. That doesn't mean I worship him. He was a man who tried his best to serve Christ and his theological legacy is rich and beneficial for understanding Biblical Christian faith. And I am not a member of a "particular sect of Christianity", I am a member of a 'branch' of the church of Jesus Christ.

Impaling heads of those that oppose your religious view on a stake is not exactly very Christian, is it? You never did answer that. And Calvin IS the father of the Reformed Christian sect you pride yourself of believing in.
Calvin never did what you say he did, at least not personally. That does not say none of his followers did, and he objected vigorously.
In a way of speaking, yes, Calvin is credited as the 'father' of the Reformed branch of the church. Note that I use a lower case 'f' on 'father', that's deliberate because God is Father - as Calvin was well aware and taught. History has not always been kind to him, because of some of the hard truths of the Bible he helped emphasize in their proper Biblical context.




The people you list are as much scum as Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders who kill in the name of their religion. Period. Bad people are bad people, some are religious, and do it in the name of their religion (Calvin, perhaps, impaling heads of those opposing him), and some are not religious at all.
Right - so what produces that 'bad-ness'?



LOL... if I was perfect, then I could lay claim to being the second coming, couldn't I? Or the first for the Jews.
- nah, you aren't God!!!


Follow the Code of Hammurabi. It takes out the religious stuff, and deals with the human stuff. It's a bit heavy on stuff involving the death sentence, but that seems to be par for the course in that part of the world anyways... I mean, how often does the God inspired bible talk about stoning people to death. Oh yeah, just as the God inspired OT has laws about slaves, most of those seem to be stolen (borrowed) from the Code of Hammurabi... I think those parts we would want to revise also.
Again, which came first? God's law code predates all human devised ones. And didn't Hammurabi (18th century B.C) profess to be a religious man who got his inspiration from the gods?
You are right about his law being heavy on the death sentence, a person could get put to death for looking the wrong way down the street and squinting!!! (that's hyperbole BTW). There would certainly have to be a LOT of revision to Hammurabi's Code if it were to be presented and adopted as law today in our society!
Do you really understand the reasoning and purpose behind God's Old Testament commands?

Seriously, as one judge once said, “I can't define pornography, but I know it if I see it”, as a people we know right from wrong. We (at least in the western world) over all are doing a pretty good job at defining a civil society. It would be nice if all people would buy into it, but that just won't happen.
How do we know right from wrong, and why don't we do right? How is it that we are doing a pretty good job at defining a civil society? What contributes to that? Does it have anything to do with particular worldviews? If so, which ones?

Now, if we could do something about groups like the Westboro Baptists, scammers like Benny Hinn and end times prophet Harold Camping, all who profess to be Christians, wouldn't the world be a better place?
Agreed, every 'religion' has its wackos, scammers, etc!The world would be a better place, but it'd be a whole lot less interesting - who would we roll our eyes at and ridicule?

Just as we seen to ask Muslim leaders to expose and denounce their religious wackos, why do we not impose that same standard on Christian ones?
Good question - however it is raised from within a Western cultural perspective that still holds to some 'favoritism' given to the Christian label. But that is changing as more and more western media and atheists try to push Christianity to the fringes of society - example: somewhere above in another post Arachnodisiac brought forth the post-modern worldview tenet that faith is and must be solely a private matter - it cannot be allowed to exist in the public realm. Of course, no one tells us how we're supposed to bifurcate ourselves in such a way that our faith would never follow us into the public realm.
Besides, we don't have to expose and denounce them - they do a good job of that themselves. Some of them have been soundly denounced by Christian leaders - but that's generally not newsworthy enough to make the MSM. Nevertheless, and not to defend them in any way, and as despicable as some of their activities and teachings are, I don't see any of them killing and destroying like some of the radicals of the Muslim religion.

[Okotokian]

nevermind

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

nevermind

Post of the week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Let's go out on a speculative limb here: if Jesus were the leader of our country would he, obviously being informed by his religious worldview, be, in your opinion, a good leader? A bad one?

One would probably have a rather dogmatic situation, and I'm not sure that is what we want. You know, certain inflexibilities. Apparently, he was not big on divorce (personally, I would prefer it did not exist, but fully understand why we need it).

He probably would shock a lot of Christians by changing the Sabbath back to Saturday. Most Christians of course don't know it was not changed until the 4th century. Can you imagine the discussions around that one?

His sermon on the mount seemed to hold a distaste towards wars. That would shock a bunch of people if that was brought into practise. I mean, one can only turn the other cheek for so long. What is the definition of insanity? Something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

He would probably go back to that graven image thing, and outlaw all crosses, iconography and other paraphernalia of Christian religious emblems. Just saying, you know. If he's the one who made the law, you'd think he would follow it, right?

We would probably be stripped of our right to use pagan practises; you know, like the Christmas tree, Yule logs etc. There would probably be a realignment of religious holidays; I mean, let's face it, using the first Sunday after a full moon past the spring equinox as the basis for celebrating a resurrection sure seems very pagan like. That one would have to go, I'm sure.

We would certainly get a clarification of baby versus adult baptism. Gosh, that one subject alone can fill pages of discussion. Weird, huh, since all sects take there teachings from an inerrant bible.

There would be a clarification of which bible to use; Catholic Bible has more books then the Protestant, and then of course, the Mormons, who consider themselves as Christians, would get clarification on Moroni. Wouldn’t that be a shock to the system if the determination was that, yup, that vision is to be included.

I mean, let us think of all the similarities of various religions.

Moses went up on mountain, no witnesses, came back and said, hey, look what I have, these are God's laws.

Some time later, same part of the world, Mohammed went hiding in a cave, no witnesses, and the angel Gabriel came and revealed the koran to him.

Lo and behold, come about 1800 and something, the angel Moroni revealed itself to Smith, no witnesses, up on a mountain, gave him some golden tablets, and said build on that old stuff everyone believes in.

Abraham had a ton of visions with angels, but no witnesses.

BTW, when Jesus went and did his prayer stuff in the garden of Gethsemane, his disciples kept falling asleep, right? So who was the witness to what Jesus said and did, when all were sleeping? Hmmmm, curious, isn't it?

There sure is a whole bunch of mystical stuff that happens when there are no witnesses, don't you think? Tons of angels appearing to whisper stuff to men removed from those they preach to afterwards.

So, yeah, it would be quite a turmoil. I mean, just think of the mess our constitutional laws would be in. Separation of church and state? Phfffft... out the window. The Queen head of the Church of England... cancelled. Etc. Etc.

Calvin never did what you say he did, at least not personally. That does not say none of his followers did, and he objected vigorously.*

Lets just say most historians would say Calvin was deeply involved, to the point where his signature is on documents. “I was just following orders” was not an excuse at Nuremberg, nor is it here.

Right - so what produces that 'bad-ness'?

Including religious leaders? Egomaniacs, greed, jealousy, power, and control are a few of the things I can think of.

*- nah, you aren't God!!!

In light of our discussions here, I will refrain from commenting on any “oh my god” utterances that may have been moaned in my presence

How do we know right from wrong, and why don't we do right? How is it that we are doing a pretty good job at defining a civil society? What contributes to that? Does it have anything to do with particular worldviews? If so, which ones?

I kind of like Penn Jillette's 10 Suggestions:

• 1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.
• 2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian,*Garth Brooks*versus*Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)
• 3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)
• 4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)
• 5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)
• 6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)
• 7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)
• 8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)
• 9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)
• 10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.

Pretty common sense stuff that would not be a bad foundation for any society, don't you agree?


We may disagree, but I do appreciate an honest debate. You will not change my mind, nor I yours, but it is good to discuss without getting into personalities.

[Arachnodisiac]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

nevermind

Yes. It was a great album. Some say, it defined music as we came to know it, completely changing the path of the goth movement into what became as the grunge movement.


(Have you seen the movie American Psycho? If so, please re-read that in the main character's voice.)

[gunmum]

So this of course is a topic long debated on. You continue to regurgitate your facts from positiveathiesm.org and try to prove the Bible is wrong using every imaginable fact possible and I will give you bible quotes, and it will go on and on and on because we have different worldviews.
But I think the deeper issue here is this: Who has ultimate authority? I will forever say that it's God and you will forever try to disprove me.
Were we created or did we evolve? Because if we evolved, then there is no God, and therefore no absolute authority. And while that might not effect our generation, it will certainly impact our children and subsequent generations.
The boundaries of right and wrong are changing all the time. You can already see it happening. And the more and more people that are pushing for secularism, the more the moral compass shifts. And where's the line? Who's discerning right from wrong these days? Society at large? Government officials? Well, we know how that turns out don't we?
Don't pretend that by being athiest that you are on neutral ground. You either believe in the Creator, or you deny him. And that's your GOD GIVEN RIGHT

This has been fun for me. I appreciate your comments even though some people like to resort to name calling or whatever.

[Arachnodisiac]

Yes, because secularism has been such a disaster in the free world. I much prefer the merger of religion with every facet of life. You know, like in Iran.

Yes, the power of religion is diminishing as all myth has during man's evolution and intellectual growth. But don't worry - our intrinsic moral codes will not disappear with the churches because they are not moral in nature - they are merely survival tools created by a complex species.

[avb3]

[QUOTE=gunmum;1295603]

So this of course is a topic long debated on. You continue to regurgitate your facts from positiveathiesm.org and try to prove the Bible is wrong using every imaginable fact possible and I will give you bible quotes, and it will go on and on and on because we have different worldviews.

So, why didn't you answer my question? Which 10 Commandments? It's a legitimate question.

But I think the deeper issue here is this: Who has ultimate authority? I will forever say that it's God and you will forever try to disprove me.

Nope, but I will point out the hiccups that devoting one's self to an ancient manuscript can lead to. I recognize your faith is what it is right now (you yourself indicated how many times it has changed inn the past), and I have no desire for you to change your faith.

Just don't tell us that is is inerrant. You believe it is, but only your faith drives that, not something others can touch and feel and see and dissect and confirm. You know, like dinosaur fossils.

Were we created or did we evolve? Because if we evolved, then there is no God, and therefore no absolute authority. And while that might not effect*our*generation, it will certainly impact our children and subsequent generations.

Many people of faith can reconcile evolution, which science has been pretty definitive about. Sure there are still some gaps, but every year, those gaps get smaller.

You do believe in science don't you? I mean, the physics that allows you to use your computer, the medical help you got you referred to, the medicines that were developed, and of course I can go on and on.

Science developed those, not faith. Using the same scientific process that shows us through geology, biology, astronomy and other specialities that show us how evolution has worked.

The boundaries of right and wrong are changing all the time. You can already see it happening. And the more and more people that are pushing for secularism, the more the moral compass shifts. And where's the line? Who's discerning right from wrong these days? Society at large? Government officials? Well, we know how that turns out don't we?

I posted Penn Jillette's 10 Suggestions in another post http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showp...7&postcount=51. They are a pretty good guide for harmonious living.

Don't pretend that by being athiest that you are on neutral ground. You either believe in the Creator, or you deny him. And that's your GOD GIVEN RIGHT*

Perhaps what you call the Creator is in fact not an anthropomorphic entity at all(you know, old guy, long beard, white, sitting on a throne some where near Sirius) but a a force that drives the nature we hunt, fish and trap in, a force that started the evolutionary chain so many billions of years ago, a force whose secrets science is just now discovering, and revelling in the fact that the rules laid out don't change (molecules are comprised of atoms, which have various parts like electrons and nuclei, every single time you raise the temperature of a subject above burning point, it burns, and it never will get colder then absolute zero).

Those rules are immutable and inerrant. And if they ever appear to conflict, there are a whole bunch of scientists out there finding out why, and attempting to discover what the harmonizing factor is. They don't try and explain it away by some esoteric discussion, which in the end, doesn't explain anything. You know, like all that mystical stuff in the bible.

Perhaps a spiritual understanding of the laws of nature will bring us closer to that force? You know, out in the big chapel in the bush

This has been fun for me. I appreciate your comments even though some people like to resort to name calling or whatever.

No name calling necessary. As I said earlier, neither one will change the others perspective, but it is good to try and understand why there is a difference of perspective.

Your faith relies on faith, and, mine, well, science keeps proving it.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by avb3

reluctant signatory? Sort of like hitler's followers were just following orders?
wow! You sure like to make inflammatory comparisons! Calvin was nothing like hitler!

so are you referring to servetus or jacques gruet or? One burned at the stake, one tortured and then off with his head, all on calvin's orders. Nice guy.
do you even try to understand situations / contexts / historical events? (note: Not that i am defending any of it, but lets be honest - s*** happens, and sometimes stuff happens in a situation or context that wouldn't happen at all today!)



with all due respect to your faith, any god that would condone torture, beheadings and burning at the stake is not a god i want to commune with. Mind you, wasn't it calvin who taught that the nt did not change the teachings of the ot? That would explain his penchant to the disgusting violence.
why do you persist in blaming god (the christian god of the bible) for stuff people do? It only shows how little you actually know and understand about him.

Calvin taught truth about scripture - that the nt doesn't change the ot. It is a continuation of the story and jesus clarifies and explains the ot. The nt 'completes' the ot.

seems to me that the taliban and calvin had a lot in common.
wow, just wow! That's inflammatory! And dead wrong! It's also very, very , very offensive. And it shows how little you know or understand about calvin, matters of the faith he taught, true biblical faith, and i would have to conclude - a whole lot of other christian leaders throughout the ages. But you are entitled to your opinion and i will respect that.

please go forward and keep the good part of your faith i will, i'll keep it all., but to even attempt to justify this type of violence in the name of religion causes many to be seriously concerned about fundamentalist viewpoints are you calling me a fundamentalist?, whether they be christian, jew or muslim.

And that continues to be scary.

boo!

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

There is about as much proof to support a claim that wiki info is inspired by god as the bible. In both cases its all pure speculation. There is absolutely no way to know. "Believing" and "trusting" doesn't make it so except in one's own mind. If it makes one feel good to believe in the bible and a church leaders interpretation of that book then I'm happy for that person. But the reality is that any one of us will only KNOW the actual truth of any higher power and afterlife when we pass on.

I'm not even attempting to prove it. Matters of faith cannot be proven, only believed. Doesn't negate the validity of what faith believes though - not for the person of faith.

For people of faith, faith knowledge is just as real and valid as empirical knowledge.

In a way you are right - we will only truly KNOW when we die. I'm hedging my bets on the truth of God's (God of the Bible) revelation I 'know' by faith. And there is plenty of supporting evidence. Like, for example, in the book "Heaven Is Real" written by Todd Burpo. It's an amazing story about Todd's son who spent 'time' in heaven while undergoing surgery - and there was no way he could have known what he told.

[markg]

Yes our society sure seems to be going the right way morally with out God. Murders are daily news items in alberta. When you get robbed in Alberta the police dont even bother investigating anymore due to how common it is and how the criminal isnt prosecuted. Your simply told to fillout the report and collect your insurance. Rape and Pedophillia off the charts. Divorce rates over 50%. Ya things are just peachy in todays society. Nothing is taboo anymore, everyone is only accountable to themselves for they was they live. This leads to some pretty low standards.

I find it fascinating listening to people complain about religion and religious leaders being the bane of human history. Any leader who murders or harms people is by definition disobeying the teachings of his faith and is a hypocryte.

I would have folks review the 20th century and the amount of bloodshed commited in the name of secularism and atheism buy leaders like mao pot and stalin. If you weigh the negativeity of a worldview by the number of lives taken by said worldview then the scales tip heavily in favor of secularism winning the title of most evil in history.

[markg]

I dont have enough faith to be an athiest.

To be an athiest i have to believe that everything came from nothing. All time space and matter sprang into existence from nothing. Frankly to believe this takes a huge leap of faith and suspence of logic.

Secondly to be an athiest i have to believe that life comes from non life. The mathmaticaly probability of this occuring is so astronomically infintesimaly small that to believe you have to take it happening on faith. In fact the scientist that discovered the DNA moleculue was so trouble by this conundrum that he proposed that aliens seeded the earth. (problem is it just pushes the question back a planet)

Lastly is meaning and transendence and morality. If God and an after life dont exist and all we have is the material universe then nothing matters and everything is only relative to our reality. Nitchze the famous athiest was right in his assestment that if God is dead then ultimately nilhism is the logical position.

I dont have enough faith to believe in any of the above.

[Mistagin]

Re post # 51

I was looking for a simple answer - would Jesus be a good or bad leader? I wasn't looking for all kinds of speculation about what might or might not be.

Good attempt at deflection though.

Re "what produces the bad-ness" question. Good start to the answer, but there's a simple one-word one that gets right to the heart of the matter. I wonder if you know it, or just don't want to go there.

Re: Penn Jillette's 10 Suggestions. I suppose, being suggestions, they would be optional? Not at all having the weight of divine 'Commandments'. Yup they are full of common sense, thus would be good for civil society. Some of them sound an awful lot like some ancient commandments though - well, except they remove "God" from the picture and move 'man' into His place in those ancient commandments.