Religion: Problem / Solution

[jakee 1,564]

Quote

For the time being let's forget any explanation of the origin of sin (lawlessness and missing the mark) Is it universal? I'll be 52 this Friday, and in my half century of living I have never met anyone who was perfect (without sin) Let say there "may" be someone who is perfect. That "someone" is not me. I need a savior. I believe JC is that savior. He, being (without sin) paid the price for me. I accept that, you don't. How hard is that to understand?

I do understand your position, in a lot of respects you actually seem quite moderate.

However I'm sure you can understand how frustrating it is when the real literalists (like the nut-jobs Paj is so fond of) start spouting off about original sin as an actual event. I guess saying "You're unable to go through life without any imperfect thoughts because your conscious mind cannot completely overcome the influence of your hardwired hormonal responses" is not nearly as effective as saying "You will always be guilty of EVIL thoughts because of your rebellion against the LORD, all men are GUILTY."

The fact is, millions of years of evolution have provided us with hugely strong urges towards lust and violence. The measure of us is how we deal with them. The notion so often spouted that we should be judged simply for having them is absurd.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

For the time being let's forget any explanation of the origin of sin (lawlessness and missing the mark) Is it universal? I'll be 52 this Friday, and in my half century of living I have never met anyone who was perfect (without sin) Let say there "may" be someone who is perfect. That "someone" is not me. I need a savior. I believe JC is that savior. He, being (without sin) paid the price for me. I accept that, you don't. How hard is that to understand?

What sins has, say, a one month old baby committed?

I'd say none

steveOrino

[stayhigh 2]

it is a solution for person themselve but it is a problem for the whole world,,,
too many people forces religion to other,,,"you have to believe this dude, because the dude died for us,,,dude will bring salvation,,dude will bring us to other planet,,ect"
don't force your idea into me,,,if you believe in some dude than it is fine,, but don't give me that BS...is there any chicks for god statues??? why is it always dude??

jesus=dude,
mohammad=dude
buddah=dude,,
Jehovah=sounds like dude,,
mormon=founded by some dude,

where are all the chicks at???? i rather see some hot chick half naked on the cross rather than some dude,,

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[steveorino 7]

Quote

However I'm sure you can understand how frustrating it is when the real literalists (like the nut-jobs Paj is so fond of) start spouting off about original sin as an actual event.

I'd hardly consider Jay a "nut job" I believe he accepts Genesis as a literal account of origins. In that regards I don't agree but we come to the same conclusions. Man is in need of a savior. JC is that Savior. So, if Jay is a nut, so am I. Good company to keep IMHO.

Quote

I guess saying "You're unable to go through life without any imperfect thoughts because your conscious mind cannot completely overcome the influence of your hardwired hormonal responses" is not nearly as effective as saying "You will always be guilty of EVIL thoughts because of your rebellion against the LORD, all men are GUILTY."

If I could somehow corral all my thoughts and keep them into submission, I think I (and the rest of the world) would remain guilty because of conscious deliebrate acts of sin. Verdict ... guilty, you bet!

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

... in a lot of respects you actually seem quite moderate.

That's too bad, because I strive to be like Christ, and he was anything but a moderate.

steveOrino

[stayhigh 2]

and problem is that people have such a set mind on how god should be...
have you ever thought that Moses inhaled lots of marijuana when he was on top of Mt.Sinai???
and jesus was black,, although he's name sounds hispanic,,,,

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[philh 0]

Why is it silly to debate things on a debating forum?

[philh 0]

Why is man in need of a saviour? Why does some guy dying on a cross 2 thousand years ago mean we are "saved"? What are we guilty of exactly?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Why is it silly to debate things on a debating forum?

Is this a trick question?

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Why is man in need of a saviour? Why does some guy dying on a cross 2 thousand years ago mean we are "saved"? What are we guilty of exactly?

Dude, how many ways can I say the same thing? I'll just paste what I said a few threads back. I believe mankind fell (rebelled) and God brought upon spiritual death (separation from him) as the result. I also believe that "guy dying on a cross" was the Son of God, who paid the price for my transgressions.

See, Jakee, I'm not so moderate after all.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

I read what you said before it just didnt seem to make any sense. Whatever mankind did in the past, what has that got to do with makind now? lts just keep things to one point at a time then. this is the thrid time Ive asked this question with no answer. Im hoping I can get one this time. Should Germans of today be punished for thhe Nazis , should americans today be punished for slavery? Yes or no?
if you think no then you must surely condenm the morality of a god who visits the sins of the fathers onto the children.

[jakee 1,564]

Quote

See, Jakee, I'm not so moderate after all.

Only in America could that be taken as an insult

You were right about Jesus though, he obviously leans pretty far to the left

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

I realize the basic tenants of fundamental Christianity are beliefs i mostly hold to be true. When I use the erm I'm typically referring to those who believe every word of the Bible to be literally true and reject many metaphors.

Take for instance the Holy Bible. Most fundamentalist beieve it is inerrant in every aspect. My studies have shown that not to be true. There are typographical and transcription errors. There are other changes that may or may not have been so innocent. It is "my" belief the Bible is inerrant in the manner in which it points to Christ as Saviorof the world. It is not inerrant as a history or a science book. Two purposes given to it, which I do not believe it ever had intended.

I don't think that atheists take the bible literally. I think that, since fundamentalists are far more dangerous than other christians, the atheists spend their time arguing against those views instead of the more flexible interpretations of the bible.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Should Germans of today be punished for thhe Nazis , should americans today be punished for slavery? Yes or no?
if you think no then you must surely condenm the morality of a god who visits the sins of the fathers onto the children.

No, I don't think the Germans of 21st century should be punished for Nazis, etc. However, if the Germans do not learn from that (and USA doesn't learn from it's own ilglorious past) we deserve what we get.

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

See, Jakee, I'm not so moderate after all.

Only in America could that be taken as an insult

You were right about Jesus though, he obviously leans pretty far to the left

Well, what I was meaning was I rather be revolutionary than a moderate. JC said I wish you were either hot or cold ... if you are luke warm, I will spit you out! [SteveO paraphrase]

steveOrino

[jakee 1,564]

Quote

I'd hardly consider Jay a "nut job" I believe he accepts Genesis as a literal account of origins.

I didn't say Jay, I said the nut-jobs he listens to. I do take it back though, they aren't nut-jobs, they are cynical, devious, money grubbing bastards.

Go to WOTMRadio and count how many merchandise links there are until you get to any actual content (Intermediate training pack only $99.95!).

Did you see the quotes from Kent Hovind's sentencing? "Please don't send me to jail your Honour, if its the tax you want there are thousands of people who'll pay it for me!" What The Fuck? Not "I'll pay what I owe" but "Some gullible twat will pay it for me."

They're in the business of lies and deceit (and boy, is it big business) and it pisses me off.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[steveorino 7]

Actually, we may agree on something. I do not favor the selling of sermons, etc. Books are a different thing altogether, but I don't like selling sermons. I'm not fond of paying rights to sing a worship song if the words are printed either.

steveOrino

[Butters 0]

Quote

JC said I wish you were either hot or cold ... if you are luke warm, I will spit you out! [SteveO paraphrase]

I guess no one ever read "Goldilocks and the Three Bears" to Jesus Christ.

Quote

"This porridge is too hot!" she exclaimed.

So, she tasted the porridge from the second bowl.

"This porridge is too cold," she said

So, she tasted the last bowl of porridge.

"Ahhh, this porridge is just right," she said happily and she ate it all up.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I don't think that atheists take the bible literally. I think that, since fundamentalists are far more dangerous than other christians, the atheists spend their time arguing against those views instead of the more flexible interpretations of the bible.

Like any other religion, I don't think the atheists are on a mission to 'protect' us from the religious fundamentalists.

I think that the fundamentalist atheists argue against the very fundamentalist biblical positions because it's a much easier argument that helps support their own religious fervor.

If they went after 'reasonable' religious positions, it would take a lot of wind out of their sails and they'd have to also take the 'reasonable' atheist position of they have faith that there is no deity(ies) of any kind and then agree to disagree.

Heck, people could have very different 'beliefs' on this subjective issues and just not discuss it at all and live calmly side by side realizing it doesn't really matter a whit.

But that would be too easy. ( Though, your typical atheist and your typical religious type do just this and it's not so bad at all. Why not, it's just regular decent people).

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,564]

Quote

I think that the fundamentalist atheists argue against the very fundamentalist biblical positions because it's a much easier argument that helps support their own religious fervor.

It would only be the easier argument if the literal fundies were actually capable of utilising higher reasoning. The reason that the literalists are the ones targeted is because their beliefs are the ones that are the most dangerous.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[sweetmoose 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't think that atheists take the bible literally. I think that, since fundamentalists are far more dangerous than other christians, the atheists spend their time arguing against those views instead of the more flexible interpretations of the bible.

Like any other religion, I don't think the atheists are on a mission to 'protect' us from the religious fundamentalists.

I think that the fundamentalist atheists argue against the very fundamentalist biblical positions because it's a much easier argument that helps support their own religious fervor.

If they went after 'reasonable' religious positions, it would take a lot of wind out of their sails and they'd have to also take the 'reasonable' atheist position of they have faith that there is no deity(ies) of any kind and then agree to disagree.

Heck, people could have very different 'beliefs' on this subjective issues and realizing it doesn't really matter a whit.

But that would be too easy. ( Though, your typical atheist and your typical religious type do just this and it's not so bad at all. Why not, it's just regular decent people).

The religous guys started it!!! It used to be if you voiced against many religons you would be killed, and in the modern world the religous types are the ones standing on street corners handing out pamplets and going door to door to talk to you about your relationship with god. When's the last time you had an Athiest/Agnostic person knock on your door or come up to you on the street to talk to you about evolution and give you a pamplet. Doesn't happen.

We die only once, but for such a very long time.

I'll believe in ghosts when I catch one in my teeth.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The reason that the literalists are the ones targeted is because their beliefs are the ones that are the most dangerous.

Your post is just a repeat of Nightengale's but it has less class as you opened it with an insult to the religious fundies before restating her point. (I'm agnostic, BTW)

But, again, the idea that the atheists are targetting the "most dangerous" is an implication that they are doing it to protect society.

I really doubt they have any kind of beneficient intentions. Just another axe to grind.

Perhaps if the atheistic fundies could apply a modicum of "higher reasoning, and just join their 'normal' atheist friends in living their own lives and ignoring the religious fundies (their counterparts) - then they would so perfectly reflect the other organized religions so well.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

When's the last time you had an Athiest/Agnostic person knock on your door or come up to you on the street to talk to you about evolution and give you a pamplet. Doesn't happen.

and you would be wrong on that assumption

every faith has activist elements (usually a very small, and non-representative element) - including the faith of atheism

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,112]

Quote

Quote

The reason that the literalists are the ones targeted is because their beliefs are the ones that are the most dangerous.

Your post is just a repeat of Nightengale's but it has less class as you opened it with an insult to the religious fundies before restating her point. (I'm agnostic, BTW)

But, again, the idea that the atheists are targetting the "most dangerous" is an implication that they are doing it to protect society.

I really doubt they have any kind of beneficient intentions. Just another axe to grind.

Perhaps if the atheistic fundies could apply a modicum of "higher reasoning, and just join their 'normal' atheist friends in living their own lives and ignoring the religious fundies (their counterparts) - then they would so perfectly reflect the other organized religions so well.

I'm sure that if religious zealots would cease and desist trying to get their beliefs taught in public schools and encoded in legal statutes, the rest of us would be perfectly happy to ignore them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I'm sure that if religious zealots would cease and desist trying to get their beliefs taught in public schools and encoded in legal statutes, the rest of us would be perfectly happy to ignore them.

Unfortunately, a number of people on this forum use the extreme actions of a few to justify their treatment of Christianity, as a whole.