sinker

You are wrongfully assuming that a choice someone makes is a consequence of Gods decisions. Knowing the future and causing it are two different things. However, if you are saying that since God created humans, and since humans do certain things, God indirectly caused events that will happen in the future, that is only indirectly so. Just b/c God knows all things doesn't mean he caused all things in a direct sense. What I mean is, he knows if I am going to buy a car next year. I do not know if I'm going to buy a car next year. He knows if I will have the money to buy a car next year. I do not know that. If I have the money, I just may buy a car next year. B/c God is outside of time and space and knows what will happen next year doesn't mean he caused it. His omniscence is not a condition of my free-will. And my having free-will does not negate his omniscence. Omniscence is not predetermination. Knowing and causing are not the same. I know gravity exists. I did not therefore cause it to exist. -the artist formerly known as sinker

yep, got real player, did as you asked but it said real needed to download additional software. Firewall prevents it, so I'll have to try it from home... thanks for the advice. -the artist formerly known as sinker

can anyone change this to a mpg or some thing else that I can view this video on? I can't use quicktime on my work laptop. And I am DYING to see this video!!!! HELP!!!! -the artist formerly known as sinker

Pahh!! GOod one... -the artist formerly known as sinker

Of course I prayed for her, as she did for me. Yes, I prayed for her salvation, to do anything else would not be charitable. Did I know at the time she WASN'T saved, i.e. that I knew where her soul would go if she died then? NO, I didn't. Only God knows that. However, I believe that some things are wrong and some things are right. Her and I disagreed on that point as well as many others. Did I try to force her to change her position? Hell no. A choice not freely chosen is no choice at all. And HELL YES I respected the fact that she has her own belief system that was well developed and deeply meaningful to her. Praying for her to see what I think are truths about God and morality in no ways diminishes the respect I had for her. I respected her as a person, I loved her very very much as a person. I wepted openly when she moved away. But the point is that praying for her to see what I think are truths is consistent w/ my faith, does not disrespect her, and if I'm wrong, then what have we lost? She still has my love and respect, and I have only lost time spent in prayer, which is in itself an act of love. Apology accepted. And I can certainly understand how incredibly short-sighted and ignorant some Christians can be. I do indeed understand your admonition to break the vase... I have broken it, only to find a better version, a clearer version of it, laying underneath. And it did have dogmas in it that were from those who came before me. Not fully developed and elucidated, mind you. That is Catholic view, that God has revealed Himself through his Word, through His Church. However, men have often not cooperated, have misinterpreted, etc. And, there IS an evolution of doctrine. It is not a CHANGE in doctrine, it is the elucidation of a greater understanding of doctrine. It's like the oak tree... the acorn is not the oak, just as the sapling is not the fully developed tree. There is nothing wronge w/ accepting someone elses dogma if you have discovered, through your own prayer, faith, and study, that such dogma is true. And I think that is one more fundamental difference here b/t us: That absolute truths exist. That truth is ultimately not relative. If a God exists, He exists in a certain way. That is the nature of existance. I understand that it seems very arrogant for Christians to claim that their concept of God is the truest form of the "identity" or nature of God. And Christians are largely to blame for that. However, just b/c Christians claim to be more right abou God than others doesn't make them arrogant. Sometimes, often times, they ARE arrogant and judgmental about it. However, that doesn't make them LESS right about it. And just b/c you think they are wrong, doesn't make them wrong. It's just that you reject their "proofs" for what they feel is right. If nothing else and in spite of their character flaws, at least they are acting consistently with their beliefs. About the control issue... If someone believes that the Christian God really is THE God, the fullest picture or expression of who God is, why wouldn't that person tell others about it? And if the others don't want to hear it, fine. Better yet would be for those Christians to ACT like their God was the one true God, which unfortunately is too often not the case. Also, why wouldn't that person support a church that teaches such things by giving it their money and raising their kids in the ways of that religion. That is simply acting in accord to one's conscience, not being forced under duress or control. I raise my Children in the Catholic Church b/c I think it's right about God, about faith, about human nature. Yes, the priest asked at my children's baptism if my wife and I agreed to raise them in the Catholic faith. We said yes. That was not control. That was not coercion. We freely agreed to do that b/c we think that is where truth lies. If we are wrong, we are wrong. But it is unfair for anyone to accuse of being servile follows, of being blind sheep, of being controlled by someone else. It is the assent of our will. Period. -the artist formerly known as sinker

ahhh.... sorry that I misunderstood you... I see your point. However, I wonder if there is a better way? I mean, I sometimes think it's alright NOT to quote, if there is little chance that someone will be misunderstood (like what I did to you w/o using quotes). However, this issue is so easily convoluted... I will take what you said to heart and try hard to not put anyone down or even to say something that could be construed that way. -the artist formerly known as sinker

don't bail on him, bring him along! -the artist formerly known as sinker

the title of your thread says it all... love and hugs and vibes to you and your friend. help them be strong. -the artist formerly known as sinker

indeed we shall! something to work towards. I'm very anxious to meet all these people I've met here. -the artist formerly known as sinker

skydekker, I very much appreciate your comment. And I thoroughly enjoy discussing such issues with people who do not believe the same as me. It makes me a more rounded person to be able to flex my mind and see things from other people's perspective. And I have to say, some of the richest friendships I've had were with people with dissimilar views. In fact, one of my best friends in the whole world, until she moved away, was with a fiery red-headed lesbian who was Wiccan. What great conversations we had! -the artist formerly known as sinker

you're such an ass kisser, Muenkel! Get back to work!!!

P.E.T.A = People Eating Tasty Animals -the artist formerly known as sinker

hmmm... did I say something that may have hurt someone's feelings? Was it the comment about myopia? That referred to the short-sightedness of the view of God as Santa-Claus. I don't think it is all that unreasonable to say that a view of God as SC is myopic, considering that to me, such a view of God is a little offensive. That goes for many of the snide things Zenister has said about the God worship as well. People who don't believe in the Christian concept of God can certainly offer something to this debate w/o resorting to vitriolic comments. I've tried not to respond to any of these posts out of anger. And I think I've done an ok job, barring a few instances of sarcasm. If someone doesn't agree w/ my assessment, I have no problem eating crow and apologizing. But please quote me so that I can see what you mean. As for starting w/ a quote from a previous post, I do that so that the person I'm responding to knows what I mean. Does God want us bickering? No. Would God be pleased w/ open and honest debate about His existance? About the attributes we think best describes God? Most suredly He would... -the artist formerly known as sinker

How incredibly myopic. -the artist formerly known as sinker

How is it that having an omniscient (all-knowning) God negates free-will? -the artist formerly known as sinker

Howdy Rhino!!! Is the bun done in the oven????? We're on pins and needles here... you may have spoken to this already, but this God-thread is the only one I've been watching lately... -the artist formerly known as sinker

It's a shame that's all you can see. It is not that one dimensional. All of the dictates/mores/teachings of my faith have a reason, reasons that are understandable. Reasons that do make sense, if you bothered to look into why they exist. And I have NEVER experienced personally that control that you claim is the only motivation behind leaders of Christian religions. I know it exists though. But none of the priests, religious, etc. that I have encountered have said "do this or go to hell. do this b/c God said so." Although, in another sense, for those who believe in God and in the way He choses to speak, it is ENOUGH that God said so in order for His children to act. That doesn't mean, however, that there is no rationale for what God has his children do. Have you ever stopped to think of WHY Christianity has certain proscriptions? Rules of conduct? Dictates of behavior? Why, in your world of perception, is the only motivation for such things a twisted desire to rule and control over people? -the artist formerly known as sinker

If that's how you feel, why are you speaking at all? Words are one of the best ways humans communicate about thoughts, ideas, realities, deities. Sure, words cannot begin to express the unfathomable mysteries of God. But you have to start somewhere. You're showing more of your misconceptions about Christianity... once you've tried to define or elucidate truths about God, you've automatically limited yourself and confined yourself and boxed yourself in, so you say. I think you've got it all backwards. Using words to express, as incomplete such expressions can be about God, is only the beginning to opening the door to the mystery of God... -the artist formerly known as sinker

we actually may (partially) agree on something here! I do indeed experience God in His creation. His signature, so to speak, is in fact everywhere. But I do not confuse the creation from the Creator. They are not the same. Nor are they completely mutually exclusive. The wind is not God, but it sure can teach us something about God. It and He are invisible, yet can be very powerful and also can be soft and gentle. -the artist formerly known as sinker

are you a panthiest? -the artist formerly known as sinker

I know you are referring to "religious" beliefs or beliefs about God. But why is it such a so far gone conclusion for you to possibly concede that, if there were a God, that such a being would want to reveal Himself? And reveal Himself in a way that can be infallibly perceived/received by mankind? -the artist formerly known as sinker

Incorrect. It HAS been used that way, but it isn't ALWAYS that way. It's a shame it has been used that way, b/c now so many view religion w/ contempt. It's fundamental purpose is not about control. I take no offense to the word myth. However, I believe that some of the Christian "myths" aren't that at all. It is very difficult for a lot of Christians to accept that, b/c even though the will of men (better said, the corrupt motivations of some, even many, men) have affected Christianity, such men have not destroyed Christianity. Nor have they fundamentally altered it's central truths. Are their tenets of Christianity that are disputed? Sure... Catholicism has never held any belief in the rapture. The texts that seemingly refer to the rapture, according to Catholic exegesis were misinterpreted by some Protestants. Is that a necessary, essential truth to Christianity? No. Hell no. It in no way changes or alters the salvific mission of Christ. How very Marxist you are in saying that. Religion is not the opiate of the masses. Your assertion hardly makes your theology original. It simply means you are a different sort of sheep. But a sheep all the same. -the artist formerly known as sinker

yeah, it's tragic. they live in a police state, there is enormous social pressure, and that whole family pride/disgrace dynamic going on. Man. -the artist formerly known as sinker

Can you honestly tell me that, since I call myself a Christian, one who believes in Scripture as the inspired word of God, that I follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, even though I've evaluated these teachings myself and found them to be consistent and true, that I haven't swallowed them part and parcel from the battering ram of someone else, that you do not look at me without disdain? Without contempt? As anything but a man who can "think for himself?" That you do not look at me as a servile sheep? It sounds disengenuous for you to say that you don't see me and so many others that way based on your posts. You may not have been addressing me personally, as you said, when you wrote about "you christians..." but, you certainly do seem to have unjunstly generalized to "all christians" (except of course, those you say you are close to). I don't think that generalization is fair or deserving. -the artist formerly known as sinker

very very real... -the artist formerly known as sinker