Total Posts:35|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The sun god

Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 8:10:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!

From an abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 8:16:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 8:10:23 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!

From an abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

A meaningless statement!
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 8:58:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 8:16:00 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:10:23 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!

From an abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

A meaningless statement!

Those who have the most difficulty understanding scripture are those who can't grasp the concepts of allegory and metaphor.

There is a reason Jesus taught in parables.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 5:35:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 8:16:00 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:10:23 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

Children who believe in Santa are definitely believers.
Adults who believe in God are also believers.
Those who get upset when teased about their invisible magical friends are just immature.
When they mature and come to understand they are Santas and they are gods, they are able to laugh at immaturity while completely understanding it.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!

From an abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

A meaningless statement!

You need to understand religious jargon to comprehend what fruit means when referring to knowing a person by their fruit.
It is referring to their attitudes which are manifest through their words and actions.

When people don't understand a language, the language will obviously be meaningless to them.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 6:17:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2015 11:30:49 AM, bulproof wrote:
Please take note.


"Spooky, incompetent, bullying, father figure who doesn't give a sh1t."

Couldn't have come up with a better description of the God of Abraham myself.

LMFAO

Except perhaps this one from the genius Richard Dawkins...........

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 6:22:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 8:58:18 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:16:00 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:10:23 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 8:07:19 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 7/12/2015 10:04:24 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Those don't sound like believers to me.

You can tell a believer by their fruit.

What fruit, apples, pears, bananas? LOL!

From an abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

A meaningless statement!

Those who have the most difficulty understanding scripture are those who can't grasp the concepts of allegory and metaphor.

There is a reason Jesus taught in parables.

Sure, it would be pretty inconvenient if everyone could understand scripture, right? Yeez, christians these days do not even try to hide their nerve.
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 9:11:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 6:22:19 PM, Otokage wrote:
Sure, it would be pretty inconvenient if everyone could understand scripture, right? Yeez, christians these days do not even try to hide their nerve.

No, it had to do with a few things.

First, even if you speak directly, people still won't understand, because the state of their heart effects how they interpret things.
Second, even if you speak lucidly, time makes what once was clear cryptic.
Third, it was to call attention to how the letter of the law kills, but the spirit of the law brings life.

It addresses the idolatry of scripture and language.

It's actually a huge part of Christian theology, which, despite what most people believe, has nothing to do with religion as most people understand it.

But how do you educate people on these things if they already think they know? It's a fools game. Yet, this is what I'm called to do, to be a fool for Christ's sake.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 12:47:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 9:11:12 AM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/13/2015 6:22:19 PM, Otokage wrote:
Sure, it would be pretty inconvenient if everyone could understand scripture, right? Yeez, christians these days do not even try to hide their nerve.

No, it had to do with a few things.

First, even if you speak directly, people still won't understand, because the state of their heart effects how they interpret things.
Second, even if you speak lucidly, time makes what once was clear cryptic.
Third, it was to call attention to how the letter of the law kills, but the spirit of the law brings life.

It addresses the idolatry of scripture and language.

It's actually a huge part of Christian theology, which, despite what most people believe, has nothing to do with religion as most people understand it.

But how do you educate people on these things if they already think they know? It's a fools game. Yet, this is what I'm called to do, to be a fool for Christ's sake.

Or perhaps religion is simply a carefully designed tool aimed at the masses, made sufficiently ambiguous so anyone can feel identified in it, and so people in power can make it say whatever they want it to say.

People use religion both to burn witches alive and to forgive them, to hold slaves and to free them, to "turn the other cheek" and to revenge. It really serves for nothing as it does not efficiently make people better people, it only makes people believe they have the right to be mean to other people as long as they can find a justification for that behaviour in the Bible, which is always.
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 1:39:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 12:47:23 PM, Otokage wrote:
Or perhaps religion is simply a carefully designed tool aimed at the masses, made sufficiently ambiguous so anyone can feel identified in it, and so people in power can make it say whatever they want it to say.

People use religion both to burn witches alive and to forgive them, to hold slaves and to free them, to "turn the other cheek" and to revenge. It really serves for nothing as it does not efficiently make people better people, it only makes people believe they have the right to be mean to other people as long as they can find a justification for that behaviour in the Bible, which is always.

Like I said, if you understand scripture, you are not going to make the mistake of putting your faith in man or human institutions.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

When I say that the state of your heart effects how you interpret things, it is like this. You can build an entire tree of logic off of faulty premises, and you are going to come to rational conclusions based on logic.

However, being built off of faulty premises, ultimately the entire tree of logic is faulty, even if the logic itself is sound. It is dangerous to not question your assumptions.

Every single problem that a self proclaimed atheist might have with religion is testified of in one form or another in these scriptures. It isn't God they have a problem with, God is Truth. They can't see things past the surface. It all just becomes arbitrary.

The basic building block of society is family. There was a time when social security was to raise a family that would take care of you when you were to old to functionally do it for yourself. Now what do you have? The government is raising children! and who runs the government? Self interested people who want to make profit.

Who is going to take care of the elderly? People think that it is too much of a hassle, so they ship the old off to retirement homes. People don't realize how lousy retirement homes are.

Who actually takes marriage as a serious commitment anymore? It is meant to be a covenant between the married and God that was respected and binding. Divorce rates are at shameful levels!

People don't know what family is supposed to be, they don't know what love is supposed to be about. Oh how perverse this generation is, when people act based on their feelings, and their logic has the lusts of their heart built into the premises!

It is shameful how little honor there is. No one honors their father or mother. No one seems to have the foresight to see how their actions effect society as a whole. No one has any type of respect for God, they would be gods onto themselves. They believe the lies that are being pushed on them from the people who are REALLY trying to get something out of them! If it isn't money, it is to delude people into believing that the things they do that are wicked are not only not evil, but good!

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

The sun is creation, it isn't God! The sun is bound by the laws of the natural world, it doesn't reign supreme! The sun had a beginning, the sun has an end, but The Most High has no start or finish!

The Truth is the rock, and it is the rock that The Lord's house is built on. Even a house built on the rock is subject to decay and ruin! Every house, no matter how sturdy, eventually needs repair! This is my job, to do some much needed maintenance on this temple that it become more inviting . As it stands now, people point from a distance point at this crumbling dwelling, and make up stories about how it is haunted, not knowing that He Who Dwells invites all to come to the feast that has been prepared.

It's a pretty banging party. Jesus turned the water into wine AFTER they drank all the wine, you know.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 3:08:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 1:39:13 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/14/2015 12:47:23 PM, Otokage wrote:
Or perhaps religion is simply a carefully designed tool aimed at the masses, made sufficiently ambiguous so anyone can feel identified in it, and so people in power can make it say whatever they want it to say.

People use religion both to burn witches alive and to forgive them, to hold slaves and to free them, to "turn the other cheek" and to revenge. It really serves for nothing as it does not efficiently make people better people, it only makes people believe they have the right to be mean to other people as long as they can find a justification for that behaviour in the Bible, which is always.

Like I said, if you understand scripture, you are not going to make the mistake of putting your faith in man or human institutions.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

When I say that the state of your heart effects how you interpret things, it is like this. You can build an entire tree of logic off of faulty premises, and you are going to come to rational conclusions based on logic.

However, being built off of faulty premises, ultimately the entire tree of logic is faulty, even if the logic itself is sound. It is dangerous to not question your assumptions.

Every single problem that a self proclaimed atheist might have with religion is testified of in one form or another in these scriptures. It isn't God they have a problem with, God is Truth. They can't see things past the surface. It all just becomes arbitrary.

Well I do have a problem with God as a literary character. I really do have a problem with him, mainly for being such a presumptuous tyrant and, at the same time, teach morals.

The basic building block of society is family.

How is that? And I thought it was people, not families, who made society possible.

There was a time when social security was to raise a family that would take care of you when you were to old to functionally do it for yourself.
Now what do you have? The government is raising children! and who runs the government? Self interested people who want to make profit.

Who is going to take care of the elderly? People think that it is too much of a hassle, so they ship the old off to retirement homes. People don't realize how lousy retirement homes are.

What is your point in there?

Who actually takes marriage as a serious commitment anymore? It is meant to be a covenant between the married and God that was respected and binding. Divorce rates are at shameful levels!

Why is divorce shameful? A shame would be to be tied to a person you simply do not love anymore. That's the real pitty.

People don't know what family is supposed to be, they don't know what love is supposed to be about.

"Supposed" to be? How exactly do you know how family and marriage are "supposed" to be? :/

Oh how perverse this generation is, when people act based on their feelings, and their logic has the lusts of their heart built into the premises!

It is shameful how little honor there is. No one honors their father or mother.

That last sentence is an interesting one. Do you think do you have to honor your father or mother, if by honoring them you are dishonoring yourself?

No one seems to have the foresight to see how their actions effect society as a whole.

People rarely choose to live on a particular society, they are born in it, and people rarely have the chance to "jump" from one society to another society they like, and so I believe it is only fair for society to tolerate anyone who is not happy on the mentioned society.

No one has any type of respect for God, they would be gods onto themselves.

The concept that God deserves to be respected, is such a childish one. It suits fairytales, really, it gives them this magical misterious flavour, but I will never accept it as a real life paradigm. For me it makes as much sense as respecting cheeseburgers, no, wait, cheeseburgers exist at least, but God? No, can't see him at the McDonalds. He is everywhere but not on McDonalds!?

They believe the lies that are being pushed on them from the people who are REALLY trying to get something out of them! If it isn't money, it is to delude people into believing that the things they do that are wicked are not only not evil, but good!

For example? What evil things are "these people" forcing us to do?

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

The sun is creation, it isn't God! The sun is bound by the laws of the natural world, it doesn't reign supreme! The sun had a beginning, the sun has an end, but The Most High has no start or finish!

Ok now you are exciting too much, do you have your inhaler close by?

The Truth is the rock, and it is the rock that The Lord's house is built on. Even a house built on the rock is subject to decay and ruin! Every house, no matter how sturdy, eventually needs repair! This is my job, to do some much needed maintenance on this temple that it become more inviting . As it stands now, people point from a distance point at this crumbling dwelling, and make up stories about how it is haunted, not knowing that He Who Dwells invites all to come to the feast that has been prepared.

It's a pretty banging party. Jesus turned the water into wine AFTER they drank all the wine, you know.

Sure, Jesus also launched a herd of pigs off a cliff in Gadara. Oh, wait, Gadara doesn't even a have a coast......... That's the kind of "Truth" that is in the "holy book".
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 3:53:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 3:08:29 PM, Otokage wrote:
Well I do have a problem with God as a literary character. I really do have a problem with him, mainly for being such a presumptuous tyrant and, at the same time, teach morals.

Yeah, this might be hard for you to swallow, but God killed everyone who ever died. Presumptuous?

You don't understand what you are saying!

How is that? And I thought it was people, not families, who made society possible.

Dysfunctional and broken families produce children that are not adequately prepared to being effective members of society. Family is very important.

With the destruction of the family, moral decay follows, and catastrophe that effects all of society follows. It takes a family to prepare a child for adulthood.

Certainly, there are many who come from broken families. They have things a lot rougher. I am someone who is at ground level witnessing these things. The people that I deal with on a daily basis are the lower economic classes. The destitute and the homeless. I see things that most people choose to ignore.

If a child is raised by a loving family, they have parents that honestly want what is in the best interest of the child. If a child is raised by society, they will be raised by those who are always trying to get something out of them, their motivations are never honest.

Environment has a great deal to do with how someone turns out, and I am thoroughly convinced of this.

Who actually takes marriage as a serious commitment anymore? It is meant to be a covenant between the married and God that was respected and binding. Divorce rates are at shameful levels!

Why is divorce shameful? A shame would be to be tied to a person you simply do not love anymore. That's the real pitty.

No, what truly is a pity that people have an understanding of love that makes such a situation even possible. Love is not a feeling, it is a way of life.

People don't know what family is supposed to be, they don't know what love is supposed to be about.

"Supposed" to be? How exactly do you know how family and marriage are "supposed" to be? :/

Righteous Discernment is one of the gifts of the spirit.

People rarely choose to live on a particular society, they are born in it, and people rarely have the chance to "jump" from one society to another society they like, and so I believe it is only fair for society to tolerate anyone who is not happy on the mentioned society.


Tolerating does not imply condoning. Of course we should tolerate eachother.

No one has any type of respect for God, they would be gods onto themselves.

The concept that God deserves to be respected, is such a childish one. It suits fairytales, really, it gives them this magical misterious flavour, but I will never accept it as a real life paradigm. For me it makes as much sense as respecting cheeseburgers, no, wait, cheeseburgers exist at least, but God? No, can't see him at the McDonalds. He is everywhere but not on McDonalds!?

Of course you don't respect God, you don't even know what God is supposed to represent.

It takes discipline to understand theology, discipline that most people don't have. However, it is very simple.

God is Truth. Seek God earnestly, and Love God.

Be loving and charitable to others. It isn't just about giving to the needy, it also has to do with tolerating others, being kind in the face of offense, and being honest with people rather than telling them what they want to hear.

For example? What evil things are "these people" forcing us to do?

I never said that anyone was forcing anyone to do evil things.

I said that wicked people are deluding others into accepting their wickedness as good. I said that wicked people are more interested in profiting off of someone than genuinely helping them.

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

The sun is creation, it isn't God! The sun is bound by the laws of the natural world, it doesn't reign supreme! The sun had a beginning, the sun has an end, but The Most High has no start or finish!

Ok now you are exciting too much, do you have your inhaler close by?

If you yell loudly at a dog, "I love you! I love you! You are the best dog!", the only thing that dog is going to hear is you yelling. It isn't going to understand the words you use.

Sure, Jesus also launched a herd of pigs off a cliff in Gadara. Oh, wait, Gadara doesn't even a have a coast......... That's the kind of "Truth" that is in the "holy book".

Yeah, and all the gospels have contradictions between each other.

You don't understand what scripture is for. Scripture is not intended to be an idol before God, it is suppose to point you to something greater. The LIVING word of God.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 4:31:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 3:53:32 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/14/2015 3:08:29 PM, Otokage wrote:
Well I do have a problem with God as a literary character. I really do have a problem with him, mainly for being such a presumptuous tyrant and, at the same time, teach morals.

Yeah, this might be hard for you to swallow, but God killed everyone who ever died. Presumptuous?

You don't understand what you are saying!

Are we talking about God or Hitler? I'm confused now.

How is that? And I thought it was people, not families, who made society possible.

Dysfunctional and broken families produce children that are not adequately prepared to being effective members of society. Family is very important.

This is an intolerable disrespect towards so many people, including people of this very forum. Nobody is "unsuitable to be a member of society" because of the misfortune of having a "dysfunctional family". You do not know what you are saying, and you clearly have little to no experience dealing with people from "broken families". As a teacher, I have had the great fortune of having given class to several children raised in "broken homes" that are both academically and personally, the envy of children from "very structured" AND christian families.

With the destruction of the family, moral decay follows, and catastrophe that effects all of society follows. It takes a family to prepare a child for adulthood.

You wouldn't even be able to tell us what "moral decay" is. You feel so confortable labeling everything in your absolute terms, this is clearly because you are so narrow-minded that you think your simple concepts are big enough to explain the complexity of the world you live in. It is like covering the window, and believing you've actually covered the whole landscape that was seen through it.

Certainly, there are many who come from broken families. They have things a lot rougher. I am someone who is at ground level witnessing these things. The people that I deal with on a daily basis are the lower economic classes. The destitute and the homeless. I see things that most people choose to ignore.

If a child is raised by a loving family, they have parents that honestly want what is in the best interest of the child. If a child is raised by society, they will be raised by those who are always trying to get something out of them, their motivations are never honest.

That akward moment in which you realize parents ARE society, and that they too often want you to meet the height of their selfish expectations, expectations that you are not interested at all in meeting.

Environment has a great deal to do with how someone turns out, and I am thoroughly convinced of this.

Who actually takes marriage as a serious commitment anymore? It is meant to be a covenant between the married and God that was respected and binding. Divorce rates are at shameful levels!

Why is divorce shameful? A shame would be to be tied to a person you simply do not love anymore. That's the real pitty.

No, what truly is a pity that people have an understanding of love that makes such a situation even possible. Love is not a feeling, it is a way of life.

Whenever I hear comments as empty of meaning as "love is not a feeling but a way of life" I can not help but think that the comment itself is not meant to call debate, but rather to call self-gratification.

People don't know what family is supposed to be, they don't know what love is supposed to be about.

"Supposed" to be? How exactly do you know how family and marriage are "supposed" to be? :/

Righteous Discernment is one of the gifts of the spirit.

So you know that by the spirit's grace. Ok. So you basicly judge this or that based on a pseudo-hallucination you had. That's it? That's your great revelation?

People rarely choose to live on a particular society, they are born in it, and people rarely have the chance to "jump" from one society to another society they like, and so I believe it is only fair for society to tolerate anyone who is not happy on the mentioned society.


Tolerating does not imply condoning. Of course we should tolerate eachother.

It does not imply condoning because there's nothing in there to condone.

No one has any type of respect for God, they would be gods onto themselves.

The concept that God deserves to be respected, is such a childish one. It suits fairytales, really, it gives them this magical misterious flavour, but I will never accept it as a real life paradigm. For me it makes as much sense as respecting cheeseburgers, no, wait, cheeseburgers exist at least, but God? No, can't see him at the McDonalds. He is everywhere but not on McDonalds!?

Of course you don't respect God, you don't even know what God is supposed to represent.

If I do not know God, then how do you expect me to believe he is allmighty? If he can be so easily missed by everyone, then pardon me, but he is as allmighty as an insect.

It takes discipline to understand theology, discipline that most people don't have. However, it is very simple.

It is no secret that it is simple. Simple minds can only create simple concepts, and only equaly simple minds make this simple concepts their way of life.

God is Truth. Seek God earnestly, and Love God.

Be loving and charitable to others. It isn't just about giving to the needy, it also has to do with tolerating others, being kind in the face of offense, and being honest with people rather than telling them what they want to hear.

Were you being kind with people comming out of "broken families" when you told them they simply would not fit on society?

For example? What evil things are "these people" forcing us to do?

I never said that anyone was forcing anyone to do evil things.

I said that wicked people are deluding others into accepting their wickedness as good. I said that wicked people are more interested in profiting off of someone than genuinely helping them.

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

The sun is creation, it isn't God! The sun is bound by the laws of the natural world, it doesn't reign supreme! The sun had a beginning, the sun has an end, but The Most High has no start or finish!

Ok now you are exciting too much, do you have your inhaler close by?

If you yell loudly at a dog, "I love you! I love you! You are the best dog!", the only thing that dog is going to hear is you yelling. It isn't going to understand the words you use.

Well, you have an unsurprising and naive conception of the canine intellect.

Sure, Jesus also launched a herd of pigs off a cliff in Gadara. Oh, wait, Gadara doesn't even a have a coast......... That's the kind of "Truth" that is in the "holy book".

Yeah, and all the gospels have contradictions between each other.

You don't understand what scripture is for. Scripture is not intended to be an idol before God, it is suppose to point you to something greater. The LIVING word of God.

A flawed self-contradicted text can not possibly point you in any direction, much less point you towards God, unless God is sinonimous of stupidity.
Draconius
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 4:55:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 1:39:13 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/14/2015 12:47:23 PM, Otokage wrote:
Or perhaps religion is simply a carefully designed tool aimed at the masses, made sufficiently ambiguous so anyone can feel identified in it, and so people in power can make it say whatever they want it to say.

People use religion both to burn witches alive and to forgive them, to hold slaves and to free them, to "turn the other cheek" and to revenge. It really serves for nothing as it does not efficiently make people better people, it only makes people believe they have the right to be mean to other people as long as they can find a justification for that behaviour in the Bible, which is always.

Like I said, if you understand scripture, you are not going to make the mistake of putting your faith in man or human institutions.

Any disagreement is the fault of the reader. Got it.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

Based on a man-made book.

When I say that the state of your heart effects how you interpret things, it is like this. You can build an entire tree of logic off of faulty premises, and you are going to come to rational conclusions based on logic.

True of anything. How do you define, qualify, and quantify "faulty?"

However, being built off of faulty premises, ultimately the entire tree of logic is faulty, even if the logic itself is sound. It is dangerous to not question your assumptions.

So, then "faulty" means anything with which you disagree...?

Every single problem that a self proclaimed atheist might have with religion is testified of in one form or another in these scriptures. It isn't God they have a problem with, God is Truth. They can't see things past the surface. It all just becomes arbitrary.

Preach something ridiculous. Warn people that the ridiculous will not be accepted. BINGO!!! Prophecy easily fulfilled.

The basic building block of society is family. There was a time when social security was to raise a family that would take care of you when you were to old to functionally do it for yourself. Now what do you have? The government is raising children! and who runs the government? Self interested people who want to make profit.

Same type of people that build mega churches and televangelist networks... Scoundrels.

Who is going to take care of the elderly? People think that it is too much of a hassle, so they ship the old off to retirement homes. People don't realize how lousy retirement homes are.

Their children should. They should reciprocate what their parents did, for them. This, however, is not the result of rejecting your "god" beliefs. It's a result of apathy.

Who actually takes marriage as a serious commitment anymore? It is meant to be a covenant between the married and God that was respected and binding. Divorce rates are at shameful levels!

No, that's how the church would like to have it defined. By the way, did you know that divorce rates are higher among believers than non-believers?

People don't know what family is supposed to be, they don't know what love is supposed to be about. Oh how perverse this generation is, when people act based on their feelings, and their logic has the lusts of their heart built into the premises!

But christians do, right? How do you define "perverse?" Tolerance of that which you do not want tolerated? Whose lusts are included in the pursuit of that which the churches and their actions?

It is shameful how little honor there is. No one honors their father or mother. No one seems to have the foresight to see how their actions effect society as a whole. No one has any type of respect for God, they would be gods onto themselves. They believe the lies that are being pushed on them from the people who are REALLY trying to get something out of them! If it isn't money, it is to delude people into believing that the things they do that are wicked are not only not evil, but good!

Biblical rhetoric. No substantiation, no qualification, no rational support or basis for assertions.

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

Who has higher pedophile and child molester rates? The clergy or atheists and agnostics?

The sun is creation, it isn't God! The sun is bound by the laws of the natural world, it doesn't reign supreme! The sun had a beginning, the sun has an end, but The Most High has no start or finish!

The sun is not "creation." It is the result of formation, as the result of the natural laws of attraction. The "most high" did have a start. The first conman who met the first fool...

The Truth is the rock, and it is the rock that The Lord's house is built on. Even a house built on the rock is subject to decay and ruin! Every house, no matter how sturdy, eventually needs repair! This is my job, to do some much needed maintenance on this temple that it become more inviting . As it stands now, people point from a distance point at this crumbling dwelling, and make up stories about how it is haunted, not knowing that He Who Dwells invites all to come to the feast that has been prepared.

More biblical rhetoric.

It's a pretty banging party. Jesus turned the water into wine AFTER they drank all the wine, you know.

No, he didn't. Someone made up a story about it but, in all likelihood, it was a tall tale.
I have no problem with the existence of a "god." It is the behavior of his fan clubs that frightens me to no end...
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 5:11:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 4:31:00 PM, Otokage wrote:
Dysfunctional and broken families produce children that are not adequately prepared to being effective members of society. Family is very important.

This is an intolerable disrespect towards so many people, including people of this very forum. Nobody is "unsuitable to be a member of society" because of the misfortune of having a "dysfunctional family". You do not know what you are saying, and you clearly have little to no experience dealing with people from "broken families". As a teacher, I have had the great fortune of having given class to several children raised in "broken homes" that are both academically and personally, the envy of children from "very structured" AND christian families.


I never implied that what I said is true in all cases, just that it a better environment to be raised by a loving family than by no family.

I never said that anyone was unsuitable to be a member of society.

Furthermore, if you actually took the time to read what I said, you wouldn't have missed "The people that I deal with on a daily basis are the lower economic classes. The destitute and the homeless. I see things that most people choose to ignore."

With the destruction of the family, moral decay follows, and catastrophe that effects all of society follows. It takes a family to prepare a child for adulthood.

You wouldn't even be able to tell us what "moral decay" is. You feel so confortable labeling everything in your absolute terms, this is clearly because you are so narrow-minded that you think your simple concepts are big enough to explain the complexity of the world you live in. It is like covering the window, and believing you've actually covered the whole landscape that was seen through it.

Just remember, you can't point the finger without having three pointing back at you.

Certainly, there are many who come from broken families. They have things a lot rougher. I am someone who is at ground level witnessing these things. The people that I deal with on a daily basis are the lower economic classes. The destitute and the homeless. I see things that most people choose to ignore.

If a child is raised by a loving family, they have parents that honestly want what is in the best interest of the child. If a child is raised by society, they will be raised by those who are always trying to get something out of them, their motivations are never honest.

That akward moment in which you realize parents ARE society, and that they too often want you to meet the height of their selfish expectations, expectations that you are not interested at all in meeting.


The goal of good loving parents is to prepare their child for the world when they become adult, not selfish intent.

Whenever I hear comments as empty of meaning as "love is not a feeling but a way of life" I can not help but think that the comment itself is not meant to call debate, but rather to call self-gratification.

I think the fact that you believe in disposable spouses speaks volumes about your concept of love.

Righteous Discernment is one of the gifts of the spirit.

So you know that by the spirit's grace. Ok. So you basicly judge this or that based on a pseudo-hallucination you had. That's it? That's your great revelation?


To be righteous is to be correct.

Discernment is judgement based on observation

If I am grounded in Truth, does that not make me a better observer than someone who lets the lusts of their heart effect their judgement?

People rarely choose to live on a particular society, they are born in it, and people rarely have the chance to "jump" from one society to another society they like, and so I believe it is only fair for society to tolerate anyone who is not happy on the mentioned society.


Tolerating does not imply condoning. Of course we should tolerate eachother.

It does not imply condoning because there's nothing in there to condone.

Let me rephrase that, because my choice of words was clumsy to begin with in this situation.

Just because you allow something to happen does not mean that you believe it is beneficial or good for anyone.

Sexual Immorality is bad for the individual and society as a whole. Do I think that we should punish those who commit adultery? No.

You see what I'm saying?

If I do not know God, then how do you expect me to believe he is allmighty? If he can be so easily missed by everyone, then pardon me, but he is as allmighty as an insect.

God is The Ultimate Reality. Truth independent of all bias. If you don't believe in this, you either don't understand it, or you are a fool.

It takes discipline to understand theology, discipline that most people don't have. However, it is very simple.

It is no secret that it is simple. Simple minds can only create simple concepts, and only equaly simple minds make this simple concepts their way of life.


If you yell loudly at a dog, "I love you! I love you! You are the best dog!", the only thing that dog is going to hear is you yelling. It isn't going to understand the words you use.

Well, you have an unsurprising and naive conception of the canine intellect.


I don't need to have even the simplest understanding of canine intellect to yell at a dog.

You however, missed my point entirely, because you aren't making an honest attempt at getting on the same page as me. Go ahead and contradict me on this, it will only prove my point.

A flawed self-contradicted text can not possibly point you in any direction, much less point you towards God, unless God is sinonimous of stupidity.

What direction do you expect to point me in then? You can't even call me stupid without spelling the word "synonymous" correctly. Oh how pride comes before a fall.

I will do my best to help you understand these concepts which you are having difficulty with if you are willing to get on the same page as me.

If you aren't willing to get on the same page as me, little to no actual communication will take place, and this discussion will be fruitless.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 5:28:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 4:55:31 PM, Draconius wrote:
Any disagreement is the fault of the reader. Got it.

Not saying this.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

Based on a man-made book.


Yes, as are all books.

True of anything. How do you define, qualify, and quantify "faulty?"

Think of it as performing an experiment without isolating all the variables.

However, being built off of faulty premises, ultimately the entire tree of logic is faulty, even if the logic itself is sound. It is dangerous to not question your assumptions.

So, then "faulty" means anything with which you disagree...?

Of course not, don't be silly.

Same type of people that build mega churches and televangelist networks... Scoundrels.

I agree wholeheartedly.

No, that's how the church would like to have it defined. By the way, did you know that divorce rates are higher among believers than non-believers?

When people are born into religion, the label itself becomes meaningless.

There is a difference between a cultural Christian and truly born again Christian. You aren't going to find many of the later.

But christians do, right? How do you define "perverse?" Tolerance of that which you do not want tolerated? Whose lusts are included in the pursuit of that which the churches and their actions?

To be perverse is specifically to have your sense of discernment being clouded by lust. It is a form of intellectual dishonesty.

I

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

Who has higher pedophile and child molester rates? The clergy or atheists and agnostics?

Has absolutely nothing to do with the message.

If a word of truth came from the mouth of a donkey, it would stand on its own as truth. If a word of truth came from a mass murdering rapist, it would still stand on its own as truth.

To claim otherwise is dishonest.

The sun is not "creation." It is the result of formation, as the result of the natural laws of attraction. The "most high" did have a start. The first conman who met the first fool...

Most people don't understand the nature of creation, if they did, they would understand better The Uncreated.

The idea of creation does not contradict natural law. Truth is the highest judge, Truth is the Lord of All. Truth is The Greatest. Truth is Uncreated. Truth simply is what it is.

This is not hard to accept.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 10:44:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 5:11:07 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
I never implied that what I said is true in all cases, just that it a better environment to be raised by a loving family than by no family.

I never said that anyone was unsuitable to be a member of society.

Furthermore, if you actually took the time to read what I said, you wouldn't have missed "The people that I deal with on a daily basis are the lower economic classes. The destitute and the homeless. I see things that most people choose to ignore."

I'm glad with your veiled apology. Thanks.

The goal of good loving parents is to prepare their child for the world when they become adult, not selfish intent.

It is selfish to prepare your child for what you believe is "the world" if you are not taking your child's desires as the first priority when it comes to this "preparation".

I think the fact that you believe in disposable spouses speaks volumes about your concept of love.

And the fact that you believe all married couples must love each other forever and ever, speaks volumes about how Disney has destroyed your common sense.

To be righteous is to be correct.

And let me guess, it is either you or "your book" what defines what "righteous" is, right?

Discernment is judgement based on observation

If I am grounded in Truth, does that not make me a better observer than someone who lets the lusts of their heart effect their judgement?

No. Good observers are simply those with a skilled eye. What you are doing is not to observe, but to interpret what you are observing, which you do poorly since you are biased by the Bible's fundamentalist, flawed and obsolete teachings.

Let me rephrase that, because my choice of words was clumsy to begin with in this situation.

Just because you allow something to happen does not mean that you believe it is beneficial or good for anyone.

Sexual Immorality is bad for the individual and society as a whole.
Do I think that we should punish those who commit adultery? No.
You see what I'm saying?

What is "sexual immorality" and why is it bad?

God is The Ultimate Reality. Truth independent of all bias. If you don't believe in this, you either don't understand it, or you are a fool.

God is The Ultimate Fiction. Lies independent of all bias. If you don't believe in this, you either don't understand it or you are a fool.

I don't need to have even the simplest understanding of canine intellect to yell at a dog.

You however, missed my point entirely, because you aren't making an honest attempt at getting on the same page as me. Go ahead and contradict me on this, it will only prove my point.

I can not understand your point if your analogy doesn't work. I'm not a soothsayer.

A flawed self-contradicted text can not possibly point you in any direction, much less point you towards God, unless God is sinonimous of stupidity.

What direction do you expect to point me in then? You can't even call me stupid without spelling the word "synonymous" correctly. Oh how pride comes before a fall.

I didn't call you stupid, but I said the Bible is pointing you on that direction. And btw being grammatically rookie in a foreign language has nothing to do with stupidity in my honest opinion.
Draconius
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 12:38:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 5:28:46 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/14/2015 4:55:31 PM, Draconius wrote:
Any disagreement is the fault of the reader. Got it.

Not saying this.

No, but it is implied by your statement.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

Based on a man-made book.


Yes, as are all books.

Agreed. The fact that some humans assert divinity as the source of some changes the use of some books.

True of anything. How do you define, qualify, and quantify "faulty?"

Think of it as performing an experiment without isolating all the variables.

This is not a valid analogy. "God" is a variable with zero effect. True statements are true, irrespective of the existence of one, with respect to reality. "God" is an unnecessary variable, by all definitions to date.

However, being built off of faulty premises, ultimately the entire tree of logic is faulty, even if the logic itself is sound. It is dangerous to not question your assumptions.

So, then "faulty" means anything with which you disagree...?

Of course not, don't be silly.

You state that it is dangerous not to question one's assumptions. How much of all religions would fall apart, if "god's" existence was questioned?

Same type of people that build mega churches and televangelist networks... Scoundrels.

I agree wholeheartedly.

No, that's how the church would like to have it defined. By the way, did you know that divorce rates are higher among believers than non-believers?

When people are born into religion, the label itself becomes meaningless.

Incorrect. I was born into religion, and chose to reject it, when I learned to think the way I did. I would no longer accept the label of JW.

There is a difference between a cultural Christian and truly born again Christian. You aren't going to find many of the later.

The problem with your statement is that "...truly born again Christian..." is a meaningless term, to me. The "spiritual" implications of that statement are of no value to one that does not accept the bible as anything other than a collection of books of human construct.

But christians do, right? How do you define "perverse?" Tolerance of that which you do not want tolerated? Whose lusts are included in the pursuit of that which the churches and their actions?

To be perverse is specifically to have your sense of discernment being clouded by lust. It is a form of intellectual dishonesty.

This statement makes no sense. Much the same as condemning homosexual love as an "abomination..." The word "abomination, to the ancient Hebrew, was anything outside of the accepted cultural norm. That word is used, today, to indicate anything that the speaker of that word views as "unclean" in the eyes of their "god," as they see it. I see the use of the word "perverse" in the same light.

How fallen society has become, forgetting God and taking into worshiping idols, creation! Creation came from dust, and to build off of it is to build a house on sand!

Who has higher pedophile and child molester rates? The clergy or atheists and agnostics?

Has absolutely nothing to do with the message.

Oh, but it does. It's religion that is condemning homosexuality, yet the clergy making these condemnations are guilty of it more than any other group, of which I'm aware. I know that's like rejecting the message for disliking the messenger, but how much value would you give a speech about honesty given by a convicted embezzler? It's the same thing.

If a word of truth came from the mouth of a donkey, it would stand on its own as truth. If a word of truth came from a mass murdering rapist, it would still stand on its own as truth.

It would only be truth if it aligned with reality. However, the bigger news would be a speaking donkey (talking snake, anyone?). With respect to the rapist, it would depend greatly on what that "truth" might be. If a rapist were to issue an assertion that harming other human beings is wrong, the statement would still be true. But how many people would accept it from that individual? Human nature tends to reject on the basis of worthiness...

To claim otherwise is dishonest.

Agreed.

The sun is not "creation." It is the result of formation, as the result of the natural laws of attraction. The "most high" did have a start. The first conman who met the first fool...

Most people don't understand the nature of creation, if they did, they would understand better The Uncreated.

You say "most." Do you understand the "nature of creation?" Can you explain it to the layman? How did you come upon this understanding? What method did you use to test your conclusion? What was the leading hypothesis, prior to your validation of you understanding of creation?

The idea of creation does not contradict natural law. Truth is the highest judge, Truth is the Lord of All. Truth is The Greatest. Truth is Uncreated. Truth simply is what it is.

These are a lot of vague and ambiguous statements that seem more metaphorical than anything else. Truth is a concept, not a person. There is no personage attributable to the concept of truth.

This is not hard to accept.

It is, however, hard to qualify or quantify... NIgh impossible, I'd say.
I have no problem with the existence of a "god." It is the behavior of his fan clubs that frightens me to no end...
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 4:48:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 12:38:53 PM, Draconius wrote:
Any disagreement is the fault of the reader. Got it.

Not saying this.

No, but it is implied by your statement.

I repeat, I am not saying this.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

Based on a man-made book.


Yes, as are all books.

Agreed. The fact that some humans assert divinity as the source of some changes the use of some books.

Certainly, some people like to turn scripture into something idolatrous, but theologians prefer to use the term, "divine inspiration" which does not imply that it wasn't written by human hands.

True of anything. How do you define, qualify, and quantify "faulty?"

Think of it as performing an experiment without isolating all the variables.

This is not a valid analogy. "God" is a variable with zero effect. True statements are true, irrespective of the existence of one, with respect to reality. "God" is an unnecessary variable, by all definitions to date.

God is a representation for The Ultimate Reality.

When people are born into religion, the label itself becomes meaningless.

Incorrect. I was born into religion, and chose to reject it, when I learned to think the way I did. I would no longer accept the label of JW.

You can't be born a Christian.


There is a difference between a cultural Christian and truly born again Christian. You aren't going to find many of the later.

The problem with your statement is that "...truly born again Christian..." is a meaningless term, to me. The "spiritual" implications of that statement are of no value to one that does not accept the bible as anything other than a collection of books of human construct.

You have too much baggage attached to these concepts. It will get in the way of you understanding these things, and deriving meaning.

To be perverse is specifically to have your sense of discernment being clouded by lust. It is a form of intellectual dishonesty.

This statement makes no sense. Much the same as condemning homosexual love as an "abomination..." The word "abomination, to the ancient Hebrew, was anything outside of the accepted cultural norm. That word is used, today, to indicate anything that the speaker of that word views as "unclean" in the eyes of their "god," as they see it. I see the use of the word "perverse" in the same light.

None of this has anything to do with what I just said.

Who has higher pedophile and child molester rates? The clergy or atheists and agnostics?

Has absolutely nothing to do with the message.

Oh, but it does. It's religion that is condemning homosexuality, yet the clergy making these condemnations are guilty of it more than any other group, of which I'm aware. I know that's like rejecting the message for disliking the messenger, but how much value would you give a speech about honesty given by a convicted embezzler? It's the same thing.

Once again, you aren't isolating all the variables here.

Are you going to ignore a good message simply because of a few corrupt?

Back in the 1960s, there was an FBI program called "COINTELPROS", and part of the idea of the program was to send agents to infiltrate organizations that they saw as a threat to national security to both make them look bad to the public, and destroy these institutions from the inside out. The idea was to manipulate people who used the same type of rational that you are using right now.

If you understand scripture, your faith is not going to be in man or man made institution. These people have nothing to do with the message. I'm not saying that churches are being infiltrated by the FBI, but not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is actually a Christian.

You say "most." Do you understand the "nature of creation?" Can you explain it to the layman? How did you come upon this understanding? What method did you use to test your conclusion? What was the leading hypothesis, prior to your validation of you understanding of creation?

I came to really understand the nature of creation through studying quantum physics. I know that might sound lame, but it helped me to understand that the things we deal with in the material world are representations of reality rather than reality itself.

Matter isn't real in the way that most people think it is. The universe is infinite. The current limits of our observational range have more to do with the way light bends than us actually finding what the tiniest level of the universe is.

People often times can't tell the difference between the math and what the math is trying to describe. If you open up a menu and see a picture of a burger, it isn't a burger, it's a picture of a burger.

Is that clear?

The idea of creation does not contradict natural law. Truth is the highest judge, Truth is the Lord of All. Truth is The Greatest. Truth is Uncreated. Truth simply is what it is.

These are a lot of vague and ambiguous statements that seem more metaphorical than anything else. Truth is a concept, not a person. There is no personage attributable to the concept of truth.

I agree. Personification of Deity seems to be a difficult hurdle for most people. If It is written, "The hand of God", it isn't talking about a giant sky daddy hand poking out of the clouds. It is poetry.

This is not hard to accept.

It is, however, hard to qualify or quantify... NIgh impossible, I'd say.

Materialism has it's utility, and can point you to the nature of reality, but you are not going to find the truth in the world of matter and creation.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Draconius
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 5:09:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 4:48:03 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/15/2015 12:38:53 PM, Draconius wrote:

Not saying this.

No, but it is implied by your statement.

I repeat, I am not saying this.

I repeat, you are implying it.

Of course people use religion for evil. These are man made institutions.

Based on a man-made book.


Yes, as are all books.

Agreed. The fact that some humans assert divinity as the source of some changes the use of some books.

Certainly, some people like to turn scripture into something idolatrous, but theologians prefer to use the term, "divine inspiration" which does not imply that it wasn't written by human hands.

But the term "divine inspiration" still denotes something OTHER than a human as the source.

True of anything. How do you define, qualify, and quantify "faulty?"

Think of it as performing an experiment without isolating all the variables.

This is not a valid analogy. "God" is a variable with zero effect. True statements are true, irrespective of the existence of one, with respect to reality. "God" is an unnecessary variable, by all definitions to date.

God is a representation for The Ultimate Reality.

Only in your head.

When people are born into religion, the label itself becomes meaningless.

Incorrect. I was born into religion, and chose to reject it, when I learned to think the way I did. I would no longer accept the label of JW.

You can't be born a Christian.

You're right.

There is a difference between a cultural Christian and truly born again Christian. You aren't going to find many of the later.

The problem with your statement is that "...truly born again Christian..." is a meaningless term, to me. The "spiritual" implications of that statement are of no value to one that does not accept the bible as anything other than a collection of books of human construct.

You have too much baggage attached to these concepts. It will get in the way of you understanding these things, and deriving meaning.

No, you are too vague (probably intentionally so) in your dissemination of "truth," and are trying to come off as some spiritual knowledge purveyor. You're not. You're just a deluded believer, with no real linear meaning to your "thoughts."

To be perverse is specifically to have your sense of discernment being clouded by lust. It is a form of intellectual dishonesty.

This statement makes no sense. Much the same as condemning homosexual love as an "abomination..." The word "abomination, to the ancient Hebrew, was anything outside of the accepted cultural norm. That word is used, today, to indicate anything that the speaker of that word views as "unclean" in the eyes of their "god," as they see it. I see the use of the word "perverse" in the same light.

None of this has anything to do with what I just said.

This tells me that your grasp of language, vernacular, and conceptualization is limited, at best, if not stunted.

Who has higher pedophile and child molester rates? The clergy or atheists and agnostics?

Has absolutely nothing to do with the message.

Oh, but it does. It's religion that is condemning homosexuality, yet the clergy making these condemnations are guilty of it more than any other group, of which I'm aware. I know that's like rejecting the message for disliking the messenger, but how much value would you give a speech about honesty given by a convicted embezzler? It's the same thing.

Once again, you aren't isolating all the variables here.

Once again, you're being intentionally vague. There is no way to "isolate all the variables." You're using a vague statement to make your incoherent ramblings sound as though they are on a "higher plane" of knowledge. They are not.

Are you going to ignore a good message simply because of a few corrupt?

No, but I will ignore your "message" because it is meaningless and useless.

Back in the 1960s, there was an FBI program called "COINTELPROS", and part of the idea of the program was to send agents to infiltrate organizations that they saw as a threat to national security to both make them look bad to the public, and destroy these institutions from the inside out. The idea was to manipulate people who used the same type of rational that you are using right now.

You mean linear, rational thought?

If you understand scripture, your faith is not going to be in man or man made institution. These people have nothing to do with the message. I'm not saying that churches are being infiltrated by the FBI, but not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is actually a Christian.

The fact of the matter is that NO ONE "understands" scripture. It's unintelligible. Those who use that argumentation are trying to set "scripture" above and beyond the analysis of reason, while still arguing its reason and consistency. "Accept that it's reasonable, but don't try to subject it to reason. It's above you..."

You say "most." Do you understand the "nature of creation?" Can you explain it to the layman? How did you come upon this understanding? What method did you use to test your conclusion? What was the leading hypothesis, prior to your validation of you understanding of creation?

I came to really understand the nature of creation through studying quantum physics. I know that might sound lame, but it helped me to understand that the things we deal with in the material world are representations of reality rather than reality itself.

I doubt you "really understand" much of anything, if your written communication is any indication. Anyone I have ever met that has actually studied quantum physics has an exceptional grasp of the English language. Yours appears to be tenuous, at best.

Matter isn't real in the way that most people think it is. The universe is infinite. The current limits of our observational range have more to do with the way light bends than us actually finding what the tiniest level of the universe is.

You have no way of knowing that the universe is infinite. You have no way of knowing that the universe has limits. The surest way to tell whether or not someone's thoughts are credible is whether or not they make concrete assertions on topics that cannot be truly known.

People often times can't tell the difference between the math and what the math is trying to describe. If you open up a menu and see a picture of a burger, it isn't a burger, it's a picture of a burger.

It is an optical REPRESENTATION of a burger. I get that.

Is that clear?

That statement is clear, yes. It does nothing to support your incoherent rhetoric.

The idea of creation does not contradict natural law. Truth is the highest judge, Truth is the Lord of All. Truth is The Greatest. Truth is Uncreated. Truth simply is what it is.

These are a lot of vague and ambiguous statements that seem more metaphorical than anything else. Truth is a concept, not a person. There is no personage attributable to the concept of truth.

I agree. Personification of Deity seems to be a difficult hurdle for most people. If It is written, "The hand of God", it isn't talking about a giant sky daddy hand poking out of the clouds. It is poetry.

Poetry, however, can be completely false...

This is not hard to accept.

It is, however, hard to qualify or quantify... NIgh impossible, I'd say.

Materialism has it's utility, and can point you to the nature of reality, but you are not going to find the truth in the world of matter and creation.

That depends on what "truth" it is to which you refer. Your "truth" seems to be vague and ambiguous.
I have no problem with the existence of a "god." It is the behavior of his fan clubs that frightens me to no end...
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 5:10:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 10:44:33 AM, Otokage wrote:
The goal of good loving parents is to prepare their child for the world when they become adult, not selfish intent.

It is selfish to prepare your child for what you believe is "the world" if you are not taking your child's desires as the first priority when it comes to this "preparation".

You do your child a great disservice by spoiling them.

I think the fact that you believe in disposable spouses speaks volumes about your concept of love.

And the fact that you believe all married couples must love each other forever and ever, speaks volumes about how Disney has destroyed your common sense.

Yet here you are, defending something despicable.

To be righteous is to be correct.

And let me guess, it is either you or "your book" what defines what "righteous" is, right?

That is what the word means. To be "right". To be in line with truth. You have too much baggage attached to my words.

Discernment is judgement based on observation

If I am grounded in Truth, does that not make me a better observer than someone who lets the lusts of their heart effect their judgement?

No. Good observers are simply those with a skilled eye. What you are doing is not to observe, but to interpret what you are observing, which you do poorly since you are biased by the Bible's fundamentalist, flawed and obsolete teachings.

Yet here you are, denying the fact that bias effects the ability to observe, which is what I am saying.

Just because you allow something to happen does not mean that you believe it is beneficial or good for anyone.

Sexual Immorality is bad for the individual and society as a whole.
Do I think that we should punish those who commit adultery? No.
You see what I'm saying?

What is "sexual immorality" and why is it bad?

Sexual immorality is by definition bad. That is what the word immoral means.

Sexual immorality from the theological perspective is any type of sexual activity that gets in the way of being honest about the truth or loving others.

God is The Ultimate Fiction. Lies independent of all bias. If you don't believe in this, you either don't understand it or you are a fool.

God is meant to represent The Ultimate Reality. That is how is how it is understood in theology. You have too much baggage attached to the word.

I didn't call you stupid, but I said the Bible is pointing you on that direction. And btw being grammatically rookie in a foreign language has nothing to do with stupidity in my honest opinion.

You are flawed and self contradictory. It's part of the human condition. Does that mean that I can't learn from you?
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 5:47:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 5:09:40 PM, Draconius wrote:

But the term "divine inspiration" still denotes something OTHER than a human as the source.

Isaac Newton was inspired to write out the theory of gravity after an apple fell on his head.

What do you think it means in that context?

God is what inspired the writings of these texts. God represents The Ultimate Reality, or Truth. What do you think this means?

God is a representation for The Ultimate Reality.

Only in your head.

This is the theological understanding of the concept.

You have too much baggage attached to these concepts. It will get in the way of you understanding these things, and deriving meaning.

No, you are too vague (probably intentionally so) in your dissemination of "truth," and are trying to come off as some spiritual knowledge purveyor. You're not. You're just a deluded believer, with no real linear meaning to your "thoughts."

You aren't making any attempt whatsoever to get on the same page as me, you are just rejecting everything I say and calling me deluded.

I'm a theologian. You have the chance to actually talk to someone who understands religion. Are you going to squander this opportunity by putting faith in your current understanding, or are you going entertain the possibility that maybe you can learn something?

None of this has anything to do with what I just said.

This tells me that your grasp of language, vernacular, and conceptualization is limited, at best, if not stunted.

Are you going to ignore a good message simply because of a few corrupt?

No, but I will ignore your "message" because it is meaningless and useless.

This tells me that you are more interested in contradicting me for arguments sake than having meaningful discussion.

Back in the 1960s, there was an FBI program called "COINTELPROS", and part of the idea of the program was to send agents to infiltrate organizations that they saw as a threat to national security to both make them look bad to the public, and destroy these institutions from the inside out. The idea was to manipulate people who used the same type of rational that you are using right now.

You mean linear, rational thought?

No, people who would rather judge based on appearances instead of how things really are.

If you understand scripture, your faith is not going to be in man or man made institution. These people have nothing to do with the message. I'm not saying that churches are being infiltrated by the FBI, but not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is actually a Christian.

The fact of the matter is that NO ONE "understands" scripture. It's unintelligible. Those who use that argumentation are trying to set "scripture" above and beyond the analysis of reason, while still arguing its reason and consistency. "Accept that it's reasonable, but don't try to subject it to reason. It's above you..."

There are plenty of people who have a common understanding of scripture, it isn't unintelligible.

Scripture is not above and beyond reason.

You are misinformed.

You say "most." Do you understand the "nature of creation?" Can you explain it to the layman? How did you come upon this understanding? What method did you use to test your conclusion? What was the leading hypothesis, prior to your validation of you understanding of creation?

I came to really understand the nature of creation through studying quantum physics. I know that might sound lame, but it helped me to understand that the things we deal with in the material world are representations of reality rather than reality itself.

I doubt you "really understand" much of anything, if your written communication is any indication. Anyone I have ever met that has actually studied quantum physics has an exceptional grasp of the English language. Yours appears to be tenuous, at best.

You don't understand me on first reading, so you count it as being meaningless.

If you were honest and were truly as reasonable as you claim to be, you would make an attempt at getting on the same page as me instead of blaming me for your own inability to understand me.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
Draconius
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 1:15:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 5:47:19 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/15/2015 5:09:40 PM, Draconius wrote:

But the term "divine inspiration" still denotes something OTHER than a human as the source.

Isaac Newton was inspired to write out the theory of gravity after an apple fell on his head.

What do you think it means in that context?

He was inspired by physical reality. There is no "god" in that context.

God is what inspired the writings of these texts. God represents The Ultimate Reality, or Truth. What do you think this means?

There was no god involved. It was fundamental physics.

God is a representation for The Ultimate Reality.

Only in your head.

This is the theological understanding of the concept.

No, it is a theological "spin" on vague, undefined concepts.

You have too much baggage attached to these concepts. It will get in the way of you understanding these things, and deriving meaning.

No, you are too vague (probably intentionally so) in your dissemination of "truth," and are trying to come off as some spiritual knowledge purveyor. You're not. You're just a deluded believer, with no real linear meaning to your "thoughts."

You aren't making any attempt whatsoever to get on the same page as me, you are just rejecting everything I say and calling me deluded.

I am not obligated to "get on the same page..." I don't want to be on your "page." I don't believe your god exists.

I'm a theologian. You have the chance to actually talk to someone who understands religion. Are you going to squander this opportunity by putting faith in your current understanding, or are you going entertain the possibility that maybe you can learn something?

I understand religion just fine. Yes, I will continue to place my own understanding in higher esteem than yours. I could definitely "learn" something from nearly anyone. That does not make you my teacher. The things you state are not anything that I consider to be of value to learn. I don't really care about theology. I've investigated enough to know that I have no use for religion or theology.

None of this has anything to do with what I just said.

This tells me that your grasp of language, vernacular, and conceptualization is limited, at best, if not stunted.

Are you going to ignore a good message simply because of a few corrupt?

No, but I will ignore your "message" because it is meaningless and useless.

This tells me that you are more interested in contradicting me for arguments sake than having meaningful discussion.

That's just it: I don't see any "meaningful discussion" in your words. Your thoughts are convoluted. Your ideas are not even coherent, let alone cogent.


Back in the 1960s, there was an FBI program called "COINTELPROS", and part of the idea of the program was to send agents to infiltrate organizations that they saw as a threat to national security to both make them look bad to the public, and destroy these institutions from the inside out. The idea was to manipulate people who used the same type of rational that you are using right now.

You mean linear, rational thought?

No, people who would rather judge based on appearances instead of how things really are.

What "appearances" are there to which you are referring? I am well aware of how "things really are." You are being very arrogant in your statement that you are a more valid arbiter of reality.

If you understand scripture, your faith is not going to be in man or man made institution. These people have nothing to do with the message. I'm not saying that churches are being infiltrated by the FBI, but not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is actually a Christian.

The fact of the matter is that NO ONE "understands" scripture. It's unintelligible. Those who use that argumentation are trying to set "scripture" above and beyond the analysis of reason, while still arguing its reason and consistency. "Accept that it's reasonable, but don't try to subject it to reason. It's above you..."

There are plenty of people who have a common understanding of scripture, it isn't unintelligible.

There may be plenty of people who AGREE on this or that, in scripture, but there are ALWAYS variations in interpretation. I don't think there are any two people on the planet that agree on every biblical interpretation possible.

Scripture is not above and beyond reason.

You are misinformed.

On the converse, I believe it is you that is misinformed.

You say "most." Do you understand the "nature of creation?" Can you explain it to the layman? How did you come upon this understanding? What method did you use to test your conclusion? What was the leading hypothesis, prior to your validation of you understanding of creation?

I came to really understand the nature of creation through studying quantum physics. I know that might sound lame, but it helped me to understand that the things we deal with in the material world are representations of reality rather than reality itself.

I doubt you "really understand" much of anything, if your written communication is any indication. Anyone I have ever met that has actually studied quantum physics has an exceptional grasp of the English language. Yours appears to be tenuous, at best.

You don't understand me on first reading, so you count it as being meaningless.

I do understand that you don't have any real meaning. You speak in vague allusions and pseudo metaphors, believing yourself to have an "higher understanding." There is nothing that you have shared that appears to have any meaning or substance. If you were to make a clear statement of what all you babble concerning "universal truth," "reality," etc., actually means and its actual impact on human life, there might be some kind of discussion possible. Your words, however, seem to be intentionally vague or "shrouded in mystery." You are simply trying to sound enlightened, and you are not making any meaningful statements. Be specific about what you mean, and I might listen. I will not, however, stroke your ego by attributing meaning and significance that I don't actually believe exist...

If you were honest and were truly as reasonable as you claim to be, you would make an attempt at getting on the same page as me instead of blaming me for your own inability to understand me.

Have you ever considered getting on the same page as me, instead of demanding that you be allowed to play the role of superior? No, of course not. You don't have any understanding that I find relevant or important. Stop trying to convince the forum that you are a guru of any kind. You haven't spoken/written anything that is even remotely interesting, yet.
I have no problem with the existence of a "god." It is the behavior of his fan clubs that frightens me to no end...
UniversalTheologian
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 1:33:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 1:15:19 PM, Draconius wrote:
I am not obligated to "get on the same page..." I don't want to be on your "page." I don't believe your god exists.

Ignorance is not bliss.

Live and let die I suppose.
"There are trivial truths and the great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true." ~ Niels Bohr

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 1:41:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Atheists are far easier to offend, they just express it through aggressive condescension.
"Change your sig."
~YYW
Draconius
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 3:18:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 1:33:53 PM, UniversalTheologian wrote:
At 7/17/2015 1:15:19 PM, Draconius wrote:
I am not obligated to "get on the same page..." I don't want to be on your "page." I don't believe your god exists.

Ignorance is not bliss.

Live and let die I suppose.

Funny that this seems to be the one thing you take away from my post. You seem to be intent on playing the role of a superior perception and "teacher," despite such an obvious lack of communication skill or meaningful information. Live and let die is VERY apropos...
I have no problem with the existence of a "god." It is the behavior of his fan clubs that frightens me to no end...
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 4:38:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 1:41:54 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 7/12/2015 6:42:16 PM, Skyangel wrote:
Calin is a very funny man.
Much truth can be conveyed through humor.
It's a shame so many believers in God lack a sense of humor when it comes to their invisible friend.
They are very easily offended and upset much like a child would get upset by someone telling them Santa does not exist.

Atheists are far easier to offend, they just express it through aggressive condescension.

I have witnessed some very aggressive and condescending Christians too. They not only think they are superior to Atheists but also condemn them for being Atheists as if Atheism was some kind of moral depravity.
The fact is immature people are easier to offend than mature ones.
Some people are just aggressive and condescending regardless of what they believe.