?s about Xtianity but were afraid to ask

01/16/2009 05:44:33 PM · #126

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
Actually no. I'm saying I don't believe in your god and that your god appears to be evil.

Technically no monotheistic God is evil by definition since the seat of moral authority would exist with him. Whatever he did would be, by definition, "good". Go figure.

That sounds like what Dick Cheney would say in regards to his line of work...

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

01/16/2009 05:52:41 PM · #127

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by yanko:
I think I rather worship Jeffrey Dahmer. He seems nicer.

I find the comparison interesting:

Jeffrey Dahmer MURDERED INNOCENT people and ate THEIR flesh

Whie God, in the incarnate form of Christ, gave HIMSELF up to be murdered in place of SINFUL people, and instructed his disciples to drink HIS blood and eat HIS body.

It's interesting to see who you'd rather worship.

It's interesting that you would compare what a real life human being did with the actions of a being who's existence is questionable at best. If it wasn't painfully obviously, no I wouldn't worship Dahmer either.

If god does exist I would think that my questioning of what some human beings wrote long ago based on never having met god or even experienced the events they describe would actually win me some points. I'd go further and say if all things are equal between you and I with the only difference being you accept the bible without question and I don't, I have a better shot at getting into heaven than you. How's that for interesting?

Message edited by author 2009-01-16 18:01:36.

milo655321

Nikon D70

01/16/2009 06:02:25 PM · #128

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I disagree � on a technicality. What if the god itself defined its actions as �bad�? Would it still be �good�?

Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di for Nikon

01/16/2009 06:04:32 PM · #129

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
Actually no. I'm saying I don't believe in your god and that your god appears to be evil.

Technically no monotheistic God is evil by definition since the seat of moral authority would exist with him. Whatever he did would be, by definition, "good". Go figure.

I disagree � on a technicality. What if the god itself defined its actions as �bad�? Would it still be �good�?

Hmmm, good point! I suppose the God would have that authority.

Anyway, as I mentioned in the beginning of this thread, I didn't start it to start arguing and I see we're slowly getting to that so I may shut 'er down. It's been civil though and enjoyable!

JMart

Nikon D80

01/16/2009 06:11:40 PM · #130

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Anyway, as I mentioned in the beginning of this thread, I didn't start it to start arguing and I see we're slowly getting to that so I may shut 'er down. It's been civil though and enjoyable!

I do enjoy reading your thoughts on these things doc, even when I disagree. Thanks for an interesting thread, even though there is no God ;P

01/16/2009 06:12:33 PM · #131

To try to keep the thread on topic can I ask a question? You mentioned earlier that you found Christianity to be compelling because it was unique. Why was that important to you?

Message edited by author 2009-01-16 18:13:11.

01/16/2009 06:27:28 PM · #132

Originally posted by yanko:

To try to keep the thread on topic can I ask a question? You mentioned earlier that you found Christianity to be compelling because it was unique. Why was that important to you?

Not for any really important reason. The other religions, at their essence, seem to be variations on the same theme: work hard to gain "salvation" (again, whatever that means). The stark contrast just stands out to me. I'll say it's certainly more comforting and seems to echo real life in the sense that NOBODY seems to be able to work hard enough to gain salvation. If we're complaining at the ratio of people that "make it" in Christianity, how many qualify under other religions? It doesn't seem like it would be a lot.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/16/2009 06:32:51 PM · #133

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
Actually no. I'm saying I don't believe in your god and that your god appears to be evil.

Technically no monotheistic God is evil by definition since the seat of moral authority would exist with him. Whatever he did would be, by definition, "good". Go figure.

That sounds like what Dick Cheney would say in regards to his line of work...

It is the argument Nixon used.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

01/16/2009 06:52:18 PM · #134

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by yanko:
Actually no. I'm saying I don't believe in your god and that your god appears to be evil.

Technically no monotheistic God is evil by definition since the seat of moral authority would exist with him. Whatever he did would be, by definition, "good". Go figure.

That sounds like what Dick Cheney would say in regards to his line of work...

It is the argument Nixon used.

Ya, Cheney would say God was not technically part of the Executive branch...

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

01/16/2009 07:12:38 PM · #135

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

If he's watching and saw your little quip about Dahmer, you got trouble comin' my friend. The best thing to do would be to shut up, keep your head down, and get in line.

Couple things bother me about this....

I am going to assume that this reply is somewhat intended tongue-in-cheek in the spirit of its provocation.

HOWEVER....that said.....

It seems an awful lot of fundamentalist Chrisitan sects operate on the fear, hellfire, & damnation aspects to keep people in line.

Once again, without being able to truly know if they really believe this kind of thing, it doesn't speak well of them.

I really want to believe that God is kind and that you seek out your own relationship in order to obtain guidance.

I feel that the reward is in the living and doing if it's in the right way.

I said in another thread that I just don't think about what happens when I die because it's important how I live amongst my brethren NOW.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

01/16/2009 07:21:08 PM · #136

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If he's watching and saw your little quip about Dahmer, you got trouble comin' my friend. The best thing to do would be to shut up, keep your head down, and get in line.

Couple things bother me about this....

I am going to assume that this reply is somewhat intended tongue-in-cheek in the spirit of its provocation.

You'd better since it was said concerning an evil God.

Apple iPhone 5

01/16/2009 08:30:27 PM · #137

Originally posted by RonB:

FWIW, Jeffry Dahmer said that he became a born again Christian while in Prison. If his claim is true, then he gets to spend eternity in heaven with the rest of those who believe ( that is, if their faith is found to be justified ).

But eternity sounds awful! Who would want eternal existence? In any form?

Think about it. Eternity means forever, an infinite time. So when the Universe crunches, or dissolves away into nothing, your 'soul' will still be there, somewhere, in the middle of all this nothingness, with God.

Now, if your soul possesses enough consciousness to be aware of the fact its in the presence of god, and if it possesses enough emotion to enjoy the awesomeness of the presence of god for all eternity. You can be sure that after say, a few billion years, your soul will be suffering from eternal and torturous boredom!

Over the course of a billion billion billion years, once your soul has had enough of gazing on god, its attention might wander. How about counting the atoms in the universe a few times? Rearranging them perhaps? That should take up a few billion years at least.

Assuming of course that god will allow your soul's attention to wander, and that he doesn't expect you to just be content in his presence for infinity years.

I'd rather the perfect peace of non-existence over that proposal any day of the week. Perfect, peaceful, non-existence.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

01/16/2009 08:33:24 PM · #138

Just thinking out loud here, but couldn't eternity rather mean "to the end of time" rather than "infinite" time?

Apple iPhone 5

01/16/2009 08:40:48 PM · #139

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Just thinking out loud here, but couldn't eternity rather mean "to the end of time" rather than "infinite" time?

That won't work either. You'll have a few trillion souls in heaven, aware that their time is nearly up, begging god to extend it a bit longer (or perhaps they'd be quite happy their time is up, given they've counted the atoms in the universe at that stage) - So god annihilates the souls in heaven at the end of time? Which doesn't sound very god-like.

And at the 'end of time', if heaven ceases to exist, does god cease to exist too? After all, time was supposedly formed at the moment of the big bang. I thought god operated outside these limits?

Besides, this is a pretty important point for a Christian to get clear in his mind. Probably the most important point. Eternal life in heaven is what it's all about when you die, so which version of 'eternal' would you prefer?

Message edited by author 2009-01-16 20:48:18.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/16/2009 09:10:06 PM · #140

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If he's watching and saw your little quip about Dahmer, you got trouble comin' my friend. The best thing to do would be to shut up, keep your head down, and get in line.

Couple things bother me about this....

I am going to assume that this reply is somewhat intended tongue-in-cheek in the spirit of its provocation.

You'd better since it was said concerning an evil God.

I'd be worried that one of the other gods may take wraith on you for favoring just one while ignoring the 1000 others to worship. :P

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

01/16/2009 10:27:19 PM · #141

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by JMart:
If you accept that premise for salvation as reality, wouldn't the consequence of such a reality result in the eternal damnation of the majority of humans throughout history?

Yes, it would.

So not only do you believe in an invisible being but you believe in an evil one. I think I rather worship Jeffrey Dahmer. He seems nicer.

Nowhere did I say that I believe in an evil being, and for you to infer that I do just exposes either your lack of intelligence or your lack of intellectual integrity.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. Did you not infer that god would send the majority of humans to hell?

Apparently yes, you misunderstood me. I neither inferred nor implied that God would send the majority of humans to hell. A statement worded like that implies that such an action would be the result of a unilateral decision made by God rather than being the result of the choice of an individual to refuse to accept the offer of salvation that God makes.

Originally posted by yanko:

Am I right in assuming that hell is an awful place?

Yes.

Originally posted by yanko:

So god sends the majority of humans to an awful place. Is that right?

In a sense, yes. But He only sends them to the place that they chose to go. The majority of humans would apparently rather go to hell than agree with God that they cannot possibly earn their way into heaven, and just accept God's offer to justify them through faith that Christ earned it for them.

Originally posted by yanko:

Jeffrey Dahmer only sent 17 people to an awful place, hence the comment he's nicer.

You presume that which is not known or even knowable. Only God knows whether any or all of those 17 people went to an awful place. Dahmer didn't send any of them anywhere. He only hastened their departure to the place that they decided they would rather go to - heaven or hell.

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by RonB:
FWIW, Jeffry Dahmer said that he became a born again Christian while in Prison. If his claim is true, then he gets to spend eternity in heaven with the rest of those who believe ( that is, if their faith is found to be justified ).

And if I don't do that I go to hell right? Dahmer, the serial killer goes to heaven, but I, the non-murderer doesn't?

Correct. If you don't do that, you will go to hell, and Dahmer, if his claim is true, will go to heaven. Salvation comes by faith, not deeds.

togtog

Nikon D300

01/16/2009 10:57:21 PM · #142

I've been wondering lately about Christianity's concept of original sin.

The reason as I understand it for the need of Jesus's sacrifice, and the cause of all the suffering of the world, was because of man's original sin. The eating of the forbidden fruit and related exile from paradise.

I have accepted the possibility that Genesis is actually a symbolic story of childhood without any actual impact on mankind. However it seems a great deal of the Bible weighs on the specific event of the original choice, the idea that man has fallen, has free will, etc.

I know that a god certainly does not need to act in a logical, honest, nor fair way. However it seems illogical to punish all of Adam and Eve's descendants forever for their ancestors original mistake. I have often wondered how this fits into the other imagery of God as loving and wise.

However my actual point or question is to come...

As told in Genesis, God created the earth, Adam and Eve, lots of animals, a paradise garden... and the tree of knowledge (or good and evil) and forbid both to eat from it for they would surely die. Supposedly as a required function of them having true free will, to give them a choice.

Here is where my confusion begins. The tree provides knowledge of good, and evil. This would suggest that Adam and Eve do not have knowledge, or rather that they are clean and innocent. This further suggests to me that they are without knowledge of evil specifically.

The snake appears to Eve and tempts her to go against God's only rule and eat from the tree. At this point, Eve should have no knowledge of evil deeds, behavior, nor thoughts. Without an express knowledge of evil it would be hard if not impossible to figure out that the snake is lying and being misleading. God created a paradise and so far all the other animals have been loyal to God and friendly to Adam and Eve. In a sense Eve got T-Boned crossing a blind intersection.

I do not remember the Bible mentioning a specific transformation of Eve other than her acceptance that the fruit was safe. If the fruit had no effect on her, then she should still be innocent and guiltless. If the fruit did give her knowledge of evil then she should realize what she had done meaning she purposely mislead Adam in order to hurt him or to ease her own guilt by making him guilty as well.

The way Genesis is written however it suggests an innocent childlike gesture. Adam is in the same boat, without knowledge of evil and sin he technically should be guiltless as well as his actions. He has no reason to mistrust Eve and seeing that she is still alive after eating the fruit and without feedback from God on the subject he helps himself to a juicy piece of fruit.

Genesis says God later questions both about what they did, they are shamed and hide. It is obvious the fruit had some impact on them at this point and they realize what they have done. Again this seems to support that they were innocent prior to eating the fruit.

They explain what happened and God curses the snake to forever crawl on its belly. I wonder how it traveled prior to this curse. God also curses snakes to eat dust. However it is obvious snakes do not eat dust, however all snakes crawl on their belly.

Now up to this point God was very clear on the fact that both would surely die from eating the fruit. However neither died, nor does God kill them. An error on his part, or remorse for what had happened, or was God bluffing? What other errors does God commit, actions God feels remorse for, or how often does God bluff?

Instead he curses both Adam and Eve, and curses their entire bloodline so that they will always toil and suffer. I dunno, I think I would have chosen death instead of bringing so much future suffering on the world, but anyway...

And so is the story of the original sin, mankind's fall from grace, and why you should never trust a snake.

My question is, what then is the original sin? Is it fair to apply it to mankind in the way it was applied? Does it seem a deed worthy of worship and praise? What is the real reason for suffering in the world and the reason Jesus's life had to be sacrificed?

Thank you Dr. for opening this thread, I hope my questions or statements do not cross the boundaries of the rules you set. If they do then I apologize and mean no disrespect nor trouble.

Cheers!
-tog

Matthew

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/17/2009 09:50:15 AM · #143

I have a couple of genuine questions about your mindset, which I hope you don't mind answering.

Do you ever make any sacrifices for religious reasons, either for yourself or those around you, in order to improve your chances of attaining eternal salvation? If it could be proven that there was no afterlife, would you lead your life differently?

Christianity has been used, interpreted, adapted and manipulated for very human reasons over the course of the last couple of thousand years. It is a very convenient religion suited well to pursuing, establishing and maintaining political power. Does it ever worry you that your belief system may be the consequence of political machinations, rather than any deeper truth?

01/17/2009 07:44:03 PM · #144

Originally posted by togtog:

My question is, what then is the original sin? Is it fair to apply it to mankind in the way it was applied? Does it seem a deed worthy of worship and praise? What is the real reason for suffering in the world and the reason Jesus's life had to be sacrificed?

Thank you Dr. for opening this thread, I hope my questions or statements do not cross the boundaries of the rules you set. If they do then I apologize and mean no disrespect nor trouble.

Cheers!
-tog

SO I should probably qualify my answer a bit here. There are lots of Christians (possibly a majority) who would believe in a literal story of Adam and Eve. There are others who believe it is only a story which tells a truth. I am likely to be closer to the latter than the former. That being said, here's how I see it. First, the term "original sin" never actually appears in the Bible although there are passages by Paul which would teach something to that effect. Anyway, for more specific info you can Wiki it.

One way to answer your questions is to say the "original sin", and the subsequent sin which we all suffer from, is Pride. The proper orientation for life is to put God in the center. Pride always tries to displace God and put us at the center. Adam and Eve showed this by wanting to become more God-like themselves rather than being satisfied with their position. We all show it every day in much more mundane ways. The truth is it doesn't matter if there is some "original sin" applied to everybody because we all have plenty of our own sin (leaving aside questions which have come up before about babies and mentally deficient people, etc). So Pride is the real reason there is suffering in the world (at least a portion of it). Not coincidentally, when Jesus was asked to sum up the law he basically said, "God first, others next." Anti-pride. So Jesus' sacrifice on the cross has the interesting property of removing our Pride when we accept it. As I mentioned above, "Everything in heaven is for the asking and nothing can be bought." Your Pride is effectively removed when you realize you can only gain heaven through God's gift. You cannot do it yourself.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

01/17/2009 07:55:39 PM · #145

Originally posted by Matthew:

I have asked myself the first question many times. In the end, I am satisfied. Because I firmly believe my salvation is not attained through my actions I never view my actions through that lens. If it could be proven there was no afterlife I would probably feel cheated with regard to the money I've given the church that goes purely to running the church. I wouldn't feel cheated about true charity to the needy because I think there are secular benefits that can be gained through such action. The only other place I could possibly have changed would have been to...ahem..."know" some of the girls I met in high school and/or college. My religious convictions were likely a strong part of my ability to avoid those temptations. That being said, now that I have managed to run that gauntlet I am very happy about the secular benefits of fuller intimacy with my wife and freedom from common consequences early sex can lead to (pregnancy and disease).

The reality is the "Christian life" is generally a fulfilling and happy life on a purely secular or humanistic scale.

I would sort of disagree with some statements in your second question. I don't think Christianity is truly shaped to pursue, establish, or maintain political power. It could certainly be twisted to that effect, but I think most things could and I don't view that as true Christianity. There is too much emphasis on humility and service in my mind. Personally, to answer your question, I highly doubt the scheming of man would result in the faith and creed I know. In too many ways it is the antithesis of our typical human strivings.

Message edited by author 2009-01-17 19:56:27.

Apple iPhone 5

01/17/2009 08:14:39 PM · #146

Clarifying my earlier question: Would you prefer your soul to exist in the afterlife for an infinite time, or until the 'end of time' (i.e. a finite time period) ?

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

01/17/2009 08:54:43 PM · #147

Originally posted by JH:

Clarifying my earlier question: Would you prefer your soul to exist in the afterlife for an infinite time, or until the 'end of time' (i.e. a finite time period) ?

Oh, I think I missed that question. Doesn't really matter to me. Personally I think the Presence of God will be enough to allow for a true eternity. I'm banking on it being pretty well beyond my current comprehension. Will time mean anything? Who even knows.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

01/17/2009 10:20:38 PM · #148

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

One way to answer your questions is to say the "original sin", and the subsequent sin which we all suffer from, is Pride. The proper orientation for life is to put God in the center. Pride always tries to displace God and put us at the center.

I don't buy that we all suffer from Pride. I have met people who are good, kind, caring, and selfless, yet do not ascribe to the idea that God is the answer to all things.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Your Pride is effectively removed when you realize you can only gain heaven through God's gift.

I believe it's possible through knowledge and acceptance to become humble, and reject Pride. If you're open-minded and willing, life teaches you that you're certainly not the center of the universe.

I know people who I feel have achieved this state of being without a belief in God.