Theology III

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by Tessar

For instance just to touch on one, what does the economic state of China have to do with the bible? As I recall the bible talks a lot about spiritual wealth, but never promises you heaps of gold and diamonds

Well you've just missed the point completely Tessar. Nobody's talking about gold and diamonds..

It wasn't a belief in Jesus or the awe of God that brought 200 million people in China out of absolute poverty in a few years, a feat that has never happened before in the history of mankind, but intelligent economic measures, the empowerment of many people to have jobs and make a living.
An enormous societal feat, completely unrelated to any higher being.

[Mari]

And you know that because...?
Perhaps China's leaders got inspired. Then again, maybe it was pure luck.
In any case, I don't see how that example disproves the hand of a higher being.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

Equality is a modern thing? A fad perhaps? Latest news? Perhaps redundant in the future?

I love it. Also love "Why get Altitude?" which I may add to my quotes. Or make into a t-shirt.

Originally Posted by Tessar

Coffeehouse for the effective purpose of a debate, right now this appears to be extremely unbalanced since it looks like you're just coming up with similar question after similar question for the sake of having Lief write you a reply that's 10x its length.

I don't agree with many of the things that Lief says, but you're attacking things that are not stated. For instance just to touch on one, what does the economic state of China have to do with the bible? As I recall the bible talks a lot about spiritual wealth, but never promises you heaps of gold and diamonds .

The constitution of the USA also states that men are equal. It does not force the wealthy to give all of their money out so that everyone has exactly the same amount of money. It's talking about a different kind of equality.


There are other things I could get into, but I wont because I am not a debater. However, I gotta say I don't think it's particularly great how you're treating Lief. This is less a debate and more like you're trying to interrogate him without putting out much effort yourself to explain your actual view point on the subject.

This is nothing to do with me being a mod, before someone raises the hue and cry--I'm not threatening anyone with bannings or saying you can't do what you're doing. I'm saying that I believe you should reconsider the way in which you are structuring your argument at the moment.

I disagree, Tessar. I think that Coffeehouse is being particularly respectful and using perfectly standard debating strategies. There's no rule in formal debate that anyone represent their own opinion. Lief chooses to do that, partly because he, also, is not a trained logician or debater. Giving Lief the opportunity to present his ideas logically is good training for him.

I understood the China analogy. The question Coffeehouse poses is known classically as "The Problem of Evil" and is an old one. It's a reasonable question, and many people say, "Supernatural explanations are an excuse for people to let suffering continue...that doesn't strike me as ethical behavior for followers of Christ." That's how I read it.

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

It's entirely up to Lief to answer my questions. If a 4-paragraph answer is what he would like to use every time.. If he feels that they are questions he doesn't want to answer, then let him decide that for himself. I'm sure he does not need defending. The questions I am posing I feel are relevant, and if he can't see the revelance he can choose not to answer.

Get used to it, Coffeehouse. My mother used to say I was "vaccinated with a phonograph needle." Lief's keyboard is on steroids.

[Coffeehouse]

Well you see, Christianity is a very small religion in China, and most Chinese to do not believe in God. So it does not need saying really. The point is that good things happen all the time without any interference by any higher being (a claim of invisible and secret messages of divine truth is not something I am ready to believe in. Highly suspect)

A society where the word of a God, that can neither be seen or heard by all peoples of the world, is the highest word, is not a healthy society. Where all sorts of actions and misdeeds can be carried out under the pretense of having the ear of God. Luckily, the reason of economics steers people out of poverty in China, and not converts or attendance in church or blind faith in a man in Rome.

If being close to a God brings humanity happiness, why is heavily Christian southern Sudan so desolately poor? So desolately unfortunate?

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

I love it. Also love "Why get Altitude?" which I may add to my quotes. Or make into a t-shirt.

I disagree, Tessar. I think that Coffeehouse is being particularly respectful and using perfectly standard debating strategies. There's no rule in formal debate that anyone represent their own opinion. Lief chooses to do that, partly because he, also, is not a trained logician or debater. Giving Lief the opportunity to present his ideas logically is good training for him.

I understood the China analogy. The question Coffeehouse poses is known classically as "The Problem of Evil" and is an old one. It's a reasonable question, and many people say, "Supernatural explanations are an excuse for people to let suffering continue...that doesn't strike me as ethical behavior for followers of Christ." That's how I read it.



Get used to it, Coffeehouse. My mother used to say I was "vaccinated with a phonograph needle." Lief's keyboard is on steroids.

Support from Sis *blushes*

I thought I was a wordy writer. In Entmoot that belief is put to shame!

[Nautipus]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

Well you see, Christianity is a very small religion in China, and most Chinese to do not believe in God. So it does not need saying really. The point is that good things happen all the time without any interference by any higher being (a claim of invisible and secret messages of divine truth is not something I am ready to believe in. Highly suspect)

God can, and will, work through anyone. Who knows, maybe you're strengthening someone's faith by them readin through all these passages.

A society where the word of a God, that can neither be seen or heard by all peoples of the world, is the highest word, is not a healthy society. Where all sorts of actions and misdeeds can be carried out under the pretense of having the ear of God. Luckily, the reason of economics steers people out of poverty in China, and not converts or attendance in church or blind faith in a man in Rome.

In my faith, everyone has the "ear of God". No one person hears it, but when someone does we should listen, with a spirit of discernment.

If being close to a God brings humanity happiness, why is heavily Christian southern Sudan so desolately poor? So desolately unfortunate?

I believe Tessar covered this. Christians arent necessarily promised a better life on Earth, in any way. Just a better life after this one.

[Mari]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

Well you see, Christianity is a very small religion in China, and most Chinese to do not believe in God. So it does not need saying really. The point is that good things happen all the time without any interference by any higher being (a claim of invisible and secret messages of divine truth is not something I am ready to believe in. Highly suspect)

A society where the word of a God, that can neither be seen or heard by all peoples of the world, is the highest word, is not a healthy society. Where all sorts of actions and misdeeds can be carried out under the pretense of having the ear of God. Luckily, the reason of economics steers people out of poverty in China, and not converts or attendance in church or blind faith in a man in Rome.

If being close to a God brings humanity happiness, why is heavily Christian southern Sudan so desolately poor? So desolately unfortunate?

*smiles* I don't know. I can't prove God exists. I can't explain why I believe, well I can, but I don't think you'd be interested seen as it will provide you with no answers. I can't explain all the bad things in the world. Not even with the concept that some people feel is almighty: Freedom of choice.
But at the same time you can't prove He doesn't exist. Or prove that all the good things in the world do not somehow have a higher hand in it.

I don't want to get involved in this discussion because I feel I have nothing sensible to add. I just wanted to show the reason why I think you and Lief will never be able to convince each other. Or the two of us for that matter.

[Coffeehouse]

Luckily I have a reflecting mind that cherishes reason.

Of all the progress these lasts hundreds of years that has brought so much of humanity from poverty and into a living where time for reflection and time for enjoyment is a substantial time. None of this progress has been due to any divine messages of truth or revelations of enlightenment in the Bible or in any other religious script. The Bible had its chance, it had the many centuries leading up to the Enlightenment.

The Torah, the Koran, they've all been around, had their chance. The progress experienced in the ages since the Dutch Benedict Spinoza in the mid-1600s up to today, with all the thinkers of the Enlightenment, the 19th century father of evolution, Darwin, the strides made in the 20th and 21st century, all this progress has happened despite the authoritarianism of the Church, the rigidity of the Bible.

The progress of science happened despite a cultural and traditional ironhold by religious belief and thought and way of life, not because of it.

Why, and we come back to the Problem of Evil that Sis mentioned, did God's great book of teachings fail for so long to help so many empoverished peoples? Why was an empowerment of everyday people, my forefathers and your forefathers, only a reality after the rigidity of religious thought was put aside with all its choking of reason and inequality of women?
Why was this only a reality when the belief in reason, the healthy sharing of knowledge and the unrelenting drive towards a better future not because of divine teachings, but because it was right?

I would embrace the existance of a higher being, because it would mean I could have an afterlife (a very encouraging thought!), but reason was given to me, like any other human being, and I intend to follow it and decide that the reality of the world is the reality that we can see, touch, smell, measure and experience alone and together, not a reality dictated by an outdated book..

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

God can, and will, work through anyone. Who knows, maybe you're strengthening someone's faith by them readin through all these passages.

Or making us grateful that summer services are shorter.

I believe Tessar covered this. Christians arent necessarily promised a better life on Earth, in any way. Just a better life after this one.

I don't know how anyone can read the Gospels and conclude this. I just don't.

Jesus was %100 about "daily bread", loaves and fishes, wine at weddings, and love your neighbor. Follow these rules and your life, here on earth gets better.

If you look at Jesus (putting a temporary hold on Revelation. Paul's misogyny, etc.) you get a recipe for right now.

[Nautipus]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

Luckily I have a reflecting mind that cherishes reason.

Good to hear.

Of all the progress these lasts hundreds of years that has brought so much of humanity from poverty and into a living where time for reflection and time for enjoyment is a substantial time. None of this progress has been due to any divine messages of truth or revelations of enlightenment in the Bible or in any other religious script. The Bible had its chance, it had the many centuries leading up to the Enlightenment.

I was unaare that the Bible was a deity all it's own, with messages on economy. I thought this had been covered.

The Torah, the Koran, they've all been around, had their chance. The progress experienced in the ages since the Dutch Benedict Spinoza in the mid-1600s up to today, with all the thinkers of the Enlightenment, the 19th century father of evolution, Darwin, the strides made in the 20th and 21st century, all this progress has happened despite the authoritarianism of the Church, the rigidity of the Bible.

I believe that it's been made very clear, that the Bible is not rigid. The rest refers to Catholicism, so I do not feel right in responding.

The progress of science happened despite a cultural and traditional ironhold by religious belief and thought and way of life, not because of it.

I'm gonna need to go along with you there, for the most part.

Why, and we come back to the Problem of Evil that Sis mentioned, did God's great book of teachings fail for so long to help so many empoverished peoples? Why was an empowerment of everyday people, my forefathers and your forefathers, only a reality after the rigidity of religious thought was put aside with all its choking of reason and inequality of women?
Why was this only a reality when the belief in reason, the healthy sharing of knowledge and the unrelenting drive towards a better future not because of divine teachings, but because it was right?

Firstly, the impoverished speech is done with. Tessar covered it, I reiterated a little, and I'm sure Lief will pounce on it.

I believe God had a hand in the rest. I do not have any ties with, and little respect for, the Pope and the ungodly power he weilds. It seems like the papacy was more a power-grab than anything.

I would embrace the existance of a higher being, because it would mean I could have an afterlife (a very encouraging thought!), but reason was given to me, like any other human being, and I intend to follow it and decide that the reality of the world is the reality that we can see, touch, smell, measure and experience alone and together, not a reality dictated by an outdated book..

Does this mean I am not human, because I didnt follow your "reason"? Poor choice of words, perhaps. What you call "reason" I call secular, and a lure. But the Bible is far from outdated, especially seein
g the many people who still use its teachings and parables to illustrate truths today.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Jesus was %100 about "daily bread", loaves and fishes, wine at weddings, and love your neighbor. Follow these rules and your life, here on earth gets better.

I remember Sunday school vividly, going with all the other children in church to the house on the other side of the yard and learning about Jesus, his miracles, the Good Samaritan, the blind people and the leprechauns. All pleasant experiences and very colorful for a child. And the life lessons that were inherent in these stories are healthy lessons, a healthy challenging of a child's mind and reason.
These are virtues of a good education, but they are not unique. All human beings, whatever views of the world, know stories and have learned stories of virtues and manners and how to give happiness to others and be happy oneself. They're not inherently Christian as little as they're inherently Muslim or Native American.

[Nautipus]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Or making us grateful that summer services are shorter.

*raspberry*

I don't know how anyone can read the Gospels and conclude this. I just don't.

Jesus was %100 about "daily bread", loaves and fishes, wine at weddings, and love your neighbor. Follow these rules and your life, here on earth gets better.

If you look at Jesus (putting a temporary hold on Revelation. Paul's misogyny, etc.) you get a recipe for right now.

But wasnt he just illustrating truths? He even said that those who follow Him will be persecuted by man and Satan. He never said anything about riches flwing to you, or becoming famous. Not without God's will behind it, with a purpose.
BTW, you seemed to have helped my point about the Bible not being outdated.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

I remember Sunday school vividly, going with all the other children in church to the house on the other side of the yard and learning about Jesus, his miracles, the Good Samaritan, the blind people and the leprechauns. All pleasant experiences and very colorful for a child. And the life lessons that were inherent in these stories are healthy lessons, a healthy challenging of a child's mind and reason.
These are virtues of a good education, but they are not unique. All human beings, whatever views of the world, know stories and have learned stories of virtues and manners and how to give happiness to others and be happy oneself. They're not inherently Christian as little as they inherently Muslim or Native American.

They taught about leprechauns in your Sunday school?

lol Translation issue, I think you'll find.

I didn't say that good life lessons were exclusive to Christianity. I said that the message of the Gospels was not otherworldly.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

They taught about leprechauns in your Sunday school?

lol Translation issue, I think you'll find.

I didn't say that good life lessons were exclusive to Christianity. I said that the message of the Gospels was not otherworldly.

Haha.. I searched up leprechauns.. oh dear! Lepers I meant

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

They taught about leprechauns in your Sunday school?

lol Translation issue, I think you'll find.

I didn't say that good life lessons were exclusive to Christianity. I said that the message of the Gospels was not otherworldly.

Oh and it wasn't an argument against yours. It was an agreement. I was adding to your true words.

[Nautipus]

Wow, now this is gonna be the high point f the rest of my day.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

Wow, now this is gonna be the high point f the rest of my day.

No wonder all those furriners are godless heathen.

[Nautipus]

*snort*

[Mari]

So Coffeehouse, if I understand it correctly your problem is with the institution we call the Church and the Bible?
I can see why. It is easy to point out all the things the church did wrong. Not just the catholic one, but also the protestant church, the synagogue, the mosque, etc.
Right after the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of Christianity, a lot of knowledge and good buildings were destroyed in the name of the Lord. A lot of things were done in the name of the Lord. And are still being done.
I once read a remark that said as much as: Christianity should have stayed an Idea. Institutionalizing anything makes a mess of it.
And of course it is true that with institutionalization a certain rigidity comes. Suddenly people start to think of a concept that is "correct religion" and what isn't. People who don't conform are feared, loathed, mistreated, etc.
However, the church however many its faults may be, also has its good sides. My church for example has an extensive fundraising network to help the people who don't have enough money to buy clothes for the kids etc. They are involved with the homeless. The church I went to in Japan helped people in prison (there was a prison choir under our father), they collected money for charity etc. There are still many charity organizations with roots in a church.

The point I'm trying to make (and now I'm getting to that awful "freedom of choice" argument) is that institutions are run by people. Often they really do want to help, but in a lot of cases that is a) not enough b) not practical c) too focused on one thing d) whatmore.
People who have faith aren't necessarily good people. People without it not necessarily good.

You know, I think I forgot the point I was trying to make... >_<
You see, there's a good reason I don't enter this sort of thing

[Lief Erikson]

Looks like it's been quite an interesting discussion while I was asleep! Just woke up and started reading.

I've got some school to do today- last two days of finals are today and tomorrow, but I'll try to get in a string of replies soon.