08-19-2008, 09:18 PM | #121 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Gwaimir, I responded to you in the last post of the previous page.
I'll just add here, thanks for the support . This is veeery time consuming . I didn't notice your post 111 until just now. If you're still interested in continuing, I could respond to it. But if you're not interested in pursuing this further, I guess I won't. Thanks for responding at length. I appreciate the thoroughness of that post .
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 08-19-2008 at 09:24 PM. |
08-20-2008, 07:20 AM | #122 | |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
"For every human problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H. L. Mencken.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
|
08-20-2008, 01:24 PM | #123 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Aristotle has it that we derive our premises through the process of induction, seeing many particulars which allows us to come to a universal.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
08-20-2008, 02:33 PM | #124 | |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
I believe, a particularly self-contradictory view that you hold, is this view. Because when you color the human mind as greatly fallible you forget that the rigid views you write so certainly about are as much prone to being in error as anyone else's. If the human mind is so limited, how can you claim to convey any message by a God. You are after all, human. Luckily, I don't hold that view. I believe the human mind is very able-bodied. And the notion that it is beyond our capabilities to truly reveal the presence of a God or Gods, for all to see, is laughable. Everything that exists has a.. identity. There is nothing that has no properties. If it doesn't, it does not exist. However flexible the standards of measurement sometimes prove to be when we encounter fantastic properties and phenomena (mostly in outer space, far removed from the physics of our Earth), they are still that: standards of measurement. And when the human mind is grappling with the notion of infinite spaces, and infinite processes, there is no telling how complex and how deep the human mind is capable of reaching. Aristotle called us the 'rational animal', and I agree with Gwaimir on this point: because a view of the world, and a understanding of science, and even history, that is not consistent with evidence, logical reasoning or observable facts: is basically an abuse of the mind, and throwing away not the gift that a God or Gods has given us, but something far more unique, a complexity of mind developed over millions of years in a species that took the extraordinary leap from the perceptual to the conceptual.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
|
08-20-2008, 03:45 PM | #125 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Human perception is very limited. It's hard to know whether your mathematics have reached a point where you have enough particulars to state the universal as a constant. There's always so much more to know. So it's a tricky one. Reason is absolutely wonderful, beautiful. Wisdom, according to Proverbs, was the first of God's creations, if I recall correctly. Human reason needs divine revelation, though, to have reliably correct conclusions. Quote:
I think God does the same thing with us. So he sends us simplified messages, messages that our intellects can understand. And as we grow in knowledge, we come to see more and more in those messages, just as human students of a software scientist might come to understand what he's talking about better and better as they learn the subject more thoroughly. To say that humans have got to be so puny compared to God that he can make nothing clear to them is putting limits on God, saying he can't simplify messages in a way that enables humans to understand basics he wants them to understand. Here you're talking less about human limitations than you are about divine limitations. Quote:
However, science is, I believe, a very useful tool in revealing the nature of God, because, like you, I think it has come to a lot of very sophisticated conclusions. It is very useful, as are other modern intellectual disciplines- archaeology, ancient history scholarship, etc. They don't always come to correct conclusions, but they make a lot of good ones. Quote:
And these standards often have to become more nuanced, as knowledge expands. Quote:
The human mind is glorious, I agree. But no scientist will say we can be sure we have correct premises. He might say that given the available evidence, this is by far the most reasonable conclusion. That is certainly valid. He won't say that given the available evidence, there is no other conclusion possible, no matter what additional evidence might come up in future centuries. We can't be sure of our premises. We can come up with educated opinions. Because of the strong human uncertainty element, we, as people, require faith in God. God has to show us things for us to be sure of them, and we are sure because of faith. And we have faith because we know and love God, just as I might have faith in my Dad's word if he tells me what the family plans for today are, because I know him well and we have a loving relationship. Quote:
Let's say your wife is accused of murder. They have lots of evidence, logical reasoning and observable facts to back the case. The evidence purporting that she is not guilty is much weaker. However, you know her. Because of your deeply intimate knowledge of her personality and of who she is, because of your relationship with her, you can feel absolutely sure that their evidence is wrong. Is your knowledge of her from that relationship enough to justify a personal belief in her innocence (obviously it's not going to be enough for the jury- I mean just for you as a person), or are you bound by reason to lay all that extra knowledge you have of what she is like aside and draw your conclusions purely by the facts acceptable in court proceedings, and by the conclusions of their jury, based on those facts?
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
||||||
08-20-2008, 04:33 PM | #126 | ||||||||
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
Your making a big, fuzzy generalization about mathematics and science, but what is it that you are arguing? Quote:
Quote:
If this were the case, that God needs tools, i.e. simplification, i.e. a book, to convey the message that he exists then your God is a really inefficient God. He gets an F for poor employee management. Quote:
The problem of divine limitations? Putting limits on God? I find it boring, uninteresting, because I don't believe in a God. Coincidentally that is a classic contradiction in religion, and a reason to pause: That which happens in the area of religion all the time; having to make up new, more complex answers to improbabilities, which again poses new questions with even more complex and contradictory answers. Your God is simply too riddled in contradiction and improbability to be real. It's just not plausible! Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And whatever opinions I might have about her non-guilt I'd be happy to tell the prosecuters, which they'd accordingly take into consideration. Irrelevant example.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
||||||||
08-20-2008, 05:29 PM | #127 | ||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
That is one example from the history of men a long time ago. More modern examples also exist . . . The contradictions between Quantum Mechanics and the Theory of Relativity, for instance. People in Quantum Mechanics and people in General Relativity have taken the particulars in their field and come to the logical conclusions, and they found the theories to reveal inconsistent results. Why? An insufficient number of particulars, as yet. More particulars, or data, often change the look of the results. Quote:
Quote:
That's just one layer of supportive evidence among many. I've described other layers of that evidence here many times, and I know you've seen some of them. The seismology arguments that you tried to use to refute the witness of your own eyes and all those eyewitness testimonies when I showed you the Zeitoun photographs . . . golly. That put a new definition on "bias" for me. Almost- I mean, there have been one or two other comments I've seen on Entmoot that reach that level of irrationality, but it isn't common to see. At least, that is definitely my view. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We are talking about spiritual entities, though, and spiritual entities aren't physical entities, so you can't perform physical scientific experiments on them in the way you could on physical entities. Though physical scientific experiments have been done on many people who have these experiences, such as the visionaries from Medjugorje, with pretty stunning results, and they also have been performed on miraculously impacted objects, with likewise incredible results, such as the tilma imprinted from Heaven with the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, or the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano. And those are repeatable, verifiable experiments performed in accord with the scientific method. So science does back it- I just don't think you've looked far enough to see it, and it seems that you sometimes reject it even when it has been made clear (such as the case in Zeitoun). I think you're stifling yourself when your foregone conclusions about everything religious you look at dominate your reason. Quote:
God hasn't given a ton of answers about science in the Bible or through the Church. He, instead, goes straight to the point: What humans most need. And that is unity with Him, which is what the Bible and Church are all about. Quote:
You completely missed the point I was making . You just responded to an aside. I probably should have put that second, though, with a little "incidentally" word on it. I made it too prominent by putting it first. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
||||||||||
08-20-2008, 06:15 PM | #128 | |||||||||
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
It was because they could not agree on what caused everything on Earth to fall downwards. The concept of gravity isn't exactly an easy concept for starters and thus it is quite understandable that a flat-earth theory was used to explain that. It's interesting though that, the divinely inspired Christians of antiquity were not knowledgeable about the true form of the Earth. Even more interesting for me is the total waste of time this Jesus of Nazareth was. Instead of opening the library of divine knowledge, he turned some bread and some fish into many kilos of it, made wine from water and walked a bit around on the water. Cute. Quote:
I really want to see you approach some of these scientists and tell them face to face that the basis for their research isn't "reliably correct conclusions" You are way over your head in generalizations. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And your basing it all on the premise that your religion is the only true worldview and reality of life. Your faith contradicts the other faiths of hundreds of millions of people. Which of course I've already seen that you dismiss as untrue religions.. Which then makes it unfathomable for me that you do not understand how bloody and divisive faith is, always excluding the beliefs of so many others. So concerning the fallibility of human beings as opposed to your dictionary of correct knowledge.. that isn't a question of the limitations of the divine, but a contradiction in your own argument. Quote:
Quote:
I might add that prostitution goes back to the earliest days of human life. Does it make it right? Quote:
It's all up there, in the noodle Lief. In fact, we're now coming to a level in neuroscience that it can already be observed that when this and this chemical reaction takes place in the brain that such and such thoughts, imagionations and fantasies take place. I just can't wait for the day when we know ten-fold more on this area of research. Not a day too soon. Quote:
While everything human progress in history shows that it is not in absolutes that we find answers, but in a difficult balancing act between what seems right and what seems wrong. Newton worked his ass off getting to the knowledge he obtained, and he failed many times before getting it right. He also made the most errors-in-conclusion during the times he tried to link up religion with science. He did f.ex. calculate the doomsday, sometime in the 19th century I believe. Didn't happen of course I say, Newton, stick to the facts, stay clear of the tall tales!
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
|||||||||
08-20-2008, 07:29 PM | #129 | |||||||||||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Jesus' miracles expressed his love for people. He didn't come as a scientist, to explain everything so we wouldn't have to figure out anything ourselves. That would be a vastly inferior goal to the one he sought to accomplish and which he achieved. It also would be less in tune with God's nature: God is Love. And that is how Jesus came . Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
He told them to destroy contaminated objects, burn used dressings, and bury fecal waste outside the camp. He told them not to eat animals that died of natural causes, to take precautions when touching the infected or deceased, and to wash and keep clean. He also told Israelites not to have sexual relationships outside of marriage, which, if fully followed, would eliminate STDs. Very sound medical advice, especially for a time period without "safe sex" technology (not that I think our technology makes the practice valid). Also, this advice was very unusual considering the time period, in which the surrounding nations were very accepting and in some cases even demanding of promiscuous behavior. All those pieces of advice were very advanced medical insights, unique in that time period and to remain so for hundreds, and in some cases thousands of years. Quote:
Quote:
So this gospel goes right back to its origin, Jesus Christ, and that is where the mind is. But I agree, we are fallible. That is why we rest on God in faith, faith which is not blind, which is not guesswork, but which rests upon countless solid, objective evidences that our God has given his people throughout time, and most importantly on our own personal relationships with Him, through which he proves His reality and His love for us on a daily basis . We love Him and know Him, and so we trust Him. The faith I'm describing is faith, because we are fallible, but it's faith of the sort that a child has in his parents. He has faith that they love him because of the relationships he has with them. Which a person can't objectively prove, but which one experiences and therefore believes. Praise be to God for the wonders and love he has expressed to me, to my family, to his Church, and to all the world . Quote:
It stands to reason that if any of the religions in the world is completely true, no matter what it might be, all the others that disagree with it partly must be partly false. That's just logical necessity, not something to complain about. Conservative Muslims have always acknowledged the same logic. So do many other people. It doesn't matter what is completely true, on this point- if ANY is completely true, all the others must be partly wrong. Which, if that bothers you, shows you're bothered by the idea of one religion being completely true. Which is odd, as that is actually a great grace. If no religion is completely true, we have to sift through them for the truth ourselves, through our own reasoning alone, and then what's the point of the divine revelation in the first place. It comes down to us, in that case, and our fancy that our own wisdom is preferable to God's. Quote:
And I know religion is divisive. So is science- some people support one theory, others a contradictory theory. So is archaeology- people come to different conclusions. That's true of anything that's true and worth pursuing. People have different opinions. If we were to all reject divisive ideologies, we'd have to reject everything there is. For every position, there is a contrary position. Some people would disagree with you and me that man has walked on the moon (I've met one), so our belief (or his) is divisive. Does that mean we should hold no opinions on the matter? Quote:
This also has to do, of course, with the facts that the population is growing very rapidly, so there are more people around to think of new questions, and also there is a lot more unbelief now, so a lot more people trying to think up ways to disagree with Christianity. A lot of the main objections that are brought up tend to trace back to to the very early days of Christianity, though. Some of the earliest heresies in Christian history tend to be paralleled in a good deal of modern thought. So there's an ancient element to what's going on, as well. But the fact that there are so many new objections really reflects the fact that there are so many objectors, which doesn't prove anything about whether the objections are right or wrong. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It's true that the backing for Christian absolutes is very strong, so I guess you're right about it being, "the easy way out." It makes a ton of sense, so it's easy to logically support and argue. Or at least, that's how I've found it for years on these threads. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 08-20-2008 at 09:34 PM. |
|||||||||||||||||||
08-22-2008, 12:40 PM | #130 |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
The horizon exhibits curvature when viewing it from a high point.
If Jesus did exist then he, or God, or he/God, chose a poor place to visit. Of all the places on this Earth he chose to visit this meagre populated Roman province, instead of revealing himself to the millions of human beings residing in India or China or even Rome or Cairo. It's not plausible, but this is: The theory that Jesus was merely a cult figure, made a legend by his followers and by people thereafter. Let's remember that there is not a single contemporary historian from the time that lived when Jesus lived that describes the awe-inspiring miracles and the lunacy that went on in Bethlehem and Jerusalem during Jesus' life. From the viewpoint of an historian, that's a pretty far-fetched tale to believe, and consequently why so many question the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. Certainly Jesus failed in, in your words, "wanted to know everyone", he also failed in getting everyone to, in your words, "experience his love". Because only a small percentage of human beings on the planet did hear of him, and it took decades and millenias for the rest of mankind to hear of this figure and the consequent religion that he represented. Yet when the word did come to the Americas, to Africa, to Asia, it was more often than not by the sword and not by the word, destroying cultures and languages and lives dedicated to messages more humble and less violent than anything the Catholic faith can argue they stand for. I believe that if you really want to speak of who holds the moral highground, and if you want to say that the supposed teachings of Jesus represent the best of the best, then look not to the corruption of the Catholic Church or its historical violence, or to Islam and its historical violence. No, look to Buddhism, look to many Native American earth-themed religions, look to large parts of Hinduism: There you will find the message that peace with God or Gods is not found by forcing it upon others, but by a highly personal relationship with the Creator or Creators him/her/themselves. Judaism pales in degree of violence in comparison to the way Christianity and Islam has spread out, and even Judaism is no tolerant religion but it says it all! To be sure, Jesus' 'miracles' are the replica of legends and other religious figures that appeared years, centuries and even millenias before him. His love isn't original, and neither is it a love that embraced all mankind because it focused on a small parcel of land on Earth. If God is love LIef, then God does not know what love is. This God knows nothing of compassion. This God is unimportant, uninteresting, uneducating, uncaring, unseeing and unhearing: All in all, if God did exist it wouldn't even matter because he intervenes not in the horrific disasters and plagues and wars of our time, where Millions upon Millions die, but in small cases, like freak recoveries from cancer or freak phenomenas of nature. That's the God Christianity and Islam and Judaism, etc. offers, and that's why today's religion has enough problems dealing with itself than spreading any meaningful message or promoting and meaningful peace where it is needed the most. I mean just look at the conflict in Palestine! Would it kill the guy to intervene? It's ridiculous. So please Lief, explain to me how you think over 1 billion Muslims in are wrong when they pray to Allah? And how are over 1 billion Hindus wrong when they pray to their plethora of Gods? That religion after all, is waaaaaaaaaaay older than yours! Actually, if I did decide to become religious (which I believe is a willy-nilly decision as there is nothing that provides evidence that there is a God/Gods, Only religious writings and religious culture provides that evidence: which means there is none) I would become Jewish, as they at least came before Christianity and can rightfully claim to have heard the message before Christianity, which is frankly the name of a human being: Jesus Christ. Really you don't get more idoltry than that. As to Medicine Lief, not an example you listed wasn't invented by the Greeks and passed on to the Romans and to, amongst others, Christians. And as to destroying contaminated objects, burying fecal waste, eating animals that didn't die naturally: it's such an obvious thing that this was practiced not only by the Greeks, but quite certainly by the Egyptians before them and the Persians and the Babylonians before them again! These aren't, in your words, "very advanced medical insights", no, but they are important guidelines. And for all the brilliance of the Catholic Church, it never understood that bleeding patients to death (as a means of curing him) was far less insightful than using soap, which only to come about in the 19th century. You can show me (probably none) a few medical developments from Holy (pseudo)Science and I will show you the vast array of discoveries (millions!) made by mankind not in the spirit of faith, but in the spirit of human progress, that unstoppable curiousity and want to do more, and to improve the way we live. As to this: "And I know religion is divisive. So is science- some people support one theory, others a contradictory theory." Lief, people don't fight wars of theories in science!..They don't kill each others, burn one another at the stake. But what's the use argueing moral standards and the history of mankind with a person that thinks that truth is found in the institution of moral bankruptcy that is the Catholic Church?
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." Last edited by Coffeehouse : 08-22-2008 at 12:45 PM. |
08-22-2008, 01:17 PM | #131 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
Well, "hard to get happy after that", lol.
I'll point out here (as part of the medical sidelight) that if the Catholic church hadn't forbidden womwn healers and granny midwifes as healers (and permitted them to be killed as witches) germ theory wouldn't have been as important, at least in the prevention of 'childbed fever." Rounding laboring women up and putting them in hospitals exposed them to more invasive methods and contagious diseases that homebirthing didn't.
__________________
That would be the swirling vortex to another world. Cool. I want one. TMNT No, I'm not emo. I just have a really poor sense of direction. (Thanks to katya for this quote) This is the best news story EVER! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26087293/ “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”...John McCain "I shall go back. And I shall find that therapist. And I shall whack her upside her head with my blanket full of rocks." ...Louisa May |
08-22-2008, 02:11 PM | #132 | |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
And as a last remark!: Like Richard Dawkins eloquently put it: "The trouble is that God in this sophisticated, physicist's sense bears no resemblance to the God of the Bible or any other religion. If a physicist says God is another name for Planck's constant, or God is a superstring, we should take it as a picturesque metaphorical way of saying that the nature of superstrings or the value of Planck's constant is a profound mystery. It has obviously not the smallest connection with a being capable of forgiving sins, a being who might listen to prayers, who cares about whether or not the Sabbath begins at 5pm or 6pm, whether you wear a veil or have a bit of arm showing; and no connection whatever with a being capable of imposing a death penalty on His son to expiate the sins of the world before and after he was born." and Steven Weinberg: "I don't need to argue here that the evil in the world proves that the universe is not designed, but only that there are no signs of benevolence that might have shown the hand of a designer. But in fact the perception that God cannot be benevolent is very old. Plays by Aeschylus and Euripides make a quite explicit statement that the gods are selfish and cruel, though they expect better behavior from humans. God in the Old Testament tells us to bash the heads of infidels and demands of us that we be willing to sacrifice our children's lives at His orders, and the God of traditional Christianity and Islam damns us for eternity if we do not worship him in the right manner. Is this a nice way to behave? I know, I know, we are not supposed to judge God according to human standards, but you see the problem here: If we are not yet convinced of His existence, and are looking for signs of His benevolence, then what other standards can we use?" Lastly, as a conciliatory nod Lief, I understand why people believe in a God. I understand the deep relief it gives to the heart and mind. It isn't the highly personal relationship with whatever Guidance of the Mind, be it a God, Gods, the Sun or the Moon, that I object against. We all find a point of reference in our life to create a moral guideline. In that respect I think it is absolutely fine to picture a higher being that is not like us. Perfectly okay! But when this personal faith organizes, imposes itself: deals out its own rigid judgement on issues of Life and Death, Happiness or Grief, and sets up Peoples against Peoples: that's wrong. There's nothing right about it, and if there's good in this world it certainly isn't judgemental religion.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
|
08-25-2008, 12:45 AM | #133 | |
The Ñoldóran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mishawaka, IN
Posts: 2,050
|
Quote:
__________________
Then Celegorm no more would stay, And Curufin smiled and turned away... ~The Lay of Leithian |
|
08-25-2008, 05:50 AM | #134 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ilha Formosa
Posts: 2,068
|
Quote:
Many of the Mongol Hordes were devoutly Buddhist, as were the Tibetans, who, unlike the image swallowed by their starry-eyed Western sympathizers, were a pretty fierce people- and many of their internal wars were due to religious factionalism. Being Buddhist didn't stop Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Korea or Japan from happily waging war against each other, and Hindus, right up to the current day appear to be quite willing to take to arms at the cry of "Mahadeva!" As for Native Americans, I think the idea of them as Greenpeacers living in harmony with nature has been pretty well disproven by the archeological record. It ranks up there with Lief's Chestertonian visions of a peaceful Middle Ages, with pious peasants labouring happily for thir chivalrous knightly lords, all under the benevolent gaze of Mother Church.
__________________
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep. Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them? "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us, but pigs treat us as equals."- Winston Churchill |
|
08-25-2008, 06:54 AM | #135 | |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
However, looking back at history it becomes obvious just how less expansionist and judgemental some of these other non-monotheist religions are. Neither the Buddhists nor the Hindus come anywhere near the us vs. them disease that seems to infest both Christianity and Islam. There is a far stronger trait of pacifism inside both these two large religions. An obvious example is the startling degree of non-violence (there is religious tensions in India, but surprise surprise, it involves Muslim pro-breakaways) the Indian nation represents. They have literally 1 billion people to choose from and yet I see no doctrines of world conversion. Likewise, Tibet, even today, is not immune to violence. But nobody expects them to. They are after all oppressed by a rigid Chinese gov't. However, looking back in history, all the way till this day, the Buddhists pale in comparison to the religious fervour and violence exhibited by Christianity and Islam. Interesting that the most celebrated religious leader in the world is the Dalai Lama, receiver of the Nobels Peace Prize and stubbornly in favour of non-violence against the Chinese; the very same Chinese that kicked him out of his own country. This is not to take away the plethora of faults many of the Eastern religions suffer, like the in-built caste system of the Hindus. But it's curious isn't it, that it was no Christian or Muslim person, but a devout Hindu, Mr. Mahatma Gandhi, that brought about the most astounding, non-violence advocating revolution the world has ever seen. He needed no Bible, no Koran, and no Doctrinal Decrees of Supreme Religious Knowledge, to score his point. He simply took love, patience and wisdom down from the sky and made them his message: All of which I hear are long-forgotten inside the stuffed halls of the Vatican.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." Last edited by Coffeehouse : 08-25-2008 at 07:00 AM. |
|
08-28-2008, 04:50 AM | #136 | |||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ilha Formosa
Posts: 2,068
|
Quote:
Quote:
The most well-known of the Hindu scriptures, the Bhagavid-Gita, begins on a battlefield where Prince Arjuna realises the enemies he is going to try to kill are his friends and relatives, and is morally troubled by this. Krishna, in the guise of his charioteer, shows up to point out that this life is all illusion, and the most important thing is for Arjuna to fill his karmic role as a warrior, so get out there and slaughter away. Quote:
In the Sri Lankan civil war, the most militant Sinhalese anti-peace faction is led by Buddhist monks. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, the reteat in South Africa where Gandhi first developed his principles of non-violence was named (by Gandhi) Tolstoy Farm: http://www.tolstoyfarm.com/the_past.htm Quote:
__________________
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep. Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them? "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us, but pigs treat us as equals."- Winston Churchill |
|||||||
08-28-2008, 04:55 AM | #137 | |||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ilha Formosa
Posts: 2,068
|
Quote:
Quote:
The most well-known of the Hindu scriptures, the Bhagavid-Gita, begins on a battlefield where Prince Arjuna realises the enemies he is going to try to kill are his friends and relatives, and is morally troubled by this. Krishna, in the guise of his charioteer, shows up to point out that this life is all illusion, and the most important thing is for Arjuna to fill his karmic role as a warrior, so get out there and slaughter away. Quote:
In the Sri Lankan civil war, the most militant Sinhalese anti-peace faction is led by Buddhist monks. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, the reteat in South Africa where Gandhi first developed his principles of non-violence was named (by Gandhi) Tolstoy Farm: http://www.tolstoyfarm.com/the_past.htm Quote:
__________________
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep. Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them? "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us, but pigs treat us as equals."- Winston Churchill |
|||||||
08-28-2008, 07:27 AM | #138 |
Entmoot Attorney-General,
Equilibrating the Scales of Justice, Administrator ♎ Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,891
|
GrayMouser, I've just browsed through your posts in this thread. As I take a big interest in the "sinosphere", I find your posts highly interesting. It was a pleasure to get to know Han Dan, Matsu and the Ghost Money, learn about the Jesuits' emphasis on Mary over Jesus in China and the meaning of the words "Tianzhujiao" and "Yesujiao", and read what you said regarding Asian religious violence.
Keep it up
__________________
An unwritten post is a delightful universe of infinite possibilities. Set down one word, however, and it immediately becomes earthbound. Set down one sentence and it’s halfway to being just like every other bloody entry that’s ever been written. ☻ |
08-28-2008, 10:00 AM | #139 |
Entmoot Minister of Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 2,145
|
Yes, Desmond Tutu did indeed receive the Nobels Peace Prize, and he is a Catholic. The point I was making was that Mahatma Gandhi was no Catholic, no impassioned reader of the Bible, but, and I'll repeat myself, one who "took love, patience and wisdom down from the sky and made them his message". Likewise, yes Gandhi was influenced by a Christian person, but that along with your quoted passage simply underlines my point: That no religion can claim to hold monopoly on truth, or love. It's universal, thereby my metaphor for taking these items down from the sky.
__________________
"Well, thief! I smell you and I feel your air. I hear your breath. Come along! Help yourself again, there is plenty and to spare." |
08-28-2008, 04:00 PM | #140 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
No, no, fear not, Desmond Tutu is not a Catholic; he is an Anglican.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Science | ayarella | General Messages | 804 | 04-13-2012 09:05 PM |
muslims PART 2 | Spock | General Messages | 805 | 02-03-2011 03:16 AM |
Theology III | Earniel | General Messages | 1007 | 07-02-2008 02:22 PM |
Theological Opinions | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 992 | 02-10-2006 04:15 PM |
REAL debate thread for RELIGION | Ruinel | General Messages | 1439 | 04-01-2005 02:47 PM |