Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Rían]

hi guys - I got the "blaster" computer worm and have been unable to get on all day and will prob. be logged off any second - I'm leaving on vacation, like I said, and will be back in a week if I can get the computer de-wormed!!

Thanks for your post, GM, and I had a nice response typed out but got logged off I'll try to reconstruct it when I get back.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Katt, I hate to break it to you, but GM is a he, not a she.

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
I think I am- but I could be wrong

Well, at last i think i have defeat my own lazyness and we'll try to make a response.

I needed your answer because if you had responded as Katt it'd have been useless to try to explain how i understand our freedom.

IMO, freedom doesn't consist in the power to choose between different possibilities. Freedom is the power to choose in which way do you want to perfect your life.

I think that my decisions can make me more or less perfect (you can agree or not with what i believe is "perfection", but that's another point...). I don't think all my choices have made me be a better person, and that's were i discover that i'm free to make of my life a better thing or not.

In your question about

How, exactly, is a young mother in Africa unknowingly getting AIDS from her husband and transmitting it to her unborn child an expression of our freedom?

i think you saw it as an example of a women with very little choices to avoid a great suffering in her life (and eventually, a premature death). I agree with you.

But i also think that what is really important is the attitude with which she'll take that suffering. She may become desperate because she cannot understand it. Or perhaps she may try and fight against her disease at least to help her husband and children while she still can. Or perhaps, she can help to advice other men/women of her town about the dangers of AIDS...

None of those (or other possible) options will avoid the suffering, but only some of them will make her a better person and therefore a happier person. Yes, freedom is what allows us to discover that suffering and happiness are not incompatible.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

A quick side note on the question of "suffering", especially of the innocents:

Firstly, I would like to cite Paul, who said, "All have fallen short of the glory of God" and "There is none righteous, no, not one." In other words, from the Christian perspective (and of course the "attack" if you will is against Christianity and the Christian God) there are no truly innocent people.

Secondly, I would like to remind those concerned of numerous places in the Bible, especially the Beatitudes and the parable of Lazarus in the rich man. In many places throughout (these are the only ones I can remember), it is made very clear that those who suffer in this life will be blessed in the next. According to the Jerusalem Bible, "How happy are the pure in spirit; theirs is the kingdom of heaven...Happy those who mourn: they shall be comforted. Happy those who hunger and thirst for what is right: they shall be satisfied...Happy those who are persecuted in the cause of right: theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Suffering in one world is a chance to "cash in", to reduce the Christian religion to a purely gain-centric theme, on the wealth of the next. Truly, what is a little hunger in comparison with eternal fullfilment; what is sorrow next to eternal joy; what is pain and illness next to eternally divine health?

The above is meant to represent a Christian view; naturally, I do not expect non-Christians to agree with me (though it would be nice ); and I readily invite any other Christians to make changes, additions, etc.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to keep up on this discussion, but I will try to drop in once in a while.

[Rían]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
How, exactly, is a young mother in Africa unknowingly getting AIDS from her husband and transmitting it to her unborn child an expression of our freedom?

It is certainly an expression of her husband's freedom to cheat on his wife, isn't it...

[Gwaimir Windgem]

(Still on! )

Not necessarily, I don't think. I believe that AIDS is far, far, far worse in Africa, and it's much more likely that someone will have it, whether they promiscuize (is that a word? ) or not. AIDS can of course be transmitted a number of ways; I think I remember someone once saying that about half of the people in parts of Africa could be visibly seen to suffer from the ravages of the disease. Americans fear it; it's an epidemic in Africa.

[GrayMouser]

While I think a lot of AIDS in Africa comes from unsterilized needles etc., a lot still does come from promiscuity.

It's apparently a fairly wide-spread custom that a widow must sleep with another man soon after her husband's funeral to prevent his ghost from coming back- an almost perfect set-up for increasing transmission.

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
A quick side note on the question of "suffering", especially of the innocents:

Firstly, I would like to cite Paul, who said, "All have fallen short of the glory of God" and "There is none righteous, no, not one." In other words, from the Christian perspective (and of course the "attack" if you will is against Christianity and the Christian God) there are no truly innocent people.

Secondly, I would like to remind those concerned of numerous places in the Bible, especially the Beatitudes and the parable of Lazarus in the rich man. In many places throughout (these are the only ones I can remember), it is made very clear that those who suffer in this life will be blessed in the next. According to the Jerusalem Bible, "How happy are the pure in spirit; theirs is the kingdom of heaven...Happy those who mourn: they shall be comforted. Happy those who hunger and thirst for what is right: they shall be satisfied...Happy those who are persecuted in the cause of right: theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Suffering in one world is a chance to "cash in", to reduce the Christian religion to a purely gain-centric theme, on the wealth of the next. Truly, what is a little hunger in comparison with eternal fullfilment; what is sorrow next to eternal joy; what is pain and illness next to eternally divine health?

The above is meant to represent a Christian view; naturally, I do not expect non-Christians to agree with me (though it would be nice ); and I readily invite any other Christians to make changes, additions, etc

Most major religions would agree on that, I think.

In eastern religions the idea of karma and rebirth play the same role, i.e. to explain why it is that in this world the wicked flourish and the righteous suffer, and to hold out hope for justice in the future.

From a non-believer's perspective, that's of course exactly why they were thought up.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to keep up on this discussion, but I will try to drop in once in a while.

Often, one hopes- always interesting to hear from you

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
The above is meant to represent a Christian view; naturally, I do not expect non-Christians to agree with me (though it would be nice ); and I readily invite any other Christians to make changes, additions, etc.

I'd like to add something. This is Mathew 19,29:

And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Jesus doesn't promise only "the joy in the eternal life". He promises "the joy and the eternal life".

Eternal life is not only something that make us

bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,

(Hamlet)

it is not a prize for all the suffering of life. It is the natural ending for the love of your life: it is the plenitude of love.

So, for understanding human suffering, I don't think we need to speak of the promised glory. It is enough to say that suffering, born for love, brings joy in this life. That is the way that Jesus taught us in his Passion.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Fat middle
it is not a prize for all the suffering of life. It is the natural ending for the love of your life: it is the plenitude of love.

Wow.

I really, really like that, Fat middle.



Gwai - I don't quite agree with what you said, but I imagine it's due to your short posting time - I think we're pretty like-minded.

GrayM and Gwai - yes, of course I realize that promiscuity isn't the only means of transmission - I almost typed in "unless he had been faithful and got AIDS from a blood transfusion", but then I realized that it's just freedom moved another level back - IOW, the freedom to choose promiscuity, which is against God's loving ideal for us, is a huge factor in the spread of AIDS, and makes it possible for people to get it even in morally innocent ways. And whether we like it or not, our choices affect others, even innocents.

I just threw in the final wash load from our camping trip (Oy! those socks were filthy!) - I don't feel like thinking deeply tonight, so I'll put off answering the other posts until tomorrow or the next day.

[Rían]

I'm sorry I'm letting this thread droop a bit, guys, when I promised I'd talk about the subject. My surgery is a week from today, and this, combined with the heat of summer, just leaves me not wanting to do much of anything ....

Let me get a cold drink and get going again ...

*ahhhh!*

OK - Now I imagine GrayMouser has an idea of how I'm going to address this topic (right, GM? ) because he knows the books I have read and like, esp. The Problem of Pain by C. S. Lewis. Yes, I'm going to bring up some of those points, but I'm also going to bring up some other things. This particular topic is not quite as much a doctrinal issue as the subject of hell was - there are some unknown areas here - but I think that I can bring up some things that will help to deal with the question, and I think that Christianity has the best answer to the question, altho it is certainly a complex answer, because the question is complex.

So I'd kinda like to bring in several sub-topics and let them all simmer together...

[Rían]

One of them is actually a response that I wanted to give to Millane's question awhile back, and it deals with our basic character makeup.

(and as usual when starting a new topic, I'll state that I'm talking about internal logic/consistency in Christianity - whether or not you believe in God is a different issue. The basic question is: "how can a God who is all-powerful and all-good allow suffering in the world?", is that all right with everyone?)

(and note #2 - I'll be discussing this in a formal manner, in order to be as clear as possible, but believe me, I hate to see suffering!)

One of the things that Millane brought up was something like what's so wrong with pornography and drugs and alcohol and things like that? And what was so interesting about that list is that these are all addictive things. You need more and more to get the same buzz, and they are all very hard to stop doing.

(edit - I should add that drinking alcohol in moderation is perfectly fine, acc'd to the Bible, and I very much enjoy a glass of wine several times a week, but getting drunk is what is a "don't".)

The reason why that interested me was that Millane was talking about freedom, and how he thought that Christianity was very limiting to freedom. However, the things he wanted to be free to engage in are .... addicting!. IOW, they take away your freedom as you get further and further into them.

Christianity, IMO, and from my personal experience, DOES have some "don't do's", but they are for our GOOD. I don't consider "don'ts" to be limiting to freedom if it is for the good of the people involved, or if it keeps you away from an addicting behavior that will take away your freedom.

See, the interesting thing is that (and many of you WON'T like this!) we are created beings. And that means that there is a creator that has authority over us. Now luckily for us, the creator is good and wishes only the best for us. But there is no getting away from the fact that, acc'd to the Bible, we are created beings. And something will be master over us - the Bible says that we are either slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness - no other choice. I know what I would rather be And our freedom lies in the fact that we can CHOOSE what will be master over us - either God or sin-marred self. If we choose God, we find true freedom and joy, because we are in harmony with our created nature and design. If we choose self, we end up being in slavery to our sin natures.

whoops- gotta go now, kid emergency - I might try to reword the last paragraph, because it didn't come out exactly like I intended, but comments are welcome so far....

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by RÃ*an


<snip>

Christianity, IMO, and from my personal experience, DOES have some "don't do's", but they are for our GOOD. I don't consider "don'ts" to be limiting to freedom if it is for the good of the people involved, or if it keeps you away from an addicting behavior that will take away your freedom.

Being for our own good or not doesn't really bear on whether "don't do's" restrict our freedom- it's undoubtedly for my own good to require me to wear a seat-belt, but it's equally undoubtedly a restriction on my freedom.

As long as I have correct information as to the consequences of my acts, any prohibition on my actions is a limit on my freedom.

"True Freedom is obeying the Rules" ?

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
Being for our own good or not doesn't really bear on whether "don't do's" restrict our freedom- it's undoubtedly for my own good to require me to wear a seat-belt, but it's equally undoubtedly a restriction on my freedom.

As long as I have correct information as to the consequences of my acts, any prohibition on my actions is a limit on my freedom.

"True Freedom is obeying the Rules" ?

I tried to explain that when you asked me about the African woman with AIDS.

Freedom is not a simple capacity of choosing between different options.

Freedom is the capacity of human beings to better their own persons by the use of their will. The choosing between different alternatives is only a consequence of that.

Clearer now?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

suffering, born for love, brings joy

Couldn't possibly have put it better, FM. It's wonderful on those rare occasions when profundity and clarity mix so very well.

One of the things that Millane brought up was something like what's so wrong with pornography and drugs and alcohol and things like that? And what was so interesting about that list is that these are all addictive things. You need more and more to get the same buzz, and they are all very hard to stop doing.

On a side note, I personally don't think that alcohol is wrong; indeed, I feel that such a position is un-Biblical. It is of course the excess of alcohol that is wrong, because of the addiction which you mention. I suppose I feel the same way about drugs, though I think that it is considerably more dangerous, and that overall people are best to just steer clear of them, due to the increased danger.

something will be master over us - the Bible says that we are either slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness - no other choice...And our freedom lies in the fact that we can CHOOSE what will be master over us - either God or sin-marred self.

Well put, indeed.

Often, one hopes- always interesting to hear from you

Thanks, GM. The same to you; you are always not only interesting, but courteous; an area I fear that I lack in from time to time.

This particular topic is not quite as much a doctrinal issue as the subject of hell was - there are some unknown areas here

I feel that I must point out that there are some unknown areas in the subject of Hello, as well.

Being for our own good or not doesn't really bear on whether "don't do's" restrict our freedom- it's undoubtedly for my own good to require me to wear a seat-belt, but it's equally undoubtedly a restriction on my freedom.

As long as I have correct information as to the consequences of my acts, any prohibition on my actions is a limit on my freedom.

And I would like to point out that you are, according to Christianity, informed as to the consequences of your acts, and are able to choose between life and death, blessings and cursings.

Another thing I would like to say is that while it is most surely true that sin is detrimental to us, I think that the most important thing to state is that, from the Christian view, it is unhealthy for one's soul (or spirit, depending on which you prefer ). Sin is a cancer, which causes our spirits to sicken, and damages our relationship with God. If left unattended, it could in the end prove to be a fatal cancer.

I feel like there's much more that I want to say, but alas! I am feeling rather illiterate in the English language tonight, and I don't really have the time to sort out my thoughts, so I must bid you "a Dieu".

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
[B]Couldn't possibly have put it better, FM. It's wonderful on those rare occasions when profundity and clarity mix so very well.

Hey, thanks, but I could say the same about your

I personally don't think that alcohol is wrong; indeed, I feel that such a position is un-Biblical. It is of course the excess of alcohol that is wrong,

... and that's not a minor point

[Rían]

Whoops - thanks for pointing that out, Gwai- I'll edit the post. The way Millane was asking it, I just assumed excess alcoholic drinking.

I have no problem at all drinking wine! In fact, I just put a new bottle of White Zinfindel in the fridge 10 minutes ago - we polished off the old one last night The only thing in the Bible that is a "don't" is becoming drunk (esp. in a habitual manner).

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by Fat middle
I tried to explain that when you asked me about the African woman with AIDS.

Freedom is not a simple capacity of choosing between different options.

Freedom is the capacity of human beings to better their own persons by the use of their will. The choosing between different alternatives is only a consequence of that.

Clearer now?

Not really. If you use "freedom" in the generally-accepted way it is the capacity of human beings to make choices, whether of right or wrong, chocolate or vanilla, left or right etc.


Even if you restrict it to "moral freedom" or some such, the essence of the term is still the choice. Surely the capacity of human beings to better their own persons must also include the capacity of humans to worsen their own positions?

What you refer to as "only a consequence" is actually the definition.

[Fat middle]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
Not really. If you use "freedom" in the generally-accepted way it is the capacity of human beings to make choices, whether of right or wrong, chocolate or vanilla, left or right etc.

...

What you refer to as "only a consequence" is actually the definition.

Nope. Animals can choose chocalate or vanilla. But they cannot choose what kind of an animal they want to be. There's the difference between choosing and freedom.

The simple capacity of choosing is a very poor thing. Freedom is a much higher capacity of men.

Even if you restrict it to "moral freedom" or some such, the essence of the term is still the choice. Surely the capacity of human beings to better their own persons must also include the capacity of humans to worsen their own positions?

Of course. That's why very man needs to achieve his own freedom. Freedom needs a strong will. If you don't choose what makes you better you go worse and then loose capacity for later choices.

For example, if you beging having drugs, it will come the time when you're not able to stop having. That's because your choices have made you less free.

But as you see, the capacity of making choices is only the consequence of the decision to be or not a better person.

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by RÃ*an

One of the things that Millane brought up was something like what's so wrong with pornography and drugs and alcohol and things like that? And what was so interesting about that list is that these are all addictive things. You need more and more to get the same buzz, and they are all very hard to stop doing.

(edit - I should add that drinking alcohol in moderation is perfectly fine, acc'd to the Bible, and I very much enjoy a glass of wine several times a week, but getting drunk is what is a "don't".)

yes I have to add my 2 cents in Getting drunk results in letting something other than yourself control your actions....ie many people can do stupid and irresponsible things when theyre drunk and that's why it's wrong