# Jesus-Christ has paid the price



## yoyo

What was the main mission of the Lord Jesus-Christ? As it is written in the Holy scriptures, the mission of Jesus-Christ was to save the humanity from spiritual and physical death. He did that through resurrection and the atonement. But what does it mean? How is it possible that a person such as Jesus-Christ saved the world? How would that go? Let me explain to you with own words how that went. I will use an analogi in order to illustrate the atonement. I hope that my personalised explanation will help you understand the great mission of our savior.

Analogi:

Imagine that you ( you reading this message) and I are very good friends. We have known each other for a very long period of time, let's say 30 years. Our friendship is totally absolut and nothing in this imperfect world can interferes it. Our trust for each other is the strongest element in our relationship and we can perfectly rely on each other. One day, you are facing a problem. You have received a big telefon bill, but you can unfortunately not afford it. You then turn to me and explain your problem. I listen to you carefully and do not think that it is a big deal. You then ask me if you could borrow the money from me. Of course, I tell you that I surely will, which I do. You then promise me that you will pay back within a week. The promise could even be called "covenant" because of our special friendship. I agree and we shake hands. I know without the shadow of a doubt that you will keep your promise.

A week later, when time to pay back has come, you come back to my place, but with empty hands. You look very sad and feel guilty. I am asking you why you seem so strange. You then tell me that you do not have the money to pay back on time. The reason why you are sad is that during the week, you did your very best in order to earn or somehow get the money that you were owning me. You looked for a temporary job, you asked many other people in your family and among your other "friends" if you could borrow money from them in order to pay your debt on time, but nothing worked out. You really did your very best and God knows that. Unfortunately, you can not pay back now. I then look at you and try to find out how I could help you with your problem. I then think about one possible solution: you can pay back later. Because of our friendship, I could even accept that you pay only when you have succeeded with getting the money or even better, give you the money. I want to be mercyfull and generous, because you are my friend. Of course, you think it is very kind of me to suggest this solution, but you see one problem with it. If I give you more time in order to get the money or if I simply give you the money, you still have not kept the promise. You still have broken our covenant. Justice is then not accomplished/respected (justice would require that you get some sort of punishment, but that will not happen if I give you the money). Our trust failed. We then both realise that justice and mercy interferes with each other. How can justice and mercy(both of them) possibly apply to our situation? If I give you the money, mercy is shown, but justice is ignored. If I do not give you the money, justice is then accomplished but mercy is ignored.

The phone suddenltly rings. I answer. The person on the phone knows(somehow) your problem and suggest to pay back your debt now. Of course, we both become glad and you accept the generous offer. I get my money on time. As we now realise, both justice and mercy successfully applied, but that required the participation of a third person. That third person is Jesus-Christ, our savior. He saved us from the eternal spiritual death and physical death ( our imperfections). He gave us by grace the gift of immortality through resurrection. We will only be saved though if we accept His gift. If you( in my analogi) refuse the generous offer made by the third person, then you are still responsable (liable) for your breach. The question now is to establish how we can accept and receive that wonderful gift? The answer is by following the teachings of our Lord Jesus- Christ. Jesus showed us the way to eternal life and to eternal happiness. He teached us the importance of baptism and repentance. Let us now not perrish and embrace that wonderful gift.


----------



## MrMortgage

I seriously have a bad memory yoyo! For some reason I remember you being on a 50/50 with religion...or maybe that was someone else I talked to in the chatroom....anyway have you always been in to God or is this new for you?


----------



## SillyPutty

Yoyo has advised me when we met that he is a Mormon and that he is a 'pastor' ( I use that term loosly as I do not know if they bare that title or not, but he did say he was the head of his church).


----------



## yoyo

Hi Silly, nice to hear from you again. I am actually not a pastor as you believe, but I am member of the Church of Jesus-Christ of later day saints( sometime called the mormon church) as you said. Thus, I have been a bishop in a congregation, but that was for 6 years ago. I do have the priesthood though, but it does not make me to a leader necessary. The priesthood is the power by which God created or should 
i say organised the world. Take care of you silly.


----------



## agentcooper

do you live in utah, yoyo?


----------



## yoyo

Hi agentcooper,

 no, I do not live in Utah. But I noticed that you live in Utah. Well, you are a lucky one. Are you possibly a member? Take care.


----------



## agentcooper

i was raised mormon, but i'm not active anymore. it's not that i'm not a spiritual person, but being mormon really isn't for me.


----------



## Guest

What the...? What a crock of shite. It could just as easily be anyone on the phone. How does saying that then launching into some spiel about being forgiven and ever-lasting life have anything to do with anything?


----------



## Mollusk

i don't understand how both justice and mercy are accomplished. It seems to me that neither were in your analogy. Your friend did not have to grant you mercy and you became unresponsible for your promise. It just was magically fixed. It seems that you are saying that if we follow jesus then unresolved problems will just become fixed.


----------



## julie13

My phone bill is two weeks late...Jesus...give a girl a ring!


----------



## sleepingbeauty

urbn said:


> i don't understand how both justice and mercy are accomplished. It seems to me that neither were in your analogy. Your friend did not have to grant you mercy and you became unresponsible for your promise. It just was magically fixed. It seems that you are saying that if we follow jesus then unresolved problems will just become fixed.


thats exactly what he is saying. its called FAITH. learn it, live it, love it. OR ELSE!! :twisted:


----------



## julie13

thats exactly what he is saying. its called FAITH. learn it, live it, love it. OR ELSE!!

That is exactly what I cannot stand!!! Why is it that all you people are like ....Jesus Christ or BURN IN HELL!!! So you're saying that if we don't follow blindly the masses of Christianity, we must face an eternity of damnation?? Great message. The only thing that will accomplish is getting a bunch of people to say they believe in God only because the other alternative- burning in hell- isn't a real viable one.

I say stop threatening and let people find God for themselves


----------



## Guest

She was being highly sarcastic. :wink:


----------



## sleepingbeauty

hey speak for yourself sinner! :x


----------



## MrMortgage

julie13 said:


> thats exactly what he is saying. its called FAITH. learn it, live it, love it. OR ELSE!!
> 
> That is exactly what I cannot stand!!! Why is it that all you people are like ....Jesus Christ or BURN IN HELL!!! So you're saying that if we don't follow blindly the masses of Christianity, we must face an eternity of damnation?? Great message. The only thing that will accomplish is getting a bunch of people to say they believe in God only because the other alternative- burning in hell- isn't a real viable one.
> 
> I say stop threatening and let people find God for themselves


I'm with you on that. Like I said many times before, its not my job or any Christians job to pound getting saved in your mind. In fact doing that too much will make you not want to be saved.

I personally never go around saying that all you guys must agree with me or youre going to hell. All I do is type the truth, if you put the time in reading it, you must be intersted, I know for a fact that I didnt ask for your meaning > (anyones) opinion on my views...

Its like writing a book, and you meanining > (anyone) gets all pissy about me forcing you to buy the book and pay for it.

If someone doesnt want to be saved because, they dont want to worship a God that is "cut and dry" that's their buisness.

Maybe some of us should make up our own God's or search around till we find a God that pleases us, Kinda like a contest, we should hold a big survey to see what kind of God you would like to worship and start worshiping that! :roll:

Its simple folks, take it or leave it.


----------



## julie13

Thanks Mr. Mortgage...now if you weren't so intimidated by strong women and weren't so screwed up in your views of dominance, we might get along :wink:


----------



## agentcooper

MrMortgage said:


> I personally never go around saying that all you guys must agree with me or youre going to hell. All I do is type the truth, if you put the time in reading it, you must be intersted, I know for a fact that I didnt ask for your meaning > (anyones) opinion on my views...
> 
> Its simple folks, take it or leave it.


"it's simple folks, take it or leave it." but if you leave it you're going straight to HELL! where you will burn for all eternity! i've heard you say it a bazillian times.

i'm just sayin'.........


----------



## Homeskooled

A bazillian times.....that cracks me up. :lol: At least somebody else around here says bazillian....My next most favoritest made up number is gajillion......

Homeskooled


----------



## agentcooper

Homeskooled said:


> A bazillian times.....that cracks me up. :lol: At least somebody else around here says bazillian....My next most favoritest made up number is gajillion......
> 
> Homeskooled


 :lol: i really like bajillion, too.


----------



## sleepingbeauty

gajillion infinity 8)


----------



## Homeskooled

Haha..yeah, Cooper, bajillian is funny too. I like how in Back to the Future, Doc is always running around ranting how its impossible to get 200 jiggawats to make the time machine (Delorean) work again....a totally made up wattage. God, I love those movies. Christopher Lloyd's performance was so natural....I cant think of him as any other character than doc. Hope you had a nice holiday!

peace
Homeskooled


----------



## MrMortgage

julie13 said:


> Thanks Mr. Mortgage...now if you weren't so intimidated by strong women and weren't so screwed up in your views of dominance, we might get along :wink:


No, no...you think I'm screwed up in my views, and you said I'm intimidated, I never said that or thought that.

I can easily say that your are intimidated by me because you get so defensive whenever I type something you dont agree with.

I'm going to go ahead and say this, becuase I really dont give a shit if you get saved or not, or end up laughing at me when Jesus never comes, ITS VERY CLEAR WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT, ITS BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT HAPPY WITH WHAT IT SAYS, OR TEACHES.

EVERYONE WANTS TO FEEL COMFORTABLE IN WHAT THEY BELIEVE OR DO, BUT SOMETIMES YOU DONT ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT, AND SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO GET TOLD WHAT TO DO. I DONT MIND HAVING GOD TELLING ME WHAT TO DO.

LET ME TYPED THIS, I KNOW WHEN I GO TO HEAVEN THAT WE ARE NOT ALL GOING TO BE EQUAL UP THERE, AND THERE WILL CLASSIFACTIONS, FOR ALL I KNOW YOU MIGHT BE HIGHER UP THEN ME AND I WILL HAVE TO LISTEN TO WHAT YOU SAY AND I WILL HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT.

SO WHEN THE BIBLE SAYS WOMEN SUBMIT TO YOUR MAN, IT DOESNT MEAN LET HIM BEAT YOU AND RAPE YOU, IT MEANS GIVE HIM THE RESPECT OF THE DOMINATE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD...IT DOESNT ME WOMEN DONT HAVE A SAY OR CANT HAVE AN OPINION.

BUT ON A LIST ITS GOES HUSBAND THEN WIFE, YOUR JUST MAD BECAUSE IT DOESNT SAY WIFE THEN HUSBAND. GET OVER IT, AND GET OVER YOURSELF.

:wink:


----------



## MrMortgage

agentcooper said:


> MrMortgage said:
> 
> 
> 
> I personally never go around saying that all you guys must agree with me or youre going to hell. All I do is type the truth, if you put the time in reading it, you must be intersted, I know for a fact that I didnt ask for your meaning > (anyones) opinion on my views...
> 
> Its simple folks, take it or leave it.
> 
> 
> 
> "it's simple folks, take it or leave it." but if you leave it you're going straight to HELL! where you will burn for all eternity! i've heard you say it a bazillian times.
> 
> i'm just sayin'.........
Click to expand...

Very true, its cut and dry. Take it or leave it.

People get all pissy about having to bow down to a God. They dont want to fear a God.

I'll tell you this, these are the type of people that dont fear a man or women with a gun, and refuse to give up their purse or car because its just unfair, and they should not have to fear anything.

Then they end up shot.


----------



## agentcooper

MrMortgage said:


> agentcooper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MrMortgage said:
> 
> 
> 
> I personally never go around saying that all you guys must agree with me or youre going to hell. All I do is type the truth, if you put the time in reading it, you must be intersted, I know for a fact that I didnt ask for your meaning > (anyones) opinion on my views...
> 
> Its simple folks, take it or leave it.
> 
> 
> 
> "it's simple folks, take it or leave it." but if you leave it you're going straight to HELL! where you will burn for all eternity! i've heard you say it a bazillian times.
> 
> i'm just sayin'.........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Very true, its cut and dry. Take it or leave it.
> 
> People get all pissy about having to bow down to a God. They dont want to fear a God.
> 
> I'll tell you this, these are the type of people that dont fear a man or women with a gun, and refuse to give up their purse or car because its just unfair, and they should not have to fear anything.
> 
> Then they end up shot.
Click to expand...

you said "I personally never go around saying that all you guys must agree with me or youre going to hell. "

my point was, that you DO go around saying that all of us must agree with you or we're going to hell....you totally contradicted yourself.[/b]


----------



## MrMortgage

Agentcooper, the bible says this! I dont say this! These are not my views, this is what is in black and white.

I dont have views on the bible, I just know what it says. If people have different views, then that's wrong, we should all have the same view on it.

You cant throw the baby out with the bath water. You cant take a bite of what you like and throw away the rest.

I just relay what I study, I dont make it my own becuase it is not my own, its Gods.


----------



## Guest

Mr. Mortgage, when people talk like that it seems that they're really trying to convince themselves.

I don't and won't "fear" God, just because the Bible was voted to be the book of authority on Christianity many centuries ago.

If you really believe what you say, you'll live it instead of spouting it.

Do you actually think an ass hole who reads the Bible has a better chance in the afterlife than a compassionate person who doesn't?

Dream on.


----------



## rainboteers

well said beachgirl

whatsoever the godward path may be 
I will do my best to give it dignity
truely lighted souls seek only to ascend
ALL paths that lead to god must somewhere blend.


----------



## MrMortgage

beachgirl said:


> Mr. Mortgage, when people talk like that it seems that they're really trying to convince themselves.
> 
> I don't and won't "fear" God, just because the Bible was voted to be the book of authority on Christianity many centuries ago.
> 
> If you really believe what you say, you'll live it instead of spouting it.
> 
> Do you actually think an ass hole who reads the Bible has a better chance in the afterlife than a compassionate person who doesn't?
> 
> Dream on.


Listen genius, have you studied other religions... They all talk about having fear of the Lord. The only religion that doesnt is the church of Satan, they say to think of yourself as Lord and have fear of nothing.

Even Budahism speaks of a "hell" if you act the fool. All religions talk about a wrathful lead spirit.

And I must spout this in order to live it, its part of the mission.

All i'm trying to do is get my point across the right way.

MY POINT TO ALL THIS IS, HOW CAN YOU READ A SCRIPTURE IN THE BIBLE, THE KORAN, THE TORA, THE HEBREW BIBLE ABOUT GOD BEING KIND AND LOVING, AND ANOTHER SCRIPTURE ABOUT GOD GETTING PISSED IF YOU DONT DO CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT TREAT BOTH SCRIPTURES EQUALY.

NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THE SCRIPTURES OF DISCIPLINE, BUT THEY WANT TO TALK ALL DAY LONG ABOUT THE SCRIPTURES OF LOVE PEACE AND JOY. THERE ARE JUST AS MANY SCRIPTURES OF LOVE PEACE AND JOY AS THERE IS SCRIPTURES OF DISCIPLINE, WHY TREAT THEM ANY DIFFERENT.

*NOW BEACHGIRL, IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE YOUR OWN RELIGION AND TELL ME WHAT ITS ABOUT, I WOULD SERIOUSLY LIKE TO HERE ABOUT IT. BUT DONT TAKE A BITE OF SOMETHING AND LEAVE THE REST.*


----------



## MrMortgage

beachgirl said:


> Do you actually think an ass hole who reads the Bible has a better chance in the afterlife than a compassionate person who doesn't?
> 
> Dream on.


Oh, thankyou for being so compassionate by the way. See you in heaven with that loving attitude. :?:


----------



## Guest

Oh, you're right, Mortgage! I can see you doing God's work here!


----------



## MrMortgage

beachgirl said:


> Oh, you're right, Mortgage! I can see you doing God's work here!


I'm glad you finally agree. Now sit down and listen. Just kidding, dont want to piss you off, since I've already seen your nice side, I can only imagine your mean side.


----------



## rainboteers

it doesnt matter, eveyone has their own path, and that should always be respected. one thing that must be said is that my relationship with god involves no fear and i am certainly not a satanist. i dont have to explain why i believe some of the bible and i think other parts are ridiculous, because it doesnt matter if it makes sense to anyone else. I am at peace with my realtionship with god, and what other people believe doesnt bother me. what bothers me and why i try so hard to stay out of this section is the attacking, and claiming to know what is right for everyone else. arghhh irritating.. okay carry on... i have to stay away from this.


----------



## widescreened

If people actually started to take personal responsibility for themselves rather than adhering to dubious ancient scripts that have been edited and doctored to control people,we would be a lot closer to God.Instead,we live in an age where the old testement is used to win votes and go to war.Mr Mortgage,you have to accept responsibility for yourself.You can be a good person without this bullcrap of vengeful Gods,tsunamis and earthquakes.If you continue this way,and by some fluke,have kids,they will turn out to be unhappy at best and a danger to society at worst.


----------



## rainboteers

widescreened said:


> If people actually started to take personal responsibility for themselves rather than adhering to dubious ancient scripts that have been edited and doctored to control people,we would be a lot closer to God.Instead,we live in an age where the old testement is used to win votes and go to war.


BRILLANTLY said *claps* that is exactly how i feel as well. OK no more reading this because im sure the next reply will be something eurks me to no end. :lol:


----------



## MrMortgage

widescreened said:


> If people actually started to take personal responsibility for themselves rather than adhering to dubious ancient scripts that have been edited and doctored to control people,we would be a lot closer to God.Instead,we live in an age where the old testement is used to win votes and go to war.Mr Mortgage,you have to accept responsibility for yourself.You can be a good person without this bullcrap of vengeful Gods,tsunamis and earthquakes.If you continue this way,and by some fluke,have kids,they will turn out to be unhappy at best and a danger to society at worst.


Dude, your making up your own religion. Theres nothing wrong with that. So what is it called? Your comments show you want nothing to do with any disipline and want to be a free spirit. Good for you. That means that you think muslims, and budahist, and Jewish people must throw out there religions too right. All there ancient text speak of a pissed off God or higher spirit/s as well.

You guys are missing the whole point here, I'm just telling you what the bible says. You have your own views and that's fine. I'm not forcing it upon you, I'm just letting you know what it says. I see so far that you guys have knocked down 4 religions so far, care to go for 5.

My views go against yours, and people get all huffy puffy about it, because they want to feel right about what they believe.

*Dude, people using the old testement to win wars? Your throwing the baby out with the bath water here man. Come on The old testement consist of knowledge and life examples, the old testement is more of a series of history books that explains why things were the way they were, and how choices made then effects situations today. Have you ever studied the book man? In fact who has studied the bible at all here? I'd like to know.*


----------



## MrMortgage

widescreened said:


> If you continue this way,and by some fluke,have kids,they will turn out to be unhappy at best and a danger to society at worst.


What the hell does that have to do with anything? I talk to you guys this way because you are ADULTS. You think I would drop this type of knowledge on a kid in this way? Your an idiot IF you think that man.

Do you have some type of education in parenting therepy, or have a PHD or something to be giving out that advice or is that just your opinion, *YOUR OPINION USED TO WIN WARS AND GET A BIG ROUND OF APPLUASE*

I talk about religion the way it is, I dont butcher it up so its easier to swallow. If you dont like it then you dont have to follow it.


----------



## rainboteers

MrMortgage said:


> I talk about religion the way it is, I dont butcher it up so its easier to swallow. If you dont like it then you dont have to follow it.


you talk about religon the way it is *FOR YOU*! and just because that is what you believe DOES NOT make YOU right. I believe you are the one butchering it, holy shit why cant i stay out of this !!!!!! ban me from this section :lol: makes me huffy and puffy mrmortage not because you disagree but because of your condescending attitude at times. You say its not your beliefs, it what is written in black and white, but what you dont seem to get is your belief is what is written is correct, we dont all share that belief. and guess what? you CAN take what you believe and leave the rest if that is what you so choose, so stop telling people they cant do that. it is what is right for them and YOU DO NOT KNOW if they are correct in how they interpret the bible and religon, so let them be. its okay if someones beliefs dont fit in a perfect little box of an organized religon. they CAN throw the baby out with the water. they can believe what they want, and they may have the truth and knowledge that we are all searching for. I LIKE THAT WE DISAGREE, gives us all a chance to learn from one another but only if we can relax and be open. i already know i shouldnt have responded because i am attacking you back, which helps nothing and is a complete waste of everyones time. fact of the matter is i want to respect you and your beliefs and that is what i am going to try and do. my apologizes for being disrespectful to you... i realize it doesnt matter what you believe, i am passionate about my views just as everyone else is, but it doesnt give any of us the right to be nasty to each other. i think you can agree that no matter what you believe, we should be tolerant and let everyone follow their own path, and possibly be suppotive and try and learn from them, rather than argue and learn nothing from one another. all beliefs have something to offer and yeah i think religon is so skewed, the true beauty of it for me is that it can blend together and lead to the same place. one of these days people will figure it out and come together... i myself am still working on it... but one of these days... :wink:

okay i have apologized, made my opinon heard, and i know you will have some points to argue back with me, but im gonna try and bow out of this gracefully, mainly because i am working on my own spirtualtity and it involves a loving accepting attitude, if i keep arguing this i will be further from who i want to be.... deep deep breath reminder to myself and maybe others:

whatsoever the Godward path may be
*i will do my best to give it dignity* (ive obviously gotta work on that)
for TRUELY lighted souls seek ONLY to ascend
ALL paths to God do somewhere blend.


----------



## MrMortgage

I have nothing to argue back on that. Well said, I just hope you understand that I'm getting my point accross, and that instead of some of us on here (not especially you) attack me as soon as I give my understanding.

I know if I were to talk about flowers and butterflies I would get a round of appluase but if I speak of anger and fear, people will knock me down.

I'm just telling folks what it says, and as soon as I do that, they attack the messanger.


----------



## yoyo

Justice is accomplished because of the fullfilment of the promise or covenant and mercy is shown by the third part. My analogi explains the role of Jesus- Christ as described in the Holy scriptures. I just made that analogi in order to illustrate and facilitate understanding of the power of the atonement whcih is the way Christ accomplished his mission.

As Sleeping beauty figured out, faith is the first requirement, the fisrt principle of the Gospel. Christ is willing to pay the debt for us, but we only can be saved in accepting this wondeful gift, which requires that we believe that Christ really has sacrificed his own life for us and saved us from the bad consequences of the breach (in religious language, spiritual death). Christ has set up tre requirements: We must show faith in Him, repent from our sins and be baptised. By doing these things, we are showing that we are willing to accept His sacrifice. Only by doing these things and persevering to the end, we can qualify in order to get the blessings according to the word of God.

Of course, someone that does not believe in Christ won?t accept the sacrifice. Neither the bible or me say that such a person is condamned to hell. This is not a Christlike attitude to say so. Christ taught us though that only His disciples will inherit eternal life. It does not mean that everyone else go to Hell. That would be a terrible misstake and primitiv interpretation of the scriptures.

I am sad to see that my topic is not seriously read and that even some people make fun of it. I have deep respect for everyones opinion and I expect the same in return. Love everyone.


----------



## MrMortgage

yoyo said:


> Justice is accomplished because of the fullfilment of the promise or covenant and mercy is shown by the third part. My analogi explains the role of Jesus- Christ as described in the Holy scriptures. I just made that analogi in order to illustrate and facilitate understanding of the power of the atonement whcih is the way Christ accomplished his mission.
> 
> As Sleeping beauty figured out, faith is the first requirement, the fisrt principle of the Gospel. Christ is willing to pay the debt for us, but we only can be saved in accepting this wondeful gift, which requires that we believe that Christ really has sacrificed his own life for us and saved us from the bad consequences of the breach (in religious language, spiritual death). Christ has set up tre requirements: We must show faith in Him, repent from our sins and be baptised. By doing these things, we are showing that we are willing to accept His sacrifice. Only by doing these things and persevering to the end, we can qualify in order to get the blessings according to the word of God.
> 
> Of course, someone that does not believe in Christ won?t accept the sacrifice. Neither the bible or me say that such a person is condamned to hell. This is not a Christlike attitude to say so. Christ taught us though that only His disciples will inherit eternal life. It does not mean that everyone else go to Hell. That would be a terrible misstake and primitiv interpretation of the scriptures.
> 
> I am sad to see that my topic is not seriously read and that even some people make fun of it. I have deep respect for everyones opinion and I expect the same in return. Love everyone.


Not everyone is going to hell true, but when Jesus comes for the church he comes for the church! Then the rest of the world has to sit here and deal with shit for a few years, till Jesus comes again as king for 1000 years.


----------



## julie13

Mr. Mortgage,

Your attitude, along with your grammar and spelling are atrocious.


----------



## Guest

julie13 said:


> Mr. Mortgage,
> 
> Your attitude, along with your grammar and spelling are atrocious.


That's why I don't read his posts anymore, life's too short and there are so many great posts/people here I can relate to and learn from.


----------



## MrMortgage

beachgirl said:


> julie13 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. Mortgage,
> 
> Your attitude, along with your grammar and spelling are atrocious.
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I don't read his posts anymore, life's too short and there are so many great posts/people here I can relate to and learn from.
Click to expand...

Oh no, my feelings are so hurt now. Now shes' trying to turn people against me. :roll:


----------



## sleepingbeauty

uhh.. no mortgage, you did a fine job of that ALL ON YOUR OWN.

pal. :lol:

honestly, ive laid pussyfarts with more divine truth then what you spew. :roll:


----------



## MrMortgage

sleepingbeauty said:


> uhh.. no mortgage, you did a fine job of that ALL ON YOUR OWN.
> 
> pal. :lol:
> 
> honestly, ive laid pussyfarts with more divine truth then what you spew. :roll:


Pussyfarts LOL! Oh that's too bad, sorry, if you dont like it then stop responding to my posts :wink:

Just like rainboterrs said, " if I apoligize its wrong, because then I would be apologizing for truth"


----------



## rainboteers

when did i say that??


----------



## MrMortgage

rainboteers said:


> when did i say that??


Never apologize for showing feeling. When you do so you apologize for truth. ---Benjamin Disraeli

your sig.


----------



## MrMortgage

your just as bad as the american solider wearing a helmet with a peace symbol on it and carrying an AK47 and shooting people.


----------



## julie13

oh are we against the war now mr. mortgage? well i bet that you still voted for dubya based on his "faith", did we not? its people like that, who claim that they are "following jesus," who have no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars blowing up half the world. You two probably bond over bible study.


----------



## MrMortgage

julie13 said:


> oh are we against the war now mr. mortgage? well i bet that you still voted for dubya based on his "faith", did we not? its people like that, who claim that they are "following jesus," who have no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars blowing up half the world. You two probably bond over bible study.


I voted for kerry. I dont really pay attention to politics too much because the real important things I believe in wont get changed, and no matter how you vote, someone gets the short end of the stick.

You know why people dont like to talk about religion and polictics? Because it makes them feel uncomfortable.

Julie, I dont know what to tell ya, I dont know what your trying to get at with these personal comments you make.

Answer me this question, in fact anyone here answer me this question, if you believe in the Christian/Catholic God, why dont you believe in everything in the bible? Remember, the reason you know about God, is because of the Bible, if you want to question things in the bible, or leave certain things out then you might as well throw God out the window with that bible. If man wrote the bible, then "God" is man made right?

So stop talking about the Christian/Catholic God and tell me a little about the God you believe in...Tell me where he/she/it came from and what "it" stands for. AND DONT SAY YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS/GOD IF YOU DONT GET TAUGHT OUT OF THE BIBLE.

YOU CANT PUT GOD IN A BOX AND MAKE HIM THE WAY YOU WANT, IF YOU DO THEN YOU DONT BELIEVE IN THE CATHOLIC GOD, CHRISTIAN, HINDU, MUSLIM, JEWISH, BUDAHIST ECT.... YOU MUST BE STARTING YOUR OWN RELIGION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT IT.....AFTER ALL YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT THEN.


----------



## sleepingbeauty

whats a budahist? it sounds rude. :shock:


----------



## MrMortgage

Buddhism


----------



## yoyo

I unfortunately feel some contention in here. I must acknowledge that it makes me a little disapointed. I never thought that my topic would create such reactions. Religion is probably the most controversial subject in the world, but I still believe that it is possible to discuss it with manners of respect. I expect more maturity being shown from now one. Love everyone.


----------



## MrMortgage

yoyo said:


> I unfortunately feel some contention in here. I must acknowledge that it makes me a little disapointed. I never thought that my topic would create such reactions. Religion is probably the most controversial subject in the world, but I still believe that it is possible to discuss it with manners of respect. I expect more maturity being shown from now one. Love everyone.


That's what I'm saying man, all I did was bring up some scriptures in the bible that most people dont know about and I get attacked, after that, I just defened myself while still respecting others. I was called names and made fun off. Yet I still kept my cool, then people started to try and get more personal, and made asumptions, that I'm some type of sexist pig, that likes to beat up girls and have sex with them, and make them make me dinner. WTF how did it turn into that?

Someone needs to check themselves and it aint me. That fact is, these people cant argue these scriptures, so they hit shots at me personally, but they cant argue with whats black in white.


----------



## dalailama15

It also says in the Bible, in black and white:

The earth rests on pillars (1 Sam. 2 8
The earth was formed out of and by means of water (2 Peter 3:5)
The earth won?t be moved (1 Chron. 16:30)
The world?s languages didn?t evolve but appeared suddenly (Gen. 11:6-9)
The Earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1)

Also, it says clearly in the Bible that Pi is not 3.14159all those godless decimals, but is, in fact, 3.

"And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about" (1 Kings 7:23)


----------



## rainboteers

mrmortage,
i believe homskooled did argue the meaning of some of the scriptures and did not attack you personally. i had a lot of respect for what he said and the WAY he said it (i am referring to what he said in the other thread "Thank You.") people are taking shots at you for reasons other than religon... trust me.


----------



## rainboteers

MrMortgage said:


> and made asumptions, that I'm some type of sexist pig, that likes to beat up girls and have sex with them, and make them make me dinner. WTF how did it turn into that?


indeed, how did it turn into that? :roll: :roll:


----------



## julie13

mr. mortgage,

I really don't take anything personal. I just like watching you writhe and try to defend yourself 

All joking aside, you probably have me pegged as the anti-christ but I do have a personal relationship with Christ- and all im saying is that is what is SHOULD be- personal. I see you in here all the time contradicting yourself, spouting conspiracy theories, and going on a personal rampage to "christianize" everybody. I respect that you have so much faith, but seriously man, take a xanax or something.

I'm also sorry that this friendly banter makes some people uncomfortable, but this should be a forum where we can debate. i enjoy our discussions.


----------



## rainboteers

julie13 said:


> I see you in here all the time contradicting yourself, spouting conspiracy theories, and going on a personal rampage to "christianize" everybody. I respect that you have so much faith, but seriously man, take a xanax or something.


 :lol:


----------



## Guest

rainboteers said:


> julie13 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see you in here all the time contradicting yourself, spouting conspiracy theories, and going on a personal rampage to "christianize" everybody. I respect that you have so much faith, but seriously man, take a xanax or something.
> 
> 
> 
> :lol:
Click to expand...


----------



## MrMortgage

beachgirl said:


> rainboteers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> julie13 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see you in here all the time contradicting yourself, spouting conspiracy theories, and going on a personal rampage to "christianize" everybody. I respect that you have so much faith, but seriously man, take a xanax or something.
> 
> 
> 
> :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 :lol: hehehe, I'm laughing like a little school girl! I'm so glad we are like the 3 musketeers now.


----------



## yoyo

8)   :lol:


----------



## sleepingbeauty

:roll:

sorry guys, my eyes are stuck like this.


----------



## Martinelv

Sleeping Beauty mentions 'faith'. I'm a little confused, so some clarity would be appreciated. Do you mean that faith is:

1.) Closing your eyes and crossing a busy road and having 'faith' that you won't get run down?

2.) The faith in your parents love?

3.) Faith in god/s ? Whichever one you choose to have faith in.

Which raises a mysterious question that nobody has been able to answer. Why do people with tremendous faith in 'god/s' sometimes die terrible, awfull d.e.a.th.s, preceeded by agony, despair and suffering. Apart from the excuses that 'god/s' had a 'plan' (whatever that is) for them, a lesson perhaps, or that 'it is their time to journey to heaven/nivarna/whatever. Any clues? (Note - don't bother to reply with the 'god works in mysterious ways cop-out. That's as useful has saying that Father Christmas works in mysterious ways.)

Thanks.


----------



## Homeskooled

Its interesting, Martin, because I can tell when you are in certain moods simply from watching when you catch up on old arguments in this forum and decide to bring up one of your faith-stumping arguments. I swear, I could graph the highs and lows of your life by simply making an algorithm that uses your posts and dates from those posts on this forum. Its very odd....but I think its when your temporal lobe really starts to act up, you get huge swellings of rage, and your mind is swimming in ideas and you have undeniable urges to write that you come here. I think all of these things probably coincide. Just a theory and an observation of mine.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

I think what's interesting is the inherent implication that his questioning of reality should be discarded, or likewise, categorized as an overactive temporal lobe. Perhaps he should simply accept the vague beliefs of others because that would be the sane thing to do.

After all, it seems as if sanity is just the radical acceptance of all that is. The sheep don't get flustered because the shepard is always there to lead them.


----------



## Homeskooled

> I think what's interesting is the inherent implication that his questioning of reality should be discarded, or likewise, categorized as an overactive temporal lobe.


No, I dont think his questioning of reality should be discarded - _because he isnt questioning reality_. You are projecting yourself onto his post. Martin is questioning the sanity of a person having "faith", and asking them to further define it. These are valid questions. So are your wonderings about free will and biological determinism. The fact that they hamper your life - because a rational person knows that there is no definitive answer to the question of free will, and it can be wondered and debated about for thousands of years, and has - make them unhealthy. But not that unusual, or else the Board wouldnt exist. I dont find it curious at all that Martin asks these questions - because I love debates, I actually relish it. But I'm pointing out that the odd thing about his raging against religion in these forums is that it is cyclical - the same counterpoints being brought up from before at a time which usually correlates to increased symptoms for him in the outside world. Its not a poke, a jab, or a post designed to make him stay away from this forum. Quite the contrary - I love his visits. But I see a pattern in them. And I'm quite possibly wrong, too.



> The sheep don't get flustered because the shepard is always there to lead them.


Ah, a reference to the Monday rant thread. Touche.

peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Martinelv

Indeed Homeskooled, everything I write is dependant on the current sate of my temporal lobes !

Incidently, I'm not questioning the sanity of the religious. I`m just curious why these people need to believe in something with as much basis in reality as the tooth fairy. I understand why people need faith, in the same way as lonely people have a pet, but what I don't understand how they believe in the reality of it. God that is, not their pet.


----------



## Homeskooled

I sense a hint of sarcasm! You will NOT be a different person once your temporal lobes calm down....You will probably still be irascible, you will definitely remain an atheist, you will have all of these arguments and counterpoints still stored away in your mind. I just dont think that they will needle you in quite the same way. Just as you will still be a fluent writer, but your talent wont rule you, so to speak. If there were a treatment that would make you lose your atheistic tendencies, I'd be the first to tell you about it. Of course, I wouldnt let you know that. "Yes, Martin, its a fantastic new DP treatment! Anti-epileptic holy-water! A double-blind placebo controlled study recently done at Yale was very clear on its efficacy...."

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## CECIL

mrmortgage said:


> DONT TAKE A BITE OF SOMETHING AND LEAVE THE REST.


Works both ways, buddy. Do you eat meat on friday? You shouldn't. Do you keep slaves? You should. It says so in black and white, in the bible. If you want to use this argument then you MUST follow everything in the bible to the letter. Will you accept a blood transfusion or organ transplant if you are dying of cancer? Would you take insulin if you were a diabetic? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it clrealy states in the bible that you should not take other people's blood (therefore organs) into yourself. Or would you like to argue an interpretation of what you think god MEANT to say? (I've never been that confident...).



widescreened said:


> If people actually started to take personal responsibility for themselves rather than adhering to dubious ancient scripts that have been edited and doctored to control people,we would be a lot closer to God.


Amen, brother 

Now I'm going to mix it up a bit by talking about who Jesus really was and what the bible really is (Warning: Crazed ramblings of a delusional man may follow  ).

Jesus was a person. Jesus was really ahead of his time, because he DIDN'T live in fear of god, or fear of the Romans or fear of anything, really. He LIVED his life. He LOVED his life. People followed Jesus and they thought he was great because someone who could do that in his time truely was awesome.

Now, Jesus had 12 diciples (although correct me if I don't know anything about the bible, MrMortgage...). Did anyone ever wonder why there's only 4 disciple's books in the bible? Its called editorial discretion. One such book, the book according to Thomas, was in fact a Gnostic work.

The story goes like this: A few hundred years after Jesus' supposed death (enter conspiracy theories!) there was unrest in the empire. People were actually listening to what Jesus had to say and they were starting to live it. They believed that no-one could own them or control them and that they were free to live without fear. Now the authorities saw this happening and basically it freaked them out. You can't have power and control over people who didn't want to be controlled. So what happened?

1. They drew together a few selected writings about Jesus which they felt most benefit their need to control the populace. The rest was declared heretical and either destroyed or lost. Anyone found following these teachings was summarily murdered. These writings they bound together into a book they called "The Holy Bible".

2. Since Jesus was a normal person, born on earth to earthly parents, people believed that they too could reach his level of "holyness". If Jesus can do that, so can we. Again, that's no good to those in power. Therefore they decided to deify Jesus and Mary. When you deify someone you put them out of reach of normal people and you make them a force to worship and bow down to. What happens when you worship something? You put it above you and yourself beneath it. In other words, now people would be STRIVING to attain god's love and the holyness of Jesus, but not actually be able to reach it.

The perfect control mechanism.

As we reach a stage where we no longer need to be controlled like this, we begin to find these old scriptures (e.g. Book of Thomas, Nag Hamadi Library, Dead Sea Scrolls...) and we begin to unravel the control of religious dogma on us.

Someone mentioned that Satanists believe they are the lord and that they don't need to live in fear of God. There's a very good reason for teaching this to people: if they are afraid to believe that then they will never experience the truth. The truth is humans ARE gods (no one person is god, mind you) because we have the power to create. We create our own lives, our own minds and our own reality.

The real secret is that no-one ever needed forgiving. The bible tells us we sinned when we ate from the tree of knowledge, but really it was God's plan all along. Human history has been one big training ground for us to learn how to exist as gods on this world. To literally create heaven on earth.

(Note: All mentions of Jesus, God etc can be substituted for whatever metaphors you feel fit better. That's the good thing about religion and spirituality  ).[/quote]


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear CECIL, 
I agree with this, and found it sort of inspiring, in an esoteric sort of way:

Jesus was really ahead of his time, because he DIDN'T live in fear of god, or fear of the Romans or fear of anything, really. He LIVED his life. He LOVED his life. People followed Jesus and they thought he was great because someone who could do that in his time truely was awesome

I sort of agree with this take. Us humans have a terrible tendency of ascribing our modern day motives (and your paragraph reads a bit like "Jesus was all for sticking it to the man"), but I think you were on the money with this. Jesus was very coutercultural....although he came to "fulfull the law, and not to destroy it". I'm not for anarchy - in my mind, a good set of laws is as good as being free. A good law should encourage you to be a better, happier you. Christ came because the Old law was destroying people, destroying their happiness, fettering them with old ways of thinking, and giving power to those who abused it, such as the pharasees. In other words, it wasnt fulfilling the point of the Law. It was defiling it.

As for the editorial control, I dont buy it. Mostly because the first apocryphal books popped up, and were suppressed, in the late first century, when the memory of Christ was too fresh to completely suppress. If you read some of the apocryphal books, some of them are historically inaccurate and fairly ridiculous. So many of them contradict each other, and the New Testament is known to be much more reliable in that way than the Old Testament. What it means, though, is that one or more of the books which contradict each other must be historically inaccurate. Eventually a call had to be made - which was reliable, which wasnt. This never occurred with the Old Testament. It was based entirely on tradition, old stories, legends, and (we hope) inspired writings. Some historical books, some fictitious parables (like Daniel and Job), lots of early moral interpretations about slaves, etc....No review ever occurred. I'm glad it did with the New Testament.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## sleepingbeauty

youre so on it cecil. what you say makes more sense then anything ive ever seen posted in this section about the bible and jesus. i have nothing bad to say about jesus, only the bible which is simply a mass mindcontrol device, and the morons who peddle it. jesus was a man that could do wonderful things. he realized that he WAS GOD! he was an entire universe within himself. as we ALL ARE. none of us and nothing is any less then the universe around us. how liberating is that knowledge!! its wonderful and to think, people who call themselves 'born again' consider that to be liberating!! how foolish can one be??


----------



## wei ji

Just a quick note:

Isn't it dangerous to consider ourselves as "god's" instead of "God's creations"? I mean just think of the things that are tried through this philosophy - people are admitted to hospital for thinking they're like or are J.C.

Besides, correct me if I'm wrong, but in the NIV it's said that Jesus is the son of man...

And also, you say that we create our own universes? I believe that other's create them for us, politicians, media, peers, parents etc, and we all act within the confines of this (with a little leeway). - If we don't we run the risk of being cast out of our families/society that we live within...

I beleive that the media tells us exactly how to think and have a consensual reality, and anything that isn't "popular" at that time is cast away with stigmatisms...

Anyway I'm not as intellectual as y'all and I"m dped up to the eyeballs :shock: nite...


----------



## sleepingbeauty

dont confuse what i said with 'god complex'. and dont take my words out of context. i said EVERYTHING is a universe and is part of a bigger universe. EVERYTHING. the people you are talking about most likely believe they are the center of the universe and godlike on their own as aposed to everyone else. everything and everyone is on the same level. nothing is above anything else. why would this information be dangerous? personally i think its humbling as well as empowering.

this is a good explination of what i mean.

http://higherbalance.com/meditation/download_GaiaMind.php/The Gaia Mind.pdf


----------



## wei ji

Yes but how does one feel that they are a god without getting a god complex? I think that it's right to feel we are actually a shattered part of the oneness of the universe which is considered to be god, but there is a very fine line between this philosophy and that of a "god complex"

I feel that one leads to the other...

Which would be very dangerous indeed...

If we consider ourselves as a part of the oneness of the Universe, and live in harmony with nature as much as possible, then we've become a part of the living creation here on earth as was intended - which is god-like.

SB I'm not as intellectual as anyone on this board, heck! and am not intending to take your words out of context...

(I don't even know if what I'm saying makes sense to anyone else?)


----------



## Martinelv

Why does nobody ever answer my questions? It makes my temporal lobes hurt.

And yes Homeskooled I was being sarcastic, because you were being a little caustic. Who said americans didn't understand sarcasm?


----------



## sleepingbeauty

dont bait him martin! i fear to think what he has in store after sending you back to the corner. :shock:


----------



## wei ji

But surely having faith is the same as belief in the reality of something?

dictionary - "firm belief in something for which there is no proof"

And one of the main reasons for this, is that the belief in chaos or even nihilism bringsa catyclysmic pessimism of anything that hasn't already been proven.

As nothing can be proven..


----------



## wei ji

and believing in god, which I have faith in as being real, brings a sense of order and meaning into the world. Things have a cause and effect says science and if this is so, then something would have to give this the original meaning. God is there to care for those who are unable to protect themselves, and there to make sure it rains on cricket Sunday


----------



## Guest

wei ji said:


> God is there to care for those who are unable to protect themselves


Looks like it n'all.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Martin, 
Caustic? Me? Never! I think I may try to sound too sure of things (like God) that I probably know nothing about. From that I may sound condescending, and if I ever have, please accept my heartfelt apologies. You may be closer than you know to God , closer than me, because of your heartfelt honesty. I may need to learn to listen more to my heart than my head. My apologies, friend.

Wei ji (and thats a beautiful name), 
I think that the idea that we are all Gods is not meant to be taken literally - at least all of the time. I know plenty of New Agers (like the people who made the movie "What the Bleep do we know" which was long on feel-good and short on reality) that literally beleive that humans are Gods. If we could only "beleive" we could fly, we would. But I dont think thats what I'm reading here. I'm reading more the transcendental idea that we are all part of a collective experience. I'm also reading some reactionary emotions. I think alot of people on here have been wounded by the idea of a God who is greater than them and can inflict pain and guilt. The knee-jerk reaction, when one has enough guts and age to do so, is to tear down that God from his pedestal and proclaim that we ALL are Gods. And although it makes us feel good, and its a justified reaction against the pain inflicted on us since we were young, it may have as much, or less, reason behind it as beleiving in our "imaginary friend", as Martin says. Somewhere between these two extreme worlds lies the world of truth.

I dont "know" a whole lot about God. I was about to say that I dont know anything about him. But I know that God is something you cant pin down by talking to people about Him. People usually pervert who he is in theology texts, probably because words are inaccurate. And when you're like me, and you cant forget ANYTHING you read once you've read it once, and your mind is technicality-oriented, these mis-renderings of God, from such inaccurate things as theology and words, can "usurp" God, and throw him off of His pedestal,and burn themselves in your mind, well before you're even out of your cradle. Nobody on here is throwing "God" off of his pedestal. They're throwing off the unloving, guilt spattering, peace destroying, Hell-giving monster of human creation who has taken his place. And I've fallen for this for so long. God is like a wind - when it sweeps over you, you know your loved, and that He only wants the best for you, dare I say, even if it is to His detriment. That means God welcomes sin, and by sin I mean disordered actions that lead to our undoing and those of people around us, if it will help us learn more about ourselves, and lead us to good, and actions that will free us. Human beings have to learn in order to mature. And this is why I think free will exists. And God encourages it. I dont know exactly why, but he does. He doesnt demand perfection, just growth, love, and a willingness to work with Him, in whatever capacity we know Him, to the best of our ability. God appears when we least expect it, because he is seperate from us. He is completely seperate from anything that is in our heads or ever could be.

I've been taking a good hard look at my life, my philosophies, my parents, my Church, my health, my school - everything in my life. I went to the Monastery that I attend Church at, and have since I was a boy, and afterwards ate lunch with the monks there. I've been helping one of the monks who has a rare, almost incurable brain cancer, get the correct treatment. He finished his last radiation and chemo treatment on Friday. Fr. Giles served us what he had prepared - and he is a marvelous cook. I'm never dissapointed. Its not rich fare - on the contrary its poor, simple, and healthy.Steaming chicken stew, orange slices, and fresh baked bread. As we sat there, we talked about my week. About how I had just signed up for classes at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, about my roommate's bipolar disorder, my liver problem. And as we talked, I kept reflecting on how religion had affected these men, how it had affected me, and how it had affected my roommates. It had occurred to me a long time ago, that I would be a better person if I had never heard of religion. No - thats a generalization. I would have been better if I had never heard of Hell, or confession. Because it bred fear in me, it played a triggering role in my DP, it twisted my parent's view of God, and it wrapped me in guilt and regret, that further encouraged me to sin, and do things I truly didnt wish to do. And I became wrapped up in my own mind's eye veiw of God, so much so that I couldnt see God any longer. The God in my mind was so much more powerful than the gentle breeze that would sweep over me from time to time. As the fear in me grew, my ability to respond to that breeze grew less, and less. My ability to recognize it diminished. And my parents took great pains to teach me that this breeze wasnt God, because it suited their purpose for the time.

But I looked at these men. How could they live with Confession? Willingly give up sex, possessions, ambition, to sit around this table with me? Because for them, it didnt hurt. Or maybe it did, maybe they had embraced some of religion's imperfections, but they had gotten to a point where they had left the roadmap behind - they knew the maker now. Maybe their lives werent an endorsement of all of the things in religion - especially the ones breeding fear. But maybe they had come to the point that they could embrace God and leave the "questionables", the things that bother me about my faith, behind. So after lunch, as I was helping Fr. Giles clean up, I asked him about my scruples, about the necessity of dwelling on my sins in confession, the harm it does me, about the search for a good and true religion. And as he talked to me, and reassured me, and explained what he did about confession (and I hardly remember what he said or the words. But I _understood_. ) that breeze blew over me. A breeze of peace, as if God was saying " I love you. Dont worry. I'll take care of you. Stop worrying. I've always been this way. _Be not afraid_. " And instead of holding on to any fear, I just let the breeze carry me. Fr. Giles may not be using the perfect methods, maybe the Catholic Church doesnt, maybe it does - but he knows the Man. I dont understand the technicalities. I know them - but I dont understand them. Who knows who God is? Who knows His ways? All I can do is try.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## wei ji

I hope the monk got better after his surgery?

One of the things that I don't yet understand is that although we have this feeling that God has somehow betrayed us by making us miserable and wallow in unhappiness and such forth, why would we want to neglect him?

Ditching the idea of God, doesn't make the pain of our surroundings disappear. In fact it appears to enhance them, simply because we have no light or hope and faith that such a loving God will help us. Without faith isn't there just misery? And this is blinkered. God made beautiful sunsets, made birds, the countryside, the waterfalls, the oceans, our food our housing etc... (as all come from ideas and ideas are immortal) We've got sports, families and friends and such forth - a plethora of goodness in life.

Yes we're definitely suffering from living. Life is a constant state of suffering, the Buddha realised this, but there's so much beauty in this world to contemplate as well. By ditching that goodness/godness which is in everything all we have left is the negativity of life - which is meaningless.

What's the point there?


----------



## wei ji

Isn't this self-defeating - we ditch god because he's apparantly unkind as well as loving, then we are left with just the misery and left with no loving kindness??


----------



## Homeskooled

I guess my point is that the person is the same off regardless. They never had God to begin with - they had someone else's imitation. So ditching the false idol feels the same as having one - hopeless, empty. At least without one, there's no need to see it staring at you, making you feel guilty, reminding you of how you should be. Some people feel that being an atheist, or a pantheist, which is the transcendental idea, is the better of two evils. Then they can write their own rules, at least. I can see where they're coming from. They just want to get rid of the fear.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## wei ji

Ah yes! 

But not all schools of religion depend on one being "sinful" in fact there are many which reach out with open arms and help other's suffering. For instance the Methodist church helps out with missionaries, the samaritans, help with those who are depressed, the salvation army helps with the homeless.

Very good parts of organised religion I'd have thought...


----------



## Homeskooled

My running commentary isnt about organized religion, Wei Ji. Its not even about the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has the largest charitable wing of any existing religion. The Church, contrary to so many myths, is poor. Its a funnel. Money goes in , same money goes out. The Vatican runs on a budget of 250 million a year. Thats the smallest national budget in mankind's history, as it _is_ a city-state. What I'm trying to point out, is that what I hear, what I feel, in the posts of the people on this thread, is _fear_. And its rampant in ALL religions. It doesnt even invalidate any single religion. But what it means is man has gotten his tawdry hands on God's image, and in an imperfect attempt at polishing it up, or understanding him, or explaining him, introduced human imperfection and tarnished it. I'm not saying fear is bad, either - but THIS fear is. The fear that severes the connection between ourselves, and Christ. Between us and God. Christ says, after rising from the dead " Be not afraid." The potential of one's goodness can never be released if you are afraid. You can still do good, but you are like a lame person walking. It hurts, and you dont get very far. And many,many good people live this way.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## wei ji

Ok what I was trying to say is that the churches and organisations I mentioned don't as far as I was aware promote 'fear of God'. In fact they are living proof that churches aren't all based on 'mortal sin' - not when I attended the church anyway - I don't think that certain branches even have confession chambers...

I mean that they help out people and do their best to promote 'harmony' in the world.

I also disagree that all religions are fear based. I think that the majority are this way, and that it seeps through in order to control the citizens - 'without fear of being caught would you steal' was a prime example and one of the ten commandments...

But yes, we are nearing the age of enlightenment where we don't need to constantly fear God - however, I believe in my heart that God does exist, is kind and loving, and as "Creator" the no-thing that created the universe and everything inside it, is "good"...


----------



## Scattered

The catholic church and many other organized religions rely on fear as a motivating factor for worship. It's not a mistake or the work of an individual misinterpreting religion, its one of the main purposes and causes of a fear-based religion, control. It's far easier to control people through manipulation of their own perceptions than through through physical violence and coercion. I don't understand how a person can view a large hierarchical establishment like the Catholic Church and completely disregard this obvious reality. Like any other large power-structure it has to be maintained somehow. Even if the purpose originally was to enlighten individuals, like in all other aspects of life power corrupts. The church needs fear in order to guarantee its own existence.

This is a major reason why people turn away from religion. This is why people say that they are their own gods. People understand that the only way to a pure understanding or practice of a particular belief is through personal practice. One need only look at history to understand how the links between the clergy and ruling power have joined hands in order to mutually support each other and pass laws and regulations that would otherwise not be possible. In fact you can look at George Bush right now, who often invokes the name of God, either directly or indirectly, in order to explain to the public his belief in his great cause of spreading democracy.

Christianity isn't inherently evil but it is often, along with other religions, used to commit great evil, or used to justify horrible actions on the part leaders. Maybe all of these negative actions are on the part of heathens or people who have misinterpreted the religion, but the end result is the same. So when people get angry at Christianity, maybe it isn't because they had a rough childhood. Maybe it's because the religion itself has alot of blood on its hands and alot of corruption amidst its ranks.


----------



## CECIL

I think the term 'all that is' is a better word for "God". The way you avoid getting a god complex is to think of all creation like a gigantic pattern, or jigsaw. Each person is a piece of that jigsaw, a small part of the overall pattern. A small part of all that is. Everything is interconnected. All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration and furthermore all energy/matter is mind, consciousness (Hermetic principles).

I do believe that "God" is very loving and there's nothing you can do to change that. However, its not the whole picture. If God is All that is, then God is not only love and forgiveness but also hate, fear, war, death, famine etc etc etc. These are all parts of our universe and they are all parts of god. They are also all parts of ourselves, since we are a microcosm of God (As above, so below - Hermetic Principles again).

However, consider this metaphor: Human beings becoming a space-faring race. If we were able to launch ourselves into space then we would bare an enourmous responsibility. If we didn't know what we were doing then not only would we be capable of fucking up our own planet but we might be able to fuck up the whole galaxy too. As we are at the moment we aren't able to become space faring because we are too busy killing each other and squabbling over things that are, in a cosmic sense, unimportant. To be able to reach the stars we need to be able to dissolve our ideas of Country and a lot of our egoic ideas of what's MINE and what you can't have. We need to be able to act as a global community which does not discriminate on race, creed etc.

So there are a lot of dichotomies we have to transcend on a global level before we are capable of taking that step. If you were to think that the entire goal of the human race is to become space faring and eternally traverse the stars then it wouldn't be too far fetched to say that our entire history has been to teach us how to handle doing that. Not until we can overcome our problems on earth are we responsible enough to handle ourselves in space.

The nature of consciousness is that it evolves. You have experienced this in your own life - your consciousness has evolved since you were an infant to the point you are currently at and it will continue to evolve at least until you die. One of its qualities is that when it evolves it seeks to help less evolved consciousness evolve as well.

Essentially what I'm saying is that human history has been one giant classroom to teach us how to be free. It may seem cruel of "God" to do this to us, but ultimately it was necessary to teach us how to handle ourselves in the coming future. For one thing you can't appreciate freedom unless you know bondage. From knowing pain you can experience greater pleasure. From understanding these dichotomies we eventually learn to let go of our fear and embrace a philosophy of love.

So how does this make us Gods on earth? Well, consider that "God" is, in fact, creating us in "His" own image. The same principles apply as above. First we have to overcome our own fear (erode your own fear of death and suddenly you find that you no longer fear anything in life). After we have done this then we find true freedom because we can no longer be lead into believing false ideologies, can no longer be controlled through fear and we can truely start living our lives!

However the real fun begins when you realise that you create your own reality. Consider the example of a parent. I know my parents did this and I'm sure most of you have parents who are the same. My parents desperately didn't want to be like their parents, and so formed a sort of negative construct around the idea. "I'm never going to turn out like my dad", "I can't do that because I'd turn out like my dad". Or, possibly they go the other way and believe they should be like their parents because that's what's right (similar to how people let the bible and religion dictate their behaviour). Anyway, essentially what they are doing is pouring psychic energy into the idea and voila, that's the outcome that occurs. My parents turned out like their parents, and so the cycle continues.

You may not believe me, but I believe this is how all of our reality works (you can try simple experiments if you want to). We create our own reality, we are personally responsible for everything that happens to us (you can't blame anyone else because you created it). Embracing this philosophy empowers people because then you are in control and you only ever blame yourself or answer to yourself.

Now you may say something along the lines of "Then if you have no in built system of morality and you don't need to answer to anyone but yourself, wouldn't you just lie, cheat and steal for your own ends?". Well, you might do that, yes, but in the end that's your choice and it won't affect anyone who doesn't want to be affected by it (since they create it for themselves). However you can only really reach this place once you've gone through the "saftey switch" scenarios, just like becoming space-faring. In other words you can only really reach this place when you let go of your fear and embrace love, so there's not much chance of being malicious when you get there.

So that's what I mean by becoming God. We are all being taught how to be responsible and how to be like god, creating our own realities on earth, manifesting "heaven" on earth instead of the "hell" we have currently created for ourselves.

It also has implications for DP but that's another story and my rant is now officially over 

[/rant]


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear CECIL, 
If you equate God with evil, if you make evil its own entity, then your explanation for God works. In Christianity, this was called Manicheanism. In Chinese thought, its the Yin and the Yang. In Roman it was Mars versus whatever "good" God you chose. The only modern, mainstream religion that endorses the idea of evil and good deities is the Hindu relgion. But I think a more profound explanation is that God is all that is good. All that is evil, is lacking him. Where pure evil exists, there is a nothingness - a void in the soul. In this explanation, evil is simply good things perverted. Anger, when directed against something unjust, is godly. Strength of body and country are also godly. When strength of body and unjustified anger (or hate) are focused on another country, you get an unjust war. But the war is made of things which are inherently good but are perverted - they are lacking something. Something that is evil can never be as strong, or as perfect, or as happy, as something that is good. Because it is always diminshing and taking away from what it affects.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## wei ji

Could someone define with examples if possible what *exactly * is good and evil.

From what I've understood these are relative terms, and as God is eternally good then what is this goodness we're equating him to?

:?:


----------



## wei ji

and my understanding of daoism is flawed. I thought that there was an undivided circle of yin/yang with yin being in the heart of yang and yang being in the heart of yin - the black and white dots in the centre of eachother...

This means that what is bad can have good parts and that which is good can have bad parts..

I'm confused


----------



## wei ji

> The nature of consciousness is that it evolves. You have experienced this in your own life - your consciousness has evolved since you were an infant to the point you are currently at and it will continue to evolve at least until you die. One of its qualities is that when it evolves it seeks to help less evolved consciousness evolve as well.


Also as far as I was aware consciousness is original mind. It doesn't in fact evolve only the ego and considered self change dependant on age and learning experiences. Consciousness has stayed intact unlike our "selves" which have with the illusion of time evolved.

However, if we were to relax shut down the world and return to pure consciousness for a while, we'll realise that it is indeed just where we left it the last time without any difference...

...It's only our outward appearance and perceptions that have changed....

for the extent of knowledge we've achieved we consider ourselves evolved? Yet we're further away from planetary harmony and social expertise than we've ever been. With the "evolution" of humanity we further pollute and destroy our surroundings, and we've destroyed our own community...


----------



## Homeskooled

Some people see good and evil as relative. I disagree. The real question is - what is good? Is anything good "good" because it is like God, making anything that He does good, or is good a standard that God can live up to or disobey? I love this question, and I've had some great theological debates about it. I beleive that the answer is the former. Goodness is anything that is God-like. We dont hold God to a standard - He _is_ the standard. As for taosim,I'm certainly not an expert, but there are a multitude of explanations of the yin and the yang. My friends who appreciate it, however, read it as dark versus light. They are interconnected, but distinct from each other, much like the Trinity in Christianity.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

Good and evil are both specific to a person's culture and to a person's religious ideals or self-imposed ethical system. They're social constructs and as such are relative. Also, the whole idea of good or evil is probably also strongly related to environment. It's easy to say that stealing is bad when you're rich, and have access to all the necessities of life. It's easy to say killing is universally wrong or right dependent on what circumstances you're living under. In some war like cultures its perfectly reasonable to kill someone for stealing or some other minor infraction in our culture. These are concepts and rules that, for the most part, are accepted among people of these differing viewpoints.

I think it's only when you're well off, and completely out of the state of nature that you can sit around and have debates about what is good, evil, and the nature of virtue. Objectively, life is pretty brutal and divorced from these idealized concepts. The problem occurs when people start believing that their culture or society, which is aritificially constructed, is somehow eternal and that its values strecth back into the past and will continue in the future, indefinitely.


----------



## CECIL

Good and evil do not exist. "Good and evil" is one pair of dual opposites that are value judgements that we humans assign to our lives and the occurences therein. We construct our own moral code based on what we believe good and evil are. Everything that is, is. Anything that exists is valid, otherwise it would not exist. The universe does not care what you want. Things do not change because you don't think it should be that way or that what you are experiencing is evil (in fact this belief just feeds it energy and makes it expand in your reality). If you want something to change you must first accept it for what it is and then move to change it (rather than fix it, since its not broken or "Evil").

What empowers you is understanding the why. Why do you believe in good and evil? How does this serve you? How do you create a mental illness to torture yourself based on these arbitrary dichotomies?

God is love. Everything is love/energy/consciousness. Not all consciousness acts like what we humans percieve as consciousness (i.e. our own minds). If a rock is consciousness then it evolves by being built into a house, eroding over time and being deposited on the bottom of the ocean.


----------



## wei ji

Cecil
\
Good and evil must exist if by their nature they are dual opposites. It may be that they don't exist except by value judgments, but even these exist in some form. Just like the emotions are intangible and unable to measure so is good and evil but they exist don't they?...

colors don't exist except by wavelength yet we see a vast array of them as well...


----------



## sleepingbeauty

weiji, cecil is talking about personal interpretation. for instance, one person may think that something is evil when another person thinks that its good. what he is saying is that they are both wrong. that it simply is.

death and destructions simply are, this is quite true, and a very buddhist concept. but i think that can be misinterpreted as a sort of defeatism. we are not as powerless as that. i hope that cecil can elaborate on this a bit before i make any further assumtions.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear CECIL and Scattered, 
In other words, you are both saying you are relativists. Good and evil are only societal constructs with no basis in a spiritual reality. This is as bad - or almost as bad - as atheism. You've lost enough beleif in God being anything real that you've settled for an explanation that the symptom is the same as the cause. Its so politically correct and academically elitist to just say "Whatever you feel is right, is" and take the anthropological way out, negating the idea of truth because cultures rise and fall. So only the well off in "artificial" society (which is actually a natural construct) ponder religion? Quite the contrary. When one truly wants to ponder God correctly, they give up all they have, take a vow of poverty, and live as a hermit, in the wilderness. I know Franciscans who do just that. Its no mystery, if you've truly studied the cycles of history, that when societies become rich and hedonistic, they fall away from morals and into decadence, and soon after the decline and fall occurs. Two specific instances I'm mentally referencing are Athens before falling to Sparta, and Rome in the 4th and 5th centuries. They instituted welfare systems, frivolous lawsuits were begun, cruelty in the penal and warfare system became more commonplace, and citizens fell into bloodsports and away from their prescribed Gods. You've given me nothing concrete to support your generalizations, Scattered.

You've set up society as something that makes up morals for their own sake, nothing more, and who have morals that die with them. But _why_ do we set them up? Why do we want morals, or deities? These moral codes, as imperfect as some are, are a sign to me that men are inspired by, and seek, a God. He isnt perfectly interpreted, but He's there. You can only get away with having a beleif in God and being a relativist if you make God into something that isnt real and isnt personal - a transcendental blank canvass that we spatter whatever feelings we have upon so that he can mimic them and approve. And this isnt the God I know - a God of love or of personhood. You may call "it" God, but I truly beleive that the argument has come full circle, and you are simply worshipping a reflection of yourself. Or even worse, you've begun to worship nothingness.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## sleepingbeauty

homie, please dont misconstrue this as feminism,

but why do you, when you refer to your god, insist that it is a 'HE'? if god is a creator, then wouldnt his genetalia of choice be the female version? i mean sure, hes got the seeds, but you also need the eggs if you want to bake a cake. 

of course christians believe that god spontaniously created everything out of thin air. so why would god need genitals at all? a snap of the fingers needs no sexual stimulation... or does it? according to the bible, god is contantly flaunting 'his' manhood about. what for? if god is truly the all powerful all seeing all knowing all that there is, whats the use of having man parts and resorting to such a self defeating method of exposing himself(no pun intended) as machoism?


----------



## julie13

Whooo hoooo! Right on SB


----------



## yoyo

I agree with you homeschooled. There is though nothing wrong with relativism. Relativism is a fact. It is true that moral has changed over the years. What was wrong for 2000 years ago may not be considered as wrong today. The moral of men is changing. This moral is relative. But Gods moral is everlasting and is unchangeable. To steal is wrong. That has always been wrong, in in the eyes of God, and will remain wrong, no matter what we men think about it.


----------



## falling_free

http://www.theonlytruegod.johnsbighead.com/

HAHA


----------



## falling_free




----------



## wei ji

> weiji, cecil is talking about personal interpretation. for instance, one person may think that something is evil when another person thinks that its good. what he is saying is that they are both wrong. that it simply is.


Yes and I disagreed with this -I think that they are both right and wrong depending on which side of the fence you stand on. I feel that good and bad are indeed concepts relative in terms but still are real in appearances. just like a ghost can be real in appearance we can identify and explain what one is to an extent understandable - can we define good and evil this way?

The eight fold path in part is

RIGHT view
RIGHT action
RIGHT livelihood

In buddhism we can ascertain that there is such a thing as right/wrong good/bad and perhaps good/evil, and that being moral is a path to Nirvana...

The Buddhist truth of reality is that everything just 'is" but even in appearance it is either good or bad...

Phew!


----------



## wei ji

Thanks 

Wei Ji


----------



## Scattered

Homeskooled said:


> You've set up society as something that makes up morals for their own sake, nothing more, and who have morals that die with them. But _why_ do we set them up? Why do we want morals, or deities? These moral codes, as imperfect as some are, are a sign to me that men are inspired by, and seek, a God.


Have you ever heard of the concept of the social contract as proposed by John Locke? The idea that the state of nature can be so difficult and brutal that we are willing to give up some freedom to a state in order to protect us and make survival just a bit easier. We all agree to established rules of society because without society the vast majority of us would be f*cked. We agree that stealing is wrong because in nature, left to our own devices, the constant threat of a neighbor stealing from us would breed a constant state of conflict. We agree that killing is wrong because if it was not punished then we would be forced to spend the vast majority of our time defending from attackers. Furthermore, we give this power to a state or government who we allow to maintain power and order by use of coercive force. But we also all agree to this state of affairs via our agreement with the social contract. We all want order, we all want to prevent chaos.

Morality is a function of the need to maintain order. Nothing more nothing less. I'm not religious at all but I agree that killing is wrong and stealing is wrong. They're wrong, from a functional point of view, because they deprive us of the ability to live freely and flourish. But this sense of "rightness" or "wrongness" is inherently biased, due to our particular situation and motivations. If we lived in some sort of warrior society then killing might not only be allowed, it would be praised. All of your nice ideas about God and right and wrong are great for your own situation within society. In fact, they're extraordinarily adaptive. It's when you try to generalize them to very different groups of people that they no longer have any relevance.



Homeskooled said:


> Its so politically correct and academically elitist to just say "Whatever you feel is right, is" and take the anthropological way out, negating the idea of truth because cultures rise and fall. So only the well off in "artificial" society (which is actually a natural construct) ponder religion? Quite the contrary. When one truly wants to ponder God correctly, they give up all they have, take a vow of poverty, and live as a hermit, in the wilderness.


No, we as a society and as a group of people with similar values all agree, for the most part, on what is right or wrong. I'm simply stating that these notions of right or wrong are not objective. If a person chooses to form his own idea of right or wrong within society and kill someone, then he's put into jail like everyone else. These ideas are superficially objective insomuch as we all agree with them and are subject to them. But they have no eternal value as you you would argue, by saying that they come from God or are informed by God. A person can only create his own morality by completely seperating himself from society.

It's nice that when one wants to ponder God, they completely divorce themselves from society. However, this means that their ideas have already become biased via their upbringing and experiences within society. They already know what to look for before setting out on the path. Then they become enlightened, realizing the inherent truths of the existence of God or the holy scriptures, all of which they have already been schooled in. Perhaps their own subjective understandings makes them "realize" that the actual truth is not _exactly_ the same as what they've been taught, but the end result is the same. A person has come full circle and has self-validated what he already suspected.

It would be more interesting if a person was raised in an environment completely devoid of all spiritual teachings and then, through their own contemplation, became aware of the truth of Jesus Christ, and Catholicism or Buddhism or whatnot. Even Buddha had the ancient Vedic tradition to work with while discovering his middle path between ascetism and indulgence.

I have my own sort of respect for religion. Especially for some eastern traditions such as Buddhism. Some of these ideas are extremely elegant and beautiful in their own right. I don't blame people for being believers, its as good an answer for the problems we face as any. The only reason to argue any of this is that people start to get it in their heads that their tradition somehow applies to everyone. There's nothing wrong with introducing someone to you're religious beliefs, but don't condemn them or make grand statements about the objectivity and superiority of these beliefs.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered, 
Hmmm....


> There's nothing wrong with introducing someone to you're religious beliefs, but don't condemn them or make grand statements about the objectivity and superiority of these beliefs.


Scattered, you 've made both objective assertions about your beleifs in this thread as well as dismissive comments about such things as: (1) Traditions having merit (2) Morality transcending culture (3) the idea of absolute truth and (4) the nature of society. You've taken the rug out from under your feet asserting that there is a right or a wrong way to discuss things in the forum, when in a previous post you stated:



> Good and evil are....relative.


 There's a law in philosophy called the law of non-contradiction. If you dont hold it, it makes debate useless. I can only think of 2 philosophers who refused to hold it. But I want to make a point that your arguments will bend in on themselves from this point. Choosing not to take a stand, or choosing not to beleive in truth, is still taking a stand and beleiving in a truth. Even if the one truth you hold is that none exists. Yes, I'm very familiar with John Locke. I agree with part of his theory. That humanity bonds together in society for survival. That some rules emerge because of the need for order. But I accept that, and move to the next step. Why do we have a need for law? Why do we feel it is "good" (and I'm using your words) to survive? If the primary need is to survive, why do people commit suicide? Martyrdom? Why do we need other humans? If man didnt bond together in society, would he still feel altruism? You only see a good and pure philosophy being arrived at free from the constraints of society. _You_ Scattered, and every philosophy you've quoted to me, every philosopher, is a product of society. You've been tainted Scattered, as have all the philosophers you like - your thoughts are now simply built on the thoughts of others. How sad. There must be no truth in them, because that means you are all human. What you are thinking is just an extension of a social, albeit artificial, construct. What they were thinking was. Throw in biological determinism, and you had even no choice as to whether you'd think them. If only you could live in a vaccuum, becoming entirely inhuman, you'd _finally_ arrive at the truth, right?

Wrong (and I can say that without contradicting myself). I embrace my humanity, and the fact that I'm connected to ancient cultures and modern ones. I embrace the fact that my thoughts are impacted by other's - I stand on the shoulders of giants. I embrace the fact that the truest test of morality is holding it when there is no payoff, or when the payoff is even death. Locke had no explanation for this. Its unnatural. In my vocabulary, I call it supernatural. It supersedes nature. I embrace the fact that human history is linear, and that I am an inheritor of the human tradition. I embrace the similarity of moral codes across cultures as evidence that humanity has arrived at shared and eternal truths. Without these things, we have divorced ourselves from the human nature in us that we seek to nourish, the very reason we ask these questions. Without them, we cannot experience the fullness of our humanity or the truth that seeks to nourish it.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Methusala

Concerning 'good and evil', 2 words:

Categorical Imperitave

Kant and his idea are most readily explained on wikipedia.com

Spinoza is interesting also.

M


----------



## Scattered

Well then apparently the answer to this whole debate is that there is no answer. Because as you basically say, I cop out, while you continue to deny certain self evident aspects of the world and revert back to a simplistic explanation informed by your brand of humanism/theism. Well, I suppose you've really backed me into a corner now :lol: .

I see the world as being inherently valueless, yet recognize the ability to impose our own unnatural values onto the world in order to satisfy our need for meaning and purpose. Yes, if you want to reduce my argument or viewpoint to its most simple starting point, then I believe in what I would call "positive nihilism". Which is also a contradiction. The world is inherently valueless, meaningless. The point of life is ultimately as simple as surviving and spreading your genes. This is what we're here to do. This is what thousands of years of science has led to. And maybe this is why life is so brutal, but can be so peaceful and beautiful. It lies within our evolved mind and its ability to deceive itself. Its truely amazing the kind of layers of fantasy, wishful thinking, and daydreaming that occurs within our minds which helps to structure our worlds. Socially the world is chaotic, because of the untenable nature of these warring fantasies. Physically and objectively it makes perfect sense. But the answer is too simple and perhaps too depressing in order to accept. This is why I, contrary to other radicals, don't think religion is a disease. Religion is a beautiful dream, that I think should continue to exist. But if we're going to come right down to brass tacks, then I'm going to argue for what I see the world to really be.

We need law because law helps us to survive. We want to survive because it is our evolutionary imperative to do so. Without this very basic drive to exist, we simply would not be here today. It feels "good" to survive because we are fulfilling the basic purpose of our lives. People commit suicide and martyr themselves because while survival is our main imperative, we have evolved the complexity in order to give rise to our own cultures. We are advanced enough to, in extreme circumstances, override our basic instinct to live. But this exception does not destroy the evolutionary argument, it simply modifies it and makes us aware of how different, intellectually, we are from our ancestors. If anything, we kill ourselves because we don't fulfill societal obligations. Perhaps a person is depressed because he is not integrated in society. If he is not integrated in society then he is not contributing to society. Suicide can then be seen as an aspect, albeit a self-imposed one, of natural selection. Martyrdom can be explained the same way, conversely. A person may kill himself for the survival of the whole. Altruism is just another aspect of survival for the species. Instead of individual survival, we are now talking about group survival or the survival of group values, which in turn guarantees group cohesion.

Does truth exist? It depends. I don't believe truths pertaining to social reality exist. This includes of course, our religious and ethical beliefs. The problem is that people really and truely want to believe that social beliefs, which are unnatural, are somehow natural, eternal, and objective. I believe in physical truth. The truth of the objective world when seperated from culture. Unfortunately, culture is the product of groups and as such is necessary to survive within this world. This is why so many people see life as being chaotic and crazy.

I believe in science. Science is not free from "taint". It's as much a product of society as religion is. But in order to continue this arguement, I would say that there are obvious differences between religion and science. Both are biased, but science is less so. Science _at the very least_ tries to be unbiased. It strives to incorporate data from scientists of different cultures and beliefs. It also tries to remove our basic human biases from its results. Its *NOT* always correct. It's often incorrect. But it is a continuing, evolving, and _ideally_ self-correcting system. Religion on the otherhand is obviously not. There is room for debate but this debate often occurs under the watch of religious hierarchies that have self-evident needs and place restriction on that which is harmful, or heretical.

I think it's great that you embrace humanity, free will, god. I think that psychologically this is the best thing to do. I think that people who don't accept humanity and believe in nihilism have much shorter life spans. More importantly, I think that cultural-capacity evolved in order to ensure our survival. A byproduct of that was doubt and self-awareness. The ability to question our place in this world. In turn we had to devise a way to fix this potentially fatal problem. Religion did the trick. So did nationalism or just an abiding belief in group identity and values. So this is not a large tirade to make people not believe in God, just a questioning of the underlying truth of such a belief, as well as a confession that such questioning is potentially hazardous.


----------



## Scattered

Methusala said:


> Concerning 'good and evil', 2 words:
> 
> Categorical Imperitave
> 
> Kant and his idea are most readily explained on wikipedia.com
> 
> Spinoza is interesting also.
> 
> M


That is interesting. My argument is not that there can never be an ethical system that all people can follow. Although, I don't think that is possible, that isn't what I'm saying. I'm simply saying that even elegantly constructed ethical systems that have wide appeal mean nothing. The only way that any of these systems can objectively mean something is if either a)God sets the rules and has created an ethical system or B) It is somehow written within our DNA and as such is natural to all human beings. For A) we have to not only get into an argument about the existence of God, we also have to get into an argument about God's will. For B) to be true, all societies would have to exhibit close similarities and while similarties have been shown to exist, I don't believe there are enough in order to describe some universal form of morality.


----------



## wei ji

Scattered,

That's a lot to ponder and I'm going to have to reread what you've written.

My question is regarding morality. If society has put up a moral system, then why is there so much debate by the people not only who run the system but those of us who are just general public.

And by this I include an example of those who actively seek to stop the torture of animals (by my belief and by my value I'm now vegan) when society feels it's the right thing to do in order to survive. (a large part of our world is made out of meat consumption).

There are also many other humanitarian aides...

Ok, so we can say that God put animals on this Earth for us. But does this give us the right to capture them and put them in cages for the rest of their lives? - this is rhetorical...

And before this turns into some kind of animal rights activism campaign (please don't this is spirituality), my point is simply set as an example that society doesn't create morality each person in society has their own moral guide - conscience. There are certain laws which are set up but these laws don't have morality as their main purpose, simply protection of the state.


----------



## Scattered

Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not have sex with minors, etc

These may be necessary for the protection of the state (with the exception on the last one) but it does not mean they aren't moral laws as well. I think there is always an appeal to an ethical system when we try to justify the enforcement of these laws. People may have their own individual opinion about certain technicalites regarding law, or they may differ greatly. But the vast majority of the populace has come to agreement about these laws. I don't mean to offend you, but most people don't care about the imprisonment and slaughter of animals, as long as they aren't all asked to be held witness or to actually take part in the process.

So society doesn't make you believe that the imprisonment of animals is ok or isn't ok. You can choose to believe whatever you want. But you're beliefs have no bearing on the day to day practices of government, or farms or zoos or whatever, unless a critical mass of people believe that and become influential enough to change law. The system as a means of maintaining order and imposing morality still stands.


----------



## wei ji

So what we're saying is that it's ok for other people to kill and steal as long as we don't have any part of it ourselves?

I'm not offended by the idea that most people don't care about the slaughter of animals, but a moral society which says don't kill won't kill animals or is that an exception?


----------



## Scattered

I'm saying its the responsibility of the individual to decide what is right or what is wrong for himself and for his own reasons. If you believe that its wrong to kill and slaughter animals then don't kill or slaughter animals. If you want it to stop, then go about whatever channels you can to try to influence people and to make it stop. However, not everyone or every society is governed by the same moral code. Whether or not this means that its right to do whatever you want is a personal decision. I don't think its right because I have my own ethical system, while realizing that others may not agree with me. I also realize that my own ethical system, which works for me, is probably not objectively true.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered, 


> Well then apparently the answer to this whole debate is that there is no answer.


Why's that?



> Because as you basically say, I cop out, while you continue to deny certain self evident aspects of the world and revert back to a simplistic explanation informed by your brand of humanism/theism.


No, I dont think you cop-out. You contradict. Do I revert back to a simplistic explanation? Absolutely. I'm beginning to realize that the essence of spirituality is simplicity. Not irrationality or the forsaking of knowledge, but allowing the heart to inform the head. I _do_ think that the truth is rational. I do think that it is complex. But I think it is simple. So simple that people who arent "intellectuals" can grasp it. So simple that children personify it. You'll have to expound on the self-evident areas of human experience I'm denying. I will not ignore or refuse to respond to any counterpoint you bring up.

Scattered, you're missing the point. You are missing the very objectivity that you've stated will inform one of the truth. You're making statements about truths that transcend cultures while saying that this cant occur. I'm definitely not anti-science. I think a good religion should add to science and science should give evidence to back its assertions up. Sure, I guess they're both tainted by humans. But I would use the word enriched, instead. Certainly, I might live longer. But its probably because integrating the truth about how the world works, both physically and spirtually, increases one's survival. Suicide being a part of natural selection? Natural selection, is by its nature, not self-imposed. Martyrdom and altruism are not linked together. Martyrdom may not benefit the whole - it isnt meant to. Its based on the idea that something other than one's earthly life is worth saving. Supernatural survival of the fittest. Altruism is indeed an evolutionary mechanism, I agree. Colonies of chimpanzees were shown to exhibit this trait in a study done last year. No chimp martyrs yet, though. My question is why is it an inherently good thing, according to nature, to survive? _Why_ does nature wish to self-perpetuate?

Now I have a question for you . First of all, why would the capacity to have a culture ensure our survival better than say, a hive mentality, which allows insects to be the dominant earthly species, by numbers? Second of all, why would self-awareness be fatal? I beleive you are confusing self-awareness with free will, but regardless, why is this a fatality? Self-awareness is the antidote to itself - it allows for the self-review of actions. If we were ruled purely by instinct, we would quickly overrun the planet. No remorse for killing species, each other, etc....Religion is not the antidote to our having a more developed cortex. Its simply the emodiement of accrued wisdom from repeated cortical decisions, good and bad. Repeated cortical stabs at the divine, what works in acheiving spiritual peace, fruitful prayer, and enlightenment, and what doesnt. I dont see religion as invented - I see it as an extension of something natural, and certainly not a control mechanism. Humans are self-policing. I welcome your responses and objections.

Methusala, 
Martin and I have had some discussion about Kant and the categorical imperative, I beleive in the CS Lewis thread on here.

SleepingBeauty, 
No, I dont consider your question to be at all feminist - and even if I did, there are very good forms of feminism. A good deal of my female friends are feminists. I just had a conversation with one of them about Goddess worship today. God has no sex. For my purposes, he revealed himself as patriarchal figure in the Old Testament because this is what they would understand. In the New Testament, he took on bodily form, again as a man. But God has no ordained sex - He just is, and embodies all that Is. Male and Female. This is simply how, in my beleif system, he has symbolized himself. Thus, I use the pronoun He. I hope that you keep overturning your fears and find true peace.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## wei ji

Homeskooled:

we would quickly overrun the planet. No remorse for killing species, each other, etc....

haven't we already done that? We chop down the rain forest daily to make newspapers and such like, killing different species that we haven't even discovered yet. People destroy cattle for food and sustenance without "caring" As to overrunning the planet, isn't it such that the planet can hardly sustain us right now and that China is overrun with a population explosion? In war we readily kill eachother without remorse. I despair at this because all life has a right to live (although war is sometimes a necessary evil and there will be casualties).

If people were self-policing then why do we have an authority at all?

Thanks

wei


----------



## CECIL

Well I do believe a moral code is relative to the society you are indoctrinated into. In a headhunting tribe somewhere in the vast, untouched wilderness you would be praised as the best and most powerful amoungst your people if you had decapitated 50 men and had their heads mounted on the spikes of your hut. In our society you would be locked in prison, bare a massive social stigma and more than likely be executed by the government if you did this. Both sides of the fences are 100% correct in their belief because their moral codes are relative and everyone's reality is 100% real to them. Just like DP, depression and schizophrenia are 100% real realities (as opposed to what modern psychiatry will tell you), so is everyone's belief systems. They are all as valid as each other.

However, consider this Jungian argument: You are walking through the forest and happen apon a wounded baby bird. Immediately there are two emotions that run through you. One of those impulses is to take the bird and crush it in your hand. The other is to nurse it back to health and set it free to live a healthier life. Immediately you stop and think "I couldn't crush the bird, that would be wrong....no I couldn't possibly do that, I would be a BAD or EVIL person if I did that". Effectively what you are doing is denying yourself the potential psychic energy of that "negative" action. The truth is that as a human you DO have the potential to take either action. If you deny that you are capable of the former then you create a negative energetic construct around it (or a complex about it if you want to call it that).

Over time what happens when you build more and more of these negative connotations is your energy gets tied into patterns. You constantly pour negative energy into those actions you percieve as wrong or evil ("I'm not like that") and create what Jung calls the Shadow (i.e. those aspects of yourself that you don't want to admit exist but really do). Over time these grow and create a sort of 'vacuum'. You pour energy into these connections but are never allowed to act them out. In some cases, very severe ones, people find themselves so obsessed and tormented by this desire to not be the evil person they are desperately trying not to be that they end up giving in and commit "Crimes" or "Acts of sin". For example murder, rape, homosexual acts, blasphemy and so on and so on.

Basically what I am saying is this: Based on the fear of judegment by some external force (god) you deny parts of your potential and you dissallow yourself to do many things you believe are wrong. Incidentally, when it is in your nature to exist against the grain of society (i.e. you are wierd or different or hell, just unique like everyone else) you may find yourself developing dissociative disorders because of these patterns of denial and blame.

In the end, you are not free to be you. You are not free to explore all of your true potential as a human. You keep so much of your personal energy locked away in these constructs that you begin to feel drained and so on until you die. In severe cases this can lead to depression and other "mental illnesses".

Ultimately you are only completely free if you undo these negative value judgements and allow yourself to be completely free to explore any potential energy you desire. In the end the universe does not care whether you kill the bird or help it. Ultimately the universe does not care whether you are gay or bi or straight, and so on.

What IS important is that you are responsible for your actions. True freedom means being able to do ANYTHING you want ON THE CONDITION that you are also willing to accept any consequences and all responsibility for those actions. You can't blame anyone else for anything that happens in your life because YOU created all of it. Note that this does not mean that you should go on a killing and stealing spree. What it means is that you accept those things are part of your potential as a human and make a conscious CHOICE as to which path you take. You cannot make a choice if an external moral code is forcing you to act in certain ways.

Also its worth noting that if you don't have these negative connotations associated with "Good" and "evil" then you will not be inclined to commit those "Evil" acts in the first place. This is because the emotional hooks that make people act with "evil" intent are built upon this very first value judgement and subsequent denial that they are capable of doing those things. If you are truly free then you will probably pick up the bird, marvel at its beauty, be overcome with joy and nurse it back to health. On the other hand, if you were totally free you could revel in the experience of crushing it to death. However when you see the impact of dying birds on the ecology around you then you will take responsibility for being part of the problem and perhaps be inclined to make a change.

My belief is that life is not just about being here, surviving and passing on your genes. I find that to be a very drab, dead and pointless existence. I believe that the point of life is experience and creation. There are an infinite number of experiences you can have here in life and each one is divine. What's also divine is that YOU create every single one. Every single painful moment and every night you couldn't sleep because you were scared out of your mind by DP was of your own creation. On some level you are learning from this experience and on some level you agreed to do this before you were even born. WHY?

Furthermore, if you have already created hell for yourself to live in, then why can't you instead CHOOSE to create heaven on earth?


----------



## Methusala

Great post on philosophy Scattered, I agree with well those well explained ideas and think they are important.

A quick thought for the moment on part of that expansive post, is another way to answer the question of 'how can any human kill themselves when that seems to be against the evolutionary imperative to pass on genes?'

Some may say 'but bees work themselves to death for the hive, that shows suicide behavior can evolve.' But that doesn't apply to humans, because worker bee genes are propogated by the queen they are working for, not themsleves. Human genes are propogated by each individual human, there is no genetic 'worker human' class, we are all true valuable individual sentient beings.

OK, now on to my answer to the question of 'how can suicide happen when it is against the evolutionary principle of survival?'

I think the answer is that humans have evolved a unique ability on planet earth among living things. That ability is for the brain to over ride all other internal biological systems to control behavior based on thought alone. This is what it mean to be sentient, I think, I think therefore I am.

This unique ability is an immensely powerful tool that can also be immensely dangerous. Tigers must rake their claws to keep them from overgrowing and injuring their paws. Humans must keep tabs on their thought habits lest they also become overgrown in undesireable directions and result in self harming behavior.

M


----------



## Scattered

Homeskooled said:


> Scattered, you're missing the point. You are missing the very objectivity that you've stated will inform one of the truth. You're making statements about truths that transcend cultures while saying that this cant occur. I'm definitely not anti-science. I think a good religion should add to science and science should give evidence to back its assertions up. Sure, I guess they're both tainted by humans.


No, I'm really not missing the point. I realize that my views are somewhat mired within their own argument. However, I take it that all of these views are inevitably tainted and move forward from there. All things being equal, the scientific view is the most rational and plausible view available. This is why I stated that even science is biased, however science tries its hardest to NOT be biased. It may fail, yet it is still the best we have. I'm simply saying that the scientific view is the best view we have. Its a choice between an unsatisfactory view, the scientific outlook, or a view that is completely separated from even the most minute claims at objectivity, the theistic or spiritual view. The spiritual view is inherently subjective and self-validating. We move from the presuppositon that there is a God, an intelligent design, a divine purpose, and then move forward in our lives finding hints here and there that prove our views. Either that or we completely disregard proof altogether and simply have faith that such a construct exists. This faith is your so-called childish simplicity that simply recognizes a spiritual "truth" without recourse to intellectual debate. If you believe in this type of simplicity, then that is fine, however you would also have to admit that you have no grounds to argue with me because spirtuality would then be completely outside the bounds of any scientific debate. It would be irrelevant, and any evolutionary or other evidence that disproved religious beliefs would be simple to deal with. It could just be ignored.



Homeskooled said:


> Suicide being a part of natural selection? Natural selection, is by its nature, not self-imposed. Martyrdom and altruism are not linked together. Martyrdom may not benefit the whole - it isnt meant to. Its based on the idea that something other than one's earthly life is worth saving. Supernatural survival of the fittest. Altruism is indeed an evolutionary mechanism, I agree. Colonies of chimpanzees were shown to exhibit this trait in a study done last year. No chimp martyrs yet, though. My question is why is it an inherently good thing, according to nature, to survive? _Why_ does nature wish to self-perpetuate?


Natural selection may not be self-imposed. However, the person who decides to kill himself is not deciding within a vacuum. His decision is, in part, due to many other factors that are outside of his control. So this act is not entirely "self-imposed", its a reaction to natural (or in this case cultural) conditions that lead him to believe that it is a reasonable act. Martyrdom is meant to benefit the whole whether or not it is successful in its application. The martyrdom of Jesus became the basis for an entire religion. A religion that inevitably helped many people regardless of its truth. Chimpanzees dont martyr themselves, but then again, they are intellectually incapable of such an act. Humans are. As to survival and its purpose, I have no idea. We have an instinct to survive and continue our species, without which we wouldn't be here today. Survival is good because it fulfills this very basic instinct. Otherwise, as I have stated many times in the past, as far as I'm concerned the overall survival of life on earth seems meaningless and without purpose. If you can't accept this and have to create a religious explanation, then that is perfectly understandable. Nature doesn't "wish" to self-perpetuate. Nature isn't endowed with any feelings or plan or purpose. Nature is by definition a self-perpetuating system, thats just what it is. If you open a direct line to gaia via meditation or religious practice then maybe you can inform me of nature's intentions at some later time.



Homeskooled said:


> Now I have a question for you . First of all, why would the capacity to have a culture ensure our survival better than say, a hive mentality, which allows insects to be the dominant earthly species, by numbers? Second of all, why would self-awareness be fatal? I beleive you are confusing self-awareness with free will, but regardless, why is this a fatality? Self-awareness is the antidote to itself - it allows for the self-review of actions. If we were ruled purely by instinct, we would quickly overrun the planet. No remorse for killing species, each other, etc....Religion is not the antidote to our having a more developed cortex. Its simply the emodiement of accrued wisdom from repeated cortical decisions, good and bad. Repeated cortical stabs at the divine, what works in acheiving spiritual peace, fruitful prayer, and enlightenment, and what doesnt. I dont see religion as invented - I see it as an extension of something natural, and certainly not a control mechanism. Humans are self-policing. I welcome your responses and objections.


Perhaps my biology is a bit rusty but insects operate in a completely different world under a completely different set of circumstances. So I don't really know how to answer your question. Other than to say that humans evolved in a completely different way, had longer lifespans, smaller numbers and are born into conditions that are not conducive to a hive mentality. Humans require ingenuity to navigate their world. They need to be somewhat independent and capable of thinking, reacting, and adapting to circumstances that are more pressing. I'm not sure what you're talkign about self-awareness being "fatal". I don't think self-awareness is fatal, I just think that it is wrought with problems that have to be dealt with. Religion, I personally believe, might be one of those adaptations. As for religion not being invented I'm not sure how you can say this. Religion, as far as I'm aware, is a coping mechanism and an explanatory device. If there is a huge flood that kills your whole family and you haven't developed any form of science, you use religion to explain how the gods have been angered and caused the disaster. This is a simple way of organizing a chaotic and harsh environment into something more understandable. The explanatory power of religion has been overtaken by science in modern times. However, science can explain life but can;t really give life meaning. This is why religion still exists.


----------



## wei ji

What is meant by "God"? Can Science prove or disprove this notion? If it can't then science is limited suchas is logic and rationality. There are many contradictions behind logic, and as such it cannot take precedence over faith as being a more realistic way of viewing life.

And as to the God question my answer is yes. Science has stated that there is cause and effect and as such there must be something that would have given the notion. so the term "god" fits here. And if there is God then faith is also valid.

If we experiment and 9 times out of 10 the experiment goes the way we wish we say it's scientifically proven - what happens to the tenth time?


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered, 
Excellent post. 


> realize that my views are somewhat mired within their own argument.


Yes.



> All things being equal, the scientific view is the most rational and plausible view available.


Sure. Science is a tool. Use it. Collect data. It can only help ascertain the truth. What if altruism is, gasp, meant to help humans survive? I happen to think it does. This strengthens the idea of a Grand Designer in the universe. I happen to agree with a great deal of Locke - I simply have a problem with some of Locke's conclusions, not his methods.



> The spiritual view is inherently subjective and self-validating


You are making an assumption. An assumption is a statement in which a logical path to arrive at a conclusion has been ignored. The conclusion simply _assumed_. For instance:



> We move from the presuppositon that there is a God, an intelligent design, a divine purpose, and then move forward in our lives finding hints here and there that prove our views. Either that or we completely disregard proof altogether and simply have faith that such a construct exists.


No, we dont move from the presupposition that there is a God. People were born, at the dawn of civilization, with no presuppositions, and deism arose. Atheists who convert in their 30's, like CS Lewis, dont come from that presupposition, either. You're leaving a "devil's choice" for me. Either beleiver's disregard logic or they _assume_ that God exists. Damned if I do, damned if I dont. You leave no room for reason leading a person to God, or most importantly if God is real, personal experience. So I'm creating a third option - that perhaps God exists, and this existence is a reasonable option (you have not proven it to be _unreasonable_ yet, for all of your doubts), and arrive at it through either personal experience of the divine, or a rational process of accrued life experience and philosphical knowledge. In the option that I have chosen, atheists are the one's leaving reason and personal experience at the door, allowing doubt to consume them.



> This faith is your so-called childish simplicity that simply recognizes a spiritual "truth" without recourse to intellectual debate. If you believe in this type of simplicity, then that is fine, however you would also have to admit that you have no grounds to argue with me because spirtuality would then be completely outside the bounds of any scientific debate.


Scattered, I can answer this in two ways: You are all head. The head cant "know" something. It can only accrue knowledge. Have you ever wondered why some of your obsession bother and nag at you, while they may be entirely unproductive and frivolous, adding nothing to your life, while other valid concerns (thankfully) never begin nawing away at you? Because there is an emotional component to obsession. Obsessions use reason, but they arent very reasonable. I work in the legal field, and I can argue completely unreasonable things incredibly eloquently when I have the desire. And the logic will be flawless. You can "know" all you want, and debate it, but there is another component, something you cant put your finger on, which makes you certain. Its the same thing that makes you "choose" to think that your obsessions are worth obsessing about, and that others arent. You dont need to know a whole lot to be a happy person. I can argue rationally about something that my heart tells me is true, and make a logical case for it. But children have hearts well before they are contemplating Neitsche (sp). This is why I think that children have access to "truth" as well. You need to start experiencing life personally. With people and God. Conversation, relationships, prayer. I'll be back to finish this up.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

Homeskooled said:


> No, we dont move from the presupposition that there is a God. People were born, at the dawn of civilization, with no presuppositions, and deism arose. Atheists who convert in their 30's, like CS Lewis, dont come from that presupposition, either.


Obviously we, as a species, didn't just assume that God exists, we created religion because of the very practical purpose that it serves. Now you can say that people arrived at this conclusion because of their spiritual or supernatural experiences, but that doesn't change the fact that religion serves a very functional purpose. That doesn't change the fact that various beliefs, some beliefs that even you would deny, arise out of a need for an explanation. I'm simply contending that maybe this is as far as religion goes. Maybe it really is just a nice explanation that serves a noble purpose but is nothing more. Maybe people turn to religion because it fulfills something that science can't. Just because people need a belief to lean on to prop them up while they are down, doesn't mean that this functional and positive belief is in any way true. Deathbed conversions prove only that we are emotionally weaker than we would like to be. We need a created God to help us. I suppose even devout atheists can recognize this and "give in".



Homeskooled said:


> Scattered, I can answer this in two ways: You are all head. The head cant "know" something. It can only accrue knowledge. This is why I think that children have access to "truth" as well. You need to start experiencing life personally. With people and God. Conversation, relationships, prayer. I'll be back to finish this up.


Touche. Maybe I'm too inexperienced to have that internal knowledge of God's existence. Maybe after I become more integrated with society I'll recognize my folly and start reading the Bible. I'll pray that God reveals himself to me :roll: .


----------



## Methusala

I can't claim to know what Scattered needs or not, but I do have a few more comments.



> No, we dont move from the presupposition that there is a God. People were born, at the dawn of civilization, with no presuppositions, and deism arose. Atheists who convert in their 30's, like CS Lewis, dont come from that presupposition, either. You're leaving a "devil's choice" for me. Either beleiver's disregard logic or they assume that God exists. Damned if I do, damned if I dont. You leave no room for reason leading a person to God, or most importantly if God is real, personal experience. So I'm creating a third option - that perhaps God exists, and this existence is a reasonable option (you have not proven it to be unreasonable yet, for all of your doubts), and arrive at it through either personal experience of the divine, or a rational process of accrued life experience and philosphical knowledge. In the option that I have chosen, atheists are the one's leaving reason and personal experience at the door, allowing doubt to consume them.


 Homeskooled, if you have logical evidence and reasoning outside of pure personal faith on why God exists or what God is, please share it with us. How exactely have atheists and agnostics ignored reason or their experience? What is Jesus's cell phone number or other double blind repeatable experiment to show who and what God is?

Also concerning the line 'you have not proven it to be unreasonable yet, for all of your doubts', are you implying that what you say about God is correct on its own until other people prove you wrong? I ask that because the way I see it, when someone makes a claim about the universe it's up to them to show it's true through logical evidence and reasoning, not to demand it's true until others disprove them. In other words doubters don't have to prove anything, it's the people who are asserting some theory as true who have something to prove. If I say 100 elves made the Universe and demand that theory is true until someone disproves it, is that an acceptable method of reasoning?

I am under the impression that most leading theologians since the 1800's have admitted that knoweldge of God's existence ultimately rests on faith.
Are you asserting that your belief is based on something other than faith?

Thanks,
M


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered and Methusaleh, 


> Maybe after I become more integrated with society I'll recognize my folly and start reading the Bible. I'll pray that God reveals himself to me


Just let go a little of your doubt and try to live. You ask great questions and you have a good heart. Thats why I dont mind these threads. But the proof is in the pudding. I used to tell myself that I couldnt figure life out from an armchair - it isnt meant to be so. I often reminded myself of Mycroft Holmes - Sherlock Holmes's older brother. He would go to his older brother for advice when he couldnt solve a case. When Watson commented that Mycroft must not be as smart, Holmes replied (and I'm paraphrasing) "Ah, no, quite the contrary. His intellect is far superior to mine, but he would be an abysmal detective, for when given the _right_ data he can solve a case from his armchair, but he is far too lazy to do the footwork in the field to get it. "I would end up on completely ridiculous mental tangents.



> Just because people need a belief to lean on to prop them up while they are down, doesn't mean that this functional and positive belief is in any way true


This is what I've often thought, but I'm seeing that life is very common sensish. If it helps human beings, and is noble, its probably because there is an essence of truth about it. Its not some just some sick joke as if some things in life enrich human beings but are really just out and out lies. In Christianity, Christ says you can judge something by its fruits. If its fruit is unhappiness and death, judge it as flawed. If its fruits are peace and altruism, judge it as good.



> Homeskooled, if you have logical evidence and reasoning outside of pure personal faith on why God exists or what God is, please share it with us.


I never can quite grasp this out and out skepticism. What do you want, exactly? A slice of God pie? I cant give it to you. I can rebut any statement you make that beleiving in God is _unreasonable_. And I can instruct you in ways to go about seeking God. But God isnt something you can tame and package. Its such a Western, fast food way of looking at God. As CS Lewis says in the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, a Christian allegory for children, Aslan is "not a tame Lion". I cant predict how God will manifest in your life.



> Also concerning the line 'you have not proven it to be unreasonable yet, for all of your doubts', are you implying that what you say about God is correct on its own until other people prove you wrong? I ask that because the way I see it, when someone makes a claim about the universe it's up to them to show it's true through logical evidence and reasoning, not to demand it's true until others disprove them.


I've covered this ground a thousand times over with Martin. You have read Kant, correct? He rebuts this quite eloquently. In his mind, doubters and beleivers were on equal ground, and he placed the heavier burden on unbeleivers. I think, however, that we both have to ante up evidence to show whether what we beleive is borne out in every day life, is backed up by circumstantial evidence, and follows a logical path. As I've said to scattered, there are a thousand logical possilbilities - which one is the true one is the question. You cant know this except through personal experience. I can talk all day long about being a Holocaust survivor, and how it feels to be one, but until I am one, what I'm saying is hollow. You want a double-blind, placebo controlled, repeatable experiment to show who and what God is? Do you know, if I could give that, it would immediately rebut all my above statements better than anything you could say. It wouldnt be a God beyond my control or one with free will. It would be a God that could be boxed, be able to be perfectly understood by me (negating the possiblity that He would be greater than myself ), and under my control, as the experiment would be repeatable. I can give historical proof (as I am a Christian, and the Man we call God has historical backing), logical arguments, and personal experience (which I usually dont because for some reason, atheists seem to find "personal experience" which is really the backbone of human existence, laughable).



> I am under the impression that most leading theologians since the 1800's have admitted that knoweldge of God's existence ultimately rests on faith.


Reason can lead you to a beleif in God through your personal experience. It wont give you absolute proof. You will follow a reasonable path of deduction, learning, reading, growing, and a personal process of elimination. Certainty, as I told Scattered, which will help you to choose between one of the hundreds of logical possibilities, will only occur through personal experience and hopefully, an encounter with the Divine. One of my monk friends talks about this often. I dont know that I've had one. I know I've "rested in God". But he was an atheist and a cello player for the Canadian and Czechloslovakian National orchestras, and he said he had several of these experiences which led him to become a monk and a priest. As I've said before, the real proof is in the pudding.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

Funny thing about personal experience though, people use it to back up the most ridiculous of beliefs. I'm not saying that believing in God is ridiculous, I'm just saying that the same method that you take to know God, personal experience, can be said to be completely unreliable. We see examples of this all the time. People have had UFO abduction experiences where they claim that what they experienced MUST have been true, they felt it, saw it, smelled it; it felt completely and utterly real to them. Yet we learn later on that there are plenty of alternative explanations. For all I know some of these people may have had real experiences with aliens. I deny it because there are far simpler and more reasonable explanations.

I think its reasonable, in some way or another, to have and maintain a belief in God. However, its when we cross the threshold to personal experience that this belief becomes untenable. Spiritual experience is completely subjective and means about as much as the poor victims of alien anal probes. It may be true, but there is a situation where one desperately wants this to be true, and as such, should be expected to experience what they emotionally need to feel secure.


----------



## Homeskooled

I hate to say it, Scattered, but personal experience is the same thing we use to know ANYTHING in life. The personal experience I talk about is simply a feeling of peace. Like I said, its a little like the certainty one gets about an obsession, or putting an obsession to rest...you just feel satisfied, or like a question has been adequately answered. You dont see God. I'm just as skeptical of people who have visions (this isnt the kind of experience my monk friend speaks of) as people who see UFOs. Because in each case, it isnt natural. I'd have to test them for TLE, I'd run EEGs, MRIs, lie detector tests, psychological batteries, etc...before I'd even consider thinking they are legitimate. But this is what science is for. It cant tell me why, but it can tell me the process. Whether someone is hallucinating or bona fide. And there are enough people who have gone through these tests who have religious visions to make one wonder. I've studied a bit about UFOs, and there arent as many unexplained sitings of them as compared to miraculous occurrences. Still, though, they are there. I tend to see UFO paranoai as the inheritor of hysterical people. I think it was CS Lewis who said that when faith leaves, superstition sets in. To some that sounds contradictory. But I think that many people who used to get hysterical over religion, in modern society have a void they fill by getting hysterical over UFOs. In either case, I dont see them as reliable reporters of either phenomena. But it at least cuts down on some of the religious hysteria. True miracles and visions, should, by their nature, be far and few between.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

Homeskooled said:


> I'm just as skeptical of people who have visions (this isnt the kind of experience my monk friend speaks of) as people who see UFOs. Because in each case, it isnt natural. I'd have to test them for TLE, I'd run EEGs, MRIs, lie detector tests, psychological batteries, etc...before I'd even consider thinking they are legitimate. But this is what science is for. It cant tell me why, but it can tell me the process. Whether someone is hallucinating or bona fide.


Yeah, but don't you see the contradiction? A person who has a religious vision, to you, should be put through a battery of physical and psychological tests. Yet, a person who simply has a feeling of inner peace when meditating on spiritual teachings is somehow legit, simply because his claims aren't TOO fantastic. This feeling of inner peace, inner calm, love, whatever can be just as false as the person who has an ecstatic vision. Whose to say that these feelings aren't what they appear to be, an emotion associated with an environment of spirituality that is designed to elicit awe. This is like the person who walks into a magnificient cathedral and says that he feels calm, amazed, as if he has just experienced the divine. Is he really experiencing God? Or is he just reacting to an environment meant to elicit a reaction? Religious people cultivate a "mental cathedral". They set up a group of mental conditions that should be expected to produce these feelings. Theres nothing spiritual about it, its a mental creation.


----------



## gizmo

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are cleartly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His etrnal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse; because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.


----------



## gizmo

Romans 1:17-22


----------



## CECIL

I'm gonna have to go with Homeskooled on this one. However, Scattered is right - god and personal experience are NOT rational. That's the whole point.

There are two sides to existence:
1. The masculin, logic, reason, knowledge.
2. The feminine, intuition, love, wisdom.

Science exists in the former, because its entire dogma is built upon weeding out and ignoring the latter. Logic cannot prove or disprove the existence of god, so stop trying and stop arguing about it. Likewise no-one can convince logic that its wrong from an intuitive position, so stop trying that too. Personally I tried to exist in a purely logical world for a long time, because that's how our society tries to work. There are very good reasons for this that I won't go into right now. Ultimately however, it is intuition, love and wisdom that lead you to whatever explanation of god suits you. Learning to heal the schism between the masculin and feminine aspects of creation is a long term goal but it starts when you begin to at least put some faith in the feminine.

There is a fallacy in trying to be completely logical and objective. That is that we ourselves are subjective observers of reality. We can NEVER be objective, 100% logical because we are emotional creatures and will always be affected by what we observe and will always effect what we observe. People try to deny their intuitive side but ultimately it is a losing battle, because its part of you.

To people who see UFOs, their experience IS 100% completely real. For them. People who claim to see god have 100% real experiences. Schizophrenics are NOT hallucinating - their experience is completely real to them. You all have 100% real experiences when you have an anxiety attack or depressive bout. These are all valid experiences. The fact that there are other explanations does not change the fact that they are all real for the people experiencing them.

Now the common reaction is to use people having these experiences as evidence that they are somehow sick or delusional. We try to rationalise what has happened ("It was just swamp gas"), but this explanation is not satisfying. Perhaps we should look closely at how we define reality. Perhaps we should realise that reality is different for each person and that their own beliefs dictate what they experience.

Scattered, ultimately there is no point even arguing the point with you, because its up to you what you believe. Your belief will continue to be 100% true for you and you will continue to see this belief reinforced in your reality. Likewise, Homeskooled, your belief will remain 100% true for you and it will be reinforced by your own reality. This is because your beliefs dictate your reality (not the other way around).

Now, there's only one way that will change. If you are not currently satisfied with your current reality then you may choose to change it. At that point scattered, you may perhaps choose to pay more attention to your own subjective experience and give it a little more credit than you currently do. If you continue to deny your own intuitive aspects it ultimately only gets you into trouble (i.e. DP, depression, anxiety). These are things you have no doubt already experienced but if you are happy to blame it on purely logical reasons then by all means, do so. Good luck.


----------



## Scattered

I don't live in a completely cold, rational, logical world. I live in quite the opposite. I live in a world of inner fantasy that is normally, in my mind, completely illogically and unreasonable. The difference is that I understand the delineation between fantasy and reality. My fantasy has a place, it exists for a reason, and I allow it to be what it is. But when I'm trying to act and live in the world as it is, rather than as I'd like it to be, I recognize there are certain truths that I can't run away from. I'm arguing because the world, to me, really IS a certain way. It's experienced differently by different individuals but that doesn't mean that their real experience can somehow be generalized to the wider populace. We live in subjective worlds but when we suppress these natural inclinations we can see the world, to some extent, how it actually is. I don't think alot of people want to do this because of the conflict it would create with their rich inner fantasies. These fantasies serve a valid purpose, they help us emotionally. That doesn't mean that they are true. I'd love for God to exist. I really wish God did exist. But when I look at my experience and even outside of my experience I see no reason to believe in God. I see alot of wishful thinking that I can relate to.


----------



## sleepingbeauty

none of my willow wisps have ever been swamp gas! 8)


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered, 


> Yeah, but don't you see the contradiction? A person who has a religious vision, to you, should be put through a battery of physical and psychological tests. Yet, a person who simply has a feeling of inner peace when meditating on spiritual teachings is somehow legit, simply because his claims aren't TOO fantastic.


No, Scattered. Dont completely invalidate emotions as a true marker of reality. A true emotion is a reaction to objective exterior stimuli. We can certainly create a "placebo effect" within ourselves, but thats what your supposed to strive against. I'm not against the validity of fantastic emotional states - there are many fantastic emotional states that are valid reactions to something which truly occurs. But by their nature, the miraculous is supposed to be _uncommon_. Its an exception to the natural rules. I remain skeptical of miraculous occurrences because they are reported too frequently for them to all be exceptions. I am a skeptic at heart. I also question their validity because many of them DO have something in common with a pathological disease where a human being loses grey cortical matter and the ability to think rationally- schizophrenia. No, I dont consider schizophrenic experiences to be valid, because I beleive in an objective world independent of my own mental conjurings. I beleive a schizophrenic falls prey to the ultimate "placebo effect" or conjuring of an inward reality.

The reason I feel so at peace about my experience of resting in God as of late, is because I took no effort to conjure it. It blew over 
_me_. When it did, I had had an exceptionally rough week. I think the only experiences of God that we should take seriously are those that are external and not under our commands. I go to a college full of charismatics. They worship with their hands in the air, saying Jesus umpteen times while listening to Christian rock. Do I think they are experiencing God? Probably not. I think they're experience hysteria, and I think its the same hysteria you get in a mosh pit at a Rob Zombie concert. Can God touch someone through that? Sure. God can use anything He wants to get across to someone. He is not a "tame lion". He can use a cathedral. Is the awe of a cathedral a direct experience of God? No. But it is an _indirect_ experience of one of God's attributes - such as majesty or beauty - and this is probably what the observer means. Its meant to be taken more metaphorically than literally.

Peace
Homeskooled

PS- This quote


> This feeling of inner peace, inner calm, love, whatever can be just as false as the person who has an ecstatic vision. Whose to say that these feelings aren't what they appear to be, an emotion associated with an environment of spirituality that is designed to elicit awe. This is like the person who walks into a magnificient cathedral and says that he feels calm, amazed, as if he has just experienced the divine. Is he really experiencing God? Or is he just reacting to an environment meant to elicit a reaction? Religious people cultivate a "mental cathedral". They set up a group of mental conditions that should be expected to produce these feelings. Theres nothing spiritual about it, its a mental creation.


Is to me the essence of your doubts in regards to the emotional side of humanity and spirituality. You have to eventually decide when you beleive emotion to be a valid human experience tied to objective experience and truth.


----------



## Scattered

Emotion is completely valid. It is what it is and should be respected as such. The problem that I have is that you take emotion and try to say that emotion can be used to provide objective evidence of the experience of God. So, you're right about my view. I see emotion as being inherently subjective and prone to error. It can be elicited by objective phenomena, but it can also, and often is, simply a machination of a person's interior dialogue or interpretation of reality. This is going to be a bad example but I'll use it anyway. I have mood swings all the time. Sometimes this is the result of an objective event or sometimes its simply the result of my own interior dialogue. Whose to say that you're experience of God isn't simply a particular interpretion of an emotion that you have created.

This basically comes down to the fact that you have faith that your spiritual experience has been caused by an objective and exterior stimulus. This may be "proof" to you but in the larger sense of the word it doesn't really prove anything. I also see that you make a clear distinction between hysterical experiences and quiet, contemplative, inner experiences. The former may be more obviously false, but the latter is just as tenuous. You're relying purely on emotion to validate your experience. As an individual experiencing life this is fine, but as a claim to scientific proof it doesn't mean anything. Maybe I have to learn how to live life to realize the truth of your particular means of spiritual experience. However, this conversation isn't about living as an emotional and intuitive being its about trying to make larger claims about the objectivity of your experience.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Scattered, 
Technically this conversation began by my sharing a personal experience. It was followed by the questioning of my personal experience. It isnt, and never was, about objective proof, because we cant give anything more than rational arguments over the Internet. I realize that you are prone to not listening to your emotional side. I'm letting you know that to fully experience life, or God, or intuition about truth, you are going to have to integrate it with your coldly rational side, and most importantly, stop having rational arguments and begin experiencing. Its like arguing with people about whether you like Tapioca pudding. You've never tasted it. Some of the opposition has, some havent. You've read the experiences of Tapioca pudding tasters. You've studied the mechanisms in taste and in the limbic and parietal lobes of the brain that allow for Tapioca pudding tasting. You've studied the ingredients list of Tapioca pudding until you know it front, backwards, sideways, and you've got the chemical composition of guar gum down cold. And after all of this, you decide that you dont like it. But for all your knowledge, a kid who has eaten Tapioca pudding is more of an expert than you. This is what theological debate, and atheist versus theist arguments, are like to me. You are asking me how Tapioca tastes. And then your telling me to prove it. I cant. You have to taste it. Is taste fundamentally flawed? As fundamentally flawed as emotion or hearing, or touch, or any of the other senses you _dont_ doubt. Because all it is is doubt, until you ante up and taste. I can make a rational case for trying Tapioca pudding, but it really doesnt do Tapioca justice.



> Whose to say that you're experience of God isn't simply a particular interpretion of an emotion that you have created.


And whose to say He *is*? You can play the "what-if" game eternally Scattered. Constant doubt and theories, no more proof than I have.What I've experienced lately is a deeper understanding of things I've previously only read about. I'm not talking about an emotional state, although I still beleive they are valid. A deepening of character and broadening of my understanding of spirituality. I've still felt emotions _while_ this has been going on, but there is a certain calm over it all. As Holmes said, you have to eventually do the footwork. I cant explain to you what a deeper understanding feels like. You have to go there. The proof is in the pudding.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Scattered

I guess it is.


----------



## CECIL

Scattered said:


> I don't live in a completely cold, rational, logical world. I live in quite the opposite. I live in a world of inner fantasy that is normally, in my mind, completely illogically and unreasonable. The difference is that I understand the delineation between fantasy and reality. My fantasy has a place, it exists for a reason, and I allow it to be what it is. But when I'm trying to act and live in the world as it is, rather than as I'd like it to be, I recognize there are certain truths that I can't run away from. I'm arguing because the world, to me, really IS a certain way.


Here's how it works: You come into this world with a pure perception of the true reality. Over time you experience certain traumas (which can be as major as losing a limb or as minor as having your balloon popped) that alter the way you percieve the true reality. As you go on your belief of what true reality is becomes altered and skewed. Now, your unconscious and conscious beliefs about reality send out harmonic waves, which vibrate at certain frequencies. These harmonic waves attract experiences, people, information to you that vibrates in the same frequency. In other words, whatever your belief is about reality is what you will experience. This serves to reinforce your belief about what reality is and you therefore enter into a positive feedback loop by which your perception of the universal truth becomes increasingly scewed.

The fact that you construct a world of inner fantasy means you are at odds with your constructed view of reality. You don't want it to be this way. You'd rather it was different. Instead of facing your constructed reality you hide away in fantasy worlds which you believe are not real. You believe they are not the way reality IS.

Well, here's the clincher. The reality you have constructed is real for you, but also your fantasy reality is real for you. Both of your realities will continue to be reinforced and they will continue to be at odds with each other. The truth is that you are afraid of your power. You are afraid to take responsibility for your life and your creations. If you want to change your reality, you can. But it takes work. You begin by discovering the reasons why you have built your current view of the world. How does it serve you? How does it keep you safe? What do you fear? The answers lie in your fantasies.

If you choose to, you can make the world into anything you desire. As you learn to harness the power of belief/intent you begin to create a world that you want to live in.

Additionally, the more you clean out your own personal blocks and issues the closer you come to the universal truth/reality. The closer you become to your own spirituality and your own unique experience of god.


----------



## sleepingbeauty

cecil, you just described exactly what ive been trying to say, but in much better words then i ever could. reality is not set. i think we all have a 'purpose' but that doesnt mean our fate is sealed. our experience in this dimension is for the most part based on the choices we make. we can choose NOT to get upset when someone pushes our buttons. we can choose to be happy, even when things are not going our way, even when things are at their very worse, we can still remain positive, hopeful.

for example, i posted about this a year ago. a situation of endangered reef life called opihi getting wiped out in record numbers, shipped off island to resturaunts, and no laws in place restricting the harvest of opihi nicknamed hawaiian gold because of its high market value. my father works in baggage security at the airport, and he brought the problem to my attention. now if anyone reads my posts about my dad, they will know hes a pisser, moaner, complainer about everything. yet when it comes to action he throws his hands in the air, plops down in front of the tv and drinks his sorrows away till he passes out. well i decided to do something. and long looooooooong story short because of my action, a law has been passed banning the sale of opihi.

the reason why i bring it up here, is because i could have just been like my dad, and done nothing. taken the easy route. my dad was actually furious at me for calling attention to it, because he feared he would lose his job for 'snitching'. well as far as i was concerned, there are far more important things, like the thousands of opihi getting wiped out and shipped to oahu on a daily basis, where opihi can no longer be found because of overharvesting. so i stuck my neck out there. as anxiety filled as i was at the time, i took action. and now the results are staggering when thought about. all i had to do was throw the first stone in the pond, and it made all the difference in the world, and in my own personal world as well.

i helped to save thousands of little lives. and if i had chosen not to act, it would most likely still be happening, and i would feel crappy about it, guilty about not doing anything. my reality would be different. its definately put more spring in my step, and more fuel in my engine. i know now that i can effect great change, and its not like i have to do much. ive found purpose. and i couldnt be happier about it. my dads reality has changed as well. he no longer has to bite his tongue everyday when people come through his station with coolers full of opihi.. now he gets to bust them, and he couldnt be happier about it. its changed his reality as well, and for the first time in his miserable life he said, "activism works, you can make a difference".

the point im trying to make is simply that you can change reality. saving the opihi was a fantasy in my fathers opinion. he convinced himself that nothing whatsoever could be done. he was wrong. reality is what we make it to be. if you dont like it.. change it!! its really quite easy.


----------



## CECIL

Great story 

Pretty much the idea is that you condition yourself to react in certain ways. Most people, like SB's dad (and of course myself) are too afraid to feel pain and so we avoid painful situations. Instead of allowing ourselves to feel pain we hide away from it. We go to great lengths to avoid painful situations at all costs. Eventually we may develop a mental illness just so we don't have to hurt any more  However, the actual pain we experience in any given situation is quite small when compared to our FEAR of the percieved pain (i.e. how afraid we are of actually facing that pain).

This is why we get ourselves into such terrible feeling situations where we feel so powerless. Ultimately all we have to do is go through the feelings rather than try to escape from them (easier said than done). Eventually, when you discover what it is you've been hiding from you can undo those behaviours we all have in place to avoid pain. Then, when confronted with a previously scary situation, you can CHOOSE what you want to do, rather than be forced into a corner by your mind.


----------



## MrMortgage

sleepingbeauty said:


> cecil, you just described exactly what ive been trying to say, but in much better words then i ever could. reality is not set. i think we all have a 'purpose' but that doesnt mean our fate is sealed. our experience in this dimension is for the most part based on the choices we make. we can choose NOT to get upset when someone pushes our buttons. we can choose to be happy, even when things are not going our way, even when things are at their very worse, we can still remain positive, hopeful.
> 
> for example, i posted about this a year ago. a situation of endangered reef life called opihi getting wiped out in record numbers, shipped off island to resturaunts, and no laws in place restricting the harvest of opihi nicknamed hawaiian gold because of its high market value. my father works in baggage security at the airport, and he brought the problem to my attention. now if anyone reads my posts about my dad, they will know hes a pisser, moaner, complainer about everything. yet when it comes to action he throws his hands in the air, plops down in front of the tv and drinks his sorrows away till he passes out. well i decided to do something. and long looooooooong story short because of my action, a law has been passed banning the sale of opihi.
> 
> the reason why i bring it up here, is because i could have just been like my dad, and done nothing. taken the easy route. my dad was actually furious at me for calling attention to it, because he feared he would lose his job for 'snitching'. well as far as i was concerned, there are far more important things, like the thousands of opihi getting wiped out and shipped to oahu on a daily basis, where opihi can no longer be found because of overharvesting. so i stuck my neck out there. as anxiety filled as i was at the time, i took action. and now the results are staggering when thought about. all i had to do was throw the first stone in the pond, and it made all the difference in the world, and in my own personal world as well.
> 
> i helped to save thousands of little lives. and if i had chosen not to act, it would most likely still be happening, and i would feel crappy about it, guilty about not doing anything. my reality would be different. its definately put more spring in my step, and more fuel in my engine. i know now that i can effect great change, and its not like i have to do much. ive found purpose. and i couldnt be happier about it. my dads reality has changed as well. he no longer has to bite his tongue everyday when people come through his station with coolers full of opihi.. now he gets to bust them, and he couldnt be happier about it. its changed his reality as well, and for the first time in his miserable life he said, "activism works, you can make a difference".
> 
> the point im trying to make is simply that you can change reality. saving the opihi was a fantasy in my fathers opinion. he convinced himself that nothing whatsoever could be done. he was wrong. reality is what we make it to be. if you dont like it.. change it!! its really quite easy.


I like the story, but in no way would I put my fathers job on the line to save an animal/s.

I could be working at Wal-Mart and stage a huge walk out for union rights for all retail workers, but I wouldn't because I wouldn't want the Waltan's to send a hitman after me.


----------



## sleepingbeauty

fyi, this is what my dad says when he wakes up, and throughout the day every 3 minuites or so until its time for his shift.

*FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GOTTA GO TO WOOOOOORK! I F**CKING HATE MY JOB!!! I HATE MY LIFE!!! FAAAAAAAAAAA%*&%^*&%&*%*&%&*%&*%CK!!!!!

EXPLITIVE

EXPLITIVE

EXPLITIVE*

that is no exaggeration. honestly thats what makes it hard to be around him. he is so damn angry with his situation and his blood pressure is so high that he literally looks like a tomato in a uniform most of the time. 
so i may have had the subconcious idea that i was doing him a favor. maybe.


----------



## freesong

YoYo, what a wonderful analogy of Christ's love and atonement for our sin. I do not have a religious affiliation primarily because I find most religions to be lacking in some manner. Religion is created by man. Relationship is created by Jesus. ( Also, when I tie myself to a label then I conjure up an image of something that may or may not be true because of the imperfection of the others involved.) The Word or Bible is my guide and my fellow Bible studiers are my helpers. I do however believe that God works through authority and we are all here to learn about that among other life lessons that will prepare us for the hereafter. I am choosing against religion because it is religion. I am choosing life in Christ because it is the way for me. I am not pushing anyone as I am sure you are not either because I am about minding my own business and because Christ is a gentleman. He invites and does not push or condemn. He loves and teaches. He is the only one who can heal me and I am working out that salvation with Him. I know that is your belief ultimately as well. I also believe that love=obedience not to a hollow set or rules or laws that take the fun out of life but to the One who created us and knows how we work and what we need and how we can get messed up and ultimately, knows the end of the story. I am following the Holy Spirit(as I can finally hear(not audibly) Him again and I am obeying what I hear and read in the Word. I try to grid eveything I learn through the Word. "Love the Lord Your God with all your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as you love yourself Little by little progress not perfection Layer by Layer till forever more. Only Jesus was perfect. I am a work in progress. Ok done but not really. Yes, I am forgiven but I must learn to believe it. I must learn to BELIEVE<TRUST AND OBEY. Can one fall away? Without faith it is impossible to please 
God. I must never stop believing. I must always strive for the mark but will always fall short. Is it about the Law? Yes and no. It is about striving to please my Creator but always falling short because of the sin nature. Trying to fulfill the law without knowledge of Him and His love is like an empty gong. It is about seeking until you find and falling down and getting back up and trying again. It is a process and sometimes it is faster and sometimes slower but it is His process. He is perfecting us and guiding each of us down our life's paths. For those who never heard the gospel, the Bible addresses that. It clearly states that they will be judged by their conscience or heart knowledge. For those who have heard, then it is a different matter. Those who have truly heard the message and refuse perfect love, not the law. Those who refuse grace, are the one's to be concerned with. Some may find this truth early and others later. I am not to interfere with anyone's path. My duty is to trust and obey and pray. Because of Him, I must never get in the way. It is about balance and only He knows how to achieve it. Study to show yourself approved He tells me and others suggest studying the Truth as professed by Jesus Christ before studying any religious material of any kind. Listen to others but make up your own mind with God and yourself. And grace is not license. It is still a responsibiltiy to love and obey and trust and even be willing to die physically for a true purpose that will ultimately save us all. God bless!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## CECIL

Great Freesong 

Just to throw a spanner in the works: You are Christ. You are God


----------



## Martinelv

> Religion is created by man. Relationship is created by Jesus


Pardon?


----------



## freesong

No, I am not God but I am made in His image. He came to save me from my "self" When Christ indwells, then we are no longer our own but bought with a price by a power greater than ourselves. There are many imitations out there, including humanistic (man is god) psychology which come very close to the truth. (Satan is a master of deception and can appear 99% accurate) Study to show thyself approved. I have studied some of other religions and they have part of the truth and one can be enlightened if they are following God Jehovah's truth because all real truth is God's truth but only by Jesus are we able to transcend to heaven. That is what He said, not me. He was either crazy or He was the true Way. He said, I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by Me. I am choosing His way but I am not advocating that way to others. It is just the enlightening that I have. He is Perfect Love and He was the one who brought me out of this very focused place. He used this for many reasons I think but I was not able to forgive my father and most men for years. I was extremely afraid of intimacy because of abuse from an early age. I believe that I was placed here to get that very important work done. I am living with my father right now and he is very OCD and controlling. He is actually very fearful. We are basically working out our life lessons together. It is very fascinating. He is in the program of A.A. which was originally written by Christians but the original Big Book has been altered. He is walking by faith now and he was raised in religion and the law. It is fascinating to see him struggle with his puzzle now and I obey because I am in their house but also because I am to respect my parents and in so doing, I am learning to respect God for His light is in all of us. I think we are here for many purposes but He says that we are learning to rule and reign in heaven. It is a matter of finding out who we already are. He chose us. We are His children but not all of us know this and not all of us choose to believe yet. Why is everyone running from God? Why would we push away perfect love? Today, it is not popular to believe this way. This is the instant gratification generation and we all want to do whatever we want to. That makes us resist the Bible because it has rules. They were made to bless and protect us. Study to show thyself approved. God bless, freesong


----------



## yoyo

Hi Freesong,

I really want to thank you for sharing your sincere feelings about God. I can feel the power of the holy ghost touches my hearth through our living Gods words that you repeated so well. Christ is the living God, our savior and redeemer. He is the the son of our Heavenly Father. I wished that everyone could get that knowledge. I bear witness on these things in His name.


----------



## freesong

Yoyo, I just got back from vacation and read your reply. Praise the Lord that you love and accept the Lord Jesus. I love Him so much too. He is the answer to all our problems and struggles. So much has happened in the last two weeks. I have found out that my father is a satanist. God showed me as He had me annoint my parent's house with oil to pray for them and led me into my father's closet and I found books on satanic rituals and sado-masochistic sex books. I addressed this with him and he did not deny and threatened me. I have left their home (my mother is into this too) and am living with friends right now. I will come back and write when I can. God bless to all and please pray for me if you would. Love, freesong


----------



## yoyo

Freesong,

I am sorry to hear that your parents are involved in satanism. It must be very painful and difficult for you. I will surely pray for you. Take care and talk to you soon.


----------



## CECIL

See, the thing about Satan is that he doesn't really exist. Jesus definately did have a great message for us. That message was to love ourselves as god (because we are being created in god's image - our consciousness is evolving to be equal to "god's").

Organised religions try to make you afraid of worshipping the self (Satan) because if you do that, they lose their power. If you no longer need the middleman to tell you how to live and how to worhsip, you are free. Organised religions don't want free people, they want slaves.

But in the end, believe what you want. That's what we're here for and it makes it fun.


----------



## bobbi

I used to be a Satanist....trust me, Satan and demons exist. I have been demoned possed also.

And about religon (I was religious before I turned to Satanism) IT SUCKS!!! It's just a bunch of man made self righteous rules the make people feel like they can't measure up. I makes you feel like crap.

Christainity is the only "belief" that I have found that it's about what God did for us, NOT what we have to do to have peace with God or go heaven..etc..


----------



## Pancthulhu

If I may ask, Bobbi...what leads you to believe that you have been possessed by a demon? I'm not doubting you, just wondering. Personally I think that demons (as described in the various traditions of ritual magick) are different aspects of the personality manifested through evocation.

I was interested in Satanism for a long time, particularly modern Luciferian philosophy (as opposed to actual devil worship), and the idea that Lucifer, the light-bearer, is an archetype to aspire to. Most of the Luciferians I know are totally arrogant however, which has kind of disillusioned me with the whole movement. Now I relate more to the Chaotic philosophy of AO Spare and Peter Carroll. Fnord.

Anyway, before I completely go off topic...Christianity to me seems nonsensical because the message of love and forgiveness that Jesus taught seems completely different to the actions of God. As an example, in the Old Testament, God commands Abraham to kill his only son as a test of faith (but stops him in the end). I'm sorry, but I find this disgusting! To ask somebody to override their *conscience* in the interests of *faith* is appalling.
Jesus was a great philosopher and I agree with the majority of his ethical message. However, I don't understand how someone could want to worship a God like the tyrant Demiurge described in the Old Testament, regardless of whether he exists or not.


----------



## bobbi

The answer to the first question is the reason I know I was possessed because I totally lost control of my body and actions without the influnce of drugs.

To give it to you straight Christainity is not a "let's just feel warm and fuzzy" faith. But it's real life and it shows that Christains are just as human as anyone else, and need God. In the Bible there's murder, rape, incest, stealing...you name it. God is a God of mercy and love but He also is a God that is jealous for us, A God that demands justice and hates all sin. The Old testiment is the old law, when everyone had to follow rules and live sacrifices had to be made. If you read to process of the tabernacle it's grotesque! And Abraham was tested by God because God wanted to know if He was more important. BUT Jesus came to fulfill the law, HE became the sacrifice (God sacrificed His own Son) Since He became the sacrifice for us we no longer have to follow a bunch of rules..now it's the matter of the heart.

I'll just say this.....The Christain life isn't an easy life but it's a free life. Just by my personal experience God has saved me a lot of garbage and now I have peace. But I'd be lying to you if I said A christain life is easy and free of problems. But I have peace. Even with DR/DP.

Bobbi


----------



## CECIL

To play devil's advocate:

You are not free. If you were free then you could walk outside right now, murder the first person you see, not feel any remorse and not suffer a single consequence. If you were so inclined, that is.


----------



## bobbi

How do you define freedom?

For the sake of arguement, lets just say there were no laws against murdering. Terrorists don't feel remorse for killing, they believe it's an honor (and also for sacraficing themselves). So, do you believe a terrorist lifestyle is a free life?


----------



## Epiphany

> If you were free then you could walk outside right now, murder the first person you see, not feel any remorse and not suffer a single consequence.


Hmmmm...Cecil. Have to disagree with you on that one. It isn't within our natural human instincts to murder other people unless we are feeling threatened.

When my dp was at it's worst I feel I could have probably done exactly that though and not felt any remorse...I would have thought it was wrong but I probably wouldn't have felt it. Thankfully I had absolutely no inclination to do any such thing. I disagree that being capable of this defines freedom. I was capable of this and did not feel free in the least.

To define freedom is like asking someone to define reality....it is based upon your own personal beliefs of what freedom means to you. So if freedom to you is a life without remorse and consequence then that is what it is to you. Personally I see a lack of remorse as a glitch...an anomoly.

I am inclined to agree with you though Cecil about your perception that a Christian life is not a free life...to me it does not appear to be terribly free in many ways, but that is only my perception and obviously Bobbi's perception is that for them it is a free life.


----------



## chris_post7

yoyo said:


> The question now is to establish how we can accept and receive that wonderful gift? The answer is by following the teachings of our Lord Jesus- Christ. Jesus showed us the way to eternal life and to eternal happiness. He teached us the importance of baptism and repentance. Let us now not perrish and embrace that wonderful gift.


This is exactly what seperates a Christian from a Mormon. It is also what sperates Christianity from every other religon. Its one word "Grace"

Grace is an UNDESERVED gift. A Christian says they are saved by grace, by simply accepting Jesus, you are saved. The bible says we are not saved by works. It is set up that way so no one will be able to boast about how good they are. It is the great offense of the cross: You can't save yourself. There is nothing you can do to reach the state of being "good enough" No one can reach that point - it is come as you are. Other religions will say that you need to complete a checklist, or that it is "Grace after all you can do" this is not the case.

*Does this mean we can all "accept Jesus" and then turn around and have a wild orgy?* You just said I can't deserve it, so then that means if I do accept Jesus I can commit any offense and I am still A okay. The answer is... yes. Yes you can still have your orgy and kill that baby and still enter heaven - its grace, you dont deserve it, you can't loose it (unless you choose to reject it, just like you can choose to recieve it)

But here is the thing. My friend who started this thread sees the mission of Jesus as simply " A legal transaction" That is all I saw the work of Jesus as well, but I eventually saw that it is so much bigger than that. What Jesus did on the cross is SO much larger then that short sided single minded BORING transaction. Just one of the many other elements to what Jesus did on the cross was pave the way to completly transform those who accept him.

I am a new creation because of what Christ did on the cross. When you accept the true Jesus, God in the flesh, your ways just start to change. All of a sudden, you dont want to jump in the orgy - all of a sudden those babies look cute - and its because you are being changed inwardly.

Unfortunetly this is a process. I wish it were not so, but we learn and we grow because it is. Because Christianity is not a destination, the point isnt about going to heaven - its the journey. It is about what God will be doing through us Here... now...

So this inward change means even though I CAN have my orgy, I dont WANT to. Even though I CAN slaughter children, I wont. But all the same, I am saved no matter what I do. This is what seperates Christianity from anything else.


----------



## CECIL

chris_post7 said:


> So this inward change means even though I CAN have my orgy, I dont WANT to. Even though I CAN slaughter children, I wont.


Even though (s)he used Christianity (which I do not follow) as an example, Chris has more or less explained what I was getting at.

Human actions are not random. ANYTHING you do will have an energy behind it (we'll call this energy drive or libido). No matter what you do, there will be a reason for it. Rapists, murderers, theives, good samaritans, presidents, everyone is motivated out of love for something.

Let's take the example of a serial killer: Now this guy is fucked up. Somewhere along the way he's taken on some seriously self-hating belief patterns and his energy has become crystallised in harmful behavioural patterns. He may have a learned need for control or power, for example. Whatever life situation could have caused this I will deal with later.

Now, the reason he kills is because he feels the need to obtain this power and control over another human. He LOVES feeling control and power. What better way than to take someone's life? The drive in him to kill is the drive to feel powerfull and in control.

Now let's look at myself. I can sit at my computer desk and see someone walking past the window. I can think to myself "I could go out and slit that man's throat". This is freedom. I am free to explore every possibility within my own energy. If I choose to, I am free to act on this possibility. But I'm not going to. Why? Because I have no drive to. I have no desire or libido or need to do that. At least in that respect, my energy is free to express itself.

However, if I was to think "I could go out and slit that man's throat", but then stop myself and think "You horrible person, you couldn't do that!". Or even better "You can't do that because if you did, YOU'D GO TO HELL!". This is the root cause of people not being free and I'd go as far as to say, the root cause of all those actions out there that you would call "bad".

Let's go back to the serial killer. As he was growing up, he may have had a very controlling parent (for example, I don't really know what goes on inside the head of a serial killer). He may have found a lizard in his back yard and broke its neck to see what would happen. This is a valid expression of his energy!! There is no need to be reprimanded for doing this, it is in line with the will of the universe. It is natural and a VALID exploration of his and the lizard's energy. Enter the parent who yells at the child "You horrible little wretch! How could you kill an innocent lizard!?!? YOU ARE BAD! YOU WILL GO TO HELL!!!".

Now this child, who was exploring and freely expressing his own energy, forms a block on that expression. He is no longer allowed to express his energy as he wants to. He is no longer free. As time goes on and more and more similar events happen, he developes a belief in himself that "I am bad". "I am evil". Eventually his negative self image is so bad that it creates tension in himself, pain, and SOMEHOW he has to let this out. But he isn't ALLOWED to let it out, because if he does, he'll go to hell. He is afraid.

Time goes on and eventually this guy starts killing people just to deal with all of these feelings inside of him. Now, to help this guy and stop him killing, locking him up in jail isn't going to solve anything. To help him we'd need to erase those belief patterns as well as show him constructive ways to explore that energy.

I was rambling a bit, but anyway. The point is, if you are free then you can do anything you want to do (have the desire to do) as long as you take full responsibility for the consequences. A truly free person will be able to explore possible actions in their head/heart and not assign negative judgements to them. A truly free person probably won't murder, rape or steal because they are responsible enough for their own thoughts and feelings that if they did have the drive to do so they would take responsibility for finding out why and healing whatever trauma it is that causes that desire.


----------



## CECIL

bobbi said:


> How do you define freedom?
> 
> For the sake of arguement, lets just say there were no laws against murdering. Terrorists don't feel remorse for killing, they believe it's an honor (and also for sacraficing themselves). So, do you believe a terrorist lifestyle is a free life?


I had to respond to this 

No I don't think the Terrorist lifestyle is a free one either. Terrorists follow the same _sort_ (Note I didn't say THE SAME) doctrines as other organised religions.

Terrorists may not feel remorse for killing, but then again US officials or soldiers don't feel remorse for killing Terrorists.

Lets have a look at the Terrorist mentality. They don't kill for hate or for envy or anything like that. They kill because they LOVE the idea of being free. They love the idea of being free from (mainly) US oppression. Basically they want the US to get the fuck out of their country and stop telling them what to do. Yet what is the official US response? "We need to keep telling these people how to live and keep controlling them because if we don't they'll become more and more violent". :roll:

I truly believe that if there were no laws against murder, then eventually we would see the murder rate drop. Its just like in my previous post - we have a massive stigma against murder and anyone that murders is instantly punished. How does this help anyone? It doesn't bring back the victim or stop the crime happening again. Furthermore the responsibility for the punishment is not in the hands of the criminal but is imposed on them by an external legal body.

What would help a murderer is to sit them down and help them understand why they did it. Work with them and help them take the responsibility for it. Find out why, address those issues within themselves and you can actually rehabilitate the person.

IMO the natural order of human energy is beautiful and peaceful. It is unhealed traumas that are left to fester that eventually result in the "bad" things we see in the world. If we were to make this approach much more widespread (i.e. make it apply to all aspects of our lives) then our world will become much more peaceful. If we TEACH people to be free to make their own decisions, think for themselves, accept responsibility and concequences for their actions then we actually would be creating heaven on earth rather than devolving into a post apocalyptic nightmare.


----------



## yoyo

Hi Chris,

how are you doing? I just read your reply to my topic. I am sorry that you only se my analogi as a simple transaction/kontrakt. But that is the whole point of it. I am not trying to explain the deep of the atonement. I do not think that anyone is capable of it. My analogi shows only that justice will remain. God paid the price for us, and that is a gift. Everyone on earth har herited that gift. You are right when you say that we only can be save by grace. That sacrefice was essential to our salvation, otherwise we would not have been able to live after this live and get immortality. But only grace is not sufficient in order to get eternal life. There is a difference beetween immortality and eternal life. Christ gave us immortality by winning over death. But that is not all. We must follow Christ and become as a disciple in order to get eternal life. Immortality is the gift of living forever with a perfect and resurrected physical body. But immortality does not mean that you will live in heaven wih God, which is called eternal life. That is the difference. You have to work in order to get eternal life and live in the presence of God. Or do you really think that God is unfair and would allow murders to live with him and reward them just as much as a person who lived a christlike life?
My analogi explains that justice and mercy does not interfere with each other and that in order to be saved, not from the death, but from being separated from God for all eternity, then we have to repent and follow the Christ. In order to get eternal life, we have to get f?rst immortality. Christ gave us immortality. That is the reason that we only kan be saved from death by grace. But it does not mean that our actions do not compt, because our actions will make the difference beetween only getting immortality or even eternal life.

yoyo.


----------



## yoyo

I think the term "salvation" is not well understodd in the christian world. What does it mean to be saved?

There is two possible answers to this question.

The firtst answer is following: To be saved means that we will get eternal life in the kingdom of God. Those who do not get the highest level of glory, which is to live in the kingdom of God with God the father and His beloved son Jesus-Christ, will inherit an other lever of glory, a lower one. Such a person is not saved, if we compared to the highest level of glory. Those who only gain immortality, which everyone will get thanks the sacrifice of Christ, will not inherit the highest priviledge of being saved in the kingdom of God. It does not mean though that these people are evil or bad people, but they have not lived life in conformity with the gospel which Christ commanded us to live. These people will inherit a lower level of glory, but they are still saved from the physical death because they will get immortality. There is a last category. Killers and very bad people. There is a place prepared for them: it is called hell. These people will also inherit immortality, but they are condemned to pay the eternal price. These people are not saved from the exigences of the justice. They will inherit what they seeked: pain, unhappiness, misery. They do not have any place in the glory of God. These people are only saved from physical death.


----------



## Homeskooled

I think you're making it overcomplicated Yo-yo. All of this is sort of a mystery - we cant judge people because we dont really know exactly who merits what. "Killers and bad people" go to hell. First you have to define what "bad" is.

God is love. I dont know a whole lot else, but I know this. And the God I know, as far as I know, doesnt allow a whole lot of people to fall into Hell. What people should do, for their own sakes, is start a relationship with God. Not because it will save them, not because they are afraid of any consequences of _not_ having this relationship, but because God LOVES them, and they love Him back because of this. Thats it. God doesnt send anyone to Hell - we choose it. Hell is the state of rejecting God, and this state becomes very real in the afterlife. But I know very few people who actually have known God and rejected Him. Most people are either ignorant of Him or are trying to "please" God because they have a picture of God from their youth as a parental figure, or a morality cop. That really isnt a relationship. But these people dont merit Hell because they havent chosen it. They havent rejected Life or Love. We all need to trust in God more. It is this trust which is our salvation, and is what Christ speaks of when he says to become like little children to enter the Kingdom. It doesnt need to be complicated - just trust.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Epiphany

Homeskooled...

I love your ability to simplify an issue or baffle us with the complexity of your expansive knowledge on these topics as the need arises. You have many ways to both silence or incite a response.

I have two questions this time...



> Most people are either ignorant of Him or are trying to "please" God because they have a picture of God from their youth as a parental figure, or a morality cop.


From the responses you have read of mine in the past (and I know you never forget anything you have read), would you consider me ignorant of "Him" as opposed to having rejected "Him"?

Also, isn't it difficult for people to view "Him" in any other light than a parental figure when "he" is always personified as Father, Him, etc and we are referred to as "Children of God"..."his children"? 
This may be a small part of the reason I has difficulty with the notion of a God or a Creator.

Just interested in your responses.


----------



## Homeskooled

> I love your ability to simplify an issue or baffle us with the complexity of your expansive knowledge on these topics as the need arises. You have many ways to both silence or incite a response.


This statement alone deserves a post. First of all, thanks. I'm not as smart as people think I am - I had to look up erudite when Sebastian called me it. And I've googled things in the past. But my knowledge _is_ expansive - there seems to be no limit to what I can learn or retain, at least not that I've found yet. Its like a very large well, and I havent found a bottom to it yet. My memory is actually not as sharp as it used to be before my porphyria attacks, nor is my ability to focus. Thank you though.

I dont ever reply to anyone to incite them. Ever. Even Martin. I _do_ write my replies, though, to "solve" -or as you might say- "silence" a debate. But I'm simply stating my thoughts on an issue I've already turned over and over in my mind, and why logically I agree or disagree with thier stand. I dont have an agenda, but I am very honest in my posts. So honest, in fact, that these posts are sort of a virtual will and testament, in a way, because they contain alot of my thoughts on life, physics, philosophy, and medicine. If I ever do make an indentation in society, this is probably where they'll find my "lost works" and letters.

The reasons some of my posts are so simple and why some are so complicated, is because of that word "why". How is easy. Answering that is always simple. The essence of life is simple. Why, however, is where it is useful to be an intellectual. In other words, when you ask how, you get the end result of much thinking or searching. You get the macrocosm, or umbrella answer to an issue. If you ask why, however, you have to delve into the microcosms of "why", or how one arrived at a conclusion. _You_, dear Epiphany, spend alot of time dwelling in the "whys" of life. Which is why you get such a mixed bag of posts from me.

I would not say that you have rejected him. You may or may not be searching for him, which in a way _is_ a rejection of sorts, but you havent really come into contact with evil and embraced it or goodness and rejected it, from what I've gleaned from your posts. Yes, it is very difficult for us to seperate ourselves from the idea of a parental figure. Not because this analogy is wrong - but because we always see God like our own parents. This is where it breaks down. He has the truest "essence" of a parent - he provides for us, loves us, and wants us to be happy. This is why the analogy is useful. But many times it is better for us to just look at God as a freind, because _that_ is much less forbidding. Friends care about each other. Friends dont judge each other (or at least shouldnt). Friends share in each others joys and build one another up - just like God. While God is infinitely complex and brilliant, he is, most of all, incredibly simple. He just wants a relationship with us to show us that. Do you remember freesong on this website? She "rediscovered" a relationship with God and her DP disappeared. What is not great about the story is whether she was cured, but the fact that she rediscovered how non-judgemental, embracing, and all -encompassing God can be, and it renewed her life, her hope, and her health. I could feel what I feel at times in her posts. You might want to go back and reread them. To us cynical people in the world, they almost look crazy. And many people on the website asker her if she was "O.K.". But thats because she was crazy with love. Nobody beleives that God can be like that. We think we either have to be smart, or perfect to get in touch with God, but in fact, neither gets you closer. Just seeking, trusting, loving. Ask and you shall recieve, seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Homeskooled

> I love your ability to simplify an issue or baffle us with the complexity of your expansive knowledge on these topics as the need arises. You have many ways to both silence or incite a response.


This statement alone deserves a post. First of all, thanks. I'm not as smart as people think I am - I had to look up erudite when Sebastian called me it. And I've googled things in the past. But my knowledge _is_ expansive - there seems to be no limit to what I can learn or retain, at least not that I've found yet. Its like a very large well, and I havent found a bottom to it yet. My memory is actually not as sharp as it used to be before my porphyria attacks, nor is my ability to focus. Thank you though.

I dont ever reply to anyone to incite them. Ever. Even Martin. I _do_ write my replies, though, to "solve" -or as you might say- "silence" a debate. But I'm simply stating my thoughts on an issue I've already turned over and over in my mind, and why logically I agree or disagree with thier stand. I dont have an agenda, but I am very honest in my posts. So honest, in fact, that these posts are sort of a virtual will and testament, in a way, because they contain alot of my thoughts on life, physics, philosophy, and medicine. If I ever do make an indentation in society, this is probably where they'll find my "lost works" and letters.

The reasons some of my posts are so simple and why some are so complicated, is because of that word "why". "How" is easy. Answering that is always simple. The essence of life is simple. "Why", however, is where it is useful to be an intellectual. In other words, when you ask how, you get the end result of much thinking or searching. You get the macrocosm, or umbrella answer to an issue. If you ask why, however, you have to delve into the microcosms of "why", or how one arrived at a conclusion. _You_, dear Epiphany, spend alot of time dwelling in the "whys" of life. Which is why you get such a mixed bag of posts from me.

I would not say that you have rejected him. You may or may not be searching for him, which in a way _is_ a rejection of sorts, but you havent really come into contact with evil and embraced it or goodness and rejected it, from what I've gleaned from your posts. Yes, it is very difficult for us to seperate ourselves from the idea of a parental figure. Not because this analogy is wrong - but because we always see God like our own parents. This is where it breaks down. He has the truest "essence" of a parent - he provides for us, loves us, and wants us to be happy. This is why the analogy is useful. But many times it is better for us to just look at God as a freind, because _that_ is much less forbidding. Friends care about each other. Friends dont judge each other (or at least shouldnt). Friends share in each others joys and build one another up - just like God. While God is infinitely complex and brilliant, he is, most of all, incredibly simple. He just wants a relationship with us to show us that. Do you remember freesong on this website? She "rediscovered" a relationship with God and her DP disappeared. What is not great about the story is whether she was cured, but the fact that she rediscovered how non-judgemental, embracing, and all -encompassing God can be, and it renewed her life, her hope, and her health. I could feel what I feel at times in her posts. You might want to go back and reread them. To us cynical people in the world, they almost look crazy. And many people on the website asker her if she was "O.K.". But thats because she was crazy with love. Nobody beleives that God can be like that. We think we either have to be smart, or perfect to get in touch with God, but in fact, neither gets you closer. Just seeking, trusting, loving. Only then will your life standards be raised. Only then will you have the strength to push aside what is wrong in your life. Ask and you shall recieve, seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## yoyo

All human beings?male and female?are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.

The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God's commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God's eternal plan.

Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. "Children are an heritage of the Lord" (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives?mothers and fathers?will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

We are children of God. I do not se any other logical possibility.


----------



## yoyo

All human beings?male and female?are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.

The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God's commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God's eternal plan.

Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. "Children are an heritage of the Lord" (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives?mothers and fathers?will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

We are children of God. I do not se any other logical possibility.


----------



## CECIL

yoyo said:


> Or do you really think that God...would allow murders to live with him and reward them just as much as a person who lived a christlike life?


Yes, absolutely. God loves ALL OF US, and there is NOTHING you can do to change that. Every experience, every action is VALID (Because it exists).



> What does it mean to be saved?


It means that you don't believe you are powerful enough to change yourself and that you believe you have to rely on external sources to "pull you out" of or save you from your issues. Hence why the bible is so heavy on attonement and salvation: if you make people believe they need an external saviour then you keep them weak and powerless.



> God LOVES them, and they love Him back because of this. Thats it. God doesnt send anyone to Hell - we choose it. Hell is the state of rejecting God, and this state becomes very real in the afterlife.


YES! BRILLIANT! Very well said Homeskooled  Whatever we believe will happen to us in the afterlife IS WHAT HAPPENS! "God" acknowledges our power to create our own reality even to the point where he allows us to deny him and create for ourselves our own personal hell. All you need to do is accept responsibility for creating yourself this way, accept and love yourself (and God) and you are free


----------



## yoyo

Hi Cecil,

this reply will not be long. I just have a hard time to imagine how murderers could get the same level of glory than Christlike people. Such a belief denies the justice of God. It is rather a way for the devil to make you believe that no matter what you do in this life, you will be saved anyway. Why? Because God loves you. He will forgive you at the end. This is a false doctrine, and a dangerous one.

I am sorry, this does not make any sense at all. God loves us. He wants us to be happy as He is. But he gave us our free agency. The possibility to choose beetween life our death. God forgives us only when we repent and show that we are willing to follow the law. There is otherwise no point with the law.

In the world that you suggest, there is no free agency. That is the very opposite of what God has wanted. He wanted to give us the possibility to choose. Because of that, we all are responsible for our actions before the law.

God is love, but he is justice too!! Both at the same time. God does not choose to send us to hell, we choose it ourself.

Love.


----------



## Epiphany

> You, dear Epiphany, spend alot of time dwelling in the "whys" of life. Which is why you get such a mixed bag of posts from me.


Spot on HS...I have always been a "but why?" girl. Must have driven my family mad when I was a kid. :roll: I look for the "hows" but never seem to find them.

Thanks for your honest reply...I am always interested in your responses. They don't ever really change my opinion but do seem to provide a different perspective for me somehow...alternatives. Not sure why (there's that why again) that is important for me but it's kind of humbling I find, to hear a vioce of reason that differs quite vastly fom my own. 
Thanks.


----------



## californian

reading over this, it seems to me that a lot of the seemingly contradictory ideas on here can actually be synthesized.

for example, even as a devout Christian, i have found CECIL's ideas incredibly interesting. in some ways they are certainly against Christianity, especially what passes for Christianity in a lot of the most noticeable and vocal Christian circles today. in other ways, however, they are not so opposed to a lot of early Christian thought (or to the Scriptures themselves).

first and foremost, the idea of liberation, of freedom is a theme that runs throughout the gospels (especially John) and in the letters of Paul (especially chapters 7-12 which explain God's plans to liberate the entire universe). the skeptic is, of course, going to note the ways in which religion "enslaves" people indeed. but even nietzsche noted that this was not Christ's message. even nietzsche note that Christ was a "free" and true person who was trying to liberate others. nietzsche just didn't like the method and values of Christ.

my main point, however, is that in many ways, Christianity is still suffering from the legalizing trends that overtook it gradually, but especially took hold in the middle ages. more and more, the point of Christianity became about "getting into heaven" and "not going to hell." it was always understood to have more to it than this, but this became the focal point. sadly, "getting into heaven" and "not going to hell" are not Scriptural concepts and are not found in the early Christian writers, especially in the Greek eastern tradition.

the Bible speaks much of entering "the kingdom of God" or "the kingdom of heaven" and of the wicked being thrown into "Gehenna" (what gets mistranslated "hell" in the Gospels) or the "lake of fire." but there is never any heaven spoken of as a place where you have "pie in the sky when you die." and the "lake of fire" is a metaphor in a highly metaphorical book--Revelation. Gehenna was a literal place outside of Jerusalem, a garbage dump--where trash was always being burned and maggots were always feasting on it ("where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched"). these are NOT places people go to. the bible is clear that in the end the righteous live on a new (or better "renewed") earth, not in some other dimension or some place in the sky.

in other words, salvation is not about being saved from going to hell when you die, or being allowed to go to heaven when you die on someone else's merits.

it is about deliverance from death, which is the same as saying deliverance from inauthentic life (as well as the fact of physical death). when adam and eve are told that they will die when they eat of the fruit, they do not immediately physically die, but they do begin a life of death, an inauthentic life. where i believe that the Biblical message most clearly agrees with the core of what CECIL is saying is that if all people were actually FREE human beings, they would not kill, hurt, destroy, lie, cheat, steal, or anything else that perpetuates suffering in this world. free persons, true human beings would not do that.

in other words, what we need to be saved or delivered from is our failure to be human. our failure to BE. to a person who suffers from depersonalization such as myself, this is a powerful message. in my condition, i am not crazy--i simply am more poignantly and painfully aware of our collective failure to be human.

Christ is that authentic human (again, even Nietzsche recognized this calling Christ "my only worthy adversary"). who does not save us externally. he is present within every human being, and he saves us from within. he even specifically says, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say 'Lo, here it is! or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:20-21)

it is for this reason that John Chrysostom, one of the greatest saints of both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church, (and also is whom the Reformers quoted more frequently than any other early church father besides Augustine) one said:
"And what will I need of heaven, when I myself have become heaven?"

we have a choice. we can become liberated and participate in God and God in us. or we can struggle against that and perpetuate a slavery that is inauthentic existence and is our own personal, individualized "hell" that can be multiplied by our own non-free will unto infinity....

i don't know if any of this makes sense, but i welcome any questions that give me a chance to explain myself more fully.

may grace be with us all.


----------



## californian

oh, and just one more thing,

following yoyo's idea of God being both a God of justice and mercy, could it not also be said that

God's justice = God's mercy = God's love = God's wrath

In other words God is not BOTH just and merciful, loving and wrathful, but God is simply God. God's actions are existentially experienced differently by each person, as judgment by one, as mercy by another, as love by one, as anger by another.

even in the Gospels, the coming of Christ is experienced as mercy and judgment at the same time. his very presence is "hell" to some and "heaven" to others.....


----------



## Homeskooled

To your last supposition, Californian, I would say yes. We perceive God as changing, but we are the ones who shift. I almost entirely agree with your previous post, except for one point - heaven and hell start here, within us. But they _do_ continue once one dies. It is very clear that there will be an afterlife, and those who have helped the sick, clothed the naked, and fed the hungry will be told "Welcome good and faithful servant! Enter into my Father's house!" It really isnt about a race to get there, though - its something that grows and is nurtured in a person. The virtues of faith, hope, and supernatural Love.

Oh, and Epiphany, I think you are also a "safe bet" person. You like to hear everyone else's ideas just to make sure you feel alright about your own, but your reason for asking is reassurance and not change. And thats alright with me. I dont state things to change people. I dont expect a whole lot from people. Its nice when it happens, but change really isnt my job - its Gods. He'll use my words how He sees fit. But dont let fear trap you into not changing, or "playing it safe" with your life. Its too large, too precious, and too short. Live a little. Its a good way to grow. :wink:

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## californian

sorry i gave the wrong impression, homeskooled, i most certainly do believe in the afterlife. i guess this got buried in the following quote:



californian said:


> these are NOT places people go to. the bible is clear that in the end the righteous live on a new (or better "renewed") earth, not in some other dimension or some place in the sky.


afterlife, means resurrection of the dead and the redemption of the universe, of all creation...the entire cosmos. the good are resurrected unto eternal life, the dead unto eternal death. these states begin now but extend into eternity. (or to quote "gladiator" of all movies, "what we do in life echoes in eternity.") this all means in the final analysis that resurrection itself is related to my post on the unity of God and our existential response.

without the resurrection of Christ, the good and the evil would have just stayed dead (much as the sadducees believed). but because Christ bestowed resurrection on us ALL through his death and resurrection, the resurrection of the dead EQUALS judgment.

this resurrection, this judgment, is coming face to face with the liberating, refining fire that is God. for some people it will be gloriously illuminating, for some it will be purifying, and for some it will be unbearable torment....

but it depends on who we are and what we have made ourselves either through cooperating with God's grace or rebelling against it.


----------



## CECIL

yoyo said:


> this reply will not be long. I just have a hard time to imagine how murderers could get the same level of glory than Christlike people. Such a belief denies the justice of God. It is rather a way for the devil to make you believe that no matter what you do in this life, you will be saved anyway. Why? Because God loves you. He will forgive you at the end. This is a false doctrine, and a dangerous one.


Well first up I have to tell you that I'm not Christian, nor do I conscribe to any formal religious beliefs. Therefore my beliefs are not congruent with Christianity and if you so choose, you are more than welcome to discard them as bogus  If you are curious I am actually studying Shamanism, which has much different belief systems.

Secondly I don't believe in "Satan". I believe that "Satan" and "God" are actually the same force that humans have arbitrarily splilt into a dichotomy of good and evil. Those aspects of the divine we decide are evil get attributed to Satan and vice versa for those we decide are good (see below).

My belief in "God" (for ease of understanding, although again I don't believe in God in the Christian sense) is that it is NOT judgemental. Basically the idea is that there is no negative or positive, right or wrong. These dichotomies of reality are actually arbitrary - i.e. made up by humans to try to understand our world. The systems of morality that follow on from these beliefs are those that our society is built on. This is one reason I have so much trouble living in our current society, because I don't conscribe to the same beliefs.

Anyway, my belief is that anything anyone does is valid. Not right, not wrong. Valid. It exists and therefore it is a valid part of the universe. It has as much right to exist as anything else.

Furthermore, there is always a reason. There is ALWAYS a reason someone murders, rapes, pillages...whatever. There's also a reason that someone chooses not to do these things. That reason is also valid for that person. Not right, not wrong. Valid.

Like I was saying, true freedom means that you are allowed to do whatever you want, as long as you bear the consequences of your actions. My idea of "God" is that he loves us no matter what we do, because everything we do is a valid exploration of our own energy and creational force.

For this belief to be upheld you also have to believe in the existence of an afterlife of sorts. I believe that our lives, this world is an energetic creation. A play-pen for our imaginations so that our consciousness (which exists beyond the physical world) can learn how to use energy (create our lives) and explore everything we could possibly imagine.

From this point of view the whole "Wrong and right" thing actually becomes a game. In one life you can explore the idea of being "Holy, right, devout" by being a priest and upholding the beliefs of Christianity. In the next you can be a mass murderer and explore the idea from a different side. From an objective and spiritual view, all of these experiences are valid and FUN. All of them help your consciousness evolve, to understand itself and most importantly understand the power we each have to create our own realities.

Hope this made at least some sense, its sort of complicated and would actually take a few threads for me to explain properly


----------



## CECIL

californian said:


> afterlife, means resurrection of the dead and the redemption of the universe, of all creation...the entire cosmos.


I beg to differ.

"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death, life is only a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves" - Bill Hicks.

In other words, the physical reality that we now know is created by our consciousness, which exists outside of it. When we "Die" we return to the divine knowledge and union with God.

UNLESS we construct a belief pattern in life that says otherwise (like that we are bad and going to hell). Then the place we return to reflects the belief pattern. However, there's always second chances - even if you create hell for yourself you are always in control and able to decide "This is enough, let me have a second chance".


----------



## californian

CECIL said:


> In other words, the physical reality that we now know is created by our consciousness, which exists outside of it. When we "Die" we return to the divine knowledge and union with God.
> 
> UNLESS we construct a belief pattern in life that says otherwise (like that we are bad and going to hell). Then the place we return to reflects the belief pattern. However, there's always second chances - even if you create hell for yourself you are always in control and able to decide "This is enough, let me have a second chance".


how very neo-platonic of you. 

i'd be curious to see what you think of c.s. lewis's novella, "the great divorce." it's along the lines of what i (and homeskooled) have suggested on this topic. it has commonalities with what you believe but also differences.

i say this because it seems to me that you have taken a good look at certain strains of Christianity out there, and have decided that it is all something that it is not necessarily. it's like when i read elaine pagels's " the gnostic gospels" and other stuff. she touts a lot of spiritual concepts as belonging to the Gnostics and not the Orthodox when in fact she ignores that virtually every spiritual value she admires of the Gnostics is found in mystical Christian traditions.


----------



## yoyo

Hi Cecil,

thanks for sharing your personal beliefs. I actually found your idea about not making any difference beetween right or wrong, but only valid, interesting. But your teori does not explain how justice would apply. It seems like your teori is a way of denying justice and justify bad actions by saying that they are valid. Your theory does not explain either why we are alive, where we come from and what is going to happen after this life.

I suggest that you read my topic ""God lives".

The purpose of this message is to show and explain that God lives. The purpose is not to prove it, because I do not believe that it is possible. Faith is not things which are visible with eyes, and it is not the perfect knowledge of all things. However, I am using an eternal and true principle in order to show that God lives: opposition. The hardest thing to figure out and understand is the relation beetween that principle and the fact that God lives. I now explain the principle.

Principle: There is opposition in all things.

That principle is an eternal and permanent truth. That shows that everything has its opposit. Otherwise, we would not be aware of anything in this life.

Imagine that you live in a world where there is just one possible temperature: +25 celcius. That is definitively warm. If you never have been exposed to a lower temperature, how can then you know that warm is warm? You have to experience colder temperature in order to be aware that the actual temperature +25 celcius is warm. Otherwise, you can not possibly know what warm is. "Warm" has an opposite: "cold". That is the same thing with all things. These are some more exemple of opposites: sad and happy, high and low, good and evil, etc...

If everything has an opposite, then injustice (unfairness) has also and opposite, and that is justice. We just said that if there is just one possible temperature (+25c), then "cold" does not exist and it is not possible to know that warm is, in fact, warm. We all know that this life is unfair. We all have experienced unjustice. People have different kinds of lives. Some are more sick than other, others are criminals and do not follow the law while others follow it. Some people follow the law and do their best in order to be good persons. So if, as I said, we all know that this life is unfair, then there is an opposite to it: that is justice. Yes, justice exists!! The problem is that we do not se much justice in this imperfect world. Men are not able to judge perfectly. There is then no perfect justice in this world. Imperfect justice can not be justice, it remains injustice. But someone has to be able to judge perfect, otherwise injustice does not exist either. Why? Because if one opposite is missing, then we are not aware of the other opposite. But everybody is aware that this world is unfair. The consequence is that someone has to judge perfectly. Who is that person? Yes, it is God.

Without justice, there is no point with this life. Justice is an essential element to happiness. We all know that injustice creates much pain and sadness.

The purpose of this life is to become as much happy as God is. I truely believe that we all have the potential to become as good and perfect as God is. Only one person can help us with that. God. It is the reason why He sent His beloved son Jesus-Christ in order to show us the way to eternal happiness (eternal life). Justice will prevail at the very end. God still loves the sinner, but He hates sins. But justice has to prevail. It is a fundamental principe which happiness is build on.

God has also said: do not judge. This is something that God one day will take care of. He said, love one another like you love yourself. And the very first commandment is : love God

It might be difficult for a non-christian to accept these things. It requires faith. Faith is not perfect knowledge about things. But faith is believe in things that can not be seen but which are real. Knowledge comes after we have shown faith

I know that depersonalization is a trial. It helps me to remember God. It helps me to remember to be thankfull for what I have in my life. I know that we will all get cured from this disease. We have to live with it now and learn from it. It is much easier to live and manage with it when we recognise God and His justice.

Love.


----------



## CECIL

Californian: To be honest I'll admit I'm not 100% on Christianity. I spent a good deal of my life in the science camp saying it was stupid since you couldn't prove it.

However, I should explain that when I say "Christianity" I'm talking about mainstream Christianity, rather than "Christian Mysticism" which seems to be a slightly different kettle of fish.

And tbh I think there's a lot of applicable beliefs in Christianity. What irks me is how these beliefs are used to control people.

Yoyo: I understand what you're saying. We can't know Happiness if we don't feel pain - you can't know good if you don't know bad. However these are all the dichotomies I was talking about (or binary pairs or dual pairs are other names).

They don't really exist. The universe and God (IMO) don't measure one against the other. Everything just is. The entire basis of acceptance is giving up judgement, which means giving up those dichotomies.

Its ok if you don't want to believe it, but that's my view


----------



## californian

i couldn't agree with you more, CECIL, that it is a great tragedy that Christianity has been used to control people. it should never be about that, it is about liberating the total person, not conformity to a set of rules.


----------



## Epiphany

CECIL...after reading your post beginning _Well first up I have to tell you that I'm not Christian, nor do I conscribe to any formal religious beliefs._ I realise that you and I share some very similar beliefs.



> But your teori does not explain how justice would apply. It seems like your teori is a way of denying justice and justify bad actions by saying that they are valid.


Yoyo, from my interpretation of CECIL's theories, justice is a societal issue and is therefore dealt with on a human level. If "God" is not passing judgement then what justice is required? Our actions (good or bad) are measured by society and therefore we must be willing to face the consequences for our actions that will be imposed on us by society (IMO). I don't believe this justifies bad actions, but it does grey the lines between what qualifies as good and bad, which depends greatly on an individuals interpretation.

Hmmm HS...



> Oh, and Epiphany, I think you are also a "safe bet" person. You like to hear everyone else's ideas just to make sure you feel alright about your own, but your reason for asking is reassurance and not change.


Your thoughts are quite accurate...I do, and prior to the start of this year I would have agreed that I am a "safe bet" person, but I have changed...so many things have changed and I now find myself restricted by the safe life I thought was expected of me and I helped to create. I find myself restricted by others expectations and it stifles me. The trouble is, these expectations are not unreasonable...they are normal societal expectations which causes me to feel that my whole life is just a stageplay...a giant game...I am acting out a role the whole while feeling some huge responsibility (not imagined) to maintain this image for the sake of everyone else despite how I feel. Yet I would be a fool not to, and people would judge me accordingly. Hence I can relate to CECIL's statement that he finds it difficult to live in our current society. 
I feel I am a good person though some of my actions do not reflect this based on what is viewed as "right" and "good" by societal standards. I have grown as a person (despite my confusion and inner turmoil about it all), although if I were to reveal these non-compliances I would be judged as a fool and looked down upon. The lines are so very grey...black and white blurs in the middle, there really is no clear cut line, yet I feel my reasons are VALID.


----------



## Homeskooled

Dear Epiphany, 
Please elaborate on these "things". Right and wrong _can_ be very black and white, or it can be very elegantly soft and personal. It depends on the action, its gravity, a person's intent, and God's will. It sounds like a mostly good thing that you recognize this pattern that adults often fall into, but it doesnt mean you have to sabotage what you have, or almost literally, throw the baby out with the bathwater. Perhaps you need to have an internal "freshening up" of heart so that you _can_ love your children and husband the way they are meant to be loved, and the way that _you_ deserve to love. Change does not always mean a change of venue - the best changes change the vantage point from within, and the internal "us" who perceives what is around us.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## CECIL

Epiphany said:


> Yoyo, from my interpretation of CECIL's theories, justice is a societal issue and is therefore dealt with on a human level. If "God" is not passing judgement then what justice is required? Our actions (good or bad) are measured by society and therefore we must be willing to face the consequences for our actions that will be imposed on us by society (IMO).


No, what I was saying is that good and bad don't exist, therefore judgement and punishment don't need to exist. These things only exist in our society because we base our systems on arbitrary morals that we have made up to fulfill our own end. The only consequences you need to live up to ARE YOUR OWN. External judgement and punishment diminishes the power of the individual.

Accept yourself, everyone and everything. If other people want to judge you it has no bearing on you. If other people want to judge themselves it has no bearing on you.

Live your life free of fear and no harm can come to you - or more to the point, everything happens by agreement 

(Sorry for contrinuosly derailing these threads  ).


----------



## Epiphany

HS...I won't elaborate on what I mean by these "things"as they are too personal to me, but I will say that things I once saw as very black and white issues are not always one or the other and that perhaps sometimes we need to experience certain "things" to learn from them and grow as a person. I find it hard to see now how some issues can be percieved as either right or wrong when even what is considered "wrong" can sometimes teach you more about yourself than always playing things safe and right. Regretting what is "wrong" in my life has served no purpose for me and we if we can learn and grow so much from them then were these "things" really so "wrong" in the first place?

Oh gee...I really do go on sometimes don't I?! Enough babble...it is really isn't all that important what I do or don't think about it all. Point is, I have learnt more about myself and grown stronger from my mistakes than I have from trying to be a better person. I always had such a fear of what others thought (and still do I guess) that I spent more time presenting an image of how I thought everyone expected me to be rather than just being whoever it is that I am. In one of my poems I wrote as a teenager one of the lines was..."I, like a careful chameleon, conform to my environment". I was always attempting to be the kind of person I thought was expected of me.

Anyway, I do agree with your comment.


> Right and wrong can be very black and white, or it can be very elegantly soft and personal.


But a "wrong" that I may view as elegantly soft and personal, may be very black and white to others. It's all relevant to the individual I suppose.

Thanks HS...as always I value your opinion and you give me a lot to think about.

Cecil...judgement and punishment may not need to exist, but they do, on a societal level. I agree that the only consequences you need to live up to are your own and in an ideal world it may actually be enough, but of course there are consequences, judgements and punishments imposed by society, whether we believe that "God" also imposes them or not.

All I was trying to say, in a roundabout way, was what you had already said better yourself in an earlier post. If I may quote you...



> My belief in "God" (for ease of understanding, although again I don't believe in God in the Christian sense) is that it is NOT judgemental. Basically the idea is that there is no negative or positive, right or wrong. These dichotomies of reality are actually arbitrary - i.e. made up by humans to try to understand our world. The systems of morality that follow on from these beliefs are those that our society is built on.


----------



## CECIL

Epiphany said:


> Regretting what is "wrong" in my life has served no purpose for me and we if we can learn and grow so much from them then were these "things" really so "wrong" in the first place?


Very well said  Where we get into trouble as Humans is assigning these negative values to things we do/have done/want to do. If something terrible happened to you then you can choose to look at it in two ways:

1. That thing was bad. It was wrong. It has destroyed my life. How can I ever recover from this? This leads to depression, DP and all sorts of mental and emotional problems. Your future will dissolve until it is just a hollow reflection of your past. You won't be able to see any escape because this BAD, EVIL thing is constantly dragging you down.

2. You can just ACCEPT that what happened, happened. Get rid of the negative judgements and perceptions about it and just see it for what it is. It happened, it is valid. Now you can look upon it with a clear emotional state and you can decide what you actually learned from it. How does it benefit you?

If you start following the second path then life becomes a lot easier, because ANYTHING that happens to you is a valuable learning experience. You also begin to unravel your fear, and that's really the key, because when you have nothing to fear, nothing can harm you


----------



## yoyo

Why should be grateful and embrace the gospel? Christ has through the atonement not only made it possible for us to repent and to live up to the demands of the justice (as I explained in the beginning of this topic), but He also overcome death and sickness of all kinds which oppened the way to resurrection. Christ has suffered everything that a human may suffer, inclusive dp. Christ knows exactly what we are going through. He knows how we can be relieved.

It is much easier to cope with dp when we rely on Christ. By showing faith in Him, we might get cured. I truly believe in the power of the atonement.


----------



## yoyo

Why should be grateful and embrace the gospel? Christ has through the atonement not only made it possible for us to repent and to live up to the demands of the justice (as I explained in the beginning of this topic), but He also overcome death and sickness of all kinds which oppened the way to resurrection. Christ has suffered everything that a human may suffer, inclusive dp. Christ knows exactly what we are going through. He knows how we can be relieved.

It is much easier to cope with dp when we rely on Christ. By showing faith in Him, we might get cured. I truly believe in the power of the atonement.


----------



## californian

CECIL said:


> Epiphany said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regretting what is "wrong" in my life has served no purpose for me and we if we can learn and grow so much from them then were these "things" really so "wrong" in the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> Very well said  Where we get into trouble as Humans is assigning these negative values to things we do/have done/want to do. If something terrible happened to you then you can choose to look at it in two ways:
> 
> 1. That thing was bad. It was wrong. It has destroyed my life. How can I ever recover from this? This leads to depression, DP and all sorts of mental and emotional problems. Your future will dissolve until it is just a hollow reflection of your past. You won't be able to see any escape because this BAD, EVIL thing is constantly dragging you down.
> 
> 2. You can just ACCEPT that what happened, happened. Get rid of the negative judgements and perceptions about it and just see it for what it is. It happened, it is valid. Now you can look upon it with a clear emotional state and you can decide what you actually learned from it. How does it benefit you?
> 
> If you start following the second path then life becomes a lot easier, because ANYTHING that happens to you is a valuable learning experience. You also begin to unravel your fear, and that's really the key, because when you have nothing to fear, nothing can harm you
Click to expand...

well put by both Epiphany and CECIL, in my opinion.

in Christian theology, one of the most important aspects of the crucifixion is that past actions are crucified with Christ. it frees us from having to look back with regret. there is nothing that can be done about the past...it is gone. the cross frees us from slavery to the past.

i also think your ideas, Epiphany and CECIL, match well with st paul's statement in Romans 8:28, "we know that everything works for good with those who love God and are called according to his purpose." i have always had a big problem with interpretations of this passage that make it sound like God makes everything work out right if you are on his team...or anything like that. this passage is actually saying that all things can be redeemed, can be used for good, depending on how you approach it (by moving towards God in love or not). this is part of why st. paul himself no longer casts things in terms of right or wrong. he specifically states that because of Christ, "all things are lawful, but not all things are profitable."

in this light, morality should not be seen primarily as following or transgressing rules. human action should be measured in what is profitable for spirtual growth. what is profitable for one person, may not be for another. indeed, anything can become profitable (even disgraceful actions) if approached appropriately and learned from and progress is make in communion with God.

in the end, the only time we have is NOW. too often we forget that the past is gone, and the future may not be granted to us. we fret over the past and the future, and forget to live NOW. this is tragic. too often we "condemn the future to death so it can match the past"--aimee mann, from the soundtrack to _magnolia_


----------



## Martinique

I was raised Jewish but in my early teens my parents became Jews for Jesus. I thought I believed for awhile, but I don't anymore. I am very familiar with the Christian tenets of faith and redemption and here's how I see it:

1. God designs us fatally flawed. (All men fall short of the glory of God)

2. Then because of this fatal flaw, God decides we're not good enough for him, so he sends Jesus to die a grisly, bloody death on the cross of Rome.

3. Somehow, through this grisly "sacrifice" we are now good enough for God if we only believe in Jesus. If we don't believe we go to hell. For eternity.

4. When I ask my Christian family members and others, why God jdidn't just make us okay from the start? What's the deal with making us flawed and then blaming us for it? I'm told: Because God wants us to come to him willingly. He gave us free will so that we could *choose* to love Him. Really? How is that a choice, believe in me or go to Hell?

So here's my analogy of the above. I rob a man at gunpoint. I say give me your money or I'll shoot you. He gives me his money. I am later arrested and at my Trial this is my defense: I never said he HAD to give me his money. I said give me your money OR I'll shoot you. He made the choice to give me his money - Willingly.

See God actually doesn't give us free will, it's believe in Me or go to Hell. I believe that fits the legal definition of signing under Duress. Next time God wants to make a bloody sacrifice on my behalf - He should ask me first.

That's how it seems to me.


----------



## californian

Martinique said:


> I was raised Jewish but in my early teens my parents became Jews for Jesus. I thought I believed for awhile, but I don't anymore. I am very familiar with the Christian tenets of faith and redemption and here's how I see it:


you are very familiar with a particular way of interpreting the Christian faith. HOWEVER, the model of atonement you describe in your post is NOT one that was ever popular among the eastern Greek fathers, and was not popular among most of the early Western Latin theologians. the model of atonement you describe is flatly rejected by the Eastern Orthodox Churches (Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc.). Orthodox account for approximately 20% of the world's Christian population. it is also not the model used in current Roman Catholic catechisms.

the model you describe is the penal substitution model of atonement, popular with John Calvin and his followers. it has roots in Western Latin theology, but is hardly representative of all Christian understanding of the atonement. it IS a popular understanding with the Jews for Jesus denomination.

i write this to help make clear that you are very familiar with (and rightly critical of) a particular understanding of the purpose of Christ's death, but that this understanding is not the only understanding, nor is it representative of the majority of Christianity.

i can explain more if anyone's interested...


----------



## Martinique

Okay, so I didn't get the interpretation popular with the Greek and Russian Orthodox Church, which you say is 20% of the Christian population. BUT the model I critiqued is the brand of Christianity espoused by the Republican Taliban in Congress. The anti homosexual lobby, the anti choice lobby and the let's-butt -into-people's-lives brand of the Christian Coalition of James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and the other Pharissees.

And since the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches aren't trying to change the U.S. Constitution to discriminate against people, I have to be afraid of and fight off the Christians who ARE trying to destroy the Constititution. Unfortunately, the churches you say don't subscribe to the Jesus Christ or Hell philosphy are not prominent enough to help anything, so unfortunately, they are effectively marginilized.

Being a Russian Jew I find it hard to believe that the Russian Orthodox church which sanctioned pogroms against Jews would be any better but......


----------



## Martinique

Are you guys sure you have DP? You all sound just like all the other "normal" people that surround me (all of us). If your belief in God is strong or you have all these new agey insights about the nature of regret and sin and redemption, how come you have dp? DP pretty much belies a faith in anything just or fair or kind or most importantly ALL POWERFUL. God is the salve people use to heal the burn of nothingness, the aspirin to our emptiness as it were. So....what's the problem, you sound pretty "normal" to me.

And if i sound angry - that's because I AM. Rest in Peace.


----------



## californian

Martinique said:


> Okay, so I didn't get the interpretation popular with the Greek and Russian Orthodox Church, which you say is 20% of the Christian population. BUT the model I critiqued is the brand of Christianity espoused by the Republican Taliban in Congress. The anti homosexual lobby, the anti choice lobby and the let's-butt -into-people's-lives brand of the Christian Coalition of James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and the other Pharissees.


I feel your pain regarding the ?Republican Taliban? as you put it. Unfortunately, this is an example of a political party hijacking a religion for its aims. I am quite an opponent of Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson. It is not just Orthodox that often feel this way, but there are many Catholics and even Evangelical Protestants who feel this way as well. See http://www.sojo.net for one group trying to change this.



Martinique said:


> And since the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches aren't trying to change the U.S. Constitution to discriminate against people, I have to be afraid of and fight off the Christians who ARE trying to destroy the Constititution. Unfortunately, the churches you say don't subscribe to the Jesus Christ or Hell philosphy are not prominent enough to help anything, so unfortunately, they are effectively marginilized.


Actually, there are a rather large number of them, but their views side neither with the Democrats or Republicans wholly. They are marginalized by both parties and therefore either don?t vote, vote for whichever party seems to be the ?lesser of two evils? or (like me) vote for a third party candidate. Orthodox and Catholics have been traditionally more ?democrat? leaning, but unfortunately, the democratic party has begun to alienate them over the last few decades. I did not mean to imply that Orthodox are 20% of the U.S. population. They are actually much closer to 1% in the U.S. but closer to 20% in the world.



Martinique said:


> Being a Russian Jew I find it hard to believe that the Russian Orthodox church which sanctioned pogroms against Jews would be any better but......


I am very sorry that those pograms happened. They were wrong, horrific, evil. There is no institution that has lived up to the message of Christianity. What I am taking issue with is your statement on what the basic plan of Christianity is. Most of Christianity in the world does not believe that?although you thought your experience spoke for the majority of Christianity in the world.

It is, however, quite frustrating that people regularly have the problem of separating the ideals and teachings of a religion from the sins of its members. Are all Jews evil for what is going on in Palestine right now? Are all Americans evil because of what Bush is doing? Are even all Republicans evil because of him? That is a quite unfair attitude.



Martinique said:


> Are you guys sure you have DP? You all sound just like all the other "normal" people that surround me (all of us). If your belief in God is strong or you have all these new agey insights about the nature of regret and sin and redemption, how come you have dp? DP pretty much belies a faith in anything just or fair or kind or most importantly ALL POWERFUL. God is the salve people use to heal the burn of nothingness, the aspirin to our emptiness as it were. So....what's the problem, you sound pretty "normal" to me.


Quite simply, I have DP because I have some sort of temporal lobe disorder that sets in through stress.

DP affects the way people feel. It does not have to affect what they do, think, believe or say. DP also makes people hypoemotional, but you are still capable of great anger, are you not? DP has caused me to realize that faith is required for any and all action and knowledge in this world (see my ?a plea to the moderators? thread and debate with martin. As such, I choose to have faith because it helps me overcome DP. It has helped me with my anger problem too... It hasn?t cured either one completely, but I?m still working on that in my faith? IN SHORT: read the paradox that is my signature on all my posts!



Martinique said:


> And if i sound angry - that's because I AM. Rest in Peace.


I am sorry you feel so angry. I hope you find resolution for your anger. I hope you find peace. I hope you find faith, hope and love.


----------



## Martinique

To Californian: I tried to use the quotes thing but couldn't get the right paragraphs only, so...:

Maybe you and I are talking about different things. But the majority of my family are born again Christians. I live in Colorado Springs home to Focus on The Family. These born again Christians absolutely, without a doubt believe that only born again Christians are going to heaven. Everybody else - that's Everybody Else is going to Hell. (For no man comes unto the Father but by me. For God so loved the World he sent His only Begotten Son.... I'm sure you know these scriptures). Are you saying that some Christians don't believe all others will go to Hell? Cause I have not heard that, and I'm fairly Old! 

Also, "Are all Jews evil, because of what is going on in Palestine?"

Uh, oh. Oh no you didn't. :shock: Sorry, but being Jewish I took offense. You probably didn't mean any though. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east - the only one that didn't elect a known terrorist group anyway. Israel is surrounded by enemies. Israel LEFT the Gaza strip. They stopped "occupying" Palestine. So what do the Palestinians do? They throw rocks at each other. They elect a terrorist group, Hamas the leader of suicide bombers since David first put down Goliath. (Who are these uncircumcised Philistines that they should taunt the armies of the Living God?) The Palestinians abducted an Israeli soldier .....

Okay, I'm stopping now, because this isn't what this thread is about at all. I apologize.  (yet notice, I still send the response!) Please try and take me tongue in cheek, most people who know me do, and it makes me a lot easier not to dislike.


----------



## californian

Martinique said:


> To Californian: I tried to use the quotes thing but couldn't get the right paragraphs only, so...:


it's tricky...you have to enter the code to end a quote "/quote" with brackets, around it, instead of quote marks. you can start a quote by copying and pasting the quote="whoever" part at the beginning of the quote. hope that makes sense...



Martinique said:


> Maybe you and I are talking about different things. But the majority of my family are born again Christians. I live in Colorado Springs home to Focus on The Family. These born again Christians absolutely, without a doubt believe that only born again Christians are going to heaven. Everybody else - that's Everybody Else is going to Hell. (For no man comes unto the Father but by me. For God so loved the World he sent His only Begotten Son.... I'm sure you know these scriptures). Are you saying that some Christians don't believe all others will go to Hell? Cause I have not heard that, and I'm fairly Old!


i know exactly what you are saying here. this is the sort of Christianity i grew up with as well. i didn't even know that most Christian denominations (e.g. Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Orthodox, Methodists, etc.) don't believe in the "rapture" and all that "tribulation" stuff until i was in my twenties and stumbled upon this while doing some research. i was baptized Roman Catholic as a baby, raised as an evangelical "born again" Protestant until my early twenties, and then returned to traditional Christianity by becoming Eastern Orthodox at that time. i now know a lot about the viewpoints of the various Christian denominations. before this, i hadn't realized how many of the distinctive views of "born agains" were ideas that not all Christians had always believed.

concerning "everyone going to hell" Christinity: yes, i know what you are talking about there. i rejected that understanding even while i was still a Protestant. i came to the place where i couldn't see why God would send people to a good place, simply for _thinking_ the right things about God, and send other people to hell simply for _thinking_ the wrong things about God. it just didn't make sense. fortunately, i found that faith does not equal "thinking the right things in your head"--existentialist Christian philosophers like Kierkegaard helped me sort that all out.

in the Bible, i think it is very clear that many will think the right things about God, Jesus, theology, whatever, and still be lost because of their lack of real "faith." on the other hand, i think many will be redeemed who weren't Christians in this life, but who "trusted in" Christ either without knowing his name or without realizing him for who he is (because of the sins of Christians who distorted who he is and what Christianity is about).

i actually know a few "born-again" Christians who would agree with what i said above. i believe even Billy Graham would say so. unfortunately, this is not the norm, and perhaps things are a bit different in California where i grew up (even in California, what you describe WAS largely the norm). but the view i expressed above is not only pretty standard in Eastern Orthodox thinking, but also in contemporary Roman Catholic thinking and many of the mainstream Protestant denominations.

St Silouan the Athonite, a great Orthodox saint, cautions us that we should not teach that EVERYONE will be saved, but that we should HOPE and PRAY that somehow EVERYONE in human history will be...



Martinique said:


> Uh, oh. Oh no you didn't. :shock: Sorry, but being Jewish I took offense. You probably didn't mean any though. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east - the only one that didn't elect a known terrorist group anyway. Israel is surrounded by enemies. Israel LEFT the Gaza strip. They stopped "occupying" Palestine. So what do the Palestinians do? They throw rocks at each other. They elect a terrorist group, Hamas the leader of suicide bombers since David first put down Goliath. (Who are these uncircumcised Philistines that they should taunt the armies of the Living God?) The Palestinians abducted an Israeli soldier .....


 :shock: :?  :roll: i feel all of these emotions at once. :lol:

you are right, i did not intend any offense. i actually made the faulty assumption that because you were against the "Republican Taliban" that you would be a Jewish person who was against Zionism. i could just have easily have said, "Are all Palestinians evil because of what's going on in Palestine."

i do, however, think you are missing some facts of what actually goes on in Palestine...neither side are the "good guys." but you are right that this particular topic is not a part of this thread. i also don't want to agitate you on this topic any more than you are comfortable with being agitated by it. as such, i'll say this...if you would like to discuss this topic further, please post a new thread about it in "that's life" forum. if you don't make such a post, i'll understand completely and we'll steer clear of this sensitive topic.


----------



## CECIL

Martinique said:


> Are you guys sure you have DP?


I did for quite a few years, not to mention chronic Depression/Anxiety for about a decade. Over the last few years I've changed enormously, healing so many of the issues that plagued me.

Now I come here for a few reasons:

1. Because there's a lot of cool discussions that go on here about things that I am interested in, as well as cool people 
2. Possibly provide some help for people still suffering, or at least a different perspective on the "illness" from what I've learned.
3. Because healing is a process and there's still parts of the old me that remain, so having some support is handy.


----------

