Nakranoth wrote:
Okay, Woah... let me pause on that for a second... God can have an accident if he wants to? Do you not understand the concept of mistake? For it to be a mistake it cannot be on purpose.
I understand the concept of mistake. You're not taking into consideration the concept of omnipotence.
God can make a square circle. God can make a stone so heavy that even he cannot lift it, and then lift it. He can defy logic, reason and fact, as all comes from him, and can be shaped or discarded by him.
And so God can make a mistake and wish to.
But that's not important.
Nakranoth wrote:
My point is "wicked" is something Mankind invented to describe things it itself finds unacceptable. God does not intervene because things are as they should be.
Not invented. Misappropriated. "I must kill the Wicked!" says the Bishop, so that he may take people's land. But it is in fact the Bishop who is wicked.
Wickedness exists. It is just not up to mankind to decide what it is. Not that we don't. Hell, I do it. I won't say I don't.
Nakranoth wrote:Therein lies my point. God did make us. It did so in such a way that we are exactly as it wants us to be. It hasn't made us do anything. We do things on our own. But the things we do are based on our personalities/principals which we have no real hand in developing. If you know the spin on a die, you can tell what face it will land on. We are but cogs in a big cause-effect machine.
No, no, see here man. What God has done is leave it up to us. It's a huge show. We've all got the choice as to whether we turn out as he wants or not, thereotically. People can corrupt others and not even give them a chance to be as God desires. Neither life nor afterlife is fair. Now, that's not to say I think people burn in Hell for eternity just because someone else corrupted them (I.e. Teaching a child to look out for himself and only himself, bringing him up to be a thug or getting someone to murder someone else.), but I do believe that God, all the same, isn't happy with their sins.
It's like this. I'd like someone to say, be passionate about rice cultivation. If I beat them in the head with a stick and feed them a low protein diet until I get them into it, sure, they're into it, but it wasn't them who came to it for the sake of it's own goodness. It's because I hit them with a stick. Pie put it well.
Nakranoth wrote:You missed the point... there is no imperfection here so far as God's concerned... he made the universe the way it wanted to make the universe. No mistakes, no flaws.
No mistakes, but yes, flaws. Like I said before, I disagree.
But I see you're point, man. God wants the flaws, and yet doesn't. If he's omnipotent, than this is what he wants. Yeah, I get it.
See here, God wants it to be this way, I agree, he wants us to be able to sin to our hearts content, but he doesn't want us to do it. You see what I mean? And he wants us to not do it with the free will he has given us.
Schme wrote:You can Hate God all you like, just like you can hate Kim-Jong Il, but you sure as hell better not do anything about it. You get what I'm saying?
Nakranoth wrote:Okay, one, I have nothing against God... Two, even if I did, there is Nothing I could do to hurt it.
Sorry, that was unclear. I didn't mean that you hate God. By you I meant anyone. As in "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." You know? Sorry about the confusion.
Nosajimiki wrote:
Christian morality is primarly based on social outlooks contrived by the Greeks and Jews in response to wars, slavery, tyranny ,and other injustices before any religious interpretions were added on to them........
I'm sorry, you're quite right. When I say "Christian Law" I mean Christian societies as done in Europe. If you ask me, the scriptures condemn a lot of how those were and are run. My mistake.
Nosajimiki wrote: The improvements in the church that you've mentioned are social improvements brought about by people defying religious convictions.
I disagree. I believe they were brought about by people going with their faith and standing up to the thugs that had taken over the clergy, as gradually, people stopped having to fear that the church would get the police to string them up if they stood up to the crooks who had hijacked the faith.
Nosajimiki wrote: You yourself say that the church is wrong for condemning condumns. Is that religion? no, it's your own sientient conscious steping and and say, "HEY! this is wrong." You didn't look to the bible for that, you didn't ask the Pope, you just know it b/c of your experience.
Actually, that is not true. I did look in the Bible. It is to me very much religion. No, I haven't found some vague piece of scripture that I've interpreted to support condom use.
Let me explain. The Bible says you should do good and not allow for harm to come to people.
Now days, just as in the days before use, there are STDs and pregnancies that people don't want and so abort.
Africa is being torn to shreds by HIV, as if it doesn't have enough problems. Degenerates are running around everywhere spreading disease in people like mad.
Much of Africa is Catholic. As a Christian, I don't support pointless and sinful fornication. (Now, mind you, I've never said I was a good Christian.) And lots of people are like me. They'll do what they want even if they know it's wrong.
Much of Africa is Catholic. Because wasted seed (sperm) is sinful, as it is destroying life, the Church forbids the use of Condoms. (Likewise masterbation.)
Now, I agree, to waste seed is a sin. But because of the Churches objections, millions are getting diseases that are killing them, as Condoms are harder to come by. This is wrong of the Church. If anything, they should put together some money to distribute condoms in places were HIV is a big problem.
Furthermore, in many other places, people get unwanted pregnancies, or to avoid doing so, take birth control pills. If they miss the mark, they might get an abortion.
It is better to use a condom than to take birth control pills or to have an abortion, and why anyone would do otherwise disgusts me. If you're going to fuck around, without wanting to have kids, and will kill one if it starts to develop, then for fuck sakes, use a condom. I know it doesn't feel as good as going unwrapped, but if you want to live in sin, then tough it out. Besides, you'll last longer anyhow.
There are other reasons why I support condom use among fornicators, but they are nationalist in nature and not relevant here.
Nosajimiki wrote: Maybe 50-100 years from now enough people with your experience will say, hey lets go change what God thinks again and say he wants us to feel it's okay to use condomns!
Perhaps. I hope not though. I just hope they decide that it's better to do a smaller sin than to murder an innoncent child or to give someone a disease.
Nosajimiki wrote:Personally, I'm not waiting that long for a bunch of guys who've sworn off sex all together to realize that.
That's a good point and could be a whole other debate.
Mykey wrote:
First, you point out many of the reasons why I have the veiws I do. Essentially, Christianity offers only blackmail...imo. I am not a shepard, nor a sheep, Schme. I saw a fork in the road, and went straight...
Christianity is not blackmail. Blackmail is when you find out something bad about someone that they don't want exposed and then threaten to expose it.
What you are reffering to is extortion.
I think you mean the thing that many Christians say, or used to say, that non-christians are bound for Hell.
I personally don't believe that. I believe that any good person, wheather christian or not, is welcome in God's Kingdom, and that even the wicked can be forgiven.
Mykey wrote:As for the hate thing, I was being sarcastic.... I know that doesn`t translate well in a post...
As for the, take a poll comment.... I was pointing out the fact 98% of cantr players would agree with you. Mykey = fool.
Mykey wrote:Doesn't matter what people think in this case. It just matters whether or not you are. (I understand that whether you are or not by my definition hinges on my being absolutly right, but luckily, I am.)
Mykey wrote:Now I have to end with that, because this rant-filled defence of catholicism, is really way of base from what I was saying, and I do not really understand where you are going...
Neither do I.
Mykey wrote:I must say you jump to alot of conclusions, inventing things.... I never said, "that people who do not share my libertarian views, are sub-human".
Listen, you said, and I'm paraphrasing here, what you were implying, right, is that people who weren't their own people aren't people at all. Whether or not you believe that isn't the case here, it's just that that's what you said. I don't really believe you believe that, but you said that. I didn't jump, I walked. Jumping is undignified. (And no, I don't speak for the Church when I say that.)
Mykey wrote:In all honesty, throughout the "New Testament" I find little of what "Jesus" said as, wrong. In fact, if he did in fact exist. I pretty much idolize the man. What I do have a problem with is how great lessons were turned into twisted doctrine, that survives to this day. I do have a problem with declaring "Jesus" "God". And I have a problem with the fact we always have a "living God" Through the pope. It is all rather absurd to me.
Few people disagree with the Jesus idea. Now, whether or not Jesus existed is a huge other debate, let's not get into that today. I'm not saying you were trying to, but let's not, just the same.
I also agree that the doctrine and the scriptures have been corrupted and misused. But It's not the misuse I focus on. It's ideas of virtue and goodness.
If I'm wrong, it won't matter. I won't know until I'm dead, and if I'm wrong I won't care.
Mykey wrote:Now my biggest peeve is the fact my religious beliefs are spitted on or ignored, and people expect more respect from me, because their religion has more than one member.
Listen here, I wasn't critiscising your faith. I don't really know anything about you're faith. I don't know what you believe.
All I was saying as that you're calling for the abolition of the Catholic church, essentially, because it did bad things in the past. But you then go and say you believe in helping and being good to people. The Catholic church does that better than you ever could on you're own (unless you're some kind of billionaire, I suppose, but even then). So it doesn't make sense to want it abolished if you truly believe that, even if Catholiscism is geniunly not "The Right Faith."
And very importantly, the Pope is not "God on Earth." He is technically the representative of God on Earth. Although too me, that's just ceremonial, just as the Queen is "Defender of the Faith" (The Anglican Faith, that is.). To me, the Pope is just the most senior member of the Church hiearchy.
Before, it was used to lend God's support to whatever the Pope was up to. But that's gone out of practice.
Mykey wrote:Freedom of thought, and action. Or, "free will" is essential to all I hold dear. I honestly believe organized religion drains that reserve. Okay Im just babbling to people that will just skim my post, and pull things out of thin air, I`m done....
Free will is essential to my belief system to. I am not forced to be a Catholic or love God. I do so on my own, just as most other Catholics do. Granted, many were brought up Catholic. But all the same, no one makes anyone go to church at gunpoint anymore. Not much, anyhow, not for most people, and certainly not for most Catholics.
And so I don't at all believe organized religion such as Catholiscism is crushing free will. It tries, oh God how it tries, and in some cases, it has in the past and today. But not for me.
Religion can destroy free will. But so can any other organized belief group. And for many of the Faithful (whatever they may be faithful too), it is their own choice, and organized faith is good for them if that's what they subscribe to.
I came to the Church on my own.
Mykey wrote:I`d say you are a person trying to do good, as you have been taught what good is. However, I am personally, completely against the "God" of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. So, I obviously see fault, in placing faith in these things, or the pope. Especially living men.... Am I basing my disdain on only century old atrocities? No. Perhaps we quickly forget the rate of pedophiles, in the catholic church? Perhaps the rate of cover-ups is just ignored by most, not I. I do not like the church. I do not like the religion, and I don`t want people knocking on my door, trying to sell their angle on god to me. I have many reasons for disliking christianity in particular, and organized religion in general. You all may see the good. I see the bad, and the ugly.
I see that bad too, my friend. I also see that it is past.
I brought up the pedeophilia before you did. I suppose you missed it. I said "They represent the Church in the same way as Robert Pickton represents Canada." I meant it a few hours ago, and I mean it now.
Believe me, nobody knows more about the atrocities of the Church than me. How can you honestly say to yourself "This is what I believe" without knowing about it? I know I sure as Hell can't.
The Spanish Inquisistion, the murders out in the America's, the pedeophilia, not just modern but done for centuries, even by one of the Pope's, the whoreing, the murder of innocents, the theft, the corruption of justice, the politicking. It's all there. I know it. Believe me, I know it. And that's just all the stuff we know about! Imagine the millions of things that we'll never here about. Think that the Priests taking advantage of women, whoreing and molesting childrens ever got found out in the past? I doubt it, and were they, it'd have been hushed up, I'm sure. I know it. Don't I know it.
(I understand you were talking to Floris, but I'm pretty full of myself.)
I don't try to sell my angle on God to anyone who isn't interested. You don't have to talk to me about God at all. I won't bring it up if you don't want to. But you do want to talk about it, and so we are.
As for going door to door, well, I don't much like Jehovah's witnesses either. Nobody does. But I'm no Jehovah's Witness and I'm no missionary.
In fact, Canada has a history of the government persecuting Jehovah's Witnesses, which I think it pretty cool, even if it's cruel and sinful.
[quote=”Pie”]
I do have a problem with declaring "Jesus" "God"."
The concept of the Holy Trinity has been a debate ever since organized Christianity manifested itself.
Don’t worry about it.
. Sure the bible says he is, but as you've proven the bible is flawed. Sure if he exists than he obviously has good enough control over the universe to manipulate it in some pretty extreme manners, but think of a programmer. I could be the best programmer to ever exist and understand inside and out what the code I write does and how it works, but that doesn't meen I can't make mistakes or include random number generation so that is does things beyond my control, or even copacity to predict. You could also argue that he IS the theoretical code, but even that would have it's potiential limitations. In my own body I have mussles and organs that I do not control or that control is bound by rules. The universe as we precieve it is bound by rules wether we understand them all or not, what's to say God is any different?
about it being impossable for God to be infalible and the bible correct, there is also a distinction between infalability and ominpotience. God is, if the bible is correct, omnipotient, meaning he can do anything, including raise the dead, but that does not automaticly make him right. Just like in you analogy of a wieghtlifter, yes God working out in his nice gym can make us look like a bunch of pansies here on Earth, but all that power does not make him suddenly un-able to be wrong. There are even bible stories of God realizing he is wrong and changing his mind. He originally decreed that he would wipe out Sodom and Gramora with everyone in them when Abraham objected on the behalf of the inocent people who lived there (Lot and his familly if I remeber right). God changed his mind and sent an angel to save his familly first. EI: even in all his power, God can be wrong.