138 replies to this topic

[Reflectionist]

I think the only thing that's vague is your understanding of religion.

Sure, you say that the only thing that's in the Bible are rules, rules and more rules. How to live, don't do this, don't do that.

Remember the Pharisees? Doing exactly what you're talking about. Preaching the whole 'don't do this don't do that' routine, and then Jesus came and basically pwned them?

Does that say anything to you about how the religion views rules?

So what exactly did Jesus do? Do you know? He replaced the old ones with new rules. Do unto others as thou would wish them to do unto you. Is that not a rule? Of course, it is more than a rule, but then so is a control mechanism. I'd say it was a guideline, but if you look carefully you'll see I didn't mention the word, rule, once.

They're there for you to follow them, but God isn't sitting there waiting to strike you with lightning for putting a toe out of line.

Gee, what is that I hear about divine Judgement?

The most important part is the part about Jesus dying for everyone, but you know, I can see how you'd overlook that.

I disagree with you. Jesus dying for everyone means diddly squat as to how someone behaves. Notice how it doesn't stop Fred Phelps, a Christian, from being a complete arsehole. Or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. The emphasis on Jesus' death and resurrection is too strong, so much so that many people forget that to be Christian is to follow his example.

What is of more use to us in this world? Knowing that Jesus died for our sins? Well, whoop-de-doo. That's of no use to us in this world. It's only of use to us in the next world, therefore, it doesn't change anything. Only the guidelines and rules set forth in the Bible by Jesus and others, are of any use and of any value to us in this life.

And either way, how does religion answer why?

Hm? Does the Bible tell us why God created anything? Does it?

1. Jesus wasn't legalistic about his morals and how you should live. Jesus doesn't care what you do, good or bad, as long as you know what's good and what's bad, and you cover your ass for the bad stuff.

2. You said 'what is the most important thing about Christianity,' not 'what is the most important thing to do with morales in Christianity.' Maybe if you had said that, I would've said the teachings of Jesus. But you didn't, and the fact of the matter is, that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message.

3. Jesus really only had 2 guidelines. Love God, Love Others. Those are things you *should* do. The other things, like the sermon on the mount, was more about rebelling against the overbearing condescending Jewish Athorities, because none of the stuff they were saying you absolutely HAD to do was necessary.

So Like I said, you have a very vague and biased understanding of Christianity.

[vodkamaru]

Isn't technological evolution a result of the advances in scientific understanding?

I'm talking about technology evolving new technology. It took human understanding to make the machines that can do this but once they're designed, machines can start designing machines. The human is taken out of the problem solving process. In that case, scientific understanding isn't needed to advance anything. You just say, "I want this," and the machine will randomly generate, evaluate, and reproduce solutions until the criteria is met. We may have no understanding of how the solution works in the case of something very complicated, but that doesn't matter because the machine designing it knows it will. This kind of evolution plays part in human society and I think it will play an even bigger part in the future. Scientific understanding is neccessary to a point.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

1. Jesus wasn't legalistic about his morals and how you should live. Jesus doesn't care what you do, good or bad, as long as you know what's good and what's bad, and you cover your ass for the bad stuff.

It doesn't matter what Jesus intended. The fact that it is a guideline on how to live is still relevant. This does not change the fact that religion seems far more concerned with how to live than why we are here. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the term, control mechanism, but I fail to see how that isn't an apt term.

2. You said 'what is the most important thing about Christianity,' not 'what is the most important thing to do with morales in Christianity.' Maybe if you had said that, I would've said the teachings of Jesus. But you didn't, and the fact of the matter is, that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message.

No, the fact of the matter is not that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message. That is your opinion, which may be shared with a good number of Christians that you know of and that you may speak to. I still disagree with you, because the Salvation Message has no bearing whatsoever on this life. Jesus' teachings are far more important than his death and resurrection, for ultimately, if people do not follow them it creates an oppressive atmosphere that is like Hell unto Earth, which makes people value life less.

The Salvation Message is a horrible one that helps to encourage weak people to focus on their afterlife instead of improving the world around us. It is the strong that ignore the Salvation Message and do good things irrespective of whether they will be rewarded or not.

3. Jesus really only had 2 guidelines. Love God, Love Others. Those are things you *should* do.

And I value them far more than Jesus' salvation, for ultimately, you cannot have salvation if you do not follow in his footsteps.

[Arturo]

No, the fact of the matter is not that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message. That is your opinion, which may be shared with a good number of Christians that you know of and that you may speak to. I still disagree with you, because the Salvation Message has no bearing whatsoever on this life. Jesus' teachings are far more important than his death and resurrection, for ultimately, if people do not follow them it creates an oppressive atmosphere that is like Hell unto Earth, which makes people value life less.

St. Paul says that's the most important part of Christianism.

1 Corinthians 15: 17:

And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.

And what St Paul says there is in the canonic Bible, and therefore, it's supposed to be true.

[Raien]

I'm talking about technology evolving new technology. It took human understanding to make the machines that can do this but once they're designed, machines can start designing machines. The human is taken out of the problem solving process. In that case, scientific understanding isn't needed to advance anything. You just say, "I want this," and the machine will randomly generate, evaluate, and reproduce solutions until the criteria is met. We may have no understanding of how the solution works in the case of something very complicated, but that doesn't matter because the machine designing it knows it will. This kind of evolution plays part in human society and I think it will play an even bigger part in the future. Scientific understanding is neccessary to a point.

Although I understand what you're saying, I don't think technological evolution reflects the entire situation regarding human society. The process of pen and paper did not need to be scientifically understood for it to be applied to human purposes, and as long as technology remains the process between human input and output, then it hasn't gone much farther than pen and paper. Human input, scientific process and human output always evolve together but the roles never change from the structure. And even though processes are not understood, human intelligence still develops in accordance with technology, hence the development of a computer-savvy population.

Changes in human society currently seem to be concentrated around the decline of farming and manufacturing and the rise of the entertainment industry. People are doing things less because they have to and more because they want to. The development of internet communications and technological understanding in the mainstream is making individual creativity more possible than ever before. In other words, just as technology is reaching the stage where it requires less scientific understanding, the human mind is becoming studied much more thoroughly so that people can understand and express themselves.

So I would say the development of humanity is: Evolution > Scientific Understanding > Creative Understanding

Edited by jhurvid, 01 June 2007 - 04:13 PM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

St. Paul says that's the most important part of Christianism.

And what St Paul says there is in the canonic Bible, and therefore, it's supposed to be true.

Yes, but St. Paul also claimed to have seen Jesus on the road to Damascus and that made him fall off his ride. Personally, I feel he was hitting the wine a bit hard.

[Arturo]

Ad hominem fallacy

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Actually, if you want to be precise, it's Ad hominem circumstantial. Frankly, St. Paul's claims just seem rather suspicious to me, which is why I don't trust anything he says.

[SOAP]

You might have good reason to. There's some rather convincing claims that Paul was a self-loathing sexually frustrated former homosexual. Don't know if it's true but it totally puts a different spin on everything he said. Was he so against homosexuality because it was morally wrong or because he was sick of all the other gays having all the fun and wanted to drag every man, homosexual or otherwise, down the same lonely lifestyle as his. If he couldn't have fun, no one could. :/

[Arturo]

Or maybe because he was a pharisee. And homosexuality was forbidden by the Books of the Law.

It seems much more likely, if you ask me.

[SOAP]

He could still be gay too, infact him being both a pharisee and gay makes sense because that explains why he still hated himself, despite converting to Christinianity. What was the constant thorn in side he kept referring too? Was he still having murderous thoughts against other Christians? I doubt taht.

Taking another look at Paul, I see a man who was always a stickler for the rules, a total Pharisee. He liked displine but the one thing he could not control was a desire in himself that was the most forbidden desire according to the laws he held so dear.

[SOAP]

1. Jesus wasn't legalistic about his morals and how you should live. Jesus doesn't care what you do, good or bad, as long as you know what's good and what's bad, and you cover your ass for the bad stuff.

It doesn't matter what Jesus intended. The fact that it is a guideline on how to live is still relevant. This does not change the fact that religion seems far more concerned with how to live than why we are here. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the term, control mechanism, but I fail to see how that isn't an apt term.

2. You said 'what is the most important thing about Christianity,' not 'what is the most important thing to do with morales in Christianity.' Maybe if you had said that, I would've said the teachings of Jesus. But you didn't, and the fact of the matter is, that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message.

No, the fact of the matter is not that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message. That is your opinion, which may be shared with a good number of Christians that you know of and that you may speak to. I still disagree with you, because the Salvation Message has no bearing whatsoever on this life. Jesus' teachings are far more important than his death and resurrection, for ultimately, if people do not follow them it creates an oppressive atmosphere that is like Hell unto Earth, which makes people value life less.

The Salvation Message is a horrible one that helps to encourage weak people to focus on their afterlife instead of improving the world around us. It is the strong that ignore the Salvation Message and do good things irrespective of whether they will be rewarded or not.

3. Jesus really only had 2 guidelines. Love God, Love Others. Those are things you *should* do.

And I value them far more than Jesus' salvation, for ultimately, you cannot have salvation if you do not follow in his footsteps.

Firstly, I don't understand what any of this has to do with evolution but oh well.

Secondly, yes religion about how people should live but honestly is their anything wrong with it's guidelines? Especially when it comes to helping the poor and oppressed which is emphasized a lot in the Bible. But there is more to it than that. It's about Love. God loving us. Us loving God and each other. That is the Why, not some stupid reward/punishment system that you perceived Christianity to be for some strange reason. Quite frankly I wouldn't care if I got into heaven or not or if it turns out that it never existed at all. Christianity has a lot of strong morals to live by and I will follow them regardless if there's any reward or not. In fact, the Bible says more than likely will suffer more for doing good than we ever did doing bad. Doing good for others just for the sake of doing good is the reward itself. Now other Christians may stress more on the heaven and hell thing and unfortunately they're the loudest. All I can say in our defense is that we Christians aren't perfect. Are we allowed to be human like everyone else or do we need special permission from the atheists?

Thirdly, I agree that the strong people are the ones who do good deeds for others, seeking no reward for themselves but I don't think they're the ones that are ignoring the Salvation Message because in effect, they're doing what Jesus did. Laying their lives/jobs/reputations/ect on the line for others with no thought for themselves. People who try to twist the Jesus' sacrifice around and try to use it as excuse to not lift a finger to do any good for anyone else in this life are the one's that are ignoring Christ's message. Jesus never said, just believe I existed and you're free to sit on your as till the afterlife comes. No. He said many times to take your old selfish desires, throw them out the window, and follow in his footsteps. It's not because we'll be rewarded in Heaven, even though the Bible teaches this. Heaven isn't important. It is, but not in the sense that you should only care about the fate of your own soul and not the souls the rest of the world. In fact, you should care more about other people than yourself. I would gladly go to hell if my soul was worth enough to switch places with at least one person destined for that fate. And even if there is no heaven and hell, I'd gladly suffer hell in this world so that those I love won't have to. Why? Because I love everyone and I hate suffering I don't want anyone in this world to suffer anymore, even those who consider me worthless.

Erm... Not really sure if me suffering would actually help anyone but my point is that I would do good irregardless if I was rewarded or not. I believe this to be the true Christian message. It's the answer to the "Why." The answer isn't my own selfish benefit. The answer is to be free from thinking of yourself and thinking of each other. And I know a lot Christians, online and off who share the same or similar beliefs.

That said, I wish to drop this whole thing and get back to talking about evolution. But you can, you know, do whatever.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Firstly, I don't understand what any of this has to do with evolution but oh well.

Because no one is going to debate against evolution, the entire topic has turned into a differences between religion and science topic.

Secondly, yes religion about how people should live but honestly is their anything wrong with it's guidelines? Especially when it comes to helping the poor and oppressed which is emphasized a lot in the Bible. But there is more to it than that. It's about Love. God loving us. Us loving God and each other. That is the Why, not some stupid reward/punishment system that you perceived Christianity to be for some strange reason.

I don't perceive to be that, but I do know that it can be interpreted that way and it's that part of Christianity I dislike.

And anyway you slice it, it's still a mechanism of sorts to get people to conform. Even if the conformation is entirely voluntary.

Thirdly, I agree that the strong people are the ones who do good deeds for others, seeking no reward for themselves but I don't think they're the ones that are ignoring the Salvation Message because in effect, they're doing what Jesus did.

Maybe not ignoring, per se, but really it has no effect onw hat they do, does it? If they're not doing it for salvation, the message has no real effect on them.

That said, I wish to drop this whole thing and get back to talking about evolution. But you can, you know, do whatever.

As much as I'd like to get back on topic, it would seem that the people who dislike evolution are avoiding this thread. Maybe they've already used their arguments in the other thread. Or perhaps they just don't want to argue against it. I suppose we should just leave this thread to die.

[SOAP]

I don't perceive to be that, but I do know that it can be interpreted that way and it's that part of Christianity I dislike.

And anyway you slice it, it's still a mechanism of sorts to get people to conform. Even if the conformation is entirely voluntary.

Fine, I'll give you that much. But you'd be under a system of control mechanisms regardless if you're religious or not. I'd stick to religion though because I'd like to think there's more to this universe than meets the eye. I don't know if God or heaven exists but theres' just sort of beauty in Christianity that I can't quite describe but I want to be a part of. I can't do that as a casual observer. I have to get into the religion to truly appreciate it for it is. That's why I get touchy when outsiders try to knock it down try to make it into something less than what is to me. Why if it wasn't for Christianity, I wouldn't bother with religion at all. It'd be much easier to be atheist like the majority of the world and not get labeled as "medieval" or "backward-minded". I'm sorry if I came off as whiny jerk though. I'm possessive my God, I guess; don't want anyone to take him away from me.

Edited by SOAP, 02 June 2007 - 05:52 AM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Frankly, I don't think atheism is any easier. You're constantly labelled by the other faiths as Satanic, evil, immoral etc. etc. Of course, it's not as bad over here in the UK, but I hear it can get very, very worse over there in the US.

[vodkamaru]

The majority of the world isn't atheist either.

[SOAP]

Frankly, I don't think atheism is any easier. You're constantly labelled by the other faiths as Satanic, evil, immoral etc. etc. Of course, it's not as bad over here in the UK, but I hear it can get very, very worse over there in the US.

If you don't believe such faiths then why does that bother you anymore than it should bother me than when Muslim or Jew says I'm going to hell for believing Jesus is God's son. It's not like the old days when it used to be you couldn't vote or have a fair trial if you didn't believe in some sort of higher power. The majority of the world is religious but aren't they religions like Buddhism which have no gods, and are technically atheists anyways? Unless you're only talking about the Western World which is mostly monotheistic and all arguably follow the same God, but it should be noted that [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of people say they're Christian, Muslim, Jewish, ect but don't believe in God and just remain in the faith for the community support and having a moral structure to their lives.

It's easier to *say* you're Christian because then people won't bug you about you going to hell for this or that. But on the flipside, it's hard to genuine live Christian life when everyone outside of Christianity thinks Christians in general are a bunch of bigoted assholes. The very word Christian has gained such a negative connotation that some missionaries don't even use it overseas anymore and opt to call themselves "Lovers of Christ" instead. I can be in mixed group of people of different beliefs and if I were to claim to be Christian, anything I'd say after that would be automatically rejected. I'm just "another Christian trying to ram my opinions down everyone's throats." But if I were the only Muslim, Buddhist, or even something more exotic like a follower of the Ba'hai Faith, I'd have all ears.

Also you don't always get support from other Christians too. If there's something you disagree with or don't understand, usually *YOU'RE* the one with the problem, not the church. If you don't give in and align with their cookie-cutter vision of what a Christian should, you get alienated and people ho are supposed to be you're Christian brothers and sisters start gossiping about you behind your back. It really makes me sick when churches do that and I tried complaining to the deacons but in the end it came down to the whole "their word against mines" and guess who's was more valued? So even if you claim to be Christian and do try to live a genuinely Christian life, and even try to go above and beyond that by helping the poor and such, it still wouldn't be enough to get the Hell talk off your back. Unlike the other gays at my church, I never believed homosexuality is wrong. They all went and got girlfriends and told everyone that they wanted to change but I didn't. And because of that, nothing I say or do matters because I don't believe homosexuality is wrong which means I'm demon possessed. Which I find totally ironic because they called Jesus demon possessed back in his time because he disagreed with the religious experts of his time.

Maybe I shouldn't have said being an atheist would be easier. But it's not necessarily any easier being Christian either. You still get labeled and talked about, even by people in the same faith. What IS easier to be a fake Christian who gossips about everyone else like it's the fraking gospel and the more you condemn others to hell, the less of a hard time you get from everyone else.

Edited by SOAP, 04 June 2007 - 05:37 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

The majority of the world isn't atheist either.

Who said it was?

Buddhism which have no gods, and are technically atheists anyways?

It's technically Agnostic. It has deities, but they're merely another realm of life.

[vodkamaru]

The majority of the world isn't atheist either.

Who said it was?

Sigh...

It'd be much easier to be atheist like the majority of the world and not get labeled as "medieval" or "backward-minded".

[Wolf O'Donnell]

SOAP, I didn't say atheism was any harder, I just said it wasn't any easier. Every single faith position and lack of faith position has its ups and downs.

[wisp]

The majority of the world isn't atheist either.

Who said it was?

Buddhism which have no gods, and are technically atheists anyways?

It's technically Agnostic. It has deities, but they're merely another realm of life.

Yeah... to my knowledge, they believe there are godlike beings, but that they're really just like human beings who have different abilities and characteristics... and that they are just as prone to making mistakes and doing things in the heat of anger or excitement as we are..

[Reflectionist]

1. Jesus wasn't legalistic about his morals and how you should live. Jesus doesn't care what you do, good or bad, as long as you know what's good and what's bad, and you cover your ass for the bad stuff.

It doesn't matter what Jesus intended. The fact that it is a guideline on how to live is still relevant. This does not change the fact that religion seems far more concerned with how to live than why we are here. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the term, control mechanism, but I fail to see how that isn't an apt term.

2. You said 'what is the most important thing about Christianity,' not 'what is the most important thing to do with morales in Christianity.' Maybe if you had said that, I would've said the teachings of Jesus. But you didn't, and the fact of the matter is, that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message.

No, the fact of the matter is not that the most important part of Christianity is the Salvation Message. That is your opinion, which may be shared with a good number of Christians that you know of and that you may speak to. I still disagree with you, because the Salvation Message has no bearing whatsoever on this life. Jesus' teachings are far more important than his death and resurrection, for ultimately, if people do not follow them it creates an oppressive atmosphere that is like Hell unto Earth, which makes people value life less.

The Salvation Message is a horrible one that helps to encourage weak people to focus on their afterlife instead of improving the world around us. It is the strong that ignore the Salvation Message and do good things irrespective of whether they will be rewarded or not.

3. Jesus really only had 2 guidelines. Love God, Love Others. Those are things you *should* do.

And I value them far more than Jesus' salvation, for ultimately, you cannot have salvation if you do not follow in his footsteps.

Well, considering you're obviously the number 1 source for all things Christianity, you should know what John 6:29 says.... right?

Well, it begins with the two words "Jesus said," so right off the bat, you can throw out any of your bullfat about this is only an opinion of a guy, or whatever you were saying about Paul. And it ends with ".This is the only work God wants from you: Believe in the One He has sent."

There's also a verse in the Bible that says that God uses the simple to confuse those who think they are wise.

Put 2 and 2 together, mr wise man

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Woo, personal attacks. A subtle one, indeed, but I think it still qualifies.

John 6:29 is something that can still be debated. At first, I accidentally looked up 6:26, which kinda didn't support your argument, but then I got to the right verse in the end.

To believe in the one he has sent.

Well, if you believe in Jesus, that means you should follow his example, doesn't it? You know, do good deeds, be good to other people.

[vodkamaru]

Hehehehehe... SCIENCE!

[Reflectionist]

Woo, personal attacks. A subtle one, indeed, but I think it still qualifies.

John 6:29 is something that can still be debated. At first, I accidentally looked up 6:26, which kinda didn't support your argument, but then I got to the right verse in the end.

To believe in the one he has sent.

Well, if you believe in Jesus, that means you should follow his example, doesn't it? You know, do good deeds, be good to other people.

Not necessarily, it says to believe IN Jesus. And while, yes, it would be wise to follow his example, it's not mandatory.

[wisp]

It also says faith without works is dead.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

And really, how can you prove your faith in Jesus with doing good works?

Well, I don't know... This debate has turned into another against-the-Bible debate, which isn't what I intended to do. Funny, seeing as how the religion debate turned into an Evolution one, and the purpose of this thread was to stop it from doing so.

[Arturo]

Because you can't say that you believe in Jesus, and act is if you didn't. And because you can go to teh heaven with good deeds, even if there is no faith (Catholic belief)

[wisp]

Yeah.. the way I always saw it, if one truly believed in Jesus, then one would believe in his teachings and would want to live up to them... so it's not really optional, for if the belief is really true then good works will automatically follow.

[Reflectionist]

Yeah.. the way I always saw it, if one truly believed in Jesus, then one would believe in his teachings and would want to live up to them... so it's not really optional, for if the belief is really true then good works will automatically follow.

Exactly. Want is the key word there, which makes it not really work. So the whole thing of being 'forced' and 'under control' is a stupid assumption.

I don't believe it's a set of rules, or a system of control. You're supposed to WANT to follow Jesus' teachings, follow in his example.

If you feel you're being forced to, then it is works without faith, which is not how you get to heaven.

Edited by Reflectionist, 09 June 2007 - 08:39 PM.