Ok you've picked up on the one point Ive messed up on, I admit I hav'nt got a great knowledge of other faiths, but are you debunking my whole point because I've made a mistake. It didn't matter whether I said Buddah or my cat, What happens to all the millions of people who are worshiping the wrong God/leader? Surely its not their fault being born into that culture. They genuinly believe they are worshipping the correct figurehead as much as Christians believe worshipping Jesus is correct. Only one group can be correct, if at all.
Why does Christianity change over time? Thing that would send you too hell a few hundred years ago are perfectly acceptable now. Did those people go to hell a few hundred years ago get a reprise later on when the Church decided that perhaps it isn't so bad after all? Thats just farce.
And pfflam, WTF is your last paragraph saying in English?
Why don't you all try and answer some of the other points I made regardless of whether I made a technical mistake...
I get pretty agressive when discussing faith/religion, because I strongly believe that there is no higher being/God, which is a kind of paradox i guess.
I am not taking pops at you personally, so there is no need to get offended. I love discussing this subject, but no-one can win. You'll never change my belief, and I know I'll never change yours. So let the arguments flow!!!
It's my personal beleif that all religion (mainly christian, jewish and islamic) is a sham for the privledged few to make boatloads of cash. I'm a christian (non denomination) but i don't believe in hell. Hell was made up in the middle ages to scare people into accepting the papal role in christianity. After Christ, christianity has been warped and bent to fit the needs of the higher ups, especially in integrating pagan rituals and beliefss into christianity. I haven't celebrated Christmas for many years. The hypocracy makes me sick.
<strong>It's my personal beleif that all religion (mainly christian, jewish and islamic) is a sham for the privledged few to make boatloads of cash. I'm a christian (non denomination) but i don't believe in hell. Hell was made up in the middle ages to scare people into accepting the papal role in christianity. After Christ, christianity has been warped and bent to fit the needs of the higher ups, especially in integrating pagan rituals and beliefss into christianity. I haven't celebrated Christmas for many years. The hypocracy makes me sick.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Really? Hell was mdae up in the middle ages? That is interesting. You have any evidence to prove this? Was it just put into the bible at random points for effect? You are basically saying that the Bile is wrong, flawed and not worth the paper it is written on, correct? If that is the case, where does your Moral foundation come from? What is your guidelines you follow? You cannot say the Bible from your view as it is flawed and incorrect. after all if one part is wrong, the whole work becomes suspect. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Was it just put into the bible at random points for effect? You are basically saying that the Bile is wrong, flawed and not worth the paper it is written on, correct? If that is the case, where does your Moral foundation come from? What is your guidelines you follow? You cannot say the Bible from your view as it is flawed and incorrect. after all if one part is wrong, the whole work becomes suspect.
Where does it say in the Bible about hell? Book/chapter/verse please. And for extra credit, verses from both the old and new testament.
<strong> [1] About Hell and Christianity: if you are a Christian because you are afraid of going to hell then you are selfish, which is unChristian of you. Wouldn't it be better to be a Christian because you love God.
[2] About forgiveness: good stuff, a profound attitude. But why would we be in need of being forgiven when we were not responcible for coming into the world, as we are -all screwed up and human?
[3]The way I see it, God is supposed to be all powerfull, therefor whatever God wants God gets: God wants to make me be unable to believe in Christianity and thereby go to hell, then that's what God gets, and because I trust in the universe (omniscient God) then I will love even the hell of it, as I would God.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[1] I don't fully agree with you here. Becoming a Christian because you don't want to go to hell is a legitimate reason. If that remains the entire reason of your realtionship with God then you have certainly missed the boat entirely. Besides, you cannot 'become' a christian by just saying, "Gee, I think I want to be a Christian." About the only part we are responsible for is Believing that Jesus is the Christ that died for our sins and asking for forgiveness of said sins. If you don't truly believe, you are not saved. God will not be mocked. He knows lip service when he hears it.
[2] Forgiveness is necessary. Thank Adam and Eve for not being happy with walking with God and listening to the serpent [Satan, or the Adversary in the Hebrew] and eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. That introduced sin into the world and because of that sin became a part of Man from that point on. Creation was cursed, but man bears the burden of sin. We are not responsible for being brought into the world, and we are not not responsible for being all screwed up to start with. But we are responsible for continuing to be all screwed up. It all comes down to free will. Which leads into the next statement.
[3] God is all powerful. God can do anything he pleases. God can make a person into a robot that only loves Him and can (has if I read the Bible right) harden a persons response to Him so that they refuse to do what they should do to further His purposes on earth; which He could do without humans if He wanted to.
Free will is at the core of this whole discussion. God created humans for one purpose. To worship Him and for companionship with him. And he gave that creation free will. You choose whether or not to beleive there is a God. You choose whether or not to cuss me out for being a narrow-minded bigot. You choose. There is nothing forcing you to do anything. There are however influences and God will influence you to do what is right (you have a conscience). As will other powers and pricipalities influence you to do whatever you want so long as you can get away with it. Is that getting beyond the scope of this conversation?
<strong>Where does it say in the Bible about hell? Book/chapter/verse please. And for extra credit, verses from both the old and new testament.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Here are a few refrences just to the word hell in the bible.
Matthew
5:22
5:29-30
10:28
18:9
23:15
23:33
Mark
9:43
9:45
9:47
Luke
12:5
16:23
James
3:6
2 Peter
2:4
That is all New Testament and for the most part the Red Letter portion (Jesus Speaking).
I will come up with more as I have more time. Some in Revelations talking about hell, and there is a bit in the OT about it as well, I just cannot recall where right now.
Do any of those explain the nature of Hell as it is understood today? Buning forever in fire? I don't have a Bible here at work but I'll look when I get home. Also what translation are you using? Are you interpreting the words Sheol and Gehenna as hell? The word hell is translated from the Hebrew word in the Old Testament "Sheol" which means "the place of the dead". In the New Testament the word is "Hades". The Greek word "Gehenna" is also used. "Gehenna" is translated to mean "a place of retribution for evil deeds."
I'm not good at writing rebuttles but I read <a href="http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/holloway/gresham 5 pt 1.htm" target="_blank">this</a> and I saw many of his points were well written. Now if you critisize the artcle remember I didn't write it, simply thought it was interesting.
<strong>Do any of those explain the nature of Hell as it is understood today? Buning forever in fire? I don't have a Bible here at work but I'll look when I get home. Also what translation are you using? Are you interpreting the words Sheol and Gehenna as hell? The word hell is translated from the Hebrew word in the Old Testament "Sheol" which means "the place of the dead". In the New Testament the word is "Hades". The Greek word "Gehenna" is also used. "Gehenna" is translated to mean "a place of retribution for evil deeds."
I'm not good at writing rebuttles but I read <a href="http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/holloway/gresham 5 pt 1.htm" target="_blank">this</a> and I saw many of his points were well written. Now if you critisize the artcle remember I didn't write it, simply thought it was interesting.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't read that right now, but I probably will later. As far as explaining hell as it is understood now, some of them talk about te fire of hell such as Matthew 5:22 in the last sentence. I am using the NIV Bible. (Nearly Inspired Version ) I am not sure about translations but I have heard many who say that NIV is very good as is New King James Version.
And as far as nitpicking what the literal translation of the Hebrew is for certain words, I usally let the scholars who wrote the translation I am reading handle that as I do not know Hebrew. Have you studied Hebrew? How many Years?
Read part of the article. It is easy to wite something where you pick that which makes your case. It is what many Christians are accused of doing time and time again. YOu cannot approach this issue on that level. People have a personal interest in believing and proving that there is no hell. Because if there is, a lot of people are going to be very uncomfortable forever.
Ont the other side of the coin, do I beleive that hell is all flames and torture by physical mistreatment. Maybe not. My interpretation of hell is much simpler. Hell is complete and total absence of God. Since God is everywhere here on Earth, this is not hell (although it sure seems likeit sometimes). But I think God will not be present in hell at all, and without God there is no love, no peace, no joy, no hope, no kindness, no self-control, no goodness, no faithfulness. These are all fruits of the Spirit. They cannot grow without water so hell will be spiritual death, which will be quite torturous I am sure.
Not so pictoral as fire and brimstone, But still not a nice thought.
This "magic underwear" you talk about are simply called "garments" by Mormons. I don't see the purpose of asking me if Mormons wear them or not when you know very well that they do... They are special and important based on the condition that you believe in what the Mormons believe..</strong>
"Holy," "Magic," "Special"... whatever... you're still ducking the question about how they are "special." Yes, I know that they wear them and that Steve Young credits them with sparing him injury in a car crash. So why don't you pull upon your vastly superior knowledge of the faith and edify us about their meaning without acting like their just another pair of Hanes.
Also, could you please explain what aspects of a religion are open to criticism or humor since the requirement for "holy undergarmets" an untouchable issue to you? Am I allowed to criticize the use of Burkhas by the Taliban? Can I make fun of the use of E-meters by scientologists? How about Madam Cleo's tarot card readings? What about that UFO cult that wants to clone themselves?
BTW, repeatedly calling all questions "stupid" is an incredibly powerful counter argument. I stand in awe.
I already talked about garments, what further explanation do you require? Do you have a specific question?
[quote]Also, could you please explain what aspects of a religion are open to criticism or humor since the requirement for "holy undergarmets" an untouchable issue to you?<hr></blockquote>
You can criticize anything you like, I haven't violated your right to do so.
I will disapprove, but if that's your problem then you need thicker skin if you're going to be attacking people and religions.
[quote] Am I allowed to criticize the use of Burkhas by the Taliban? Can I make fun of the use of E-meters by scientologists? How about Madam Cleo's tarot card readings? What about that UFO cult that wants to clone themselves?<hr></blockquote>
Sure, have at.
Just don't expect every person you encounter to bow at your feet and praise you for being critical.
It is your right to criticize, as it is mine. I choose to criticize your criticism. Am I not allowed to do that?
Hell is complete and total absence of God. Since God is everywhere here on Earth, this is not hell (although it sure seems likeit sometimes). But I think God will not be present in hell at all, and without God there is no love, no peace, no joy, no hope, no kindness, no self-control, no goodness, no faithfulness.
I can agree with that. I'm against the notion that hell is a firery place of torture (like demons anally poking you with splintery sticks and such). But if you're idea of the word translated as hell is what you spoke of then I'm in accordance.
On the other hand maybe I have pointy sticks in my future.
But if logic were true: By the definition of God as omnipresent and omniscient, there is no place God would not be: in fact there couldn't be a place without God: if there were, then the definition of omniscience and omnipresents would not be true: because that would mean that God lacked that place: Omniscience by definition lacks nothing. Therefor God is also in Hell: and therefor there is no complete and total absence of God. It is a logical impossibility.
My definition of God would have to be similar to Spinoza: God is that who's substance it is to Be.
and following that, but more elaborately, Heidegger and his ideas about the difference between Beings (things in the world) and Being.
<strong>I already talked about garments, what further explanation do you require? Do you have a specific question?</strong>
Seeing as how you haven't affirmed anything other than that Mormons do indeed wear them I can think of a whole lot of specific questions (some of which were already asked).
1. What exact property of the underwear would cause someone like Steve Young to believe that they protected him from injury in a car crash? Are they made out of Kevlar or do they emit a protective spiritual force field, sorta like superman's cape?
2. What are the consequences of a mormon not wearing them? Is it a requirement of the religion or just a suggestion? Can a Mormon get into heaven if he's wearing jockeys?
3. Are Mormon women required to wear any special underwear? If so, what color are they? Do they come in thongs and push-ups with garter's maybe? (Hey, if this is the case I can see why this religion would be pretty popular).
4. What, exactly do the special triangular nipple patches on the men's underwear represent? Do nipples have special meaning to Mormons?
5. Are there ceremonies where the "special" underwear is mandatory and other's where it's optional?
6. Is the special underwear consecrated by a Mormon priest or in any other way sanctified? Do you have to buy the underwear from the Mormon church or do they certify thrid party sellers?
7. How does one confirm that mormon underwear is really mormon underwear instead of some cheap counterfit magical underwear?
8. Is the design of the special underwear supposed to be handed down by God directly or did a Mormon prophet come up with it? Is there a passage in the book of mormon that goes something like, "And thou shall stich triangular patches about thy nipples."?
9. Is there an age requirement for wearing the underwear? I ask only because I never saw any kids at high school wearing it and we have a mormon church in town.
Now, as for your criteria for criticism- I don't recall suggesting that this was a first amendment issue and that either you or I were trying to repress each other's freedom of expression. I simply asked for your criteria for criticism. From your statements in this thread and elsewhere it would seem that the only thing you criticize is the criticism of religion. I freely admit that I will criticize any position that is based on irrational or unprovable suppositions. As to your criteria, I am left wondering whether you believe all religions are off limits to criticism or is it just the Mormon faith, or the Xian faith, or the belief in magic underwear.
Comments
Ok you've picked up on the one point Ive messed up on, I admit I hav'nt got a great knowledge of other faiths, but are you debunking my whole point because I've made a mistake. It didn't matter whether I said Buddah or my cat, What happens to all the millions of people who are worshiping the wrong God/leader? Surely its not their fault being born into that culture. They genuinly believe they are worshipping the correct figurehead as much as Christians believe worshipping Jesus is correct. Only one group can be correct, if at all.
Why does Christianity change over time? Thing that would send you too hell a few hundred years ago are perfectly acceptable now. Did those people go to hell a few hundred years ago get a reprise later on when the Church decided that perhaps it isn't so bad after all? Thats just farce.
And pfflam, WTF is your last paragraph saying in English?
Why don't you all try and answer some of the other points I made regardless of whether I made a technical mistake...
[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: MarcUK ]</p>
I get pretty agressive when discussing faith/religion, because I strongly believe that there is no higher being/God, which is a kind of paradox i guess.
I am not taking pops at you personally, so there is no need to get offended. I love discussing this subject, but no-one can win. You'll never change my belief, and I know I'll never change yours. So let the arguments flow!!!
<strong>My last paragraph is my way of saying that my athiesm is God's will and I love even that since I love God so much</strong><hr></blockquote>
Assuming I understand athiesm correctly (non believer)
Now that is a truly fvcked up statement
[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: MarcUK ]</p>
<strong>It's my personal beleif that all religion (mainly christian, jewish and islamic) is a sham for the privledged few to make boatloads of cash. I'm a christian (non denomination) but i don't believe in hell. Hell was made up in the middle ages to scare people into accepting the papal role in christianity. After Christ, christianity has been warped and bent to fit the needs of the higher ups, especially in integrating pagan rituals and beliefss into christianity. I haven't celebrated Christmas for many years. The hypocracy makes me sick.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Really? Hell was mdae up in the middle ages? That is interesting. You have any evidence to prove this? Was it just put into the bible at random points for effect? You are basically saying that the Bile is wrong, flawed and not worth the paper it is written on, correct? If that is the case, where does your Moral foundation come from? What is your guidelines you follow? You cannot say the Bible from your view as it is flawed and incorrect. after all if one part is wrong, the whole work becomes suspect. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Where does it say in the Bible about hell? Book/chapter/verse please. And for extra credit, verses from both the old and new testament.
<strong> [1] About Hell and Christianity: if you are a Christian because you are afraid of going to hell then you are selfish, which is unChristian of you. Wouldn't it be better to be a Christian because you love God.
[2] About forgiveness: good stuff, a profound attitude. But why would we be in need of being forgiven when we were not responcible for coming into the world, as we are -all screwed up and human?
[3]The way I see it, God is supposed to be all powerfull, therefor whatever God wants God gets: God wants to make me be unable to believe in Christianity and thereby go to hell, then that's what God gets, and because I trust in the universe (omniscient God) then I will love even the hell of it, as I would God.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[1] I don't fully agree with you here. Becoming a Christian because you don't want to go to hell is a legitimate reason. If that remains the entire reason of your realtionship with God then you have certainly missed the boat entirely. Besides, you cannot 'become' a christian by just saying, "Gee, I think I want to be a Christian." About the only part we are responsible for is Believing that Jesus is the Christ that died for our sins and asking for forgiveness of said sins. If you don't truly believe, you are not saved. God will not be mocked. He knows lip service when he hears it.
[2] Forgiveness is necessary. Thank Adam and Eve for not being happy with walking with God and listening to the serpent [Satan, or the Adversary in the Hebrew] and eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. That introduced sin into the world and because of that sin became a part of Man from that point on. Creation was cursed, but man bears the burden of sin. We are not responsible for being brought into the world, and we are not not responsible for being all screwed up to start with. But we are responsible for continuing to be all screwed up. It all comes down to free will. Which leads into the next statement.
[3] God is all powerful. God can do anything he pleases. God can make a person into a robot that only loves Him and can (has if I read the Bible right) harden a persons response to Him so that they refuse to do what they should do to further His purposes on earth; which He could do without humans if He wanted to.
Free will is at the core of this whole discussion. God created humans for one purpose. To worship Him and for companionship with him. And he gave that creation free will. You choose whether or not to beleive there is a God. You choose whether or not to cuss me out for being a narrow-minded bigot. You choose. There is nothing forcing you to do anything. There are however influences and God will influence you to do what is right (you have a conscience). As will other powers and pricipalities influence you to do whatever you want so long as you can get away with it. Is that getting beyond the scope of this conversation?
<strong>Where does it say in the Bible about hell? Book/chapter/verse please. And for extra credit, verses from both the old and new testament.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Here are a few refrences just to the word hell in the bible.
Matthew
5:22
5:29-30
10:28
18:9
23:15
23:33
Mark
9:43
9:45
9:47
Luke
12:5
16:23
James
3:6
2 Peter
2:4
That is all New Testament and for the most part the Red Letter portion (Jesus Speaking).
I will come up with more as I have more time. Some in Revelations talking about hell, and there is a bit in the OT about it as well, I just cannot recall where right now.
I'm not good at writing rebuttles but I read <a href="http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/holloway/gresham 5 pt 1.htm" target="_blank">this</a> and I saw many of his points were well written. Now if you critisize the artcle remember I didn't write it, simply thought it was interesting.
<strong>Do any of those explain the nature of Hell as it is understood today? Buning forever in fire? I don't have a Bible here at work but I'll look when I get home. Also what translation are you using? Are you interpreting the words Sheol and Gehenna as hell? The word hell is translated from the Hebrew word in the Old Testament "Sheol" which means "the place of the dead". In the New Testament the word is "Hades". The Greek word "Gehenna" is also used. "Gehenna" is translated to mean "a place of retribution for evil deeds."
I'm not good at writing rebuttles but I read <a href="http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/holloway/gresham 5 pt 1.htm" target="_blank">this</a> and I saw many of his points were well written. Now if you critisize the artcle remember I didn't write it, simply thought it was interesting.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't read that right now, but I probably will later. As far as explaining hell as it is understood now, some of them talk about te fire of hell such as Matthew 5:22 in the last sentence. I am using the NIV Bible. (Nearly Inspired Version
And as far as nitpicking what the literal translation of the Hebrew is for certain words, I usally let the scholars who wrote the translation I am reading handle that as I do not know Hebrew. Have you studied Hebrew? How many Years?
Ont the other side of the coin, do I beleive that hell is all flames and torture by physical mistreatment. Maybe not. My interpretation of hell is much simpler. Hell is complete and total absence of God. Since God is everywhere here on Earth, this is not hell (although it sure seems likeit sometimes). But I think God will not be present in hell at all, and without God there is no love, no peace, no joy, no hope, no kindness, no self-control, no goodness, no faithfulness. These are all fruits of the Spirit. They cannot grow without water so hell will be spiritual death, which will be quite torturous I am sure.
Not so pictoral as fire and brimstone, But still not a nice thought.
<strong>
This "magic underwear" you talk about are simply called "garments" by Mormons. I don't see the purpose of asking me if Mormons wear them or not when you know very well that they do... They are special and important based on the condition that you believe in what the Mormons believe..</strong>
"Holy," "Magic," "Special"... whatever... you're still ducking the question about how they are "special." Yes, I know that they wear them and that Steve Young credits them with sparing him injury in a car crash. So why don't you pull upon your vastly superior knowledge of the faith and edify us about their meaning without acting like their just another pair of Hanes.
Also, could you please explain what aspects of a religion are open to criticism or humor since the requirement for "holy undergarmets" an untouchable issue to you? Am I allowed to criticize the use of Burkhas by the Taliban? Can I make fun of the use of E-meters by scientologists? How about Madam Cleo's tarot card readings? What about that UFO cult that wants to clone themselves?
BTW, repeatedly calling all questions "stupid" is an incredibly powerful counter argument. I stand in awe.
[ 02-11-2002: Message edited by: Nordstrodamus ]</p>
[quote]Also, could you please explain what aspects of a religion are open to criticism or humor since the requirement for "holy undergarmets" an untouchable issue to you?<hr></blockquote>
You can criticize anything you like, I haven't violated your right to do so.
I will disapprove, but if that's your problem then you need thicker skin if you're going to be attacking people and religions.
[quote] Am I allowed to criticize the use of Burkhas by the Taliban? Can I make fun of the use of E-meters by scientologists? How about Madam Cleo's tarot card readings? What about that UFO cult that wants to clone themselves?<hr></blockquote>
Sure, have at.
Just don't expect every person you encounter to bow at your feet and praise you for being critical.
It is your right to criticize, as it is mine. I choose to criticize your criticism. Am I not allowed to do that?
I can agree with that. I'm against the notion that hell is a firery place of torture (like demons anally poking you with splintery sticks and such). But if you're idea of the word translated as hell is what you spoke of then I'm in accordance.
On the other hand maybe I have pointy sticks in my future.
But if logic were true: By the definition of God as omnipresent and omniscient, there is no place God would not be: in fact there couldn't be a place without God: if there were, then the definition of omniscience and omnipresents would not be true: because that would mean that God lacked that place: Omniscience by definition lacks nothing. Therefor God is also in Hell: and therefor there is no complete and total absence of God. It is a logical impossibility.
My definition of God would have to be similar to Spinoza: God is that who's substance it is to Be.
and following that, but more elaborately, Heidegger and his ideas about the difference between Beings (things in the world) and Being.
[ 02-11-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</p>
<strong>I already talked about garments, what further explanation do you require? Do you have a specific question?</strong>
Seeing as how you haven't affirmed anything other than that Mormons do indeed wear them I can think of a whole lot of specific questions (some of which were already asked).
1. What exact property of the underwear would cause someone like Steve Young to believe that they protected him from injury in a car crash? Are they made out of Kevlar or do they emit a protective spiritual force field, sorta like superman's cape?
2. What are the consequences of a mormon not wearing them? Is it a requirement of the religion or just a suggestion? Can a Mormon get into heaven if he's wearing jockeys?
3. Are Mormon women required to wear any special underwear? If so, what color are they? Do they come in thongs and push-ups with garter's maybe? (Hey, if this is the case I can see why this religion would be pretty popular).
4. What, exactly do the special triangular nipple patches on the men's underwear represent? Do nipples have special meaning to Mormons?
5. Are there ceremonies where the "special" underwear is mandatory and other's where it's optional?
6. Is the special underwear consecrated by a Mormon priest or in any other way sanctified? Do you have to buy the underwear from the Mormon church or do they certify thrid party sellers?
7. How does one confirm that mormon underwear is really mormon underwear instead of some cheap counterfit magical underwear?
8. Is the design of the special underwear supposed to be handed down by God directly or did a Mormon prophet come up with it? Is there a passage in the book of mormon that goes something like, "And thou shall stich triangular patches about thy nipples."?
9. Is there an age requirement for wearing the underwear? I ask only because I never saw any kids at high school wearing it and we have a mormon church in town.
Now, as for your criteria for criticism- I don't recall suggesting that this was a first amendment issue and that either you or I were trying to repress each other's freedom of expression. I simply asked for your criteria for criticism. From your statements in this thread and elsewhere it would seem that the only thing you criticize is the criticism of religion. I freely admit that I will criticize any position that is based on irrational or unprovable suppositions. As to your criteria, I am left wondering whether you believe all religions are off limits to criticism or is it just the Mormon faith, or the Xian faith, or the belief in magic underwear.
[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: Nordstrodamus ]</p>