[Janos]

Well, he [Trashman the Lightbringer] has a point.
 Even though I'm an atheist, the idea of church ideas (the Big Ideas, not some trivial **** like birth control or gay marriage) changing to suit the times better is somewhat repulsive - for me. I wonder when we have Church Inc., with quarter year announcements and "A renewed secular school of thought for a new person of 21st century!". Durrrr.

(Neither speaking for total stagnation or taking an I AM THE ICONOCLAST attitude, both are stupid.)

[Ghostavo]

I'd be more inclined to say "being what it is supposed to be," rather than "doing its job." At least, "being what it is supposed to be" is what is outlined in the definition of perfect that you posted above. If you are finding the term is not helpful for expressing what you want to express, perhaps you might try another term?

Since I will continue to use perfect in the sense of the definition posted, I ask: why is it impossible to have a perfect human being?

Then there's a problem with that definition... everything in nature is exactly what is supposed to be... terrorists are exactly who they are supposed to be (terrorists). If that definition was true, everyone is supposed to be perfect!! If this is not what you wanted to express then what is a man/woman supposed to be? If that is the case then why are we all not perfect? Or at least some of us... or even only one person in the whole world? And what is god supposed to be? And isn't death itself imperfection? Isn't the purpose of man/woman to live?

In your definition sure it is possible... but that is not exactly what I was asking. I fear this has to do with my strange/"imperfect" definition of perfect (aka "godlike"). But even so please "enlighten" me on the matters I expressed and will express in this post.

Now I'm beginning to see where we diverge... you're saying that only after making such a choice were they perfect. I'm saying that due to the choice they made they couldn't be perfect before. So the main point of this is... can perfection be lost or does perfection endures forever?

1 - Yes, sorry... I meant imperfect.

2 - Everything is caused by something. If that is your true definition of free will, it can't exist. You very existence is caused by something happening. You opinion will always depend on something happening.

3 - Yes... my mistake. So god can become imperfect...

Another off discussion question. Why didn't god create more inteligent animals (not quantity, quality)?

Note - I'm only here to discuss, learn about this and maybe if lucky teach. I'm not here to critisise any belief system as I would have the rights to do so.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Kazan
TrashMan keeping us in the darkages since the late 1990s

I'm not keeping anyone in the midle ages....Some thing simply mus not be prone to changes.
If a religion changes itself simply to suit more a few spoiled brats and gain a few more worshippers, that is not a religion worth following...
Don't get me wrong - some thing should be changed (and have been changed allready), but that are minor, strictly "esthetical" things...
Some principles and laws must never change...NEVER!...or it will truly lead us to the dark ages...

As far as gay marriage goes, a state wedding? Why not...the state is crazy enough... But a Church wedding? No...never...ever...

[Ghostavo]

some thing should be changed (and have been changed allready), but that are minor, strictly "esthetical" things...

As far as gay marriage goes, a state wedding? Why not...the state is crazy enough... But a Church wedding? No...never...ever...

[Ace]

Originally posted by Janos
Well, he [Trashman the Lightbringer] has a point.
 Even though I'm an atheist, the idea of church ideas (the Big Ideas, not some trivial **** like birth control or gay marriage) changing to suit the times better is somewhat repulsive - for me. I wonder when we have Church Inc., with quarter year announcements and "A renewed secular school of thought for a new person of 21st century!". Durrrr.

(Neither speaking for total stagnation or taking an I AM THE ICONOCLAST attitude, both are stupid.)

Yeah, to be honest stuff like that (churches changing from the traditional worship, theology, etc.) pisses me off.

What's even more pathetic are the fundamentalist denominations (who claim to be "non-demoninational") in the area who try to attract people with "Contemporary Worship" which has nothing to do with a religious service. It's a bunch of people singing and dancing 'Chrisitian music'. It turns religion into entertainment as opposed to a spiritual experience.

[Flipside]

I still fail to see why Gay Marriages are a problem, funny thing is that most religions are against it.
I suppose, in my opinion, the reason for that is simple, Gay Men don't make more followers, and if theres one thing religion relies on, it's force of numbers.
Morality is such a dangerous trap to fall into, from the point of view of many people, America is an immoral and wasteful country, I'm not here to judge that, but, it just goes to prove how many different points of view are involved.
I suppose if it can't happen in churches, it's no big deal really, it's not as if the couple are any less married, and God is everywhere, so he's obviously ok with it, considering there are enough Gay Men in the US to populate Soddem AND Gomorrah (sp) a couple of times over, and we are yet to see any sign of wrathulating.

Being scared of Gays is perfectly natural I suppose, Lesbians tend to be ok, because they pamper to our more polygomous side, deep inside, we all still want territory and mates.

However gay men are another matter for many people. The whole idea of penetration, of being 'under the sexual power' of another man is scary to them, hell, even I feel a little wierd when I word it that way, it's a 100% normal reaction. It all traces back to precisely the same thing really, it's a dominance issue.

Men all yearn to be the 'leader of the pack' to have the most territory and mates, our whole genetic makeup rebels at the idea of anything else.
This does not make homosexuality wrong, it just means that we find it easier to react to our primal fear of being dominated, and of not being in control of a situation than use reason and intelligence.

On the issue of sects and sub-religions, these are inevitable. I suppose I will never have faith in any Holy Book that says it's ok to kill for any reason, because once a Human being is given a get out clause (righteous killing, religious killing, revenge killing etc etc etc) he will beat himself, and several other people to death with it.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Flipside
I still fail to see why Gay Marriages are a problem, funny thing is that most religions are against it.

Gay marriage is immoral because it violates God's design for a man and a woman entering into a mutual complementary partnership.  It's fundamental to humanity's job on Earth and it's been ingrained on our psyche since the beginning of civilization.  Satan knows better than to challenge it directly, so he's trying to wear it down gradually behind the scenes: promoting it as natural, establishing an alternative lifestyle, and framing it as a civil rights issue.  It's no more natural than someone marrying his horse.

[Kazan]

goober5000: tell me you don't honestly believe that

[Grey Wolf]

The entire concept of gay marriage really rests on your view of two things. Do you consider sex for just procreation, or procreation and pleasure? And do you consider marriage a civil institution, or a religious institution? All other points are superfluous.

[Omniscaper]

Originally posted by Ace


Yeah, to be honest stuff like that (churches changing from the traditional worship, theology, etc.) pisses me off.

What's even more pathetic are the fundamentalist denominations (who claim to be "non-demoninational") in the area who try to attract people with "Contemporary Worship" which has nothing to do with a religious service. It's a bunch of people singing and dancing 'Chrisitian music'. It turns religion into entertainment as opposed to a spiritual experience.

What is the basis of that opinion? Do you even understand and respect "traditional worship"? If not, I don't expect a change of attitude toward "contemporary worship."

How would you define a "spiritual experience?" Hippies on LSD would call many of their trips a spiritual experience as well. Would you accept that as a valid spiriual experience?

What you consider "contemporary" is actually quite old, going way back to John the Baptist (BC period) or perhaps even further. The only thing really contemporary about your "non-denominational" worship is the music.

[Omniscaper]

I was raised Roman Catholic and went through all the sacraments up to "confirmation". Organ music, confession, rosaries, etc... you name it, I did it. I was an alterboy and attended a Catholic grade school as well. So many of traditions and rituals that I never bothered to question became a normal part of my life... er, um Sundays. That was all I knew of spirituallity.

My attending a public high school opened my eyes to a world of different perspectives on life. Science and world history came into the picture. I found evolution to be quite convincing, and astronomy to be overwhelming. The intricacies of biology and chemistry, oceanaography, and especially astronomy shifted my brain to a different gear.  History and art history classes taught about the history/religions/mythology of the Middle East, India, Egypt, as well as early Roman catholicism in Europe. I made a number of friends who were athiests, agnostics, hippies, and stoners. At that point, Christianity in my head started to become another scientifically baseless blind faith religion among many others.

My folks then dragged the family to a non-denominational Christian service. QUITE A CHANGE from the usual Sunday church mass. My usuall Sunday morning nap and day dreaming session was now impossible because the mellow church organ was replaced with loud electric guitars, digital drums, keyboard, and vocalists. I thought my parents were taking us to some concert. It was quite a strange experience to hear christian rock and seeing a sea of people all into it, clapping and swaying instead of the heads down, hands folded to gothic organ symphony. I was around the age of 16 at the time and I was cracking up at the sight of this. Then a robeless and hatless person I assumed was a priest came up and started reading and analyzing Bible passages and their practical applications in everyday life while making historical and even scientific references. He even provided some references to look up so people don't just take his word for it. He even told everyone to think for themselves and challenged the congragation to do the research on various things. That very gesture got me very interested. A church that concentrated on an objective and spiritual study of the Bible and prayer was quite compelling. The real kicker was the end of the service when the pastor said that salvation only comes through divine grace and trusting on it. An inner personal acceptance for what Jesus did on the cross and an admission of being a sinner in order to become "born again" in Christ.

No elaborate ceremony involving incense and candles, no priest to confess sins to, but a personal intimate relationship with God using the Bible as the guide to know Him better. This changed my view on Christianity drastically. I've been with that congragation for over 4 years now I am more active as Christian, now then when I was attending a Roman Catholic church. I never thought I'd ever find myself ever reading a Bible during my train rides to school.

[Kazan]

and only proved one thing, and that is a property of you



[edit]
bah s/l/t

[Rictor]

And you can only ever hope to prove that same thing Kazan, that athiesm is proper for you. Nothing more.

[Ace]

Originally posted by Omniscaper


What is the basis of that opinion? Do you even understand and respect "traditional worship"? If not, I don't expect a change of attitude toward "contemporary worship."

How would you define a "spiritual experience?" Hippies on LSD would call many of their trips a spiritual experience as well. Would you accept that as a valid spiriual experience?

What you consider "contemporary" is actually quite old, going way back to John the Baptist (BC period) or perhaps even further. The only thing really contemporary about your "non-denominational" worship is the music.

First off, insulting someone and claiming they do not understand something because they don't agree with your point of view is not a way of having a conversation.

Fortunately, your second post has information that shows your point of view.

Now, I do apologize for using harsher lanuage such as "pathetic" in my earlier post and I will now explain my position:

Going to an Episcopal Church many years after moving from Seattle, (where as I child my parents and I went to a Unitarian Church) with a fun and open minded priest interested me in the history of that church as well as the Roman Catholic church.

Early on when learning more about Christianity I was slightly disturbed by the fact that people seemed to worship Jesus as opposed to God. Fortunately Father Robin, the priest there said that it's alright to have some problems with the idea of the trinity and mentioned how the idea first came to be the main accepted one. (i.e. council of nicea, etc.)

After he retired, we gained a priest who was a good accountant but a poor theologian and no longer wanted to do any outreach for the community. Even simple things such as donations for the local homeless shelter.

Since then I've had a bit of a falling out with organized religion after seeing two extemes. A very active and compassionate priest and another who treated it as a franchise of a business.

I have had several friends in college who are fundamentalists who are into the contemporary worship. From my experience with it, the people involved seem to spew rhetoric as opposed to actually apply examples of religion to their lives, as well as do not help the community except to arrive conveniently during a political scandal to garner attention for their congregation. A casino moving into a town to the north is an example of this, and amazingly drinking and driving and crime rates have not risen in the town despite the claims of a priest whose name I'd rather not mention.

In the last few years after seeing what people do in the name of God I've returned to the conclusion I made as a child: There is no need for a God to exist, except for the need of a person for a God to exist.

I do have respect for religious people who actually help their community, but those who claim the Devil is around every corner and is here to destroy us all here and now at best have my apathy.

[Omniscaper]

I'm sorry Ace if my first post was taken as an insult. I was asking if you understood, I wasn't claiming that you didn't. I wasn't sure where you were coming from and the word "pathetic" being used without some form of back up caught my attention. Perhaps I could have worded it more friendly by removing "even" in that sentence.

Believe me, I am not blind to hypocrasy and double standards in  Christian oganizations. At times of weakness, I find myself stepping over the line when feelings of pride are allowed to pervail. Actions will always speak louder than words and many people who call themselves christians perform actions that prove otherwise.

The other week I was in a subway and two guys started speaking rediculously loud about the sins of NY and the pending damnation. At some point the homosexual issue was brought up and a passanger started screaming back. One of the loud mouths then said something about sensing a "gay" spirit in his midst. He would then take out a Bible and screamed at people to read it then join their church.

I was so filled with anger. The anger was fueled by the very notion that every person who had no knowledge of what Christianity is really all about in that train, now have a twisted negative view of it.  I wanted to confront those guys publicly and point out the serious flaw in their approach. I composed myself and realized that such a public confrontation was counter productive. I felt my knowledge of Biblical teachings was still insufficient to engage in a private one on one chastizing discussion about Christianity with one of them. More reason for me to continue learning.

Jesus treated everyone with respect and dignity. He reached out to people in a human level. He never talked down to people.

Matthew 24:4-5 warns, “Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ [that Jesus is the Messiah]; and shall deceive many.”

This passage keeps me going when I witness such sickening things.

The only time Jesus went ballistic was when He saw The Holy Temple filled with "thieves and robbers" with their merchant stands and stuffs. His anger was rightfully focused on the desecration of the Temple's sanctity.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Rictor
And you can only ever hope to prove that same thing Kazan, that athiesm is proper for you. Nothing more.

i typed the wrong word, go back and look again

(Actually my points have already been PROVEN - some people just fail to accept them)

[Grey Wolf]

From a theological point of view, the men in the subway are the same as the merchants in the temple.  "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?" (1 Corinthians). Hence, their negative approach and attempts to convert were both blasphemy (taking the Lord's name in vain) and sacrilege (defiling His temple).

[Shrike]

34 pages and I bet not one person has had their opinions changed to any significant degree.

I simply don't see the point of arguing over faith.  It's faith.  You can't prove or disprove it.

[Grey Wolf]

Umm..... At least if we have this thread, it doesn't contaminate the other threads as much. It still does spread, but not as much as it could.

[jdjtcagle]

Originally posted by Shrike
34 pages and I bet not one person has had their opinions changed to any significant degree.

I simply don't see the point of arguing over faith.  It's faith.  You can't prove or disprove it.

Excactly what I was saying in my earlier threads:nod: