ZEFRANK.COM - message board  

Go Back   ZEFRANK.COM - message board > DEBATE HALL
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 16 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 03-07-2005, 08:55 PM   #286
Smartypants
MR. Smartypants to you.
 
Smartypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oh, YOU PEOPLE go ahead and call it "Frisco." See if I care.
Posts: 3,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckie egg
"Suffering is not part of God's original created order (Genesis 1-2). There was no suffering in the world before humanity rebelled against God. Suffering only entered the world because Adam & Eve sinned. It is, therefore, an alien intrusion in God's world. If all suffering is a result of sin, directly or indirectly, why did God allow sin to enter the world?
He did so because he loves us and wanted to give us free will. Love is not love if it is forced; it can only be love if there is a real choice. God gave human beings the choice and the freedom to love or not to love. Given this freedom, men and women from the beginning have chosen to break God's laws and the result has been suffering.
Why do you believe this?! Why is it that just because it is written in that book, it MUST be true. Sam Harris writes about this odd quality of the faithful:
"Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence whatsoever."
He adds:
"How can any person presume to know ... the way the universe works? Because it says so in our holy books. How do we know that our holy books are free from error? Because the books themselves say so."
Harris has a point. The illogic of clinging to biblical "truths" in this day and age, with so much man has discovered about his universe since the first bible story was invented -- discoveries that disprove so much of ancient beliefs -- is mind-boggling!
__________________

"I don't think God wants us to believe in him. If he wanted us to believe in him he'd do something about it -- like exist perhaps!" --Linda Smith
Smartypants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2005, 08:58 PM   #287
Smartypants
MR. Smartypants to you.
 
Smartypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oh, YOU PEOPLE go ahead and call it "Frisco." See if I care.
Posts: 3,967
And if I may add: Ilidbot, you are an idiot. (Or did I already say that once before?)
__________________

"I don't think God wants us to believe in him. If he wanted us to believe in him he'd do something about it -- like exist perhaps!" --Linda Smith
Smartypants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2005, 09:36 PM   #288
chuckie egg
a peach
 
chuckie egg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 4,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartypants
You say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to. Since "sin" is a subjective term based on what one's religion allows, a better way of stating might just as well be: "Much of the suffering in the world is the result of one religious group not tolerating the actions or beliefs of another." Or, more succinctly, "Religious intolerance is the root of most suffering."
Okay, point taken. Just for the sake of it... take out the word 'sin' and replace with the 'wrong-doing.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartypants
Why do you believe this?! Why is it that just because it is written in that book, it MUST be true.
I never said that. I'm just using a quote that I happen to agree with.
chuckie egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2005, 09:44 PM   #289
Smartypants
MR. Smartypants to you.
 
Smartypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oh, YOU PEOPLE go ahead and call it "Frisco." See if I care.
Posts: 3,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckie egg
Okay, point taken. Just for the sake of it... take out the word 'sin' and replace with the 'wrong-doing.'
Well, except that it's not simply wrong-doing; It's wrong-doing as defined by religion. Man has never created so much suffering as he has demanding adherence to his religious beliefs. (Yet, contrary to what you believe, he has NEVER created ANY suffering -- through natural disaster, disease, or any other means -- by angering a god.)
__________________

"I don't think God wants us to believe in him. If he wanted us to believe in him he'd do something about it -- like exist perhaps!" --Linda Smith
Smartypants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2005, 09:52 PM   #290
Smartypants
MR. Smartypants to you.
 
Smartypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oh, YOU PEOPLE go ahead and call it "Frisco." See if I care.
Posts: 3,967
Quote:
Given this freedom, men and women from the beginning have chosen to break God's laws and the result has been suffering.
This is such a tired idea! Imagine if men and women exercised their "god-given" free will, and there was no bible. Would you truly think God steps in to make them suffer? Of course not. The suffering is caused by man, taking it upon himself to punish others and make them suffer in the name of God. Without his rule book, man would have no justification for his barbarism. And in the 21st Century, we know better than to believe locusts, diseases, or severe weather are the result of God's wrath.
__________________

"I don't think God wants us to believe in him. If he wanted us to believe in him he'd do something about it -- like exist perhaps!" --Linda Smith

Last edited by Smartypants : 03-07-2005 at 09:59 PM.
Smartypants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2005, 11:40 PM   #291
madasacutsnake
no more nice girl
 
madasacutsnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckie egg

This leaves a small proportion which can only be explained as being the result of the fact that we live in a fallen world: a world where all creation has been affected by the sin of human beings. It is the result of Adam & Eve's sin that 'thorns and thistles' entered the world (Genesis 3:18). Ever since that time 'the creation was subject to frustration' (Romans 8:20). 'Natural' disasters are a result of this disorder in creation.
Human freedom does not always answer the question why a particular individual or nation suffers so much, but it does help explain the origin of suffering. All suffering is the result of sin, either directly as a result of my own sin, or someone elses, or indirectly, as a result of living in a fallen world."
So some asshole rapes and murders some-one on one side of the world and a whole lot of little children die in a big wave on the other side of the world.

I mark that explanation with a big "must do better".

*remembers now why she left the church*
__________________
He really shatters the myth of white supremacy once and for all.
madasacutsnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2005, 02:23 AM   #292
craig johnston
dalai clique
 
craig johnston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: tea leaf towers - home of fine musical entertainment
Posts: 5,609
well thanks ce for stating your case.
i think smarty p has said what i would have, but much more eloquently.
it all seems so alien and strange to me, so illogical and anachronistic
that i have great difficulty discussing it. the whole sin idea is really
hard for me to approach as i find it so repulsive and destructive.
i am left feeling sad to be honest.
__________________
the tea leaf family
craig johnston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2005, 03:41 AM   #293
topcat
monkey
 
topcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: across the st. from the telephone pole
Posts: 1,970
adam should have banged steve instead of eve
__________________
the most tip top topcat

This is an internet bulletin board.

Nothing more. Nothing less
topcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2005, 01:20 PM   #294
Saxifrage
monkey
 
Saxifrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Angband
Posts: 411
Actually I have no particular feelings about you one way or the other, I just take my oportunities to be silly and run with them. It was all meant in fun, don't take it so hard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I lidbotLl l
the wheel o' hate turns,
saxifridge no like lidbot,
willow tags along,
hate and insecurity rule the majority of people,
yet clytie claims fear of nothing?
__________________
The Dude abides.
Saxifrage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2005, 08:06 PM   #295
I lidbotLl l
moving on
 
I lidbotLl l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: alone in a maze
Posts: 243
who said i like to take it hard?
i mean was taking it hard
I lidbotLl l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 02:53 PM   #296
Clytie
thundering is my favorite
 
Clytie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: motivated to be all i can be
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartypants
And if I may add: Ilidbot, you are an idiot. (Or did I already say that once before?)

wowow thats kinda harsh...for being a person that thinks Christians are haters... this didnt come across as warm and loving to me.
__________________
your star shaped heart
has reached out to me
and together our hearts beat as one
bound by the rich red that runs coarsing
united we stand
stronger than before
able to face the dark
with hands entwined
Clytie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 04:15 PM   #297
craig johnston
dalai clique
 
craig johnston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: tea leaf towers - home of fine musical entertainment
Posts: 5,609
you can think someone's an idiot without hating them.

i'm still depressed about this whole thing. it's such a
shame that we can't move forward into our future
without dragging a long a whole lot of mumbo jumbo
from the dark ages.
if only we were ruled by rationality and logical thought,
we could achieve so much, but as it stands, with huge
numbers of people believing such hokum, i see only trouble
ahead.
__________________
the tea leaf family
craig johnston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 05:01 PM   #298
Saxifrage
monkey
 
Saxifrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Angband
Posts: 411
Here is an article that I found interesting

The dark side of secularism
By James Carroll *|* March 8, 2005

LAST WEEK the US Supreme Court took up two cases having to do with "government displays of the Ten Commandments" the old question of church and state. Those who emphasize the "bright line" of separation are conscious of the breakthrough it was when, after savage religious wars led by God-intoxicated rulers, a new politics required the state to be religiously neutral.

Thomas Jefferson stood on the shoulders of figures like Benedict Spinoza, Roger Williams, and Mary Dyer, who paid dearly for this principle.

Far from an insult to faith, the "wall of separation" was a guarantee that each citizen, free of public coercion, could worship at the altar of conscience or not. This foundational idea of American democracy protects political freedom of a diverse citizenry but also creates space within which authentic religion can thrive. The courts are right to keep the line sharp, and new democracies around the world are right to draw it.

But there is a dark side to the separation of church and state, and its shadow grows longer. This core notion has been distorted into a terrible dichotomy that undercuts both politics and belief.

Early on, "church and state" became a euphemism for the separation of the private realm from the public the separation of morality from law. "You can't legislate morality," Americans told each other. Because the language of morality was associated with religion, the discourse of "secular" politics became ethically hollow. Thus, for example (in an observation made by the writer Wendell Barry), Thomas Jefferson could in his public role argue against slavery, while clinging to slaves as "private" property, about which the state had nothing to say. On this issue, Americans would fight a war to enshrine morality in law.

Complete http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...larism?mode=PF
__________________
The Dude abides.
Saxifrage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 06:27 PM   #299
Feed the Monkey
Go on, dare ya......
 
Feed the Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: LONDRES, ANGLETAIRE
Posts: 23
Craig, Cltyie didn't say smartypants was a hater. They said smartypants comment wasn't warm and loving. Logic......?

And we can talk about not dragging stuff from the dark ages. It's true, we don't need mumbo Jumbo to advance. But are we really learning lessons from history? I don't think so. If we were looking back over the last century and saying 'War is Wrong' then that would be different, but people simply aren't.

Also, do you beleive anyone of faith (whatever that is) is beleiving in hookum?

I'm just interested in this thread, especially smartpants comments. I agree with lots of what your saying, but I realy think you have to be careful that you also don't fall into the prejudiced judging pile. "All christians are a little crazy and I don't like em" is kinda also like saying "All gays are a little crazy and I don't like em" or "All Muslims are a little crazy and I don't like em". You seem to be speaking out against a trait that you yourself might be guilty of. Just an observation, not an attack.

I agree that we need to remove all intolerance from the world (religious or otherwise), from all corners. I think this will really give us peace and allow us to advance as a race.
__________________
I want more. More oneness, less categories, open hearts, no strategy. Decisions based upon faith and not fear, people who live right now and right here. I want the wisdom that wise men revere. I want more.
Feed the Monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2005, 06:29 PM   #300
Smartypants
MR. Smartypants to you.
 
Smartypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oh, YOU PEOPLE go ahead and call it "Frisco." See if I care.
Posts: 3,967
Quote:
Early on, "church and state" became a euphemism for the separation of ... morality from law...
This is the height of arrogance. As I've stated here many times before, morality is hardly something only possible through religious doctrine. On the contrary, the "morality" practiced -- and the "moral" examples set -- by today's religious leaders around the world are sorry examples of man's capacity for good. Give me the moral code of my secular friends ANY day!


Quote:
Because the language of morality was associated with religion, the discourse of "secular" politics became ethically hollow. Thus, for example (in an observation made by the writer Wendell Barry), Thomas Jefferson could in his public role argue against slavery, while clinging to slaves as "private" property, about which the state had nothing to say. On this issue, Americans would fight a war to enshrine morality in law.
It should be understood by all those who use the bible as a moral compass, that slavery was justified in the American south by its approval in the pages of the bible. Deals were cut during the drafting of our Constitution to allow slaveholding to continue as a means of holding together a fragile new union composed of slaveholding and free states. One could use these deals as examples of the worst morality of religion AND politics.

Yet in the end it was our secular government that brought slavery to an end and, perhaps more importantly, taught future generations to understand the immorality of slaveholding and the hypocrisy of practicing or accepting slavery in a country built on the ideals of human Freedom.
__________________

"I don't think God wants us to believe in him. If he wanted us to believe in him he'd do something about it -- like exist perhaps!" --Linda Smith
Smartypants is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -3. The time now is 02:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.