'Religion, regardless of its colour, is a cancer that keeps us from ever achieving peace on earth. '

so believed Mao and Stalin. Keep up your hatefilled dogmas David G. One day you might look at your own heart and realise the problem.

Yuyutsu - If humans cannot agree on the meaning of the words they use then it is obvious that they cannot have a rational discussion. This is one of the fundamental principles of all argument. You seem to use a lot of language where the meaning of the words is not agreed upon by all human beings. For one example – “But speaking in absolute terms, others don't need anything either. In absolute terms, there is nothing but God: the Giver is God, the Receiver is God, the Giving is God and the Gift is God: the perceived separateness is a divine illusion.”

You show great disrespect to fellow posters when you do this. It is arrogant to use such language. If you have an argument as to the merits of Christian involvement in charitable work then you should be able to make that argument without resorting to language where there is no consensus of meaning. If such involvement is so reasonable and logical then it should not be hard to make a case for it using the same rules that everyone else agrees upon.

The fact that you resort to such language shows that you are backed into a corner and do not have a reasonable argument. Perhaps you are trying to protect something on which you have an emotional dependence. When people find themselves trapped in this way they often resort to aggression. One form of aggression is to elevate yourself above the rest of humanity by refusing to abide by the rules we all accept in normal circumstances when we do not feel threatened.

Every time you resort to such language you do nothing but expose your own emotional dependence on religion

Box of bananas anyone:)...lol...From the first human awakening, to where we are now...religion is/has been hard wired from the separation. So...you might ask....its the best first law and order we had in looking at our selves since we found out how to screw each other over.

Your still in baby boots.

We will wait for you.

Planet3

phantasm/quote..<<.To serve..means that someone benefits.>>

serve/means..to do ones duty
duty means..moral/or..legal obligation

bad policing/bad service=dis-service..[who has been served..by poor bad or absent/biased..or poor service?][one serving..badly benefits no-one]
'
<<..How can God..who needs nothing benefit?>>
and you..know..god needs nothing..how?

does it benefit..god not having to/do it..for me/you/us..
[if i grow up/look after myself?..one more serving..one less needing service..of course it helps god]

<<..The service of God adds nothing..to the charity..for the person receiving the charity>>[rubbish..police XCHARGE you for their serevices..hospitals charge for their services/xtians are expected to doit for charity[so too many other beliefs]

<<..since the same level of charity..can be provided by someone not serving God...>>

please present proof..

<<..Christians do many things in their lives simply because it is reasonable to do them.>

who dosnt?

you have a rather bizarre notion
of what the word service means...

in/relation to the religious
as a service..the garage checks..if it can sell you some oil..a week before they say..the next oil change is due*[ever heard of over servicing?..in some religions thats a crime][say your an atheist..am i..serving you by..telling you of god..or god rates all serving as good..how about the yankies serving war globally?

good service to big oil=bad service to the rest of us
just because of iran..we pay 20 cents more per litre..of fuel
good service..or dis-service..[self serving/serving only the undeserving]

service=duty..who..binds atheists..charity/into..duty?
if you think..god is watching/weighing the quality..of thy service..you try harder

[if you think serving anyone=serving god wee try harder/than/if your only doing 'duty'..wiping out nips/gooks ..or other labels..we serve higher by demanding ending murder][all life is sustained..its living of god/thus our service begins with all life being sacred

Dear Phanto,

<<You show great disrespect to fellow posters when you do this.>>

If that is so, please show me where, who and how.

<<It is arrogant to use such language.>>

Do you mean it's arrogant to mention the Truth that what we truly are, is God?
Do you mean that all scriptures that state so are arrogant?

<<If you have an argument as to the merits of Christian involvement in charitable work>>

In my last post, I freely admit that I departed and was no longer addressing the original issue of Christians and charity, but instead I addressed your former claim as if God need not be served.

Previously you asked:

<<If you can achieve the ends that you claim you want (to help others) without servicing God then why not do only that?>>

And my answer is that I never claimed having such a goal, that helping others is not an end to itself, but a means.

Had so-called 'others' been truly others in the sense of being completely separate from us, then helping them would make no sense. However, others are not separate because we all share God as our underlying common-ground and essence.

In other words:

<<Why not just do charity because it is a worthwhile thing in itself?>>

Because had it not been in the service of God, it would make no sense - it would not be worthwhile.

Now you need not be aware that your charitable acts are done in the service of God. You are entitled to give it any other reasoning and use any other language, but even if you are an atheist, when you do charity without expectations, you do serve God and you do in fact come closer to Him, whether you know it or not.

Some people are motivated to do charity by the logical understanding that they are in fact serving God, but if you can find a different motivation, then God bless you, then you are no less religious than them.

Yuyutsu: but even if you are an atheist, when you do charity without expectations, you do serve God and you do in fact come closer to Him, whether you know it or not.

Of course that statement depends on weather or not there is a "GOD."

In the scheme of things we are but fleas on a Proton of some Atom somewhere in something. Maybe that is what "GOD" is, or, maybe that "GOD" is but a flea on another Proton on another Atom, ad infinite. Fractually speaking. x(x+1),