"To care for the sick is in the nature of God, and he created us that we care for distressed persons. " says Philo who believes in teddy the creator and in a different context says teddy is a non being. Must say this whole teddy milieu is contrived and confusing to say the least.

e.g.

If teddy is such a loving creator how come we have this belief ..... teddy invents pain....teddy invents humans who feel pain..... teddy comes to earth as a human son who really is teddy and gets nailed to a cross. Human son who really is teddy feels pain. Moral of the story ..... Teddy is a sadomasochist. Is this everyone’s idea of how a responsible teddy should behave?

Or perhaps a less contrived explanation is that no teddy exists and bad things inevitably happen in a neutral, imperfect universe

Some people prefer to be sadists and fatalists and concoct infantile rebuttals because they believe they hold superior intelligence and have the answers to all reality. Those believe there is no reality beyond their understanding of the universe. Eat, drink and be indulgently merry for tomorrow we die. Hopeless death! Impoverished fools!

As Christians we are idealists, opportunists to overcome and optimistics because we believe in a better society, a better world, a better future. It is this view that generates creativity to change bad behaviour, exchange the nature of evil and mortality for something better, and a hope that there is a soon emerging heaven on the horizon. Our perceptions of reality are that we need to renew our mind and fortify it with faith and hope. Faith and hope are spiritual qualities found in God, and imparted to us as his spirit lives through our humanity.

Phil I find Keiran's posts as infantile as you. While I don't hold any belief in the supernatural, I despair every time I read a post of Keiran's with his 'teddy' analogies. They are indeed offensive.

However, I do take issue with some of your sentiments also.

I too believe in a better world, a better future, a better society. I too am an idealist. The only difference is that I have these hopes and dreams without recourse to a book which has been written and rewritten by myriad authors with an equally varied number of agendas.

Christianity (or any other religion) does not hold the moral superiority in this world of ours. Claiming it does is an insult to many decent and good people who contribute positively to this world. This arrogance of religion is what divides us.

Live and let live, Philo.

Scout,
I am interested in learning of the moral superiority that is greater than the teachings of Christ. Please give me the sourse of this morality so I can learn. Or is this one of your typical fob off statements!

Philo, there is an well known answer to your question.

Find out for yourself.

There is no single source but rather a journey that is life.

When you start taking responsibility for your own life and how it is lived rather than expecting the answers to be served up from a single source you may understand some of the meaning of life.

R0bert

Scout, religion is a child's playpen and for an infected occupant (whatever age) who has never left this playpen the concept of the real world may be terrifying. To someone outside the myriad of playpens it all seems just a bit peculiar to say the least. Why do we have these divisive incubators that are quite limiting and, well, childish. Take away the playpen and what are you left with? A child? So I agree, we are talking of infantile concepts are we not?

Perhaps you may explain how "'teddy' analogies" can be offensive. Is it that teddies are so loveable that perhaps it is offensive to teddy bears? Well who knows, but what I do know is that belief stamping of babies and the vulnerable is false. It is systematic control and emotional blackmail that amounts to blind abuse through a crude extortion of an individual's psyche. e.g. We have had Philo try the offensive emotional blackmail effort out in a poor answer to a question a few posts back.