The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Duped by secular rationalism > Comments

Duped by secular rationalism : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 15/5/2006

Theological relativism has subverted all theological discussion.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. All
Keiran while I too find the concept of religion an immature response to the world I don't believe that making infantile posts does any credit to athiests and agnostics. You can make your point without being so offensive.

Philo, I am not claiming any moral superiority. I attempted to point out to you that many positive aspects that you ascribe exclusively to christians such as "To care for the sick ..." is simply human nature.

There is nothing supernatural in caring for others. Human beings with the exception of sociopaths, care for each other. We are and always have been social creatures, we would not have survived living in caves if we hadn't looked out for each other.

For you to suggest that only christians have altruistic abilities is very arrogant and insulting to the rest of us who conduct our lives in humane and exemplary fashion.
Posted by Scout, Wednesday, 7 June 2006 1:37:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Scout,
If you had read my post carefully you might have recognised I made no such accusation against altruistic non-believers. I merely stated a Christ like position of faith and care in a positive attitude. Selfless care no matter who gives it reflects the nature of the divine.

Quote, "For you to suggest that only christians have altruistic abilities is very arrogant and insulting to the rest of us who conduct our lives in humane and exemplary fashion.
Posted by Philo, Wednesday, 7 June 2006 11:35:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you, Philo.

In future you could say something like 'people who care for and help each other are doing god's work'. Then we'd all know that you were not just referring to christians.

:0)
Posted by Scout, Thursday, 8 June 2006 12:23:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Scout....

You said: "myriad authors with an equally varied number of agendas."

I'd be interested to know about the 'varied' agenda's ?

I see only 2. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart". and "Love your neighbour as yourself" The historical information and poetic section also underline that major theme.

What was Pauls agenda ? Wait..I know this one :) "Enslave women"

Seriously, what was his agenda ?
and James ?
and Peter ?
and John ?

How did they differ between each other ? Could you state 2 major differences of agenda ?

Cheers.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 12 June 2006 7:42:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Seriously, what was his agenda ?
and James ?
and Peter ?
"How did they differ between each other ? Could you state 2 major differences of agenda ?"

Late us start with John, By John I suppose you meant John who was supposed to have written the Gospel John. If you mean John the disciple then we don't know as we don't know anything definitively about John's thought processes. The writer of the Gospel John wrote later than all the other Gospels,well after Paul and was most certainly not the disciple John.
James. By James do you mean the "brother of Jesus"? Who knows what James thought about anything? As Paul is the first writer to nominate James as Jesus' brother and the hand-picked Pauline synoptic Gospels confirm this but we can't be sure if he actually was or that Paul meant "brother" in another sense. Paul never confirmed that he believed in an historical Jesus so it would be strange if he thought he had a brother.
Peter. There is confusion about whether Peter (Simon Peter) mentioned in the Gospels is the same as Cephus mentioned by Paul so what his "Peter's" agenda was is anyones guess.
We do however know what Paul's agenda was because we have 6 or 7 writings atrributed to him by most scholars which show him as a Gnostic and Hellenised Jew. His agenda was to spread the idea of a dying and resurrecting god-man to the gentiles and start a new (although eclectic) religion.
You are right Boaz_David there is very little agenda difference in the New Testament writers because the whole thing is based on the religious meanderings of Paul. In the 4th Century any "Gospels" and writings that did not agree with Paul's agenda were discarded and included were writings of various unknown people with Pauline Christianity flowing through their veins.
What was Jesus' agenda.......whatever Paul said it was.
Posted by Priscillian, Monday, 12 June 2006 8:49:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Priscillian,
What utter unresearched nonsense. Please give your sourse material. I suggest you at least read the New Testament and learn the vocabulary, language style and individual characteristics of each of the writers.
Posted by Philo, Monday, 12 June 2006 9:10:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy