I just wanted to find out why all the discussions here, were leading to matters involving religion...thats all.

As Jim Carey said when the lift doors opened in Liar Liar.. "It was MEEEEEEE" (regarding a bad smell left in the lift).. perhaps its my fault? :)

Remember I drew your attention to Ecclesiastes.. "God has placed eternity in our hearts, but not so as we can determine the beginning or the end" .....

Paul describes this in Romans 1

20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made,....

Dr John Polkinghorne.. Hawkings associate..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne

This theoretical physicist of the highest order is now "Reverend"...Dr Polkinghorne as he.. found the truth of both Ecclesiastes and Romans 1.

But we need to go from the 'general' to the particular..and your title says it all.. "JESUS"... or.. more aptly put "The Messiah".

There are many views on why he came.. but one interesting coincidence is found in the Gospel of Mark.

Chapter 8:31, then 9:31..then 10:32.. all have the same message.

Here is a hint.. the book is 16 chapters long..
The first 8 chapters deal with the first 3 yrs almost of his ministry.
The last 8 chapters deal with the last few weeks.....

-but only after EIGHT chapters (and around 3 yrs) do we find these words, 'He beGAN...to teach them...... (something) 8:31)

WHAT...was he establishing in the minds of His disciples for those 3 yrs?

BIBLE STUDY TIME :)

Check this out.

-Chapter 8:1-10...is about what ?
-Contrast this with verses 1l-13 do you see anything 'odd' about 11-13 compared to 1-10 ?
-Verses 14-21 are about...? does anything surprise you about the subject of the discussion in the light of 8:1-10 ?
-How to verses 22-26 connect or relate to the events of verse 1-10 ?

-Do you see any connection between 22-26 and 27-30 ? if so...what?

-Verse 31...... the key....to it all :) and life itself.

Learn these things...and you will never be the same again.

Blessings.

Moderating things for the sake of the topic would be nice.

My Big Bang post was directed exclusively at science....but, ya know....

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*cough cough look up cough*

God and Jesus are the only ammunition some people have. I'm reasonably certain the bible wasn't intended to be used for smiting purposes, but that's the inventive human mind for you. Even love can be used as a weapon, so why not God?

Spanky

This forum's been infiltrated by the AMEN SNORTERS

Graham should invoice them for advertising fees!

This is an insidious plot to convert all heathens to Christianity! The tedium's becoming quite intolerable!

Truly, they'll stoop to anything to save the souls of the wicked.

True Story:

A man came into a shop with a 'Salesman Wanted' sign in a window.

He went up to the owner and said, "I-I-I w-w-waannn-t the j-joooob-b."

"I don't know if this job would suit you because of your speaking impediment," said the owner.

"I h-h-havvve a w-wi-wiiiife and s-s-s-six k-kkkids, iiii-I re-really neeeed thi-thi-this j-j-job!" said the man.

"O.K. Here are three Bibles. Go out and sell them." said the owner.

So the man went out and came back an hour later.

"H-here-sss your m-m-money." said the man.

The owner was impressed, so he gave the man a dozen more Bibles and sent him out.

The man came back in two hours and said, "Her-ers y-yooour m-m-money."

The owner said, "This is fantastic. You sold more Bibles in three hours than anyone has sold in a week. Tell me, what do you say to the people when they come to the door?"

"W-welllll," said the man, "I r-r-ring the d-door bell, a-a-and s-s-say 'H-Hel-Hello, M-m-maaaaddam, d-d-do you w-w- want t-t-t-to buy thi-thi-this B-B-Bible, oooor d-d-do y-you w-w-want m'me t-toooo read it t-t-t-t-to you?

Dear Dickie :) I really needed that.. I just found that 45 units of product I am getting read to send out... have a problem. I ran out of some special nichrome wire with a certain resistance... and obtained some more from a different source.. 'assuming' the resistance per meter is the same.. due to the same diameter.. *WRONG* it turns out to be twice as much :( so.. my product is current limiting at half the intended output... now I have to do something to the LOT of them to overcome it... but your joke lightened up my day :)

The ironic thing is.. every time I talk to my entrepreneurial son.. I say "DETAILS SON.. DETAILS" as he tends to run on hype more than reality at times...

Well.. I take issue with one word you used in your mini diatribe..

It's not an 'insidious' plot..its a 'heartwarming' one :)

Its definitely a plot though.. because Christians are bound by the great commission.. "Go into all the forums of the world"... or words that effect.... "and make disciples" ...well.. we will stop when you become a disciple... then you can join us and we can together look further afield for more wheat to harvest...

Light hearted as my mood is in this right now.. it is a serious subject..and we do take it seriously. I hope and pray that God will work in your life also, and bring you to the Savior

"Its definitely a plot though.. because Christians are bound by the great commission.. "Go into all the forums of the world"... or words to that effect.... "and make disciples" ...well.. we will stop when you become a disciple... then you can join us and we can together look further afield for more wheat to harvest..."

Holy cow, Boazy.....I thought for a moment you'd plagerised the paragraph above from the Mozzies and converted to Islam....until I re-read the word "Christians!"

Man has been looking for god ever since the day he looked up and began to think. This is another pondering question and again, there is no answer.
But think about this. If I lived 2000+ years ago and something came down from the sky, I would call it god too. I think god is not what people think it is. I beleve something has come down and helped us just look how fast we have evolved. Some of you may know where Iam going with this but I cant think of any other living thing that has moved forward so fast.
We cant be the only intelligent life in the universe.
One more question. If god is made up of love and kindness, Why is his good book causing so many problems. With all the sadness and cring thats going on, He is just not there or has a very sick sence of humor. I beleve the bible was made by man and was the first type of law and order. It controled millions of people from killing and hurting thy fellow man. But as we can now, I think it has served its purpose. Well! maybe for some of us. Its time to move on. We need to get off this rock. Maybe the bible is gods way of asking us to meet him. Like I said, I dont think god is what we think it is.

Just a thought.

"Go into all the forums of the world"... or words that effect.... "and make disciples" ...well.. we will stop when you become a disciple... then you can join us and we can together look further afield for more wheat to harvest...

Yea, right David. So tell me where else you go to preach. And if you limit yourself to the unwilling targets then such as forum members then I see you and others like you as pests. Some forums allow for a choice to be made as to who goes on to an ignore list where all posts by those on that list do not appear on any thread for members taking up the option of using the feature. If this forum has that option I will be using it. If it doesn't I will lobby for one to be offered.

If you genuinely believe that others are incapable of making up their own minds about what they do or don't believe, you are naive.

You are a thread crapper and this forum is the poorer for your presence.

I would have much more respect for the Bible Thumpers if they actually read their Bible and not just bits of it - those bits that suited them. Exodus 21 is a good one to start at... Hmmmm amazing!

If people want to believe in a God so be it... it doesn't bother me.. but at least read the books that you are relying on in their entirety rather than cherry picking the topics.

Also why do religions need to own God... every religion is right and the rest are wrong. The Catholics own God, the protestants think they are wrong, the Muslims own God etc etc.

Plus in Christianity if Jesus is God why have the so-called Christians broken his religion into over 22,000 sects in just 2000 years plus a few. And why did he say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do"? Who was he saying it to if he is God? Himself?

And if the Bible is so big on prophecy why is it that the religions never tell people that the calendar is out by some 4 - 7 years?

It seems to me that if you call yourself Christian (for example) you should know what the Bible actually says and understand the implications of calling yourself a follower.

As for the big bang ... it is a theory... not proven but not disproven either... The answers may have us all tied up in strings... Ha!

Ditch... most heartwarming words there mate :)

hmm... like this. 'Christian' opinion...is still opinion. Your view would see us either fed to the lions or sent to the gulags.. well. we survived both. Words can't hurt you...can they ?

It's not like you have come up with anything other than 'unworkable_systems' in the political realm.. and the problem with all those 'systems' or ideologies is 'us'..and that is what Christ addresses.. the inner man.. I always maintain that it is not a new 'system' which will solve our social or political problems, but new people.

I don't mind your harsh words... I feel compassion for you.. after all, going around in political or philosophical circles with the overall directiong being 'nowhere' is not something to be envied, and definitely something to be addressed with a message which can save a person from it, and the Gospel of Christ is that message. The great thing about the Gospel also, (and our free society) is that you and anyone can just say 'get lost'... but don't try to shut people up on a forum please.

ALL THE SECTS. Yep.. there are plenty out there..and of course.. it goes without saying that 'mine' is right....right ? :) Well.. how hard is it to understand that the message of the Gospel is not a rigid set of laws.. it is about a relationship.. and that relationship might be expressed in a variety of ways, and with different emhpases. If the Anglicans believe in "Baptidzo-I sprinkle" and the Baptists believe in 'Baptidzo-I drown'... is it a huge question of earth shattering difference?

If the Presbyterians believe in Elders and the Anglicans a heirarchy.. will it damn them ? No.. how people organize their community of faith is up to them, as long as it does not include sin.
So..no self indulgent parties at communion.(as the Corinthians did)
Most Christians from most denominations get along well. No biggy.

It becomes an issue when a 'sect' goes off the rails about Christ, or God, That's why JWs, Moonies, Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Mormons are called 'cults'.

Opinionated.....

'Why do religions need to own God'?

I suppose it might be like for Marxists who like to 'own' atheism ?

But not all religions wish to 'own' God.. Buddhism doesn't even have a god.... Hinduism believes everything IS God.... Bahais are different again.. as are Zoroastrians.

The 3 major faiths of the world Judaism Islam and Christianity all have the same root.. and it is that God has revealed Himself in History.. really.

The divergence comes as follows:

-Judaism has rejected Christ as Messiah. (But believes in the same God)

-Islam has rejected Christ as Messiah (i.e. His true nature of God manifest in the flesh) but claims to believe in the God of Abraham.)and they say Mohammad was the final prophet of God.

-Christianity...believes that God has come in Christ in absolute finality, with no possibility of any other coming after Him. That he died on the cross for our sins, and rose from the dead according to the Scriptures, and ascended to the right hand of the Father, and will return in Glory for those who know Him as Lord and Savior.

Discovering which is true.. is the best thing mankind can do.

"These things are written, that you may know that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing, you might have life in His name"....John 20:31

The 'these things' include healing cripples, restoring sight to the blind, enabling the deaf to hear, casting out demons, calming storms, walking on water, raising the dead... and ultimately, rising Himself.

UNIQUENESS OF CHRIST.
In the history of mankind.. there never has been, is, or ever will be, one who graced the world for a mere 3 yrs of public ministry, who, without weapon, army or sword, has impacted the planet so much.
That the simple Gospel could overcome the might of Rome.. simply by the power of that life changing Word..of repentance,faith and forgiveness is testimony to His true origin.

"I don't mind your harsh words... I feel compassion for you.. after all, going around in political or philosophical circles with the overall directiong being 'nowhere' is not something to be envied, and definitely something to be addressed with a message which can save a person from it, and the Gospel of Christ is that message. The great thing about the Gospel also, (and our free society) is that you and anyone can just say 'get lost'... but don't try to shut people up on a forum please."

Oh shut up David, for crying out loud. You are a pest and a bore!

Onya Ditch... please remember this thread...is.. 'errr Jesus' ....

I was listening to a good talk before where the speaker related an even in Speakers Corner many years ago.

The methodist lay preacher went there every week.. and during the height of the 'Communisms is good' era a communist nearby noticed a derelict in an old scruffy coat and said to the preacher "Communism will put a NEW COAT on that man"...

without hesitating the preacher said "and Christ will put a new MAN in that coat"

The gospel...and those who proclaim it.. can be offensive.. but lets hope you can see past the offense.. to the one on whom all our offensiveness was placed...on a cross and in giving your life to Him, become one of those 'new men'.

Spanky: " just wanted to find out why all the discussions here, were leading to matters involving religion...thats all."

Clearly, it's because a small number of religious fanatics regard it as their duty to preach their delusions to the rest of us, with the futile intention of converting rational people to their primitive belief systems. To do this, they will shamelessly hijack any discussion at all and turn it into one about their imaginary friends and/or fairy tales.

Interestingly, the main offenders are exclusively Christian. I can't recall reading similar proselytising rubbish here from Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Ba'hais and so on. That's probably why I find fundamentalist Christianity to be more offensive than the other forms of organised delusion - simply because some people try to shove it down my digital throat on a daily basis.

Hopefully, one day the godbotherers will realise that their actions turn far more people away from their dotty beliefs than they will ever attract through their preaching and ranting.

You keep on saying it Boaz, but it still doesn't make it right.

>>Why do religions need to own God'? I suppose it might be like for Marxists who like to 'own' atheism ?<<

Now where, for goodness' sake, does it say anywhere in the Marxist creed, that they like to "own" atheism?

Atheism is a word of two parts. The a- indicates "without", as in aphasia, anaemia. The -theism means "belief in the existence of a god or gods, [esp] belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world"

No-one can own atheism, even if they wanted to or claimed to (which, as I said, I sincerely doubt). It is - unlike religion - a very personal thing, a decision that one has arrived at through thought and contemplation, rather than through evangelism, or even coercion, bullying or blackmail.

And this is pure evangelistic bunkum.

>>Discovering which is true.. is the best thing mankind can do.<<

Which religion you join, Boaz, is first of all an accident of birth. If you were born in Topeka, KS, you are far more likely to be a Pentecostalist than a Hindu, for example. After all, it is extraordinarily rare for a parent or a school to say "hey, we're Pentecostalists, but you wait and make up your own mind, as soon as you are old enough to figure it out."

"Changing religions" is, I believe, a relatively rare event - if anyone has done any statistical work on this, I'd of course be interested. Rejecting religion in favour of an atheistic or agnostic position is more common, but is not the result of atheist or agnostic evangelism. There's simply no such thing, because you cannot evangelize a non-belief system. It just doesn't stack up.

You can encourage people to think, rather than simply "have faith", but where that faith is strong - i.e. the individual feels that it is a necessary part of their make-up - rationality cannot win.

But that faith also tends to be to a particular brand. Atheism isn't a brand.

"The gospel...and those who proclaim it.. can be offensive.."

You just don't get it do you David. It isn't the gospel that's offensive, it's your proselytizing. It's the constant, predictable pushing of your fundamentalist views in this forum that is offensive. The comment by CJ Morgan above is right. You are doing more to turn people off your views than on to them. And that is why you are naive. You think we are going to swallow your preaching because you keep repeating it. No. That is not going to happen.

Members of this forum are intelligent enough to think for themselves. They do not need a self righteous evangelist to do it for them.

Dont be a "snivelling" Ditch. Its what christians do again and again and again...
Its how the Holy Spirit leads christians.
If you dont know Jesus when you pass on, it can be the outer darkness or the pits. We really dont want to see you guys there.
Look up Mary K Baxter...take the time... read her story of going to hell. Every night for 40 nights The Lord appeared at her bed and took her down into hell to show her what happens to the sinner who rejects God. Pits full of people all looking like skeletons and all with flames moving up over their bodies. Many lukewarm pastors and congregationalists in the USA turned back to Christ through her later public testimony of her journey.
God is a very Holy God and men who reject Jesus and trample their consciences to do what feels good are in big trouble. Best to be friends with God through Jesus Christ. "Everyone who calls on the Name of the Lord will be saved"...Romans 10:13. In need? Jesus is just a prayer away. Get serious with Him today. Invite Him in and get set free.
Mary K Baxter Ditch...have the grit to read her testimony.

Gibo

I saw a picture of Mary K Baxter and yes, I do agree, she looks like she's been 'round the block a few times! She's not an out of work barmaid, is she?

She'd be well advised to consult a shrink to cure her paranoid delusions. I'd also offer the same advice to the others who've jumped on her soapbox, practising 18th century occultism and claiming visions of fire and brimstone, where all their experiences contradict each other.

Going to hell and leaving is contrary to Bible teachings, Gibo.

Jeremiah 23:32 "Behold, I am against those who have prophesied false dreams and related them and led My people astray by their falsehoods and reckless boasting; yet I did not send them or command them, nor do they furnish this people the slightest benefit."

Hey Gibo....that goes for you too mate!

Now let's see. Mary K Baxter sold half a million copies of her book of delusions for around $US12.95 in 1993. Mmmmm........$12.95 multiplied by.........equals ....? Wow! Look out Harry Potter!

According to Mary K she's the "Lord's anointed hand maiden." Strewth....what does that mean?

I look at the fruit of Mary K Baxters' works. If she brought many lukewarm pastors, ministers and believers back to Jesus, I have no complaint.
As for her being a false prophet...how would you know?
You werent there Dickie!
Did you receive what she recieved as revelation?
I think youre just another Ditch needing Jesus. Stop wandering like a bedouin and find some strength in The Lord.

ARGUMENT FROM INFINITE REGRESS

(1) Ask Atheists what caused the Big Bang.
(2) Regardless of their answer, ask how they know this.
(3) Continue process until the Atheist admits s/he doesn't know the answer to one of your questions.
(4) You win!
(5) Therefore, God exists.

And if this fails to convince try:

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm?

or if you have nothing better to do and I suspect that this applies to some, try:

http://www.atheistresource.co.uk/humour.html

Johnny, now I'm embarassed. I followed the last link and then went to the Landover Baptist site which is supposed to be a parody of a church site. If that is a parody then it appears that a number of those who I had thought were christains posting on this forum are really doing a parody of christain postings (taking it a bit far in my view but then it takes all sorts).

All this time I thought they were just the extreme end of christian fanaticism and really it was just a long term parody. Just too far out there for me.

R0bert

Hi Ditch (Pericles and CJ)... humanly speaking I understand what you are getting at....

You would like to turn this into a 'its you' kind of thing.. well.. you arn't the first and won't be the last.. its ok. There is no 'ramming' down anyone's digital throat..there is 'contributions' under my nick..and if anyones wishes not to avail themselves of my thoughts.. they just ignore it.... it ain't that hard..

You see.. 'posts' are like chanels... you can just ignore them... bypass them... so.. "ramming" , ? hardly.

I admit.. on other topics.. I often give a biblical perspective.. but this is quite legitimate.
We have.. "Left"...."Right"...."Green"...and "Biblical".... its just one of many...so why the fuss ?

Perhaps you worry that 'others' might be influenced by what we share ? .. but then..I was assured in the last few posts that forum members can think for themSELVEs.... so..if they don't need me or my ilk to think for them.. they surely don't need YOU (whoever 'you' might be) to do their thinking either.. right ?

So... while some might like to censor open debate.. I'm not really into that.. freedom of speech is a precious commodity. Do for me... as you would have me do for you... if you want me to censor you.. then just censor me.

My experience is.. I know that resentment is often a prelude to an experience of Grace... so.. don't expect the Gospel to be gagged anytime soon.

Saying "It's not the Gospel..its you" doesn't count for much. After all..when was the last time you were able to please all the people all the time?

I proclaimed the Gospel once.. and 2 people came to the front.. one was glowing with grace and joy..the other.. a bit like the 'naysayers' here... The Lord has his sheep..and they know His voice.

cheers

SPANKY, a breakthrough for you! See the post at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1122#19962

As I post this the thread only has two posts but the second post is quite a surprise.

R0bert

Wow R0bert - I had a look and it was indeed a revelation. He didn't mention Jesus once!

This adds a whole new dimension to the notion of 'letting the cat out of the bag' :)

Yeh not once. Was waiting to see if the story was real or unreal.

Mmmmm! Now that is a revelation. I wonder who else knows this?

Do cats go to heaven? Did Mary K. Baxter see any cats in her underworld travels?

I've heard of going to hell in a handbasket - maybe Mary K took a cat with her.

Did Jesus have a handbag?

Ahh CJ. Mary K Baxter actually saw rats and snakes in hell on her trips.
Jesus may have had a bag of some kind but it was Judas who help the money purse and used to dip into it.
You guys would love Mr. Boots. We named him after Bootsie in the British TV series "Bootsie and Snudge". Humour in those days was a quieter, less sleazy thing. Pity about the change in the times.
It all points to the Second Coming as does Luke chapter 21, 2 Timothy 3 and Revelation.

CJ MORGAN,
"Did Jesus have a handbag"?....Whaaaaat?

You still insist on misunderstanding the simplest little thing, Boaz.

>>I understand what you are getting at... You would like to turn this into a 'its you' kind of thing..<<

Not at all.

If you were to stop slagging Islam at every opportunity.

If you were to stop inventing opportunities to slag off Islam at every chance you get.

If you were to accept that atheism isn't a religion, and stopped posting that it is "just another faith".

If you were to accept that not all atheists obey a single set of rules, instead of accusing them all of being paedophiles, or practicing bestiality at every opportunity.

Then quite frankly, I wouldn't need to give you another thought.

Unfortunately, under the somewhat tatty cloak of "bringing the word to the unbeliever", you constantly rattle on along the lines of the above.

Having said all that, it probably wouldn't matter if you posted logical, supportable statements, or presented thoughtful, untainted evidence. But this is a habit you have yet to get into.

>>there is 'contributions' under my nick..and if anyones wishes not to avail themselves of my thoughts.. they just ignore it.<<

But when your contributions are illogical, or insulting, or when they are simply yet another excuse for your whack-a-mozzie fetish, I'm afraid they will not be ignored.

They need to be cleared up, like dog turds off a pavement.

But it is absolutely not personal, Boaz, I promise.

Hi Pericles.....

well.. you did it again. Aside from the rather repetitive allegations...
You are doing that thing again.. (I'm glad you mentioned that finger.. I've never forgotten that) you are saying..that "I'm" saying..

-All Muslims are terrorists.
-All Atheists are pedophiles and enjoy a bit of animal...

Whoa... I've not said either of those things.

I criticize "Islam" as a set of doctrines.
I point out that without reference to God.. people will just go off in any moral (immoral) direction, and there is no reason to claim bestiality, pedophilia or other forms of abuse are anything but 'different' forms of legitimate behavior.

Now there is a difference between pointing out the philosophical implications of something and claiming EVERYONE is 'that'.

This applies to Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and any ism.. and that includes Atheism.

I'm spending most of my debating time in constructive dialog with Muslims on youtube at present, and by and large we are all getting along famously, even warmly.

Sometimes.. it helps to publicize 'stupidity'.. which includes..

-People prone to give money to (to me)obviously fraudulent Televangelists.
-Mormons believing a book (Book of Mormon) claiming that Native American Indians are Hebrew descendants when DNA shows that impossible.
-Muslims believing some of the Quran which to most people is unpalatable.
-Atheists who claim they have a foundation for morality, when the truth is.. 'anyone' can make up their own rules as they go...on that basis.

and so it goes on.

Cheers

"I point out that without reference to God.. people will just go off in any moral (immoral) direction, and there is no reason to claim bestiality, pedophilia or other forms of abuse are anything but 'different' forms of legitimate behavior."

Nonsense. You have not substantiated this and I challenge you to do so. Your claim implies any non Christian is incapable of behaving morally. What rubbish. This is something you might beleive but it has no basis in fact. Of course you'll disagree, so offer your rationale and examples to back up your claim.

This is exactly where we disagree, at a fundamental (sorry!) level, Boaz.

You state your position, as you have many times, as:

>>You are doing that thing again... you are saying..that "I'm" saying..
-All Muslims are terrorists.
-All Atheists are pedophiles and enjoy a bit of animal...
Whoa... I've not said either of those things. I criticize "Islam" as a set of doctrines.
I point out that without reference to God.. people will just go off in any moral (immoral) direction, and there is no reason to claim bestiality, pedophilia or other forms of abuse are anything but 'different' forms of legitimate behavior. Now there is a difference between pointing out the philosophical implications of something and claiming EVERYONE is 'that'.<<

If there is a difference, Boaz, it exists only in your mind. To those whom you target, telling them that they fit within, in your view, an immoral category, is exactly the same as calling them immoral, as individuals.

You obviously do not see this, which is why you continue to do it.

No answers my question or your's Pericles by the look of things.

Boaz.........?

Don't expect a quick response, Ditch.

Boaz is presently trawling YouTube, looking for some more juicy bits of propaganda to present to us.

Like a cat bringing in a dead pigeon for you to admire.

His next offering will probably be just as interesting as a dead pigeon too.

I would challenge the easily dog-whistled Boazy to direct his purported Muslim friends from YouTube to this forum to read what he really thinks about them.

That would seem to me to be reasonable, since he's always exhorting us to visit the YouTube garbage with which he is apparently obsessed.

But to be fair, you can find absolutely anything on the web if you want to.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/1008072scuba1.html

Someone else "making it up as they go", eh, Boaz?

By their deeds shall ye know them

Ah the old 'secular people have no basis for morality' argument.

It's actually quite an interesting one - I can see the theory behind it, but not the practicality.

It was one of the central things Nietzsche looked at - Boaz, if it's something you're really interested in, have a look at the wikipedia entry for 'god is dead.'
It's not the literal meaning of course, more that with the rise of reason, the concept of god has taken a battering thus the basis for morality becomes a key question.

It's rather an interesting read.

Hi Ditch...you said:

[Nonsense. You have not substantiated this and I challenge you to do so. Your claim implies any non Christian is incapable of behaving morally. What rubbish]

I quite agree... such an assertion would indeed be rubbish. The problem is.. you misunderstand the point and I didn't assert that.

It is not that lack of reference to God will mean amorality, but it will mean ANY morality.. get it ? :) Put 2 people together Fred and Joe.. on my favorite island.. limited resources. Fred says to himself "I must discuss with Joe over there about sharing" in contrast..Joe says "Hmm.. without Fred, I can have it all...I'll kill him"

That....is my point. Both would be living according to the 'morality' they have developed. Both were developed based on survival. Who is to say which is 'more moral' ?

You are also assuming that morality with which atheists will act.. is going to be an agreed or universally applicable one..and that my friend is a logical fallacy,with no basis in anthropological, sociological philosophical and perhaps the most important.."historical" -fact.

One does not need to 'prove' this.. it can be stated as the bleeding obvious.

In the same way that a rudderless ship in a stormy sea will be pushed this way and that... how plain does one have to make it ?

HINT.. 'try to flush out all those inherited (often Christian) presuppositions and ideas about what is good and proper and expose you thinking to raw reality'

PERRRRRICLES....

you said:

"If there is a difference, Boaz, it exists only in your mind. To those whom you target, telling them that they fit within, in your view, an immoral category, is exactly the same as calling them immoral, as individuals."

You see ? :) you did it..A-GAIN.. and here it is.

"an immoral category"

That is not, has not been..and will continue not to be.. my point.
Refer my post above for the answer.

I maintain.. that the morality of the unbeliever is completely arbitrary.. is might be a HEALTHY morality.. it might be a 'PEACEFUL' morality.. or.. it might not. That.... THAT....is the point

You persist in your rather resilient philosophical myopia.

Ditch.. please consider the above..as well as the other post.

"Some aspects of Islam being dangerous" does not mean all muslims follow such things or are evil. But Hizb Ut Tahrir IS.. based on the scholars they adhere to. You just cannot SEE that evil at this time, because you fail to understand their program, or the theological underpinnning of that group.

"Some aspects of national socialism being evil" does not mean all Germans are evil.

"Some aspects of Buddhism being irrational", does not mean all Buddhists are 'bad' people..(irrational maybe)

"Stating that Hindusism is pantheism" does not mean Hindu's are 'bad' people. But it DOES mean that stict Hindus follow a strong sytem of social caste and class based on their religion..and this disadvantages many in tragic ways..and will never be addressed while they are under Hindu regime.

But there is no Hizb Ut Hindu or Hizb Ut Buddha in Australia... so they don't get much flack from me.

Back 2 Topic.. Yes.. It's the Lord Jesus.. re-focus please.

What is bleeding obvious Boaz is the inability you have to think and discuss beyong your blinkered frame of reference.

"That....is my point. Both would be living according to the 'morality' they have developed. Both were developed based on survival. Who is to say which is 'more moral'?"

There is no fundmental requirement for people to behave cooperatively, that they must be Christian. That is what you would like to think would happen. Why would individuals, when isolted, behave immorally, yet didn't when in the communities where they were socialised? Why would unacceptable behaviours be acted out simply because they found themselves isolated? You imply that the propensity to behave in any unacceptble way at all is simmering away in people just waiting for the chance to be acted out. Why wouldn't they continue to behave in the same acceptable way when isolated?

Quite the opposite has occurred where the need and wish to get on with ones' fellow man is the domonating factor is groups finding themselves is unexpected circumstances.

And please, no Lord of the Flies examples. It was a work of fiction after all.

Err..Lord of the rings? How about Lord of the rings?

I agree Spanky. 'Lord of the Rings' is a much better work of fiction than 'Lord of the Flies'... or 'Lord Jesus' for that matter :)

And Boazy, the thread topic isn't actually 'Jesus' - if you read Spanky's first post it's about why threads in this forum all too often get diverted to being about religion.

Lord of the Flies....a story of school age boys marooned on an island and the ensuing breakdown of order and cooperation between them.

"Lord of the Flies is a thought-provoking novel authored by William Golding in 1954. The book describes in detail the horrific exploits of a band of young children who make a striking transition from civilized to barbaric. Lord of the Flies commands a pessimistic outlook that seems to show that man is inherently tied to society, and without it, we would likely return to savagery."

From here http://www.gerenser.com/lotf/

Interestingly the author sees the breakdown as being due to the break from society, not religion. But as I said, it's fiction not fact. Just the same, a great read.

Ditch,
William Golding was a master in a private religious school. The title of his book "Lord of the flies" in the Biblical text refers to Baalzebub of the Caananite religion meaning god of death, and the concept of Baalzebub is of seething fly maggots in a dead carcus. Baalzebub from the Arabic text refers to the god of the underworld.

Golding is dealing with the nature of evil that lies in the heart of every man who is capable of killing the most moral and sensitive of characters - notably Jesus who gave us divine light on forgivness and grace and unselfishly serving each other.

Hi Ditch...

you responded to something...but not my point.

I am arguing that without a divine reference point, all morality and systems of it.. are relative. You made a good point, but I think it escaped you on the way through to the keeper.

"Why wouldn't they continue to behave in the same acceptable way when isolated?"

Answer: because I said in my example "limited resources".

I don't know if you have ever encountered a shortage of a staple commodity in a multi racial community, but I have, and it's quite scary. Kerosine... was the fuel on which most households in the part of Malaysia I was in, depended to cook food. One day.. it became a shortage... LINES.... and.. then it kind of degenerated quickly into ethnic groups.. my mob.. his mob.. their mob.. then to pushing in line... taking others places... with the unspoken support of 'my mob' so to speak. If you were Chinese or Christian ... you didn't matter to the 'other' group .. Malays.

If you want to know just how bad human behavior can get during difficult times read up on the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 by Josephus.

So...the issue remains.. that morality is relative, apart from God. This is a philosphical and reason based position.. no matter how you perceive it in practice and in your experience.

I can agree with what you said.. that people generally act in accordance with inherited values. But without God, they know deep down that its about what they can get away with, and when the pressure is on.... they will get away with whatever they can.

No. Again you are simply pushing the "Christianity is the only way" barrow. You've cited one example form your personal experience an have applied it to all of mankind.

All forms of moral behaviour are not dependent upon adherence to Christian beliefs. In the example of the two individuals on the island, your reasoning implies the necessity for a dual set of moral standards to have developed in individuals, the immoral and the moral, with a particular set of circumstances being necessary for the manifestation of the alternate set. This reasoning is flawed. You have not expained why this immoral set of behaviours would develop alongside the moral, nor why it would manifest itself when the opposite would be more beneficial to the individual's survival. It would be counterproductiove to behave immoraly, to continue with your example, when to do the opposite would be the more beneficial way to behave.

How would anyone develop this dual set of morals? Why would a change of circumstance bring out the worst?

Like it or not Boaz, a set of behavioual standards that allow a community to function do not have to be based in christian doctrine.

You genuinely don't get it, Boaz, but I will keep trying to correct you just as long as you keep making these ridiculously sweeping generalizations about the moral and ethical characteristics of others.

But I am beginning to enjoy the internal contradictions in your posts - some of them are simply delicious. This one for example:

>>You are also assuming that morality with which atheists will act.. is going to be an agreed or universally applicable one..and that my friend is a logical fallacy,with no basis in anthropological, sociological philosophical and perhaps the most important.."historical" -fact.<<

The point I made in an earlier post was exactly that - except that the word "christian" could be substituted for "atheist". I illustrated this with a little news item about a christian...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/1008072scuba1.html

- no, not just a christian, but the "pastor of Montgomery's Thorington Road Baptist Church". I strongly suspect that he was not following any "morality with which christians will act.. [that is] an agreed or universally applicable one"

So here we have it. Christians clearly do not have "an agreed or universally applicable morality". They pick and choose, just like the rest of humankind.

The only difference is that christians have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are somehow different, and that the normal rules that govern our lives somehow don't apply to them.

In most societies, this would be classed as hypocrisy, Boaz.

Your example of the two guys on the desert island begs an obvious question: how would the behaviour of two christians differ? More importantly, what evidence can you offer to support your theory, given the behaviour of our pastor?

Try as you might, Boaz, you cannot escape the obvious.

I pointed out that "[t]o those whom you target, telling them that they fit within, in your view, an immoral category, is exactly the same as calling them immoral, as individuals."

Your response is less than edifying:

>>You see ? :) you did it..A-GAIN.. and here it is. "an immoral category" That is not, has not been..and will continue not to be.. my point. Refer my post above for the answer.<<

There was nothing in the "post above" that bore any resemblance to an answer, Boaz.

Let's recap. You spend your waking hours - possibly sleeping ones as well - painting Islam as evil. You then somehow expect Muslims not to notice this, and just say "mmm, that's an interesting point, Boaz".

More likely, they will make a strong association between your hatred of their religion and a hatred of themselves as people, since they consider Islam to be an indissoluble part of their make-up.

Does this make any sense to you?

If I said - this is hypothetical, because I would say absolutely no such thing - that Christianity is an evil force in the world, would you not make the slightest connection between that statement, and how I might conceivably feel about you?

And continuing the theme of the internal contradictions in your posts, I had to chuckle at this one:

>>I am arguing that without a divine reference point, all morality and systems of it.. are relative.<<

But it seems, Boaz, that even with a "divine reference point", christians still behave with as much freedom from restraint as non-christians - I'm sure you don't want me to catalogue all the obvious examples here - which would appear to show that the christian morality is also extremely relative.

Or expedient, as we atheists like to point out from time to time.

Perhaps Boaz you'd also like to consider the behaviour of a significant number of Catholic and Anglican priests with their choir boys/pupils over the past several decades, or centuries I would imagine as there is no reason to assume that their trangressions have occurred only over the past few decades only. Oh Christian morals indeed. Masturbation, oral sex and buggery! And they didn't even need to find themselves conveniently marooned on an island with the choir to indulge their frustrations

Pericles and Ditch,
Thanks for concluding the Christian position that "All persons are inherently evil and fall far short of any divine standard".

That is why the Christian position of repentance for moral violations and Grace to the undeserving person is only found in Christian theology.

All others societies hang, shoot or electrocute violators of the societies moral laws. There is no concept of repentance and grace extended to sinners. We are all equally as sinful wether Christian, atheists, or of another religion.

Oh, ri-i-i-i-i-ght. Now it is clear, thank you Philo.

>>All persons are inherently evil and fall far short of any divine standard<<

So, we can now take it as admitted, that all this finger-pointing and name-calling by you christians against Islam is nothing but pure hypocrisy?

As in "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone"

Or even:

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

That pretty much says it all, don't you think?

>>the Christian position of repentance for moral violations and Grace to the undeserving person is only found in Christian theology. All others societies hang, shoot or electrocute violators of the societies moral laws<<

Hold on a moment. Since when are a religion and "all other societies" one and the same? Are you trying to say that a christian should be forgiven - rather than hung, shot or electrocuted - when they commit a crime that demands that penalty?

But your statement is rubbish anyway. There is a strong correlation between the existence of the death penalty in the US, and the presence of a christian "moral majority" in that State.

Texas even executes juveniles - that's kids under eighteen - there have been eight in the last five years alone.

Christian forgiveness? Tell that to the marines.

I have to add a big thank you to Boazy here. Thanks mate, you have made me see the error of my ways and have turned me into a much more productive human being. By filling up OLO with your religious tripe and bible quotes and totally hijacking threads that may have been more interesting, you have fatigued my interest in this site altogether. I can hardly be bothered reading or responding to anything these days. This of course has given me much more time to do things around the house and catch up on the little jobs, read books (the last Harry Potter was pretty good I thought) and talk to my wife more.

Thanks again Boazy!

Well I'm tired of ther debate with Boaz also. I wouldn't be if his answers and responses were rational and partly intelligent. But they're not. I might contribute if others like Pericles for example, continue. Otherwise I'm heading for more rational debates.

There are more sensible threads to contribute to than any of those that Boaz and Gibo hijack.

Allow me a translation for all the methods used to preach christanity on these forums, and the chief offenders.
Treat this as a quick reference guide, so you don't need to read the posts any more.

gibo: Join god, or else. *Insert loopy diatribe about flying saucers or a prophecy of the apocalypse.*

Boaz_David: Beware Islam. Join god. *Insert diatribe of X part of the bible said X* or alternatively *Islam is evil because of X part of the Qu'ran.*

runner: Join god. Abortions are evil and all pro choicers are evil baby killers.

coach: muslims are evil and pro-choicers are baby killers. Oh, by the way, Join god.

Thanks for the ready-reference TRTL, a handy guide for us all.

I understand your frustration Ditch. But this particular thread was started with the intention of discovering why and how every other thread is quickly diverted by the God Squad. As such, I think it has been very illuminating. But that isn't a reason to back down.

>>I'm heading for more rational debates. There are more sensible threads to contribute to than any of those that Boaz and Gibo hijack.<<

Regrettably, they all are hijacked, some sooner, some later. Since this is a free country that values free speech - however unpalatable that is for some - it is just something we rationals are happy to live with.

Boaz and Co. are "on a mission from God". Whenever I succumb to the need to react to them I see myself "on a mission from society".

Their fear of Islam is palpable. While this is in itself understandable - after all, their religions are in direct competition with each other - it expresses itself primarily in bilious and mindless scaremongering. Wherever this appears, I try to point out how stupid and pointless their reaction is, serving only to increase tension, and to foster hatred where before there was indifference.

What tends to happen then, is also frustrating.

After a couple of attempts to change the topic and avoid the difficult questions, they simply fade away, only to appear - as if nothing had happened - on another thread, with the same Chicken Little cluckings about the world ending in some kind of Islamic takeover.

But even that isn't a good reason to stop. Without some voices of moderation and reason, these folk will fill the blogosphere with their witless ravings, until no-one is left to listen, except themselves.

So it's not a lot of fun, but someone has to do it.

Actually, scratch that. On occasions, when you do hit a motherlode of their illogicality and non-sequiturs - which is fortunately quite often - it can be hilarious.

Back-flips, double-pike with a twist, triple salkow, you get to see them all.

I have to agree with most of that Pericles. The plus is the hilarity of some of their posts which can make hanging in the thread worthwhile.

Who said "Evil is what happens when good men do nothing"? That reasoning can be applied to the God squad's attempts to hijack and thread crap in this forum. Giving the bastards some opposition isn't such a bad idea.

Yes indeed Bugsy, Pericles, TRTL and Ditch - I find much to identify with in all your posts. It does get tiresome at times, but someone's gotta do it, eh?

Besides which, as we all know, it's often highly entertaining :)

It can be entertaining, you bet. It really depends on what sort of day I've had. If I feel like a good laugh I get one from reading the squad's posts. I don't like kicking the cat when I get home after I've had a bad day, so getting stuck into the stupidity of their posts is a good alternative.

I tend to think it's a wider issue than just a fear of Islam - there seems to be a need to impress a fundamentalist version of the judeo-christian belief system on wider society.

The same christian rhetoric gets applied to a plethora of issues - such as abortion and related debates such as stem cells and so on.
I'm not saying christians shouldn't have a voice here, nor am I suggesting there shouldn't be rigorous debate on these, or indeed the role of Islam in society.
I suppose what I do have an issue with is this retreat into scripture as a fall back position. It's then extrapolated to what they see as a superior morality and ultimately leads to a breakdown in reasoned debate. There is nothing more frustrating than the feeling that regardless of what points you make, regardless of any revelations (the non biblical kind) you can put forward, it simply doesn't matter. Any argument you can make is either seen as an attack on god, or the information is ignored because it doesn't quite jibe with the ordained script (pun very much intended).

I give boaz_david some credit insofar as he appears to oppose religion in government - though I fear that other fundamentalists don't share that view.

Yes, it does get frustrating. When a rational comeback is beyond the fundamentalits' grasp, the same old "faith in the lord" answer is seen by them as a superior way to view the topic at hand and all others are faithless inferiors. That makes fundamentalists an arrogant bunch for me. And that applies to any relgious fundamentalist.

The "my way is the only way" attitude is often a belligerent attitude, something that is borne out often enough in human conflicts throughout history.

TurnRightThenLeft, " There is nothing more frustrating than the feeling that regardless of what points you make, regardless of any revelations (the non biblical kind) you can put forward, it simply doesn't matter. "

That probably has something to du with the bit where everyone except god is considered a liar discussed earlier. No matter how strong the evidence if it contradicts the interpretation of the bible a fundy holds then the evidence must be wrong rather than either god or the fundy's interpretation. See the fervent support for a literal creation vs evolution shown by some.

R0bert

I just realised I started a virtually identical post about godbothers - I should have just added to this one. I've given up on OLO (my last hurrah notwithstanding) because of the more rabid christians whose reactionary social policies I find boringly predictable: "Well, must say, I'm not keen on those refos or abos, and guess what, neither is Jesus!"

I think it's a pity - I'd like a good social policy forum to contribute to. Anyway. The good news is that posters like boaz do more than any of us could to turn people away from the myth of Christianity.

He's certainly been made aware, courtesy of this thread, that his precictability is a bore and a pain. As for Gibo, well I think his skull is numb to the point of being beyond help. Time will tell.

Good one, Boazy. Another rational, reasonable contributor leaves OLO, largely because of you.