Bible Study with Xyle

You seem to be conflating a couple of things here. When you say that belief in God is not necessarily without basis in scientific or rational thought, I don't suppose you're going full blown argument-from-ignorance on us; rather, I think that you're saying, quite correctly, that a belief in God is not inconsistent with scientific etc. thought. And I think I'm right in saying that this is also what you mean when you say that it's not irrational to believe in God, in the sense that such belief is not incoherent, it doesn't contradict certain knowledge, etc. However, not all atheistic positions are synonymous with with what you've argued against, though there certainly are a great many whose views your criticism applies to, and I don't think that we're quite at a 'science vs. religion' ('oh no it doesn't', 'oh yes it does') stage, here.

As you say, for some people any supernatural event or myth could take the place of any other, since we don't know which of them is true. I think you're wrong, however, to say that it's a type of Occam's razor question. In the first instance, most people's religious views are not of this type: many believe in God, but they don't just stop there, bringing in life after death, magic healing powers, etc. Stripped of these, we're thinking about a creator, with little or no religious connotations in the sense I've mentioned above. That's all fine, but...

As Ring Lord has hinted at, this is simply as assumption on your part. Some would say, an unnecessary assumption.

 

Humans are crazy. Fact.

They treat each other badly. Fact.

Why stress about how delusional people are? The only real issue is how nasty they will be.

I condescend but I dont trivialise.

 

P.S. Sorry for the:- condescension; hypocrisy and; double post.

I am especially sorry for the irreverence. Jesus is definitely worth more respect.

I still recommend buddha's mental yoga to all my friends and enemies. It is the best science and the best sacrament too.

P.p.s. Oh here's the edit button.

 

Because the two are often linked. Delusions let you hide from reality. This includes the reality of other people's rights and suffering. Reducing the amount of delusion in the world is a good thing, and that applies to all kinds of delusion, including "the old ways are best", "the new ways are best", "religion will solve all our problems", "free market capitalism will solve all our problems", and "returning to nature and living as hippies in the wilderness will solve all our problems".

The truth will set you free.

 

Which one?
"The world is generous enough to provide for any truth." (F. Helmholtz)

 

Well, not that one.

 

Contrary? The rule is love. For the head to rule the body, it must love the body. As your head submits to the needs of your bladder, so should the head of the home submit to the needs of the wife. For Jesus doesn't command use to rule in the manner of the heathens, but

"25And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. 26But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. 27For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth." Luke 22:25-27

Furthermore, for the body to love the head, it must obey the head even as we obey the head of the church who is Jesus.

When you live as the lost, you live without love and understanding. Do not do so; instead live according the example of Lord Jesus who set an example for us with both word and deed. Is not the very basis of Christianity the fact that our Lord died for us?


Should the body rule the mind or the mind rule the body? They are both parts of equal value for without either you have death, and yet when the body tries to rule the mind, the mind cannot function the way it was meant to function.

No. When God gave Adam dominion over the earth, that included the need to establish governments. When a government decides that all of its citizens are to granted equal protection under the law, that is what creates and promotes equality within that culture. And like anything that man creates, it can be taken so far as to become a transgression against the law of love.

Did you know that if you wash a blended fabric in a substance that destroys one of the materials, it becomes more transparent, without appearing damaged? So the purpose of that law was modesty and protection of the poor and uneducated who won't know such things. Once you know the why of a thing, it makes much more sense. Unfortunately, there are too many things to explain for any one person to learn all the explanations.

Depends on your define of lasciviousness and whether or not lust plays a role in your action.

The book of Romans deal with this issue better than I, but to summarize it, it tells of the necessity of law to reveal our wrecked state, but once you are saved, you are no longer under the law, but under grace. That does not excuse your continuing in sin, but rather it changes the focus on where you derive your behavior. Rather than relying on the written law in the Old Testament, the Christian who obeys God, obeys the law that God wrote upon their hearts (as God promised in Jeremiah 31:33).

That doesn't mean the Christian immediately becomes perfect, for the process is called sanctification. Each sinner who becomes saved becomes convicted in their own hearts as to what is right and wrong. The obedient believer who truly turned away from sin will lay aside each sin as God reveals that sin in their heart. It is a process that is much likened to a baby learning how to walk... with many falls.

A man's love for himself is reflected in his love for wife (Ephesians 5:28). A wife who encourages a husband's self-worth will reap rewards when he loves her more because he has more love to give. Now what happens when a woman destroys a man's self-image by permitting others to call him crazy because he claims she can hear his mind and she refuses to provide proof? Who then is being harmed in this relationship?
Yes, such a relationship can be harmful, but the difference between this one and anyone other is the immediacy of the harm. There is no denial, no delusion, no hiding for the harmful effects of one's sin upon the other. Every sin that you commit against another, whether or not the other knows it, causes harm. Therefore, because we live in a fallen world, every relationship we forge causes harm because we constantly and continuously sin against each other. Even now, my soul-mate wages war to prevent me from declaring the harm we do to each other, but I forgive her. Constantly, continuously and relentlessly I forgive her for every slight, every conflict of wills within our minds, every disobedience and every harm. Because to do otherwise is to deny the simple fact that God endures worst from the hands every human on this planet because not only does He feel the harm for the transgressions against him, he feels the harm for every transgression against everyone and everything.
This is HIS planet, HIS creation, His and His alone. And yet he freely gives us liberty to choose Him or reject Him. Death and harm and sin and destruction exists because he gave us the liberty to choose Him or reject Him. He did not want automatons so he gave us Choice, and every one that rejects God does harm to themselves, to others and the planet because all those people care about are their own desires.
So which is the greater harm? To pay the cost for a love so dear that your heart merely feels dead and yet you still love, or to kill your own heart with greed, malice and hate?

God loves me and that gives me the means to love. God forgives me and that gives me the means to forgive. Glory be to the Most High because He deserves our praise.

 

Right on, Smuel.

Truth is the key.

Buddhists use the word dhamma and although atheistic, truth/reality is venerated and worshipped in a sense.

Dhamma means reality as it is in a general sense but also refers specifically the technique used to observe reality, ie, the yoga of objective observation, much like "science" in english.

Of course many idiots and jerks use scientific and buddhist terms as well.

I agree truth is of utmost importance, but I dont mind if people can only handle fairytales, as long as they are ethical.

Ethics is a kind of truth.

 

I did a quick search for a substance that might damage wool but not linen and vice versa, but haven't found anything. Then I did a quick research as to why the law exists (which by the way appears in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, or in other words - among the things god dictated to Moses). The scholars mostly agree upon its purpose: the priests (Kohens) were supposed to have both of these fabrics in their ceremonial clothes, and so this law was to separate the holy from the common folk.

"Though shall not kill" appears in the same book with the command to wear Tzitzit, but I've never seen a christian wear one of those. It seems that some laws, which god himself dictated, remain, while others don't.
Not all laws exist to "reveal our wrecked state". In fact, most are tedious, completely irrelevant to anything, but god himself commanded people to obey them.

 

Oh, it does.

 

Are you saying that inequality is necessary for love?

 

It would appear that you, as well as myself, are also in possession of an incredibly sexy hand.

 

And reality sucks, therefore dreamers hid from reality with the delusion that they can change reality. However, nothing would change without dreamers.

Yes, the one who wishes to love must LOWER himself (or herself) to the position of servant.

Actually those are the laws that reveal our wretched state the most; after all, the commandment that brought sin into the world was the simple command not to eat from a single tree. Obedience isn't about obeying the laws we understand, obedience is about obeying the laws regardless of understanding. However, God forgives us for disobedience and will allow those that can accept His rule to live under His rule.


Rejoice, you who reject God, for the God that you reject won't require that you live eternity with Him, instead He will give you eternity WITHOUT Him. And yes, it will still be hell because you were made to spend eternity with Him. For God is Love (I John 4:8) and rejecting God is rejection of the law of love. And if you won't rejoice then fear the God of judgement who gives you the consequences of your choice, and in fear repent from your sins and accept the rule of God. For He is a gracious God willing bring us wretched sinners into His embrace and protection!! ... Too dramatic?

 

If someone can successfully change something, then they're not deluded for thinking that it can be changed.

That's not what I was asking. You posted a load of rambling about how equality is against the law of love. The implication was that you think that "man as the head of the household and woman doing what he says" is some kind of necessary condition for love, or the law of love, or blah blah God something.

I'm asking whether you think that's actually true. Do you have a real opinion here, or was it just your usual random spouting and selective bible quoting?

 

There is a big difference between having a dream and being delusional. When you have a dream you are accepting the reality as it is and works to change it into what you want it to be.

When you are delusional you are denying the reality as it is and imagines that the world is how you want it to be. This is something that can be difficult to separate for oneself.

 

Xyle reminds me of Durance.

 

Hah, that's true.
Both in regards to religious fervor and inability to concoct more than a few replies before needing respite.

 

More like "Queefs on Scrotal." Kidding aside, I see your point.

That was about as dramatic as we can expect from you, so...no, I don't think so.
My wife is a Christian herself, and whether or not I agree with her belief structure, I agreed to not argue with her about it because I appreciate her company too much to jeopardize it with my ego. More recently, however, we began talking about Hell - in the context of her hoping that people who molest children (Josh Duggar, in that conversation) are still going to Hell in spite of their religiosity. I said "I think Hell, as a place of fire and suffering, was invented by the Catholic Church to increase the amount of people following their teachings."

Now, she thought I was starting an argument with her based on her faith, but what I lead into was how Gehenna, as was mentioned in the bible, just happened to be where people dumped the bodies of the dead. "Hell" itself is a word that's rooted in Germanic languages, and simply means "hole." Hell as a place didn't exist, but if you didn't agree with the teachings of Judaism, and later Christianity, you would simply stay on earth, away from God. An experiential oblivion devoid of stimuli, surrounded by your own thoughts, and aware you're not where you should be. I've found that idea of hell ultimately more horrifying than being tortured appropriately and coincidentally according to my sins.

Aside from that, it's taught that "the dead know nothing." So even if someone ends up going to heaven, they will have no knowledge or memory of their life, and will only know the presence of God. I'm sure that's utterly fantastic for anyone currently experiencing it, but as I'm alive, that's a scary thought on its own.

 

Oblivion is awesome.

Devils don't scare me.

Hell is a state of mind, eg, obeying an idiot because testicles are magical.

 

What if my desire to change reality is the product of a delusion about reality that results in changes to reality that are not the changes I desired to impact, but nevertheless, have impacted? Or what if I am delusional about being delusional and I am really not? ...Do these questions count as trolling? ::smirk::


Seriously though, I feel as my dreams tend to be delusional. The impacts that I desire are never the impacts that occur. "No man is an island." Every action we take has consequences and therefore have impacts upon the lives of others. The simple fact that we don't know the people we are impacting (even when we think we know the person) means that we will never achieve the full consequences that we aimed for. "Shot for the moon. If you miss, you'll land among the stars."

It's called being an introvert. One of the concepts that personality typing offers that has real value in spite of its overall lack of apparent usefulness.

Does that mean my "acting" sucks?

Dante's Inferno is a work of fiction, unfortunately it's more widely cited than scripture (though probably not directly). So the mental imagery that enters into the minds of the majority isn't based on what little knowledge that God has granted to us, but is based on a lie. So it is easy to argue against anything based on Dante's work because all you have to do is point out that is based on Dante's Inferno which is not scripture.
That being said, scripture says "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." (Revelation 20:12-15) This, of course, is after the thousand year reign of Christ. (v7) So my understanding is that death is like sleep until the resurrection, where everyone gets their body back, and then you get either eternal life or eternal death (torment).

You can think of this time on this planet as your childhood (especially when compared to eternity). Once we grow up, most people barely remember their childhood. Not remembering it doesn't impair our sense of self. As for knowing only the presence of God...

"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind." Isaiah 65:17

"And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err." Mark 12:26-27

I believe that we have bodies and experiences after the resurrection. That our heart-based knowledge will be intact so that the friendships we make will carry over, if our friendships go with us and not to the other place.