12 Apr 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitI would say it applies to the predominantly Muslim neighbourhood I live in, where - incidentally - the community leader for the last 18 years has been a Catholic.
From experience, this usually doesn't apply to people outside the religion. Maybe it is different in the UK.
12 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitSlavery is a result of sin. If slavery was embraced by the Mosaic law then why the Sabbath? Why free any slaves at all? So no, your skewed presentation has not sunk in at all.
I was the one who gave you the verses from the Bible that showed that not all slaves were freed after 7 years, that you were allowed to sell your daughter as a sex slave, that you were allowed to pass slaves on as an inheritance to your children, that you were allowed to beat your slaves so long as they didn't die in the next 2 days, etc. etc. etc.
No ssage that says it is.
I'll go with the 13th Amendment over 'eradicating sin' any day.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by Pianoman1
Let's get back to the thread:
[b]"I am spiritual, but I'm not religious."
In order to discuss this we need to clarify the terminology:
Spiritual: of, relating to, consisting of, having the nature of spirit, not material.
Religious: having or showing belief in and reverence for a deity or god.
So is it possible to believe ...[text shortened]... particle of the Cosmos, then it is quite possible to be spiritual without being religious.[/b]Let's get back to the thread (AGAIN!!)
"I am spiritual, but I'm not religious."
In order to discuss this we need to clarify the terminology:
Spiritual: of, relating to, consisting of, having the nature of spirit, not material.
Religious: having or showing belief in and reverence for a deity or god.
So is it possible to believe in spirit, an intangible non-material stuff that survives the body after death while not believing or showing reverence for a god?
Richard Dawkins ( The God Delusion ) would say an emphatic NO, but I disagree.
And the reason I disagree ilies in the interpretation of the word "god".
The Christian God is a creating, human-like entity (we were made in His image) who looks over us and intercedes in our affairs. But if you widen the meaning to include the creative force of the universe, in us, around us, in every particle of the Cosmos, then it is quite possible to be spiritual without being religious.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by whodeyLet me see if I understand this correctly.
Slavery is a result of sin. If slavery was embraced by the Mosaic law then why the Sabbath? Why free any slaves at all? So no, your skewed presentation has not sunk in at all.
SG cited verses from the OT that explicitly state "that not all slaves were freed after 7 years, that you were allowed to sell your daughter as a sex slave, that you were allowed to pass slaves on as an inheritance to your children, that you were allowed to beat your slaves so long as they didn't die in the next 2 days, etc." and you see this as having made a "skewed presentation"?
Have you considered that perhaps it is your conception that is "skewed"?
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by Pianoman1
Let's get back to the thread (AGAIN!!)
[b]"I am spiritual, but I'm not religious."
In order to discuss this we need to clarify the terminology:
Spiritual: of, relating to, consisting of, having the nature of spirit, not material.
Religious: having or showing belief in and reverence for a deity or god.
So is it possib ...[text shortened]... particle of the Cosmos, then it is quite possible to be spiritual without being religious.[/b]I would go a step further and state that its quite possible to be religious and have no
concept of spirituality whatsoever, in fact, I would go even further than that and state
that many religious practices are empty and deviod of spirituality, being a kind of
mundane and empty ritual, a semblance if you like.
12 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI asked for a verse showing that slavery is a sin or a result of sin. Unless you provide one, I'll just have to assume this is something you made up yourself.
Slavery is a result of sin. If slavery was embraced by the Mosaic law then why the Sabbath? Why free any slaves at all? So no, your skewed presentation has not sunk in at all.
So what if slaves get the Sabbath off?
And so what if some of them get to go free after 'only' 7 years?
They're still subject to all the abuses explicitly permitted under the Mosaic Law.
My 'presentation' was nothing but quotes from the Mosaic Law. You haven't made the case that I am misusing them in any way. You're just flat out ignoring them. Again, unless you provide a theory that fits these verses in, I'll just have to assume you don't have one.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitMy reference comes from Christ as he said that those who sin become a slave to such sin. We all have experienced this as we have sinned and hated ourselves for continuing that sinful practice.
I asked for a verse showing that slavery is a sin or a result of sin. Unless you provide one, I'll just have to assume this is something you made up yourself.
So what if slaves get the Sabbath off?
And so what if some of them get to go free after 'only' 7 years?
They're still subject to all the abuses explicitly permitted under the Mosaic Law.
...[text shortened]... ovide a theory that fits these verses in, I'll just have to assume you don't have one.
As for Christians, we are referred to as slaves as well, only, we are slaves to Christ and it is by choice.
So as you can see, we are caught in the middle of a slave war or sorts. Choose your side.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by whodeyRE "slave to sin" - this is obviously a metaphoric use of the term 'slave'. It has nothing to do with the type of real, literal slavery that I am talking about.
My reference comes from Christ as he said that those who sin become a slave to such sin. We all have experienced this as we have sinned and hated ourselves for continuing that sinful practice.
As for Christians, we are referred to as slaves as well, only, we are slaves to Christ and it is by choice.
So as you can see, we are caught in the middle of a slave war or sorts. Choose your side.
The whole bit about 'slaves to Christ' is obviously metaphoric also. 'Slave by choice' is an obvious oxymoron.
And as for the last sentence, maybe you could do a better job of converting people to your side if you actually bothered to back up your claims on the Biblical issues at hand instead of deflecting or ignoring them entirely.
12 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI am sorry to say that this is a problem in the US as well. I heard of a poll that said US citizens would sooner elect a gay person or Muslim to the Presidency than an atheist. I don't know how valid the poll is, but it seems true based on my experience. And I'm not at all justifying the bigotry and hatred towards gays and Muslims that exists in this country. It just really hit home with me as an atheist that we're in some ways even more hated than that by the bigots.
True. There are some problems with intolerance in some parts of the country. They get into the news.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitBut I still think the snippet is broadly true: religion - at its best - in the country where I live, is part of "the DNA of communities", and allows different faiths to live alongside each other with a fair degree of trust, even if there are plenty of stories in the news about conflict [and earthquakes and volcanoes and a Muslim preacher marrying a nine year old etc.].
I am sorry to say that this is a big problem in the US as well. I heard of a poll that said US citizens would sooner elect a gay person or Muslim to the Presidency than an atheist. I don't know how valid the poll is, but it seems true based on my experience.
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by FMFYeah, there were a bunch of crazy Christians in Texas who practiced polygamy with underage girls. There's also the Westboro Baptist Church, a notorious anti-gay hate group. But I wouldn't tar all religious people with this sort of brush either. If religion helps you live in peace with your neighbor, great. It's not working out so well in the US right now, but maybe we'll mature at some point.
But I still think the snippet is broadly true: religion - at its best - in the country where I live, is part of "the DNA of communities", and allows different faiths to live alongside each other with a fair degree of trust, even if there are plenty of stories in the news about conflict [and earthquakes and volcanoes and a Muslim preacher marrying a nine year old etc.].
12 Apr 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitWell the snippet talks of "religion at its best". You and I could trade stories of 'religion at its worst', I suppose.
Yeah, there were a bunch of crazy Christians in Texas who practiced polygamy with underage girls. There's also the Westboro Baptist Church, a notorious anti-gay hate group. But I wouldn't tar all religious people with this sort of brush either. If religion helps you live in peace with your neighbor, great. It's not working out so well in the US right now, but maybe we'll mature at some point.
You don't think religion gives cohesion to communities; never or rarely or sometimes? Neither I, nor the person in the podcast, contend that there are not things like "crazy Christians in Texas who practiced polygamy with underage girls" or things like the Westboro Baptist Church.
Do you really think these kinds of things 'disprove' the snippet's application to the lives of millions of ordinary people in ordinary communities in a country like the one where I live, despite its newsworthy problems and bug jar type scandals?