Originally posted by ivanhoeDon't you think the modern day high priests are the right-wing religious nuts who can't see humanity for their dogma?
Telerion: " ....... You're just making excuses for your idol to spare him our judgement."
Matthew
Chapter 26
Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,
4
and they consulted together to arrest Jesus by treachery and put him to death.
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew26.htm
Originally posted by telerionWhere does your "moral sense" come from? On what or who's authority do you judge what is good or bad? It seems that moral sense is not universal. Hitler had his moral sense, so did Gandhi. So who are you to judge or dispute?
I dispute it. Even humans now have enough moral sense to realize that blood and death for every tiny transgression is heinous. ,,,I say our moral sense cries out that such cruel punishments are reprehensible. ...
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou more direct about it, but you are in the same boat as telerion. You have defined good as that which "maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain" and on that basis you judge God. But you have not given a justification for making that you definition of good.
I judge God, if he exists, as not fully good because I define good as that which maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain. ....
And it is not without other flaws. For instance - who's pleasure and pain? Some people get please out of causing other's pain. Your definition of good and evil would lead to relative good and evil. An act could be both good and evil at the same time and too the same extent. Therefore nothing can be said to be universally good or evil. Are you willing to except that?
The whole sacrifice of Christ thing has been a problem for me throughout my religious practice......
Here is an understanding that works for me.
I do not believe that God required a blood sacrifice. I think that People required a sacrifice. People could not and still do not believe that they were deserving of the love, mercy, acceptance and forgiveness of God. God having created us as we are, and having given us free will must work with us and our limitations.
Now, I will get a bit foggy 'cuz I am still thinking this part through (for like the last two decades)....
God was willing to sacrifice Christ who manifested the divine spark which each of us posses in its fullness. Christ as a man choose to be sacrificed because he was capable of believing himself and us as worthy of God's mercy and love.
And for the ongoing blood drinking at Communion.....well, my understanding and experience....
For me, my brain knows that the wine is wine. My heart knows that once the communion blessings have been said and I recieve....it is the blood of Christ....
I drink because somehow this wine/blood carries with it acceptance of all that I am, love because of and inspite of all that I am, mercy for healing, forgiveness for all the ways I am wrongful. I drink not for hope of heaven. I rarely think of salvation. I drink to recieve renewed life which will be manifest in me here and now, in the choices I make, the words I speak, the actions I take and the person I am. In communion, the theology, the dogma, the multiple words and ideas of faith give way to the truth......
I, too, am loved, wholly and passionately by a God who sees all of me....and loves. I know that God loves you, each of all the others in the world in that same passionate, forgiving perfection but accepting that it might just might be true for me......hard to believe.....Christ did not die for God, he died for me.....
that I might be healed and made whole....
I would expect semi-savages from thousands of years ago to believe in a "God that demands blood"; after all, many primitive cultures did. Most of such beliefs were based on xenophobia and other self-centered beliefs which considered the tribe or people more important than other "lesser" humans. It's the 21st century now, Coletti, surely even you realize that humanity has passed beyond such savagery. That you continue to worship a hateful, bitter God and feel that your brothers are "vile" shows only your psychosis; it has nothing to do with the way human beings, with billions of acts of simple kindness every day, conduct themselves. You are a pathetic excuse for a human being, Coletti; I fervently hope that someday such a twisted, hateful dogma as yours will be known only from history books and people will say "Somebody really believed such crap" and shake their heads in wonder and pity.
Originally posted by no1marauderGood thing you don't respond directly to my posts. Better if you just keep making the same fallacious assertions and abuse ad hominems. After all, you know you can't justify your beliefs, so repeating your old pathetic attacks of my beliefs and character is your only chance of convincing anyone. You are a fool.
... surely even you realize that humanity has passed beyond such savagery. ...shows only your psychosis; ... You are a pathetic excuse for a human being, Coletti; ... hateful dogma as yours....
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1: " .....your brothers are "vile" shows only your psychosis; it has nothing to do with the way human beings, with billions of acts of simple kindness every day, conduct themselves."
I would expect semi-savages from thousands of years ago to believe in a "God that demands blood"; after all, many primitive cultures did. Most of such beliefs were based on xenophobia and other self-centered beliefs which considered the tribe or people more important than other "lesser" humans. It's the 21st century now, Coletti, surely eve ...[text shortened]... people will say "Somebody really believed such crap" and shake their heads in wonder and pity.
Where can I find those acts of simple kindness in your conduct towards your opponents, No1 ?
Am I imagining all your annoying Ad Hominems ?
Am I missing something here, No1 ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeA reasoning, functioning brain is something you obviously are missing, Ivanhoe.
No1: " .....your brothers are "vile" shows only your psychosis; it has nothing to do with the way human beings, with billions of acts of simple kindness every day, conduct themselves."
Where can I find those acts of simple kindness in your conduct towards your opponents, No1 ?
Am I imagining all your annoying Ad Hominems ?
Am I missing something here, No1 ?
Originally posted by ColettiLMFAO! Who never "justifies their beliefs"? You've dodged numerous posts regarding your ridiculous "predestination" belief system. My post is directly on point; you regard the human race as vile garbage; try justifying that belief. It is also beyond question that numerous primitive peoples believed that Gods "demanded" blood sacrifices. Your posts are the usual tiresome "humans aren't s**t, but my God is wonderful" crap that's been passed on by simpletons for thousands of years. Your superstitious rot combined with liberal doses of contempt and loathing for your fellow Men doesn't cut any ice with me, Coletti; you're RBHILL pretending to be educated (and your laughable attempts at "logic" show you probably didn't complete grammar school).
Good thing you don't respond directly to my posts. Better if you just keep making the same fallacious assertions and abuse ad hominems. After all, you know you can't justify your beliefs, so repeating your old pathetic attacks of my beliefs and character is your only chance of convincing anyone. You are a fool.
Originally posted by ColettiI judge based upon what appears right through reason.
Where does your "moral sense" come from? On what or who's authority do you judge what is good or bad? It seems that moral sense is not universal. Hitler had his moral sense, so did Gandhi. So who are you to judge or dispute?
Until you solve Euthyphro's Dilemma, you are prey to your own accusation. You just have an extra bit of fantasy tied on.
Originally posted by ColettiBut you have not given a justification for making that you definition of good.
You more direct about it, but you are in the same boat as telerion. You have defined good as that which "maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain" and on that basis you judge God. But you have not given a justification for making that you definition of good.
And it is not without other flaws. For instance - who's pleasure and pain? Some people get p ...[text shortened]... Therefore nothing can be said to be universally good or evil. Are you willing to except that?
Why do I need a justification?
For instance - who's pleasure and pain?
Everyone's is equal.
Some people get please out of causing other's pain.
The pleasure would be countered by the pain. Depending which was the greater factor, the net act might be good or evil.
I don't have a moral calculator to show exactly which acts are net good and which are net evil, but then neither does anyone else.
Your definition of good and evil would lead to relative good and evil. An act could be both good and evil at the same time and too the same extent. Therefore nothing can be said to be universally good or evil. Are you willing to except that?
My definition does lot lead to relative good and evil since the concepts of good and evil to me include the total pleasure and pain that result from an action regardless of who experiences it. If an act were both good and evil at the same time and to the same extent it would be morally neutral.
Your 'therefore' does not seem to follow from anything said previously. I'm not sure where you got that conclusion from.
Originally posted by no1maraudercan a scathing be considered an ad hominem? lol
LMFAO! Who never "justifies their beliefs"? You've dodged numerous posts regarding your ridiculous "predestination" belief system. My post is directly on point; you regard the human race as vile garbage; try justifying that belief. It is also beyond question that numerous primitive peoples believed that Gods "demanded" blood sacrifices. Yo ...[text shortened]... ed (and your laughable attempts at "logic" show you probably didn't complete grammar school).