Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Quackenbush's' started by RyanUTAustin, Jan 27, 2008.
I am simply perplexed by people's unwaivering belief in something so ridiculous.
The fact that people actually believe that there is a entity looking down on them that judges there actions on earth...then decides if they go to the right or left when they die is mind boggling to me.
The universe is too immense to be so self absorbed and think that anything you do matters.
I understand why people need it but it is simply a crutch to help explain the reason we are here.
Not to mention the books make outrageous claims that people believe...and why?
Ya, it is coming out on Easter
A mix between Religion and Ridiculous
Comparing deities to Love (or Hate or Jealously, no need to zero in on a single emotion) is totally inaccurate given the nature of the claims. Emotions are functions of our human brains that exist only within our brains. Claims of deities being supposedly independent of our brains is different. These deities supposedly have the power to interact physically with the world, and even create it! Our thoughts cannot do that.
Religions are claiming the existence of something that exists outside the human mind and interacts with the perceivable universe. At that point it's fair to ask, "How does God interact with the world? How do you know that?"
Trouble is, too many Christians have been practicing religion instead of seeking a relationship with their all-powerful, all-loving God.
I think we're misunderstanding each other's vocabulary with regards to Love. This conflict is the source of much of the world's poetry.
But my usage is narrowly restricting it to that which we all know: a personal, human emotion. I have to restrict it to that because this definition is the most universally understood. Your definition appears to require the belief in a deity in order to even discuss it. Mine requires only shared human experience. We could very well be talking about two completely different concepts that share the same spelling, like the two versions of "gay" or "bad" (think 1970s).
If vocabulary is a barrier I'll use another human emotion, apprehensiveness. I've never heard anyone define a deity as Apprehensiveness. Yet it's as universal and real, if not potent, as love in the human condition. Is there a deity that is responsible for all our apprehensive feelings? Christianity doesn't provide one. No, it is the result of our minds, our contexts and situations, just as love is. I feel Christians have co-opted the great human emotion of love, and it is now a circular definition. "What is love? Love is God. What is God? God is love."
I understand you POV HitH. I am speaking of love in the sense of agape, as understood by the early Christian movement. The english word really doesn't capture the concept. I guess the best description is selfless love, based on what I understand. I agree that we are not talking about the same thing. I agree with most of the points you make in your last paragraph. I admitted in my post that I don't like the idea of describing God as the source of human emotions. I wouldn't even know where to start with trying to wrap my head around that.
In reply to:
I am a believer now!
Between the virgin mary in the donut and seeing this, I am sold
I have a feeling that Ryan's children will be the unfortunate recipients of unavoidable genetic child abuse.
for both sides, both netslave and ryan, this is like arguing over an algebra problem when one side believes in the concept of "0" and the other does not.
the disconnect is there, ryan. you refuse to even consider his point of view. he said that a reasonable discussion could not be had if that was the case, and despite some real good posts by netslave, we are still where we were at the beginning.
see, i'm not even a person of much faith, and i find your comments borderline offensive.
i know you don't give a ****. but there it is.