Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

Original poster

YEC 2

999 replies

Januarymadness · 24/04/2013 21:05

Right I am going to bite. I shouldnt have looked at the facebook but I did.

Mr Ruggles you have made some horrible accusations. You have claimed everyone who disagreed with you was an atheist who lacked logic and reasoning. You were wrong on ALL counts. Many people told you they were Christian or Theists, they just didn't agree with you. The thread was also full of valid scientific arguments which were well worded and full of logic and reasoning.

You have also accused us all of being bullies. Something I saw no evidence of. Not agreeing with someone is not bullying.

So please do feel free to justify your off board comments here as speaking behind peoples backs is really not on.

Please could someone link to the old thread. Thanks

OP posts:
Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:41

And Christian concept of deity seems to vary depending on which christian sect you belong too. I cant say I really understand too well any of them. Which sect are you and what is your understanding? Like the trinity. I really cant understand that one.

I believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, maker and ruler of every creature, and that "Father" is not "son", nor "Holy Spirit" "Father" or "son"; but a Trinity of mutually related persons, and a unity of equal essence.

I think you'll find Augustus thinks summat similar, too.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:41

*Augustine, obvs.

daftdame · 10/05/2013 19:41

LizzyDay there are ways to know whether someone is abusing their position of trust. The Bible says "You shall know them by their fruits" (ie how they behave, what they have done), it is quite clear concerning what is a good fruit and what is not. Although only God can judge people's hearts and there is no expectation of overnight perfection upon Salvation. There are also sections about expectations regarding the leadership of the church.

Someone cannot really claim they did it because God told them and be believed if they have done something really bad, unless people are being deceived by Satan. To really know about how you can be deceived you have to know the Bible.

LizzyDay · 10/05/2013 19:47

Daftdame - the problem is that yes, corrupt / criminally-inclined religious officials can be weeded out when they are found out (and of course I'm not claiming that all religious officials are corrupt or criminal) - but by then the damage is done.

The thing is that it's practically impossible to have a religion which doesn't cross over into power and politics in some way.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:50

Wine, water and honey make a single drink, in which each of these will extend throughout the whole, and yet they remain three. There would be no part of the drink which does not contain all three - not side by side as in the case of oil and water, but completely mixed. All are substances, and the whole fluid is one definite substance made out of three. Yet water, wine and honey do not derive from a single substance, though one single substance of drink results from that mixture.

HTH

infamouspoo · 10/05/2013 19:51

'I believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, maker and ruler of every creature, and that "Father" is not "son", nor "Holy Spirit" "Father" or "son"; but a Trinity of mutually related persons, and a unity of equal essence.'

I dont know how to do that bold thing Blush
so 1, the 3 are one God but 2, they are seperate but related entities.

You can see why I'm confused I hope!

PedroYoniLikesCrisps · 10/05/2013 19:53

The Bible says "You shall know them by their fruits"

How do you know that this bit shouldn't be taken literally? Perhaps those bearing bananas shouldn't be trusted. After all wasn't it fruit which got us all in this mess in the first place?

Where does the bible tell you that you should take this passage as a metaphor?

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:53

...so you believe, then. Just answer the question, will you?

Believe in the sense of 'I believe I concur with that theory' is not the same definition of belief as 'belief in religion'. One requires faith and trust and emotional commitment, the other doesn't.

Yes, Lizzy, I know. I am trying to figure out why Pedro is so terrified of using the word 'believe' even outside of a spiritual context.

PedroYoniLikesCrisps · 10/05/2013 19:54

Jewcy, that's the best I've ever heard it explained actually. Thank you.

But I'm still confused as to how jesus is god if he's separated from the other two parts on earth. Would he not just be honey?

daftdame · 10/05/2013 19:55

Lizzy yes there has been problems with organised religion. Agree about the power and politics, certainly does seem to be a temptation for some.

My only antidote to this is checking everything against the Bible and praying for personal revelation. I'm not really 'established' church in that way. If I couldn't confirm anything told to me in the way I have described I would not pro-actively follow it.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:56

I'm terribly sorry that I bored you with something you don't understand. I answered the question, it's not about belief.

See above

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 19:56
  • apologies: 'above' meaning my post at 19.53.
PedroYoniLikesCrisps · 10/05/2013 19:57

Yes, Lizzy, I know. I am trying to figure out why Pedro is so terrified of using the word 'believe' even outside of a spiritual context.

Because I don't 'believe' in quantum physics, I know it to exist because it's a theory.

daftdame · 10/05/2013 19:59

Pedro imagine a spiritual being being able to split a part off itself, and then put it into flesh = Jesus.

The parts are all the same, of the same essence.

daftdame · 10/05/2013 20:00

Pedro

...exist because it's a theory! Grin

Congratulations your very own paradox!

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:01

Yet you are encouraged to hand-wave your way past these contradictions and paradoxes with the circular reasoning of believing that your god did it therefore it was fine, and you can be sure it was fine because your god wouldn't have done it if it wasn't.

That's not enough for me. It makes me mildly depressed that is enough for so many people.

There are people who backed the invasion of Iraq despite massive misgivings because Blair & Bush said it was fine. I can give you lots of other examples of how, as human beings, we operate at this level. Why do you insist it is the preserve of believers?

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:03

The sacrifice, well would you fancy dying on a cross

If I were god it probably wouldn't bother me that much in the scheme of things.

How crass.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:05

I know some religious people like to suggest otherwise - why I'm not sure, maybe to try and characterise atheists as some sort of confused robotic adherents to science as a substitute religion?

You've got it in one - and you say it far more eloquently than I.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:08

As for emotion, I could be wrong, but I detect there has been some emotion involved in the forceful way opinions have been expressed on here.

Quite. Zealots, even.

LizzyDay · 10/05/2013 20:10

There are people who backed the invasion of Iraq despite massive misgivings because Blair & Bush said it was fine. I can give you lots of other examples of how, as human beings, we operate at this level. Why do you insist it is the preserve of believers?

Who is insisting it's the preserve of believers? It's actually a nice example of the importance of questioning our 'leaders', whoever they might be.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:12

This is an inherited belief. It is not the truth. The end.

So what's the truth then? That all the stories similar to the bible which predate it are not true and all the stories which came after the bible which are similar are copies, but the one right in the middle is the absolute truth (but not all of it cos some parts are metaphorical, but no one can actually agree which bits are which).

Pedro, the agricultural allegory was trotted out as a truth on this thread. It is true to whoever posted it (can't remember who). This 'truth' is no more valid than mine. That is all I'm implying.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:19

I'd point you to EllieArroway's excellent thread below re evidence for Jesus's divinity, if you haven't already read it.

Do you mean to say there is a whole thread dedicated to discussing how someone was not who he said he was by someone who lacks belief in him? Isn't that an extraordinary amount of energy to invest?

PedroYoniLikesCrisps · 10/05/2013 20:21

...exist because it's a theory!

Congratulations your very own paradox!

It's not a paradox, you obviously don't get it. QP is a theory, or a framework if you will, like mathematics. It's a man made thing, thus I know it to exist. You obviously confuse the theory with what actually happens at the subatomic level which wasn't what was asked.

Jewcy · 10/05/2013 20:21

Did I ever suggest that? Wow you really come out with some crackers!

You implied it

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 10/05/2013 20:22

Jewcy, these can be interesting subjects to (some) believers and (some) non-believers alike. Nobody's forcing you to read it.