[sinfuldragon]

Yeah I know its not a popularity contest, what I'm saying is regardless of who speaks up to say they are christ they will all be doubted unless we actually see him fall from the sky or something equally as mind blowing.
Let me try this a different way. Lets say Jesus comes back while you are still alive, what is he going to do to make YOU believe that he is the one true messiah?

[analogbear]

Originally Posted by leelover

Is there any more circular pursuit than Philosophy?

Breaking our agreement, Lee...Try living a sermon, instead of giving one...

And faith, with its "god says so, this is is the TRUTH," thing is the circular item here, not philosophy. Philosophy actually requires reason, consideration, and thought constantly, not just some quasi-justified decision at the beginning to adhere to a book or a religion, then blind obedience after that...Unfortunately, very few people (rightly, I will admit sometimes) adhere to the rules of argument and debate, the essence of reason, and any variety of independent thought; and they merely appeal to a text or dogma that may have some relevance to them in some small part at one time, and then hold on like a pit bull, brooking no perceived challenge to their faith, while ignoring the actual facts of all faiths, most of which preceded theirs, and/or have far greater numbers of coherent followers.

[leelover]

Originally Posted by analogbear

Breaking our agreement, Lee...Try living a sermon, instead of giving one...

What are you saying here, exactly and specifically?

[leelover]

Originally Posted by sinfuldragon

Yeah I know its not a popularity contest, what I'm saying is regardless of who speaks up to say they are christ they will all be doubted unless we actually see him fall from the sky or something equally as mind blowing.
Let me try this a different way. Lets say Jesus comes back while you are still alive, what is he going to do to make YOU believe that he is the one true messiah?

He will come back in the way He said He would and do the things He said would in the Bible. Other wise He is not the Messiah.

[sinfuldragon]

Okay I had a nice long answer for you Lee but before I post I'm going to go and do some research (god I dread looking up things in the bible... maybe I can just ask my wife, she is a believer and cuts through all the extra bullshit to just give me the answer that I'm looking for). At any rate... to be continued.

[analogbear]

Originally Posted by leelover

What are you saying here, exactly and specifically?

In your post at 10:10AM, you began with an inaccurate insult to Philosophy, then proceded to sort of address my comments (not really addressing them to my satisfaction, of course, but that is an old issue...The talking past me because you don't understand what I am really saying even though you say you do--the responses have never really address the comments, just led us away from my point, so I don't think you ever really got anything that I was saying, because you still think I am dissing your religion or coming up with my own...Both are patently not true) on religion, in contravention of our earlier agreement not to discuss god (religion) with eachother. That means you were kind of an interloper in the conversation between slorider and myself. Now, as He and I are not doing this by PM, I expect some intereference by others, but I found it a bit rude for you to respond to my comments, after our agreement. I stated earlier that any comments made by you would be treated as cheerleading for slorider, but that assumed you would respect our agreement not to discuss the god thing with eachother. That is why I said you broke the deal.

Now, to living a sermon rather than giving a sermon, it has always been my belief that man is so fallable, that any man attempting to tell someone else what the actual or true nature of god is must be in serious error, and the truly devout and faithful would keep their mouths shut, and lead by example. This was a lesson an Anglican Bishop told me many years ago, when he and I were having a discussion about god and religion...At that time, I was an extremely devout Christian, having just converted from Judaism, and I was questioning his dedication to his faith...I was a real idiot then, may still be one now, but his lesson was still a good one. We are so imperfect, and often we confuse the message when we try to relate it to others, so instead, we should show the right way, not say the right way, to live.

Talk, especially talk of an emotional nature, is cheap, but actions are full of wealth. remember what Ghandi said: "Be the change you would like to see in the world."

Live the sermon, but when talking to others, keep your mouth shut about things you may have faith in, but will never really understand, know as a real truth, or be able to effectively share with non-believers. Sorry! That is not intended as meanly as it might sound! I guess I mean just that proselytizing is not necessary, but living rightly is really the best way to share your faith.

Your personal relationship with god is diminished by trying to share it with people who either don't appreciate it (not me, as I really do respect -not just tolerate, but actually have reverence for- your faith), or disbelieve it (partially me...I find the bible incomplete at best).

[Macattack]

Originally Posted by analogbear

In your post at 10:10AM, you began with an inaccurate insult to Philosophy, then proceded to sort of address my comments (not really addressing them to my satisfaction, of course, but that is an old issue...The talking past me because you don't understand what I am really saying even though you say you do--the responses have never really address the comments, just led us away from my point, so I don't think you ever really got anything that I was saying, because you still think I am dissing your religion or coming up with my own...Both are patently not true) on religion, in contravention of our earlier agreement not to discuss god (religion) with eachother. That means you were kind of an interloper in the conversation between slorider and myself. Now, as He and I are not doing this by PM, I expect some intereference by others, but I found it a bit rude for you to respond to my comments, after our agreement. I stated earlier that any comments made by you would be treated as cheerleading for slorider, but that assumed you would respect our agreement not to discuss the god thing with eachother. That is why I said you broke the deal.

Now, to living a sermon rather than giving a sermon, it has always been my belief that man is so fallable, that any man attempting to tell someone else what the actual or true nature of god is must be in serious error, and the truly devout and faithful would keep their mouths shut, and lead by example. This was a lesson an Anglican Bishop told me many years ago, when he and I were having a discussion about god and religion...At that time, I was an extremely devout Christian, having just converted from Judaism, and I was questioning his dedication to his faith...I was a real idiot then, may still be one now, but his lesson was still a good one. We are so imperfect, and often we confuse the message when we try to relate it to others, so instead, we should show the right way, not say the right way, to live.

Talk, especially talk of an emotional nature, is cheap, but actions are full of wealth. remember what Ghandi said: "Be the change you would like to see in the world."

Live the sermon, but when talking to others, keep your mouth shut about things you may have faith in, but will never really understand, know as a real truth, or be able to effectively share with non-believers. Sorry! That is not intended as meanly as it might sound! I guess I mean just that proselytizing is not necessary, but living rightly is really the best way to share your faith.

Your personal relationship with god is diminished by trying to share it with people who ether don't appreciate it (not me, as I really do respect -not just tolerate, but actually have reverence for- your faith), or disbelieve it (partially me...I find the bible incomplete at best).

Could you summerize this for me........its all too complicated

[sinfuldragon]

Originally Posted by leelover

He will come back in the way He said He would and do the things He said would in the Bible. Other wise He is not the Messiah.

Research done (asked the wife, she filled me in) yeah IF i were to see those kinds of things happening.. I too would be an instant believer. However I stand firmly on my side of the fence, sounds a little hokey to me.

[steingar]

Show me someone performing real magic I'll belive whatever he/she says. All we get these days is smoke and mirrors.

Remember, in the time of legend people had miracles. That all seemed to stop when folks started writing things down contemporaneously.

[analogbear]

Originally Posted by steingar

Show me someone performing real magic I'll belive whatever he/she says. All we get these days is smoke and mirrors.

Remember, in the time of legend people had miracles. That all seemed to stop when folks started writing things down contemporaneously.

My Messiah has spoken!

All Hail Steingar!

We shall follow his shoe!

[Macattack]

Originally Posted by analogbear

My Messiah has spoken!

All Hail Steingar!

We shall follow his shoe!

I dunno about that.......his shoe might have pooh on it!

[analogbear]

Originally Posted by Macattack

I dunno about that.......his shoe might have pooh on it!

Poop shoe! I haven't thought about that in a while...But even Steingar must have hus mac-judas...

[Macattack]

Originally Posted by analogbear

Poop shoe! I haven't thought about that in a while...But even Steingar must have hus mac-judas...

Is that a McDonalds meal?
I like McD's!

[steingar]

No poop in the Steinshoes, but poop on them on occasionally (don't always spot all the puppy nuggets). Definitely too busy to worry about which invisible dude is better. No magic tricks here, unless you count putting on Steinshoes one at a time while standing up.

I think I like the Buddhists best. I never heard of a fundamentalist Buddhist killing anyone, blowing up anyone, or setting anyone on fire besides themselves.

[slorider18]

wow, i thought we were alone. guess not.

Anyway, i would like for us to set out some boundries that we can work within. I would like us to agree on the following and then i think we can really get moving. if you can't agree with one let me know and we'll throw it out conversly if you want to add anything i'll let you know if we can.

1 - There is a God(higher power)
2 - there is an afterlife
3 - most religions generally teach us to be nice to each other(those that don't we'll ignore)
4 - there is an inherint moral code or ethics known by all people (our contience)(gosh i can't spell)
5 - people, if left without some structured society will act only in their own interests(disregard any moral code)
I think that should do it. let me know what you think.

I would have to agree with the lesson you cited earlier and say that leading by example is the best way. I don't go out of my way to force my beliefs on anyone. I live my life and allow what i belief to be obvious by my actions(the music i listen to, my lifestyle, choices i make) if someone chooses to ask me about it i share with them. coming from a chrstian point of view we are instructed to be the salt of the earth. as salt will cause you to thirst we are supposed to cause be people to desire christ by our witness. It is also written in the book of james that it is more powerful to demostrate your faith with your works because anyone can confess their faith with their mouth.(paraphrase). I don't think it is wrong for anyone to share thier faith with another. but i don't think anyone should if the recieving party doesn't want to hear it. as far as a believer(in any faith) telling a nonbeliver(of any faith) that they are "doomed" to judgement is harsh. If the two people are engaged in a mutual conversation and agree on the result of nonbelief then you can let them know they may be headed in the wrong way. otherwise i don't think anyone should hand a person their ticket to hell and say goodbye. rather they should keep quite and pray for that person(or what ever their convictions lead). anyone can change and if you god wants to change them he'll tell them what he needs to. it's up to them to listen.

[sinfuldragon]

rule one... can there be multiple gods?

[sinfuldragon]

Also your rules of the discussion remind me of the bible. long long ago someone (not really some ONE as much as some form of government) thought hey I'll make some rules to keep people in line and make up this great place you'll go if your good and put some horrible father figure in there that will send you straight to "hell" if you are bad... just my .02

[slorider18]

Originally Posted by sinfuldragon

rule one... can there be multiple gods?

we'll just leave it as a higher power if that suits everyone better.

[slorider18]

Originally Posted by sinfuldragon

Also your rules of the discussion remind me of the bible. long long ago someone (not really some ONE as much as some form of government) thought hey I'll make some rules to keep people in line and make up this great place you'll go if your good and put some horrible father figure in there that will send you straight to "hell" if you are bad... just my .02

i'm not sure what you are refering to. if you are refering to our "moral code" i just mean people know they shouldn't steal. your just not supposed to. no one has to tell you. i'm not refering to the ten comandments or anything. just we all have a general perception of right and wrong.

[sinfuldragon]

No we don't all know. It like religion has been beat into us all since we were children. Take a kid to a candy store that you haven't told not to take anything. Watch them start eating the candy right there in the shop. Not because they are bad children but because no one has taught them "whats right and wrong".

[steingar]

Sorry, I guess I'll have to bail on this party. I don't believe in any invisible dudes.

I do like Mikky D's if only for the fries.

[slorider18]

Originally Posted by sinfuldragon

No we don't all know. It like religion has been beat into us all since we were children. Take a kid to a candy store that you haven't told not to take anything. Watch them start eating the candy right there in the shop. Not because they are bad children but because no one has taught them "whats right and wrong".

ok, we can dismiss that one. is there anything you would like to add?

[sinfuldragon]

No, I'm good now. I'll await Bear's response because I think he is going to have plenty to add before we even begin

[slorider18]

Originally Posted by sinfuldragon

No, I'm good now. I'll await Bear's response because I think he is going to have plenty to add before we even begin

sounds good. i think you are right on that one. at least we already agree on something. this is off to a great start.

[analogbear]

Originally Posted by steingar

I think I like the Buddhists best. I never heard of a fundamentalist Buddhist killing anyone, blowing up anyone, or setting anyone on fire besides themselves.

I like them too, as they feel bad when something has to die for them to survive...Food animals as well as plants...They really challenge the Nietzsche-ean will to power thing...Very nice.

Originally Posted by slorider18

wow, i thought we were alone. guess not.

Anyway, i would like for us to set out some boundries that we can work within. I would like us to agree on the following and then i think we can really get moving. if you can't agree with one let me know and we'll throw it out conversly if you want to add anything i'll let you know if we can.

1 - There is a God(higher power)
2 - there is an afterlife
3 - most religions generally teach us to be nice to each other(those that don't we'll ignore)
4 - there is an inherint moral code or ethics known by all people (our contience)(gosh i can't spell)
5 - people, if left without some structured society will act only in their own interests(disregard any moral code)


I would have to agree with the lesson you cited earlier and say that leading by example is the best way.

I live my life and allow what i belief to be obvious by my actions(the music i listen to, my lifestyle, choices i make) if someone chooses to ask me about it i share with them.

If the two people are engaged in a mutual conversation and agree on the result of nonbelief then you can let them know they may be headed in the wrong way.

here it goes...
1-This is a conclusion, not a ground rule. We both have an idea, so instead of starting with conclusions, let us begin without assumptions that speak to the very essence of the debate. I would say: Let us set out to justify belief in the existence of a supreme being, by analyzing what the nature of such a being might be, and then trying to find some analog in nature or the universe. You seem to procede from the basic assumption that any supreme being will be anthropomorphic. I don't, so instead of building in conflict, let us sidestep dogma for this conversation, and draw a picture of the god we think should exist.

2-Sure, but is the afterlife nothingness? Oblivion? Is it the traditional lack of pain and suffering and need, surrounded by loved ones and bloody harp-music? What is the nature of the afterlife, and what ought it be?

3-Absolutely alright with me.

4-No freaking way...I could write a series of books on ethics, morality, and from where we as humans get our moral code, and follow it up with a series of books on where we ought to get our