SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: St_Bill who wrote (29956)9/27/2001 7:10:37 PM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
<no good or evil>

These are man-made constructs, which is why people disagree upon them.



To: St_Bill who wrote (29956)9/27/2001 7:20:17 PM
From: Bill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
I read all that and have one question. How did you ever get Canonized?



To: St_Bill who wrote (29956)9/28/2001 10:50:24 AM
From: Greg or e  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
Hi Bill.
"why, if there is no God, it should therefore follow that there is no good or evil."

If there is no ultimate standard by which good and evil can be measured then all such pronouncements are purely relative, consisting of conventions and preferences. If that is true then what is evil for you is not evil for OBL. The words good and evil become merely personal statements about feelings, therefore they do not REALLY exist, in any meaningful way.

"So If morality is not arbitrary, then God himself is bound by its rules."

God is not bound by any external constraints, rather, morality is a reflection of His holy character. Gods character is self limiting, in that He can not act in a way that violates that character. He cant make rocks so big that he can't lift them, or square circles, either. Can your god?

" you seem to suggest that all that don't believe as you do about the existence, death and resurrection of Christ are therefore hopeless. I have a hard time with that."

That is simply a reiteration of what Scripture claims. see 1Cor 15:
unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: (Eph2:)
And now, brothers and sisters, I want you to know what will happen to the Christians who have died so you will not be full of sorrow like people who have no hope.
As I do? No, but if there is a God then it is He that sets the rules, not the creatures. Jesus' claims are indeed exclusive, does that automatically mean they are wrong? I don't see any basis for hope in the religious systems you mentioned, aside from Jesus being the Jewish Messiah, He still must be received by Jewish people for His sacrifice to be efficacious. Aside from that I don't see much hope, in karma, or reincarnation. Did the people in NY do something in a past life that caused this ? Is there any expectation that things will be any better the next time around? Islam demands perfection but makes no provision for it besides Martyrdom.

The Bible claims to be a direct revelation from God to man. Thousands of times it says "thus says the LORD" and again "All Scripture is God breathed". That is not my exclusive Pipeline to God as you put it, but it is a lifeline. I take it from your comments that you don't believe those claims, that's your choice. Would you like your life to be judged on the basis of perfect Justice? I would rather have Grace and mercy myself, since I recognize that I would no come close to meeting a perfect standard. Does believing that, mean I am somehow unworthy of the respect afforded to every other being in the universe? Somehow, that seems to be the case, but in implying I am wrong and you are right are you not doing exactly what you find so distasteful in my theology??????

What does religious tolerance mean?
1] I'm right, your wrong and doomed but I won't kill you, God will let you know what you're in for later.
2] I think I'm right, I don't agree with you, but maybe you're right and I'm wrong or we're both right. God's complicated. 3] Full blown religious relativism: Whatever you believe about God is true, just because you believe it. Same goes for me, even though we disagree. But then what if your God is telling you to persecute with great prejudice all those that don't believe as you? Hmm. This I find a good question: Are there limits to religious tolerance?


I have to choose 4, none of the above. No one will be able to stand before God and give Russell's weak excuse; "You didn't give me enough information" . The created order, the moral order, God's special revelation, the bible, and His incarnation, the God-Man Jesus Christ, will all, witness against them. As far as religious persecution goes Christians are told to let the wheat and the tares grow up together and let God sort it out. We are responsible for proclaiming the Good News, that Christ has come to save sinners, and then let the chips fall where they may. None of this is fanatical, it's just basic, Christian doctrine. It's either true or it isn't. I'm not forcing anyone to accept it, and it has as much in common with terrorism as beach ball does to the Sun.