Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2010 07:07 am
@auroreII,
I think we all need to feel that our passing makes the world better. I think we all strive for harmony with whatever resources and understanding we have.
But we are not unified at the very core. Our beliefs about life are so different that sometimes our values, the ideals of what we see as good, come into conflict with the ideals of others.
Some believe they have to kill or subdue their enemies to get peace.
Others believe that an enemy is just a manifestation of fear, and that you have to conquer fear in your own heart to get peace.
But regardless of which of these groups we belong to, our motivation is the same; an instinctive need to seek harmony, whatever we percieve that to be.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2010 10:21 am
AuroreII wrote:
I mean I know why I would do it, but if it is truly all pointless why bother? It seems people must believe that there is some point for what they do. And what would they call the reason for why they do it? love? What is love?
Why do you bother about what I call it? Why do you say I call it love?

Should I act according to what you think and give my feelings the name you want to?

What you are demonstrating is just wishful thinking..


and wrote:
The bible says God is love.

This is your interpretation and just crap, btw.

Quote:
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
Is this love?

Quote:
Maybe people don't necessarily relate that to God but that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't so.
Ok, I say I don't relate to a god but you say maybe I relate. You know better than I do about me.

auroreII
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2010 06:44 pm
@Francis,
My gosh you are touchy. I never said you called it love. I just asked if you think that (love) might be a reason for why people - agnostics, christians, islamics- act unselfishly.

Don't want to get into an argument over whether or not God is love. Been there, done that- to each his own. Still the BIBLE says God is love. 1 John 4:8
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
1 John 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 4:21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.


Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2010 11:16 pm
@auroreII,
Quote:
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?


And yet brothers kill eachother in the name of god... Is it not our moral obligation to save them and ourselves from their ignorance?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 01:46 am
@Cyracuz,
Krishnamurti captured the essence of "love" with the adage:
Quote:
Where the self is, love is not.

The implication is that all who quote the simplistic language of the bible which uses first person references (Me , my etc) fail to understand the transcendental/spiritual point which stands without the requirement for the separate existence of "a God".
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 02:41 am
AuroreII wrote:
Still the BIBLE says God is love.

The bible says all kinds of lunacies and you pick up whichever suits your views.

It also says that god is jealous, vengeful, murderous...
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 05:20 am
@Francis,
Quote:
The bible says all kinds of lunacies


That's too easy to say Francois. I'm surprised that an intellectual of your calibre should stoop to such a blurt and take advantage so casually of the fact that to contradict what you assert requires an essay of a length that one can easily decline to set about composing it.

In a proper pub such a remark would be turned away from and the blurter left to his own devices.
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 05:36 am
@spendius,
Spendi wrote:
That's too easy to say Francois. I'm surprised that an intellectual of your calibre should stoop to such a blurt and take advantage so casually of the fact that to contradict what you assert requires an essay of a length that one can easily decline to set about composing it.
That's because I'm an opportunist, as you know..

However, I doubt that even a lengthy essay would contradict my assertion..

and wrote:
In a proper pub such a remark would be turned away from and the blurter left to his own devices.
As I rarely do pubs, it suits me. I have very little faith in the intrinsic value of the comments uttered in a pub, whatever the soundness of the pub goers elsewhere.

In addition, I try to avoid blurting in public (as I do in my privacy)...
0 Replies
 
auroreII
 
  2  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 10:54 am
@Francis,
Quote: Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB) Is this love?

Francis,
I don't feel that I am schooled enough to give you a good answer. All I can do is give some of my thoughts on the subject.
We can take the quote at face value, for that reason I would encourage people not to do it.
But if we take it a little deeper perhaps the reason that we are told not to sacrifice to other gods is because they cannot save us. Kind of like putting oatmeal in your gas tank and expecting it to go. Oatmeal in your gas tank isn't going to get you where you want to go. If you want the car to go you need a combustible like gasoline. The christian bible says there is only one God; there are no other gods.
Do you have kids. Most people want their kids to be safe and live long. Parents can't live their kids lives for them, but they can instruct them so their kids may go safely through their lives and hopefully do well. Surely these parents love their kids when they warn them of the dangers of following the wrong path.

The bible speaks about sacrificing self or, I believe, self will. This is Easter and christians everywhere celebrate the resurrection of Christ. So if he was resurrected where is he? I think christians will tell you that he lives in us. Some feel that our conscience is Jesus talking to us, instructing us the way to go. We are encouraged to sacrifice self that we might be like Christ, that he might show forth in our lives. Don't know how much you know about Jesus or the kind of man he was. Most people say he was pretty loving.
Francis
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 11:16 am
@auroreII,
AuroreII: You are right when you say you are not able to give me a good answer.

Your combustible comparisons are as lame as the arguments that are put forth by confused christians.

If the quote I provided is not meaningful than nothing in the bible is, as I can cite hundreds of others in the same vein.

I wonder, were there a loving god if he would allow the sufferings that the kids endure all around the world.

You don't need the help of a fairy book to know that you may sacrifice for your kids.

If you need it to be reassured about the rightness of your choices in life, so be it.

But keep it for yourself, people may not be as weak as you are..
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 11:19 am
@auroreII,
Quote:
The bible speaks about sacrificing self or, I believe, self will.


That's the problem. The "blood sacrifice" of Jesus makes for a good story but misleads the "seeker" away from the Buddhist point that, from a "spiritual" point of view, the "self" has nothing to lose but its ephemeral attachments. Christians who think a " Jesus figure" died for "them", have been hoodwinked by a metaphor.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 11:55 am
@fresco,
As I understand it, the buddhist proscription against "attachments" refers both to the "ephermeral" nature, i.e., the impermanece or emptiness of all that we objectify in the world and to the equally unreal ontological status of the craving self that attempts to grasp such "objects."
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 12:05 pm
@JLNobody,
Agreed...but we need to pay lip service to " objectification" in order to justify "communication". Beyond that is silence.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 01:47 pm
To sort of kind of get on topic, at least according to Judeo Christian writ:

That Jesus died on the Passover is no coincidence.
He is the fulfillment of the Passover, the sacrifice to end sacrifice.
As Paul wrote: (Galatians 3:24) . . .Consequently the Law has become our tutor leading to Christ,. . .
That he was resurrected by his father was prophesied at Genesis 3:15 when God told Satan he would bruise 'the seed' in the heel.
This 'seed' is now poised to bruise Satan in the head. (See Genesis, Ch 3)

'He who causes to become' will not allow his purpose to be thwarted.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 10:13 pm
@fresco,
Yes, we are doing that right now.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2010 02:36 am
@neologist,
Quote:
That Jesus died on the Passover is no coincidence.


That point may be merely consistent with the view of "Jesus" as a deliberate political agitator/suicide martyr. He would have been be well aware that the Romans were always on red alert for trouble during a festival celebrating liberty from oppression. The religionist elaboration of the incident may have no more significance than Islamic "celebrations" of present day "martyrs".
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2010 03:32 am
@fresco,
Why choose Islamic martyrs fresco? Is it to try to demonise Jesus?

There are martyrs to many political movements. Emmiline Pankhust for example. Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Martin Luther King.

Jesus is the most famous because of the importance of his teachings.

It's notable that it's always atheists who try these tricks of selectivity on.


fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2010 03:39 am
@spendius,
No. It can equally be argued the "fame" of Jesus can be attributed to its political utility with respect to the problems of the Roman Empire. The "teachings" were politically selected as a later part of that process.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2010 04:59 am
@fresco,
But Jesus lived under the Roman yoke.

Just as Ms Pankhurst lived under the patriarchal yoke. Bonhoeffer under the Nazi yoke and Martin Luther King under the white supremacist yoke.

Quote:
The "teachings" were politically selected as a later part of that process.


Possibly. I think the point is moot.
0 Replies
 
Philis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2010 09:57 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:

Quote:
The bible speaks about sacrificing self or, I believe, self will.


That's the problem. The "blood sacrifice" of Jesus makes for a good story but misleads the "seeker" away from the Buddhist point that, from a "spiritual" point of view, the "self" has nothing to lose but its ephemeral attachments. Christians who think a " Jesus figure" died for "them", have been hoodwinked by a metaphor.



Not only did he die for us, he was resurrected for us also.

 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Define God
  3. » Page 49
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/24/2024 at 12:09:25