RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

onceburned -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 3:10:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: testlimit
2. Death is only bad if you assume either:
A. there is no heaven (heaven being a pleasant continuation of existance after the corporeal one has ended not neccessarily the accepted tradition)


Actually, if there is no life after death, then death isn't such a bad thing. It just means that life is more important. I think the ancient Romans didn't expect an afterlife. Certainly there are some common Roman epitaphs such as Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo. -- "I was not, I was, I am not, I don't care." (found on tombstones abbreviated NFFNSNC or NFNN)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster
Ever heard of the Inquisition?


But the Inquisition was about political and economic power, it simply used religion as a tool. I don't think its right to say that religion has a pernicious effect on humanity, but rather that humanity has a pernicious effect on religion.




pinkpleasures -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 7:29:02 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster
Ever heard of the Inquisition?


But the Inquisition was about political and economic power, it simply used religion as a tool. I don't think its right to say that religion has a pernicious effect on humanity, but rather that humanity has a pernicious effect on religion. onceburned


i agree that even St. Peter showed his ass sometimes..the Catholic Church has always been engaged in some sinful activity -- at present is the missionary work, especially in Africa -- but that is a Church created by God but run by men..and so it goes off the rails alot. *Sigh* i have said this before; being Catholic is not for weeenies.

pinkpleasures



pinkpleasures -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 8:05:29 AM)

quote:

I don't think so, because a religion has to have institutions, and a philosophy doesn't. Religions aren't religions without a social basis. That's one of the main reasons why religions have had such a pernicious influence on humanity. (Yes, that's my private view, so Christians: fire at will.) They use their institutions to persecute non-believers.

lordandmaster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Can the terms religion and philosophy be used interchangeably?


To me the absolute crysalization of this is the Pope making a deal with Hitler not to pilage the Vatican in return for the Vatican not coming to the aid of Italian Jews in any way.

pinkpleasures



Lordandmaster -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 12:58:40 PM)

That's exactly the kind of specious distinction I'm talking about. Religion doesn't exist without humanity. Religion is grounded in society; otherwise it's not religion. When I say religion, I don't mean simply doctrine; I mean the entire organization of society that makes a religion. You cannot separate the Inquisition from Christianity because Christianity would not have been what it was without the Inquisition. It was part and parcel of the institutions that made Christianity a social reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: onceburned

I don't think its right to say that religion has a pernicious effect on humanity, but rather that humanity has a pernicious effect on religion.




pinkpleasures -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 2:17:22 PM)

My, my how we try though. No teaching the vagarities of past popes in religious instruction (or elsewhere, for that matter). No teaching about the genocide of native americans. Instead we put Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill; a man who led the slaughter of nearly every Seminole in Florida. No teaching about the Japanese-Americans put into concentration camps during WW II whilst German-Americans were left alone. No teaching about American foreign policy that supported dictators on Amnesty International's Top 10 list for human rights violations. i could go on, but basically all children need help from their parents to really learn about the USA. And while other countries (like Canada) study us, it would not kill us to teach our children some geo-politics and a foreign language.

That was fun..now here's the relationship to what Lam said: institutions santize themselves and grind whoever is in their way to dust. Religious organizations are no different. All in the name of power, greed, envy, etc. Not especially Godly. i have a friend whose parents were Jewish and African American and who was raised Jewish. She says she gets such hateful looks on entering the Temple she just cannot go anymore. *Sigh* People are so venial sometimes.

pinkpleasures



perverseangelic -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 2:36:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pinkpleasures

My, my how we try though. No teaching the vagarities of past popes in religious instruction (or elsewhere, for that matter). No teaching about the genocide of native americans. Instead we put Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill; a man who led the slaughter of nearly every Seminole in Florida. No teaching about the Japanese-Americans put into concentration camps during WW II whilst German-Americans were left alone. No teaching about American foreign policy that supported dictators on Amnesty International's Top 10 list for human rights violations. i could go on, but basically all children need help from their parents to really learn about the USA. And while other countries (like Canada) study us, it would not kill us to teach our children some geo-politics and a foreign language.



I think I got lucky with my teachers. I got a pretty darn good look at how nasty America can be.

Odd that at the same time we were doing abstience only.



onceburned -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 4:14:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

That's exactly the kind of specious distinction I'm talking about. Religion doesn't exist without humanity.


Good lord, don't be so literal. I was simply reversing your word order.

quote:

Religion is grounded in society; otherwise it's not religion. When I say religion, I don't mean simply doctrine; I mean the entire organization of society that makes a religion.


I think you are lumping several distinct features together. Religion can simply refer to official doctrine, but that is not what I am referring to. Relgion can be seen as the faith that is believed by a large segment of adherents. It is this faith that motivateds actions. Religion can also be seen as formal institutions, which is what I think you want to consider. And religion can be considered as a group of symbols which are invoked to represent a cultural or national identity. Perhaps this too is what you are referring to. This could all be broken down further but I don't have the background to do so very quickly.

quote:

You cannot separate the Inquisition from Christianity because Christianity would not have been what it was without the Inquisition. It was part and parcel of the institutions that made Christianity a social reality.


Most people when they mention to the Inquisition are referrring to the Spanish Inquisition. This was primarily a tool to ferret out crypto-Jews after Ferdinand and Isabella expelled all Jews from Spain. The persecution of Jews who officially converted but who continued to practice their religion in secret had mixed political, economic and anti-Semitic motives.

Yes, the Spanish Inquisition was brutal. Yes, religion was also invoked to justify the brutality of colonial conquests. But does that mean that Christianity is to blame? Isn't the real problem with the way that religion was used to justify motives that didn't originate in Christianity - which is to say, that the real problem was with the particular historical cultural context in which the Church was immersed?



Lordandmaster -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/12/2005 7:08:23 PM)

The Inquisition covers more than just the Spanish Inquisition (inquisition generally was a process sanctioned by the Vatican), and the Spanish Inquisition had to do with more than just expelling crypto-Jews (since it extended into the nineteenth century). I mean, I'm not REDUCING Christianity to the Inquisition; that would be specious too. But it's also not right to say that the Inquisition was simply about power and falsely manipulated Christianity. It was the institutions of Christianity made the Inquisition possible in the first place.

This is a reasonable overview of the Inquisition; it's a little old, and somewhat apologetic, but not unsound (and it's posted on a Catholic website):

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

This assessment is harsher:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/inquisition1.html

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: onceburned

Most people when they mention to the Inquisition are referrring to the Spanish Inquisition. This was primarily a tool to ferret out crypto-Jews after Ferdinand and Isabella expelled all Jews from Spain. The persecution of Jews who officially converted but who continued to practice their religion in secret had mixed political, economic and anti-Semitic motives.

Yes, the Spanish Inquisition was brutal. Yes, religion was also invoked to justify the brutality of colonial conquests. But does that mean that Christianity is to blame? Isn't the real problem with the way that religion was used to justify motives that didn't originate in Christianity - which is to say, that the real problem was with the particular historical cultural context in which the Church was immersed?




FangsNfeet -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/13/2005 1:55:48 AM)

quote:

Ever heard of the Inquisition?


Yes I have as. [:D] There methods have always given me interesting ideas for torture and punishment. I enjoy researching them, there methods, and devices.



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/13/2005 1:39:45 PM)

quote:

There methods have always given me interesting ideas for torture and punishment.


Yes and furthermore I credit the nuns and Jesuit priests, who educated me through my formative years and college, for establishing and fermenting my dominant and sadistic tendencies. When I open my BDSM B&B and theme park someday there will be a huge "Inquisition-Land" area.



darkinshadows -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/13/2005 2:52:51 PM)

okokok...

Now I am just having pythonesque visuals.....

Peace and Love



luvdragonx -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/28/2005 3:05:13 PM)

quote:

My religion is based on my own personal relationship with God. I do not subscribe to any one way of thinking or any one set of interpretations of the Bible. I go to a Methodist Church, but do not believe I have to blindly follow every rule or believe every word spoon fed to me. Call me a psuedo heathen or what you will, but for me.. It is a personal, one on one relationship.. and in the end, if I am wrong I will be fully accountable to God on that day. As I said in previous post it's based on faith and faith is not based on logical proof or material evidence. Somethings have to be believed to be seen.

misteria


So why 'go to church' at all?



NakedOnMyChain -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/28/2005 3:42:32 PM)

Ahhhhh. So glad I'm not Christian. Or monotheistic. <sits back and enjoys the show>



Faramir -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/29/2005 1:11:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EmeraldSlave2

The Problem of Evil when you believe in a monotheistic benevolent god...I'm not touching this one. :)


No, it is the Problem of Pain, not evil. CS Lewis wrote a good, approachable book on it if you care.



ElektraUkM -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 3:52:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanita

if God said "Thou shalt not kill."
maybe God is a Big Ole Dominant.
God said "Thou" Not "We"
kind of like a Dom/me saying "Thou shalt not go out without a making our bed."
but the Dom/me can go whenever they want.

just a thought. if we are dealing with semantics.


That's not semantics, it's the answer to the question.

God said (according to the bible) "THOU shalt not kill". God didn't say anything about God's behaviour in the great scheme of things. God didn't even say death was a bad thing... God just said we weren't to make it happen of our own volition. Can't people follow a few, simple rules? [:D]

For the rest of the question: well, there are too many ponderables to answer imho. Wondering about why God "allows" "bad" things to happen stems from us making unwarranted assumptions, or having unanswerable questions about God, and about the concepts of 'good' and 'bad' occurrences from a standpoint outside human experience.

To my mind, the best we can say or conceive of is that God is ALL. And that means that God is, and encompasses, both 'good' and 'bad' (which are our conceptions, of things as they appear to US). It's fruitless (I believe) to question the reasoning behind events and objectives we don't understand.

I think you had it right, sanita, when you viewed God as a "big ole dominant". What happens, happens, whether we think it's good or bad or indifferent... our job (imho) is to get on with dealing with the results, not to question the methodology.

~ Elektra



Lordandmaster -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 7:40:31 AM)

Well, I agree with all of that except the last paragraph. Who gave us our "job"? I think it is as healthy to question as it is to get on dealing with results.



domtimothy46176 -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 12:05:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel


No? and No! Where has that arrived? I would really like to see where, biblically, I have missed out on that statement?
Specific acts maybe, like the great flood, was and is linked to your statement - but not to group all natural disasters as a direct result of mans failiure to repent. Thats what the rainbow is all about - if you really want to be specific. Technically speaking - people killed in floods, are not killed by God at all. Because the great flood was, theologically speaking, the last flood created by specifically God because of mans sin. So technically, floods and tsunamis aren't 'Acts of God'.



I have to disagree with you here. The rainbow was a sign that never again would God destroy mankind with another flood. Smaller floods, tidal waves, hurricanes don't destroy mankind, only kill a few odd souls now and again. Big difference.



domtimothy46176 -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 12:16:05 PM)

I haven't studied much philosophy but I do recall something from my light reading which makes the distinction that religion is a closed-system philosophy. The author made the distinction because religion, like other closed-systems always have a circular way of ending debate. Religious debates often end with the proclamation that what can't be understood isn't meant to be understood here on Earth. Critics are often said to be unable to relate to the truth because of their lack of faith. The rationalizations tend to be endlessly circular.
Timothy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

There are all kinds of moral philosophies that do not presuppose a belief in God. (I'm assuming by "religion" you mean "belief in God," but the two are not exactly the same thing.)


Can the terms religion and philosophy be used interchangeably? The distinction is that religion presupposes a deity and philosophy doesn't. But somehow the idea of consequence still has to be including in the discussion. I guess that's where the necessity of religion and it's inferred deity is needed. Not adhering to a philosophy may get you kicked out of the clan, but it doesn't imply any other consequence except ostracism.

This in fact works in some communities, the Pennsylvania Dutch come to mind, but with a larger population the clan tends to morph into sub-clans and the shame of ostracism is lessened when you can just sign up with a different clan more philosophically compatible. Next you go to "war" with the conflicting clan to inforce your philosophy, citing "god is on your side". Just add ritual and bloodshed and BINGO - you have "religion".

With that logic I think the question has to focus on the religion aspect of the question.




slavedesires -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 12:36:42 PM)

because acts of nature are not commandments of God like one of the 10 are. so the same "rule" doesnt apply. only people stand before him on judgemnt day, not acts of nature. [:@]



Mercnbeth -> RE: "Acts of God" Riddle (8/30/2005 2:10:59 PM)

quote:

only people stand before him on judgemnt day, not acts of nature


But then being "all merciful" and "all forgiving"; along with the "all knowing" why the need for any judgment? Or is it your position that the diety you worship doesn't control acts of nature?



Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125