I remember reading at one time about the "what came first" the
"DNA change that procured new thoughts" or the "thoughts changing the DNA change." I don't think they ever came to a conclusion on it. Though I do believe that thoughts are powerful in of themselves, but hmmm this was never proved in the study of brain chemistry.
Originally posted by Oncewhite
or u can't handle an alternate perspective.
Or maybe it just offends my sense of rationality and education to see such a baseless and scientifically incorrect theory?
Alternative perspectives are significantly more valid when there is some sense and basis to them.
Like I said--with their sins weighed against the standard of the glory of God.
Ahhh - so should our legal system attempt to imitate that of God's? I mean since it is the ultimate yardstick of right and wrong and mass extermination can be justified by it, then surely the world would be a better place if sinners went to jail.
But wait... that wouldn't work.
Again, we're not measuring right and wrong from our more "liberal, progressive" (read: secular humanistic) society.
Once again I wonder why God bother to make us in his image if we are such pail imitations without any real power or understanding. And it is funny that the afore mentioned "conscience" God supposedly gave us to decide between right and wrong is suddenly... meaningless. We can't measure right and wrong? Since societies are intended to reflect the moral attitudes of progressive sense. It seems God's morals are good for heaven and not earth.
I don't know. The Bible doesn't expound upon it.However, it wasn't even that they were doing so much wrong that they were beyond hope, but they had no inclination to do right. At the time period described, apparently there was no tendency to do right (or even desire to do so).
This leads me to believe that, in cities like Sodom and Gommorah, the people had so warped and perverted their minds that they had more or less eliminated any good thoughts.
Hmmm. There are mental illnesses that make a person incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. And there are social examples of how a child raised a certain way can be devoid of socially acceptable qualities of right and wrong (simply because they don't understand)... but surely God wouldn't be so down on people like that, since it isn't, in the immediate theory, directly their fault. It is a product of something else... because it sounds more like a social problem then an individual one. Talk about overkill.
And I wonder... there would have been children at the time. Were those children irreconcilably perverted and without good thoughts? And the animals! I lived on a farm in a region prone to flooding... drowning is not a nice way to go for animal or man - as any number of farmers had stories to attest. Why drowning? I mean even if all those men and women and children and animals were beyond hope... didn't they deserve some respect as people? They wouldn't have even been given funerals. Or mourned... not nice at all, and less so when one thinks about it.
Presumably, they were committing crimes that went beyond any subjectivity or abstractness of conscience.
And the fact there is pretty much no parallel doesn't make you wonder a bit? "Oh, there crimes were beyond comprehension, thus we will merely say they are evil. No one will question that."
God doesn't run a prison.
Metaphor: "God is a loving parent who has to sometimes punish the wrongs of his children (hence flood)
Reality: "A human who is a loving parent who kills their children tends to go to jail."
Logic - Loving parent or no God would be in jail if he let himself get judged by the people created in his image.
Controversial psychological studies have, if I am not misremembering. Furthermore, God blessed Job beyond what He had originally granted him after the entire ordeal.
Hence the "controversial" - but when you have children and you love them, of course you would let the worst do their worst to them, just to insure you children really did love you, correct?
And of course blessing him - well that makes it all worth it (never mind the innocent bystanders who got hurt and killed in the process.) If I ever let something terrible happen to my child I'll make it up to them with a trip to the zoo.
Once again, it was not only their crimes but their warped and twisted outlook on the world.
So now it is how they think as well. Maybe there is something to the idea God is the thought police. Not only will we be punished for what we do, but how we see the world while we do it.
The Egyptians enslaved the Israelites. This made God angry, so He said to Himself, "I will raise up Pharaoh to be great and powerful that, when I strike against him, my glory will be shown to all."Thus, when Pharaoh was "raised up," God chose Moses to release the Israelites. ...b]
Because eye for an eye is a valid operating system. "You killed our infants, so we'll kill yours." And the Egyptians who were punished weren't the same ones who did the enslaving. And many of the Egyptians who got punished didn't actually have a choice over what happened to slaves (because this is know as monarchical state - where the people who act against the king are known as traitors.) And it seems even less pleasant - God: "Well, this business makes me unhappy. So I will let the Egyptians become great, instead of saving the Israelites immediately I will let them suffer for a good long while, let the Egyptians gain something to loose... then wham!"
And of course God apparently didn't mind so much about all the other people enslaved at the time or later. No saving them.
[b]God helps those in need. Sometimes He does it in a more dramatic fashion than others--even the Israelites had suffered as slaves for a long period of time prior to their deliverance.
Really... so I could paste a huge list of all the groups who lived and died in slavery (up till modern times) and you'd be able to explain how exactly God helped those in need, despite no apparent sign of any such help?
I guess it was a good thing that they were evil according to the ultimate standard of goodness and righteousness so that we can say, "Gee, they were evil. Not according to a moral relativist, of course, but to God.
Ah, the God clause. God says they are evil, so of course they are. Any one who questions that is a moral relativist. Nice way to insure people don't ask uncomfortable questions about what would... in rational terms... be considered genocide. Because evil people deserve to die - because they have "evil" before people. And once again - do you think they cared for their children? What happened to the children of these "evil" people? I guess they were shown mercy and didn't face the horror so many children face when their cultures are butchered - be they by God order Israelites or Romans or Mongols.
I don't know why God bothered. I'm not God. He made us anyway, though.
Which I also find funny. So many Christians and other Theists claim Atheists are bleak and can't be happy and think nothing good. Then they go to there sermons about how terrible humanity is (humanity created by Great God), how we are so undeserving, so worthless.
Oh well, I guess my loving God father, when I eventually meet him, will have plenty of anger to direct at me. Heaven forbid he, like a good parent, try and understand where I am coming from. Best to just be angry and yell at those people who have different ideas.
Just 'cause God didn't want us to rape and murder and all that good stuff doesn't mean that He wasn't a fan of free will.
Only it isn't really about rape and murder - is it? If all this is true the majority of people in hell aren't rapists and murderers. They are in hell first because they didn't subscribe to God, and most, secondly, for what in human terms would be considered minor offences. And abstract ones (bad pride, bad.) But they are evil like all the previous evil people, thus deserve there eternity of suffering.
Son: "Dad, I stole a candybar."
Father: "I thought we had a talk about this before--stealing is wrong."
Son: "Well, I've been thinking, and I decided that not stealing wasn't for me. And you always extolled the virtues of living a good, moral life, but you can't control me. So I'm going to keep on stealing."
Father: "Not while you live in my household, you won't--either you quit stealing or get out."
Son: "You're an *******. Here you are, allowing me to make my own decisions for myself but you don't want me to do things that are wrong? **** you."
Nice twist. To be honest I have never stolen anything. Yet I will apparently end up in hell. Not because of any sin I have committed but because I find logic and sense in Atheism and can't find a way to believe in something I don't, and thus can't genuinely ask. Thus I will be there for choosing to be an actor while God wanted me to be a lawyer. Any sin I have with me (and not a single sin at this point beyond the abstracts like pride and so forth) is secondary to that - I don't believe, and as I result can't genuinely ask for forgiveness. Thus I earn my damnation.
A masterwork craftsman, actually. Not only did He give us life, He gave us a will. It just so happens that we often choose to go against God's will.
Hmmm, I'd hate to have something made by such a masterwork craftsmen. The flaw was built into us, God gave us the option of being good bad - we didn't. We choose to act on the option, but the craftsman installed it. And he is the craftsman who knew his creation would never work so a thousand years ago he told us that no matter how we lived our lives or what we did with the world he had installed a self destruct. We have no choice in the matter. Only he does (if you believe.)
Originally posted by debbiejo
conscious flow? Let us all learn from this....yes..........Please pay attention now...............We must really think before we type...............Not just drool upon old thoughts and old words................
It isn't quite so bad if you are a quick thinker, and it all makes sense, so it is good.
Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
Meh - I consider you giving your opinion on my opinion being *proselytizing* to be a hostile topic..Anyway - shall we now continue to *preach* erhem - discuss our opinions on said topic...
Would you PLEASE ..for the love of GOD stop saying 'meh' before your posts. It's f*cking annoying. Thanks.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Ahhh - so should our legal system attempt to imitate that of God's? I mean since it is the ultimate yardstick of right and wrong and mass extermination can be justified by it, then surely the world would be a better place if sinners went to jail.But wait... that wouldn't work.
Once again I wonder why God bother to make us in his image if we are such pail imitations without any real power or understanding. And it is funny that the afore mentioned "conscience" God supposedly gave us to decide between right and wrong is suddenly... meaningless. We can't measure right and wrong? Since societies are intended to reflect the moral attitudes of progressive sense. It seems God's morals are good for heaven and not earth.
After all, if I'm an absolutist, I'm naught but a fundamentalist.
Hmmm. There are mental illnesses that make a person incapable of differentiating between right and wrong.
And there are social examples of how a child raised a certain way can be devoid of socially acceptable qualities of right and wrong (simply because they don't understand)...
but surely God wouldn't be so down on people like that, since it isn't, in the immediate theory, directly their fault. It is a product of something else... because it sounds more like a social problem then an individual one. Talk about overkill.
And I wonder... there would have been children at the time. Were those children irreconcilably perverted and without good thoughts?
And the animals! I lived on a farm in a region prone to flooding... drowning is not a nice way to go for animal or man - as any number of farmers had stories to attest. Why drowning? I mean even if all those men and women and children and animals were beyond hope... didn't they deserve some respect as people? They wouldn't have even been given funerals. Or mourned... not nice at all, and less so when one thinks about it.
And the fact there is pretty much no parallel doesn't make you wonder a bit? "Oh, there crimes were beyond comprehension, thus we will merely say they are evil. No one will question that."
Metaphor: "God is a loving parent who has to sometimes punish the wrongs of his children (hence flood)Reality: "A human who is a loving parent who kills their children tends to go to jail."
Logic - Loving parent or no God would be in jail if he let himself get judged by the people created in his image.
Hence the "controversial" - but when you have children and you love them, of course you would let the worst do their worst to them, just to insure you children really did love you, correct?
It was similar to what happened to the protagonist in V for Vendetta, except God didn't do it.
And of course blessing him - well that makes it all worth it (never mind the innocent bystanders who got hurt and killed in the process.) If I ever let something terrible happen to my child I'll make it up to them with a trip to the zoo.
So now it is how they think as well. Maybe there is something to the idea God is the thought police. Not only will we be punished for what we do, but how we see the world while we do it.
Because eye for an eye is a valid operating system. "You killed our infants, so we'll kill yours."
And the Egyptians who were punished weren't the same ones who did the enslaving. And many of the Egyptians who got punished didn't actually have a choice over what happened to slaves (because this is know as monarchical state - where the people who act against the king are known as traitors.)
And it seems even less pleasant - God: "Well, this business makes me unhappy. So I will let the Egyptians become great, instead of saving the Israelites immediately I will let them suffer for a good long while, let the Egyptians gain something to loose... then wham!"
And of course God apparently didn't mind so much about all the other people enslaved at the time or later. No saving them.Really... so I could paste a huge list of all the groups who lived and died in slavery (up till modern times) and you'd be able to explain how exactly God helped those in need, despite no apparent sign of any such help?
Ah, the God clause. God says they are evil, so of course they are. Any one who questions that is a moral relativist.
Oddly enough, God doesn't get off the hook.
Nice way to insure people don't ask uncomfortable questions about what would... in rational terms... be considered genocide. Because evil people deserve to die - because they have "evil" before people.
The end.
And once again - do you think they cared for their children?
What happened to the children of these "evil" people? I guess they were shown mercy and didn't face the horror so many children face when their cultures are butchered - be they by God order Israelites or Romans or Mongols.
Which I also find funny. So many Christians and other Theists claim Atheists are bleak and can't be happy and think nothing good. Then they go to there sermons about how terrible humanity is (humanity created by Great God), how we are so undeserving, so worthless.Oh well, I guess my loving God father, when I eventually meet him, will have plenty of anger to direct at me. Heaven forbid he, like a good parent, try and understand where I am coming from. Best to just be angry and yell at those people who have different ideas.
Only it isn't really about rape and murder - is it? If all this is true the majority of people in hell aren't rapists and murderers. They are in hell first because they didn't subscribe to God, and most, secondly, for what in human terms would be considered minor offences. And abstract ones (bad pride, bad.) But they are evil like all the previous evil people, thus deserve there eternity of suffering.
They decided not to.
Nice twist. To be honest I have never stolen anything. Yet I will apparently end up in hell. Not because of any sin I have committed but because I find logic and sense in Atheism and can't find a way to believe in something I don't, and thus can't genuinely ask. Thus I will be there for choosing to be an actor while God wanted me to be a lawyer. Any sin I have with me (and not a single sin at this point beyond the abstracts like pride and so forth) is secondary to that - I don't believe, and as I result can't genuinely ask for forgiveness. Thus I earn my damnation.
Hmmm, I'd hate to have something made by such a masterwork craftsmen. The flaw was built into us
God gave us the option of being good bad - we didn't. We choose to act on the option, but the craftsman installed it. And he is the craftsman who knew his creation would never work so a thousand years ago he told us that no matter how we lived our lives or what we did with the world he had installed a self destruct. We have no choice in the matter. Only he does (if you believe.)
Originally posted by FeceMan
Le sigh. You have misconstrued the entire point I was making. The point was that IF they were to be judged as such, they would have been deserving of death. Therefore, when judged by God, they deserved death.
No, I get what you are saying, and all I can say is it is fortunate we don't have legal systems that judge by the "standards of God." Why, if that happened I suspect we would have something that might... closely resemble that delightful legal system the Taliban set up.
Or would it somehow be profoundly different? Just image, society punishing abstract, moral crimes, based upon a holy text.
The conscience isn't meaningless, but our society has made it so. We can discern right from wrong, but our society teaches us otherwise. God's morals are good for heaven and Earth, but people just like to act like they aren't.
So are the legal systems, of say western societies, profoundly out of whack with our conscience? A God given conscience imples some sort of standardisation... and if I am not mistaken everyones is different. What does your conscience say that doesn't sit well with your society?
Thank goodness those aren't in the majority.
Indeed.
Yep. Which is, in fact, what I was saying.Subjective awareness, objective reality, and the sociological imagination. From individual instances we can perceived the whole of the problem--that the people in question were vile beyond belief.
And what exactly did God do to correct the problem? Except burn it to the ground and start over? And you of course realise that societies don't spring into being full formed? And even if one existed that was "vile beyond belief" by any standard - well, that is the product of a long evolution. Once again it seems we have an example of God not doing anything with his children till they were completely wrecked. Parenting is a constant thing, all interconnected. Not one day a week when the parent decides, due to the lack of parenting, that the child has to be excuted.
Presumably.
Well, that is something. Considering how changeable kids are. Talk about the sins of the father.
It's animals we're talking about here. Not people. This entire section sounds like a Bardock post.
No, animals and people. Drowning is profoundly unpleasant for either. Why did God choose such a cruel method of mass execution? Why not simply make them... dead? Why drown them? Seems a wee bit cruel.
Not beyond comprehension, but beyond the ability to say--if one were so inclined--"Weeellll, it wasn't really bad because of..."
Ahh, no mitigating factors.
What's your point? Capital punishment isn't illegal.
Not everywhere.
My point is the craziness of the whole "God is a parent who had to discipline his children - hence the flood."
A parent who kills their child because they are bad by their standards are considered criminal. However one can say God is both a parent and a judge (thank goodness he can give himself whatever authority he wishes. Nothing tyrannical about that.)
It wasn't to insure that Job loved God. It was to prove to Satan Job's loyalty.
When I am boss of whatever I will let my staffs family be killed to insure their loyalty to the business. I will let someone infect them with aids and then let them think they are about to be fired... and if they stay loyal they will actually get a raise and promotion.
And if any of the cry I will tell them I am operating from the divine management manual. I mean no one would think that was bad.
*Sighs.* Again, you're missing the point. It's not that God is the "thought police," it's that every single inclination they had was evil.
And? Isn't one of the tenants of thought police usually "everyone is a criminal in someway. We just have to did deep enough to find a crime. Even if it is simply thinking bad" They are being judged on inclinations. We can't be saved on them, but we can be damned by them.
Ah, but were they willing accomplices? Did they care about the condition of the Hebrews?
I fear you don't know much about ancient societies with that question. And once again double standards - not all slaves left Egypt, since Jews would only ever bee a section of the slave populous Egyptians drew on.
Somehow I think if Exodus is true... well, God didn't help all slaves, and those that remained would have been put on even more with God taking away a big number of other people.
And thus showing His power and glory to be far beyond the false gods and idols the Egyptians worshiped.
Uh huh.
Hmm. Well, the Nazis got owned, so there goes that example.
I think I hurt my spleen laughing. So now the fact the Nazis lost is an example of God doing things? Somehow I am more inclined to think it was.... the millions of soldiers who fought against them. The millions who died. If I study history of WWII I am afraid I see no fingerprints to show God had been sneaking around. And sure - WWII was a glorious thing to attribute to God. When he acted... granted, millions had already died horribly, but gee, when God got involved those Nazis got owned. Hard.
No, not anyone who questions that would be a moral relativist. However, what the Egyptians did would be excusable--perhaps even morally right--by a moral relativist.
No, it wouldn't. However it would tried to be understand, and it would be seen as historical and cultural differences meant that to the Egyptians (and most cultures at the time) it was legal and the like. You would not hear a moral relativist saying "slavery is right." However you would hear one saying "that morals are a product of societies and thus relative to those societies. Most western societies in modern times with liberal and progressive thoughts understand slavery to be a crime and infringement of human rights. However in times past such behaviour was not only accepted but supported by ancient cultures moral system."
It is one of the weak arguments against moral relativity - the whole "Oh listen, they are saying slavery is all right! Grrr! Best not try and understand the thinking of others, otherwise you will end up owning slaves and in Hell!"
And didn't the Israelites have something about the correct way to treat slaves?
Once upon a time there was a man named Josef Mengele. He was an evil man. He deserved to die.
Did God kill Josef Mengele? No - despite all Josef Mengele had done he lived to a ripe old age. If he had been caught he would have been charged with a crime and likely executed for it - by humans, under a human law.
Which is rather different from "God saw the people were all inclined to evil and decided they had to die." The difference being Josef Mengele had a catalogue of crimes. The people God killed were simply classified as evil. They got no trial, they didn't face their accuser. And somehow I find it hard to picture a time when every man, women and child was a copy of Mengele.
Probably.Terms of conquest and excision of followers of false gods.
Have I already mentioned Theological legal systems and the Taliban? I think I have... still, sounds fair - "excision of..."
We have complete choice in the matter. You have chosen not to believe, to accept God's grace.
"We choose not to believe" my project for the day... first I will try and find a way to believe in magic. Then I will moves on to believing in griffins and dragons. Then I think I might be able to believe in Ra and maybe Dionysus. Then I will be ready for a monotheistic God.
Maybe all of them. I mean if I am believing in Christian God, well, he has the same amount of evidenced claims as the Islamic one, and the Jewish one, so I guess to be on the safe side I best believe in all three.
Maybe then I should try and believe in something really difficult... Scientology. Makes sense yes? I mean logically if my current predicament is based upon me choosing "not to believe" then I should be able to believe in all of that - yes? Care to join me? You can choose to believe in magic yes? One can believe in whatever surely?
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
No, I get what you are saying, and all I can say is it is fortunate we don't have legal systems that judge by the "standards of God."
So are the legal systems, of say western societies, profoundly out of whack with our conscience?
A God given conscience imples some sort of standardisation... and if I am not mistaken everyones is different. What does your conscience say that doesn't sit well with your society?
And what exactly did God do to correct the problem? Except burn it to the ground and start over? And you of course realise that societies don't spring into being full formed? And even if one existed that was "vile beyond belief" by any standard - well, that is the product of a long evolution. Once again it seems we have an example of God not doing anything with his children till they were completely wrecked.
Parenting is a constant thing, all interconnected. Not one day a week when the parent decides, due to the lack of parenting, that the child has to be excuted.
Well, that is something. Considering how changeable kids are. Talk about the sins of the father.
No, animals and people. Drowning is profoundly unpleasant for either. Why did God choose such a cruel method of mass execution? Why not simply make them... dead? Why drown them? Seems a wee bit cruel.
Ahh, no mitigating factors.
Not everywhere.My point is the craziness of the whole "God is a parent who had to discipline his children - hence the flood."
A parent who kills their child because they are bad by their standards are considered criminal. However one can say God is both a parent and a judge (thank goodness he can give himself whatever authority he wishes. Nothing tyrannical about that.)
Furthermore, a lot of the people who were so entrenched in the moral decay of the time were not even totally human--they were angelic halfbreeds, mockeries of humanity.
When I am boss of whatever I will let my staffs family be killed to insure their loyalty to the business. I will let someone infect them with aids and then let them think they are about to be fired... and if they stay loyal they will actually get a raise and promotion.And if any of the cry I will tell them I am operating from the divine management manual. I mean no one would think that was bad.
1. To prove to Satan that Job was a good and faithful servant to God.
2. To test Job's loyalty.
3. To serve as a teaching experience for Job.
With all of this, though--God merely allowed Satan to do to Job what Satan could do to anyone else. After all, Satan is the ruler of this world.
Your example of being a boss in a company is flawed as there isn't a rival company running amok and hurting all the workers in the example.
And? Isn't one of the tenants of thought police usually "everyone is a criminal in someway. We just have to did deep enough to find a crime. Even if it is simply thinking bad" They are being judged on inclinations. We can't be saved on them, but we can be damned by them.
I fear you don't know much about ancient societies with that question.
And once again double standards - not all slaves left Egypt, since Jews would only ever bee a section of the slave populous Egyptians drew on.Somehow I think if Exodus is true... well, God didn't help all slaves, and those that remained would have been put on even more with God taking away a big number of other people.
Uh huh.
I think I hurt my spleen laughing. So now the fact the Nazis lost is an example of God doing things? Somehow I am more inclined to think it was.... the millions of soldiers who fought against them. The millions who died. If I study history of WWII I am afraid I see no fingerprints to show God had been sneaking around. And sure - WWII was a glorious thing to attribute to God. When he acted... granted, millions had already died horribly, but gee, when God got involved those Nazis got owned. Hard.
No, it wouldn't.
Moral relativism says that there are no moral absolutes and that right and wrong are defined differently by different people. Therefore, slavery, to one man, could be right while being wrong to another.
The reason that you never will hear a moral relativist say that slavery is right is because moral relativists tend to be a tad hypocritical with their beliefs that there are no moral absolutes.
It is one of the weak arguments against moral relativity - the whole "Oh listen, they are saying slavery is all right! Grrr! Best not try and understand the thinking of others, otherwise you will end up owning slaves and in Hell!"
And didn't the Israelites have something about the correct way to treat slaves?
Did God kill Josef Mengele? No - despite all Josef Mengele had done he lived to a ripe old age. If he had been caught he would have been charged with a crime and likely executed for it - by humans, under a human law.
Have I already mentioned Theological legal systems and the Taliban? I think I have... still, sounds fair - "excision of..."
"We choose not to believe" my project for the day... first I will try and find a way to believe in magic. Then I will moves on to believing in griffins and dragons. Then I think I might be able to believe in Ra and maybe Dionysus. Then I will be ready for a monotheistic God.Maybe all of them. I mean if I am believing in Christian God, well, he has the same amount of evidenced claims as the Islamic one, and the Jewish one, so I guess to be on the safe side I best believe in all three.
Maybe then I should try and believe in something really difficult... Scientology. Makes sense yes? I mean logically if my current predicament is based upon me choosing "not to believe" then I should be able to believe in all of that - yes? Care to join me? You can choose to believe in magic yes? One can believe in whatever surely?