Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 9
Is the US hostile to science?
Topic Started: Oct 28 2005, 08:26 PM (2,851 Views)
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
The 89th Key
Nov 2 2005, 02:41 PM
Nina, you should prove that they said it first. The burden of proof is on you, since I'm responding TO your claim. ;)

89th:

:tsktsk:
You MUST respect the statement that Nina heard it. Otherwise you are doubting her integrity and credibility, in which case she has no reason to further discuss anything with you.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Salesman (at Peter's door): Sir, do you have house insurance?
Peter: Yes.
Salesman: Do you have car insurance?
Peter: Yes.
Salesman: Do you have life insurance?
Peter: Yes.
Salesman: But do you have volcano insurance?
Peter: No, of course not. There's never been an eruption here before.
Salesman: Well, wouldn't you say you're due for one soon?
Peter: Touche, salesman.

:lol: :lol:

Aqua...sorry if I messed that up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

ivorythumper
Nov 2 2005, 05:03 PM
The 89th Key
Nov 2 2005, 02:41 PM
Nina, you should prove that they said it first. The burden of proof is on you, since I'm responding TO your claim. ;)

89th:

:tsktsk:
You MUST respect the statement that Nina heard it. Otherwise you are doubting her integrity and credibility, in which case she has no reason to further discuss anything with you.

Haha, actually the whole reason I said it, was because we all know we can't prove the existance of God or other religious items, so I asked her to prove something she couldn't either. It was actually pretty tongue in cheek...kinda funny what it grew into...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bachophile
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
funny how this theolgical thread was started by jeff. ironic.

must be a jewish conspiracy.
"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Quote:
 
You MUST respect the statement that Nina heard it. Otherwise you are doubting her integrity and credibility, in which case she has no reason to further discuss anything with you.


Ahh, see, THAT'S what I was trying to get at, but then got all screwed up. Nina's evidence for claim X was that she heard it. 89th's response of "noyadin't" should fall into the category of Appeal to Ignorance. If it doesn't, I have no idea WTH is going on anymore.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
The 89th Key
Nov 2 2005, 03:05 PM
ivorythumper
Nov 2 2005, 05:03 PM
The 89th Key
Nov 2 2005, 02:41 PM
Nina, you should prove that they said it first. The burden of proof is on you, since I'm responding TO your claim. ;)

89th:

:tsktsk:
You MUST respect the statement that Nina heard it. Otherwise you are doubting her integrity and credibility, in which case she has no reason to further discuss anything with you.

Haha, actually the whole reason I said it, was because we all know we can't prove the existance of God or other religious items, so I asked her to prove something she couldn't either. It was actually pretty tongue in cheek...kinda funny what it grew into...

:rolleyes2:

You need to learn to distinguish between evidence and testimony.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

...and YOU need to learn how to.......ahh, I'm tired. Gonna go play some poker! :D

Cya 4ory.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
bachophile
Nov 2 2005, 03:05 PM
funny how this theolgical thread was started by jeff. ironic.

must be a jewish conspiracy.

You mean a post-Jewish atheistic secular materialist conspiracy??? :lol:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Nina, the answer lies in the heart of every believer. If your friends had the lightning bolt experience, good for them. There are many others whose faith grew slowly, over time, but at some point their faith is just as strong and deep as the lightning bolt believer. Both of those experiences, if they result in a person consciously committing themselves to belief in Christ as Lord and Savior, and living accordinagly, meet the definition of "born again." The most thoughtful of evangelicals would agree with that opinion.

Whether it's a solemn profession of faith made by each confirmand as they go through their Confirmation process, or a teary-eyed testimony and profession made by a previously unchurched person getting baptized in a lake, if it's from the heart, the net result is the same thing - the person has experienced a second, spiritual, birth.

If your friends say the lightning bolt is required, they would have to prove it to me. As far as what I read in the scriptures, what's required is a change in the heart of the individual believer, and what response is made when the call to believe is discerned, not in the manner of the response. Tell your friends that what's important is how you rsvp to the invitation that comes in the mail, not the color of the envelope.

And this is from a guy who had the semi-lighting-bolt experience at age 15, and has slowly, gradually been chipping away at just what it really means, ever since.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nina
Senior Carp
Dwain, your view is pretty close to mine. There are many roads, all leading to the same place.

My cookies get frosted whenever I hear what sounds to me like an All-Knowing Truth statement, because let's face it--none of us humans really *know*, do we? We're all maneuvering in some state of faith. Most of us are all honestly trying to do what's best, and to be told, "you're wrong, I'm right" about spiritual matters is hard to swallow.

Now a good discussion, that's different!

I think it's the sort of judgment that's best left to God. Our role is to strive honestly, resolutely, compassionately and fairly, to achieve what we think is a good life, with respect for our fellow man.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
"...your view is pretty close to mine. There are many roads, all leading to the same place."

Well, it all depends on how you mean that. Defined one way, that's not my belief at all.


"...Our role is to strive honestly, resolutely, compassionately and fairly, to achieve what we think is a good life, with respect for our fellow man."

Here again, I think that's a good start, but I think we're called to more than that.


Retiring back into reading-only mode...
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Nina
Nov 2 2005, 03:33 PM
Our role is to strive honestly, resolutely, compassionately and fairly, to achieve what we think is a good life, with respect for our fellow man.

You are not far from the Kingdom, Nina. But we both already knew that! ;)
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nina
Senior Carp
Dwain Lee
Nov 2 2005, 03:59 PM

Here again, I think that's a good start, but I think we're called to more than that.


I'm guessing you feel more of a compulsion or calling to teach and spread the word, Dwain? Just guessing...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Nina
Nov 2 2005, 04:43 PM
I'm guessing you feel more of a compulsion or calling to teach and spread the word, Dwain? Just guessing...

Well in my own instance yes, although I'm more comfortable thinking of it in terms not so much as a call for me to teach anyone, but rather, it's a call to help others learn for themselves, whether through words I'm led to speak or write, or through raising difficult questions that they may not have thought of, or hadn't crystallized in their own minds; combined with a call to care for others and help comfort them through difficult times in their lives, as I've been comforted through difficulties of my own.

But I wasn't talking particularly about me. I believe we're all called to a bit more than the excellent list you gave - or put more accurately, that we're called to do them for a distinct purpose, which just wasn't specifically identified.

I believe we're called to do those things in acknowledgement God - that, in fact, doing them in this spirit makes our actions a true form of worship of God. I don't believe that doing those things from a reference point other than it being an act of obedience and worship of God is the same; nor do I think that these two divergent paths necessarily lead to the same end. While it may be extending kindness in the world, and as such is a good thing, I don't believe that's the whole picture. I believe that doing deeds of kindness outside of a spirit of recognition, obedience, and gratitude to God captures only a part of the true calling that each of us is given.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nina
Senior Carp
I think I understand what you're saying, Dwain, but I'm not sure.

Are you saying that good deeds and moral/ethical character are possible only with God? or that knowing God and using the very same good deeds is somehow better (for who--the doer or mankind in general) if they are done to acknowledge and sactify God?

I'm envisioning something kind of like this, deliberately simple to try to make the point easily.

Two people go up to someone in need. They both give the individual a loaf of bread and some milk. The first person says, "Enjoy this, God blesses and loves you" or words to that effect. The second person says, "Enjoy this." Does God approve of the first person's good deed more than the second person's? And is His approval based on the fact that the first do-gooder possibly opened an avenue for the individual to find God?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Nina
Nov 2 2005, 09:13 PM
I think I understand what you're saying, Dwain, but I'm not sure.

Are you saying that good deeds and moral/ethical character are possible only with God? or that knowing God and using the very same good deeds is somehow better (for who--the doer or mankind in general) if they are done to acknowledge and sactify God?

I'm envisioning something kind of like this, deliberately simple to try to make the point easily. 

Two people go up to someone in need.   They both give the individual a loaf of bread and some milk.  The first person says, "Enjoy this, God blesses and loves you" or words to that effect.  The second person says, "Enjoy this."  Does God approve of the first person's good deed more than the second person's?  And is His approval based on the fact that the first do-gooder possibly opened an avenue for the individual to find God?

"Are you saying that good deeds and moral/ethical character are possible only with God?"

In the sense that God is ultimately the source of all good, technically, yes, all good deeds and moral/ethical character are possible only with God. But that's not the same as saying that only people who know or acknowledge God are capable of doing good. Clearly, much good is done by people who do so without acknowledgement of God, or who have even completely rejected God.

"or that knowing God and using the very same good deeds is somehow better (for who--the doer or mankind in general) if they are done to acknowledge and sactify God?"

Yes. I believe it's the more complete understanding of not just the "what" but also the "why" of how God would have us live. I believe it's better for both the doer of the good work and its recipient.

"Two people go up to someone in need. They both give the individual a loaf of bread and some milk. The first person says, "Enjoy this, God blesses and loves you" or words to that effect. The second person says, "Enjoy this." Does God approve of the first person's good deed more than the second person's? And is His approval based on the fact that the first do-gooder possibly opened an avenue for the individual to find God?"

Well, to somewhat complicate your example, it isn't just an issue of using certain words, it's really what's in the person's heart - so the physical act of saying "God blesses and loves you," while true, isn't the necessarily the point nearly as much as what's internally motivating the person to give the bread. This goes to the issue of what God considers true worship and obedience: God doesn't want or accept empty ritual, disconnected from our actual existence, as worship of God. Yet performing those same rituals in a true spirit of worship and reverence of God can be quite moving and acceptable forms of worship. It isn't the physical manifestation, but the internal motivation, that's important to God.

For example, what if the first person - who says, "God blesses and loves you" - really doesn't mean it, or understand the significance of it, and is actually looking down his nose at the person needing help; while the second person actually has love in his heart for the person, and views him as an equal in creation, and is giving his gift out of a spirit of love in obedience to God's instructions - but out of humility, just says "Here, have some bread?" Are both of these situations equal? Which of these is more pleasing in God's eyes, or is more illustrative of God's will?

To help understand my viewpoint, it helps to know the first question of the Westminster Catechism, an old standard in the Presbyterian Church, that I was teasing Freedom about recently. The first question is this: "What is the chief end of man?" And the answer is, "To glorify God and enjoy Him forever." That's a pretty interesting point, and I agree with it. The format of the answer is important, too; it isn't accidental. Our chief end on earth is FIRST to glorify God. All this isn't about us, it's about God; and we are charged with doing all else in recognition of this. Our enjoyment comes second in the list, and even then it isn't enjoyment of ourselves, but enjoyment of God.

That isn't as austere and dour as it seems on the surface; we all have plenty of opportunity for self-enjoyment. But the concept expressed in this first catechism question is important in view of your example. I believe that anything that we do must be done from a framework of glorifying God; otherwise what we're doing is incomplete, and by definition, not "as good" as if we did the exact same thing, with the exact same apparent physical outcome, in a manner acknowledging and worshipping God. In "Dwain's World," anyway, this is what God asks of us, and doing so works out better for the bread-giver, the bread-receiver, and the world in general.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Quote:
 
I believe that anything that we do must be done from a framework of glorifying God;


Exactly, Dwain!

"Do what you can with what you have where you are."

I say, set ridiculous goals and constantly strive for self and societal improvement for God's glorification. For me, it kind of negates the whole "why are we here", "existance" question as well. It really shouldn't matter what the point of being is, so much as you do your best with whatever time you have.

It's our duty to glorify God, if you want to do what is your duty, you should do just a little bit more than that...
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Quote:
 
say, set ridiculous goals and constantly strive for self and societal improvement for God's glorification. For me, it kind of negates the whole "why are we here", "existance" question as well. It really shouldn't matter what the point of being is, so much as you do your best with whatever time you have.

It's our duty to glorify God, if you want to do what is your duty, you should do just a little bit more than that...


It doesn't actually need to read that differently from that for those of us who don't believe in God. Replace the word 'God' with the word 'Humanity' and you've got a pretty good code to live by. The problems arise, of course, when you start asking whether a particular action glorifies God, or humanity. I really don't want to de-rail this discussion by diverting it to topics that are covered ad nauseum elsewhere, but how do we decide if, for example, going to war with Belguim (picked for reasons of non-controversy!) for what we see as a just cause glorifies God, humanity, or anyone?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
I would contest that glorification of God and supporting humanity go hand in hand, John. Potato potato!
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

I think it comes down to the foundation of the religion. Christianity is a very peaceful religion, in theory. You'll always have those anomalies (just like in Islam) where you'll have an extremist taking violent acts in the name of God.

Basically, there's natural law. A law that every person on earth should live by and it doesn't interfere with current religions. It basically says, do not hurt others. Sure laws must be set up, and countries must be defended, but in general, it would be nice if everyone lived by natural law. Of course that can complement the christian way as well, so there shouldn't be a problem.

Again of course, you'll have those taking things to the extreme, like terrorists, and you have to act or you'll be killed.

Sometimes I think the latter is easier, better...but alas, the good fight must be fought.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Quote:
 
I would contest that glorification of God and supporting humanity go hand in hand, John. Potato potato!


Only if you believe in potatoes :wink:
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Is that spelled right?

Dan Quayle
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
My personal favorite collection of Quaylisms (abridged):

"I was recently on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have was that I didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse with those people."

"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."

"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child."

"Welcome to President Bush, Mrs. Bush, and my fellow astronauts."

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."

"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any vice president, and that one word is 'to be prepared'."

"I have made good judgements in the Past. I have made good judgements in the Future."

"The future will be better tomorrow."

"People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history."


...and, my all-time favorite:


"Public speaking is very easy."
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Quote:
 
Is that spelled right?

Dan Quayle


LOL.

You actually made me go back and check. It would have been a particularly horrendous blunder as I was abusing the great man in another thread.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 9