Ancient Domains Of Mystery, forum overview / General / Religious Beliefs
| Online users ( Unknown) |
| Application object not working properly at the moment, no clue who is online... * Numbers in parentheses are the number of minutes since the user last loaded a page. Logged-in users time out after 40 minutes (unless they manually log out), lurkers and anonymous posters after 20. |
This thread is 4 pages long.
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 |
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
D'oh! I shouldn't have let myself get pulled into the trap of comparing humans and animals when discussing morality. I have found that animals can be used to support any side of such discussions, depending on how one chooses to anthropormorphize them. As for differing ethics (beliefs), BMB, I think they arise from human wants, desires, fears, etc. We allow such things to to obscure our awareness of the Truth we know deep inside. Still, though I believe morality (truth) to be absolute, I think it is functionally relative -- how can one person be certain that their perception of Truth is less obscured than somebody else's? IMHO, the best we can do is try to assess our morals, judments, etc. sincerely to determine which ones we honestly believe, and which ones we wish to believe (or are afraid to doubt). |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 21 seconds ago. |
Gyr: You said "If conscience is supposed to come from God, why is it that there are thousands of different beliefs as to what is right and what is wrong?" To acknowledge the "possibility" of God, you must also acknowledge the "possibility" of Satan. Satan knows what is in peoples hearts... and that the inherent emotion within nearly ALL people is rebellion... whether mild (Mom: "Clean your room" Kid: "Okay" *whispering* yeah, whatever) to extreme (Rebellion against government) to outright (Rebellion against God). So he offers alternitives. "Worship this/Do that and be happy" And happiness with most other religions are immediate "Sugar-rush" happiness... they last a little while, and then the need for that kind of happiness happens again. Christianity, however, is different. God is like, the Father whom you can cry on His shoulder whenever you need to, be encouraged when you are sad, and when you do wrong, it is easier to understand WHY it was wrong. If you wish to attribute conscience to instinct, then explain to me why NO animal is able to show remorse over its own actions. It is able to show fear over consequences (a dog afraid of getting the newspaper on the rump after chewing a slipper). But no dog, gorilla, or dolphin has the capability of giving that chewed slipper, then hand the paper to its master, with the understanding what it did was wrong. The most it could do was give the chewed slipper thinking it was a toy. What you describe, with the dolphins not attacking each other, or other animals showing remorse, is not "conscience" or "morality", but rather preservation of the species. Animal altruism, I believe is what evolutionists call it. My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Archangel Registered user The Creator's servant Last page view: 7567 days, 10 hours, 41 minutes and 40 seconds ago. |
To me, from all aspects, God and creation is the most reasonable explanation for my existence. Evolutionists say that this all began from a huge explosion that created the universe as we know it. And somehow, a cell was formed. The cell multiplied and became a primal slime. And then, this slime eventually began to walk on two feet and think about moral questions, meaning of life, etc. Hmmm... This is supposed to prove that we are here because of a happy chance. Sounds pretty fragile theory to me... Scientists claim that energy has always existed. Where did it come from? And,IIRC, DNA can't be built without proteins and proteins can't be generated without DNA. So the old question ,"Which one was here first, the egg or the chicken?", is suprisingly relevant. I hereby announce that I am more than willing to kill anyone who dares to cross my way |
||
|
Jan Erik Administrator Last page view: 9 days, 4 hours and 7 seconds ago. |
Well personaly I think that given all that we know of the universe and such by now that the scientific explanation (while still sketchy and incomplete) is more plausable than everyting beeng created out of thin air (well void actualy) some 10.000 years (or whatever) ago... Funny to hear a christian ask where something came from if it is supposed to always have existed (no offence intended), seeng as that is the exact same question most people (who are not religious) have regarding God :) It have always existed and hence it didn't come from anywhere. It's hard to wrap your brain around the consept that something having always existed (in one form or another), but the only alternative is that at one point NOTHING existed ANYWHERE and that's even harder to imagine... As for DNA I believe they have been eable to "produce" at least RNA (DNA too I think but it's been a while since I read about this) proteines via chemical processes that can ocur naturaly under the right conditions... The odds of these right conditions ocuring at some point somewhere on earth within a few hundred million years are quite good, from there it's just a matter of time and luck as I understand it... The current THEROIES are far from complete, but IMHO the evidence seems to suggest that they are at the very least on the right track... Jan Erik Mydland HoF admin |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 21 seconds ago. |
I will admit, that the views on science and religion have a double standard. Christians are not expected to explain where God came from, because plain and simply, as far as we're concerned, God has always/will always exist. However, scientists have "placed upon themselves", if you will, the need to explain EVERYTHING, by attempting to explain everything. And hence they look like fools when they can't explain something as having always existed. Certainly, scientists have created the "primal mass of goo" that they believe existed in the beginning, however, "Nature" did not evolve this goo in the lab on accident. The *Scientist* -CREATED- the goo. One other thing scientists cannot explain... there is a... property... called the Higgs Boson Particle. It is something so infintesimally tiny... that it is even tinier than the the only known NON-SPLITTABLE thing, the quark. This particle, also called the "God Particle" by scientists, is what holds things together. Nutshelled, molecules create their own gravity, holding their own electrons/neutrons/protons within reach of the nucleus, however, this gravity is not strong enough to hold two molecules together. It is the God Particle that does this. There is "proof" that this exists, because it is the removal of this particle that creates energy when two atoms are split. Now scientists seek to find why atoms are held together. AFAIC, if they want God's Duct Tape, they should go look in the Bible. My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Archangel Registered user The Creator's servant Last page view: 7567 days, 10 hours, 41 minutes and 40 seconds ago. |
Well, nobody can explain where God came from or how He has always existed. However, God himself has promised that when we arrive to His house we will understand and recieve answers to our questions. The fact that Jesus once walked on earth can be scientifically proved, but of the existance of God, the only proof is the Bible and Jesus' words. I hereby announce that I am more than willing to kill anyone who dares to cross my way [Edited 1 time, last edit on 8/27/2002 at 15:34 (GMT -5) by Archangel] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
Darkwolf: Re: Conscience I think you give satan to much credit, even if it exists. I think that we humans are perfectly capable of giving into our desires on our own. I have found it dangerous to try to use animals as examples in theological discussions. How do we know what animals are thinking, with the exception of Nim Chimpsky? |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 37 seconds ago. |
Archangel: Re: Evolution When I learned about evolution, they never used the term "Somehow a cell was formed." They have actually tracked, piece by piece, the steps from soup to amino to protein. They haven't made the step through to RNA, yet, but I'm rather certain they have proven that protiens can be created. They have been able to "cheat" and dump in enough different types of protiens which resulted in RNA strands. Albeit, they didn't make all those protiens from scratch, but they haven't had a million years -- and a billion gallons of soup -- with which to work. I think the standard answer to "What was before the big bang" is that time did not exist, so there was no "before". Gravitational fields supposedly effect time in a manner similar to how relativistic speeds effect time. Thus, there is no time at a singularity, be it a black hole or the singularity that started the Big Bang. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Jan: Time Have you ever read _Flatland_? It is a story about a civilization that exists only in two dimensions: length and width. There's is more to it than that but I was most taken by the thought of a two dimensional existance. If you decided to view time as the third dimension for such a world, the world would take on a 3D shape. For example, if a circular creature in this 2D world stayed still, in its perception of existance, for four seconds, to our eyes, that four seconds of 2D existance would look like a circular cylinder, 4 inches high. Similarly, if it moved around, following a circular path, we would perceive a corkscrew. A cross section of the resulting sculpture of 2D existance would reveal the state of existance at any point in 2D time (The position of every particle, etc) Now then, from the "perception" or "awareness" of those two dimensional creatures, where did we come from? When did we start? We would be outside the bounds of 2D time. Such terms as begin and end would not be applicable to us. |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
Caladriel : Certainly humans are foolish enough to screw it up on their own... ^_^ But, to acknowledge God, you must also acknowledge all of His creations, and Satan, being mentioned in the Bible as one of his creations (an angel, with a free will, who chose to be greater than God, and rebelled against him). Examine the story/book of Job. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. And the Lord said to Satan, "From where do you come?" Then Satan answered the Lord and said, "From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it" And the Lord said to Satan, "Have you comsidered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil." Then Satan answered the Lord, "Does Job fear God for nothing? "Hast Thou not made a hedge about him and his house and all that he has, on every side? Thou has blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. "But put forth Thy hand now and touch all that he has; he will surely curse Thee to Thy face." Then the Lord said to Satan, "Behold, all that he has is in your power, only do not put forth your hand on him." So Satan departed from the presence of the Lord." Job 1:6-1:12 If we are to assume that the Bible is the word of God, and God is infallible, eternally truthful, and just, then we also must assume that all within the Bible, concerning when God Himself speaks, that it too must be truth. Now, if God mentions that He was talking to Satan, He certainly wouldn't be making up a name for a personification of sin and evil itself, especially when Satan responds. God does not speak to "Love", "Compassion", "Hunger", or "Comradery" as if they were personified concepts, so why would He speak to one that represents "Evil"? And as far as credit goes, consider this: Two Generals of opposing armies. One, who seeks to protect his own homeland, his countrymen, and uphold the concept of honor. The other, who seeks nothing more than the destruction of the first, and will use any means possible, by deception, thievery, greed, lust, hatred, jealousy, and anger, among many other things. The countrypeople are invited into both armies. The first asks nothing but to uphold the concept of honor, as the General himself has defined, and all who join his army must acknowledge his Lieutenant as their commander. The second asks nothing at all, but forces the destruction of honor, and encourages mockeries of the first General, and his Lieutenant. ...Now, imagine the country that these two Generals are warring in... do you imagine love, peace, harmony, and the other ideals of honor? Or, do you think it is more likely to see depravity, greed, hatred, and death? One final thing, about animals : "How do we know what animals are thinking...?" Simple, tell me what it means for a human to show a conscience, and then tell me if an animal is capable of doing it? To be honest, no animal I have ever seen has killed something, then allowed its master to kill it... no turkey has willingly laid its own head on the chopping block. My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Guinea Registered user tWo-HeAdEd cHaOs WeAsEl Last page view: 7179 days, 23 hours, 23 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
DarkWolf: "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them." Sons of God? I don't think I understand that. And comparing God and Satan to two Generals that are having a war is in my opinion wrong. War always brings death, destruction and such things, regardless of the final score. Anyway, I have a new riddle for you, maybe someone can answer me. There are 3 persons of God: Father, Son and the Holy Ghost. And God has no beginning and no end - He was, He is and He will be. Right? But Jesus is His son. Son usually is younger than the father. So Jesus couldn't existed forever, like Father. If He did, we would have the God Brothers. And there is still the Holy Ghost left "who comes from the Father and Son" (I don't know how that prayer goes in English, but there is such a statement there). So only Father always existed? Or did all 3? If all 3, so why one is Father, and another one Son? |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
Guinea : You pose excellent questions... let's see if I can't answer'em ^_^ The analogy of two Generals is somewhat, IMHO, accurate, in that one General has caused death to come into existance by deceiving a simple-minded countryperson (Satans appearance as the serpent in the Garden of Eden, causing her to eat the apple and share it with Adam.) Death has reigned from the beginning of recorded time, and will continue until Christ's reign. And there will be a war, that which is described in Revelation (I believe Catholics call this book Apocalypse). Many seemingly needless deaths will occur, but consider Jesus's parable of the tares. (Very nutshelled), a farmer plants some wheat, and his enemy plants weeds (tares) among it. The farmhands ask the farmer if they should go pull up the weeds. The farmer replies "no, 'cuz if you do, they'll destroy the crop of wheat as well. We will wait until harvest time, and seperate the wheat from the weeds, storing the wheat, and burning the weeds". There will be death, in fact most of the world's final population will die. There will be destruction, because in Matthew 24:2, it reads "And he answered and said to them, "Do you not see these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here shall be left upon another, which will not be torn down."" In the end, those who follow God are the wheat, and those who don't are tares... "Sons of God" is another term for angels. You will also see, in the Bible, that Jesus is called "Son of God". Don't confuse the two. The term "Son of God" is a messanic term, whereas "Sons of God" refers to angels ONLY. The reference to Jesus as the Son is only applicable AFTER he was born into this world as a man. He (IMHO) existed alongside God in the same form as God, but with the mind of Jesus in the beginning, because it reads in John 1:1-1:3 "In the beginning was the Word (Jesus is also called the Word of God), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things cam into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." The exact details of Jesus's relation to God, as anything other than Son, before his human birth is unknown in the Old Testament (AFAIK). I will admit that I know little about the Holy Spirit (I refuse to call Him the Holy Ghost). To me, He is the acting, visible part of God's will. Perhaps an analogy, and may God forgive me if it's a bad one, would be like God's Mouse Cursor. The Holy Spirit is what actually interacts with people visibly. The dove that landed upon Jesus after his baptism was the Holy Spirit. But as far as I know, there is no prayer of "who comes from the Father and Son". What you might be thinking of is The Lord's Prayer... Matthew 6:9-6:13 "Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil, [For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen]" Perhaps you might be thinking of the way some religions pray "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost". Whether it was just God the Father who has always existed, no, I don't think so, because in Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.", it proves the Holy Spirit existed in the beginning, and John 1:1-1:3 (mentioned earlier) shows that Jesus was as well. I believe another reason that Jesus is also known as Son is also symbolic as opposed to family order. Matthew 24:36 reads "Of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." Because although Jesus is of the same mind as God, and does everything God wants him to do, there is one thing that God has not told ANYONE, and that is the exact day and time of Jesus's return. It was a Jewish tradition, in Jesus's time, that when a couple was going to get married, EVERYONE -KNEW- they were going to get married, the couple knew about when they were going to get married, but the groom's father was the one who decided on the date. People of all sorts now-a-days can see the beginnings of the chaos described in Daniel, Ezekiel, the Gospels, and Revelation, Christians ("the bride", aka the Church) know that the time of Christ's return is near, but ONLY God the Father knows the day of Jesus's return. As far as "who comes from the Father and Son", I can't help you unless you can find a Bible reference. My signature is umop apisdn. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 8/30/2002 at 09:32 (GMT -5) by DarkWolf] |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Darkwolf: Any chance of keeping ideas to 20 lines? |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Darkwolf: Re: Satan I don't know if satan exists, although I except the possibility. However, even if it does exist, your examples do nothing to support the idea that Satan is leading some army or that it is responsible for all the evil in the world. It appears and tempts Jesus. This is a very specific case of temptation. It torments Job, but I have always been of the opinion that God granted it the power to do so in that specific instance. Notice how it always has to ask God before it does anything and that God places aspects of Job's life in Satan's hands? Out of curiosity, where in the Bible does it say that Satan chose to be greater than God? Where does it say Satan rebelled against God? More important: Where does it say that the serpent is Satan? I believe that the serpent is specifically referred to as "The craftiest of animals." [Edited 1 time, last edit on 8/30/2002 at 12:01 (GMT -5) by its author] |
||
|
Unregistered user |
*I type this half way alseep* I don't have my Bible with me at the moment, so I'm using bible.gospelcom.net. Revelation 12:9 reads "The great dragon was hurled down–that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him." And the part about rebelling... give me some time, I'll find it... Although I'm not exactly sure those are the words used. (ie rebelling/greater) |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
? This is in Revelations, not genesis. Dragons are often referred to a serpents. What does that reference have to do with the serpent in Genesis? [Edited 1 time, last edit on 8/31/2002 at 19:47 (GMT -5) by its author] |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
Forgive my sleepy post last night... a little more specific... Rev. 20:2 "And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years," The "serpent of old" refers to Genesis... Genesis 3:15 "And I will put emnimity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." This is a prophecy; There is a direct lineage from Jesus to Adam in Luke 3:23 (WAY too big to type), which proves that Jesus is the seed of Eve, in regards to family line. What this references is that Satan (the serpent) will cause a bruise to His heel (not a life threatening wound, assuming of course the snake isn't poisonous ^_^), whereas He will bruise his head (hit a snake hard enough on the head and instant death), causing a deathblow, representing an eternal victory over Satan. Nutshelled, although Satan caused a wound to Christianity by causing Jesus's temporary death, Jesus will eliminate Satan and the crud he causes. As for the part about Satan being greater/rebelling against God... my mistake, and I recount that. I re-read 2 Thessalonians (all of chapter 2), and it is the Anti-Christ (in cross-reference to the person mentioned in Daniel and Ezekiel who sits in the rebuilt temple of Solomon) that incites rebellion, and that he exalts himself over all that is either a false god, or that which represents the True God (verses 3 and 4). However the anti-Christ is a representative of Satan in the end days. My analogy makes some sense (makes sense in the fact I got a tad confused! ^_^). And as for him asking permission, Satan would have no power if God didn't allow it. So in that sense I agree with you. My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Well, I think much of the book of Genesis is symbolic, but I'm not quite convinced. I will concede that you have an intriguing interpretation. But the thing is that Satan doesn't seem to have even "stand-by" power. I find it hard to view it as a near omnipotent being when it has to go to God each and everytime it wants to do something. Especially when God is the one it is fighting. Is the term "antichrist" actually used in the Bible? [Edited 1 time, last edit on 9/2/2002 at 17:56 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
Yes, in 1 John 2:18, 1 John 2:22, 1 John 4:3, and 2 John 1:7. (Keep in mind I'm using a New American Standard version, your mileage may vary according to other versions) Re-read the passage about Job. The sons of God (the angels), including Satan, went to God, en masse. Not just Satan by himself. God showed how proud he was of Job, and Satan told him that Job's only good 'cuz God protects him, so in response God told Satan, take away his stuff but don't hurt him, then we'll see. Satan didn't ask permission, but rather, permission was given to him to prove God's point. Everything is that is done is done if God allows it do be done. In Daniel chap. 2 (specifically 2:37, but taking in the whole chapter in context), 2:37 reads "You, O king, are the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, the strength and the glory; and wherever the sons of men dwell, or the beasts of the field, or the birds of the sky, He has given them into your hand and has caused you to rule over them all. You are the head of gold." [Daniel speaking to King Nebuchadnezzar (Nebu from here on) about his dream] God gave the kingdom to Nebu. [next post] My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
There is also the story of Moses. Exodus 7:3-7:5 reads "But I will harden Pharaoh's heart that I may multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. When Pharaoh will not listen to you, then I will lay My hand on Egypt and bring out My hosts, My people the sons of Israel, from the land of Egypt by great judgements. And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt and bring out the sons of Israel from their midst." This shows that God hardens Pharoah's heart so the rest of Egypt understands that God is the Lord of Israel. The thought probably never occured to the Pharoah that the Hebrews' God was using him to prove He is Lord. Nutshelled, other stories that show that things only happen if God wants them to happen are Joseph's enslavement and rise to power in Egypt (Genesis 37-the end of 45) and Samson (Judges 13:24-16:30). In regards to people, John 3:27 reads "John answered and said, "A man can receive nothing unless it has been given him from heaven." I'll elaborate more later... My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Breaking a thought into two 20+ lines doesn't count. :-) I'm afraid it is also largely off topic. We were not debating if God allows things to happen, or if all things are done through the Word. We were talking about whether Satan is a force to be reckonned with in this existance. Let me reiterate (clarify) my point. I see no evidence that Satan is tremendously powerful, leading armies, and influencing all the evil in the world. Re: 20 lines: View it as an exercise. I think you will find that you become more organized and succinct if you limit how much you allow yourself to write. You will hold people's attention better, as well. |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
Sorry, I tend to go off on a tangent as I rant. (A major flaw of mine ^_^). Anyhoo, the two generals thing was an analogy. As in "pick a side" sort of effect. Life the life that God has shown us, or live a Hedonistic life as most other religions teaches (excluding Buddaism, and other self-denial belief systems). Okee, I'm gonna be blunt (with a touch of silliness/sarcasm thrown in): 1.) Influence - Marilyn Manson (directly), Church of Satan (directly), Communism (through teaching Athiesm), Marxism/Nazism (genocide), hedonistic religions (those who feel "might makes right" and "I'm gonna do what feels good"), Gwar (the death metal band, sure they're funny, but still), anarchy (rebellion against government is also against God, 'cuz God allows those governments to be set up), etc, etc. My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
DarkWolf Registered user The Ravager Last page view: 8041 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes and 22 seconds ago. |
2.) Leading Armies - droves of people flocking to see movies like Harry Potter, Evil Dead/Army of Darkness, Resident Evil, Friday the 13th, Blair Witch Project, Tales from the Crypt, etc, certainly aren't helping God's cause by doing this, are they? 3.)Powerful - Revelation 12:3-13:18 (too big to quote) Revelation 12:9 (as mentioned above) mentions the army of angels which follows Satan. (I'm *really* trying to get this 20 line thing down...) My signature is umop apisdn. |
||
|
Jan Erik Administrator Last page view: 9 days, 4 hours and 8 seconds ago. |
Well just because people aren't doing somethign to help God's cause doesn't nessesarily mean they are part of a big plot to bring an end to christianity... The same argument you made abowe can be applied to 99.99% of all commercial activities in the world, very little of it is helping God's cause (even a lot of charity is done by non-christian organizations)... Does that mean that everyone who try to make money are Satanists? Or does that only apply to people who happen to use ocult/religoius symbols as part of the "package" they are selling because they know some people find it "cool" (guess you are no big fan of the Spawn comic either ;P)? Resident Evil have little to do with the ocult BTW, the "zombies" are the result of a bio-weapons experiment gone wrong. Some virus that keeps a tiny part of the brain alive enough to "lurch" around on "autopilot" looking for food for a few weeks (untill decay render the body immobile) after the host have officialy gone braindead (thus further spreading the virus)... A redicolous consept naturaly, but at least nothing realy ocult about it... Jan Erik Mydland HoF admin |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Re: Most Religions are Hedonistic and the Buddhism believes in self-denial. What religions are hedonistic? Neither Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Wicca nor the handful of Native American religions I have encountered teach "Do whatever feels good". Similarly, Buddhism does not teach self denial. At most, I would describe them as teaching (indirectly) "do what feels right." (an important distinction) On a practical levels, IMHO, these religions (and Christianity) want you to lead a balanced life. You should not let your emotions, fears and desires control you at the expense of the world and those around you. Neither should you repress/suppress them and pretend they don't exist. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Re: Influence Have you ever seen "Army of Darkness?" It is one of the funniest films I know. I thought "Blair Witch and "6th Sense" were brilliant examinations of fear. After watching them, though, I am less likely to believe in witchcraft. They may not help, but I don't think they truly harm I think that wanting to suppress or to ban such things (Even Friday the 13th) is on the side of trying to repress emotions and pretend they don't exist. I have no yardstick for such criteria. I try to imagine the intent of the author (both conscious and unconscious) and try to see if there is truly any harm. For example, personally, I think that the author of the Gor books vomitted his basest lusts onto the printed page in order to revel in the feelings by sharing them. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 9/4/2002 at 16:13 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Re: Governments and rebellion I think that any forced control or favoritism of religous beliefs is bad, whether Israeli, Iranian, Holy Roman or Stalinist SOVIET. I'm afraid you have a contradiction, though. You imply that both rebellion and communism are morally wrong. So what does a person do if they are under a communist government? (Or any government that they feel to be unjust and/or amoral) Personally, I disagree with the basic claim that rebellion is inherently wrong. What about the slaves in Haiti? [Edited 1 time, last edit on 9/4/2002 at 15:53 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3966 days, 14 hours, 29 minutes and 8 seconds ago. |
Caladriel, excuse me butting in, 'kay? :) I just got my computer back and I'm overjoyed... Anyway. I don't think that Satan is so directly involved in the world as DarkWolf seems to think: He doesn't need to be. Humans are bad enough as it is (basic evil nature), and many times we don't need prodding for perfectly good ideas (such as sharing with the less fortunate) to degenerate into nightmares (like Communism). Human nature is bad enough; I don't think Satan has to directly influence much at all to get people going on the downward slope towards chaos. Yes. Rebellion (against the government) and Communism are both wrong. However, one law is superior to the other: God's law is superior to man's. So if your Communist government told you to do something morally wrong, you'd have to refuse ("We must obey God rather than man"--very famous quote, from Acts). Of course, it's dangerous--but it's right. Rebellion against such governments is tricky moral territory--but sometimes it's necessary: Allowing evil to happen, by your inaction, is just as sinful as being a participant in that evil. --Iridia, who's thankful not to be living in a Communist country Die Gedanken sind Frei [Edited 1 time, last edit on 9/5/2002 at 17:33 (GMT -5) by Iridia] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
In "Perceptions of Time and Space" Guinea wrote: . . . What is the meaning of life on Earth, if someone up there already knows if we go to heaven or to hell after we die (I don't want to discuss if heaven of hell really exist. We'll all know the answer someday. One day too late I'm afraid but nothing can be done about this :-)) in the very moment we are born (or maybe a lot earlier). Is there any sense in any choice I made, if it is already known what I will choose? What do you think? |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4908 days, 6 minutes and 38 seconds ago. |
Guinea: If I understand your question correctly, you are asking why the way we live and the choices we make matter if God already knows whether we will be damned or saved. The answer I would give to this is that God's knowledge does not make our fate predetermined. God's knowledge merely makes our fate preknown. This is an important distinction. It means that, when we are born, God knows what our fate will be, not in spite of how we will live our lives, but, rather, It knows our fate because of how we will live our lives. (How we will live our lives would also be known to It) Analogy: If you see a fire under a kettle of water, you know that the water will boil. The "fate" of the water is pre-known to you. Now then, does this preknowledge cause the water to boil? No. Similarly, IMHO, God may know your fate, but that fate is still determined by how you live your life. ie. God knows how you will live your life, and thus what your fate will be, but It doesn't make you live that way. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 9/8/2002 at 23:24 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 |