We all have some clue about the universe, what it is, what it isn't, and
we build our lives around things that we think are true, be they some
things we can see and handle, some things we can not, some things
we accept as factual, some things we simply accept because we believe
them to be true. The mix is our foundation for our lives, some are
more important than others as far as what we trust when we think
how the universe should be interpreted. If this is accepted what is
the most important part of your foundation at this time? How you
define it too I think would be important if you care to partake in this
discussion.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayWhere are all the replies? Do we have to hear from my big mouth again?
We all have some clue about the universe, what it is, what it isn't, and
we build our lives around things that we think are true, be they some
things we can see and handle, some things we can not, some things
we accept as factual, some things we simply accept because we believe
them to be true. The mix is our foundation for our lives, some are
more imp ...[text shortened]... ou
define it too I think would be important if you care to partake in this
discussion.
Kelly
Where are all the free thinkers, skeptics, agnostics, athiests telling us about their foundations? I don't understand why such an invitation to speak of one's foundations goes so long without a submission.
I mean I thought so many people had much more valid and rational foundations of belief then us believers in God.
Originally posted by jaywillLol....well said sir.....
Where are all the replies? Do we have to hear from my big mouth again?
Where are all the free thinkers, skeptics, agnostics, athiests telling us about their foundations? I don't understand why such an invitation to speak of one's foundations goes so long without a submission.
I mean I thought so many people had much more valid and rational foundations of belief then us believers in God.
Originally posted by jaywillHadn't actually seen this post. I think the thread is about foundations for our lives rather then foundations for believes. In terms of foundations for belief, I think you answered that already. I base my beliefs on 'valid and rational' evidence whereas your foundation appears to be absolutly nothing. Unless of course you base your faith in the bible which wouldn't really set you apart from any other religion, such as Islam or Jewdaism which does pretty much the same (found their beliefs in a book). I would argue that the basis of your faith is more likely to actually be indoctrination as a child, a time when you are highly impressonable.
Where are all the replies? Do we have to hear from my big mouth again?
Where are all the free thinkers, skeptics, agnostics, athiests telling us about their foundations? I don't understand why such an invitation to speak of one's foundations goes so long without a submission.
I mean I thought so many people had much more valid and rational foundations of belief then us believers in God.
But anyway thats really off topic. What are the foundations of my life? Thats a more difficult question. Not entirely sure how you want us to answer that Kelly, I suppose family and friends are a good place to start in terms of what my life is founded on, but don't know if thats what you mean.
Hi Jake,
Thanks for coming forward with a post. Let's take a look
++++++++++++++++++++++
Hadn't actually seen this post. I think the thread is about foundations for our lives rather then foundations for believes. In terms of foundations for belief, I think you answered that already. I base my beliefs on 'valid and rational' evidence whereas your foundation appears to be absolutly nothing.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That's a nice assertion.
To me it means "Your evidence means NOTHING to ME."
But Jesus is History. And the Holy Spirit is experiencial. So while you say my basis is "nothing" I say that perhaps it means "nothing" to you. In that case it is more of a matter that you don't care. I accept that.
You don't CARE that there was a Jesus of Nazareth. And you don't care that over two millennia many of totally diverse backrounds have claimed to have met Him, according to His predictions and teachings.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Unless of course you base your faith in the bible which wouldn't really set you apart from any other religion, such as Islam or Jewdaism which does pretty much the same (found their beliefs in a book).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well Judaism's book is also a part of the Bible - The Old Testament.
And from what I have read of the book of Islam, it seems a kind of jumbled up repetition of some of the Old Testament yet, modified to propose some twists of interest to the Arabs.
+++++++++++++++++++++
I would argue that the basis of your faith is more likely to actually be indoctrination as a child, a time when you are highly impressonable.
+++++++++++++++++
Ah yes. I was brought up in Sunday School all my life. That is why I claim that Jesus is the living Lord.
Well, indoctrination upon an impressionable mind would not in and of itself mean that what was taught must be false.
I also was impressionably indoctrinated from a youth that the moon circles around the earth and that 10 plus 10 = 20.
So this in and of itself does not prove falsehood. As it stands I spent a good part of my young adult life as a Agnostic, seeking, "free-thinking" person with quite a strong skeptical view of the Bible.
So I would have to reject your cavilier dismissal that I was just brought up in Sunday School and that is the only reason why I confess Jesus as Lord.
Sorry.
What else do you have?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But anyway thats really off topic. What are the foundations of my life? Thats a more difficult question.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I accept that. Yes, it is not an easy thing to speak of for some people.
I think that was a pretty honest statement.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not entirely sure how you want us to answer that Kelly, I suppose family and friends are a good place to start in terms of what my life is founded on, but don't know if thats what you mean.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well for me, the one known and fact which I am assured of more than anything is that Jesus Christ is alive and can be known. I think this is more real to me than probably my own name.
You see, down in the innermost kernel of a man's being, the presence of the Holy Spirit is hard to deny. That is to those regenerated by the Spirit of the resurrected Jesus.
1.) "Yet a little while and the world beholds Me no longer, but you behold Me; because I live, you also shall live.
In that day [the day of the personal realization of His resurrection] you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." (Jesus speaking in John 14:19,20)
Those are not just words to me Jake. On this side of receiving Jesus I can say "I understand that now. I know what Jesus meant by that. These words ring very true to my personal experience."
2.) "And in this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He gave to us." (the Apostle John in 1 John 3:24)
Those are not just comforting sounding words to me Jake. I could say to the Apostle John - "I know what you mean John. I agree. And this does match my personal exprience. He has given a Spirit to dwell in the kernel of my being."
3.) "The Spirit Himself witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God" (Paul in Romans 8:16)
That is right brother Paul. I think I know very well what you mean. There is an inner bearing witness in my spirit that God is my DADDY that God is my Father, intimately and sweetly.
4.) "The last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" ( Paul again 1 Cor. 15:45)
Christ in my experience is accessible as the life giving Spirit. He is experiencial and enjoyable as the life giving Spirit Whom He became in resurrection.
5.) "The Lord be with your spirit" (2 Tim. 4:22)
This explains a lot to me since the day I called on Jesus Christ to contact Him. Since that day the Lord Jesus Christ has been with my spirit. He has been with my innermost being. He has been joined in an organic union with the nucleus of my immaterial being.
"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)
It makes sense. It does the best explanation of what has happened to me since the day I knew nothing accept to call out to the Lord Jesus. He has indeed been JOINED to me. His Spirit and my spirit have become one united spirit.
This is evidence that you can ignore. But I cannot.
a further comment about this passage:
"Yet a little while and the world beholds Me no longer, but you behold Me; because I live, you also shall live."
1.) Jesus explains that the world at at large will no longer behold Him. But yet the world no longer does the believing disciples will continue to behold Him.
I think I have experienced exactly that. The man beside me does not behold this Jesus. But when I called upon Him to enter into my life I began to "behold" Him. Just as He said. Something's up here!!
2.) "because I live, you also shall live."
My first reaction to this phrase is "Well, Jesus, I'll live regardless of whether you live again or not."
But my experience with Jesus is this: Before I met the resurrected Jesus I cannot really count that life as living. It certainly was not a rich living. It was a living in vanity and in emptiness.
When Jesus said "because I live you also shall live" He must mean, has to mean - that life from that point on will be by the power of His having been raised from the dead.
You will live in this new realm, in this new sphere, only because He is resurrected from the dead. "The last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45).
What I had before meeting the Christ Who is in resurrection I cannot really call "living" in comparison with living with Jesus.
Originally posted by KellyJayI guess one of the basic foundations of life for me is: "Don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you."
We all have some clue about the universe, what it is, what it isn't, and
we build our lives around things that we think are true, be they some
things we can see and handle, some things we can not, some things
we accept as factual, some things we simply accept because we believe
them to be true. The mix is our foundation for our lives, some are
more imp ...[text shortened]... ou
define it too I think would be important if you care to partake in this
discussion.
Kelly
Originally posted by jaywillJust breifly about the first bit (I don't have much time):
Hi Jake,
Thanks for coming forward with a post. Let's take a look
[b]++++++++++++++++++++++
Hadn't actually seen this post. I think the thread is about foundations for our lives rather then foundations for believes. In terms of foundations for belief, I think you answered that already. I base my beliefs on 'valid and rational' evidence whereas yo rit.
This is evidence that you can ignore. But I cannot.
Your evidence doesn't mean nothing to me, I don't think you have any evidence. I don't disrespect your religion or the members of your religion because of this, I just don't think there is an evidence base to your beliefs.
Jesus may be history, but the bible is not a reliable historical source. A lot of the teachings of the bible arn't even particuly nice teachings. Especally with regard to the old testament, and parts of the new, there are aspects of the bible that would not be followed today or condered moral. Despite the shakey moral credential of the bibles, it has to be said that it is far more likly that the authors of the gopels wrote a few untruths to fill old testment prohesies, then that the events actually took place.
As for the number of Christians over the past two millennia, you could equally quote to me about the numbers of peoples from all sorts of different faiths and religion throughout the whole of human history. Christians didn't invent religion.
Islams have taken parts of the Old Testament, in much the same way that Christians have and expanded on it. I would expect a similar responce from a Muslim with regards to the New Testament. They believe that Mohamed was the last prophet sent from God. The angel Gabriel appeared to Mohamed in a cave. Mohamed bought word from God spesifically saying that Jesus was not God, and that you would be punished for believeing this. There is absolutly no reason why any of your prohets were more reliable then Mohamed, and there is absolutly no difference between your faith and the faith of Muslims, except that there are many Muslims that have a far more deep faith in God then many Christians. So deep in fact that even educated degree holding Muslims have killed themselves (and others) in the name of their God.
As for indoctrination do you find it surprising that the majority of Muslims have Muslim parents? That most Christians have Christian parents? That most Hindus have Hindu parents? I could go on, overwhelmingly religion is transmitted through the generations. True, just because you indoctrinate somebody it doesn mean you are wrong. But why do you say that only with regards to Christianity? Is it prehaps because you were not bought up as a Muslim? A lot of children seriously believe that Father Christmas comes into their homes every year to give them presents. Of course when the bases of their faith disintergrates and they realise that there parents do not really share this believe, then they themselves cease to believe. The bases of your faith, in much the same way, is in those that have seriously believed and gone before you. But they are as right as any Muslim parant that teaches their child about Allah.
I'll read the rest of you post when I have more time.
I suppose I'm one of those stinky moral relativists. The foundation for all of my morals is that they must remain relatively plastic. What is morally repugnant in one society could be run of the mill for another and that when we speak of morals, my belief, or foundation, would be that morals are what they are only within the framework of the society they exist in.
If I go to live in another culture, I believe I must force myself to abide by their morals and customs, however wrong I may personally think they are, I must retrain myself to mesh into that framework.
That is not to say that I don't have my own morality, but I refuse to believe that there is a common all encompassing morality to which we can as one subscribe to.
Originally posted by jaywillUnfortunately, whoever wrote The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant is long dead.
That's good. I'd like to meet whoever came up with that.
All we have are the later versions, as found in the Tao Te Ching, the Analects of Confucius, and some early Zoroastrian texts. Leviticus has it, too, in the Torah.
Oh, you can also find it much more recently in the New Testament.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity
Originally posted by agrysonDo you feel that there are some morals which are a little more universal, going across all societies ?
I suppose I'm one of those stinky moral relativists. The foundation for all of my morals is that they must remain relatively plastic. What is morally repugnant in one society could be run of the mill for another and that when we speak of morals, my belief, or foundation, would be that morals are what they are only within the framework of the society they exi ...[text shortened]... believe that there is a common all encompassing morality to which we can as one subscribe to.
For example, are there any societies in which these actions might be the custom highly regarded by the members of that culture:
1.) That a man should grow up and marry his mother.
2.) That a man should marry his daughter.
3.) That man and his wife should eat their own children for dinner.
4.) That a man should plot murder against another person on a whim.
5.) That a person trick a blind man to walk into a pit so as to get hurt, for a laugh.
Are these mores that are pretty much disdained by all cultures? Is there any behavior that you might regard as reprehensible everywhere?
On the positive side are these mores that are respected across all cultures generally:
1.) That a person work diligently at the work he does.
2.) That a woman care for her children with love.
3.) That a person be honest with people.
4.) That person say he is sorry for an offense committed to another.
I guess I am seeking to find out what you feel about morals which seem to go across the framework of all societies.
Jake,
Your evidence doesn't mean nothing to me, I don't think you have any evidence. I don't disrespect your religion or the members of your religion because of this, I just don't think there is an evidence base to your beliefs.
Well, Jake, I guess we should narrow this down a little and say "Evidence of exactly WHAT?"
Let's say do I have evidence that the man Jesus is the Son of God.
We have a band of fellas who were fishermen who seemed to follow Him around. After their Teacher was crucified they cowarded away behind locked doors frightened that they would suffer the same fate.
Suddenly, they were transformed into a power testifying team of witnesses proclaiming that this Jesus had been raised from the dead. The available history kept by those who really cared to know about these things tells us that these 12 (including the one who replaced Judas) died by persecution for thier work.
What do you think changed them from timid hideouts to martyrs for the faith? What did they have to gain by propagating a hoax?
How could all twelve of them have suffered the same false delusion?
Then you have Saul of Tarsus. He was reputed to be exceptionally devoted to Judaism. He took the initiative to persecute this cult of Christians. Then he too claimed to have encountered the resurrected Christ and became the strongest exponent of the faith.
He authored some 13 or so books of the 27 New Testament books. This was previously someone who dragged Christsians from their houses and threw them into prisons forcing them to recant the name of Jesus.
What turned him around? What turned the twelve around?
One possibility is that what they witnessed of Jesus was in fact true. He had risen victoriously over death. Paul wrote that He appeared to 500 of the disciples at one time. And at the time he wrote that he said some had since died but the majority were still alive.
We don't have evidence that any of these 500 wrote to contradict Paul's misinformation, had it been that.
Then we have Christ's brother James who was not a believer in his brother's claims. Latter he turned his skepticism around and decided that his brother Jesus must have been telling the truth about Himself.
What caused James to turn around?
These are all external evidences not related to subjective experiences.
The question is is Jesus really Son of God? If He wasn't He deserves an Academy Award for acting like Son of God. Then the other possiblity is that He is Who He says He is.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jesus may be history, but the bible is not a reliable historical source. A lot of the teachings of the bible arn't even particuly nice teachings. Especally with regard to the old testament, and parts of the new, there are aspects of the bible that would not be followed today or condered moral.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think that the teaching of the Bible is progressive in nature. I believe that over a long period of time God gradually unfolded the revelation concerning Himself.
The gospel of John does not immediately follow Genesis. And in the intermediate books you do have some things which are not easy to accept. But I think ground work had to be laid down in order for us to appreciate the incarnation of God in His Son Jesus.
For example - God does many things to demonstrate His hatred for sin in the Old Testament. There are some harsh punishments for sin there. I suppose these are what you say are not nice.
But unless we had a backround of the Divine hatred and judgement for sin we would not appreciate that He took into Himself the judgement for our own sins on His cross.
The revelation of the Bible is progressive. Leviticus is not the final word of the Bible.
What is it in the New Testament that you object to as amoral?