1 edit
Originally posted by amannioni shall get back to you ammanion, but for the next few days i shall be fiendishly busy, however, these realities, our capacity to love, to appreciate art and beauty, poetry music and literature, our sense of justice and our capacity to exercise conscience, etc certainly seem to be superfluous to our survival, i am just wondering how you reconcile this to your world view? secondly there are many elements that are out with our control, thus it seems to me, that while we may try to forge our destinies, there is an element of unforeseen occurrence (see Robert Burns most excellent poem, To a mouse (upon turning up its nest with a plough))
No, I haven't said that.
Life has no external purpose - we impose our own purpose on it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes, you're right, nice poem.
i shall get back to you ammanion, but for the next few days i shall be fiendishly busy, however, these realities, our capacity to love, to appreciate art and beauty, poetry music and literature, our sense of justice and our capacity to exercise conscience, etc certainly seem to be superfluous to our survival, i am just wondering how you reconcile thi ...[text shortened]... ence (see Robert Burns most excellent poem, To a mouse (upon turning up its nest with a plough))
I don't see any problem with having these abilities that 'seem' to exist beyond any use for our existence and survival. I highlight seem because I'm not so sure that these things are actually of little or no use to our survival. But then, I think from memory you deny an evolutionary history for human development, so maybe I shouldn't start that little fire here.
I agree, there are many things that happen in our lives that are beyond our control. But notice in my many rantings (and yes I'm aware, there are many) I didn't claim that we control our own lives. I merely state that I believe we create purpose in our lives.
I feel very purposeful, despite the vagaries and inequities of our existence.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatSorry for the late response; I'd lost the conversation in the flow.
Well here's the thing Freaky - I have searched very, very hard for a deeper meaning, for the 'good' for a very, very long time. I spent several years following the teachings of Christ, really quite devoutly, but ultimately, I felt, rather pointlessley. I felt no enlightenment, no divinity, no illumination whatsoever, but I did encounter what seemed ...[text shortened]... nowledge. I still seek spiritual truth, but now mostly without expectation of reaching it.
I spent several years following the teachings of Christ, really quite devoutly, but ultimately, I felt, rather pointlessley.
Join the club. I cannot claim to be a charter member, but I certainly deserved a seat somewhere near the front.
I felt no enlightenment, no divinity, no illumination whatsoever, but I did encounter what seemed like an endless parade of hypocrites and rascals (a minority of the faithful, of course) who seemed to think themselves 'saved' (whatever that means) and who, I felt, may have been christian according to the letter of his laws, but depressingly often without regard for the actual message.
A couple of problems, if you aren't opposed to my arm-chair quarterbacking.
Christianity--- contrary to popular, recently developed marketing blunders--- is not an emotionally-driven state-of-mind. To be certain, one's state-of-mind is critical to playing the game successfully, but therein lies the issue: the Christian life is one of thought first, thought foremost. Will a person emote? Quite possibly, very probable given the nature of the topic. However, emoting first is not in the game plan. Thinking is. How one feels about the process is inconsequential... literally without importance of any kind. What person thinks--- not only of the Christ, but what their mind is consistently stayed upon--- determines the path of their Christian life.
People, by and large and overwhelmingly, get it wrong. Stop looking at them.
I still seek spiritual truth, but now mostly without expectation of reaching it.
Without a shred or hint of apology for sounding trite...
"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOh I see that, of course. As far as I understand it, Christ's version of the faith could never have caught on in the way that Paul's did - quite apart from anything else, it's hard to see how Constantine would've found the gnostic aspects at all attractive, and I don't see christianity taking off without that leg-up from the Roman church.
Perhaps what you fail to recognize is that the vast majority of Christians do not follow "the teachings of Christ" but rather follow the teachings of others, i.e., Paul of Tarsus, their denomination, other writers of the Bible, etc.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatOh I see that, of course.
Oh I see that, of course. As far as I understand it, Christ's version of the faith could never have caught on in the way that Paul's did - quite apart from anything else, it's hard to see how Constantine would've found the gnostic aspects at all attractive, and I don't see christianity taking off without that leg-up from the Roman church.
This is what I was responding to in particular:
I spent several years following the teachings of Christ, really quite devoutly, but ultimately, I felt, rather pointlessley. I felt no enlightenment, no divinity, no illumination whatsoever, but I did encounter what seemed like an endless parade of hypocrites and rascals (a minority of the faithful, of course) who seemed to think themselves 'saved' (whatever that means) and who, I felt, may have been christian according to the letter of his laws, but depressingly often without regard for the actual message.
Seems to me that its much more than "a miniority of the faithful" are in the "endless parade of hypocrites and rascals". This should come as no surprise if the "vast majority of Christians do not follow 'the teachings of Christ'". They are "hypocrites and rascals" and are not "christian according to the letter of [Christ's] laws" precisely because they do not follow His teachings.
As far as I understand it, Christ's version of the faith could never have caught on in the way that Paul's did - quite apart from anything else, it's hard to see how Constantine would've found the gnostic aspects at all attractive, and I don't see christianity taking off without that leg-up from the Roman church.
Not sure how this is supposed to fit in. What does popularity have to do with it? Paul's version is "popular" simply because it's cheap and easy, but is antithetical to the teachings of Christ". Earlier you said that you "still seek spiritual truth". Do you think that it can be found in "the teachings of Christ" as opposed to the teachings of Christianity?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWhom do you see following the teachings of Christ other than yourself? Do Muslims?
Seems to me that its much more than "a miniority of the faithful" are in the "endless parade of hypocrites and rascals". This should come as no surprise if the "vast majority of Christians do not follow 'the teachings of Christ'". They are "hypocrites and rascals" and are not "christian according to the letter of [Christ's] laws" precisely because they do not follow His teachings.
Originally posted by whodeyAs you are wont to do, you've asked a loaded question. I'd suggest you ask a straight one, but history has shown you to be next to incapable of making an honest post.
Whom do you see following the teachings of Christ other than yourself? Do Muslims?
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI thought it to be a rather straight forward question TOO even if it was "loaded". Not to worry, I did not expect an answer. Face it, you are a Christian bigot.
As you are wont to do, you've asked a loaded question. I'd suggest you ask a straight one, but history has shown you to be next to incapable of making an honest post.
5 edits
Originally posted by whodeyYet another dishonest post. It WAS a loaded question, therefore it was not a straight question. It would have been easier to ask the question without loading it, so you went out of your way to do so. Do you think that deceitful tactics such as that actually gains you anything? Or is it just such a firmly entrenched part of your character? You've also changed the verbiage from "straight question" to "straight forward question" in a lame attempt to defend yourself.
I thought it to be a rather straight forward question TOO even if it was "loaded". Not to worry, I did not expect an answer. Face it, you are a Christian bigot.
I suppose if you could make an intelligent argument you would. But out of desperation you repeatedly attack my posts and me using dishonest tactics. One of these days you might surprise everyone and start addressing the germane points of my posts instead of taking cheap shots.
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOriginally posted by ThinkOfOne
Replying to whodey: Yet another dishonest post. ...
... It WAS a loaded question, therefore it was not a straight question. It would have been easier to ask the question without loading it, so you went out of your way to do so. Do you think that deceitful tactics such as that actually gains you anything? Or is it just such a firmly entrenched part of your character? You've also changed the verbiage from "straight question" to "straight forward question" in a lame attempt to defend yourself. I suppose if you could make an intelligent argument you would. But out of desperation you repeatedly attack my posts and me using dishonest tactics. One of these days you might surprise everyone and start addressing the germane points of my posts instead of taking cheap shots.
Spot on. This should be re-posted on the Debates Forum.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOk then, which religion is the most Christ-like? Is it Hinduism, Islam, Judism etc.?
Yet another dishonest post. It WAS a loaded question, therefore it was not a straight question. It would have been easier to ask the question without loading it, so you went out of your way to do so. Do you think that deceitful tactics such as that actually gains you anything? Or is it just such a firmly entrenched part of your character? You've also chan ...[text shortened]... everyone and start addressing the germane points of my posts instead of taking cheap shots.