Christianity

[Dontaskme]

It really makes no difference (nor adds credibility) where anyone says they get their information.

[Lacewing]

You may have read my account on the forum below of the two nights I saw 'UFO's. /...Considering all the 'miracles' I have witnessed and what I understand about God, I am rather sceptical about extraterrestrial material out there since it would require me to consider that aliens are running the entire reality we are in, rather than this intelligence which seems to care about my indiscretions.

You had experiences of UFOs but you need to dismiss them because it doesn't align with your experience of God?

I still think this God entity is blowing smoke up the arse of people that want to believe such things, ya know, projecting whatever they hope to see, including ghosts.

So, your willingness to dismiss a lot that people experience, in defense of your preferred beliefs, is not giving you pause?

[iambiguous]

Oh Lord, Won’t You Buy Me A Mercedes-Benz?
Martin Tyrrell on lotteries, religion and Pascal’s Wager.

What, then, of the alternative possibility? That only one religion is the genuine article. Again, it is far from clear which it might be. Fail to spot it, however, and your fate could be as grim as that of any atheist.

Exactly, IC!

You are the Infidel -- the Atheist -- to those other than the True Christians on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

One suspects that is why ecumenism and Unitarianism -- or even pantheism? -- came into existence. A way to expand the spiritual umbrella to include practically everyone. For some there is no Heaven or Hell...there is only being "at one" with one or another overarching transcendental sense of reality.

Anything being better than, “They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.” Samuel Beckett

But even if the choice could be made accurately, there would be a further decision regarding how much commitment the religion should receive. Too low a commitment might result in perdition. Paradoxically, too great a commitment has often been looked upon as likely to have the same result. Frequently, those who seem the most committed to a particular religion have been widely disparaged as fanatics even by their coreligionists, some of whom say that this fanaticism is, itself, a sin.

And, of course, with each and every denomination in the link above there is the One True Path that must be taken while on the One True Path to immortality and salvation. This can revolve around anything from what you are permitted or prohibited to eat or drink, to what you wear, or watch or listen to, to any number of behaviors that are judged down here by the elders...or the ecclesiastics.

Then the part where who the hell really knows what is expected of you by God down here given all of the many conflicting liturgies around...

Take Christianity. Look at how suspect it makes the piety of the Pharisees and how favourably it treats religious slackers who go in for last minute repentance – the Prodigal Son, the meek, the poor in spirit. These days, while its fundamentalists argue that there is little or no chance of salvation beyond the faith, more ecumenical Christians have suggested that even atheists can share in the Christian prize. Increasingly, in this liberal rewrite, eternity belongs, not to Christians alone or even especially, but to the moderates of all faiths and of none.

Or does it make not a whit of difference to God if you are inclined to worship and adore him liberally or conservatively? One tries to imagine the Christian God's reaction to Pope Francis "firing" Bishop Joseph Strickland from "Don't Thread On Me" Texas.

And, of course, this is nothing short of utter blasphemy to those far more orthodox communities. Those Christian missionaries sent out around the globe to save the souls of those who are not True Christians.

And then just how convoluted this can all become...even though the stakes are no less high.

In contrast, if Christianity could be demonstrated to be valid, the path to salvation would become more like a game of skill than a game of chance, and dedication and commitment would become more akin to an athlete’s training schedule. Pascal himself believed this. Sure that his own particular version of Christianity was correct, he recommended that non-believers go through the motions of its prayer and ritual. Were they to do so for sufficiently long, he argued, they would build faith like a man who works out in a gym every day builds muscle.

On the other hand, no doubt, there are those on the other paths above who are basically arguing the same thing about their own God. Pray to Him, concoct rituals that might please Him.

Place your bet. Roll the dice. But don't let it all come down to luck.

[attofishpi]

You may have read my account on the forum below of the two nights I saw 'UFO's. /...Considering all the 'miracles' I have witnessed and what I understand about God, I am rather sceptical about extraterrestrial material out there since it would require me to consider that aliens are running the entire reality we are in, rather than this intelligence which seems to care about my indiscretions.

You had experiences of UFOs but you need to dismiss them because it doesn't align with your experience of God?

No, I had experience of God projecting bollocks to me, as was much of the case that couple of months with God introducing itself (indeed its power over my perception of reality) to me.

I still think this God entity is blowing smoke up the arse of people that want to believe such things, ya know, projecting whatever they hope to see, including ghosts.

So, your willingness to dismiss a lot that people experience, in defense of your preferred beliefs, is not giving you pause?

When you have experienced that we are basically in a 'virtual world' under the power of this God entity where anything can be 'displayed' in front of you...indeed that can defy the natural laws of physics you understand it goes beyond simply thinking..yep, there is definitely a craft there that is defying physics.

[Lacewing]

When you have experienced that we are basically in a 'virtual world' under the power of this God entity where anything can be 'displayed' in front of you...indeed that can defy the natural laws of physics you understand it goes beyond simply thinking..yep, there is definitely a craft there that is defying physics.

So, is it your conclusion that absolutely anything you experience is God projecting bollocks to you?

There's no way for anyone else to have a reasonable conversation with that.

[attofishpi]

When you have experienced that we are basically in a 'virtual world' under the power of this God entity where anything can be 'displayed' in front of you...indeed that can defy the natural laws of physics you understand it goes beyond simply thinking..yep, there is definitely a craft there that is defying physics.

So, is it your conclusion that absolutely anything you experience is God projecting bollocks to you?

There's no way for anyone else to have a reasonable conversation with that.

I am not stating anything\everything is God projecting bollocks, but I reserve my right as an intelligent being to discern between the bollocks and what is real. Truly the mundane life of reality I consider totally real, people 9to5 family, drop dead, reincarnate, same shit.

So.

Let's talk about what you are interested in, much of which can be explained by that rather dull, dorky not cool thought of God!

How much more might we realize that we don't currently see or fathom?

The official, worldwide revelation of involvement with extraterrestrials?

Greater understanding of the other dimensions, energies, spectrums, wavelengths that non-human life perceives and operates on?

Personal capability for instant cellular healing?

Conscious telepathic communication?

It's not just AI that will advance -- we can/will too, yes?

Do you see any of the above that can be explained by an intelligence that pervades ALL of our reality? (I still call it God )

[Lacewing]

When you have experienced that we are basically in a 'virtual world' under the power of this God entity where anything can be 'displayed' in front of you...indeed that can defy the natural laws of physics you understand it goes beyond simply thinking..yep, there is definitely a craft there that is defying physics.

So, is it your conclusion that absolutely anything you experience is God projecting bollocks to you?

There's no way for anyone else to have a reasonable conversation with that.

I am not stating anything\everything is God projecting bollocks, but I reserve my right as an intelligent being to discern between the bollocks and what is real.

So the UFOs you saw were not real, correct? They were God projecting bollocks.

Truly the mundane life of reality I consider totally real, people 9to5 family, drop dead, reincarnate, same shit.

So.

Let's talk about what you are interested in, much of which can be explained by that rather dull, dorky not cool thought of God!

The official, worldwide revelation of involvement with extraterrestrials?

Greater understanding of the other dimensions, energies, spectrums, wavelengths that non-human life perceives and operates on?

Personal capability for instant cellular healing?

Conscious telepathic communication?

But you think it's all bollocks, right... so what's the point?

Do you see any of the above that can be explained by an intelligence that pervades ALL of our reality? (I still call it God )

Sure, all of it -- with the condition that I don't think of that as 'an intelligence'. The same way you likely wouldn't describe a tree as 'an intelligence'. I think of this more in terms of a fabric or network of naturally flowing awareness. Creating, dissolving, shifting, evolving, attracting, repelling, etc,. in an organic way without 'thinking'. Manifesting through countless forms. You are describing something that projects bollocks at you. You have also mentioned judgement... and 'an entity'. An entity is based on an idea of separation. I think separation is an illusion. You see?

“The greatest illusion in this world is the illusion of separation.” – Albert Einstein

"The 'illusion of separation' is a fundamental principle in many spiritual traditions. It refers to the belief that despite appearances, all beings and things are interconnected and fundamentally one."

And yet, look at how religions divide and separate! They're not really grasping or accepting the interconnected nature of one.

In my view, all of the things (I listed above) are possible without a separate entity. And all of the bollocks being projected/experienced are possible without a separate entity. The greatest projection of all could be the projection of a separate entity, which can be endlessly projected onto.

You and I have had different experiences, showing us different things, in seemingly profound ways. So do we have to agree on the same 'sources' and 'framework' in order to talk about anything that we both find intriguing?

For a starter/example: Is it possible to discuss shared understandings about life and ourselves without mentioning religious or political positions? Or does that not serve us?

[attofishpi]

So, is it your conclusion that absolutely anything you experience is God projecting bollocks to you?

There's no way for anyone else to have a reasonable conversation with that.

I am not stating anything\everything is God projecting bollocks, but I reserve my right as an intelligent being to discern between the bollocks and what is real.

So the UFOs you saw were not real, correct? They were God projecting bollocks.

Yes, let's call them UGB (Unidentified God Bullshit - just like much of the buy bull)

Truly the mundane life of reality I consider totally real, people 9to5 family, drop dead, reincarnate, same shit.

So.

Let's talk about what you are interested in, much of which can be explained by that rather dull, dorky not cool thought of God!

The official, worldwide revelation of involvement with extraterrestrials?

Greater understanding of the other dimensions, energies, spectrums, wavelengths that non-human life perceives and operates on?

Personal capability for instant cellular healing?

Conscious telepathic communication?

But you think it's all bollocks, right... so what's the point?

No I don't, I used to until I comprehended that we are indeed immersed within an intelligent system that pervades ALL matter, including our brain matter.

Not so long ago I tested the God system (only in 'on' mode) by querying whether I could control my dog by thought alone (knowing that it is plausible for God to audibly call out what I thought in my head, to my dog) ...while on a walk along a track in a field.

So.

I thought what I would normally call out (he's a very obedient\intelligent dog)...I stated "wait" inside my head. Donnie (my dog) stopped in wait mode, I called out (*in my head) come here, Donnie came to me.

So, within Donnies existence, he heard "WAIT!" as I'd normally call to him, and "COME HERE!" also as I'd normally call to him.

ps. This shit isn't plausible without an intelligence operating between the matter that makes my mind, and the matter that makes my dog Donnies' mind.

Do you see any of the above that can be explained by an intelligence that pervades ALL of our reality? (I still call it God )

Sure, all of it -- with the condition that I don't think of that as 'an intelligence'. The same way you likely wouldn't describe a tree as 'an intelligence'. I think of this more in terms of a fabric or network of naturally flowing awareness. Creating, dissolving, shifting, evolving, attracting, repelling, etc,. in an organic way without 'thinking'. Manifesting through countless forms. You are describing something that projects bollocks at you. You have also mentioned judgement... and 'an entity'. An entity is based on an idea of separation. I think separation is an illusion. You see?

“The greatest illusion in this world is the illusion of separation.” – Albert Einstein

"The 'illusion of separation' is a fundamental principle in many spiritual traditions. It refers to the belief that despite appearances, all beings and things are interconnected and fundamentally one."

And yet, look at how religions divide and separate! They're not really grasping or accepting the interconnected nature of one.

In my view, all of the things (I listed above) are possible without a separate entity. And all of the bollocks being projected/experienced are possible without a separate entity. The greatest projection of all could be the projection of a separate entity, which can be endlessly projected onto.

You and I have had different experiences, showing us different things, in seemingly profound ways. So do we have to agree on the same 'sources' and 'framework' in order to talk about anything that we both find intriguing?

For a starter/example: Is it possible to discuss shared understandings about life and ourselves without mentioning religious or political positions? Or does that not serve us?

I'm not sure what all the above means, I'm an impatient reader. It appears you think I have some "separation" value that you have an argument with. In my speed read, to the contrary as I state all along the connecting force between you and me and everything is an intelligence, unfortunately for you and anyone that intends to consider things as such, that means its God. (not sure what you'd prefer to call it?)

[Lacewing]

This shit isn't plausible without an intelligence operating between the matter that makes my mind, and the matter that makes my dog Donnies' mind.

Yes, it is. It's called nature. And all kinds of creatures communicate without words because they are connected.

I'm not sure what all the above means, I'm an impatient reader.

You want your communication to be heard and considered, then you zone out when you're done. It wasn't that much and it wasn't that hard.
So I won't waste any more time.

[attofishpi]

This shit isn't plausible without an intelligence operating between the matter that makes my mind, and the matter that makes my dog Donnies' mind.

Yes, it is. It's called nature. And all kinds of creatures communicate without words because they are connected.

Well, we can all agree animals don't use words to communicate.

How would you suggest telepathy works between two brains Lacewing?

I'm not sure what all the above means, I'm an impatient reader.

You want your communication to be heard and considered, then you zone out when you're done. It wasn't that much and it wasn't that hard.
So I won't waste any more time.

Nah, I'm certain that you don't consider what I have to say a "waste of time".

[iambiguous]

Oh Lord, Won’t You Buy Me A Mercedes-Benz?
Martin Tyrrell on lotteries, religion and Pascal’s Wager.

Ultimately, then, Pascal is dismissive of the idea that salvation is a game of chance. On the contrary, he says that the game is winnable but only so long as we observe the prescribed schedule.

On the other hand, come on, what, for all practical purposes, does that mean? For example, in regard to your own soul? If the game -- immortality? salvation? -- comes down to a "wager" then of course there's an element of chance involved. After all, even if there is a God, what if you "bet" on the wrong one?

Nope, from my frame of mind either an extant God makes it abundantly clear that, beyond all doubt, He is the One True Path to immortality and salvation or there is perforce going to be an element of chance -- luck? -- involved. After all, your own assumptions about God are going to revolve in large part around the historical and cultural and experiential parameters of your actual lived life.

It is John Calvin who says that the prospects for salvation are only ever chancy. God, he argues, is omniscient; no Christian denies that. And no Christian denies that God is the creator. But if the creator is omniscient, he must, necessarily, know in advance the destiny of his creations – whether they are going to Heaven or Hell – and must know it better than they know it themselves.

The part that many Christians don't/won't spend a whole lot of time thinking through. That's all just subsumed in a leap or faith and in God's mysterious ways. But how does one wrap their head around the belief that immortality and salvation -- or Hell itself? -- is essentially beyond one's control?

This part in particular...

Even the most self-righteous, says Calvin, are wrong to believe that they are safe for all of the people all of the time are in a state of sin. In the end, he reckons, God alone knows which of them he has damned and which he has saved.

Bummer?

[iambiguous]

Oh Lord, Won’t You Buy Me A Mercedes-Benz?
Martin Tyrrell on lotteries, religion and Pascal’s Wager.

If Calvinist predestination follows logically from the characteristics Christians ascribe to God (and I think it does) it also paradoxically seems to negate much Christian practice. Why pray, for instance?

Of course, I'm sure there are theological arguments around that construe Calvinism in a quite different -- less categorical and imperative? -- light. Just as there are arguments said to reconcile an omniscient God with human autonomy itself.

And since there has never been an actual God produced [that I am aware of], the flocks need but turn to Scripture. It says so in the Bible. Although here too there are any number of conflicting assessments regarding what one is obligated to believe. Even when pertaining to the same God.

“I know I’m a sinner but make me a winner”, that quintessential Christian prayer, becomes redundant if winners and losers are decided aeons in advance of the game. Should we pray in thanks just in case we are, unwittingly, part of the Elect? Hardly. Whether we are or are not elected, prayer is a waste of time.

Please. The beauty embedded in leaps of faith to God is that you can describe Him in a way that most comforts and consoles you. If you believe that Calvin was wrong and that prayer is a truly crucial component of your relationship with God, then that need be as far as it goes to make it true. With religion, after all, you only have to believe that something is true. At least until someone is actually able to demonstrate that their God is in fact the one and the only truly Divine option. Or, perhaps, one or another rendition of the Second Coming?

Likewise, why be charitable or abstemious? Why be good at all? Hitler, Louis Althusser, even Barry Manilow; all might be saved. And Mother Teresa, Albert Schweitzer and Anthea Turner might be damned.

Here, of course, each particular religionist among us will concoct their own rooted existentially in dasein distinction regarding "saved" and "not saved". And, why not? Who is actually able to demonstrate it beyond what they do believe "in their head"?

These are the kinds of problem that will not go away once God is defined as extravagantly as he is in Christianity.

Right. Let's run that by those like IC here. See if these problems are still around for him.

And there’s more. Arthur Schopenhauer, accepting the logic of the predestination argument, questions why anyone at all should be damned. After all, if, as Christians say, God is all-powerful, he scarcely needs to damn anyone. If he damns, he does so capriciously, neither to deter nor to reform but out of pure revenge. And those whom he damns are his own creations, created in full knowledge of the punishment to come. This, Schopenhauer argues, removes “revolting” Christianity’s claims to be moral.

On the other hand, I'll bet that, given the Christian God's "mysterious ways", any number of Christians here can effectively rebut that.

[Walker]

Some religions seem to believe that worshipping the wrong God will result in condemnation also. Religion is a Public Relations bonanza. Since no one really knows the matter for sure, spin doctors can cojour any and evey PR device the human mind is capable of in order to sell their product. Religion is a breeding ground for corrupt minds.

Is that so. And this is such a concern of yours.

Question:
- Atheism is belief in no god, or even the premise of a god.
- Agnosticism is fence sitting. Like Moss.
- Is there a tidy word for unabashed God-hating and God-blaming?
- If not, you should have the honors.

- This link illustrates the depth of reasoning that is the bedrock of God Hating, the root of God Hating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jocI_R8lMpM

[Walker]

Jeopardy answer: Named in the early 21st century, this is the offshoot of atheism (some say agnosticism) that hates and blames God for every perceived wrong, great and small.

Jeopardy question: What is ________?

[iambiguous]

Homosexuality & Christianity
Douglas Groothuis argues that it is possible for someone to be gay, happy, and committed to traditional sexual ethics.

Critics of Christianity sometimes argue that its sexual ethics are unlivable, especially regarding sexual orientation and activities outside of traditional marriage. Recently Philosophy Now ran an article to this effect by Rick Aaron [‘Christianity & Homosexuality’], I, who argued specifically that putting conservative, heterosexual, marriage strictures on Christian gay peoples’ sexual activity was not ‘practically feasible’, since most gay people could not find a happy and meaningful life without living out their sexuality.

On the other hand, some Christians will insist, this misses the point. It's not what mere mortals think about homosexuality in terms of their own lives down here, but how God judges it in the Bible itself. Is it a Sin? And, if so, will homosexuals be sent to Hell?

Over the years as a political activist, I bumped into Christians who were absolutely adamant that being gay was indeed a grave sin.

Consider: https://www.focusonthefamily.com/get-he ... sexuality/

"The Bible says homosexual behavior is a sin. This resource sets a foundation for biblical sexuality and answers gay revisionist arguments."

First, the idea that gay celibacy is not ‘practically feasible’ is questionable. Of course, what is logically or physically impossible is not morally obligatory. But what may seem beyond us morally or existentially may nevertheless be possible for a Christian.

Nothing is impossible if you believe it is derived from God. Just read the Bible. It is bursting at the seams with things that, if attributed to mere mortals, would seem nothing short of ludicrous. As for moral obligations, the whole point of Christianity is to provide the flocks of sheep with a Scripture. Why endure "the agony of choice in the face of uncertainty" when, chapter and verse, the Lord can do your thinking for you?

Talking now in non-sexual terms, the Golden Rule of ‘treating others as we would have them treat us’ is no piece of cake, either. Neither is ‘loving your neighbor as yourself’. Yet both of these apparently impossibly demanding norms, commanded by Jesus, are commonly agreed upon by Christians.

And in sexual terms?