Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Results 1 to 30 of 147

Threaded View

  1. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    God Wants Actions
    And you base this opinion/truth on what exactly? Your intuition?

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    That's part of the problem with trying to understand religious truth. Scholars have only messed up the search for truth by attempting to quantify it. Real truth is generally self evident truth that people just act on! People don't have to back it up academically.
    The point with academic studies, isn't to impress with big brain on internet forums. It is comparing ideas and learning from each other. You're rejecting this and replacing it only with intuition. I'm guessing that you're not a scholar. If that is the case, what you are doing is rejecting thousands of years of work, that you haven't read, and draw conclusions about the futility of their work. But you're not against studying are you? You read the Bible don't you?

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    For exp., a father doesn't delay teaching his child to stay out of the street until he documents the dangers in the street.Some common sense facts are self evident. Helping the sick man in a ditch is self evident act based on a truth of love. Also, if we help one person with AIDs, I think at the same time we are helping all mankind.
    So what do you need God for? If being good is self evident then religion can be rejected, right? I'd personally call it instinct or human nature. But that's just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    Activist Christians have done a lot to help mankind. Their actions have been based on self evident truth (M.L. King, Pope John Paul, teachers nurses, etc.)
    Scholars who argue over which facts about God are real or backed up or can be proven are the ones that have not done shit, as you call it.
    I'm not going to argue. But I think the did what they did, not because they believed in God, but because of helping others made them feel good about themselves, and affirmed them. Humans are a helpful species. We're social, and we like to help those we can connect and empathise with.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    I am using the term truth as an abstract. But the truth that Jesus used certainly was not empty. It was very relative. In your responses to this thread, you provide us with many good sources but I don't see the relativeness to any of them in relation to the "human situation." Most people who read these threads do not have the academic background to interpret the sources you cite. They only have to take our word for it that these sources say what we say they say.
    Wikipedia is for laypeople. It's the whole point of it. So I think you'll do fine.

    If truth is relative you need to give a context.

    You wrote the bellow text:
    "For example, in the Bible the Good Samaritan did did not need theological knowledge to help the sick man in the ditch. Theological knowledge often overlooks the personal needs of mankind. It is this personal knowledge and truth that Christ brought to the religious argument. This the truth that the Bible seeks to enlighten mankind. There is no error or fault in this truth."

    Is the Bible seeking to enlighten mankind? Is this relative? If the good Samaritan would have done it anyway, what did he need God and the Bible for? How has he been enlightened if he had done it anyway? And then you go on to saying that "it is no fault or error in it", like a statement. As if it needs pointing out if it would have been true.

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    The real scholar of truth goes a step closer. He taught in parables and sayings that helped individuals see the self evident facts of live and the human situation.
    Again, what does the "real scholar of truth" need God for? If he's taught parables that are self evident, he doesn't need them does he?

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    If the common person wants to know if God is real or does miracles, he doesn't need to ask fellows like us.

    So you're basically saying that God is irrelevant? If the existence of God isn't important, I assume that you don't care either way?

    Quote Originally Posted by wmrs2 View Post
    We might know too many facts that would only confuse persons with real good common sense.

    I hope this helps.
    But your facts wouldn't confuse a man with bad common sense?

    edit: BTW. There is no need to apologise for not answering fast. I prefer you taking your time and making sure what you write is what you had in your mind and what it is you want us to understand.

    Just to make my point more clear. I'd like to know how you detect the truth? If your only tool for figuring it out is your intuition, you've robbed Christians of any platform from which to judge anything. Their own morality for example. What if another Christians religious intuition goes against yours. Who has truth on their side? How do you know? I think you need to quantify the truth, for moral judgements to have any value.

    A problem with parables is that they need interpreting. Which brings us back to the issue with truth. How can you possibly know that you've interpreted something correctly? How can you ever say that you know what God wants? How can you ever say that your actions are in accordance with Gods wishes?
    Last edited by TomOfSweden; 02-18-2008 at 06:05 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top