[Brenda]

BartSimpson wrote:

Brenda wrote:

You asked if I find them "people of character". They make an honest living, so yes, they are people of character. It is way easier to NOT sell your body than to sell it for sex, but then again, anyone who works is a whore in a way. We all sell our skills.

So an accomplished school teacher is no more or less noble than a good whore in your worldview. So noted.

Who said "more or less noble"?
A school teacher sells his skills, as a hooker sells hers. A good call girl is VERY expensive and makes more money than a Uni-prof. Makes you wonder, no?

Let me put it this way... I would not treat any (McDonalds worker, uni-prof, call girl or hooker) any differently from the other, and they could all be my friends.

[hurley_108]

BartSimpson wrote:

hurley_108 wrote:

Aren't they the same, at least as far as God cares?

Nope. With God, sometimes the commission of a crime is a virtue.

Oskar Schindler committed serious criminal acts by sheltering Jews during WW2 and there was no sin in what he did. Ditto the same for Raoul Wallenberg.

Likewise, Hugh Hefner has never committed a serious crime yet there is no virtue in the life he has led and it's safe to say that his name will not be revered in centuries hence as will be Oskar Schindler's.

But we're talking about being punished for thought, not for action:

BartSimpson wrote:

DrCaleb wrote:

Hawkins wrote:

And it is said that God hates adultery and it is written that even "lust is a sin".

Where did he write that?

Matthew 5:28

Quote:

But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

[BartSimpson]

Brenda wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

DrCaleb wrote:

Actually reading the Bible a few times has helped me to realize \ that it's mostly a work of fiction.

So since you don't believe in any of it why do you bother with this topic?

Because he is discussing "the point of Jesus", which IS the topic, and in his opinion (I think), there is no point of/in Jesus.

I didn't realize that only if you agree with you, you were allowed to discuss or debate a topic

I'm curious as to what he wants to get out of this discussion.

[andyt]

The original question was is Jesus the only way to God? If yes, then most people are condemned to everlasting torment by a vicious God. If no, then why go thru all the agony of sacrificing your only son (for both of you) if there are alternative means?

As I said, seems like the Bahai have a better grasp on it - they honor all prophets (including Buddha etc). In a Bahai church(?) the only thing that's allowed are religious texts - but the texts of any religion. Seems like a more inclusive way to be.

There's nothing wrong with following the teachings of Jesus. He restates the perennial philosophy quite well. Although, as Thanos pointed out it was for a different time. Not for heatstroking sheepherders, Jesus was trying to update their beliefs. He was mostly interested in reforming Judaism, not creating a new religion.

But, if his words speak to you, great, follow them, you can't go too far wrong. Turning the other cheek, checking the log in your eye first, not casting the first stone, do unto others - all good advice. Just don't try to make it more than it is, that's it is somehow spatial over all belief systems, or that someone who spouts the bible but is intolerant of others is a better person than someone who never spouts anything but gets along well with others.

[DrCaleb]

Brenda wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

DrCaleb wrote:

Actually reading the Bible a few times has helped me to realize \ that it's mostly a work of fiction.

So since you don't believe in any of it why do you bother with this topic?

Because he is discussing "the point of Jesus", which IS the topic, and in his opinion (I think), there is no point of/in Jesus.

I didn't realize that only if you agree with you, you were allowed to discuss or debate a topic

+1 on that Bren. I participate in threads which I either have interest or have knowledge and passion in the subject.

I may not believe Jesus is the embodiment of the God of Moses, but that does not mean I don't have faith in God. I believe the Bible is the work of man, and therefore just as flawed as man. Therefore, what is his purpose? As I said earlier in the thread, his purpose is the morality of the teachings of this carpenter's son. When people say that words written by man are written as God's intentions, that gets my hackles up, just as 'Political Correctness' is one persons way of forcing their morality on others.

The Universe is the word of God, and that is what I believe. We have no right, nor any ability to comprehend such a being's intentions, let alone inflict them on others.

[BartSimpson]

hurley_108 wrote:

But we're talking about being punished for thought, not for action:

God punishes for sin, the courts and the law punish for crimes.

Sins are not always crimes and crimes are not always sins.

Now does God punish you for thoughts? Maybe He does. I don't know. What I do know is that if you fill up your head with unhealthy thoughts you punish yourself. Trust me, I'm speaking from personal experience on that one.

Myself, I see much of what is in the Bible as warnings from a concerned parent and not as commands from a dictatorial master.

Like the admonition in the OT that sin can create a curse to the fourth generation. It's true and I've seen it in my family. Something my father's father did way back in 1923 reverberates to the current day and has an affect on my niece who wasn't even born until 1991.

At the same time, look how the families named Hitler, Mengele, Goebbels, and etc. are hurt by the legacies left to them.

God has warned us not to f*ck up in our lives because generations yet unborn to us can end up paying a price for our impulses and our sins. And we do it to ourselves without any help from on high.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb wrote:

The Universe is the word of God, and that is what I believe. We have no right, nor any ability to comprehend such a being's intentions, let alone inflict them on others.

Concur to all of this. Very wise words, my friend.

[Dayseed]

therookie wrote:

I like the way you think! The reason why the bible has so many mistakes as that it is made by us "humans", who are not perfect. For example I writer does not write a book and then try to sell it, he get's a publisher to first check it over and then fix the mistakes. Faith is also the only way we can really belive. The way I see it is God is like a human is to a computer.
What I mean is that a computer is built by humans and we can understand a computer but it can not understand us. So God can understand us but we can't understand him. If we think of eternity we say it's forever but when you actually try to think of eternity you can't finish because where does it end?

That's a terrible comparison, God to human, human to computer. If your God is omnipotent, there's nothing stopping Him from simply creating fully understanding humans. In other words, any limitations on understanding Him are His own fault.

What faculties you do believe He gave us give us no understanding of Him anyway. He is a God you can't see, touch, smell, taste or hear. Prayers to Him appear granted randomly and without pattern.

From Carl Sagan:

Quote:

"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"

Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle -- but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all?

We humans, on the other hand, are desperately trying to make computers understand us. Check out the Watson computer that kicked Ken Jennings' ass on Jeopardy this past week. No, it's not understanding, but it's knowledge and that's a start.

[Hawkins]

When real choices are in front of true freewills, people choose differently and they will vary. They thus divide. Law is used to confine their actions then followed by judgment.

That's actually how a human society is run. Whether God should make humans understanding is irrelevant.

If on the other hand, people can't choose to betray God, then there will be no freewill at all, humans are then just a group of puppets.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Check it out..and trust me, these guys are FAR from being a religious band