if god was a designer, he did a poor job

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Except when people misuse mathematics they are misusing something that is actually useful.

I've heard quite a few people claim that mathematics isn't useful, but they are just as mistaken as you are.

To be honest true religion hasnt ever resulted in atrocity, violence and other abuses so much as ideology or religion as ideology, persons who individuallly and voluntarily create intentional communities to share their lives and beliefs with or who withdraw to lives of prayer and contemplation and reflection are not hurting anyone, in fact a lot of the time by example and often literary works they have helped many besides themselves or their immediate circle indirectly.

Yeah, you are absolutely right. You never hear of violence and hate perpetrated by monks or Amish or any group like that. On the other hand people in power try to use religion and a whole host of other things to further their agenda: national pride, defence, spreading freedom, preserving order, etc.... The problem isn't with religion itself, but rather the corruption that often is present with people in power.

 

[Sniffles]

You never hear of violence and hate perpetrated by monks or Amish or any group like that.

Are you talking about today or in the past? Cause monks have engaged in violence in the past, and not just within Christianity. There were the warrior monks of China and Japan for example.

 

[IZthe411]

Really? It reminds people to love each other? I thought it reminded some people that they were "the chosen people" and reminded still others that while homosexuality is a hideous sin, it's okey-dokey to sell one's daughters into sexual slavery, and dammit she better perform!

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

Slavery was actually permitted under the law code to settle debt. And if you read this, you'll see the law is stressing treating her as a human being not as a dog.

Your other posts - a lot of them have to do with punishment for disobedience. Obviously the person in question was going to die, leaving his wife as a widow for another man to take as his wife. I can't go through them 1x1 here at work, but the thing about the Bible, you have to look at it as a whole- people isolate statements and try to make it support some cause, but fail to read the context.

 

[INTP]

 

[Lark]

Are you talking about today or in the past? Cause monks have engaged in violence in the past, and not just within Christianity. There were the warrior monks of China and Japan for example.

Yeah but I think that its being applied in the trappist or withdrawn from the world sense, it was the Amish which I was thinking of as an example of people who where prepared to live very differently but as close as possible in accord with their own principles and precepts without attempting to compell others to do so also.

Although they are only one example which I can think of and pretty recent if you consider a greater time scale, I'm trying to think of which order it is that established a mountain retreat in, I think it was France, removed entirely from the world and with that in mind as a precept.

It is the radical alternative to terroristic or political religious creeds, in more ways the more challenging one which requires a greater faith too. I've long maintained that its a lot harder to live in accordance with principles in an imperfect world, which is necessarily imperfect and unperfectable, than to die for them. That's whether your motivated by spirituality or not.

 

[Sniffles]

Well as far as the Christian context is concerned, I would refer to the role that monks played in inter-sectarian violence in Alexandria during Late Antiquity for example. Now is this inherently part of the monastic existence? I wouldn't say so, unless we're talking about specific orders of warrior monks(Knights Templar, Knights of Malta, etc). The example of Alexandrian violence demonstrates the dangers of mixing monasticism with political endeavors.

 

[Lark]

I'm interested in the warrior scholar traditions or warrior sages, do you know where that comes from Peguy? Would that be associated with the monks? I've known about wars being fought over libraries during the crusades but only vaguely and read about some of the librarians being described as warrior scholars.

 

[guesswho]

You're right it is, is that biblical and who believes that?

They do draw him with a beard don't they!? Why do they even draw him? Are they retarded!?

 

[Snuggletron]

 

[Thalassa]

Ok alot of these verses concern contexts involving warfare, in which the Israelites were fighting for their survival as a nation, and that often involves considerable brutality. General Sherman didn't remark that "war is hell" for no reason. And in the ancient world, warfare was a winner-take all affair. If you conquered your enemy's territory, you often had to enslave and kill many of them off - and yes this did unfortunately include children. If the children were allowed to survive, they would grow up and seek vengence upon your people. So you had to prevent that from happening so as to forbid further bloodshed descending upon your own people. So in a sense God is looking after the long-term interests of his people, which would be done out of love for them.

I'm still not sure how having one's wife raped in broad daylight is a just, holy punishment, or why women are treated as "spoils of victory" in the Old Testament if God is so superior and loving and righteous. It all pretty much strikes me as men writing the Old Testament, then having more enlightened thoughts as they socially evolved in the New Testament.

 

[guesswho]

Ok so it's official God has a beard.

 

[Mole]

one thing i dont understand people who believe in bible, many things in it has been proven wrong, but still people keep on believing in it.

People still believe in astrology and MBTI, even though both are confidence tricks, but still people keep on believing and using them.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Well as far as the Christian context is concerned, I would refer to the role that monks played in inter-sectarian violence in Alexandria during Late Antiquity for example. Now is this inherently part of the monastic existence? I wouldn't say so, unless we're talking about specific orders of warrior monks(Knights Templar, Knights of Malta, etc). The example of Alexandrian violence demonstrates the dangers of mixing monasticism with political endeavors.

I was thinking about occidental monks, but I didn't know about this event. It still kind of proves my point though that any evils in religion have more to do with corrupt people in power than the religion itself.

 

[wildcat]

I dont believe that Christianity is "ridiculous" and neither do I behave so dismissively about some of the greek or ancient metaphysical speculations, having read On The Gods by Cicero recently I was actually fairly impressed with some of their speculations and reasoning, though I dont believe the truth they do possess has parity with the beliefs I do profess myself. Its like mathematics, you can get close to the answer without being right and your working out will be useful but there's only one right answer.




I can not believe that if Christianity where purely and simply a convention or habit that it would have endured at all, without wishing to appear condescending the view that it is merely convention and therefore a sort of arcane, nebulous, waste of time and cowardly vice is one I associate with youth and arrogance. I'm inclined to believe with Jung that spirituality is important but more so in the second half of life and failing to recognise this and somehow integrate it into your psychology results in mid-life crisis.

You cannot get close to the answer without being in the right.
A cat close to home finds the way home.
There is no parity with answer and question.
The question is field dependent.
The answer is not.

You cut the bread in two halves.
Where do you cut it?
In the middle.
Cut halves are not in the middle.
The cut is not the cutter.

 

[Sniffles]

They do draw him with a beard don't they!? Why do they even draw him? Are they retarded!?

It's called the Sixth Ecumenical Council.

 

[Sniffles]

I'm still not sure how having one's wife raped in broad daylight is a just, holy punishment, or why women are treated as "spoils of victory" in the Old Testament if God is so superior and loving and righteous. It all pretty much strikes me as men writing the Old Testament, then having more enlightened thoughts as they socially evolved in the New Testament.

I already gave you the overall cultural background to this. Like it or not, the Israelites had to contend with the world as it was; namely with nations with gods who were more ruthless and bloodthirsty by nature than the God of the Old Testament. And as the Book of Ecclesiastes states, there's a time for everything under Heaven, including killing. But at the same time, God promises to Isaiah of a time this will no longer be necessary; when nations shall "beat swords into ploughsheds"(Isaiah 2:4), "the wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together"(Isaiah 11:6), and that "the fruit of righteousness will be peace"(Isaiah 32:17). So it's very important to get the full story. God's loving nature is the main theme of the Song of Songs, which allegorises the love between God and mankind as a love affair between a man and woman.

 

[Sniffles]

It's called the Sixth Ecumenical Council.

Actually it was the Seventh Ecumenical Council. My mistake.

 

[Sniffles]

Concerning the issue of slavery:

"If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. If a man strikes the eye of his male or female slave, and destroys it, he shall let him go free on account of his eye. And if he knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, he shall let him go free on account of his tooth."
-Exodus 21:20-27

"You shall not hand over to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you. He shall live with you in your midst, in the place which he shall choose in one of your towns where it pleases him; you shall not mistreat him."
-Deuteronomy 23:15

A man shall be punished for killing a slave, and a slave shall be set free upon receiving grave injury. A man who strikes a woman with child shall also be punished as the circumstances demand. And an escaped slave shall not be returned to his master, and must not be mistreated in your care. This helps demonstrate the point I made earlier that while yes slavery exists, many of the brutal aspects of the instititution known at this time have been tamed by Biblical law.

 

[Lark]

You cannot get close to the answer without being in the right.
A cat close to home finds the way home.
There is no parity with answer and question.
The question is field dependent.
The answer is not.

You cut the bread in two halves.
Where do you cut it?
In the middle.
Cut halves are not in the middle.
The cut is not the cutter.

Totally Victor.

Or someone working up to blaming a meltdown on some personal issues.

Watch this space.

 

[KDude]

He's definitely not Victor (uber math skillz, for one..which would trickle down to uber reasoning skillz probably.. which would indicate he isn't Victor). Whenever I read wildcat's posts, I picture Mordin from Mass Effect. Although I'm sure he's easier on the eyes.