First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Christians: Who defines your interpretation of God?
852 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/23/14

JustineKo2 wrote:

See that's the thing, what do authority figures seem to keep posturing about lately? That homosexuality is wrong, having a choice about an abortion is abhorrent, we should teach our children that we all descended from survivors of a great flood, not a common primordial ancestor. They've made it all so politicised when belief in God should be only about the way you choose to conduct your life based on guiding principles (even though they are universal regardless of faith). This authority wants to be able to control what other people think is abhorrent just because they think its abhorrent. But no one knows if this "God" is actually supportive of those ideas, the ones enforcing them are not God, so what gives them the right to do so?



It's the people who keep on supporting them that gives them the right. They have a lot of followers and so naturally they would have a lot of power. But I have no idea why the people want to keep on supporting those figures who promote these sort of messages.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 2/24/14 , edited 2/24/14

JustineKo2 wrote:


spinningtoehold0 wrote:

I'm not a christian, but wouldn't they usually listen to someone who seem to have a higher authority on the subject? Like the pope, or Jesus, or those other important religious figures, or a preacher. Now as for who defines their interpretation of god, who knows. Maybe it was their own thoughts? Or how they saw god? And maybe now we're just interpreting their interpretations, accurately or inaccurately.


See that's the thing, what do authority figures seem to keep posturing about lately? That homosexuality is wrong, having a choice about an abortion is abhorrent, we should teach our children that we all descended from survivors of a great flood, not a common primordial ancestor. They've made it all so politicised when belief in God should be only about the way you choose to conduct your life based on guiding principles (even though they are universal regardless of faith). This authority wants to be able to control what other people think is abhorrent just because they think its abhorrent. But no one knows if this "God" is actually supportive of those ideas, the ones enforcing them are not God, so what gives them the right to do so?



No. Creationism is not science. Because it's false.
I agree with the rest of the things you say, though.

On that subject, it is pretty obvious to me that if the christian God was to exist (i.e. the omnibeneviolent, omniscient god), then he would most definitely be for women's choice and ESPECIALLY for gay's rights.
People who think otherwise haven't thought their beliefs through properly.
But then again, that is the case with all people who follow other people's interpretations of god to the T with no objections.
28514 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Delaware
Offline
Posted 2/24/14
That's an easy question: People.
48494 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / ar away
Offline
Posted 2/24/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:No. Creationism is not science. Because it's false.
I agree with the rest of the things you say, though.
Oops I should have worded that better. I'm not advocating anything in that sentece with the line you highlighted, I was just providing examples of things from the Religious Right lobby.

1040 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Oklahoma
Offline
Posted 3/3/14
i dunno if i can define it, but as a christian i dont really on interpretations. i really on faith in the god i know loves me and watches over me
Posted 3/3/14
It would be the people who originated the various Christian sects.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 3/4/14

sagecrawford47 wrote:

i dunno if i can define it, but as a christian i dont really on interpretations. i really on faith in the god i know loves me and watches over me


So what is your idea of God like, and why?
1040 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Oklahoma
Offline
Posted 3/7/14 , edited 3/7/14
like a second dad. who i can finally meet after a really long time.why? because i never met him. but im blessed in the knowledge that someone cares about me even from as far away as heaven.
1773 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 3/10/14

"he would most definitely be for women's choice"

I can understand gay rights, as no one should be oppressed for their beliefs, but abortion? I'm not so sure about that. I mean it may seem to give help to the women giving birth, but I think He would want everyone to have a chance at life, no matter their situation.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 3/10/14 , edited 3/10/14

Laiseran wrote:


"he would most definitely be for women's choice"

I can understand gay rights, as no one should be oppressed for their beliefs, but abortion? I'm not so sure about that. I mean it may seem to give help to the women giving birth, but I think He would want everyone to have a chance at life, no matter their situation.


But as God (the abrahamic god) has proven time and time again throughout the bible -- the loss of a human life doesn't really mean squat to him.

Besides, if we are to believe (as many do) that all babies (who have not yet had the chance to hear about Jesus Christ) go to heaven, then abortion would in fact be doing those babies a favor. It would spare them the misery of earth and the chance of eternal damnation and instead send them straight to heaven.

So with that in mind -- why WOULDN'T he be okay with abortion?
1773 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 3/10/14
Hmm... I need to think about that a bit more, but I can say that He may have wished for them to have the choice of life or death. I think that something cannot really be good unless it has the choice between good and evil. Not sure how that works for babies who do die...
Also, as God is God he can chose between life and death but who are we to decide who lives and who dies?
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 3/10/14 , edited 3/10/14

Laiseran wrote:

Hmm... I need to think about that a bit more, but I can say that He may have wished for them to have the choice of life or death.


But if that was more important for him -- should he then not have prevented the situations where people would decide to have abortions in the first place? I mean, it's not like he couldn't...



Laiseran
Also, as God is God he can chose between life and death but who are we to decide who lives and who dies?


I don't really think that's relevant. The point is -- God can (if we assume that he exists) either re-create that life in a new fetus or just take it to heaven. No existence is lost for him. With that in mind, for him to be able to end the lives of millions of people at a whim -- yet saying that we can't, even to make the lives of the ones already alive better -- would be a massive act of hypocricy. Divine or not.

No?
1773 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 3/10/14
Well, God is able to judge people properly, unlike us. And like you say, if good people will go to heaven, why not take them there early by letting them die? You also seem to be assuming that people somehow deserve life and God should let us have it. It's pretty clear in the Bible that we do not deserve eternal life and I can think of no scientific evidence to suggest that.
The bible outlaws murder, but not all killing. If the killing could be justified, like in saving anothers life by killing the would be murderer then it is fair. Murder is wrong, as we do it for selfish reasons and cannot see others intentions. If God kills some undeserving humans, so what? He gave them life so He can take it away. We are on the same level as the other humans, we steal their chance at life, God simply takes back what was his to begin with.
It's not so much that God thinks all fetus should die, it's that we are not the ones to make decisions.

Of course, this leads back to why God would give them a life here in the first place but then why should He give anyone a life here? I think this is more to do with the question of the evil in this world.

I don't know if God takes the unborn dead to heaven but I think he may work on a sort of hypothetical, how they would have acted. I'm only guessing here, I can't fathom the thoughts of God. I think everyone lives on Earth to make the choice to follow God or not. If there is no temptation there is no reward.

Maybe sin has corrupted the world somehow? Do the unborn really suffer less? Does living on Earth give us a worse time?

I think God has left the world to be corrupted and so allows us to be born into it, this may make us suffer more than an unborn child but that pales in comparison to Hell. I think it is similar to being born rich or poor, one may seem worse but in terms of eternity the difference is negilable. I think there is a passage in the bible saying that those who suffer will be rewarded, so maybe we will be rewarded more than the unborn as the extremely poor are more than us.
1773 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 3/10/14
In summary, while your argument may make sense if we assume unborn babies are given a free pass, I think that is illogical and the idea that they are hypothetically judged makes more sense. I think God is more or less indifferent to when they die but just wishes that we do not intervene. To God, the mortal death of a person is nearly irrelevant, but we should not be the ones to decide such things. We are pretty biased. It is less to do with the fact that they died and more that we make them suffer against their will for our own gain.
50 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 3/10/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Laiseran wrote:

Hmm... I need to think about that a bit more, but I can say that He may have wished for them to have the choice of life or death.


But if that was more important for him -- should he then not have prevented the situations where people would decide to have abortions in the first place? I mean, it's not like he couldn't...


If god prevented the situation wherein people decide to have abortions, then the act of abortion would never exist in the first place. But it would be impossible for people to not consider abortions, since abortions have been made possible, meaning that at least one person has considered it. It's a confusing paradox, but it makes sense.

The act of "deciding" is a conscious effort and consideration made towards a problem.

But theoretically speaking, there has to be at least one person to consider abortion if the act of abortion were to be made possible. Because if god prevented all situations of abortion, then that means that abortion should not exist... which in turn means that god wouldn't have been able to prevent us from thinking about abortion, as abortion does not exist...!

So if god were to exist, a better question would be: "Why does abortion exist?" And yet this, too, turns into circular reasoning. So the short answer? Abortion exists because humans have conscious, independent thought.

But this makes no sense, as you could apply this to any situation: "If there is a god, then why do so many disasters, genocides, rapes, crimes, and acts of hatred occur?"

...which I find a ridiculous question to ask. There is no known answer, neither from god or anyone else. This is what happens when you have 7 billion people of different genetics, histories, backgrounds, living conditions, societies, and with the complexity of the human body, all on one planet... A lot can go wrong.




Laiseran

Also, as God is God he can chose between life and death but who are we to decide who lives and who dies?



Syndicaidramon

I don't really think that's relevant. The point is -- God can (if we assume that he exists) either re-create that life in a new fetus or just take it to heaven. No existence is lost for him. With that in mind, for him to be able to end the lives of millions of people at a whim -- yet saying that we can't, even to make the lives of the ones already alive better -- would be a massive act of hypocricy. Divine or not.

No?


It's relevant. There has always been a lot of argument between Creationists and the scientific community (specifically biotechnology and synthetic biology and whatnot) over whether or not we, as humans, should have the power to create life and destroy life. Normally this is for the extreme cases of cloning, euthanasia, creating artificial life, and perhaps genetically modified crops/food, among other situations. This entire act is informally termed "playing god". The idea is that only god should have the power to create or end life. It's not really about existence, but about death.

If someone died from murder, and someone else died from old age, their existence after death is irrelevant. They're both dead. It depends on how they died. One is considered ethical, and one is not. One is probably god's will, and one is probably not. Care to guess?

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.