How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Ten Commandments ?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Ten Commandments ?

  Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


50 posted 04-26-2003 04:55 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
... if it was pre-determined that I couldn’t choose to write anything else ...

But you could. You could and can write anything you wish. Once you've made your choices and posted them, then I will know what they are. If I knew right now what they would be, that wouldn't change a thing. That I might be able to "guess" all of your decisions, even with 100 percent accuracy, doesn't take the decisions away from you.

If you don't know what is predestined, all of your choices are still open to you.
Crazy Eddie
Member
since 09-14-2002
Posts 221


51 posted 04-26-2003 07:02 PM       View Profile for Crazy Eddie   Email Crazy Eddie   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Crazy Eddie

Ron,

Doesn't that just equate to it being an illusion?

If the future is fixed all the choices may be available but I can only choose one, the one that I’m pre-destined to choose – I have the illusion of free will. Under such circumstances I cannot do anything to alter what will happen, if I could the future would not be the fixed future that God has seen – one is incompatible with the other.

Let’s say for a moment that this is how it is, that man has the illusion of free will and God knows and has seen the future. In this scenario you’d have to admit that God knew that he would hand down the Ten Commandments, the obvious question however is could he/she have decided not to?

Littlewing,

I’m sorry I’ve digressed away from the original topic, it’s probably due to intense curiosity and a side order of selfishness on my part.  

The original question was how the Ten Commandments became part of the Roman Catholic religion. My opinion is that the answer lies in the creation of the Pauline church that split from the devoutly Jewish church of Jerusalem founded by the disciples of Jesus. It was the followers of Paul who wrote and collated the gospels of the New Testament almost a century after the death of Jesus, to add credence to the new religion aspects of the Jewish faith including the Ten Commandments were adopted.

[This message has been edited by Crazy Eddie (04-26-2003 07:03 PM).]

Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


52 posted 04-26-2003 08:09 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

It is not only a breach between the Old testament and the New testament there is also the split between the disciples and original 'Christian' thought and what became Pauline Roman catholic thought. Pauline though and the entire New Testament was written to entice and persuade a Roman audience thus the chasm between Judaic and Pauline thought...sigh. Oh nevermind
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


53 posted 04-26-2003 11:33 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Well since the original question has been asked and answered many times over I spose it's ok to proceed -- I'm not sure why this topic is in the Alley in the first place -- but --

Ron

Pascal's Wager doesn't make sense because it assumes that this Hebrew Lord would want someone to 'fake' it just on the bet that he exists.  This runs completely contrary to the record.

IE: "Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain."

And then there is the bit about preferring someone hot or cold and spewing out the lukewarm et al.

Deer,
There are fourth and fifth possibilities as well.  Some who seek to maintain some modicum of relevancy of the bible ascribe the apparant changing face of God as a growth in understanding amongst the authors over the many generations instead of a change in God.  It's pretty easy to see that understanding evolve.

Of course -- the fifth possibility is pretty close to what Ron is saying -- and that is that we're ill equipped to understand the nature of God and whether or how influence is exacted in the universe.  I have to give you credit Ron for that point -- but then you go back to anthropomorphizing God into the parent paradigm.... and that's ok because it's your view.

The Kabbalists had an interesting interpretation of the interaction between God and the observable universe that goes something like this...

You dream that you're floating on an iceberg freezing to death and you awake to find you've kicked the covers off the bed.

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (04-27-2003 03:22 PM).]

littlewing
Member Rara Avis
since 03-02-2003
Posts 9998
New York


54 posted 04-27-2003 05:29 AM       View Profile for littlewing   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for littlewing

Deep Breath . . .

Amazing replies everyone - here is what I came up with:

Jason:  As to the 10 commandments being at the core of both religons. I think christians view the Hebrews as their beginnings, and ancestory. Up until the birth of Jesus, the roots and beliefs are the same  Exactly - I agree TY

K: There is NO borrowing. There is no theft. There is only personal realization of Godhead that transcends time, culture, and laws of man. It's a very personal path. To assume superiority of one's OWN path, is to attempt to question the values of self vs. divine--and the lines of those answers define our limitations.

Excellent - yes - I do agree - unfortunately we have this thing called the Bible . . . which I am trying to work through here - but yours - seems like a more peaceful way  TY

Ron: The Ten Commandments (the Law) provides the Hebrew path to righteousness and God Just what I was looking for TY

JP: It should be noted that in the first century Christianity was a Jewish sect.  I like this idea - do you have any more thoughts on this? I do think that Christianity stems from and is rooted deeply in Judiasm and that is what my question begs . . .  why the switch - why not one religion?  
the original versions of thier religious structure were used as a "Big Brother" network, to keep an eye on the populace and an ear to the ground.
another amazing statement TY

TY Thomas: The huge separation between the two did not start until after the destruction of the Jewish temple.
Most people don’t realize how deep the Catholic religion is rooted in Jewish tradition.  An example is a SEDAR MEAL and the significance it plays in our lives.


That is what I am seeking - the seperation . . .

Jason:  TY for the views on diversification - we need more on this - anyone?  Yahweh translates early to mountian God, a warrior God.

Raph:  to my rescue
Well if you're looking for logic in catholicism you won't find it.
Pauline christianity greatest influence is the bastardization or absolute erasure of the Hebrew element for introduction to Roman audiences. This is where the pagan element is most visible. To work with the roman audience there are drastic changes in its ceremonies, its holy dates now coincide with pagan holidays, etc..
Christianity is that it is a fairly recent relegion shaped over the course of DOCUMENTED history


Excellent!  Yes TY

Balladeer:  For me it is much more confusing to understand Christianity than it is Judiasm.
These reasons make me feel that it must be a bit more comforting to be a Christian as opposed to a Jew

Thomas:  excellent views - yes I agree fully:  FREEWILL & Yes a HUGE sense of humor  . . .

Mine is God allows us freedom to worship him or not to worship him.
Free choice is what makes our worship of him so special.
Oh and I think he has a huge sense of humor


Balladeer:  He just keeps looking into this petri dish we call Earth and probably shakes his head slowly in wonder - and possibly amusement.

I KNOW he/she does this . . .

BB: hehe - made me smile there for a sec

Ron:  OUTSTANDING STATEMENT - WHICH IS WHY I STARTED THIS THREAD:

Those who never question will never learn, and choices made in blind ignorance are an insult to both Man and God. There can be no harmony until first there is discord . . . You either have to throw out the Bible entirely or try to resolve perceived conflicts within the context of the entire book . . .   Thank you

Eddie: no apologies please - this is why I started this . . . do you have more on this?
My opinion is that the answer lies in the creation of the Pauline church that split from the devoutly Jewish church of Jerusalem founded by the disciples of Jesus. It was the followers of Paul who wrote and collated the gospels of the New Testament almost a century after the death of Jesus, to add credence to the new religion aspects of the Jewish faith including the Ten Commandments were adopted.

Raph:  again here - please continue:
Pauline though and the entire New Testament was written to entice and persuade a Roman audience thus the chasm between Judaic and Pauline thought

Rebel:  I posted this here because this is a forum open for discussion - highly charged or not - where else would I put it?

I agree/disagree with many of these statements as all of us hol dour own belief system and opinion - a touchy subject indeed and really not one with rock solid answers but am pleased to see all I have learned here.  I still question why the switch?  Why not one religion?  My misunderstanding lies in the fact of organized religion and specificaly WHY there was a switch.  What purpose did this switch serve but to diversify spirituality?  

    



  
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


55 posted 04-27-2003 09:35 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Philosophy... of course  
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


56 posted 04-28-2003 10:34 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"I said exactly what I meant to say. Not my fault if it makes you feel so, uh, observant?"

~ Then tell me what my comment had to do with your declaration? It is quite simple, why post this...

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I were The Creator, I surely would not have a need to be praised by those whom I created. There would be no purpose for it, except for a sheer craving for attention.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

~ My words and then answer with this...

"Any parent who says they don't want their children to love them is either lying or in need of serious psychological help. Such a desire is not selfish or egotistical, but is born instead of the unconditional love any good parent feels for their children.

How many times have you heard the advise, "Always show your kids that you love them?"


~ You quoted my statement regarding praise and then immediately talk about love, children and parents.

How do they relate?

[This message has been edited by Opeth (04-28-2003 10:34 AM).]

JP
Senior Member
since 05-25-99
Posts 1391
Loomis, CA


57 posted 04-28-2003 11:49 AM       View Profile for JP   Email JP   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit JP's Home Page   View IP for JP

It's obvious how they relate:  God The Father....

Come on y'all!  Get real. If you want to debate something be above pedestrian bickering.

Yesterday is ash, tomorrow is smoke; only today does the fire burn.
Nil Desperandum, Fata viem invenient

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


58 posted 04-28-2003 11:56 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

They only relate JP if one has a particularly anthropomorphic and Christian view of God.

Not everyone does.

The notion didn't really turn up in Hebrew thought until around the time of Jesus... perhaps he was the one that introduced the idea.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


59 posted 04-29-2003 12:04 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Crazy Eddie said:
quote:
If the future is fixed all the choices may be available but I can only choose one, the one that I’m pre-destined to choose – I have the illusion of free will.

Let's rephrase that slightly, using a different time-line.

"If the past is fixed all the choices may have been available but I could only choose one, the one that I actually chose – I had the illusion of free will."

Even if we agree that the past is fixed and cannot be altered, the conclusion that such a fixed past interferes with your free will makes little sense. They have nothing to do with each other. I believe the same is true of a fixed future, with only a slight variation in the equation. With past events, you know the choices made, but have no power to change them. With future events, you have the power to shape them, but do not know the choices that will be made. The equations are similar to moving like quantities from each side of the equals sign in algebra in the sense that such manipulation doesn't really change much. Both equations result in free will.

Local Rebel said:
quote:
Of course -- the fifth possibility is pretty close to what Ron is saying -- and that is that we're ill equipped to understand the nature of God and whether or how influence is exacted in the universe. I have to give you credit Ron for that point -- but then you go back to anthropomorphizing God into the parent paradigm.... and that's ok because it's your view.

Actually, it's not my view. One danger of an analogy is that it can be taken too literally. And too far. That is particularly true when you are comparing the incomparable. Unfortunately, though insufficient, such comparisons are the only tools we have available.
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


60 posted 04-29-2003 10:22 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

JP and Local Rebel, you both missed the point.

They (my quote and his retort) don't relate at all unless one equates love to praise.

I think Ron "jumped the gun" on his retort to my praising statement by equating my usage the term "praise" to his definition of love. To me, they are separate terms and not equivalent.

Common Sense 101

I don't have to be praised to be loved.
I don't have to praise in order to love.


Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


61 posted 04-29-2003 11:48 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

At some point, one would think I'd stop dropping pennies into the well. I know this is a waste of breath, but I guess there's a bit of masochist in all of us. Sigh.

Praise and love are not equivalent terms, Opeth, but neither are they necessarily separate and unrelated. You have repeatedly used phrases alluding to praise, playing harps, giving glory, and singing at the feet of Jesus. Your tone seems to be one of mockery, but maybe that really is your interpretation of the Bible. Doesn't matter.

You claimed that the only purpose behind praise was a "sheer craving for attention." I used a close analogy to show that wanting something from others, in the example I gave, love, wasn't necessarily as selfishly motivated as you concluded. That one went over your head, so let me try another, one perhaps a little closer to your world.

A military officer doesn't require discipline, respect, and obedience from the enlisted ranks because he is on a selfish, power-hungry ego trip. He knows, instead, that those requirements will both lend order and purpose to the lives of the enlisted men and may, ultimately, be their only path to survival. Asking a man to salute you may seem like adulation, and forcing him to do pushups as punishment may be interpreted as petty, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that a good officer loves the men he commands and wants only what is best for them. Those who ascribe his motivations to selfishness simply aren't looking very deeply. Wanting something from those we love, even demanding it, can often be the most true and real way of expressing our love.

Tough love isn't an oxymoron. It's a redundancy.
WhiteRose
Member Elite
since 07-23-2002
Posts 3310
somebody's dungeon


62 posted 04-29-2003 12:10 PM       View Profile for WhiteRose   Email WhiteRose   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for WhiteRose

The Catholic religion is in fact the oldest religion in the world today. They can be traced back to as early as 50 BC. Over time they have become one of the most paganistic religions. Before a man can become a priest in the church of satan, he must be ordained as a Catholic Priest, that should tell you something. They are also steeped in idolatry. Well that was more than my penny on the Catholic Church..

So, anyway, on to the ten commandments.

They were given in the age of law. Before Calvary, and the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the world was in the age of law.

There is no way that anyone could ever live an entire life upon this earth and not break one or two, or more, of them. That was why there was the need for the priets to offer up a blood sacrifice once a year for the sins of the people. They were breaking them all the time. The catholics adopted, and still teach them as law for the simple fact that they believe the priest still has the power to forgive sins, and they think sin, sin that would make you miss heaven, is the breaking of the ten commandments.

We now live in the age of grace. There is no more sacrifice for sin. Jesus Christ was the final sacrifice. Priests no longer have the power to forgive sins. The Catholics seem to be unaware of this fact. But because they are a religion that puts more faith in acts, rituals, and hail mary's and such, they seem to find it comforting to have a set of rules they can easily recognize, and then be forgiven for by the priest.

[This message has been edited by WhiteRose (04-29-2003 12:12 PM).]

Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


63 posted 04-29-2003 01:02 PM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

Let’s start from the top…

My original statement that made caused you to err in a retort

“If I were The Creator, I surely would not have a need to be praised by those whom I created. There would be no purpose for it, except for a sheer craving for attention.


(Your reply)

“Any parent who says they don't want their children to love them is either lying or in need of serious psychological help. Such a desire is not selfish or egotistical, but is born instead of the unconditional love any good parent feels for their children.

~ And so, I ask how does one go on a rebuttal about “parents who say they don’t want their children to love them” out of my original statement about a Creator needing praise?  You have yet to successfully answer that question.  Your rebuttal just doesn’t make sense with regards to my original statement, unless one mistakenly reads “praise” as “love.”

You further stated)

”A parent should very much want their child to love them, not because it bolsters parental ego, but because it is the most important thing a mom or dad will ever teach their kid.”

~ You make a definite link between the phrase “bolsters parental ego” and my “sheer craving for attention.”  And by doing so you have mistakenly equated praise to love.


(I replied)


”Really Ron. I do believe you should refrain from discussing issues with me because doing so clogs your sense of perception.  Which "any parent" are you talking about? Certainly not me.

Since when does praise = love?

I don't need my children to praise my name. I don't need my children to play harps at my feet. I don't need my children to give me glory. That has nothing...listen Ron...nothing to do with expressing and teaching about giving LOVE.”


(To which you replied)

“Where in my post do I mention praise, harps, or glory? Those are presumably your concepts of divine love, not mine.”

~ Talk about twisting words, you lost track of what was said. It is not my concept of divine love, it is most likely yours and other Christians.  You equated praise to learning how to love God…remember?

“Learning how to love God isn't for His benefit. It's for ours.

~ I believe a Creator wouldn’t want his creations to go around praising Him (or Her), just like I wouldn’t want my children praising me.


“Praise and love are not equivalent terms, Opeth, but neither are they necessarily separate and unrelated.”

~ True.  However, you took a statement of mine that dealt with “praise” and immediately retorted by this…

“Any parent who says they don't want their children to love them is either lying or in need of serious psychological help.”

~ Again, I ask you…how do you relate “Any parent who says…” to my original statement?  To say I am being defensive is ridiculous.  Two people are in a room, one says that god doesn’t need to be praised, the other person immediately says to that person, “Any parent…”  What is the other person to think?  P-lease.  Your answers may fool others, but certainly not me.

“You have repeatedly used phrases alluding to praise, playing harps, giving glory, and singing at the feet of Jesus. Your tone seems to be one of mockery, but maybe that really is your interpretation of the Bible. Doesn't matter.”

~ It is out of common sense. A Creator so powerful to create the universe would want people to play harps at his/her feet? This Creator would want people to sing and praise his/her name…for eternity?  I don’t know about you, but I would be sick and tired of praising the Creator in about a week.

”You claimed that the only purpose behind praise was a "sheer craving for attention." I used a close analogy to show that wanting something from others, in the example I gave, love, wasn't necessarily as selfishly motivated as you concluded. That one went over your head,”

~ Your analogy doesn’t work, Ron.  It doesn’t work with my original statement.  What went over your head was your common sense when you allowed your personal bias towards me enable you to “jump the gun” when retorting.  The subject of your analogy was about “love.”  The subject of my original statement was about “praise.”  

Result, bad analogy, concocted out of a personal bias.  Try again.

and I didn't even sigh.

[This message has been edited by Opeth (04-29-2003 01:03 PM).]

Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


64 posted 04-29-2003 01:06 PM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

PS ~ As for your "saluting" and military analogies, in my best Richard Dawson voice, "Our survey said [insert BONK here]."
littlewing
Member Rara Avis
since 03-02-2003
Posts 9998
New York


65 posted 04-29-2003 02:52 PM       View Profile for littlewing   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for littlewing

Can we please try to stay on the subject guys?  

Thank you
Crazy Eddie
Member
since 09-14-2002
Posts 221


66 posted 04-29-2003 04:32 PM       View Profile for Crazy Eddie   Email Crazy Eddie   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Crazy Eddie

quote:
Even if we agree that the past is fixed and cannot be altered, the conclusion that such a fixed past interferes with your free will makes little sense. They have nothing to do with each other. I believe the same is true of a fixed future, with only a slight variation in the equation. With past events, you know the choices made, but have no power to change them. With future events, you have the power to shape them, but do not know the choices that will be made. The equations are similar to moving like quantities from each side of the equals sign in algebra in the sense that such manipulation doesn't really change much. Both equations result in free will

Ron,

I agree concentrating only on a fixed past does make little sense with regard to an interference of free will. It’s only when you see the fixed past as having been at one point a seemingly unknown future that the cracks begin to appear, then the fixed past question becomes exactly the same as that of the fixed future.

On the 06/10/99 I had a choice to make, whether or not to join these forums, on the face of it I could have decided either way, which suggests I possessed a free will. If we agree a fixed past then I definitely do know now that I did indeed decide to join, this knowledge doesn’t affect the choices I had at the time until you consider what God knew on 05/10/99.

On the 05/10/99 in the linear time line I inhabit God knew that I would join the forum, on the 05/10/99 I was destined to join the forum - I couldn’t make any other choice but to join. If the future, or the past is fixed, enabling God to see it, then my belief that a choice existed at all is merely an illusion.

Applying the perspective of an omnipotent entity that lives outside time but has free access to our proposed linear timeline adds, I believe, even more weight to my assertion when applied to this hypothesis.

If an omnipotent entity that could see the fixed future turned back time to 06/10/99 and allowed me the choice again the outcome would always be the same. I would never choose not to join these forums, not because I happen to like it here but because the fixed nature of the future, dictated by the ability of the entity to know it, denies me any other option.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


67 posted 04-29-2003 05:57 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I agree concentrating only on a fixed past does make little sense with regard to an interference of free will.

Cool.

Now I just have to do is convince you that everything is a fixed past. The only difference between past and future choices is one of personal knowledge. If you are unaware of the choice you're to make, the only possible way to become aware is to make the choice. THAT is free will.

Interestingly, when someone says "I had no choice," what they usually mean is they felt they knew the results of all their choices and only one seemed palatable to them. Absolute foreknowledge removes choices.

quote:
... until you consider what God knew on 05/10/99

But absolute foreknowledge only removes choices when it is balanced by action. You can possess absolute knowledge of the past without affecting your free will because that knowledge is not balanced by a freedom to act. Similarly, what someone else knows, even God, is irrelevant to your choices because there is no action to balance the knowledge. Your free will can only be determined by what YOU know.

If I knew, without any doubt, exactly where you would make your next post in these forums, would that turn your free will into an illusion? If I turned out to be wrong, obviously my knowledge didn't interfere with your free will. But if I was right? Would that make a mockery of your free will? Of course not, else I could have you repeatedly flip a quarter and "force" the coin to land on its head half the time. Because I am right half of the time doesn't mean I am influencing the coin. It only means I know something about the nature of the coin. If we assume that God knows more than I do, about the coin, about the Universe, about time, then it is not at all unreasonable to think He would be right 100 percent of the time. Without necessarily ever influencing the coin!

You have the ability to make personal choices. Heads or tails? That God knows what those choices will ultimately be is irrelevant because you will STILL have to make the choices. Each choice will be a reflection of who you are, and each choice will lead to a definition of who you will become, two concepts necessarily mired in the human perception of time. Only by making your choices will you learn what God already knows.
Thomas119gold
Senior Member
since 06-03-2002
Posts 719
Biloxi, MS (city by the sea)


68 posted 04-29-2003 06:44 PM       View Profile for Thomas119gold   Email Thomas119gold   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Thomas119gold's Home Page   View IP for Thomas119gold

Ok where are we going with all of this?
Crazy Eddie
Member
since 09-14-2002
Posts 221


69 posted 04-29-2003 06:54 PM       View Profile for Crazy Eddie   Email Crazy Eddie   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Crazy Eddie

Thomas119gold,

To hell, or so people keep telling me.  

If you mean in this thread then I’m not quite sure, generally we end up agreeing to disagree and wander off avowing never to get involved in a religious discussion ever again - until next time.


Ron,

If it helps I’m convinced that the past is fixed, I’m just not sure the future is, which it would have to be for an entity to know 100% what that future is.

Flipping a coin is also a good analogy for my argument against an entity that knows a fixed future:

I may think the coin can land on heads or tails (there are other possibilities but let’s not get into those) in the same way I think I have a free will but if the future is fixed then the outcome is pre-destined to turn out the prescribed way. In fact with a fixed future everything that happens occurs regardless of the myriad of choices or possibilities that we think exist.

Free will presumes that there exist choices that are real and valid possibilities, like there was actually a possibility that I wouldn’t join these forums. I maintain that if the future is fixed and allows only one possibility to exist the choice is simply an illusion.

[This message has been edited by Crazy Eddie (04-29-2003 06:55 PM).]

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


70 posted 04-29-2003 09:40 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I maintain that if the future is fixed and allows only one possibility to exist the choice is simply an illusion.

Then that must be equally true for a fixed past. Your future, after all, is the past for your great-great-grandkids. The ONLY thing that differentiates your past and your future is personal knowledge.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


71 posted 04-30-2003 12:59 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

The Catholic religion is in fact the oldest religion in the world today. They can be traced back to as early as 50 BC.



Well, no, lets just take a look at a few -- First Judaism has to predate Catholicism doesn't it (of course it's a neat trick to have Catholicism predate Christ)? and Hinduism -- dates back to 10,000 B.C.E and Confucianism to around 500 B.C.E and Taoism also 5th century B.C.E and Buddhism 563 B.C.E. and Zoroastrianism around 1500 B.C.E. -- oh yeah and it was the Zoroasters that invented the Devil --

now what the devil was it you were saying?

quote:

Over time they have become one of the most paganistic religions. Before a man can become a priest in the church of satan, he must be ordained as a Catholic Priest, that should tell you something.


Would that be the First Church of Satan?  The United ?  Or the Southern Satan Convention?


What the devil should it tell me?

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (04-30-2003 01:34 AM).]

WhiteRose
Member Elite
since 07-23-2002
Posts 3310
somebody's dungeon


72 posted 04-30-2003 08:44 AM       View Profile for WhiteRose   Email WhiteRose   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for WhiteRose

Rebel,

I should have specified that when I speak of religion, I was not speaking of a belief system such as one that thinks their poor passed relatives are coming back as cows.

And I'd like to know how this odd reincarnation was going on when there were no cows in 10,000 BC?  The world wasn't even here, let alone the cows.

Hinduism differs from Christianity and other Western religions in that it does not have a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization. It consists of "thousands of different religious groups that have evolved in India since 1500 BCE."

That is a statement I read from a hindu page. Sounds more like chaos than religion to me.

As for my statement about the priests of satans church, and their correlation with the catholic church. Read this book, it will tell you what you need to know.
http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/0175.asp
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


73 posted 04-30-2003 08:56 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

There have been "Messiahs" in other religions which are quite similiar to the Jesus messiah in Christianity...and these religions are thousands of years older than Judaism/Christianity.

But like politics, religion is another topic of discussion that can be debated hours on end without any resolve if both parties have already made up their minds and do not want to turn away from their norms.

The biggest problem I have with Christianity is that it teaches that its Jesus is the one and only true messiah and if you don't believe in Him, you are to suffer in hellfire forever.

To me, that is just plain ludicrous.
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


74 posted 04-30-2003 08:59 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

As for the 10 commandments, many Christian churches teach that 9 are still to be obeyed and 1 was done away with, while other Christian churches believe the commandments changed to just 2, yet others believe in all 10, but have changed the 4th one.
 
  Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Ten Commandments ?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors