Brainwashing Children
Mikey 93 comments
I recently watched the Richard Dawkins documentary "Root of all Evil", an intelligently presented eye opener about the atheism vs religion debate.
Being the open atheist I am, friends and colleagues often send me links to videos, articles and other material that both supports or denies the existence of God.
This one arrived in my inbox this morning, in it a subject covered by Dawkins other documentary "War on Science".
In the video below, witness adults actually brainwash children into believing that humans and dinosaurs co-existed only a few thousand years ago. Absolute insanity. As a parent myself, I consider it a form of child abuse.
The words "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" are shown in this video.
Michael
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 03:10 PMLast time I checked, schooling requires a structured learning curriculum based on fact - not fairy tales. Whether you believe in evolution or not, there is a wealth of evidence suggesting the Earth is a lot older than 6000 years.
The thing I have a problem with - is not because they are saying the Earth is only 6000 years old and we all co-existed with dinosaurs, but because creationists are saying that is the absolute truth. No wiggle room. Sorry - we are right and everyone else is wrong. I am not sure if that is plain arrogance or just close mindedness.
Science on the other hand says 'here are some facts. We think things happened this way. But we won't eliminate the possibility of God because we simply can't.' Even Richard Dawkins says that.
So to answer your question: "What is your problem with what others believe. Get over it." As a person who takes the side of science, I don't have any problem with what others believe. I have already said that. I have a problem with obvious propaganda, which the subject of this video surely falls under.
Once again Gilly, you jump to conclusions without any basis.
Gilly
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 04:36 PMI will teach my children that creation is true and I will teach them evoloution is wrong.
Child abuser?
Thanks
Michael
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 05:00 PMI won't even dignify that with a proper response other than to say...sigh...whatever...
Gilly
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 05:14 PM"As a parent myself, I consider it a form of child abuse." So you said Mike.
I sigh, as well then.
Rodney
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 07:23 PMOk, enough.
All I am seeing so far is someone with a strong conviction in their beliefs. But not strong enough to stand up and address anything that questions that belief.
Several questions have been posed to you by myself and others, yet you've avoided answering any of them. Instead, you've made uneducated statements such as refering to Jewish beliefs as fairytales, apparently not understanding your own bible is primarily the same bible you just called fairytales. So either you actually didn't know this or you don't believe your own bible?
So this is your opportunity. You say you don't believe in evolution and I don't take objection to that; as you say, it's your business. But I do ask that you explain WHY, if for no other reason than for our benefit. You say you can answer my other "little issues", posed on https://rustylime.com/show_article.php?id=481 or that you have friends who can. So do so, or get them to.
C'mon, let's hear some reasons!
Gilly
Thursday 14th June 2007 | 12:36 PMOk Rod, you are the Talmud intelectual giant; explain the Leviathon or whatever it is called in Hebrew to me. You know, the one described in Job, or whatever his Hebrew name is. Sounds like a DRAGON to me.
and yes I believe it's true and I believe it to be a Dragon. Call me stupid ;)
and as far as I am concerned mutation is enough to dispell evoloution completely, But wait there is more.
Rodney
Thursday 14th June 2007 | 08:06 PMYou know the leviathan is a sea creature, right?
G
Thursday 14th June 2007 | 08:56 PMBehemoth? You know what I am talking about.
Rodney
Friday 15th June 2007 | 12:25 AMBehemoth is an ox-like creature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behemoth">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behemoth
I don't begrudge you your beliefs and your faith. In fact, I applaud you for the strenght of character to stand by your beliefs, even when they're unpopular.
I do suggest, however, you gain a deeper understanding of the topic at hand; if you wish to base your life on it.
I suggest you start by asking yourself some hard questions. Such as, why do you believe in the Books of Moses, yet you disregard the laws and teachings of those Books? You believe in the 10 Commandments yet you ignore (1) 'I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the house of Egypt..' and (4) 'Remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy'. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments">Wikipedia again)
Ask your priest or advisor. Ask your other Christian friends or ask Google. I would suggest, however, anyone who answers your questions with another question or a trite comment deriding other beliefs is probably not worth asking further questions to.
Anonymous
Friday 15th June 2007 | 11:52 AMYou didnt read Job did you Rod, should I post up here what it says about the Behemoth in your Jewish testament. Those words came directly from G-d, does the old testament embarase you.
I am a Christian, we have only 2 main laws
1. Love god above all things.
2. love your nieghbour as you love your self.
If you choose not to accept Christ as the Messiah that is none of my buisness. Just as G-d hardend the Pharose heart, so I believe he has yours.
The New Testament supersedes the Old Testament. Christ came to save all men, not just the Jews.
I believe in the old testament but I dont need to live by your laws because of what Christ did at Calvary.
My answers are in the Bible not in the mouths of priests.
I will get ... all ... the text of the behemoth from the book of Job and post it here, then you tell me its a cow
Rodney
Friday 15th June 2007 | 01:24 PMThe words don't embarass me - I did post the words; if you look at the link to wikipedia; they're in there.
The general understanding of Behemoth is not that he's a cow, but an "ox-like creature". Now maybe a dinosaur is a bit like a giant cow, to a certain persepctive. Can't argue with that, I suppose.
Now, as to God hardening the heart of Pharoah, that's also a misnomer. This doesn't mean God chose to make Pharoah's heart hard and remove his free will. Pharoah had several chances to repent but he always chose (through free will) not to. Eventually, God removes his "helping hand" to repent, meaning that the person must do so on their own, without help.
It's fine to say the new testament supercedes the old. But it actually completely disregards the old, so it's more like a stand-alone book.
I hear this term "saved" all the time - what are we being saved from?
G
Friday 15th June 2007 | 02:03 PMRod go read Job 40.........The Whole thing.
It seems you dont even know the old testament, only what Wikki tells you. Then tell me its a cow.
Saved from what. Why did Priests kill animals on there alters. Saved from sin
You say "God removes his "helping hand" to repent, meaning that the person must do so on their own, without help. "
I say "Pedantics"
Rodney
Friday 15th June 2007 | 02:17 PMI am not saying it's a cow.Here's what I just said: "the general understanding of Behemoth is not that he's a cow, but an "ox-like creature" ".
We're just going round in circles here, so let's move on.
We have different beliefs. I'm happy you have yours and they give you what you want.
g
Friday 15th June 2007 | 03:02 PMYeah my fault I was confusing the Behemoth and the Leviathon.
What is this creature described in the Old Testament if not a Dinosaur or didnt it exist in Job's time.
From the book of Job.
1Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
2Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
3Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee?
4Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
5Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
6Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants?
7Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears?
8Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more.
9Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
10None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?
11Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
12I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
13Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?
14Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about.
15His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.
16One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.
17They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
18By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
20Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.
21His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
22In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him.
23The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
24His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
25When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves.
26The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
27He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.
28The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble.
29Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
30Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.
31He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
32He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.
33Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.
34He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.
A scaley whale thingo hey?
Anonymous
Friday 15th June 2007 | 03:06 PMLet me clarify my point to every one.
Just because it is not around today? Does not mean it was not around when Men first walked the Earth.
I am not a child abuser for teaching my children the Bible, no matter what anybody says.
Rodney
Friday 15th June 2007 | 03:20 PMI don't think you're a child abuser.
And while I'm not going to argue with you about the validity of the Biblical stories, I have to put to you the problem with using either Behemoth or Leviathan to cover dinosaur skeletal remains, so you can respond.
There is clear indication in Biblical texts that only 1 Behemoth & 1 Leviathan exist ("Upon earth there is not his like"). Yet there's more than 2 sets of Dinosaur bones.
g
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 12:33 PMI am not covering Dinosaur remains only suggesting that they could have been around the time of Man.
Rod, please explain to me for once and for all the Behemoth; a cow/ox like creature, does not have a tail like a Cypress tree as described in the old testament.
I am not going to argue creation v evoloution, mainly because I dont care what people think. What does bother me is when somebody suggests teaching the Bible (old testament to, at that) is Child abuse.
Funny how the image at the top of this thread is of Christ and the bases of the teaching is Jewish.
Anonymous
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 01:15 PMRod, please explain to me for once and for all the Behemoth; a cow/ox like creature, does not have a tail like a Cypress tree as described in the old testament.
Can you please clarify what the question is?
Jake Farr-Wharton
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 02:01 PMMichael thanks for covering this subject. I think that Dawkins covered my problem with religion fairly adequately in the 'Root of All Evil' doco.
The picture at the top Gilly is merely an artists representation idealising Jesus. It holds no actual substance as the artist was not alive during the time that Jesus was. In saying that, neither were the people that wrote the bible, they were born almost 400 years after his reputed death. Jesus wasn't even devine or immaculately conceived, nor did he ascend to heaven until 200 years after the crusiFICTION.
The bible is a piece of literature written by people for people.
I really do think that forcing religion on children is abuse, especially when the many parables (stories with meaning) are taught as truth. It is brainwashing in it's most rudimentary form.
On the other hand, if you were to teach the child about all religions (that would involve researching them Gilly) you could quite easily call that a productive history lesson.
Rodney
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 04:50 PMWhile I agree with much of what has been written here, I feel the need to step in on behalf of my religion. In the West, Australia in particular but probably the UK, US as well, there is a popular belief that Islam, Judaism and Christianity are pretty much the same thing.
People think "Bible" and they think of the Christian Bible and it's interpretations. Islam and Judaism are completely unrecognisable as religion in this form. Judaism, and Islam too to some extent, do not even consider themselves "religions". As quoted from Reb Zalman (from hundreds of years ago) "the god you don't believe in, I do not believe in either".
I don't simple mean Judaism is Christianity without Jesus. It's far deeper than that. There are almost no similarities at all. To the outsider, it's easy to dismiss this and say "you all belief the same thing... god, bible... etc" but that's, I'm going to be honest here, bullshit. That's what we, as seriously persecuted minority have come to allow mainstream Christianity to think, to prevent the endless stream of murders that follow otherwise (in fact only last week one of my friends was attacked in north perth by complete strangers, for no reason other than being a jew).
Above you mention issues with the Bible - they're all in the Christian additions only so I'll move on from them.
Jake, the beliefs you outlay in "Waking Up Alone" are much closer to what I understand religion to be. In my mainstream religion, there's no concept of some God sitting up on a cloud handing out smacks and lollies.
There's no devil or hell. How could there be? How could an all powerful god be incapable of controlling some pointlessly evil "fallen angel"?
There's no spiritual saviours or sons of god or virgin births. There are no concepts of original sin.
There's always been a belief that when science and the bible collide, you must reasses your understanding of the bible, not of science. I showed this with quotes in the Creatonist Museum discussion, dating back from the 12th century and can provide further such quotes from far further back than that.
All these concepts and so many more are completely absent from Judaism (and to some etent Islam).
There's only a single life-force if you will, throughout the galaxy, we just refer to this as God. This is the mainstream, understood view, btw, not just my personal interpretation. Everything is part of the single life force that is the universe. All the planets, star, rocks, people, etc - all one thing. I am God. You are God. How could we not be, if God is One?
There's no belief that "others" will burn in hell (which doesn't exist). Judaism has no requirement that "reward" (for want of a better term) is for Jews. All people are of God. All people have a place in the "world to come" again, no good English terminology, so apologies). This is why we don't believe in conversion and you'll never have a Jew knocking on your door asking if you've seen the light. What's the point - you ARE the light (and so is your door, for that matter)!
None the less, the whole belief system focuses on the here and now. Being good to people and yourself now, in this life - not in gaining eternal life because someone got nailed to a cross 2000 years ago. There are some rules to live by, sure but the rules are there for reasons.
It's very difficult for people to appreciate this because they've had a Christian understanding rammed down there throats their whole life and now can't see how passages and texts could mean anything other than they were taught.
I'm quite sure G and others will disagree with what I've just written and will attempt to prove that I am somehow wrong but, being the Jew, I'm probably in a more reaonable position to know what Jews believe.
If anyone wants to ask any sensible questions, please feel free.
G
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 05:00 PMThe picture at the top Gilly is merely an artists representation
Are you sure. I thought he was a White Italian looking fella?
In saying that, neither were the people that wrote the bible, they were born almost 400 years after his reputed death.
What? You have obviously read the bible.
Hounestly JW you have no Idea what you are talking about, only what others lead you to believe , and that has always been my problem with what MO has had to say. It does not get any simpler than that.
Michael
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 06:02 PMAt risk of adding fuel to the flame-war...
Jake says: "Michael thanks for covering this subject. I think that Dawkins covered my problem with religion fairly adequately in the 'Root of All Evil' doco."
Yes it's an amazing doco. Scary how kids can be brainwashed in that manner. It's fine to teach the bible, but what they do in that doco is abusive.
I think this is the part where Gilly chimes in and puts the documentary in it's place despite probably having never seen it. It doesn't matter if he hasn't seen it, it just matters what he believes based on what he has heard about it :-) And next week when I post my objective 'The God Delusion' book review he will probably go on a rant about how wrong Dawkins is, even though it's a book review - not a religious statement.
G asys: "Hounestly JW you have no Idea what you are talking about, only what others lead you to believe , and that has always been my problem with what MO has had to say. It does not get any simpler than that."
Translation: 'I'm right and you're wrong and I don't care to support my argument with anything other than that.'
Hey G, are you sharing the same computer as Gilly? Or are you the same person? Think about your response...
Jake Farr-Wharton
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 07:06 PMGilly, you did it again. All you ever manage to do is dismiss, you continually add nothing! You just put your hands over your ears and go lalalalala, like I did yesterday when the plumber was trying to tell me the price of my new tank installation. BTW, it's much cheaper to do it yourself... dah!
Gilly, you've again contributed nothing, all that you've said over and over in several posts in succession is exactly what Michael said, 'I'm right, you're wrong, so ner' (obviously paraphrasing).
Mate, if you're going to contribute, do so, but the hot air is just childish - as you so eloquently put it in an earlier post.
I have an extremely good understanding of both the bible and christianity's branch religions. I was even touched by a priest at an early stage, so I probably have a better understanding of what it is to be a pious christian than you do.
I challenge you to come up with anything that has any substance on the above issue.
Rodney
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 07:19 PMJake, it's not going to happen. I just don't think he understands the difference between arguing for and arguing against.
Michael
Tuesday 19th June 2007 | 08:00 PMSave your breath fellas. Gilly doesn't directly respond to comments any more than a few lines long...:-) Seriously have a look....
G or Gilly
Wednesday 20th June 2007 | 01:34 PMJust one reasonable answer about good mutations, thats all.
The picture at the top Gilly is merely an artists representation
That was a typo
gilly
Wednesday 20th June 2007 | 01:47 PMEverything is part of the single life force that is the universe. All the planets, star, rocks, people, etc - all one thing. I am God. You are God. How could we not be, if God is One?
Thats Hinduism, you are a Jew by name only.
Now I understand why your God yahweh took Israel away from your people for so long and why he allows there persecution.
As Christ said, Dont throw pearls to pigs.
Rodney
Wednesday 20th June 2007 | 03:57 PMGilly, why be so hostile? Do I call you a pig and encourage hostility to your or your people? Grow up and stop acting like a child.
In Judaism, there is a central belief. It's called the Shema. You will find it in google easily enough. It says "hear o Israel, the lord is our god, the lord is one". http://www.jewfaq.org/prayer/shema.htm">jewfaq. That's not Hinduism, which you seem to think everything is. That's Judaism. Welcome to reality, mate.
I understand my religion far better than you do. Don't tell me what it is to be a Jew. Don't tell me that you understand my religion. You don't. You don't even appear to understand your own.
Jake Farr-Wharton
Thursday 21st June 2007 | 11:10 AMHitler was a roman catholic. Gilly or Hitler as I think you should now be called, what you've written about your belief above is quite agnostic. If you beleive everything in that silly book as you've said on occasion, you have blasphemed blasphemer. You have taken your own interpretation of what the bible says which makes you agnostic and made your god universal instead of omnipotent.
god created the universe? god is the universe? make your choice hitler.
I'm sorry to be so inflamatory and acidic, those comments gilly were just disgusting.
Hitler
Saturday 23rd June 2007 | 07:07 PMNo offence. Truth is, I have no choice but to love and forgive. These are truely tough teachings, but that is my road of choice, sorta.
I am not stupid enough to think that I can ever influence your thinking, only suggest that you could be wrong, "Possible?".
You have been taught from people you respect a certain doctrine-me to. That does not make you right or me wrong or viccy- vee.
You can judge me -coooool. I can live with that.
To me your comments re my children are contemptible, but I am not going to hold that against you.
Yes I do believe everything in that silly book. Should I change for you?
God created everything from nothing-simple- he created the universe-everything-everything. I dont know how.
I dont even care how.
Everything is part of the single life force that is the universe. All the planets, star, rocks, people, etc - all one thing. I am God. You are God. How could we not be, if God is One?
And Rod
I know Jews who would LAUGH at this crap, so do you.
Anonymous
Saturday 23rd June 2007 | 07:30 PMSave your breath fellas. Gilly doesn't directly respond to comments any more than a few lines long...:-) Seriously have a look....
Just one a simple answer to MUTATION, Mic?
Not a stupid comment about the Earths magnetic change, that does in no way correlate to evoloution. Duhh.
It isnt hard unless its crap.
It is important to question everything. It is stupid to rely on others for answers
It is important to question everything. It is stupid to rely on others for answers
one more time
It is important to question everything. It is stupid to rely on others for answers
Anonymous is hitler
Saturday 23rd June 2007 | 08:34 PMAnonymous is Hitler
Let there be no mistake
Sandeep Kurian
Sunday 22nd July 2007 | 04:46 PMAs per the Bible, God is never mentioned to have told that he did not create the dinosour.In fact what the scriptures mentions is that he created 'creatures' rather than pointing out names.And the order of creation stands good against scientific reasoning.Created Light ..(Big Bang)....The sun the planet ....sea .. the land ....creatures in the sea first and then land (evolution theory states the same) and at last man.
Moreover on the point that creation was completed in 7 days ......guys ...that was God's 7 days ,not ours ......
As far as I know the duration of the 'day' differs from planet to planet.here we are trying to define something that is almost impossible to fathom
Hence ,I dont see any conflict between Christianity and science .Infact one supports the other ...;)
Have a nice time guys ....
Sandeep Kurian
Sunday 22nd July 2007 | 04:52 PMTypo
Read
"As far as I know the duration of the 'day' differs from planet to planet"
as
"As far as I know the duration of the 'day' differs even from planet to planet"
Jake
Sunday 22nd July 2007 | 05:02 PMWhich planet does god live on?
God[s] can create a universe but are unable to walk, they must be carried. Dog[s] oops, god[s] do not exist without their believers, so what happens when the last believer dies, does the god[s] then also die?
That being said; I was also under the impressions that it was not god that it was god[s] followers that wrote the bible, it was certainly not written in the first person.
Gilly
Sunday 22nd July 2007 | 07:06 PMWhere do you get this stuff from Jake?
God cant walk?
He lives on a planet? You somekind of scientologist or something?
Before man existed God existed, he created everything.
Yes the Bible was written by man, but inspired by God, that is why it is still so accurate in its predictions.
What I cant understand is- I base my beliefs on the Bible, you base your beliefs on what?
And not to be a broken record# but still the same questions#
1 Where did life come from?
2 Where is there a proven positive mutation to justify evoloution?
I dont bring anything positive to the table? Neither do you.
and Rod what type of Jew are you?
Jake
Sunday 22nd July 2007 | 08:26 PMI asked what planet 'he' lived on because the guy above said that the 7days it took to create the universe was relative to the planet he was on, that was the reason for the comment.
I don't have any dogmatic beliefs, I find them useless, they serve absolutely no purpose in my life. I have no gods to worship.
Gilly, I personally have no actual proof that spontaneous mutation is possible, nor do you that an omnipotent being pulled a rabbit out of its hat, so to speak and created the universe. We as individuals have no proof that our individual belief systems are any more than the contrived thoughts of clever people.
As sure as you are in saying that your god is real and I am in saying that such complexity could not have come before simplicity.
Now, perhaps you can explain something for me, why is there such great contempt for women in christianity, why are they placed in the lowest regard and basically forgotten? It would make more sense to me either way, if the monotheistic christian god were depicted as a female, after all, they bare children, they nurture and provide, they have more readily available emotions and feeling (obviously I'm generalizing). I never understood that.
Gilly
Wednesday 25th July 2007 | 04:17 PMJFW quote
(Gilly, I personally have no actual proof that spontaneous mutation is possible, nor do you that an omnipotent being pulled a rabbit out of its hat, so to speak and created the universe. We as individuals have no proof that our individual belief systems are any more than the contrived thoughts of clever people.)
End Quote
Thankyou
You have finally gotten off your hi horse. Congratulations!
I have never said I had any answers, other than my faith.
JFW quote again
Now, perhaps you can explain something for me, why is there such great contempt for women in christianity, why are they placed in the lowest regard and basically forgotten? It would make more sense to me either way, if the monotheistic christian god were depicted as a female, after all, they bare children, they nurture and provide, they have more readily available emotions and feeling (obviously I'm generalizing). I never understood that. )
End Quote
What?
They cant lift heavy things?
When I read the Bible, I cant help but feel and understand they are my equals. Who has told you otherwise? Your old priest/old church? I dont think they are Christian if they teach you that.
I will try to make it simple for you Jake. Love God, foremost. Love others and forgive them. These are the only 2 major Christian rules. I am not making these up, they are Christs commands to his followers in the Bible.
Satanists have one fundamental rule, Do as you like. Yes its in there Bible. Again, your choice. I wont judge you for it.
Jake
Thursday 26th July 2007 | 08:38 AMThanks Gilly.
Though one small correction, the Satanist rule is do unto others as they do unto you. This differs from the old greek 'golden rule', do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
The notion that christians view their female counterparts as second class citizens is not a new one. It is a resounding theme throughout all religions. The notion that (excluding the anglican religion) no female can reach the highest post in the theocracy and that only a male is allowed to interpret the scriptures into sermons is just one example.
Gilly
Thursday 26th July 2007 | 11:40 AM"Do what tho wilt" Satanic Bibles golden rule, go research Allister Crowley. He wrote it.
I am continualy amazed by your complete miss understanding of Christianity.
Margaret Court has one of the largest if not the largest Christian ministry/church in WA. Guess what, she is a Lady and she is the head of that Church. Its called Victory Life and its in Osborne Park.
I could list heaps of verses in the New Testament where men and women are spoken of as equals. But how would that help?
Where do you get your info from?
Rodney
Thursday 26th July 2007 | 04:36 PMI'll have to agree with Gilly on this one. The persception that women are less than equal in religious doctrine is usually borne out of the misuse of such doctrines by various groups over the ages, which were inherently chauvanist to begin with, as virtually all human cultures appear to be.
The old testament actually rates women as more spiritual, closer to God and of more value than men. This is in fact the reason men are obligated to do more various commandments - women are exempt from being obligated as they naturally reside at a higher level. Note I said exempt from being obligated - not that they are not allowed to do them. Women are just as allowed to perform these commandments, they are just not obligated to do them, i.e. they are optional for women but compulsary for men; as men require more effort to be close to God. How does that make women subordinate to men?
You raise the issue that women cannot deliver semons, etc. Again, not true. My very orthodox synagogue regularly has women deliver a sermon.
Women do not, however "lead" a prayer service, because they are not obligated to attend it. The basic rule is, when you are not obligated to perform something, you should not perform it unless you intend to continue it forever. That's because if you started performing something and then later decided "too hard, I'm stopping because I'm allowed to", it's a bit like a slap in the face to God. Kind of like saying "I tried this and didn't like it". Therefore, men who are not obligated for various reasons also do not lead.
Likewise, to say women are not allowed to interpret scriptures is incorrect. One of the greatest Jewish scholars of all time, the Rashi, in fact passed on the torch to his daughter (Miriam bat Shlomo), who is also considered one of the all time great interpreters. One of his grand-daughters became a great teacher (Channa Bat Shmuel) and all the others were known as great thinkers of their time.
I think you'll find that you're buying into a common and quite intentional misinterpretation. Of course there will be many individual examples of women being treated in a 2nd class way throughout the ages but they're societally imposed, not religiously (at least not in the religion I know) and as with all things root back to the local lords or power holders controlling what they want to control.
Jake
Friday 27th July 2007 | 09:43 AMI'm happy to eat my words here Gilly and Rodney, it is an interesting insight nonetheless.
It has long been my perception that women were supressed, perhaps even oppressed in many religions, perhaps they may be culture based rather than religion. Thanks for the insight.
Sandeep Kurian
Sunday 29th July 2007 | 07:22 PMWell Jake ...
Hope you have heard of the theory of relativity ....
What I meant is time , per say, has a different durations even with respect to our nearest planet .....
That being the case ,how on earth do you compare the duration of the entity 'time' with respect to a co-ordinate in space or whichever dimension ,of which neither you or I don't know much.........
As to the last believer alive .. that is not in your hands ...nor is it your headache ....
Meanwhile I have never come across such a stupid logic like ...when the creation perishes the creator too perishes ,,,,, I don't think you get crash courses for logic ....
I think you logic is better suited for your dogs, if any .......
Sandeep Kurian
Sunday 29th July 2007 | 07:25 PMAnd beware the dog[s] might have a stronger logic sense than you ;)
Jake
Monday 30th July 2007 | 10:18 AMSandeep, while your nonsensical answer has me scratching my head, may I ask what compelled you to compare me or my logic to a dog.
Am I more simple because I have no god to worship. I am free of external scrutany and as such, live my life as though I am the only god I need to appease.
The point I was making, was that a god can not exist without its followers. Therefore, if the creation perishes, the creator dies also, for the creator only existed in the mind of the creation.
Look, you have your beliefs, and you are more than entitled to them and their practice. It seems though that I, as one without belief, am more of a threat to you than one with a conflicting belief. I am more than happy to live and let live, and raise comment or critique as I see fit, you apparently have the need to belittle my comments by adding further absurdity to your already absurd comments, then attempting to belittle me.
I live in heaven, you live your life to get there... who is more nieve?
Gilly
Monday 30th July 2007 | 05:59 PMSorry Sandeep, I might have this wrong,
But Jake.
If you as a God, decided not to believe in the moon, would it suddenly get darker for me at night.
You talk about others nonsense. Listen to yourself.
As for scrutiny. Every day of your life.
Jake
Monday 30th July 2007 | 08:17 PMWhat?
Read what I have said Gilly, then critique. You've simply raised a moot question.
I don't believe that I've ever called myself a god of anyones universe than my own. Even then I was speaking metaphorically, saying that I find it pointless in my life to believe that there is anything greater governing my existence than my own will.
You've taken the high and mighty approach Gilly, but done so with no more substance a cow patty.
Gilly
Monday 30th July 2007 | 08:53 PM"metaphorically", see I missed that bit, all this time.
Why do you see me as high and mighty?
Point is. You said that if Gods followers stopped believing in him then he would not exist. Is that right? What if he does exist, theoretically, and his followers all die, he still exists.
Chasing my tail here.
I am not taking myself important or smarmy here, just providing a foil for this very anti Christian site.
I am not telling you to become a Christian. Just leave my beliefs alone.
Just as Mikey said in his atheist rant.
I think its an inferiority complex.
This is clearly an attack on the Christian belief of creation,
You attack Christianity and poor Mikey is claiming a Christian plot to take the world.
Dawkins wants to convert all Christians to atheism, you are all hypocrites who just dont get it. Preach Preach Preach your anti Christian gospel.
Why?
Jake
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 10:44 AMGilly, you are more than entitled to you beliefs, just as I am. I subsribed to the christian faith for many years until it lost its relivance to me. I attempted to relate to others until I came to the realisation that there was no point in me worshiping something external to myself when I am the one experiencing life. I dictate what I do, and to a great extent, what is done to me.
These are my beleifs and I could not care less if anyone else in the entire world has similar or conflicting views because to the greatest extent, they dictate their life and path.
Gilly, you're as entitled to your comments and views etc as any one else here. Don't act the victim, it will get you no where.
Gilly
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 12:22 PMThe Victim was Mikey when he fired off his "I am a poor Atheist and Christendom is trying to do away with me and my kind" and all his supporters went to his aid. Poor VICTIM.
Obviously this kind of an argument works well for ratings on this website, and you have all continued to chip away at Christian beliefs.
Am I entitled to my beliefs? Read the name of this thread, I got called Hitler, though I have not accused you of brainwashing children, with the still unproven theory of evolution, STILL UNPROVEN.
You tell me to come up with an argument for creation. To what? Evolution is a good THEORY, that is all it is.
Dawkins wants to end all religion, how Stalin like, and you called me Hitler (I didnt understand why tho).
You said I am entitled to my beliefs
Jake that is a piss weak comment, given the title of this thread. Hypocrite
If I was the victim, why do they cower?
Gilly
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 12:39 PMYour not all scared to answer me are you.
Bring it on. Cowards.
Victim, me.
You have got nothin.
Gilly
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 12:43 PMand as for Brainwashing children. I remember in the 80s in year 12 being taught Piltdown man as a human ancestor. PAH science. Evolution, the new RELIGION.
Hypocrites
Rodney
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 12:53 PMGilly, I believe the person who called you Hitler was refering to you saying this:
"Now I understand why your God yahweh took Israel away from your people for so long and why he allows there persecution.
As Christ said, Dont throw pearls to pigs."
Whether or not you intended it that way, this was interpreted as racist.
Jake
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 03:07 PMGilly, it was I who labled you hitler, and when you made the above comment, I felt it justified. You've made a couple more anti simetic remarks that I've read on other posts, it's just not kocher... good pun?
Pah science? You're typing on a computer, looking at an lcd screen, blogging on the internet!
Evolution is, in my opinion (and you are entitled you yours) a much stronger argument than creation. One has a well thought out theory, one is a bed time story.
As for atheism being quashed by christianity; they're both religion, they both have their theology and they both have their fundamentalist fanatics.
Gilly, I think you're a legend for standing up for what you beleive in, as patronising as that sounds, you're as vocal as anyone else here.
Gilly
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 05:37 PMThis is like Frontline.
The Jews lost Israel over and over and over again because they strayed from God. It is in the Old Testament. They are not my opinions, its Biblical fact.
Tell them Rod?
The difference now is after speaking to Rod, I can sorta understand what God has done to the Jewish nation and why.
I cant ever remember reading in the Bible "blessed are the ignorant"
Science has been skewed by scientists since its inception- Jake. Piltdown man, Pah, that is science. Anything to justify your religion, even if its scientific BULLCRAP.
Here is at tip- Google; Piltdown man.
Science by its own definition is flawed. Think about that.
Jake, I am anti Jewish? There are some real evil Jews out there, as there are some real evil Americans and Iraqis and Germans and Frogs and Nips and Aussies, gee I must be real insecure racist anti everything, or I dont bury my head in the sand and say how lovely everybody is..
You are a minority victim Jake. You Mike and others. You cast yourselfs as victims, and wait for all the other week insecure victims to come to your aid to make themselves look strong. You all want others to see you as great protectors.
Yes I am outspoken, read the name of this thread and you might understand why.
Again to the IGNORANT, There is not one dot of proof that evolution is anything more than a bed time fairy tale made up to justify a few scientists jobs.
Find me one solid- scientific fact on evolution and I will retract happily all I have said.
It cant be that hard, surely. Surely?
Jake
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 05:58 PMI'm sure it wouldn't be hard, though probably time consuming...
I don't consider myself a minority, certainly not a victim, if I wanted to be a victim, i'd still be a christian. Now before you get all riled up, what I meant is that it just didn't relate to me, and I tried to believe, believe me! I considered myself a victim of media for a while, of john safran and people like dawkins.
Just one last stab before I submit though, you mentioned an oxymoron; biblical fact.
Rodney
Wednesday 1st August 2007 | 07:08 PMGilly, you are correct the Jews lost Israel over straying from the Bible. If you take the Bible as your source, then that is indeed what it says.
However, all the points I have made on this site are within the bounds of Torah Judaism. To say that because you, as someone of another religion, disagree with my people's interpretation of our own Bible, you accept that Jews should suffer as they have is massively offensive.
As believers in different religions, we're going to have different views and beliefs. If I had the same views as you, I'd be a Christian, not a Jew.
You call me ignorant because I don't share your views. Now understand this: The Bible is Jewish book. You don't have to like that but it's an undisputed fact. If you as a Christian want to come along and try to reinterpete it by adding your own volumes, fine. Good luck to you. This doesn't give you the right to say that the Jewish interpretation of the the Jewish Bible is wrong. You are simply not in a position to claim otherwise. Just like I am not in a position to claim one Christian understanding of your New Testament is more correct than another.
By my understanding of my Bible, every single concept of Christianity is utterly flawed. However, I don't therefore accept millions of Christians should be executed each century. Understand that almost all Jewish suffering has been at the hands of Christians. The Catholic church officially declared suffering of Jews to directly equate to Christian victory. Whether you like it or not, all subsequent Christian faiths have stemmed from Catholicism.
So yes, statements like the one above do make me (and others) see you as racist. There have been countless evil "Chrisitans" (you may say they're not genuine Christians but it's equally easy for me to say evil Jews aren't genuine Jews) over the years but no one here has advocated the mass extermination Chrisitians.
Jake
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 08:14 AMJust to further that point though Rodney, Jesus was born, baptized and died a devout Jew. He was crucified because he was fundamentalist and would not tollerate blasphemy in the temple, thereby pissing off the temple priests and having him thrown before pilate.
Jesus had nothing to do with the movement of christianity.
Gilly
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 03:10 PMI am assuming Rod you are a Saducee? Other Jews think that your sect is wrong. The Jews lost Israel by straying from God and killing his Prophets. That is what I said.
Dont change my words thanks.
I call people Ignorant cos they dont know the facts.
I never said the Jews should suffer, just that I now understand why God turned his back to them.
I dont believe anybody should suffer.
The Bible is Jewish, fine, I dont have a problem with that either. Your welcome to interperate it anyway you like.
Jake & Rod, Christ said "Follow Me" Not follow a Priest a Pope a Minister or Pastor. If its going to be about interperatation, how can you miss understand that, "Follow Me" bit.
I have no doubt in my mind that the Catholic Church is a satanic empire dressed as a Christian Church. If anyone follows it, it is because they are ignorant. I was a Catholic, I studied there doctrine. It is Christian in name only.
For you Rod to say that all Christianity stems from Catholisism shows your complete IGNORANCE, Christianity should be Bible based only.
Jake- Jesus has everything to do with Christianity, he said "Follow ME", If you chose to follow a false Christian churches doctrine that is your fault or your parents. Not Christ, he gave you a free will.
Jesus pissed lots of people off because of there hypocrisy.
Christ said "Follow Me" to both Jews and Gentiles, and they still do.
Rodney
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 04:10 PMI am certainly not a saduccee. If anyone could be linked to that group today, which I am not sure anyone really could be, I suppose it would have to be the reform / conservative or progressive Jews. Saduccee's rejected the talmud or oral law and interpreted the torah literally, word for word, without accounting for grammatical understanding, etc. Judaism has always seen this approach as heretical.
I don't think Saduccee or Pahrisee really holds anymore today but if you had to think in those terms, I'd be on the Pharisee side. But like I said, those terms don't really hold any more. The Pharisee's were also a political movement, as well as religious movement. I think Jesus was a Pharisee, but you'd know better than me. They evolved into Rabbinc Judaism over time and this has become the modern Orthodox Judaism of today.
The basic groups today are Reform and Orthodox but as with everything in the World, there are many groups inside those two. My opinions are pretty standard, Orthodox Judaism. If reform jews disagree with me, I don't care.
So that's a little (fairly pointless) history lesson for us all.
Now I'll accept you didn't intend to imply Jews should be exterminated but chose your words with care. I'll try to do the same, in future.
The only thing I'll pull you up on is that Jews, by definition, don't follow Jesus. If they did, they'd be Chrisitans. Jews for Jesus (Messianic Jews) are simply not Jews.
So can you repeat the favour and give me a history lesson? If Christianity didn't stem from the Roman Empire / Catholic roots, where did it stem from? (And that's a genuine question, I am not having a go).
Gilly
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 06:28 PMThe teachings of Jesus are the foundation of Christianity.
He was a Jew "The Messiah" Yeah debatable to a Jew.
His Disciples wrote of his life and teachings.
There where many Churches of pure Christian faith that came directly from the middle east. Most have been destroyed by the The Roman Empire who used there own version of Christianity to control people. They introduced Saint/Mary/Angel - worship, confession of sins, purgatory, Christmas the list is nearly endless, none of which has any relevance to Christianity. Modern day Pharisees.
Christianity and its teachings stem directly from the New Testament of Jesus Christ, everything true Christians believe is in that book.
Protestant Christianity came out of Germany. Initially the Catholic inquisitions called Bible reading a heresy and imposed the death sentence on anybody caught reading a Bible. Some Catholic Priests who were allowed to read the Bible found the Bibles conflict with there Religion to much to accept and protested there issues with the Catholic church. The Catholic church struggling financially couldn't pay anybody to kill the protesters. This brought the Catholic stranglehold over Europe to an end. A new "true" Christian faith sprang up in Europe. Re Martin Luther
A friend of mine can trace there family to one of the 12 tribes of Israel, she considers herself a Jew, she also believes that Christ is the Messiah. This completes her Judaism.
Quote Rod------------
There's only a single life-force if you will, throughout the galaxy, we just refer to this as God. This is the mainstream, understood view, btw, not just my personal interpretation. Everything is part of the single life force that is the universe. All the planets, star, rocks, people, etc - all one thing. I am God. You are God. How could we not be, if God is One? ---------End quote
I can not understand how you as a Jew can arrive at this conclusion, unless you have seen Star Wars 1 time to many.
Gilly
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 06:32 PMRod, by the way. have you been Baptized a Jew yet-
not really a question.
Jake, do you have any idea what you are talking about?
Rodney
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 07:17 PMI would probably have seen Star Wars 50 too many times.
But anyway, no I haven't been baptised because that's not a Jewish concept. It is, of course, impossible to be baptised a Jew. One may undergo a process of tevilah but this has nothing to do with baptism.
As for the "life force" comments, I was trying to word an abstract concept into widely palatable and acceptable phrase, this being a general consumption site, not a religion site. This has obviously lead to some confusion, which I apologise for.
Judiasm believes in one God and that God is one. If you work from here, God is everything. God is not some man sitting in the clouds with a beard. God has no form, gender, etc. Now, God being "One", God being "complete", implies that God is everywhere and everything. All that exists is not only because of God, but actually of God. So I don't back away from saying that we are all part of the sum that is God. To say otherwise would be to say God is incomplete.
How I arrive at this conclusion is that I listen to and read the great Jewish philosophers and laws and, well, that's exactly what they say. You seem to believe this is some concept I made up by myself? I can only repeat again that this is mainstream, Orthodox Judaism. It is however a concept I agree with and find acceptable.
As for your friend, well she can consider herself a Jew all she likes. The unfortunate reality for her is, and I don't mean this to be harsh, Jewish law does not consider her a Jew.
Gilly
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 08:19 PMBut if we are all part of God, why do we have free will?
Didnt God walk in the garden of Eden.
Excuse my crude English translation
KJV Genesis-And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
---- End
Doesnt sound like what you said. In fact your philosophising aside. Gods walking in Adam and Eves garden to me.
You say-------Judiasm believes in one God and that God is one. ...end---------- Simple I agree its Biblical------------- You say------If you work from here, God is everything. God is not some man sitting in the clouds with a beard. God has no form, gender, etc. Now, God being "One", God being "complete", implies that God is everywhere and everything. All that exists is not only because of God, but actually of God. So I don't back away from saying that we are all part of the sum that is God. To say otherwise would be to say God is incomplete.....end-------
The rest of your comment is speculation?
The Mormons say they understand God, are the Jews that arrogant?
Jake
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 08:38 PMGilly, excelent content to back your argument, sorry to be patronising but it's good to get some substance.
There is one great flaw in the new testament; no one has any frickin idea who wrote it. The compilation of books from the many authors [most of whom were unknown] were decided upon in circa 200ad. This has been widely recoded. This was a roman catholic council of elders within the church. Rome was principally responsible for the actual christian movement after the first christian church was built in Rome (some speculate on the vatican grounds).
Such was the state in Rome at the time that the Pagan ruler (lost in my memory) invited religious tolerance throughout the empire. Before his death, he converted to christianity in a show of 'faith' towards the now popular religion.
Gilly, in response to your above comment about Jesus giving me free will, I was born with that, no dead guy was responsible. He died for his own sins, certainly not mine.
Rodney
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 08:50 PMI'm kind of having trouble following your question, I am afraid. All I can do is repeat what I have said - this isn't my theory. I did not make this up.
You can disagree with it, in fact, I would expect you to disagree with it because you follow a different intepretation but it's still the Jewish interpretation. You don't have to like it or agree but I'm not going to ring the Jew-Hotline and get things changed coz a guy on the internet doesn't agree.
One of the problems with a literal interpretation is you are assuming the translation you are reading is accurate. It's not. It's going to be biased towards what the person who translated it believes the words are trying to say. Individual sentences may be correct but whole tones and messages are lost. Many sentences are in fact not accurately translated at all.
That aside, I almost think you're saying above that you believe God is sort of walking around talking in Eden, like a person? You'll have to forgive me for my ignorance and I mean no offense, (it's a genuine question) is that what Christians believe? That God walks around talking to people? With a mouth and feet and stuff?
So you ask are we Jews so arrogant to believe that our understanding of our own Bible is correct. Well, we do believe we are correct, so if that makes us arrogant, then yes, sure. Of course we believe we are correct. Of course you believe you are correct. That's pretty much the textbook definition of having "different beliefs".
However you claim my understanding is wrong and you are correct, so by your own logic, you are arrogant.
Gilly
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 09:22 PMI am having trouble following you Rod.
Simple answer, I dont understand to much of who God is, I have said it before, I dont need to. The great mystery, thats fine by me. My simple; exceedingly simple question was------- You said....if you work from here, God is everything. God is not some man sitting in the clouds with a beard. God has no form, gender, etc. Now, God being "One", God being "complete", implies that God is everywhere and everything. All that exists is not only because of God, but actually of God. So I don't back away from saying that we are all part of the sum that is God. To say otherwise would be to say God is incomplete.....end-------
Is this part of your Jewish beliefs speculation. Dont miss understand me. I dont give a toss if its your speculation or some other Jewish sages speculation. IS IT SPECULATION? What is it based on?
or Who made it UP?
and NO! I didnt ask you weather you understood your Bible I asked weather you understood who/what God is.
Jake there is a hundred flaws in your argument. You are stupid. Its harsh but it fits.
Go study Christianity not vatican History.
You are a Catholic and you will die a Catholic no matter what you believe.
Jake
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 09:42 PMGilly, I'm no catholic, I was, but it's not a life long disease or race, its a belief system.
What makes me stupid?
What makes you smart?
What makes you exist?
Is it god? Are you god? What is gods name? Is god a male or a female, or androgynous, or asexual or a hermaphrodite? Why don't you need to know who got is? Are you a peasant in gods brown rice fields? Why worship something that is not tangible or active in your life?
Rodney
Thursday 2nd August 2007 | 09:48 PMOk, what's it based on? The Bible. The Talmud. The Kabbalah. All the same thing. The Talmud is part of the Bible. You can't understand the Bible without the Talmud. So no, to me, it's not speculation. If one accepts the Bible, then this is what it says. Do we like not using carriage returns?
But come on, Gil. Jake's not stupid. He has a different view to you and to me. He's allowed his view, you're allowed yours and me, mine. I thought your religion preached tolerance and understanding?
What Jake quotes above may not be fact to you but to a large % of the world, it's accepted as truth. Attack the evidence, not the person, k?
Gilly
Friday 3rd August 2007 | 02:34 PMSorry Jake. That was very rude of me. I would of taken it back straight away but I couldnt.
Frustration is the culprit, I will try to control it.
Whats a carriage return, Rod?
Jake the first Christian Churches based on the teachings of Christ probably started in Israel and headed across to North Africa, Egypt and across to Libya, and also down into central Africa. The church (not a building but a gathering of Christians) also headed up to Turkey and the Balkans and then on into Europe. This happened well before Constantine accepted Christianity as a state religion around 300 AD, and subverted it. Remember here, Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, not the teachings of a Religion. Thats 300 years of Christs teachings before Rome accepted it. 300 to 400 years of Christs teachings before it was scattered by her oppressors. Europe is not the center of the World, neither is New York. Most early Asians and Middle Eastern "scientists" knew the Earth was round and circled the Sun thousands of years before Europeans accepted it.
Constantine may well have been a Christian early on in his life but in his latter life his actions where not those of a Christian.
The Epistles or Letters of the New Testament where written to the early Christian Churches by Christs disciples or Converts like Paul to the respected churches in those city's. Hence " A letter to the Church in Ephesia."
City's where early Christian churches had grown. These letters where eventually to become the Epistles in the Bible as voted by the Nicaean council. The Nicaean council was not made up of only Catholics- Google or Wikepedia it. Bible canonization. Wiki that to.
You also say that nobody knows who wrote what in the Bible, with a little CSIing the authors of the respective Gospels become obvious as stories are cross referenced, education and spiritual beliefs are accounted for. For somebody who believes in evolution, understanding who wrote what Gospels 200 years ago should be mere childs play.
Eg- Luke was a highly educated man, Possibly a Lawyer or a Doctor (they think he was a Doctor because his writing was so bad (joke)) One Gospel was written by a formerly educated man, so we can assume comfortably it is Luke's gospel. That and when the original writings where passed on by the new church it was called the "Gospel of Luke"
Another gospel is steeped in Jewish Issues, Mathew was a Christian convert from Judaism. He spoke to the Jews.
Again all this is pissing in to the wind, if you have no faith in God.
So to me its a waste of time and effort.
If anything it should at the very least explain why the Catholic church was not the first Christian church.
It probably started off as a Christian church around 300 ad, but was hijacked by the state soon after.
Let me clarify one more thing again- By definition a Church is not a building- but a gathering of Christians.
Christ was not born on Christmas day either.
What is God? I will say it again-I dont know, I dont need to know. Only that he sent his son to Earth for us.
Sorry again for calling you stupid Jake, maybe brainwashing children re dinosaurs isnt the worst thing happening here.
Jake
Friday 3rd August 2007 | 02:47 PMGilly, incredible insight, I will look into it further. As for the comments, don't worry about it. You're as passionate about you're beleifs as I am about not having any!
In truth though, it is far more productive for any argument, as you know, to provide information over inflection.
Rodney
Friday 3rd August 2007 | 03:26 PMCarriage Return: it's return (the enter key).
Gilly
Friday 3rd August 2007 | 05:00 PMQuote Rod-----If one accepts the Bible, then this is what it says. God is everything. God is not some man sitting in the clouds with a beard. God has no form, gender, etc. Now, God being "One", God being "complete", implies that God is everywhere and everything. All that exists is not only because of God, but actually of God. So I don't back away from saying that we are all part of the sum that is God. To say otherwise would be to say God is incomplete. --------End Quote
You know Rod when I go to my Church, I carry a Bible and use that to reference everything that is said, mostly everything, mostly things that are new to me, well not much actually. After 20 odd years of Christianity I have a reasonable understanding of the truth.
So where in the Talmud, Torah whatever can I go to read that. Are you saying that God is both good and evil or evil does not exist?
I dont understand what you are saying, and that carriage bit, cant understand that either.
Jake
Friday 3rd August 2007 | 08:48 PMIt was great when we were discussing if god existed, but now that its come to what capacity it exists as, I withdraw... too much theology for me!
Sandeep Kurian
Sunday 12th August 2007 | 05:08 AMHi Jake .....
Keep scratching your head ;)
Regards,
Jake
Sunday 12th August 2007 | 05:04 PMScratching your head is much more productive than putting everything that you can't immediately explain down to 'god[s]' will. That is basically an ancient tradition mate, and it is one that was used to prevent people from seeking the truth and advancing themselves or evolving, if you will.
Aficionado
Sunday 12th August 2007 | 06:31 PMJake hit the nail on the head.
It's a pretty dated concept, to say God must be the reason simply because we can't explain it. Let's examine that laughable concept for a moment:
History has shown there were a lot of things in the past that couldn't be explained, and were therefore assumed to be the work of God. Take something as simple as the sunrise and sunset, which was once thought to be controlled by God.
The sunrise/sunset 'phenomena' has since been explained in great detail and I dare say there isn't a religious person on the planet today who still believes God makes the sun rise and set.
But during those times the people who thought God was responsible for this believed it with absolute certainty. They were of course, as we know now, completely and utterly wrong.
So my question is, with a wealth of questions still to be answered by science: What makes you think you are right about what God is responsible for today?
Jake
Sunday 12th August 2007 | 07:40 PMAfi, you're a quarter correct, a god was responsible for the example you gave, not the monotheistic god. Theists today still believe that god is responsible for all of those mundane things, though in a more structured way. The old testament of the bible explains the 6 day process in which this was designed and given autonomy.
I mean, in my opinion, nothing starts out complex, it always starts off simple and minute. This, for example, is why I find it so easy to accept (though still with a grain of salt) the big bang philosophy; that there were neutrons and electrons in existence that banded together by the force of gravity and in such close proximity, created friction. Without an outlet for the energy created, it tore a hole in the space crated by its own existence and exploded the universe into existence.
Sandeep Kurian
Tuesday 11th September 2007 | 06:57 PMHi Jake ,
Well .. you should atleast understand there is a definite difference between understanding things and explaining things.Well I am not in this discussion to persuade you to believe in God. I was a staunch non-believer myself ...
Perphaps more stauncher than what you believe that you are right now ... Experience has changed me and not speeches and literatures....Believe me or not ...one experience is all it takes ...hearing mine won't help you .....but experiencing yours will ....
As for Afi,
What makes you think that the property of mass (matter) ..ie ...phenomenon of gravity which is responsible for the rotation and revolution of the celestial bodies ... has been assigned to it by default?
Where did the residential energy needed for the big bang come from ....? My Question is "Where did the initial energy come from ?" .Of course an answer that it existed for time infinity ,would not suffice. There was a start...But how ? when? where ? .There lies the answers for the unified filed theory and your quest and mine ....
Regards,
Brennan
Tuesday 9th October 2007 | 03:03 PMThis is a debate that at this time will not have an ending because it is impossible to end, you will continuously go around in circles so i would like to concentrate on one concept, the idea of the video above being child abuse.
Personally I am undecided in religion, I am not sure what to believe and think about several key concepts that are irrelavent to our current discussion. But I do have one belief, and that is that EVERYONE should be allowed to believe what they want. Now Gilly I'm sure you won't have a problem with that statement but I ask you this, could teaching a child your belief from such a young age be a violation of their rights? Children will believe fully in what an adult tells them simply because they have been taught to listen to their parents and not to question them. Therefore they gain no ideas on religion just that this is the way it is, don't question it, don't think for yourself.
I believe that children should not be educated in any form of religion. I do believe that when they reach an age where they have the ability to make their own beliefs they should be educated on a variety of beliefs so that they may decide for themselves. Christianity is the predomanent religion in North America there is no threat posed to it today despite what certain propeganda may say, the only threat being posed is the threat of people making up their own minds
Jake
Tuesday 9th October 2007 | 03:24 PMPeople make the religion mate, not the other way around. The only threat, as you put it, to any religion is that the people stop beleiving. The various religions, as a consequence need to do one of two things in order to stop this from happening, brainwash people or evolve the religion.
Gilly
Tuesday 9th October 2007 | 04:32 PMBrennan, of course it is the childs choice. I wont have my children Baptised/christend because of that. That is there choice, not mine. Given time they may wish to be Baptised, I am hoping so, until they choose either way they will come to church and go to Sunday school with us as parents. I will teach them what I see as right from wrong, based on Christs teachings.
Christianity is not based on violence or selfishness. The principles of Christianity are based on serving each other and self control.
History has shown that some psuedo Christian organisations have manipulated a gullible poppulation into doing the organisations "works", not Christs teachings. This is based on peoples ignorance and stupidity, not Christs teachings.
Jake accuses Christians of stupid laws though he cant name them, simply because he is ignorant as to what he is talking about.
Soldiers went on Crusades in the name of God although it was really for the catholic church. Christs teachings do not endorse any violence.
Jake, religion has evolved, as many men and organisations have twisted it to suit themselves over the years to manipulate people- Just like you. What needs to happen is people need to re read and understand the Bible to find out exactly what it teaches, not what they think it does.
Fundamental Christianity is growing at a phenomenal rate world wide and while it doesnt suit you Jake it does appeal to many.
The Bible says Christ came to fullfill the law. It is finished.
Gina Squitieri
Sunday 24th February 2008 | 06:27 AMWow, check out this site. www.bible-truths.com It'll knock your socks off! (Or maybe it'll knock ya off ya high horse. Did me!)
Gina Squitieri
Sunday 24th February 2008 | 06:28 AMI'm sorry, Michael, that comment was not meant for you! You know I like ya.
Jim- Just a Guy
Sunday 24th February 2008 | 06:59 AMAs a parent I will expose my children to both as well as other beliefs from around the world and I will let them make up their own mind. To me it is more important to teach my kids how to think instead of what to think. I want them to know they have the ability to make up their own minds. No one should ever take anything at face value. Free will is the most valuable thing we have.
HaHa - thanks Gina! I will have a look at the site you mentioned.
Gina Squitieri
Sunday 24th February 2008 | 11:30 AMUmmm.... okay? ;)
Gina runs away .......................
Charles
Thursday 13th March 2008 | 10:11 PMReligion the perpetual mind rape of children, by those once children grown to adults.
John
Monday 7th April 2008 | 01:57 PM15 Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh
19 It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
How can a big dinosaur fit under a 6 foot plant?
Probably a hippo not a dinosaur which is being taught.
Gerald
Saturday 26th July 2008 | 02:00 PMWhat can you say to something so mind numbingly ignorant? Those poor kids don't stand a chance if thier parents expose them to that bull crap
Solomon
Tuesday 2nd June 2009 | 08:06 PM
Jesus
Monday 19th April 2010 | 11:51 AMI'm just... some dude. Religion is just a figment of the worlds imagination. FUCK YOU
Gilly
Tuesday 12th June 2007 | 01:32 PMas opposed to your evoloutionary fairytale. Taught at every school in Australia as the real theory.
So what, do these Christian educated kids who believe creation turn into, gun toting underage rebel soldiers bent on the governments destruction? Extremists who strap on a kilo of TNT and hop on a bus. What is your problem with what others believe. Get over it. All kids are taught your evoloution at school and we as Christians have a God given freedom of choice to make up OUR own minds.
or are you suggesting we are to stupid to do that ourselves?