Null's grudge with scientists. Take 5.

[Avatar]

Some great posts. So great in fact, that I don't think I have anything more to say right now.

I was going to list a few names, but I think that all the recent ones have been great.

Good reading.

--A

[Cail]

Lord Mhoram, that passage you quoted, for lack of a better way of explaining it, is a historical story, not something that God demanded. The animal and human sacrifices were done away with in the New Testament.

Abraham's sacrifice (you got me Wayfriend) is subject to interpretation, I suppose. I see clearly that he did it out of love of God, you may see it otherwise. Christ is God, so John 3:16 covers his saccrifice quite nicely.

[variol son]

Hmmm. I was going to reply that the people that don't believe it's about love aren't Christians, but then I remembered being a Baptist......OK, I concede the point, I suppose.

Hehe. Cail, you rock!

And your memory of being a Baptist sounds very much like my memory of being a Pentecostal.

[Zarathustra]

That's retarded logic, Null. Seems you need some reasoning skills.

It warms my heart to hear others being just as rude as I am. I don't feel so lonely in my arrogance after reading this thread.

Null is probably right: science has probably been used by humans to kill more people than religion has. But so what? Isn't God the one who decided to make us all mortal in the first place? As punishment for sin? If you ask me, God sending billions of humans to eternal torment in a lake of fire is worse than Hitler gassing the Jews. After all, none of us asked to be here, none of us asked to part of God's little morality experiment. Yet, if I fail to please him, it's eternal torment for me. Yeah!

On the other hand, science is responsible for saving millions of lives each year and increasing our lifespan threefold last century. How many lives (not souls) has religion saved? How has it increased our lifespan? How has it been used to develop life-saving medicine?

[Loredoctor]

Null is probably right: science has probably been used by humans to kill more people than religion has. But so what? Isn't God the one who decided to make us all mortal in the first place? As punishment for sin? If you ask me, God sending billions of humans to eternal torment in a lake of fire is worse than Hitler gassing the Jews. After all, none of us asked to be here, none of us asked to part of God's little morality experiment. Yet, if I fail to please him, it's eternal torment for me. Yeah!

On the other hand, science is responsible for saving millions of lives each year and increasing our lifespan threefold last century. How many lives (not souls) has religion saved? How has it increased our lifespan? How has it been used to develop life-saving medicine?

Good post, sir.

[wayfriend]

Do you really think so? Do you think the Bible is about polygamy, murder, and war?

I dunno man, I think that's a stretch. Mind you, I'm not denying that those things (and more) are in there, but you think they're given the same importance as loving your neighbor and God?

(Sorry to take this back, but some of us don't live here, we just visit once in a while.)

This is a fair time to point out that most of Christian Doctrine (and I may need to exclude Greek Orthodox here) was not derived from the Bible. It was derived in the next two to eight centuries by a bunch of guys who were trying to figure out what "Christianity" was, and whom have since been sainted in order to bolster their integrety in the matter. (This includes the major revisions to the Bible that we've discussed in another thread.) The concept of Holy Trinity stems from these actions (so when you say "Christ is God", these words may have roots in scripture, but the philosophy behind exactly what those words meant does not), as do the seven sacrements, the sanctity of the apostles, the virginity of Mary, the office of priesthood, confession and communion, and the interpretation of Christs actions as 'miracles' rather than allegories. Which, AFAIK, is 99% of what most Christians on the street know about their religion. Then throw in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny for good measure.

(One of the interesting things that these Fathers worked out was whether or not anyone could be Christian, or if you needed to be born into it, like the (then) Jews. Imagine if they had ruled that the other way!)

So, yes, I do say that anyone claiming that Christianity is really about peace and love does so on the basis of interpretation. It's institutionalized interpretation, but interpretation nonetheless.

It's too easy to point out that a thousand years ago -- half way between us and Christ, mind you - you would have got a completely different answer to what it's really all about. Then your answer would have been something like, it's really all about God claiming the Earth as his dominion, that we are all worthless worms before God, and that all earthly passions are inspired by Satan.

Peace and Love are pretty recent additions to Christianity's marketing campaign. It's been redesigned to fit the times.

[Cail]

All perfectly valid points, which is why I conceded mine.

[Lorelei]

Just was doing some research for a project at work and discovered that polycarbonate plastic is made from a salt of bisphenol A and phosgene (the nerve gas used in WWI). One of the uses of polycarbonate plastic is for bullet resistant "glass". Just thought I'd share........

[Lord Mhoram]

null,

Mhoram: and what did Luther give us, protestantism has fractured Christianity, given a weakened religion, where if anyone disagrees with something they form a new church. martin Luther formed his own church, at what cost? not following God's will, God's timeline. maybe Vatican II would have happened quicker if he had stayed with the Church? and editing the bible, what purpose did that serve? and you seem to forget there was another factor in the crusades, Islam.

Seriously, what century do you live in? What Luther did didn't follow "God's will"? The Church was extraordinarily corrupt and as a result of his teachings, and the Reformation that followed it, the Church cleaned up its act - to a degree.

What Luther gave us was a way for people to interpret their own relationship with God, instead of it being dictated to us by some self-righteous, worthless priest. Editing the Bible, as you call it, put the Bible into the vernacular, allowing people to read the Bible without having it read to them in Latin by their priest (if their priest even read Latin, which not all of them did).

And yeah, I know Islam was part of the Crusades. What about it?

Cail,

The animal and human sacrifices were done away with in the New Testament.

Well yeah, human sacrifices were, but animal sacrifices were very much alive at the time of Christ (not to say I don't approve of that or whatever, I have no problem with it.) One thing I don't understand about the difference between OT and NT (and this isn't directed at you at all, Cail) but I hear a lot about Christ you know, doing away with Old Testament laws. But it's those same people who quote Leviticus when telling me homosexuality is wrong. *shrug* Anyways...

I suppose. I see clearly that he did it out of love of God, you may see it otherwise.

Is there a particular reason why you think so?

Christ is God, so John 3:16 covers his saccrifice quite nicely.

Well alright. But he was human too, wasn't he? And it's not like he sacrificed himself; he was captured, put on trial, legally executed.

People always say you need to take these things on faith, but that faith is based on religious interpretation of these quasi-historical events, and I'm truly trying to understand them.

[duchess of malfi]

Cail: I accept what my Church has done. i admit what my Church has done. and not all science is amoral. explain poison gas. what good was there for that?

would you consider cancer treatments to be a good?

www.lymphomainfo.net/therapy/drugs/mustargen.html

[Cail]

LM.

Christ is God. God is omniscient. Christ knew what was going to happen. It's sacrifice. For us.

And you have never, ever heard me quote Leviticus.

[Lord Mhoram]

Cail,

Where does Christ say "I am God"?

And you have never, ever heard me quote Leviticus.

Yeah, I was careful to note that in my post.

[Sunbaneglasses]

Null,what about the scientific advancements that are allowing very premature infants to survive,ones who in the past would have died?Its nice to have scientists around to work on such things is it not?And does it matter to you who the credit is given to?Whether the scientific community credits God or themselves the bottom line is you still have a whole bunch of live babies,where once not long ago many of them who make it
would have died.I do not want to hear about abortion,apparently you can do your own at home with herbs or a coat hanger.It takes science to save babies.

[Cail]

LM, that's the whole concept of the Trinity. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. One God. Christ was the Son of God, and God.

[Lord Mhoram]

Yes, I know that, Cail. But that was determined at a Church Council centuries after Christ. (And has been a hotly debated issue in Christianity ever since.) But when and where did Christ declare that he was God?

[sgt.null]

many need to get this message. no problem with science. problem with the blind followers of science.
i love meds, refrigerators, cd players.

LM: Luther deciding to excise parts of the bible he didn't like is not a question of venacular. please explain what part of James is problematic. as Luther had problems with it. and you seem to blame the CHurch for the crusades, failing to see the other player. and could you tone down the rhetoric that you accuse me of? continuing insults help no one. (worthless priests?) and as to God being the Son and reverse...
www.godonthe.net/evidence/said_god.htm

Jesus and God are one.

also...
I and my Father are one. John 10:30

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...All things were made by him...He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us John 1:1, 3, 10, 14

Jesus saith...he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? John 14:9

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 1 John 5:7

[Avatar]

I thought Jesus didn't come to change the law?

Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18 )

Not sure if Christ actually said he was god, but he sure said we were.

I tell you, and it is written in your own law, that you are gods. (John 10:34)

--A

[Loredoctor]

many need to get this message. no problem with science. problem with the blind followers of science.

Ahhh, a truism there - there is always a problem with blind followers of anything.

[sgt.null]

thanks. never said i was a flat-earther. just disliked folks criticizing religion and then replacing it with blind devotion to science. each is a tool.

[Xar]

Christ is God, so John 3:16 covers his saccrifice quite nicely.

Well alright. But he was human too, wasn't he? And it's not like he sacrificed himself; he was captured, put on trial, legally executed.

People always say you need to take these things on faith, but that faith is based on religious interpretation of these quasi-historical events, and I'm truly trying to understand them.

To clarify your doubt, LM, I feel the need to mention that even the question whether Jesus was God or not is beside the point in this case. The Gospels clearly mention that he knew what was going to happen - during the Last Supper he mentioned that one would betray him, for instance, and during the night in the garden of Getsemani he knew that his doom was approaching him, to the point that he asked that this "cup of poison" be taken from him (this is generally considered the point in which it is most clear that he is human, as well as divine). So, even if you don't accept that Christ was God, there is evidence in the Gospels that he knew of the betrayal in advance, in any case, and could have likely chosen to avoid capture if he had wanted to. The fact that he did not, and that he did not resist when the guards came, makes it a willing sacrifice rather than a kidnapping.