Christian tropers, join together!

Re: joke: personally, as an atheist, I find Psalm 14 itself to be offensive. The joke, on the other hand, was thoroughly grounded in said scripture, and I have no special objection to it*

EDIT: Do you, then, oppose criminal justice on the grounds that mortals cannot judge sin?

edited 31st Aug '12 11:10:39 AM by Muramasan13

edited 31st Aug '12 11:22:42 AM by Carciofus

I think that's a ridiculous thing to say. your reject God, yet you find his word offensive?

Agreed. we're not supposed to judge others, thats not a thing to keep use from maintaining law and order.

edited 31st Aug '12 11:24:29 AM by Joesolo

Hmm. Interesting.

If I may ask another question, if mortals cannot judge sin, what did the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil gain us?

I don't believe the scriptures to be of divine origin; that doesn't mean I can't be offended by them, especially given the fact that they are still a cultural influence.

edited 31st Aug '12 11:26:24 AM by Muramasan13

but if you dont believe in the truth of it, how can you be offended by it?

Because people still base their worldviews and actions around it.

Besides, if I called you an idiot and morally deficient, even though it's not true, you'd be offended.

edited 31st Aug '12 11:32:24 AM by Muramasan13

I'd be more irritated than anything. I dont get offended by lies.

I could go further on this; but what I want to emphasize is that my opinion on this is perhaps somewhat different from the ones of others Christians in this thread, and that it is very important that it is clear that here I am talking about what I think (without much confidence, to be honest) is the case, and not about what Christianity as a whole states.

This said, I think that ultimately, the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil gained us nothing. In the way I understand it (and again, that's little more than random speculation), "knowledge" is to be understood a bit in the sense of "possession", "ownership" and so on. The idea is that by eating of the fruit, we attempted to become the arbiters of what is good and what is evil, and, in doing so, we broke off our original connection to the one Source of everything that is good.

As I said, this is random speculation. But insofar as humans not being able to judge sin, I am quite certain. I am barely able to guess, with a ludicrous degree of imprecision, some aspects of what's going on in my own soul: how am I even supposed to be able to hazard any guess about what's going on on other people's souls?

I'm aware that your interpretation is rather heterodox, Carc. Sorry that I was unclear, but that question was directed at dRoy.

My view of moral matters is that there be dragons, but nobody's going to make the tough choices for us.

As far as I know, my interpretation is not "heterodox", strictly speaking — it is quite acceptable with respect to the standards of my denomination, I think. But it is not literalist, if that's what you mean.

edited 31st Aug '12 11:58:57 AM by Carciofus

@Mura - You have not read that post in context of the discussion; that was an extension of the topic that people should not go around exacting vengeance on their own. Because there is no standard on measuring "sin" and it would eventually lead to emotions, personal vengeance will only result in bloodshed.

That is why criminal judgement system is necessary; it gives out law and there is something consistent about it. Even if the law cannot be perfect (after all, it is written by flawed man), it would at least maintain the order, which can provide some room for negotiation and peaceful resolution.

Ultimately, it is only the Lord who can really hand out the accurate judgement. Even then, the mortal law serves its purpose well enough, as flawed as it may be.

edited 31st Aug '12 12:01:01 PM by dRoy

I see. Thank you.

I would inquire further, but this is your thread, not mine. Good day.

I think the government does have a role in avenging wrongdoing and punishing those responsible, and not just "rehabilitation". See for example Romans 13:4

Or 1 Peter 2:13-14

The context of these passages is that Christians should be law-abiding, but embedded in them is the statement that earthly authorities are the tools of God's punishment on wrongdoers.

Now the tricky part is that in western democratic society, we as individuals are part of the government. So it becomes difficult to determine what are our obligations as individuals and what are our obligations as part of the government, and which take precedence in a given situation.

edited 31st Aug '12 12:44:43 PM by EdwardsGrizzly

I will be honest, the notion of "Divine punishment" is one I have some serious trouble wrapping my head around.

I understand the concept of consequences: if I decide, out of my own free will, to do something that is actually a horrible idea, God will still respect my agency and not override my own decisions (even though these decisions are not in my best interests.)

In a way, it seems to me that wrongdoing is its own punishment, as it brings a person further away from the source of all that is good; but what's the point of wanting wrongdoers to suffer?

Mostly out of spite, I suppose.

Oh wow.

If this info is correct, a little less than one out of every three people in the world is a Christian. Do note that this is seven years old, but still...

Oh yeah.

edited 1st Sep '12 10:42:10 AM by dRoy

That's roughly accurate, but it's actually depressing to me, because it's stayed the same for quite a long time now. We're still massively out-evangelizing the other religions, but the other religions are having kids faster than we can convert them, and our own base is slipping away.

And, according to a literalist reading, it means that roughly two out of every three contemporary people are gonna have a bad time.

I wouldn't don sunglasses; prospects were probably better in the Middle Ages.

That's oen thing that's always disturbed me. groups that just(Im sorry for saying) pop out kids like crazy are really not doing the right thing. birthrates SHOULD be lower now, what with reaching the edges of what the earth can sustain. but nope, they keep having lots. actually LEGALLY limiting it would be wrong, but too few do it of their own accord.

I kinda doubt it. Back then Christianity was pretty much limited to Europe and a handful of pocket groups in Africa and Asia. Now Europe is going down the tubes but we've made massive advances in the rest of the world.

It's largely an economic issue. In areas that don't have the social safety net we have in the West, the "shotgun approach" is often the best way to maximize the chances of at least one of your children being successful enough to support you in your old age.

edited 1st Sep '12 9:41:29 PM by EdwardsGrizzly

Just read a very cool essay by Lewis I had not noticed yet. I particularly liked the following passage:

edited 2nd Sep '12 12:11:19 AM by Carciofus

Huh. That's very nice. I like that.

Good afternoon, brothers and sisters. Yes, I just wanted to say that, don't judge me.

Today I went to a church, the first time since my college started. It is a small Baptist church and by small, I mean small, as in less than 15 people, including the staff. Also, the pastor is a very old gentleman and his sermon lacks energy in my opinion. This is not really the type of church I like.

However, the people are nice. After the sermon, we gathered around and had a lunch, talking about little things, like where we are from, what we are majoring in, and such. I also got five books from the church's (small) library, because the staff decided to give them away.

I would like to look around for other churches but I feel really squirmish. :/

Could Satan create a whole sapient species like God?

In Christian theology, Satan can't create anything. He can only corrupt what already exists.