|
scuclimber
May 3, 2004, 12:17 AM
Post #51 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 1007
|
In reply to: In reply to: Not all Christians live by the "be fruitful and multiply" ethic. Please don't generalize. :wink: I'm sorry- didn't mean to generalize. I know there are many Christians that believe in parts of the Bible and not others, and I think that's a good thing. (also- I hope I'm not mis-remembering.. that is from Genesis, isn't it?)
Yeah, it's from Genesis. If I took the Bible literally I'd say we'd have to stone women to death for adultery. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
calcaneus
May 3, 2004, 12:32 AM
Post #52 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 7
|
In reply to: Yeah, it's from Genesis. If I took the Bible literally I'd say we'd have to stone women to death for adultery. :wink:
It's encouraging to hear a Christian admit that there are a few mistakes in the Bible. It's also nice to enjoy civil discourse regarding a sesitive topic. You make an excellent ambassador for your faith. Cheers, and happy climbing! :D
|
|
|
|
|
rescueman
May 3, 2004, 12:33 AM
Post #53 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Posts: 439
|
In reply to: don't focus on the "Religious" aspect of it all. There is none.
How sad! And how fundamentalist to assert that, because it is not a religious expreience for you it can't be for anyone else.
Climbing, first and foremost, is about ascension - about rising up through our mortal limitations and our personal fears to reach the heights of bliss. If we can truly transform fear and not just push beyond it, then it is a redemptive experience.
What is won from completing the journey is a new and broader, almost heavenly, perspective that no way of travel other than our own steadfast effort, complete trust, and a good dose of grace and can offer.
- Robert
|
|
|
|
|
jpearl
May 3, 2004, 1:48 AM
Post #54 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2003
Posts: 517
|
No, Rescueman, my "religiousless" climbing is not a sad experience. My climbing is an awesome experience. Go back to page one of this thread and read my initial post to see where I'm coming from. Whether it's 50 feet, twenty moves, and three minutes on a toprope, or 10 feet, six moves, and one minute on a boulder, my climbing is a pure, intense, and powerfull experience.
Climbing is just a part of life, it fits into a bigger picture. It jostels for position with work, friends, family, society, and future. And personally, just like on Shabbat when I don't work and thus take the ability to sit back and appreciate the work that for 24 hours I can't do, so to do I sit back and appreciate the climbing that I do all week that I don't get to do for that one particular day.
In the role of climber, I am nothing more than an athlete. And if it means that I have to reduce my climbing to a sad, empty experience to do it as good as I possiblly can, then so be it. I don't care about deeper meaning, I don't care about philosophies, I don't care about metaphores. I just care about sending climbs. Period.
That is, of course, my take on it and I'll respect whatever yours is as well. But at the end of the day, a climb is either on my Tic List or it is not. That is all that counts to me.
|
|
|
|
|
cgailey
May 3, 2004, 3:05 AM
Post #55 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 585
|
In reply to: Not all Christians live by the "be fruitful and multiply" ethic. Please don't generalize. :wink:
I second that. I do agree with the user's post that many Christians do live by this principle, but there are also many who believe that "having dominion" over the beasts of the earth means being a good steward. Just as in any aspect of the Christian life, we are called to be good stewards of what we have. :D
|
|
|
|
|
scuclimber
May 3, 2004, 3:07 AM
Post #56 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 1007
|
In reply to: In reply to: Yeah, it's from Genesis. If I took the Bible literally I'd say we'd have to stone women to death for adultery. :wink: It's encouraging to hear a Christian admit that there are a few mistakes in the Bible. It's also nice to enjoy civil discourse regarding a sesitive topic. You make an excellent ambassador for your faith. Cheers, and happy climbing! :D
Thanks man. I was raised Episcopalian and now attend a Jesuit university, so I've had a pretty liberal and accepting upbringing. My personal faith that I've developed is kind of all-inclusive too.
"Next to the light of the dawn on high mountain tops, the alpenglow is the most impressive of all the terrestrial manifestations of God."
"Everybody needs beauty as well as bread, places to play and pray in, where Nature may heal and cheer and give strength to body and soul alike."
"These temple destroyers, devotees of ravaging commercialism, seem to have a perfect contempt for Nature, and, instead of lifting their eyes to the God of the mountains, lift them to the Almighty Dollar.
"Dam Hetch Hetchy! As well dam for water-tanks the people's cathedrals and churches, for no holier temple has ever been consecrated by the heart of man."
"Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you and the storms their energy, while care will drop off like autumn leaves."
"There are no harsh, hard dividing lines in Nature. Glaciers blend with the snow and snow blends with the thin invisible breath of the sky. So there are no stiff, frigid, stony partition walls betwixt us and heaven. There are blendings as immeasurable and as artraccable as the edges of melting clouds."
"I must return to the mountains, to Yosemite. I am told that the winter storms there will not be easily borne, but I am bewitched, enchanted, and tomorrow I must start for the great temple tolisten to the winter songs and sermons preached and sung only there."
-John Muir
I would venture that non-Christians, atheists, whomever, can appreciate Muir's poetry about our world, no matter how you think it was created.
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
godskid5
May 3, 2004, 3:08 AM
Post #57 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2004
Posts: 197
|
:D I don't get what all the fuss is about? If you don't like the thread, you don't have to read it. Find one that does relate to you and visit it. This guy had a serious question and was hoping someone could answer it. I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to start any sort of argument. Why not post a religious question on a rock climbing site? Who is it hurting?
God Bless
|
|
|
|
|
cgailey
May 3, 2004, 3:12 AM
Post #58 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 585
|
In reply to: In reply to: Yeah, it's from Genesis. If I took the Bible literally I'd say we'd have to stone women to death for adultery. :wink: It's encouraging to hear a Christian admit that there are a few mistakes in the Bible. It's also nice to enjoy civil discourse regarding a sesitive topic. You make an excellent ambassador for your faith. Cheers, and happy climbing! :D
I wouldn't say that there are mistakes in the bible, but rather that there are many stories of people who made mistakes in the Bible. If there are mistakes in the Bible, then how do you know what to trust? I'm not saying that EVERYTHING in the Bible must be taken literally, because it shouldn't be. There is a lot of symbolism and there are a lot of cultural issues discussed in the Bible that have no bearing on our current lives as Christians; however, to pick and choose what to believe in and what not to is a dangerous path. If we don't believe that the Bible is the word of God, then we need to seriously rethink our reasons for being Christians.
I also second the post above...I enjoy the "civil discourse" between people of differing opinions. Mud slinging gets us nowhere. :D
|
|
|
|
|
scracus
May 3, 2004, 6:34 AM
Post #59 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2004
Posts: 71
|
If I were going to relate to a church group how climbing could be relavent to their faith/religion I would tell them that God wants them to be strong and healthy and climbing is one way to accomplish that. Really though, climbing is a very "worldly" affair and the stone/rock can easily become a "idol" to many. And a group would need to know this.
Reading through this thread I see that it hasn't become a flame war and that is good. Tolerance seems to be a one way street oftentimes. There are some things that I could point out: church is mentioned in the Bible; the letters of Paul were written to churches in the early stages of Christianity and God does want people to go to church. The Bible is the infallible word of God from beginning to end. The "Law" as part of the old testament is referred to does call for stoning for a number or offenses, but it is plain that Jesus capped the law when he said,"let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
May 3, 2004, 7:10 AM
Post #60 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
One word:
Anchor
|
|
|
|
|
rescueman
May 3, 2004, 12:36 PM
Post #61 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Posts: 439
|
In reply to: I wouldn't say that there are mistakes in the bible...If there are mistakes in the Bible, then how do you know what to trust? I'm not saying that EVERYTHING in the Bible must be taken literally, because it shouldn't be... however, to pick and choose what to believe in and what not to is a dangerous path. If we don't believe that the Bible is the word of God, then we need to seriously rethink our reasons for being Christians.
I hope you realize that you're saying two conflicting things here, and that probably mirrors your own internal conflict about Christian belief.
You're saying that we must discern what is to be taken literally and what is not, what is applicable to the modern world and what is not - but if we do that we must not be "good" Christians.
May I remind you that the "best" Christians, the 12 aposltes, had no text to live by and that text was accumulated over many centuries after Jesus walked the Earth and shared his (largely metaphorical) teachings?
We can "believe" only what we do not know, by accepting some kind of external authority, whether that be scripture or hierarchy or tradition. But for millions of years of human evolution, people have had a direct personal experience of the Divine without any intervening authority. Every aboriginal person "knows" the Creator and the Creation, and elaborates that knowing by the particular culture and traditions, the "mythology", of their people and their time.
It is only very recently in human history that, by separating ourselves from the Source, we have had need for some kind of external authority to give us something to "believe" in. And this has necessarily led to widespread distortion, abuse, and self-righteous assertion of being in the sole possession of the "truth".
I am a follower of no institutional religion, for they are all compromised by our human limitations and egos. But I am deeply religious in that I am open to the voice of god (good old divinity) which is available to all who let go of preconception and quietly listen as Job finally did to the "voice of the whirlwind" (which is the correct translation of the Hebrew, not the commonly mistaken "voice from within the whirlwind").
John Muir was a truly religious man, for he saw god wherever he went. Most of us settle for a second-hand god, handed down to us from someone else.
Distancing ourselves from god allows us to be like "adrenaline junky" - simply an addict who cares for nothing beyond the immediate experience:
QUOTE: "In the role of climber, I am nothing more than an athlete. And if it means that I have to reduce my climbing to a sad, empty experience to do it as good as I possiblly can, then so be it. I don't care about deeper meaning"
This separation from the source of our being similarly allows us to be "good soldiers" who can focus simply on completing the mission - ends justifying the means - and then go to church/synagoge/mosque thinking ourselves "good" Christians/Jews/Islamics.
The US and British soldiers who were involved in torure, intimidation, and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners (most of whom, by the Army's own estimate, are innocent civilians) were probably "good" Christians/Jews/Islamics who were focusing, at the time, on the mission and on doing what they were told rather than on the larger context and meaning of their actions.
It's not possible to separate ourselves from the larger meaning of life and act responsibly, as climbers or as global citizens. Prayer, properly understood, is a way of life not a moment taken out of life. And climbing can be that kind of prayer - an act of devotion to the sacred trust that has been given to us and a recognition of our relationship to the Rock upon which we've been placed.
- Robert
|
|
|
|
|
corey
May 3, 2004, 1:14 PM
Post #62 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 10, 2003
Posts: 29
|
In reply to: :D I don't get what all the fuss is about? If you don't like the thread, you don't have to read it. Find one that does relate to you and visit it. This guy had a serious question and was hoping someone could answer it.
BINGO!!! We have a winner.
Agree or disagree with the nature of the post, but at least READ what the post asks. If you can provide what the poster is asking for, give it to him. If you cannot, move on. I am atheist and, therefore, could not provide insight RELATIVE to the original question, so I did not. Who is forcing who's belief system on whom when a question is asked relating climbing to religion and posts are made indicating there is no relation, or there shouldn't be one. The original post didn't ask if people think there IS a link to organized religion, it asked how one would best MAKE a link. So, if you make any posts indicating there is no link, or the link has no relation to any type of mainstream religious belief system, then you're NOT answering what was asked.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 3, 2004, 2:32 PM
Post #63 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: :D I don't get what all the fuss is about? If you don't like the thread, you don't have to read it. Find one that does relate to you and visit it. This guy had a serious question and was hoping someone could answer it. BINGO!!! We have a winner. Agree or disagree with the nature of the post, but at least READ what the post asks. If you can provide what the poster is asking for, give it to him. If you cannot, move on. I am atheist and, therefore, could not provide insight RELATIVE to the original question, so I did not.
Hehe. That's pretty funny if you think about it.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 3, 2004, 2:54 PM
Post #64 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: It is only very recently in human history that, by separating ourselves from the Source, we have had need for some kind of external authority to give us something to "believe" in.
The purity of the Aboriginal Mind, eh? I'm skeptical.
How is this assertion based upon anything other than opinion? How recently in human history? 100 years? 2000? 5000? 10,000? 50,000 years? Half a million? How far back do we go before we are no longer looking at humans? What god did Lucy pray to? Who told her the god existed? Does the idea of god spring into the Aboriginal Mind whole, like a preformed picture? Or did the Aborginal Mother and the Aboriginal Father teach their Aboriginal Son about god? In terms of external religious authority and all. Who was the first Medicine Man? And really, how would you know?
Is a spider closer to the Source, because it does not accept external input with regard to religious authority?
I suspect you don't "know" any of these things either, just like the Christian doesn't "know" that Jesus is the Son of God. It is a matter of faith for Christians. You too accept, on some basis of faith, that these ideas you hold are true. That makes you a True Believer?
I totally admire Christians who accept science and scientists who accept Christianity (or what have you), in that they have chosen, along with their other firmly held beliefs, to trust their fellow man and woman, to trust the faith of others. That's a bold leap... to place you faith in others! The same sort of leap required to have faith in a omnipotent deity?
Humans congregate. We've been congregating since the Dawn (opinion of course!). Congregating is part of what it is to be human (more opinion). Congregating humans ARE the Source (2nd to last opinion).
Cheers!
DMT (final opinion)
|
|
|
|
|
petro
May 3, 2004, 3:14 PM
Post #65 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 176
|
Alright, here's the history quiz...
Who said???
"I'd rather be thinking of God when I'm outside climbing, than thinking about rocks at church"
O.K. I might be paraphrasing...
|
|
|
|
|
rescueman
May 3, 2004, 3:43 PM
Post #66 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Posts: 439
|
In reply to: The purity of the Aboriginal Mind, eh? I'm skeptical. How recently in human history? Does the idea of god spring into the Aboriginal Mind whole, like a preformed picture? Is a spider closer to the Source, because it does not accept external input with regard to religious authority? I suspect you don't "know" You too accept, on some basis of faith, that these ideas you hold are true. That makes you a True Believer?
Skeptism is good. But that implies an openness as well as a questioning attitude.
When did we begin to distance ourselves from the Source. Approximately 5000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent when the self-limiting monotheisms took root (creating God in our image) as we made a dramatic shift from being nomadic hunter-gatherers to domesticated cultivators and fenced ourselves off from the natural world. Read the book Ishmael if you really want to understand.
No, the knowledge of a creator/sustainer, a power larger than ourselves which governs the universe is "known" like a newborn infant knows the presence of its mother and knows when there is distance between them. It continues to feel the connection it knew before birth, only forgetting it (in our "civilized" world) as it grows up and becomes socialized.
Now you're getting it! Of course a spider (and all non-human creatures) are closer to the Source. And aboriginal people learned about the Source and about how to live in harmony with the world by observing other creatures and applying the universal laws of nature to their own behavior.
If you want to know about "True Believers", then read the seminal book, written in 1951 by the uneducated longshoreman philospher Eric Hoffer by that very name. A True Believer is a highly insecure soul desperate for certainty and afraid of existential freedom.
"The proselytizing fanatic strengthens his own faith by converting others. The creed whose legitimacy is most easily challenged is likely to develop the strongest proselytizing impulse."
"It is the true believer's ability to shut his eyes and stop his ears to facts which in his own mind deserve never to be seen nor heard which is the source of his unequalled fortitude and consistency."
The best examples of true believers today are Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush. They are both equally certain that they are good and the other evil, and each is willing to destroy anyone in their way and everything they claim to hold dear in order to achieve their goals.
The Crusaders were true believers. The Christian right is the modern equivalent. Rush Limbaugh is one if its prophets.
- Robert
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 3, 2004, 4:31 PM
Post #67 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: No, the knowledge of a creator/sustainer, a power larger than ourselves which governs the universe is "known" like a newborn infant knows the presence of its mother and knows when there is distance between them.
You say the above like its a well documented fact, instead of yet another religious opinion born out of our society.
In reply to: It continues to feel the connection it knew before birth, only forgetting it (in our "civilized" world) as it grows up and becomes socialized.
That sounds interesting. So you're saying that the very thing that makes us human, our abilities to socialize and communicate, seperate us from god? No offense, but I find it difficult to accept that notion. That's like saying a fish can't know god because it is underwater. A spider, with presumably no reasoning power at all, is by definition closer to the source BECAUSE of that lack of reason, means that sentient humans can never be as close to the Source as a spider.
I can't accept the idea that ideas themselves move us away from the Source. I mean, entire galaxies, the very fabric of the universe, is derived from the source. 15 billion years and counting and then we come along and start thinking and congregating, and we began to drift from the source? That makes no sense to me!
Maybe I am applying too much reason to that which, by definition, we cannot know.
I believe we know nothing of this higher power at or before birth. But I can't prove it either.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
ironhawk
May 3, 2004, 4:42 PM
Post #68 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2004
Posts: 98
|
I wouldn’t relate a god to climbing because I’ve never met a god i trust. I sure hope you trust your god because your giving him your soul. I personally wont give up my soul that easy.
Good luck in your quest to combine your god and climbing! Also please refer to your god as my god or our christian god. Not everyone will relate to your god and this is a public forum.
|
|
|
|
|
nealric
May 3, 2004, 4:48 PM
Post #69 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 21, 2004
Posts: 147
|
I would advise against trying to use rockclimbing as a religeous metaphor. At the very least be careful.
About 10 years ago, I was at a christian summer camp that had a ropes course- this was before I started rock climbing. The course involved climbing up a telaphone pole and then jumping off- basically a trust exercise. I got to the top of the pole and froze (hey, I was 10 and didnt understand belaying or the like). The councillor, who was intructed to relate the course to christanity aksed me if I believed in God, to which I relied yes. He then asked me: would a loving god let you fall? This was very bad.
Rather than inspiring faith, it inspired doubt. I knew that accidents happened. Why would God protect me over them? I was lowered from the pole angered, shaking, and doubting my faith.
I dont think that a gym experience would be like that- but there are other pitfalls. You risk it becoming a corporate motivation team building thing. Those things have already become so cliche that eye rolling is inevitable.
My advice? Drop the metahphor- use it to build community, do a bible study beforehand- for the love of god, no trite metaphor! God knows the christian community today drowns in them.
|
|
|
|
|
rescueman
May 3, 2004, 4:58 PM
Post #70 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Posts: 439
|
In reply to: You say the above like its a well documented fact, instead of yet another religious opinion born out of our society. So you're saying that the very thing that makes us human, our abilities to socialize and communicate, seperate us from god? I can't accept the idea that ideas themselves move us away from the Source. Maybe I am applying too much reason to that which, by definition, we cannot know. I believe we know nothing of this higher power at or before birth. But I can't prove it either.
You're missing my point entirely, and it's no wonder since we moderns are so thoroughly immersed in our own narrow and self-destructive mythology that it requires going outside that myth in order to understand.
There are no "well documented facts" about god or the nature of reality or about how to live in harmony with creation. "Facts" are merely social consensus based on accepted paradigms. Scientific "facts" are nothing more than the result of a method presumed to be objective and infallible (sound familiar?)
No, I never said that it was either socializing or communicating that either make us human or separate us from the Source. Most animals socialize and communicate and some (bonobos, e.g.) do so with about the same level of sophistication as do humans. And homo erectus, homo sapiens, et al have been communicating and socializing for tens of millions of years. Let's not forget that what we call human history began very, very recently in the Fertile Crescent (the area we've now decimated through sanctions and warfare)
I said it was civilization or domestication which separated us from the Source, when we ceased relying on the Universe to feed and sustain us and began hoarding food and other resources, creating wealth and disparity and mercantilism and the structures required (governmental and military) to protect it all.
So, of course you can neither "know" the Source using merely the power of reason, nor "prove" it's existence in any way. But it is available to all to know that Source directly and intimately through (this is the best language we have for this) the heart. If you understand that, you can reach beyond the limitations of the intellect. If you don't, then you're stuck in the box.
- Robert
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 3, 2004, 5:08 PM
Post #71 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: So, of course you can neither "know" the Source using merely the power of reason, nor "prove" it's existence in any way.
But of course! We can't know it or prove it. It just is. Um hmmm.
In reply to: But it is available to all to know that Source directly and intimately through (this is the best language we have for this) the heart. If you understand that, you can reach beyond the limitations of the intellect. If you don't, then you're stuck in the box. - Robert
Sounds very mystical. How is it you know all this that has eluded BILLIONS?
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
ironhawk
May 3, 2004, 5:16 PM
Post #72 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2004
Posts: 98
|
In reply to: In reply to: You say the above like its a well documented fact, instead of yet another religious opinion born out of our society. So you're saying that the very thing that makes us human, our abilities to socialize and communicate, seperate us from god? I can't accept the idea that ideas themselves move us away from the Source. Maybe I am applying too much reason to that which, by definition, we cannot know. I believe we know nothing of this higher power at or before birth. But I can't prove it either. You're missing my point entirely, and it's no wonder since we moderns are so thoroughly immersed in our own narrow and self-destructive mythology that it requires going outside that myth in order to understand. There are no "well documented facts" about god or the nature of reality or about how to live in harmony with creation. "Facts" are merely social consensus based on accepted paradigms. Scientific "facts" are nothing more than the result of a method presumed to be objective and infallible (sound familiar?) No, I never said that it was either socializing or communicating that either make us human or separate us from the Source. Most animals socialize and communicate and some (bonobos, e.g.) do so with about the same level of sophistication as do humans. And homo erectus, homo sapiens, et al have been communicating and socializing for tens of millions of years. Let's not forget that what we call human history began very, very recently in the Fertile Crescent (the area we've now decimated through sanctions and warfare) I said it was civilization or domestication which separated us from the Source, when we ceased relying on the Universe to feed and sustain us and began hoarding food and other resources, creating wealth and disparity and mercantilism and the structures required (governmental and military) to protect it all. So, of course you can neither "know" the Source using merely the power of reason, nor "prove" it's existence in any way. But it is available to all to know that Source directly and intimately through (this is the best language we have for this) the heart. If you understand that, you can reach beyond the limitations of the intellect. If you don't, then you're stuck in the box. - Robert
please refer to this source as my source or a source. I dont think i like your source all that much so keep it in your box.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
May 3, 2004, 6:04 PM
Post #73 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Poor YOU, how empty your experiences must be.
You are not better than other people, just because you are a Jesus freak.
And this is one of several statements in this thread where you imply as much.
So I tell you this: TAKE YOUR SELF RIGHTOUSNESS AND SHOVE IT!!
If people want to bring their god and religion into THEIR climbing great.
But that doesn't make them any better than anyone else.
The key is to climb for YOUR reason's and forget what anyone else thinks.
josh
|
|
|
|
|
delarig
May 3, 2004, 6:53 PM
Post #74 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Posts: 167
|
GOD HATES RELIGION BECAUSE IT DIVIDES PEOPLE FROM ONE ANOTHER. LOOK AT ALL THE KILLING THAT GOES ON IN THE NAME OF GOD. GOD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION. GOD ENCOMPASSES EVERTHING AND EVERYONE, NOT JUST YOUR LITTLE CULT. THINK FOR YOURSELF.
|
|
|
|
|
dynamic
May 3, 2004, 6:54 PM
Post #75 of 164
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 439
|
All quotes from rescueman:
In reply to: "Facts" are merely social consensus based on accepted paradigms. Scientific "facts" are nothing more than the result of a method presumed to be objective and infallible
In reply to: "The proselytizing fanatic strengthens his own faith by converting others. The creed whose legitimacy is most easily challenged is likely to develop the strongest proselytizing impulse."
In reply to: The best examples of true believers today are Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush. They are both equally certain that they are good and the other evil, and each is willing to destroy anyone in their way and everything they claim to hold dear in order to achieve their goals.
In reply to: A True Believer is a highly insecure soul desperate for certainty and afraid of existential freedom.
In reply to: we moderns are so thoroughly immersed in our own narrow and self-destructive mythology that it requires going outside that myth in order to understand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
