Forums | MacLife

D'Eyncourt wrote:

Oh absolutely my question is based on speculation, but it is an inevitable consequence of finding physical causes of what most people would consider a purely spiritual effect. I am at base a materialist in that I do not believe that there is a spiritual world that can be separated from the physical one, and I am entirely comfortable in your "rabbit hole." Any complex human behavior including one's religious beliefs most likely will be due to a whole constellation of neurological effects and just as likely will not be easily predicted or changed by controlling the activity in a specific part of the brain, but there may be surprises of simplicity.

I am not entirely clear what the spiritual effect is being discussed. To me, its about as devastating as someone pointing out that in following the spiritual command to read the scriptures, science has discovered that believers still use their eyeballs and visual cortex in doing so.

And metaphysically, anyone who believes that a spiritual realm would be entirely separate from the physical realm, makes "spirit" entirely pointless, so, I would kinda agree with you there. People who mistakenly make that sort of claim because of religious doctrines seem ignorant of the consequences.

resedit wrote:

If you are a Christian, good works will follow - not the other way around.

Would that that were anywhere near true.
Changing one's behavior, good works, leads to enlightenment, it does not follow it.
One changes by changing.

Jokotai wrote:

sturner wrote:

I think my comment still holds that without the Pauline influence, Christianity wouldn't be a major religion today.

I have to argue that you are incorrect.  From what I understand, Christianity was adopted in many societies because it allowed focus on the individual as opposed to the group.

I disagree. The salient point is what the societies other than the Jewish, would call body mutilation. The kosher food laws were one thing, and could be swallowed by others. The requirement for males to be circumcised is a major hurdle. That one item is sufficient to halt a wide-scale acceptance.

Especially amongst the Romans and Greeks where body mutilation was perceived as a gross abomination. For an adult male to undergo that without anesthesia is a major undertaking, and one that many men would not undergo.

Pariah wrote:

resedit wrote:

If you are a Christian, good works will follow - not the other way around.

Would that that were anywhere near true.
Changing one's behavior, good works, leads to enlightenment, it does not follow it.
One changes by changing.

Who said anything about "enlightenment"?

sturner: So you are saying that the Pauline Church is the one primarily responsible for aboloshing the act of circumcision, and thus gave the religion a wider appeal?  If that's your point, then it's a good one I hadn't thought of before, largely because I was not aware of that.

resedit: Does the fact that I am not a Christian alone make me either dishonorable or immoral in your view?

Last edited by Jokotai (2009-10-07 9:04 pm)

Circumcision was a sign of the covenant.
It was never the means to the covenant.

Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness.
It was always faith that brought righteousness.

Circumcision was a sign of priesthood in the middle east before Moses came along - the point of circumcision was a declaration that they were a nation of priests, not that it was a means to God.

resedit wrote:

Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness.
It was always faith that brought righteousness.

Yet faith brought Abraham to the verge of killing his own innocent son. For all he or we knew/know he might've just eaten some bad 'shrooms and been hallucinating, but he let faith bring him thisclose to homicide.

This is enlightenment, good works, the fruits of faith?

Nowadays Abe'd be put under psych observation, his son into foster care, and even Fox might call it good.

resedit wrote:

Bat wrote:

resedit wrote:

Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness.
It was always faith that brought righteousness.

Yet faith brought Abraham to the verge of killing his own innocent son.

When God says jump, you ask how high on the way up.

Because blind fanaticism and willingness to kill for your god isn't causing us any problems today...

resedit wrote:

Jokotai wrote:

Because blind fanaticism and willingness to kill for your god isn't causing us any problems today...

Depends upon who your God is.

No it doesn't.  Do you really think that a person is going to be treated differently depending upon which pantheon they were inspired by to commit crimes?

To provide an example, are people who bomb abortion clinics ultimately justified because they think they were given divine instruction?

Oh,  yeah...

resedit wrote:

If you are a Christian, good works will follow - not the other way around.

I forgot that religion trumps civilization.

Bat wrote:

resedit wrote:

Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness.
It was always faith that brought righteousness.

Yet faith brought Abraham to the verge of killing his own innocent son. For all he or we knew/know he might've just eaten some bad 'shrooms and been hallucinating, but he let faith bring him thisclose to homicide.

This is enlightenment, good works, the fruits of faith?

Nowadays Abe'd be put under psych observation, his son into foster care, and even Fox might call it good.

well for 1, God was testing his faith (which of course he passed), for his faith in God he made all born after him his seed (children).
Genesis 17:9
9And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
17Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?
Genesis 18:10
10And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.
Amplified
17Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said in his heart, Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a son?
Genesis 18:10
10[The Lord] said, I will surely return to you when the season comes round, and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son. And Sarah was listening and heard it at the tent door which was behind Him.
Keep in mind one was 90 and the other 100.

When it comes to the "shrooms", your assuming or implying he was using some type of drug at the time. So are you saying if because there are lots of drug users now, there had to be some then?? If that where true crack has been around for a very long time. But fortunately these kind of drugs where not used even if the stuff to make it was.

You use the word "Nowadays", well nowadays you can't spank your kid, or you might be arrested (not talking about abuse) because one family puts their kids on a "timeout" and see's another spanking them. Nowadays you can't smoke in so many places, nowadays can be said used in many ways. Things have changed, many positive and as many negative. you can't compare the two. (the present and that time, long ago).

Bat wrote:

Res, you of all folks with your epilepsy, should know something about how the brain can play one tricks, including on a very short-term basis.

Of course I do.
What's your point?

Bat wrote:

Res, you of all folks with your epilepsy, should know something about how the brain can play one tricks, including on a very short-term basis. Cee, many naturally-occurring plants as well as neuro/psych conditions, are psychoactive to the point that many, presumably then as well as now, can see/hear 'God' as a byproduct, knowingly or not. Also, the Bible says you not only can, but must compare 'then' with 'now.' Remember, Good, Evil, values are eternal. Else you fall into the trap of cultural relativism.

The rest, a very great deal, I leave to the reader to judge. I have no desire to stay up until dawn shooting holes in logic.

Ya, I thought this might come up when it comes to natural plants, but the way you wrote your comment (to me) it seems like you where writing like the majority who say that see/saw God back then where on some type of natural drug and when the bible as it progressed had people follow things that where written not knowing what the person who wrote these writing was on, and the person who wrote that particular book saw what they saw because they wanted to see the miracles that happened then.
   
Also your right, it does show the Bible speaking about looking and being aware of the past and the future, but comparing the different things, and how they are dealt now is a whole different thing. It does talk in general how people react in all times, past and present. but not specifically how we will deal with these things.

Good and evil will always be around, but the different ways we deal with them is a whole different thing. God does not manipulate the way people react like we are puppets, he hopes you do the right thing, but the option to do it is still up to the people/person.

res just a question, if what bat says is true, I have the same,what med/meds to you use to control it?

Pariah wrote:

resedit wrote:

Jokotai wrote:

Because blind fanaticism and willingness to kill for your god isn't causing us any problems today...

Depends upon who your God is.

No, no it doesn't.
Religious fanaticism is always more about cultural traditions than religion. The radical evangelical movement is not an exception.

Precisely.

The fundamental Islamists are not pure in their beliefs. They incorporate some very ancient cultural aspects which is what they are basing a lot of their fundamental intolerance upon. It isn't against anything in Islam for girls to be educated or to share equally in political or secular society. It's a cultural bias based upon hunting/gathering/herding cultures of the 8th Century.