Hi everybody ,
Please debate the following. It's long. And I am not here to create any mess and I'm not a clone , just an old Sgforummer that had lost his account.
Found this post on the internet.
Anyone to comment about it ?
At something like after 10p.m., an old friend asked me for my world view on Facebook. My friend is a very staunch Christian. I popped by his blog and saw that he would be one of those qualified to be an apologetic anytime (he has read Ravi Zacharias -- maybe I spelled the name incorrectly -- and a whole lot of other Christian literature...I singled Ravi out because he is among the more well-known ones, with his well-known 'Can Man Live Without God')
I could type another 17-page or 170-page essay to explain why I do not believe in God or any religion, but I have given up on these debates unless it's really called for.
To cut the long story short, anyone who wants to know why I do not believe in the Christian religion should read the following in their entirety, because to summarise them takes time and I do not have the time :
1) Dan Barker: Losing Faith in Faith
2) Thomas Paine: The Age of Reason
3) Joseph Wheless:Is It God's Word
4) Farrell Till: The Skeptical Review (online magazine)
All of the above are available on the Internet, you do not have to go anywhere else to look for them. However, you would probably take about six months (three if you are fast) to finish all of it and to check the stuff with your Bible.
***
Before this post ends up being a 'Why I Am Not A Christian' post, I shall talk about my world view.
1) On the supernatural and death/afterlife
I do NOT believe in any form of supernatural things/beings ranging from black magic to gods to ghosts to demons/devils and what-have-you.
I do NOT believe in afterlife. I believe that when I die, I will return to nature. I will rot and decompose. Full stop.
2) On morality and values
I believe that morality is relative and it is a human construct. There are things that are immoral, moral and amoral. To each his own as long as one does not exploit,harm, or negatively affect others (or oneself) in the process of achieving one's own happiness.
To elaborate on this topic in specific detail would be to write a book. Email me at [email protected] if you are really keen on answers to specific questions/issues.
3) On the meaning of life
(I've answered this so many times until I'm sick and tired of it...but let me go to Yahoo Answers to dig out my model answer...)
There you go; copied and pasted it with some minor editing:
What is the meaning of life?
a) Life has some sort of an ultimate meaning. This usually applies to religious people who seek either Enlightenment (in Buddhism) or the Kingdom of Heaven (Christianity, Islam amongst other religions)...
b) There is no such thing as the meaning of life. If there were, we would know it, just like we know we have basic needs like food and shelter. You might want to read Lin Yutang and Tom Hodgkinson (basically, embrace a fatalistic philosophy that everything is meaningless, and simply be happy)
c) According to Viktor Frankl's 'Man's Search for Meaning' and 'The Unheard Cry for Meaning', everyone must find his/her own meaning of life. The analogy used is chess. Everyone has a different game of chess to play, so it is absurd to ask the master 'What is the next best move?', because it varies for different games. However, we can find or create meaning in all circumstances, even as a prisoner in a concentration camp.
d) Meaning is something which evolves and changes over time. Perhaps, at sixteen, a teenager's greatest meaning is to find out more about the world. At thirty, it is settling down with a family. At fifty or seventy, it is self-actualisation.
e) According to Erich Fromm, if I remember correctly, he says that this question is absurd because it assumes that life has a meaning. But I do think he agrees with Frankl that life is a unique challenge presented to us.
Finally, after giving all the examples, what is MY OWN take? Well, I believe in being compassionate (Thanks to books on Buddhist philosophy and Mitch Albom's 'Tuesdays with Morrie'). I also embrace a fatalistic philosophy (I believe that everything is predestined and everything is meaningless -- look at the book of Ecclesiates in the Bible) I find my meaning in simple joys such as drawing, painting, writing, reading, singing, and having coffee with friends, as well as taking long walks in nature.
Currently, I just want to keep working at my art, and hope to print my own art books one day. :)
Friend wrote:
The title sounds big, but it's not strictly original. I'm currently listening to Dr. Ravi Zacharias' series on "Unplugging Truth in a Morally Suicidal Culture", the "Culture" in his talk referring to America. But I do sense that our country—Singapore's culture is equally suicidal, if not more dangerously so. Why do I say that?
One of Ravi's laments about American culture is its secularization—there's a deliberate attempt to keep what is religious private. In a secular society, you're entitled to your own private religious beliefs, as long as you keep those beliefs private. Ravi argues that it basically eradicate any moral point of reference, when a moral point of reference is being called for. It is rejected on the premise that any moral point of reference is based on a larger, religious worldview, and that worldview has no place in the public arena of a secular society.
I say:
A moral point of reference is being called for when there is injustice and crime, although of course, every society needs to have their definition of crime. For example, kissing in public is a crime in some conservative societies/countries, while incest is not a crime in some communities that our modern world might consider primitive.
The moral point of reference, however, obviously CANNOT be based on a religious view if that society is NOT religious. I understand that the Christians and Muslims are very upset by the gay issue in Singapore, but to declare homosexuality as immoral based on religious reasons is simply being irrational.
Furthermore, the Bible does not have a SINGULAR moral point of reference. Thou shall not kill? Then why were the Israelites allowed to kill the Amorites and Hittites and a whole host of other tribes just because the Lord commanded thus? The Israelites were also immoral and sinful people, were they not? But they were just privileged to be God's chosen people, so what sort of morality are we talking about here? Before the books of Deutronomy and Leviticus, I'm pretty sure incest wasn't a sin when there were only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. How else did the people come about?
Friend wrote:
As I reflect on the Singapore scene, I thought I saw a similar trend of thought developing. It might not have happened in the same way in our law courts, but you can smell it coming.
I'm referring to the decision to build the casino (what political correctness rendered, 'integrated resorts') in Singapore, despite the degree of protest. I'm referring to the gay debate in Oct 07. I'm referring to the apparent trend to undo laws, legislations and once-commonly-held values and beliefs in what constitute right and wrong, propriety and impropriety. I'm referring to the growing populace that supports (or is indifferent to, which is commonly interpreted as supportive anyway) such a trend.
I'm referring to the emerging Singapore culture.
And there's something that worries me more as I ponder this on the bus.
It is the unthinking, unreflective acceptance, even embracement, of anything Western. Anything American. A walk through the stores of bestsellers in Borders, the streets of flashing adverts along Orchard Road, a glance through the iTunes library of any youth on the street, and you have empirical evidence. Our thinking, our likes, our values, are so easily shaped by what Americans think, by what they like and what they wear.
What troubles me is the unreflective part. Singaporeans are, by and large, unreflective. Where the abuses of secularization fought their way into the American system of thought, the amoral values of the West simply walked unabashedly into our minds.
We are not prepared, because we are not mentally prepared. We have not thought through the issues. We have not thought through the implications, of a worldview that rejects any other worldviews founded on higher values as irrelevant, even irreverent.
If Ravi is right about American culture being suicidal, it is not alone. Many among the younger generations will be pulled along by it.And Singapore will likely be the first. I'm open to any discussion, any debate on this topic. I'm also open to any suggestion as to what can be done.
I say:
I am saying that the solution to these issues (if we perceive this to be a problem) is education and dialogue/discussion, NOT religion.
Ultimately, values have to be chosen, not enforced or indoctrinated.
u have very normal views..take a look around you..at the flowers at people at nature..do u really think all this as set in motion by an accidental gang bang..i mean big bang?? the accurancy is so intense that it is impossible not to think there is a designer of stuff..
i would sure love to talk to u on the topic on if there is a creator,demons,angels,ghosts...watever the whole lot of them there is...
Originally posted by User9754:Hi everybody ,
Please debate the following. It's long. And I am not here to create any mess and I'm not a clone , just an old Sgforummer that had lost his account.
Found this post on the internet.
Anyone to comment about it ?
At something like after 10p.m., an old friend asked me for my world view on Facebook. My friend is a very staunch Christian. I popped by his blog and saw that he would be one of those qualified to be an apologetic anytime (he has read Ravi Zacharias -- maybe I spelled the name incorrectly -- and a whole lot of other Christian literature...I singled Ravi out because he is among the more well-known ones, with his well-known 'Can Man Live Without God')
I could type another 17-page or 170-page essay to explain why I do not believe in God or any religion, but I have given up on these debates unless it's really called for.
To cut the long story short, anyone who wants to know why I do not believe in the Christian religion should read the following in their entirety, because to summarise them takes time and I do not have the time :
1) Dan Barker: Losing Faith in Faith
2) Thomas Paine: The Age of Reason
3) Joseph Wheless:Is It God's Word
4) Farrell Till: The Skeptical Review (online magazine)
All of the above are available on the Internet, you do not have to go anywhere else to look for them. However, you would probably take about six months (three if you are fast) to finish all of it and to check the stuff with your Bible.
***
Before this post ends up being a 'Why I Am Not A Christian' post, I shall talk about my world view.
1) On the supernatural and death/afterlife
I do NOT believe in any form of supernatural things/beings ranging from black magic to gods to ghosts to demons/devils and what-have-you.
I do NOT believe in afterlife. I believe that when I die, I will return to nature. I will rot and decompose. Full stop.
2) On morality and values
I believe that morality is relative and it is a human construct. There are things that are immoral, moral and amoral. To each his own as long as one does not exploit,harm, or negatively affect others (or oneself) in the process of achieving one's own happiness.
To elaborate on this topic in specific detail would be to write a book. Email me at [email protected] if you are really keen on answers to specific questions/issues.
3) On the meaning of life
(I've answered this so many times until I'm sick and tired of it...but let me go to Yahoo Answers to dig out my model answer...)
There you go; copied and pasted it with some minor editing:
What is the meaning of life?
a) Life has some sort of an ultimate meaning. This usually applies to religious people who seek either Enlightenment (in Buddhism) or the Kingdom of Heaven (Christianity, Islam amongst other religions)...
b) There is no such thing as the meaning of life. If there were, we would know it, just like we know we have basic needs like food and shelter. You might want to read Lin Yutang and Tom Hodgkinson (basically, embrace a fatalistic philosophy that everything is meaningless, and simply be happy)
c) According to Viktor Frankl's 'Man's Search for Meaning' and 'The Unheard Cry for Meaning', everyone must find his/her own meaning of life. The analogy used is chess. Everyone has a different game of chess to play, so it is absurd to ask the master 'What is the next best move?', because it varies for different games. However, we can find or create meaning in all circumstances, even as a prisoner in a concentration camp.
d) Meaning is something which evolves and changes over time. Perhaps, at sixteen, a teenager's greatest meaning is to find out more about the world. At thirty, it is settling down with a family. At fifty or seventy, it is self-actualisation.
e) According to Erich Fromm, if I remember correctly, he says that this question is absurd because it assumes that life has a meaning. But I do think he agrees with Frankl that life is a unique challenge presented to us.
Finally, after giving all the examples, what is MY OWN take? Well, I believe in being compassionate (Thanks to books on Buddhist philosophy and Mitch Albom's 'Tuesdays with Morrie'). I also embrace a fatalistic philosophy (I believe that everything is predestined and everything is meaningless -- look at the book of Ecclesiates in the Bible) I find my meaning in simple joys such as drawing, painting, writing, reading, singing, and having coffee with friends, as well as taking long walks in nature.
Currently, I just want to keep working at my art, and hope to print my own art books one day. :)Friend wrote:
The title sounds big, but it's not strictly original. I'm currently listening to Dr. Ravi Zacharias' series on "Unplugging Truth in a Morally Suicidal Culture", the "Culture" in his talk referring to America. But I do sense that our country—Singapore's culture is equally suicidal, if not more dangerously so. Why do I say that?
One of Ravi's laments about American culture is its secularization—there's a deliberate attempt to keep what is religious private. In a secular society, you're entitled to your own private religious beliefs, as long as you keep those beliefs private. Ravi argues that it basically eradicate any moral point of reference, when a moral point of reference is being called for. It is rejected on the premise that any moral point of reference is based on a larger, religious worldview, and that worldview has no place in the public arena of a secular society.
I say:
A moral point of reference is being called for when there is injustice and crime, although of course, every society needs to have their definition of crime. For example, kissing in public is a crime in some conservative societies/countries, while incest is not a crime in some communities that our modern world might consider primitive.
The moral point of reference, however, obviously CANNOT be based on a religious view if that society is NOT religious. I understand that the Christians and Muslims are very upset by the gay issue in Singapore, but to declare homosexuality as immoral based on religious reasons is simply being irrational.
Furthermore, the Bible does not have a SINGULAR moral point of reference. Thou shall not kill? Then why were the Israelites allowed to kill the Amorites and Hittites and a whole host of other tribes just because the Lord commanded thus? The Israelites were also immoral and sinful people, were they not? But they were just privileged to be God's chosen people, so what sort of morality are we talking about here? Before the books of Deutronomy and Leviticus, I'm pretty sure incest wasn't a sin when there were only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. How else did the people come about?
Friend wrote:
As I reflect on the Singapore scene, I thought I saw a similar trend of thought developing. It might not have happened in the same way in our law courts, but you can smell it coming.
I'm referring to the decision to build the casino (what political correctness rendered, 'integrated resorts') in Singapore, despite the degree of protest. I'm referring to the gay debate in Oct 07. I'm referring to the apparent trend to undo laws, legislations and once-commonly-held values and beliefs in what constitute right and wrong, propriety and impropriety. I'm referring to the growing populace that supports (or is indifferent to, which is commonly interpreted as supportive anyway) such a trend.
I'm referring to the emerging Singapore culture.
And there's something that worries me more as I ponder this on the bus.
It is the unthinking, unreflective acceptance, even embracement, of anything Western. Anything American. A walk through the stores of bestsellers in Borders, the streets of flashing adverts along Orchard Road, a glance through the iTunes library of any youth on the street, and you have empirical evidence. Our thinking, our likes, our values, are so easily shaped by what Americans think, by what they like and what they wear.
What troubles me is the unreflective part. Singaporeans are, by and large, unreflective. Where the abuses of secularization fought their way into the American system of thought, the amoral values of the West simply walked unabashedly into our minds.
We are not prepared, because we are not mentally prepared. We have not thought through the issues. We have not thought through the implications, of a worldview that rejects any other worldviews founded on higher values as irrelevant, even irreverent.
If Ravi is right about American culture being suicidal, it is not alone. Many among the younger generations will be pulled along by it.And Singapore will likely be the first. I'm open to any discussion, any debate on this topic. I'm also open to any suggestion as to what can be done.
I say:
I am saying that the solution to these issues (if we perceive this to be a problem) is education and dialogue/discussion, NOT religion.
Ultimately, values have to be chosen, not enforced or indoctrinated.
There are some cultures whereby cannibalism is morally allowed. Your culture obviously doesnt endorse that. IF both cultures meet on morally neutral grounds (if it ever does exist), would you have any preference as to what that culture wants to do to you? Is there still a moral point of reference?
I saw Jesus in glorified form when I was in my sec 1.
This has helped me to mantain my faith as a Christian.
Since the past last few years I've also been allowed to feel what other people feel inside their heart(not their mind). Now I know that every desires comes from the heart and what others feel are quite the same with what I feel well except some few people.
Besides that I've also been allowed to know some events before they happened.
These are not in any way a part of my own ability though.
Last time not too long ago I was allowed to know what is the meaning of death(what it feels to be dead) that corrected my view on death and change my perspective on life and other people. I searched the bible afterwards and came with a conclusion that conformed to what I've been allowed to know. I know this sounds crazy but actually I view these as quite ordinary because they are so natural and I'm not making them up or hallucinating.
If you want to mock or insult me I don't care because I speak the truth.
I'm trying to view that insults, defamations and bad treatments from others as an asset to balance my liability(sins) since now I view death and life differently. I'm hoping together with my assets, the CnC would wipe all of my liability while I'm trying to wipe other people's debts to me since the CnC demanded that. :-). I'm still trying though. Investing in Jesus the CnC is the best thing that I could ever do to save my life. And the freedom from the kingdom of death is the best thing that could ever happened to me. I will not be happy living only to even 100 years old. Even if I were to rule the whole world for 80 years. Every one of us is in deep shit if we couldn't get freed from the kingdom of death. The end is the same for everyone no matter what you accomplish in life. Some people are even foolish enough to deserve hell. Well I'm not planning to be a permanent resident of the kingdom of death. I'm hoping to be among one of the firsts to be raised but that seems quite far off....
What Eve and Adam did has brought dire consequence to us mankind.
hi user9754
I think all religions is good in that they all encourage good behaviour and moral conduct and this helps in creating a peace and hamonious society.
But the real essence of religion is not just restricted to this life and wordly stuffs.
There are indeed after lifes, so do heaven and hells, ghost and so on.
You might want to observe more in our daily lifes, once a while we can hear cases where someone being possesed by other spirits, then started to behave in unusual manner, talk a language that he is never taught for.
or people playing ouija board and leave the game without permission
from the spirit, and started to get disastrous outcome. Though you may be
interested to try to prove the truths, but pls don't do it.
There are also cases where some kids remember their past lifes. (try google it and see)
All these clearly tells that this life is not the only life that we live, and there are many living being other than human and animal, for example angel, ghost, hell and so on. There are even witness and pictures of celestial creatures like dragons.
It is good that though you have no religion but still believe in morality. :)
Originally posted by Display Name:hi user9754
I think all religions is good in that they all encourage good behaviour and moral conduct and this helps in creating a peace and hamonious society.
But the real essence of religion is not just restricted to this life and wordly stuffs.
There are indeed after lifes, so do heaven and hells, ghost and so on.
You might want to observe more in our daily lifes, once a while we can hear cases where someone being possesed by other spirits, then started to behave in unusual manner, talk a language that he is never taught for.
or people playing ouija board and leave the game without permission from the spirit, and started to get disastrous outcome. Though you may be interested to try to prove the truths, but pls don't do it.
There are also cases where some kids remember their past lifes. (try google it and see)
All these clearly tells that this life is not the only life that we live, and there are many living being other than human and animal, for example angel, ghost, hell and so on. There are even witness and pictures of celestial creatures like dragons.
It is good that though you have no religion but still believe in morality. :)
hmm..a very worldy point of view..all these does not means we have so many re incarnations..but jus a huge big lie..as for all religions being good. only when the end of things will we knw..for now, people jus hold on to a faith they believe in.
candies are good to eat. but would anyone eat a candy from the gutter but was white washed??
Easiest way to prove God is to make somebody evil to hate you so much that he resorts to sending you evil spirit or demon.
See if God helps when you ask for help.
It's easy very easy indeed unlike in some movies. No struggle, no effort just a heart cry for help to God or a prayer(whatever you feel comfortable to use) and see yourself being freed from whatever evil comes your way.
:-D. You'll find God a mighty Lion that scares the living shit of evil. No evil could stand God. O You God, the mighty terror for evils.
But there are special cases when holy people being allowed to suffer from demon attacks such as in the case of many saints including Padre Pio. But for the majority of us: demon? hell ya don't scare me nothin.
It is good that though you have no religion but still believe in morality. :)
Hi Displayname,
you're insinuating that morality is derived from religion to which TS will disagree?
imho, doesnt matter which religion teaches good or remains silent, problem remains with the believers, who choose to abuse it.
Jesus can teach all about non violence, but if Christians choose to ignore that and still declare crusades and inquisitions, criticism (objectively) should be levelled at the believers, not the faith itself. Case in point: when Peter slashed off the Roman guard's ear, Jesus didnt leave it at that but went on to restore that ear.
The primary objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man and not to elevate man's status, be it individually (his self-esteem) or politically.
Originally posted by 24/7:Hi Displayname,
you're insinuating that morality is derived from religion to which TS will disagree?
imho, doesnt matter which religion teaches good or remains silent, problem remains with the believers, who choose to abuse it.
Jesus can teach all about non violence, but if Christians choose to ignore that and still declare crusades and inquisitions, criticism (objectively) should be levelled at the believers, not the faith itself. Case in point: when Peter slashed off the Roman guard's ear, Jesus didnt leave it at that but went on to restore that ear.
The primary objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man and not to elevate man's status, be it individually (his self-esteem) or politically.
i like your last paragrapgh. so very true yet not many realize it.
Quote--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24/7 wrote
The primary objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man and not to elevate man's status, be it individually (his self-esteem) or politically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold your horses don't be too quick to come to a conclusion,
Blessings
The Lord will send a blessing on your barns and on everything you put your hand to. The Lord your God will bless you in the land he is giving you. The Lord will grant you abundant prosperity in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your ground-in the land he swore to your forefathers to give you. The Lord will open the heavens, the storehouse of his bounty, to send rain on your land in season and to bless all the work of your hands. You will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. The Lord will make you the head, not the tail. If you pay attention to the commands of the Lord you God that I give you this day and carefully follow them, you will always be at the top, never at the bottom.
Deuteronomy 28:8, 11&12(NIV)
And don't you read Joseph? That son of Jacob who was sold a slave by his own brothers ended up the Prime Minister of the whole Egypt. Or Daniel? Or David a poor shepperd boy annointed King by prophet Samuel who then became the King over Israel, a successful King of Israel. You think Jesus a mere holy man? Evils tremble by the name of Jesus. No evil could stand Jesus name. No man too will be able to penetrate the light of the glorified Jesus. So no ordinary man will be able to see face to face with the King of Kings. God has lifted Jesus to a very high place.
But the problem lies with the people......religions including Christianity has been abused not only by common people but also by secular men in power.
Nowadays there is a strong tendency to put environmental awareness to the hands of preachers as part of a religion movement(WTF). I'm not against it but it is but one example that religion has been steered by men in power. Come on if you truly try to follow what Jesus teaches you would not dare to risk other people to the detrimental receiver of your actions. Going green was not excluded in the teaching before it's already there. But now the focus is shifted on the earth itself not on the people. You cannot hurt the earth without hurting the people nearby. So in a way I hate the effort to include going green as a religion movement. It shows that we have been hypocrites all along. A Christian industrialist who poisoned the river and the villagers? And on Sunday he stands on the church podium preaching about doing good for others..........while his poison killling babies and making people ill.
I wouldnt be surprised if one of these days Jesus is potrayed as an environmentalist.
Hahahahahhahahahaha.
got morality can riao lor
Hold your horses don't be too quick to come to a conclusion,
Hi Miracles,
Not sure what you're arguing because you've not explained anything from your articles that relates to the primary motive of Christianity.
So i venture to guess you're saying God means to make us the "head and not the tail"? From the common prosperity gospel teaching, i reckon you say that God wants us to succeed wherever we are, whatever we are doing, because we've His favour?
My take: from that verse u quoted from the OT, it is a resultant factor, not a pervasive theme of the bible. As in it is a result of something happening first, before that will happen. And what's that? We see it in the same verse,
If you pay attention to the commands of the Lord you God
We need to follow the commands of God. Which then, we ask what are the commands for Israel then (for which this verse is written)? What were the commands for?
I reckon commands are to keep ourselves in check. Rules to ensure we dont get out of hand. So it presupposes that there is a tendency for us to get out hand. And that tendency, i would argue, is our sinful nature.
Throughout the bible, it talks more about sin and God's wrath, rather than on God wanting to pour forth His blessings upon us. They come as a result of, not something that we ought to get. I love Jesus. And i dont think He came just to help us simply to be the "head". He already said His kingdom isnt of this world.
the commandants of God given to moses,moshe aka mosiac laws was to redeem humans in the sense that should anyone can follow it 100%, he is perfect in spirit.though not the physical aspect..with JC/Yeshua, hhe the perfect man has fulfilled the mosiac laws. that is wat the commandmants are for.
the kingdom of God is not of this world, therefore Yeshua/JC told us to be no part of this world too.
Originally posted by User9754:Hi everybody ,
Please debate the following. It's long. And I am not here to create any mess and I'm not a clone , just an old Sgforummer that had lost his account.
Found this post on the internet.
Anyone to comment about it ?
At something like after 10p.m., an old friend asked me for my world view on Facebook. My friend is a very staunch Christian. I popped by his blog and saw that he would be one of those qualified to be an apologetic anytime (he has read Ravi Zacharias -- maybe I spelled the name incorrectly -- and a whole lot of other Christian literature...I singled Ravi out because he is among the more well-known ones, with his well-known 'Can Man Live Without God')
I could type another 17-page or 170-page essay to explain why I do not believe in God or any religion, but I have given up on these debates unless it's really called for.
To cut the long story short, anyone who wants to know why I do not believe in the Christian religion should read the following in their entirety, because to summarise them takes time and I do not have the time :
1) Dan Barker: Losing Faith in Faith
2) Thomas Paine: The Age of Reason
3) Joseph Wheless:Is It God's Word
4) Farrell Till: The Skeptical Review (online magazine)
All of the above are available on the Internet, you do not have to go anywhere else to look for them. However, you would probably take about six months (three if you are fast) to finish all of it and to check the stuff with your Bible.
***
Before this post ends up being a 'Why I Am Not A Christian' post, I shall talk about my world view.
1) On the supernatural and death/afterlife
I do NOT believe in any form of supernatural things/beings ranging from black magic to gods to ghosts to demons/devils and what-have-you.
I do NOT believe in afterlife. I believe that when I die, I will return to nature. I will rot and decompose. Full stop.
2) On morality and values
I believe that morality is relative and it is a human construct. There are things that are immoral, moral and amoral. To each his own as long as one does not exploit,harm, or negatively affect others (or oneself) in the process of achieving one's own happiness.
To elaborate on this topic in specific detail would be to write a book. Email me at [email protected] if you are really keen on answers to specific questions/issues.
3) On the meaning of life
(I've answered this so many times until I'm sick and tired of it...but let me go to Yahoo Answers to dig out my model answer...)
There you go; copied and pasted it with some minor editing:
What is the meaning of life?
a) Life has some sort of an ultimate meaning. This usually applies to religious people who seek either Enlightenment (in Buddhism) or the Kingdom of Heaven (Christianity, Islam amongst other religions)...
b) There is no such thing as the meaning of life. If there were, we would know it, just like we know we have basic needs like food and shelter. You might want to read Lin Yutang and Tom Hodgkinson (basically, embrace a fatalistic philosophy that everything is meaningless, and simply be happy)
c) According to Viktor Frankl's 'Man's Search for Meaning' and 'The Unheard Cry for Meaning', everyone must find his/her own meaning of life. The analogy used is chess. Everyone has a different game of chess to play, so it is absurd to ask the master 'What is the next best move?', because it varies for different games. However, we can find or create meaning in all circumstances, even as a prisoner in a concentration camp.
d) Meaning is something which evolves and changes over time. Perhaps, at sixteen, a teenager's greatest meaning is to find out more about the world. At thirty, it is settling down with a family. At fifty or seventy, it is self-actualisation.
e) According to Erich Fromm, if I remember correctly, he says that this question is absurd because it assumes that life has a meaning. But I do think he agrees with Frankl that life is a unique challenge presented to us.
Finally, after giving all the examples, what is MY OWN take? Well, I believe in being compassionate (Thanks to books on Buddhist philosophy and Mitch Albom's 'Tuesdays with Morrie'). I also embrace a fatalistic philosophy (I believe that everything is predestined and everything is meaningless -- look at the book of Ecclesiates in the Bible) I find my meaning in simple joys such as drawing, painting, writing, reading, singing, and having coffee with friends, as well as taking long walks in nature.
Currently, I just want to keep working at my art, and hope to print my own art books one day. :)Friend wrote:
The title sounds big, but it's not strictly original. I'm currently listening to Dr. Ravi Zacharias' series on "Unplugging Truth in a Morally Suicidal Culture", the "Culture" in his talk referring to America. But I do sense that our country—Singapore's culture is equally suicidal, if not more dangerously so. Why do I say that?
One of Ravi's laments about American culture is its secularization—there's a deliberate attempt to keep what is religious private. In a secular society, you're entitled to your own private religious beliefs, as long as you keep those beliefs private. Ravi argues that it basically eradicate any moral point of reference, when a moral point of reference is being called for. It is rejected on the premise that any moral point of reference is based on a larger, religious worldview, and that worldview has no place in the public arena of a secular society.
I say:
A moral point of reference is being called for when there is injustice and crime, although of course, every society needs to have their definition of crime. For example, kissing in public is a crime in some conservative societies/countries, while incest is not a crime in some communities that our modern world might consider primitive.
The moral point of reference, however, obviously CANNOT be based on a religious view if that society is NOT religious. I understand that the Christians and Muslims are very upset by the gay issue in Singapore, but to declare homosexuality as immoral based on religious reasons is simply being irrational.
Furthermore, the Bible does not have a SINGULAR moral point of reference. Thou shall not kill? Then why were the Israelites allowed to kill the Amorites and Hittites and a whole host of other tribes just because the Lord commanded thus? The Israelites were also immoral and sinful people, were they not? But they were just privileged to be God's chosen people, so what sort of morality are we talking about here? Before the books of Deutronomy and Leviticus, I'm pretty sure incest wasn't a sin when there were only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. How else did the people come about?
Friend wrote:
As I reflect on the Singapore scene, I thought I saw a similar trend of thought developing. It might not have happened in the same way in our law courts, but you can smell it coming.
I'm referring to the decision to build the casino (what political correctness rendered, 'integrated resorts') in Singapore, despite the degree of protest. I'm referring to the gay debate in Oct 07. I'm referring to the apparent trend to undo laws, legislations and once-commonly-held values and beliefs in what constitute right and wrong, propriety and impropriety. I'm referring to the growing populace that supports (or is indifferent to, which is commonly interpreted as supportive anyway) such a trend.
I'm referring to the emerging Singapore culture.
And there's something that worries me more as I ponder this on the bus.
It is the unthinking, unreflective acceptance, even embracement, of anything Western. Anything American. A walk through the stores of bestsellers in Borders, the streets of flashing adverts along Orchard Road, a glance through the iTunes library of any youth on the street, and you have empirical evidence. Our thinking, our likes, our values, are so easily shaped by what Americans think, by what they like and what they wear.
What troubles me is the unreflective part. Singaporeans are, by and large, unreflective. Where the abuses of secularization fought their way into the American system of thought, the amoral values of the West simply walked unabashedly into our minds.
We are not prepared, because we are not mentally prepared. We have not thought through the issues. We have not thought through the implications, of a worldview that rejects any other worldviews founded on higher values as irrelevant, even irreverent.
If Ravi is right about American culture being suicidal, it is not alone. Many among the younger generations will be pulled along by it.And Singapore will likely be the first. I'm open to any discussion, any debate on this topic. I'm also open to any suggestion as to what can be done.
I say:
I am saying that the solution to these issues (if we perceive this to be a problem) is education and dialogue/discussion, NOT religion.
Ultimately, values have to be chosen, not enforced or indoctrinated.
Hello,
There is nothing wrong of people having personal views they stand by, but sometimes facts cannot be ignored.
Some points i cannot argue with is that Religion shouldnt be the sole motivator in law-making. But what do you think if people 'write' laws based on a cold heart. Would victims of rape, incest, crime be served the true justice? Some of the laws now have evolved through time and require that conscience/moral influence to make it justifiable.
If you don't believe in eternity, then what's your view on where you come from? Just some natural effect where you spurn out of nowhere? So have you ever wondered how humans can develop such intellect as opposed to animals? We have been designed by something that we cannot fathom. An analogy is, how do you get a car? it doesnt just came out of a huge explosion in a car factory, it needs workers to build, engineers to design!
and i can see that alot of your arguments are based on 'declaration' in that you speak as thought Christians 'declare' that so and so is 'immoral' etc. I believe that the majority do not talk/act like that, because i believe in the freedom of thoughts and beliefs. We as Christians do not condemn homosexuals, but respect their choice of sexuality. But again, that has gone wayward from the 'natural'. Don't you think so? Sexual intercourse is to be enjoyed by a husband and wife of opposite sex.
yes, there were wars in the Old Testament, and the 'Chosen People' were not perfect. That is because through Adam, sin came into the world; and it's through Jesus Christ that forgiveness came into the world. So, whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life! In the Old Testament, theres alot of practices that are arguably 'immoral', but God has punished His own people with floods and Babylonian occupation etc. Life not should not be literally related to life 4000 years ago.
Lastly, why do you think theres an escalating negative culture? Do you think it 'naturally' happens? If you are so quick to blame Christianity for what has happened, don't you already believe that theres a viable way out of it through Christianity?
Yes God's kingdom is not of this world but you are forgetting that in essence everything there is are God's. You, me, the plants, the people we love, the people we hate, the animals, the atheists, the earth, the air we breathe. Everything is God's. To cut a creation from God's connection is essentially the same with killing it. Each of created has a connection with God. In that God is in every one of His creations. No matter who or how evil or how bad a person is. Each one of us no matter how small or how powerful is at the mercy of God every moment of our life. And that also means that each of us who is aware of God and believe in Him can benefit from the awareness that God is inside each one of us and may experience God taking a more active role in his or her life. No I'm not talking about 'the secret', we are not who we believe we are and we cannot make things out from simply believing in ourselves(That is fooling ourselves and ungodly). Praying is not a communication to some supreme being out in heaven. It's a communication with God who resides in our own heart. Aware this then you will realize that we could be praying all time of our life in that our life is a constant prayer with God, a communion with God. God is truly God that is with us. God is really our best friend, our best intel :-), our best protector from evil, our best provider. Even when we are not worthy of His love and companionship.
God has power even over this earth we live in. But true His kingdom is not of this world but God owns the earth whether we admit it or not.
There is nothing that God couldn't do even in this earth we live. In essence is that God has the ultimate control over everything. That's how I experience God. That's what I believe. If tomorrow somebody slaps me in the face that's because God allows it.
The intimate detail of life each of our life has been known since the beginning. He knows everything(that is everything) which is actually very frightening if you try to comprehend that. That my friend is total control and total power that many of us couldn't even start to comprehend. The end is already known since the beginning. The concept of God is one that admits total power and total control where nothing is out of His reach. Nothing.
God lays His plans before doing His works in great detail. So detail that it frightened me once(at least the plan that He made on me on one particular night). I know for sure now that God works by plan. The perfect failproof plan.
What about freedom? Freedom is an illusion that makes us believe we are in control of our own destiny. Freedom is simply what God allows us to choose from.
Of course people could try to fight God but that is it, they can only try but it will be in vain. Likewise the death of God's [true] people would never be in vain even when they are allowed to bear sufferings, persecutions or even martyred.
No man can have a stone unless it is given to him. And what did Jesus answer Pontius Pilate when he said: "Don't you know I have the power to release you or put you to death?"
Don't you realize that each one of us is only passing by in this world, the world is not ours.
Though we may lose our connection to God when we die. God would still be connected to us. In that God is still aware of us though we no longer aware of Him or anything.
You go to the highest mountain it's God's realm, you go to the deepest sea it is God's realm, you go to the kingdom of death it is God's realm, you go to the gate of hell or hell it is God's realm, you go to any point or border of this still expanding universe it is God's realm, you go to the house of God it is God's realm.
Each of created has a connection with God. In that God is in every one of His creations
Hi Miracles,
If i didnt know read your other posts, i would have assumed you to be a New-Ager, from that above sentence. Since God is in every one of His creations, so we can worship every leaf, animal, object and it would still be worshipping God?
That said, I still wonder about what you're thinking the main objective of Christianity is? Why did Jesus Christ come to earth? I reckoned it's to address the sinful nature of man, you felt (i assumed but no clarification thus far) it was to make man the 'head'. Appreciate the sharing of your testimonies too, and i've read quite a bit from you over the forum too, would be good if we could skip past that and go to your reasoning =)
Originally posted by 24/7:Hi Miracles,
If i didnt know read your other posts, i would have assumed you to be a New-Ager, from that above sentence. Since God is in every one of His creations, so we can worship every leaf, animal, object and it would still be worshipping God?
That said, I still wonder about what you're thinking the main objective of Christianity is? Why did Jesus Christ come to earth? I reckoned it's to address the sinful nature of man, you felt (i assumed but no clarification thus far) it was to make man the 'head'. Appreciate the sharing of your testimonies too, and i've read quite a bit from you over the forum too, would be good if we could skip past that and go to your reasoning =)
Reasoning? I already stated my reasoning. You didn't read my post obviously read it again.
Let me quote myself then
No man can have a stone unless it is given to him. And what did Jesus answer Pontius Pilate when he said: "Don't you know I have the power to release you or put you to death?"
No I'm not talking about 'the secret', we are not who we believe we are and we cannot make things out from simply believing in ourselves(That is fooling ourselves and ungodly).
24/7 If you believe in God why is it so hard for you to see that God is the ruler of all things. I don't mean he actively taking part in the government but the God of Abraham is the ruler of all things. The highest authority.
Did God not bend the will of Ramses the Pharaoh? Could anyone alive bend the will of a Pharaoh? God did that because He wanted that/had decided to
I didn't say that Christ came to make everyone the head. You are twisting what I wrote.
I was just saying that sometimes God lifts a man high in his position here on earth. Reasoning? Read about Joseph, David, Jacob, Job, Daniel, Saul.
You cannot read my post in part and ingore rest. Then twist it to your liking. That's lying.
What I wrote is not out of my fantasy but from my own life experience. I could tell you what are those that made me think so but I wouldn't because I think you cannot appreciate them. But let me tell you that even the mighty fictional Oracle in the Matrix doesn't compare to God's own servant whose prophecies came from the Lord who knows all things. And that God could send you His out of this world servant who could get inside a locked house. And God did so because He planned to do so. Peter didn't die for Jesus, he didn't die for his faith...he died for everything.
As for the main objective of being a Christian is to get risen from the kingdom of death to share everlasting life and if you are truly lucky everlasting power with God. Yes power since God equates with authority, the highest authority and men of His chosen would be given power(authority) to rule with Jesus Christ. Without being risen a Christian could potentially become the most pitiful person on the planet.
You cannot read my post in part and ingore rest. Then twist it to your liking. That's lying.
Hi Miracles,
Let's not make this a flame war. I haven maligned you but i've been asking you for clarification and i did say that i "venture to guess" what you're saying. I ask if you've done the same likewise?
You responded to my post about the main objective of Christianity by asking me to " Hold your horses don't be too quick to come to a conclusion". And you went on to say that God means to make us the head and not the tail, then in your most recent post, you say God is the ruler of all things.
So i wont interpret anything now, can you tell me how that has answered your objection to my argument that the main objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man?
Originally posted by 24/7:Hi Miracles,
Let's not make this a flame war. I haven maligned you but i've been asking you for clarification and i did say that i "venture to guess" what you're saying. I ask if you've done the same likewise?
You responded to my post about the main objective of Christianity by asking me to " Hold your horses don't be too quick to come to a conclusion". And you went on to say that God means to make us the head and not the tail, then in your most recent post, you say God is the ruler of all things.
So i wont interpret anything now, can you tell me how that has answered your objection to my argument that the main objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man?
Agree I hate it when a person attacks another person personally on the forum. Very rude and childish.
I didn't say that God means to make us the head not the tail. That was a quote from the bible.
I didn't object your argument that the main objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man. If you think God came to address the sinful nature of man how would that benefit us or Him? God said we needed to repent for us to get saved. So God didn't came to this world just simply to change men. Jesus came to this world to warn people that if they stay on the way of sinfulness they would perish. Jesus offer a way to salvation. A salvation from what? From death and the kingdom of death. God loves us so much that He gave us the chance to be redeemed from the kingdom of death and some from the fire of hell so that we might live and not perish.
So that we might live despite His previous edict that we would die. God offers us forgiveness from our sins and life despite that fact that we have sinned and thus be punishable with death. God felt sorry and took pity on mankind who live only for a short while then perish without any hope of living. So that whoever believe in Christ would not die but be risen on the last day.
God didn't come just simply to change men sinful tendencies. But I didn't object when you wrote what you wrote that God came to address the sinful nature of men .
-------Quote 24/7 wrote-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary objective of Christianity is to address the sinful nature of man and not to elevate man's status, be it individually (his self-esteem) or politically.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh I missed the primary key word. Yes yes I agree. Sometimes God elevates a man status but that is not his primary reason why Jesus came. I need to read more carefully. Sorry if I got onto your nerve I didn't mean anything bad. It wasn't personal either. I didn't recall the word primary.....my mistake. I apologize.