| |
| Writings Discussion Authors Help Search Home |
It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/18/2002; 12:13 AM Does anyone remember September 11, 2001? I should hope so. Right afterwards, everybody was talking of eradicating terrorists and some people wore shirts that said Fuck Osama etc. Then once some of the memorials started happening, people started thinking. People thought less about planes and buildings, and more about all the victims. When the sadness set in, people started questioning their god. The primary question being of course, Where was God? Where Was God?He Was Right Over...Hey, Whered He Go?Is God Made Of Lead? Why Wont He Move?So...Where Was He Then?
RE: It's God's Fault By: Eoghainn Oniongardail on 4/12/2002; 5:49 PM I really don't think that people are accustomed to blaming "God" for tragedies. At such times, Theists generally resort to the notion that the ways of "God" are mysterious. The "good" things in the universe tend to be promote their beliefs. On the other hand, "bad" things are either unfathomable mysteries or are the work of a "devil". Of course, non-Theists (including Agnostics and Atheists) have no "God" to blame one way or another.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/12/2002; 6:13 PM On 4/12/02, Eoghainn Oniongardail said: >I really don't think that people are accustomed to blaming "God" >for tragedies. At such times, Theists generally resort to the >notion that the ways of "God" are mysterious. The "good" things >in the universe tend to be promote their beliefs. On the other >hand, "bad" things are either unfathomable mysteries or are the >work of a "devil". Wow, what a generalization! Before I get started: Mark, is this the right place for this discussion? Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/12/2002; 8:56 PM Now that I've set the ReplyTo correctly, yes. (Your reply threaded to a completely different topic, the second time since the redesign an e-mail message has done so. Next time I'll leave it wrong so tech support can debug it.) I realize the redesign has left some confusion over what is appropriate in each section. At this point, I think it's fine to provide feedback that addresses both the style and the content of a written. By style I mean how it is organized, how it could be improved, awkward phrasing, grammatical infelicities, awkward poetic scansion and the like. By content I mean debating whether an argument is valid, emotional responses to written works (my mom and my sister cried over a Dreamzone entry once, perhaps the best feedback I've every gotten), and such. As long as everyone plays nice, it should be fine.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/12/2002; 9:38 PM That's what I'm denying. (EO) I believe it was Brian Carnell that got me to write this. It's always god's fault when something good happens, and sometimes people question god when bad things happen, and my essay would make up the rest of my reply.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/12/2002; 10:12 PM "Society should stop blaming God for everything, and put the blame where its due." If this is the case, does that mean God should not be given credit for our happiness?
RE: It's God's Fault By: Eoghainn Oniongardail on 4/12/2002; 10:42 PM Seth wrote: >Wow, what a generalization! Seth, I did say: "Theists generally resort to..." So, I recognised my own generalisation. Of course, anyone who advocates a system of belief or non-belief can adapt it in any way they choose. From my own experiences with various forms of media, it is very common that one hears Theists questioning "God" about a tragedy, or at least pretending to. But, I do insist that non-Theists have no god to blame. And, so, if anyone is blaming a deity for tragedy, it will obviously only be those who believe in that deity.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/12/2002; 11:27 PM Mark-No. Yah, of course god is responsible for us being happy sometimes. I just mean with events like that, it's not god's fault.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/13/2002; 12:15 AM Please clarify, then--where does God's responsibility for these things end, and ours begin?
RE: It's God's Fault By: Rachelle King on 4/13/2002; 12:34 AM I agree that negative or positive happenings are not the fault of any one particular deity. They are the fault of humans. Although I agree that human error is the cause for what happened on September 11th, I also believe that the cause of that tragic day has far more complicated a history then what one hears [believes] on CNN. One could not predict that men originating from "The Axis Of Evil [bumbumpbummmmmm!]" would use box-cutters to highjack a plane and crash it into symbols of American capitalism and conformity. Although if one had been following the battle for capital gain in the Middle Eastern and surrounding countries for the last 30 or so years, they would have been suspicious of such a retaliation. I would suspect that America had more to do with what happened on September 11th then any other National body. So I would ultimately agrue that self-righteous, greedy, materialistic human desires became the major catalyst in events such as this. All these traits are not admired in the eyes of any Christian, Catholic, Jewish, or Pagan gods that I am familiar with. I did notice that the Christian god did sort of become a mascot for America after the event. I think Mark was implying that deities are given credit for all of our happiness, but according to "ancient" manuscript, the Christian god should be exempt from the negative happenings that take place in our lives, which seems very one-sided. I guess that's why I am pagan: All the goddessess/gods have their negative and positve aspects-like humans.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/13/2002; 7:28 AM "I think Mark was implying that deities are given credit for all of our happiness, but according to "ancient" manuscript, the Christian god should be exempt from the negative happenings that take place in our lives, which seems very one-sided." Techincally, I was (and am) trying to get Adam to clarify this point. Certainly there are people who give God all the credit for their happiness but assign Him none of the blame but I should hope this is not representative of modern theological thought. I don't think Adam is doing that, but I do want to know where that line is drawn. In another thread, Brian Carnell mentioned this same attitude among some people.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Chie Theresa Fujioka on 4/13/2002; 8:49 AM actually in Christianity, God allows Satan to do the bad things he desires for their ultimate use for good. It is through tragedy and loss that character and strength is developed, as well as trust. Thus those who blame God lack the faith to believe that He is all-seeing and will not betray them. Moreover, Christians believe that death is simply the way of God bringing people home.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/13/2002; 10:22 AM On 4/12/02, Mark Morgan said: >If this is the case, does that mean God should not be given credit >for our happiness? Mark, This is *such* a ridiculous line to take. Very few thinking Christians would argue that God is responsible for all of the good but not the bad in our lives. The Bible itself says that God makes both good and evil... but nowhere does it say that God controls every event. I realize that a lot of unthining Christians might believe the sort of blind misunderstanding that you're trying to debate against, but you don't really want to debate the unthinking, do you? (I mean, it may be fun for a few minutes, if you're a little twisted, but it quickly grows boring. Thinking Christians have to debate the majority, too... it would be a lot more interesting if you'd give us a challenge and actually debate the thinkers.) Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/13/2002; 10:28 AM On 4/13/02, Chie Theresa Fujioka said: >actually in Christianity, God allows Satan to do the bad things he >desires for their ultimate use for good. It is through tragedy and >loss that character and strength is developed, as well as trust. >Thus those who blame God lack the faith to believe that He is >all-seeing and will not betray them. Moreover, Christians believe >that death is simply the way of God bringing people home. This is another generalization. Not all Christians believe there is a supernatural devil, and not all Christians believe that "death is simply the way of God bringing people home." Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/13/2002; 2:41 PM Seth Said: Very few thinking Christians would argue that God is responsible for all of the good but not the bad in our lives. The Bible itself says that God makes both good and evil... but nowhere does it say that God controls every event. I agree with him somewhat except for the part about me being unthinking. I don't think that Mark is unthinking either. Seth-saying people don't think isn't debating, it's a second grade playground fight. Mark:I'm saying God doesn't control every event. He makes it possible for good things to happen as well as bad things. Lets go through the Sep. 11 example. God gave us good brains. God gave us arms and legs. But God didn't make the terrorists use their brains to design bombs, and God didn't make them use their arms and legs to hijack planes. The terrorists just abused their God-given freedom. Although God gave them the power and the bodies to do all that stuff, he didn't make them do it.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/13/2002; 3:09 PM On 4/13/02, Adam Schirmacher said: >I agree with him somewhat except for the part about me being >unthinking. I don't think that Mark is unthinking either. >Seth-saying people don't think isn't debating, it's a second grade >playground fight. Adam, where did I say that you or Mark are unthinking? I didn't even imply it. Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: ScottN on 4/13/2002; 6:58 PM Rachelle, I would have to disagree with you. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING justifies that. It's the "blame the victim". Let's face it. Evil Exists. It may not be the Axis of EvilTM, but there are evil people out there.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/13/2002; 8:44 PM Rachelle: Although if one had been following the battle for capital gain in the Middle Eastern and surrounding countries for the last 30 or so years, they would have been suspicious of such a retaliation. I would suspect that America had more to do with what happened on September 11th then any other National body. So I would ultimately agrue that self-righteous, greedy, materialistic human desires became the major catalyst in events such as this. All these traits are not admired in the eyes of any Christian, Catholic, Jewish, or Pagan gods that I am familiar with. Yes! I agreed with everything Rachelle said, with one caveat -- "greedy, materialist human desires" are precisely what makes America great! Thank God for secular, materialist humanism. The last thing the world needs is more ascetic religious extremists who only seem interested in what cause they can die for (and kill others in the name of) rather than focus on the joy of living which is what "greed, materialistic human desires" are all about. The single best article I've read about the conflict between American materialism and Islamic extremist ascetism is Paul Freund's incredible essay, In Praise of Vulgarity (what a wonderful title).
Re: It's God's Fault By: Matthew Patterson on 4/13/2002; 9:18 PM > Thank God for secular, materialist humanism. *snicker*
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/13/2002; 9:37 PM Okay, a couple of Moderator Moments: First, I'm not sure debating the reasons for the attack is going to accomplish anything, but it's fine with me if everyone does so as long as nobody makes any personal attacks. Rachelee, Brian can be loud and bombastic but he doesn't mean it personally. Second, Adam. Seth. A careful rereading of Seth's statements make it clear he was not calling me, you, or anyone unthinking. On-topic again: Seth wrote: "I realize that a lot of unthining Christians might believe the sort of blind misunderstanding that you're trying to debate against, but you don't really want to debate the unthinking, do you?" Fair enough. What I was clearly failing to make clear was that I was trying to get Adam to work through the implications of his statements and trying to get him to expand on them. Ultimately I am hoping by challeging his thesis he'll end up with a better and more complete essay. It was not intended to be a challenge to the whole religious community.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/14/2002; 1:00 AM At 10:53 PM 4/13/2002 -0400, Mark Morgan wrote: >Rachelee, Brian can be loud and bombastic but he doesn't mean it personally. When did "loud and bombastic" become synonyms for "correct"? :-)
RE: It's God's Fault By: Chie Theresa Fujioka on 4/14/2002; 2:13 AM Sorry seth, I was describing my line of christianity... which is summed in the westminister confession God, in His ordinary providence, makes use of means, yet is free to work without, above, and against them, at His pleasure. 5.3 The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that it extends itself even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering, and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to His own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceeds only from the creature, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin 5.4 God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. 3.1 ----------------------------------------------------- James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. 1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world John 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. Rom. 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. John 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 8:47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. 1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. ----------------------------------------------------- I get the feeling I'm against the popular majority in these topics... and that what I believe is commonly categorized under "A Few Crazy People Who Believe..." but I do. An interesting question my chem teacher asked a guy who said he "had made his own god": Does whether you believe in God or not affect whether he exists? Does believing that he is a certain way change his true character? And my little note: This debate won't get anywhere. It isn't a discussion of people interested in changing their opinion. It is a mega-sermon on what each individual believes, and it is rather unlikely that anyone will change their mind. So I think the best thing to do is to make it obvious that these are beliefs, or else people will feel obligated to counter. Secondly, if you say the Bible, or any other literature says something, quote it. It helps validate the argument, along with being a general rule to any type of persuasive writing.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/14/2002; 1:18 AM At 10:18 PM 4/13/2002 -0400, Matthew wrote: > > Thank God for secular, materialist humanism. > >*snicker* I hoped someone would enjoy that. Seriously, though if people want to get all spirtual, I have no problem with that. But don't go crashing a plane into the WTC just because I'd prefer to watch Sponge Bob and listen to Britney Spears. It was interesting that Seth posted in this very thread about his own religious beliefs. Beliefs that, I might point out, would have all but guaranteed him a trial as a heretic had he expressed them in parts of European Christendom during the medieval period. The Inquisition could have cared less about materialism -- it was completely absorbed with higher matters. Fanatics and extremists who are willing to kill people who do not share their narrow ideologies are a threat to all civilizations and do not deserve even a moment's consideration. If you follow events in developing countries it is not hard to see what these sorts of people hate about Western culture. A major thing they hate about Europe and the United States, for example, is our relatively newfound tolerance of homosexuality and other liberal sexual practices. In Egypt, where they reject materialism for higher religious purposes, they still indict and imprison homosexuals. In Nigeria they sentence men and women who engage in premarital sex to public lashing and occasionally death. In Zimbabwe, the government points to Great Britain's tolerance of homosexuals as proof of the West's perversions and decadence. Ever wonder why the AIDS rate is so high among heterosexuals in Africa? Some African nations have answers to that question -- they have *no* homosexuals at all. None, nada, zip -- only those corrupt Western cultures with their obssession about sex and endemic immodesty suffer from such maladies. From where I sit, M. Atta would have done the world a favor if he had stopped trying to seek himself spiritually and started attending more Monster Truck Shows and wrote some Buffy fanfic stories.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/14/2002; 1:21 AM So, Brian, how does this relate to Adam's original essay? Can you connect it? (Avast, ye scurvy topic drift dogs!)
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/14/2002; 2:37 AM Mark said: Second, Adam. Seth. A careful rereading of Seth's statements make it clear he was not calling me, you, or anyone unthinking. But before that, Seth said: "I realize that a lot of unthining Christians might believe the sort of blind misunderstanding that you're trying to debate against, but you don't really want to debate the unthinking, do you?" This is what I say: by that first line he obviously meant unthinking instead of unthining. and he says you don't want to debate the unthinking. and who were you debating against? me. that makes me the unthinking.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/14/2002; 2:45 AM I doubt Seth meant you were unthinking. I'm so sure, I would say, drop the whole argument. Back ontopic, in your opinion, where does God's responsibility for good and evil in the world begin and end, and why?
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/14/2002; 7:34 AM On 4/14/02, Mark Morgan said: >So, Brian, how does this relate to Adam's original essay? Can you >connect it? > >(Avast, ye scurvy topic drift dogs!) Mark, if you're going to allow comments on articles that have been posted, you're going to have to accept drift. I don't see any way around it. To do so wouldn't seem to work against your goals, either. As long as all of the messages posted to this site are either published pieces or discussion generated by those pieces, then VoU will do great. Right? (Just my opinion, of course.) Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/14/2002; 7:36 AM On 4/14/02, Mark Morgan said: >Back ontopic, in your opinion, where does God's responsibility for >good and evil in the world begin and end, and why? Those things which affect his plan for the world. Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Eoghainn Oniongardail on 4/14/2002; 9:35 AM Chie wrote: >And my little note: This debate won't get anywhere. >It isn't a discussion of people interested in changing >their opinion. It is a mega-sermon on what each >individual believes, and it is rather unlikely that >anyone will change their mind. So I think the best >thing to do is to make it obvious that these are beliefs, >or else people will feel obligated to counter. Chie, I think people often counter what others express, whether it is concerning "beliefs" or not. (But, isn't just about everything we say based upon a belief, at some level?) I do not understand why anyone would wish to live in a world where their beliefs should not be critiqued and compared with others. What if we all dwelt within protected spheres, where it was comfortable to believe in anything we wish, but not comfortable to challenge views of ourseleves or others in any way? I am afraid that is the sort of environment that has gained a good deal of ground in recent decades. And it is dangerous. After the horrible events in Waco, Oklahoma City, New York City, etc, so many try to promote tolerance by accepting all religious ideas, especially those that demonstrate the commonality between different religions. This is done in sweeping terms and, always, "the less said the better". But, the obvious fact is that religions do differ; sometimes in very important respects. The more people find shelter and isolation in their religious beliefs, the more intolerance grows, because people will become exposed only to the narrow views of their own sect. The less exposure one has to the views of others, the less one is likely to understand or tolerate those views. In my opinion, this, more than anything, is the cause of the terrorism in the world: religious isolation. To combat this trend, I advocate a completely free and open atmosphere of discussion, where all things are allowed to be questioned, even "holy beliefs". While most people may not "be interested in changing their opinion", change does happen; but it tends to occur gradually, with repeated exposure to the views of others. I think this can be demonstrated by the history of my own mind, as well as many others I have known.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/14/2002; 4:27 PM At 08:36 AM 4/14/2002 -0400, Seth wrote: >On 4/14/02, Mark Morgan said: > > >Back ontopic, in your opinion, where does God's responsibility for > >good and evil in the world begin and end, and why? > >Those things which affect his plan for the world. Hey, you wouldn't happen to have a copy of that plan lying around, would you Seth? ;-)
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/14/2002; 5:31 PM On 4/14/02, Brian Carnell said: >Hey, you wouldn't happen to have a copy of that plan lying around, >would you Seth? ;-) Sure, I have about a dozen of them here in my house, one of them only a few feet away. Of course, you have to take the time to figure it on your own, nobody can do that for you. Seth
RE: It's God's Fault By: Seth Dillingham on 4/14/2002; 5:40 PM On 4/14/02, Seth Dillingham said: >On 4/14/02, Brian Carnell said: > >>Hey, you wouldn't happen to have a copy of that plan lying >>around, would you Seth? ;-) > >Sure, I have about a dozen of them here in my house, one of them >only a few feet away. P.S. Openings like that don't come along very often. Thanks! ;-)
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/14/2002; 5:45 PM At 06:31 PM 4/14/2002 -0400, Seth wrote: >Of course, you have to take the time to figure it on your own, >nobody can do that for you. Unfortunately, I do not have the time to learn Arabic to read the Koran in the original. :-) What I would like to see is God get his/her/its plan notarized and written in plain English (which is clearly the language that a real God would prefer!) ;-)
Re: It's God's Fault By: Matthew Patterson on 4/14/2002; 5:56 PM >> Of course, you have to take the time to figure it on your own, >> nobody can do that for you. > > Unfortunately, I do not have the time to learn Arabic to read the Koran > in > the original. > > :-) > > What I would like to see is God get his/her/its plan notarized and > written > in plain English (which is clearly the language that a real God would > prefer!) ;-) What do you want to bet that God only communicates in Esperanto? There must be *some* use for it.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Brian Carnell on 4/14/2002; 6:05 PM At 06:56 PM 4/14/2002 -0400, Matthew wrote: >What do you want to bet that God only communicates in Esperanto? There >must be *some* use for it. "En la komenco Dio kreis la c^ielon kaj la teron."
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/14/2002; 7:48 PM Seth wrote: "To do so wouldn't seem to work against your goals, either. As long as all of the messages posted to this site are either published pieces or discussion generated by those pieces, then VoU will do great. Right? (Just my opinion, of course.)" Makes sense.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Chie Theresa Fujioka on 4/15/2002; 5:32 AM E.O.: I'm not saying this shouldn't be addressed. Not at all! What I am saying, is that if we're going to get a good, honest exchange of beliefs and ideas, we're going to have to refrain from the opinion bashing tendencies that past religious discussions have caused. I am not interested in hearing how utterly stupid my opinions may be, but I will listen to / read a logical defense.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/15/2002; 5:41 AM Other than the one time I had to ban someone for it, has there ever been a time when someone here has called your opinions stupid, Chie? I'm alarmed at the idea I might have missed it.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/15/2002; 5:44 AM Addendum: Adam, if you'll look at the published version of your original piece, you'll see there was no need to hand code a title. Done automatically.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Chie Theresa Fujioka on 4/15/2002; 5:49 AM If they have I don't remember/mind. I guess I grow weary of the bickering that occurs when people can't support their ideas or even consider other's. It makes my participation hesitant... and I wouldn't be surprised if that were so for others too.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/15/2002; 5:54 AM I understand your reluctance, Chie. It's one of the reasons I try to be very active, even more so now. I think it's realistic to believe that the regular posters will be nice about it, since I know most of them socially in one electronic fashion or another.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Eoghainn Oniongardail on 4/15/2002; 12:14 PM Chie wrote: → E.O.: I'm not saying this shouldn't be addressed. → Not at all! What I am saying, is that if we're going → to get a good, honest exchange of beliefs and ideas, → we're going to have to refrain from the opinion bashing → tendencies that past religious discussions have caused. I think the ability to discuss ideas rationally without flaming is a skill that helps define a good writer. A lot of the flame wars we see on the web are simply due to bad writing. It is a great pity that such people seldom seem to realise their harm, for the healthy exchange of ideas has often been stunted by them. There is some refreshingly good writing on VoU. Thanks to Mark's thoughtful moderation, I think this can be a tremendous forum for meaningful exchange. Thanks for the clarification.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/18/2002; 12:18 AM I don't think there's a whole lot of bad writing on here. I don't consider mine bad, and I think Mark's definition of faith kicked plenty posterior. If anyone is at all confused about this, it's written from a Lutheran christian view. And proud of it.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/18/2002; 1:08 AM I wouldn't host the site if if was filled with bad writing, but that's I think not E.O's point--I see it as more of a challenge. If I am a good enough writer, I can make my point without namecalling. The current participants at this site fit that definition of good writer.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/21/2002; 11:04 PM I'm not namecalling yet. I think a good debatist should be able to argue without asking questions that are designed just for the purpose of being hard to answer. I think in most cases it is quite obvious whats above or below the line of god being partly or fully responsible. We as humans pretty much know what happens by chance and what could have been stoped or what is made of effort.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Mark Morgan on 4/22/2002; 10:47 AM I think in most cases it is quite obvious whats above or below the line of god being partly or fully responsible. Except, as I am an atheist, I don't see it. Is God responsible for babies born with spina bifida? Was God responsible for war, or famine, or plague? Where is that line?
RE: It's God's Fault By: Adam Schirmacher on 4/23/2002; 6:24 PM Mark, there is your problem. You can't draw the line because you aren't christian. This essay would be best for christians who draw the line at a bad place, but considering you're not christian, you have no line to draw. But anyway, no. God would not be responsible for those things, as Spina Bifida would happen by chance (whatever that is) and war and famine can be prevented. War alone is something that happens because diplomats have failed or because us homosapiens can't get along. Famine happens when people fail to efficiently make or gather food. Religion isn't an equation. Don't expect me to say exactly where the line is, but feel free to ask me my opinion on anything and everything.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Chie Theresa Fujioka on 4/24/2002; 12:36 AM I guess a right wing conservative would say that sin and the original fall is at fault for disease and horrible acts of cruelty.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Rachelle King on 4/24/2002; 3:05 AM There are countless pieces of evidence that suggest, especially in wiccan literature [Origins of Modern Witchcraft: The Evolution of a World Religion by Ann Moura], that Christianity and Catholicism and other such religions all sprung from the same beginnings-A means to control a population or group of individuals by an invading force. First, they take over the land. Then, they infilterate the politcal systems. Finally, they incorporate the religious beliefs of the peoples/society in which they are invading so as to persuade the masses to follow them. You see, these scholars seem to believe that these and other such religions are just a means to further control the people. A method of persuading conformity, if you will. So if these religious beliefs are just a system of beliefs built up around a political entity, then how can a god that doesn't exist, except for in the minds of the brainwashed, be responsible for any of the negative happenings in human history. It is because of the human appetiate for conquer and conquest that orthodox religion even exists. Ever notice how many paralles one can find between the American Law [in general] and the Kings James Christian Bible? For example, the non-exceptance of homosexuality, permaritial sex, protesters against "God Bless America..." And why the f*@k does it mention the Christian god on my Benjamin'!!!! [That was not a direct attack on anyone at all-just an irrated outburst due to an observation made while excepting cheese at the register.] Furthermore, in my calculated opinion, religion is indeed a carefully constructed equation. One so sumbliminal and penetrating in the socialization of Americans, that most will die not ever believing they actually lived in oppression.
RE: It's God's Fault By: Rachelle King on 4/24/2002; 3:07 AM Hey don't I get points from the evil accusations game for saying witch? [Just kidding-I sware.]
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright Notice | Privacy Policy | Contact | |
 |
|