god vs God

Title: god vs God
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > Reviving from Revival > The Ex-Christian Chatroom	Go to subcategory：

Author	Content

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Date Posted：10/02/2007 8:21 PMCopy HTML

As an ex member of the GRC I have gone through a lot and now don't accept the bible as anything but a man made book. It has some good sayings and examples in it but it also has a lot of crap. My view on God now has changed and even though some would say i have lost the plot i now feel that ihave becomespiritual.god vs God....... The God of the bible has nothing to do with the universal power/energy, what ever you want to call it. This universal power works totally different to the god of the bible. The bible makes heaps of claims but ultimatly doesn't deliver. The universal power has made no such claims or promises, it is because it just is. Maybe we as energy just go back to the source of that energy, no heaven, no hell, no devil, no last judgment, these are all statements made by a man made book. The man made book was written by men who had no way of understanding what we as humans can't really understand. The universal power doesn't intervene or hear our prayers it just exists for the sake of being. Describing it as a loving father or a compassionate god full of mercy is just the thoughts of men. The invention of religion was just a cunning way for leaders to get control of the masses, and i have to say it worked well. One of the strange traits of the human species is that it will give its allegiance to a higher power betterthan it will to a man. So the bookis great in making people so fearful of eternal damnation that they will change their ways and even kill for their beliefs.So god vs God.... the god of the bible is not the god of the universe. If you can look at it logically and put away all the emotion you will see that the bible is a dangerous book that needs to be put in its place with every other religious book.

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：10/02/2007 10:58 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : kahushna 

As an ex member of the GRC I have gone through a lot and now don't accept the bible as anything but a man made book. It has some good sayings and examples in it but it also has a lot of crap. My view on God now has changed and even though some would say i have lost the plot i now feel that ihave becomespiritual.God vs God....... The God of the bible has nothing to do with the universal power/energy, what ever you want to call it. This universal power works totally different to the description given in the bible. The bible makes heaps of claims but ultimatly doesn't deliver. The universal power has made no such claims or promises, it is because it just is. Maybe we as energy just go back to the source of the energy, no heaven, no hell, no devil, no last judgment, these are all statements made by a man made b 

I wrote this earlier for another post but thought it could go here as well as it 'sort' of fits the topic.
Earthquake, war, plague... shit truly happens and always always has. I'm saying that in the grand scheme of this insignificant little planets finite life, it's a speck of dust in a huge universe of matter and space... every now and then the conditions are just right in the life of a planet for life to form. The balls of its matter is just the right distance from it's sun, and is protected from meteors by the larger planets in the outer regions of its system. Whenever these conditions are right, in the countless billions of years this universe has been expanding and retracting, life has a short amout of time to form and evolve, in response to stimuli around it. These lifeforms evolve to a level of self existence where they are intelligent enough to question their own state of being. They get so smart that they begin to label the random coincidences as part of a plan by a god that simply doesn't exist outside of the common union of their own hearts.

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：11/02/2007 4:24 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : MothandRust 

Reply to : kahushnaAs an ex member of the GRC I have gone through a lot and now don't accept the bible as anything but a man made book. It has some good sayings and examples in it but it also has a lot of crap. My view on God now has changed and even though some would say i have lost the plot i now feel that ihave becomespiritual.God vs God....... The God of the bible has nothing to do with the universal power/energy, what ever you want to call it. This universal power works totally different to the description given in the bible. The bible makes heaps of claims but ultimatly doesn't deliver. The universal power has made no such claims or promises, it is because it just is. Maybe we as energy just go back to the source of the energy, no heaven, no hell, no devil, no last judgment, these are all statements made by a man mad 

I love your responce MothandRust i totally agree.  The Universe and life is such a mystery and simple men try to explain it in their own way.  The Koran, the Bible, Hindu, Buddist books, all a cheap excuse for an explaination.  I think we're on the same page when it comes to these things.  So what's your history if you're free to say?  Cheers.

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：11/02/2007 7:28 AMCopy HTML

Hi Kahushna,

my thoughts seem to be going the same way at the moment. Universal Laws, are all these things: having positive thoughts, seeing how you want to be and what you want to become, It will come to you. The laws of forgiveness, and letting  people be ... healing, scientifically proven concepts that happy thoughts heal, and negative thoughts destroy your body.

I'm throwing around the concepts that  these things have always been, and humans have always manifested gods to fit in to these things. Since the beginning of time, there has been a variety of Gods in all civilization, including a Man-god, born of a virgin, a god who heals, a god who creates. 

THrough quite a process, from 20 years in RF, a captive to the doctrine of tongues, to having to leave the place, because of severe human rights abuses, and then to go out and meet some different christians......... I've finally come to the conclusion (for me) that the Bible isn't inspired and written by God through mens hands, and there is no numeric pattern to confirm this. To me, it is a book of confusion. For example, there are 5 different ways to be saved

1. Believing in Jesus and saved by his dying on the cross, saved by faith

2. Saved by works, not faith

3. Belief and baptism

4, Belief, baptism, tongues

5. Predestination

All of these have a series of scriptures that back them up, and they all totally and blatantly contradict each other. 

When Jesus was asked how to be saved, he said things like, just love each other, or give your money to the poor. 

I talked with people about this for the last 3 years, the arguments are circular, frustrating, there is no final answer, and it just leaves you wanting to cry. 

But, the wierd thing is, I went to a church yesterday, and was very moved by the worship, an intelligent talk, mainly about Jesus simple parables, and messsages on how to live, and to care for the poor. There was something about that church (Uniting) and I'm quite drawn to go back. ( I haven't been going anywhere really for quite a while)

And Kahushna, when you say you feel more spiritual now, its wierd, but I feel the same. I can't put into words how I feel, when I ponder all this stuff. To feel joy and love and a zest for living when you finally put off the angst of bible wrestling. !!!!!!!!!And to finally understand Jesus...

Its all new territory, and its great

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：11/02/2007 8:18 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : kahushna 


I think we're on the same page when it comes to these things.  So what's your history if you're free to say?  Cheers. 

Hi Kahushna, Yes we are pretty much on the same page. My post-revival 'testimony'  and history can be found at the following link:
http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148724&startcat=1&ThreadID=2475174
and my most recent brain-spill on Life the Universe and Everything can be found in the following thread:
http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148055&startcat=1&ThreadID=2747986
The bible makes heaps of claims but ultimatly doesn't deliver.  The universal power has made no such claims or promises, it is because it just is.  Maybe we as energy just go back to the source of the energy, no heaven, no hell, no devil, no last judgment, these are all statements made by a man made book.  
Unfortunately, that seems to be the way of it. The first major promise broken by the god of the bible was that his promises wouldn't be broken. Even if the incredible happened and he delivered with the goods it'd be too late. He'd have already let much of his creation endure pain, agony and sorrow. A huge blemish on his character because he is 'eternal', and as such will have to face this eternity forever knowing of the suffering that his loved ones endured. A stain forever on his immortal mind... and therefore imperfect. An imperfect god can't exist (so puff he goes in a cloud of logic).
One of the strange traits of the human species is that it will give its allegiance to a higher power than it will to a man.  So the book is great  in making people so fearful of eternal damnation that they will change their ways and even kill for their beliefs.  
How ironic it is for us to construct god because of our own modesty. We wan't to be low and have a higher power to worship... could it be a transferance of focus? Is it our own creation we want to worship and therefore worship our ourselves. What an enigma!

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：11/02/2007 8:31 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : big girl 


But, the wierd thing is, I went to a church yesterday, and was very moved by the worship, an intelligent talk, mainly about Jesus simple parables, and messsages on how to live, and to care for the poor. There was something about that church (Uniting) and I'm quite drawn to go back. ( I haven't been going anywhere really for quite a while) 
And Kahushna, when you say you feel more spiritual now, its wierd, but I feel the same. I can't put into words how I feel, when I ponder all this stuff. To feel joy and love and a zest for living when you finally put off the angst of bible wrestling. !!!!!!!!!And to finally understand Jesus... Its all new territory, and its great 

That is weird, biggirl. But at the same time (knowing my disdain for church systems) I find it kinda healthy.
The bible makes a great reference point for discussion, and churches are like big 'water-coolers' to gather around and chew the fat. I know you're not going to go back to the tunnel vision you once looked through. I would find it completely unbearable to visit any church, and I'm sure I'd eye roll my eyes completely out of my head watching all the churchgoers singing and praying for what will utimately not be any different no matter how hard they clasp their hands together or raise their voices.
But I'm not you, and if you get a good rush of endorphins by being part of a congregation... then that's a good thing. I think our bodies work best when in a community of like minded people. Church delivers on that front and.. well... if it feels good and you know what you're doing and where you've been, go in eyes wide open and enjoy whatever floats the boat.

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Rookier
Score：1580
Posts：64
From：Unknown
Register：25/10/2006 12:58 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：11/02/2007 11:10 PMCopy HTML

Pertaining to the above discussion, check out the transcript or audio at -

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stories/2007/1812733.htm#transcript

Here's an extract:

"....and in my book I present one of the most interesting hypotheses and that is that there's variation in the human gene pool for, in effect, susceptibility to ritual and particularly the hypnotic ritual. That some people are much more hypnotisable than others, that's been known for a long time. And it's not clear why that should be the case. Well one possibility is that back in the early days of folk religion when schamanic healing was quite ubiquitous, they'd found the potions, they'd found the local herbs that were therapeutic, but they'd also found the rituals that enhanced the effects. It eased the pain of childbirth; anything that was somewhat psychosomatic or anxiety-linked could be really cured by hypnosis. Back in those days that was the only medicine going, so if you weren't hypnotisable, you didn't have any health insurance. It could have been a huge selective pressure and could explain why we see variation today.

Natasha Mitchell: Just thinking about this and the evolution of the human mind as religion evolved as well, I'm interested in your argument that the human mind is in a sense a 'fiction-generating contraption' and this weaves into your story about the origin of religion too.

Daniel Dennett: Oh yes. There's an instinct that we share with just about all mammals and that is when something puzzling or startling happens...."

There are so many dawns That have not yet broken

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Australia
Register：09/09/2006 11:27 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：14/02/2007 2:27 PMCopy HTML

Great series of posts here. It sounds very much like the investigation my mind was going through in the early years after leaving the GRCult.
During that period of awakening I had, I also pondered the question, "Could you imagine a civilization, or tribe through anytime in history, in any place on Earth (or anywhere in the universe) that, being confronted with the mysteries of life and existence, who would NOT invent some kind of story or series of stories to explain everything?" I challenge anyone to give an example a tribe who has not formed it's own supernatural beliefs.
Given this fact, we MUST draw the inevitable conclusion that we as humans have a natural propensity to invent creators and other associated mystical beings. It is in our very nature to do so. And quite reasonably so, too - a mind, no matter how simple, will enquire of the world around itself and draw conclusions - particularly if those conclusions are presented to us as a coherant set of established beliefs. Religion, in it's many many forms is therefore, inevitable.
An interesting (and relatively modern) example of this phenomenon are 'cargo cults'. Cargo cults are the result of technologically advanced people and their associated machines and equipment (cargo) coming into contact with isolated tribes that have no way to understand this 'magic' that they bring with them. An example of this was in isloated areas of what is now PNG during WW2, when supplies were brought in by air. For years after the war finished, local tribesmen still built mock runways and in the form of ceremony, imitated the actions of airfield ground crew in effort to bring back the magic cargo deliveries. There are many more examples here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult  .

...and on the Eighth Day, Man created God.

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：16/02/2007 7:12 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : MothandRust 


Reply to : kahushnaI think we're on the same page when it comes to these things. So what's your history if you're free to say? Cheers.Hi Kahushna, Yes we are pretty much on the same page. My post-revival 'testimony' and history can be found at the following link:http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148724&startcat=1&ThreadID=2475174and my most recent brain-spill on Life the Universe and Everything can be found in the following thread: 

Hi again MothandRust, again I like what you say.  Recently I was reading the life of Plato, a philosopher born around 400 B.C. he wrote a book called 'The Republic' and in it he was talking about how to make a perfect government.  He said that they needed to get a number of children together away from their parents.  The idea was to train these children in many areas, sport, language, maths, polatics, history and so on, starting from a very young age and then pick the best of the lot to lead the people.  But the interesting thing in his dialogue was that when these children would get into their teens their natural desires would get in the way of their learning.  So Plato thought what would they do?  He said to have a police force would be costly and hard to manage.  He then came up with the idea that they needed religion, the invention of a higher power to keep them in control.  As he said, they would be more likely to give their allegiance to a god than they would to a man.  That opened my eyes to why religion was invented in the first place, to keep the masses in control.  Plato worked it out 400 years B.C. and i think the bible was written for that reason.   When I first read it, it was like a lightning bolt, it all made sense.  Religion was a way govenments tried to keep the populace on control, through fear, shame and guilt.  The fear of eternal punishment has kept people over the centuries in so much fear that they've even killed for their allegiance to their god.
So MothandRust we are on the same page when it comes to these things.  Would like to sit down and talk these things over with you face to face, what do you think?  Let me know if you'd like to, if not that's ok as well.  cheers
Kahushna. (If you know where my username comes from then it means you were part of the GRC)

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：16/02/2007 7:48 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : kahushna 

Reply to : MothandRustReply to : kahushnaI think we're on the same page when it comes to these things. So what's your history if you're free to say? Cheers.Hi Kahushna, Yes we are pretty much on the same page. My post-revival 'testimony' and history can be found at the following link:http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148724&startcat=1&ThreadID=2475174and my most recent brain-spill on Life the Universe and Everything can be found in the following thread:Hi again MothandRust, again I like what you say. Recently I was reading the life of Plato, a philosopher born around 400 B.C. he wrote a book called 'The Republic' and in it he was talking about how to make a perfect government. He said that they needed to get a number o 

Cargo cults... very interesting. I saw a documentary recently on the influence on Hawaii when it was discovered. The lengths the native dwellers did to keep the cargo coming. They gave sex away like crazy! No wonder the sailors kept coming back, and it's no wonder desease became rampant. Inter-racial sex was no problem for those good ol' boys. Another example of the pillaging of a harmonious society by 'god's white people'.
Hi kahushna, we're on the same page but in different parts of the country. Checkout my new blogsite to see the last few years of my online ramblings all in the one handy place. It's more of an exercise in self indulgence rather than a balanced academic theologious exploration, but then that's what blogs are by definition.

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：16/02/2007 7:53 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : big girl 


Hi Kahushna,my thoughts seem to be going the same way at the moment. Universal Laws, are all these things: having positive thoughts, seeing how you want to be and what you want to become, It will come to you. The laws of forgiveness, and letting people be ... healing, scientifically proven concepts that happy thoughts heal, and negative thoughts destroy your body.I'm throwing around the concepts that these things have always been, and humans have always manifested gods to fit in to these things. Since the beginning of time, there has been a variety of Gods in all civilization, including a Man-god, born of a virgin, a god who heals, a god who creates.THrough quite a process, from 20 years in RF, a captive to the doctrine of tongues, to having to leave the place, because of severe human rights abuses, and then to go out and meet some different christians......... I've fin 

Hi big girl,
Thanks for your responce i found it very interesting.  When I left the GRC i went through a variety of feelings and emotions from wanting to follow the lord on my own to wanting to go to another church to being athiest.  It started while i was in the church, I was just asking the lord for a sign to let me know that the doubts i was having could be changed.  But i asked and asked and nothing happened.  I had two very specific signs, nothing major but they never occured and infact i cotinue to ask and 6 years later i am still waiting.  So now I believe that the god of the bible is just the invention of man and as i said in my posting to MothandRust it was invented to keep the masses in control.  
With people who do go to church i have mixed feelings about it.  I do know that religion can help some people in society where natural means has not worked.  It doesn't prove a god but allegiance to a higher power can be such a driving force as Plato said in his book 'The Republic'.  So i do know people who were alcoholics, gamblers, bad peole and so on.  Finding god and receiving toungues is such  a powerful motivator and some peolpe get so much benifit from it.  So religion in one way served a purpose and infact i believe the western world would not have advanced the way it did if religion had not been invented.  Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not committ adultery , thou shalt not steal, thou shalt honour thy father and mother and so on.  It kept the masses in control and fear, it didn't work for everyone but for the general population it did.  
So if someone gets something from religion and it keeps them in check it's not so bad and it can lift people.  If only they could take out the unrealistic promises and expectaions it would be much better.  Anthony Robins style meetings with no religious conotations behind it , it  would be great, no fear mongering, no promise of eternal punishment or eternal salvation, just positive affermations on how to respect and honour yourself and your fellow man.  So nice writing to you big girl and hope to hear from you soon. cheers
Kahushna
 

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Unknown
Register：13/02/2007 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：16/02/2007 3:34 PMCopy HTML

So religion in one way served a purpose and in fact I believe the western world would not have advanced the way it did if religion had not been invented.  Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, and thou shalt honour thy father and mother and so on.  It kept the masses in control and fear, it didn't work for everyone but for the general population it did. 

So if someone gets something from religion and it keeps them in check it's not so bad and it can lift people.  If only they could take out the unrealistic promises and expectations it would be much better.  Anthony Robins style meetings with no religious connotations behind it, it would be great, no fear mongering, no promise of eternal punishment or eternal salvation, just positive affirmations on how to respect and honour yourself and your fellow man.  So nice writing to you big girl and hope to hear from you soon. Cheers

Kahushna 

Kahushna I agree with you in that the western world would not have advanced the way it did if religion had not been invented. I'll go one step further and say that the world as we know it would not be the way if not for religion. But I think that is what your saying. But just in case hears my point

Just think about all the people in the world who would not be dead or not have had their land and belonging taken if it were not in the name of a god.

The aboriginal would still own the land if it were not for god giving it to the white man.  Sure they weren't just sitting around eating grubs and waiting for some anything to happen. They were busy killing one and another taking the land and belonging of others just like EVERY OTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD at the time. This manifest destiny thing takes over and bang your dead. I have a problem when people say that things should or will remain the same now and forever. Nothing Absolute NOTHING remains the same. 

When white people went to the Americas and started killing and taking in the name of god to save them from themselves they were not doing wrong against brown but people killing people who killed people who had the better weapons and tactics. This believing in a god that you would go into battle and be saved by god of if you died go to heaven just made people more likely to attack and kill. And now in the name of god people are doing what had happened from the time man and women first walked upright on 

Land. Hell ever since one animal killed the first animal billions of years ago thing have not changed.

The only difference is that those who believe in a god have rule that they say they follow. Well we all know this is just a snow job for stupid people. 

As for Tony Robins I would have to say that he is just another cult leader just in a different skin. He's in it for the money and is more than willing to sell you books and tapes and DVD's and anything that he can to make you feel as if you can help yourself. I know of people who have followed him around the US to hear him preach sorry talk. 

And I'm sure the when the husband of Tony's new wife found himself wanting to kill Tony for taking sorry with the promise of a wonderful life of the Rich and Ramous and a new life whisking her off he felt that those books an and tapes really helped.

He"s Ok He"s All Right

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：16/02/2007 8:19 PMCopy HTML

HI Kahushna, Platos Republic sounds interesting. I'm doing the same thing -I've just read a book on Gandhi, and his thoughts on religion. And I'm reading something by Nock which is about the religion in Hellenistic times. I had no knowledge of religion, until I went to RF/RCI when I was 20 and was in there for 20 years or so. Know I'm looking into the whole thing and reading like mad. 

I think God put in us an awareness of him, and a knowledge of his laws (universal law) I think great people arose, who lived it and showed the way. All these things can be tapped within us, such as healings, speaking in tongues, which has always been. Humility, lack of pride and knowing we are as grass that withers, keeps us grounded. If people are searching for peace and truth, I think the red letters in the gospels (Jesus' words) pretty well show the way. But I also think that Buddha, Muhommed probably had it sussed. However, man gets hold of these holy books, and corrupts them.

And as Red Rubber Rat says, man has always killed and conquered. Its in us. If you accept the Bible's Old Testament, then we must realize that God ordered his chosen people to commit genocide regularly. He must have made us with the ability to do this. So now i'm confused. We have the universal law in us, but also the dark side!!!! We are complex, as poor old Darth Vader found out, when all he wanted to do was have the power of immortality so that people he loved didn't die...

Oh well, thats my thought for the day. Its too hot at the moment to think any more!!!1

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：18/02/2007 5:43 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : redrubberrat 

So religion in one way served a purpose and in fact I believe the western world would not have advanced the way it did if religion had not been invented. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, and thou shalt honour thy father and mother and so on. It kept the masses in control and fear, it didn't work for everyone but for the general population it did.So if someone gets something from religion and it keeps them in check it's not so bad and it can lift people. If only they could take out the unrealistic promises and expectations it would be much better. Anthony Robins style meetings with no religious connotations behind it, it would be great, no fear mongering, no promise of eternal punishment or eternal salvation, just positive affirmations on how to respect and honour yourself and your fellow man. So nice writing to you big girl aInteresting what you write and I agree that white man went out in the name of their christian god to rob, plunder and kill  and they did this all with the supposed desire to help.  But what I'm thinking is that god or no god that would have happened regardless of religion because man in heart is basicly evil.  I think if we could go back to society before the bible man would have had their basic supersticious beliefs but it didn't keep the masses in control.  As man progressed and societies grew some men must have realised that to really exploit the people they needed a higher power that punished sin and rewarded good.  It's that basic principle that produced the bible, koran etc.  So with this they were able to keep the majority of the people in control and slowly but surely the western world was able to advance at a pace much faster than if they had not have had religion,  Anarchy would have reigned without religion but it suppressed the natural inclination of man to destroy itself.  
The consequenses of this of cource is what we have seen throughout the ages.  So it's a double edged sword, we were dambed without it and we were dambed with it and cosidering that most of the wars are fought today based on religious values what does that tell us?  Would the aboriginals of Australia survived and prospered without us?? Maybe yes maybe no it's all hypothetical i know  but my feeling is that they wouldn't have survived.  Due to their trible warings, cannabolism, ect, they would have eventually consumed themselves, no pun intended.  The human species is inherintly designed to destroy itself and bible or no bible that's probably what it will do to itself.  Religion has probably just delayed the inevitable.  Have a great day.
 
Kahushna

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：18/02/2007 8:51 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : kahushna 

But what I'm thinking is that god or no god that would have happened regardless of religion because man in heart is basicly evil.

I don't think we're basically evil, but rather we're self-centred and self-serving left to our own devices and instincts. We need to survive under harsh environments and sometimes we have to look after ourselves primarily as we've evolved or progressed. Our peripheral view and perception of reality is soley ours and we look out for number one. Of course maternal instincts and social rules dictate that we love and try to work as communities. Our survival instincts are not evil... We just have to go beyond ourselves and work as teams rather than sole entities. 
And then as teams or tribes we also become self interested and cliquey, so we defend our tribes or selfishly invade others to make our tribes stronger. Again, not evil, just the way we work as sentient animals.

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Unknown
Register：13/02/2007 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：18/02/2007 11:32 AMCopy HTML

  (Interesting what you write and I agree that white man went out in the name of their Christian god to rob, plunder and kill and they did this all with the supposed desire to help.  But what I'm thinking is that god or no god that would have happened regardless of religion because man in heart is basically evil.  I think if we could go back to society before the bible man would have had their basic superstitious beliefs but it didn't keep the masses in control.  As man progressed and societies grew some men must have realized that to really exploit the people they needed a higher power that punished sin and rewarded good.  It's that basic principle that produced the bible, Quran etc.  So with this they were able to keep the majority of the people in control and slowly but surely the western world was able to advance at a pace much faster than if they had not have had religion, Anarchy would have reigned without religion but it suppressed the natural inclination of man to destroy itself. 

 The consequences of this of course is what we have seen throughout the ages.  So it's a double edged sword, we were dammed without it and we were dammed with it and considering that most of the wars are fought today based on religious values what does that tell us?  Would the aboriginal of Australia survived and prospered without us?? Maybe yes maybe no it's all hypothetical I know but my feeling is that they wouldn't have survived.  Due to their tribal warnings, cannibalism, etc, they would have eventually consumed themselves, no pun intended.  The human species is inherently designed to destroy itself and bible or no bible that's probably what it will do to itself.  Religion has probably just delayed the inevitable.  Have a great day.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Well my history teacher would be very mad at me for letting history be twisted like this.

If man's basic heart were evil you and I wouldn't be here.

Man likes to see what is over the hill and around the corner and across the water. "In the name of god just paid the bills.

I placed superstition along with religion, as they are the same things. Bow down to a wooden object and have the holy man pray for you. It's the same all around the world.

Organized religion as they call it is just the rules written down because the clergy could read and it's easier to screw the simple folk when the story is consistent.  You might remember the Gutenberg bible was a big hit for the praying masses and yet shunned by the church because the dirty little masses did not need the holy man to interrupt what god is said to have said. 

You might also want to remember the DARK AGES and why they were dark.

 And it wasn't because they didn't have the clapper. "Clap on Clap off The Clapper"

You might member hearing about a guy called  Galileo Galilei http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

Sure sure if man were not tied to the church he might have come up with the BOMB a couple of hundred years before and we could have left this world to the rats and cockroaches long before now. Or if Bush and his friends like Howard had it their way soon. In the name of god of course

Anarchy - a state of lawlessness and disorder (usually resulting from a failure of government) Ya! Like this has never happened before during and after the god of the books arrived. 

Would the aboriginal of Australia survived and prospered without us?? Maybe yes maybe no it's all-hypothetical I know but my feeling is that they wouldn't have survived.)

Yes "OH THANK YOU WHITE MAN FOR SAVING US" You sound like G W Bush on Iraq.

The nature of man is to out think the nest guy. To harness what's at hand and use it to make live better for him and his family. The reason that the west won out in the race to conquer the world is that he had the use of resources that were not available to those in other parts of the world. Have you ever tried to hitch a wagon to a kangaroo?

There are many books that you can read on why the book god won out over the medicine men.

 I suggest Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.

And Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or succeed

And what he says

 (I don't think we're basically evil, but rather we're self-centered and self-serving left to our own devices and instincts. We need to survive under harsh environments and sometimes we have to look after ourselves primarily as we've evolved or progressed. Our peripheral view and perception of reality is solely ours and we look out for number one. Of course maternal instincts and social rules dictate that we love and try to work as communities. Our survival instincts are not evil... We just have to go beyond ourselves and work as teams rather than sole entities.

He's OK

He"s Ok He"s All Right

Rank：Noob
Score：280
Posts：11
From：Unknown
Register：06/02/2007 6:42 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：18/02/2007 7:57 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : redrubberrat 

(Interesting what you write and I agree that white man went out in the name of their Christian god to rob, plunder and kill and they did this all with the supposed desire to help. But what I'm thinking is that god or no god that would have happened regardless of religion because man in heart is basically evil. I think if we could go back to society before the bible man would have had their basic superstitious beliefs but it didn't keep the masses in control. As man progressed and societies grew some men must have realized that to really exploit the people they needed a higher power that punished sin and rewarded good. It's that basic principle that produced the bible, Quran etc. So with this they were able to keep the majority of the people in control and slowly but surely the western world was able to advance at a pace much faster than if they had not have had religion, Anarchy w 

don't agree red, man as a species in my eyes and with what i see and read and understand is basicly evil and that includes all of us.  It can be covered up with terms like self centered or selfish but it comes back to the same thing, evil.  Man is destroying the earth, global warming, bombs that can destroy the earth, species destroyed and made extinct, forests cut down every minute of the day, starvation, murders, gangs,  pollution of the land  sea and air, pediphials, rape, the homeless, horrific diseases and the list goes on.  Just take a look at your own little world and look at all the arguments and disagreements amongst family and friends, usually because of money or property.   The human race is a cancer to this planet that's probably why the cockroaches will end up being the final survivors.

TAKING CARE OF BUISNESS, THE KING.

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：18/02/2007 9:53 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : kahushna 

don't agree red, man as a species in my eyes and with what i see and read and understand is basicly evil and that includes all of us.  It can be covered up with terms like self centered or selfish but it comes back to the same thing, evil.  Man is destroying the earth, global warming, bombs that can destroy the earth, species destroyed and made extinct, forests cut down every minute of the day, starvation, murders, gangs,  pollution of the land  sea and air, pediphials, rape, the homeless, horrific diseases and the list goes on.  Just take a look at your own little world and look at all the arguments and disagreements amongst family and friends, usually because of money or property.   The human race is a cancer to this planet that's probably why the cockroaches will end up being the final survivors.   

I just don't know about describing myself or ourselves as evil. Sure I'm a freaking wally sometimes, but not inherently evil (That's a matter of opinion though as I do know a few people who wouldn't hesitate to label me that way). The word implies an unnatural state of being to me and I don't think we deserve it. Although men are all 'bastards', I know of some girls who are just plain unevil.
A few million years from now the sharks may evolve and come out of the water to ravage the land in their cold-hearted plight to rule this world. They won't be filled with a supernatural 'evil' but will rather be running on the instincts that drove them to evolve in the first place. It's a drive... a purpose. Who knows? Perhaps the dinosaurs actually died out because they got so big and driven that they eventually ended up eating each other until there was just a few hungry T-rexes running around.

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Forum Oracle
Score：41550
Posts：1881
From：Australia
Register：27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：19/02/2007 5:11 PMCopy HTML

Societies worse off 'when they have God on their side'

By Ruth Gledhill

RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. 

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems. 
 
The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society. 
It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality. 
 
Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its "spiritual capital". But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills. 
The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: "Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world. 
 
"In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies. 
 
"The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so." 
 
Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions. 
 
He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy. 
The study concluded that the US was the world's only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from " uniquely high" adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested. 
 
Mr Paul said: "The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America." 
 
He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added. 
 
Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. "I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states," he added. 
He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said. 
 
"The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. 
 
"The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted."
 
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C2-1798944%2C00.html

Instagram and Twitter: @mothpete

Rank：Rookier
Score：1580
Posts：64
From：Unknown
Register：25/10/2006 12:58 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：21/02/2007 9:10 PMCopy HTML

Moth and Rust said:

"A few million years from now the sharks may evolve and come out of the water to ravage the land in their cold-hearted plight to rule this world. They won't be filled with a supernatural 'evil' but will rather be running on the instincts that drove them to evolve in the first place. It's a drive... a purpose. Who knows? Perhaps the dinosaurs actually died out because they got so big and driven that they eventually ended up eating each other until there was just a few hungry T-rexes running around."

Well just coincidentally - and for the enlightenment of all - I heard today (22/2/2007) on Bush Telegraph (radio national) a top palentologist talking all about the latest theories on life's origins, human evolution, etc. You can listen as mp3 download or streaming. It's a top listen:

abc.net.au/rn/bushtelegraph/

Anyway, this guy has written a book expounding his theory about how human beings have evolved from fish. I am not joking.

Here's a summary from the web site show promo:

" Recently there's been great excited discussion about the megafauna - enormous mammal skeletons that lived up to eight hundred thousand years ago - which were found in caves under the Nullabor in Western Australia. But did you know that an unassuming fish fossil discovered on a station in Queensland could be the "missing link" between sea life and humans?

Dr John Long, a world leading paleontologist based at the Museum of Victoria was involved in these discoveries. Dr Long gave Bush Telegraph listeners some tips on how to find that next priceless discovery, at home: "Paleontology for beginners". "

So Moth, it seems the sharks (well fish anyway) did evolve!!! (if you accept his theoty).

I think you'd agree that literalist interpretations of the bible (evolution in 4000 years or whatever) seem total crap in the light of the more enlightened.

Catchya round the light, Mothie and friends.

There are so many dawns That have not yet broken

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Unknown
Register：13/02/2007 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：23/02/2007 3:10 PMCopy HTML

don't agree red, man as a species in my eyes and with what i see and read and understand is basicly evil and that includes all of us.  It can be covered up with terms like self centered or selfish but it comes back to the same thing, evil.  Man is destroying the earth, global warming, bombs that can destroy the earth, species destroyed and made extinct, forests cut down every minute of the day, starvation, murders, gangs,  pollution of the land  sea and air, pediphials, rape, the homeless, horrific diseases and the list goes on.  Just take a look at your own little world and look at all the arguments and disagreements amongst family and friends, usually because of money or property.   The human race is a cancer to this planet that's probably why the cockroaches will end up being the final survivors.   

Turn off the T.V. Go to the beach and SING WITH ME!!!

Don't Worry, Be Happy

From the Movie "Cocktails"

Performed by Bobby McFerrin

Here is a little song I wrote

You might want to sing it note for note

Don't worry be happy

In every life we have some trouble

When you worry you make it double

Don't worry, be happy......

Ain't got no place to lay your head

Somebody came and took your bed

Don't worry, be happy

The land lord say your rent is late

He may have to litigate

Don't worry, be happy

Lood at me I am happy

Don't worry, be happy

Here I give you my phone number

When you worry call me

I make you happy

Don't worry, be happy

Ain't got no cash, ain't got no style

Ain't got not girl to make you smile

But don't worry be happy

Cause when you worry

Your face will frown

And that will bring everybody down

So don't worry, be happy (now).....

There is this little song I wrote

I hope you learn it note for note

Like good little children

Don't worry, be happy

Listen to what I say

In your life expect some trouble

But when you worry

You make it double

Don't worry, be happy......

Don't worry don't do it, be happy

Put a smile on your face

Don't bring everybody down like this

Don't worry, it will soon past

Whatever it is

Don't worry, be happy

He's OK He's alright

He"s Ok He"s All Right

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Unknown
Register：13/02/2007 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：26/02/2007 7:20 AMCopy HTML

There is spin there are spinners and there is the spun It made me dizzy so I got out.

The words of the bible are the spin as you can pick and choose and interpret it, as you will.  As we know there are thousands of spinners. The spinners would be the different churches and pastors who do the interpretations And there are the spun that those who still believe in a God. It's fine with me if you still believe in a god but please don't burden the rest of the world with your simple thinking.

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate

By Dennis Diehl Platinum Quality Author

When I was kid, I loved to ask my minister questions about things that, to my young mind, made no sense when I read them in the Bible or more likely heard them in Sunday school. His answers were always rather bland and not a little aloof since, after all, he was the pastor and I was just a kid.

I remember asking about how humans and dinosaurs could coexist. After all, they had to be a part of the creation story, even though not mentioned specifically. Or why would dinosaurs be taken on the ark, only to go extinct such a short time after? And how do you cage a T-Rex or fit a Brontosaurus on such a boat, much less a pair of all sorts?

I got a lot of looks but very few answers. As the years went by, I concluded that none of it was either possible or even addressed in the Bible. I realized humans and dinosaurs had nothing in common (unless you live in the SE USA) and the pastor was either ignorant, deliberately deceptive or hung up somewhere in between himself, not knowing what to say to a kid. I honestly think I would have appreciated knowing what I suspect he knew, that being the story of Noah was fiction and I didn't have to worry about dinosaurs or polar bears for that matter on the ark. It never happened.

I remember asking why the Bible, a book which had to know better since it was written by God himself, said Joshua raised his hands and the "sun stopped for the space of about a day," when clearly it would be the earth that stopped rotating? I asked him how oceans would not slop out of their basins in such a scenario and drown the whole world? I asked him if humans would not be cast into space by such a sudden stop of the entire planet? I even asked if this really happened, why did no one else on the whole planet notice it, or write about it? I got that dumb look again.

I even asked him what would happen to my handicapped brother, who could neither hear, speak or see and thus had no way to become a Jesus accepting Christian. He told me he was saved automatically. Wow! How cool. I, on the other hand, would have to risk getting my beliefs correct or go to hell. Bummer.

I asked what about all those in history and even now who have never heard of Jesus. He said they all are saved in their ignorance, though another minister I asked said they all go to hell of some sort. So depending on who you ask, the ignorant either get an automatic free pass for their trouble or go to hell, having no awareness of what they did to deserve that! Hmmmm. Something ain't right here!

I did respond by asking him why then we should send missionaries and put the ignorant at risk, when if we just leave them alone, they can make it in their ignorance of never having heard the only name under heaven by which a man can be saved. I got the look again.

Our denomination believed in predestination, a very strange belief if you asked me as a kid. So God already knows who is in and who is out, and even if you are one of the outwardly good guys, you could be on the outs with God. The minister said yes. Hmmm, so a killer might actually have it made, while the minister was predestined to be lost? Big look there! He said that one could tell by their fruits who God probably had already predestined to be saved. This was getting confusing to me so I dropped it. I later read that John Calvin, the founding father of our particular denomination, chased a former heretic friend all over Europe for disagreeing with him theologically, and had him burned at the stake. Wow, these theologians are seriously serious people! Sounds like as long as you are a Church Father, you can do this kind of thing and get away with it. I began to think that up to this point, most of the answers I had been given were just someone's educated guesses or ideas, but had no basis in fact.

I went to a Christian college to study these things. Boy if you think I had questions as a kid!

"Why did God not like Cain's vegetable sacrifice but loved Abel's cooked meat?" Answer...Vegetarians are weak Christians.

"Who was Cain afraid would kill him when God put him out of the Garden for killing Abel? There were mom, dad, bro and himself on the whole planet at the time." Answer...He must have known his sisters were going to have kids with dad, no not that. He was speculating. Cain wasn't thinking very clearly that day.

"Why would God stop the whole earth for a day so Israelites could finish a genocide against the enemy?" I mean, I can see stopping it so there is more time to hug, or feed the hungry, or plant the crops, but more time to kill? Dumb story. Answer...God hates sin and had to kill the bastards, he just needed more time than he planned on."

"How come the horses in the Exodus die twice in the Ten Plagues and still survive for Pharoah to mount a final attack against the Israelites, and then die again." Answer...Where do you get this stuff?

"Why, no matter what, is it always the human's fault and God never gets any blame for not making good on his promises?" Answer...It's a mystery. Have faith. God's ways are not your ways.

"Why does the Apostle Paul, who writes most of the New Testament, NEVER quote Jesus, tell a story of his life or death, discuss a miracle or teaching?" Answer...Where do you get this stuff?

"Why does neither Mark nor John know anything about Jesus birth, while Matthew and Luke do but tell contradictory stories?" Answer...Because the Gospels are like four people who see a car wreck...

"Why does Paul only say Jesus was born of a woman like everyone else?" Answer...Paul was concerned about the risen Jesus, not the earthly one. He was too busy to check up on the details.

"Did Paul ever spend five minutes with the real human Jesus?" Answer. Well no, but Paul's Jesus is the risen Jesus, it doesn't matter.

"Isn't it strange the man who writes most of the New Testament and tells us all how to live, think and believe about Jesus, never met him, while the Twelve who did, vanish into thin air and write nothing/" Answer...You ain't from around these parts are you boy.

"How come Jesus never wrote anything himself while alive, but then writes perfect Greek after he is dead in the form of the Book of Revelation?" Answer....He finished his PHD in Heaven.

"If Herod killed all the little children under two to get at Jesus, who escaped, can we not say the little children had to die for Jesus before he died for them?" Answer...No we can't, sheesh.

"How come Herod couldn't follow the Star of Bethlehem himself to find Jesus, but sent others to report back when they found him?" Answer...He was busy.

"How could Mary leave town after being warned of Herod's intentions and never tell the women in the town, their kids were about to be butchered?" Answer...she was under oath not to tell the Angel story.

"Do you think Mary thought, 'I know something you don't know,' as she left town?" Answer...you're sick.

"How could Jesus family flee to Egypt sometime during the first two years in one story but go home to Narareth quietly after 40 days in the other?" Answer...It's a miracle.

"How come in Mark 3 Mary and his brothers came to get Jesus and take him home because they thought he was "mad" which I assume means insane. Did Mary forget who he was and how he got here?" Answer...shut up.

"How come Matthew uses the Old Testament to weave a story of Jesus, where every quote he uses has absolutely nothing to do with the point he is making about Jesus birth?" Answer...While we might flunk you for such methods, we give Matthew an A, because, well, he's Matthew. Bible guys get to do and say things you're not allowed to.

"If Jesus was asked 'who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?', would that not imply the man had sinned before his birth, perhaps in a previous life, if his blindness at birth was some kind of punishment? I mean, the blindness was from birth, so the sin had to be before that." Answer...Ummm.., no. Whatever the answer, it's definately not that one.

"So is it just me, or are these good questions to ask about the text and theology of the Bible?" Answer...It's just you. While we might be marginally informed ourselves, we are very piously convicted of our answers. The wisdom of man, and this would be you in this case, is foolishness with God. You're fired and have a nice day.

And so it goes. If you want to make a pastor, elder or deacon turn white with fear or red with anger, just ask a Bible question based on the actual text or what today we would simple know as common sense. Depending on his denomination, education, candor and personal spiritual confidence, he will react accordingly. Most pastors I know are sincere, but ill informed or duplistic and well informed, not willing to risk all for what they clearly also see is a problem with the "inerrant" text of the Bible. Kinda sad actually, but when it comes to matters of the spirit, it is important to keep asking those questions about a book that proports to have the key to everything and the only right way for a human to think. It's important to ask questions of all such books and ideas. Let's face it, take away the zealots and fundamentalists from Judaism, Islam and Christianity, and the planet might actually find some peace. Killing the messenger for bringing the message some don't want to hear, is however, still the preferred way to handle such things all too often.

Dennis is a former Pastor of 26 years and still has lots of questions left 

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dennis_Diehl

He"s Ok He"s All Right

Rank：Not quite new
Score：710
Posts：31
From：Unknown
Register：25/03/2006 11:10 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：26/02/2007 1:59 PMCopy HTML

wow, that is deep, hurt my head by time i finished reading it, sounds like the pastor would be a great person to meet and discuss stuff with

Rank：Member I
Score：1150
Posts：53
From：Unknown
Register：13/02/2007 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：05/03/2007 3:12 AMCopy HTML

This is worth a look. IT's short and to the point

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol5OWI7ZJZA

He"s Ok He"s All Right

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：05/03/2007 8:21 AMCopy HTML

A COALITION of prominent Australian Jews, including the philosopher Peter Singer, publisher Louise Adler and Robert Richter, QC, has sparked a furore in the Jewish community by announcing it will challenge what it sees as extreme pro-Israeli bias among Jews in Australia.

The group, Independent Australian Jewish Voices, has been criticised by some Jewish authorities for calling for more open debate on Israeli's treatment of Palestinians.

The organisation yesterday launched an online campaign to have "alternative voices" heard in the media. One organiser claimed many Australian Jews were "basically brainwashed" into unthinking support for Israeli government policy towards Palestine.

The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council, a major think tank, said the group was dangerous and unrepresentative.

"Some of the individuals are clearly committed to the delegitimisation of Israel," said Colin Rubenstein, the executive director of the council.

"They're simply using their Jewish ethnic background. It is clearly a small number of Jewish-born individuals who make their Jewishness known while they are being critical of Israel," Mr Rubenstein said.

A visiting British author, Melanie Phillips, last week nicknamed the group "Jews for Genocide", according to the Australian Jewish News. Phillips, who wrote Londonistan, a book criticising elements of the British Muslim community, could not be contacted to verify the claim yesterday.

Ms Adler, Melbourne University Press chief executive, a signatory to the group's petition, said she was outraged by the council's references to "Jewish-born individuals" when commenting on the group.

"When you are classified as Jewish-born or not, or who is a legitimate Jew - I don't want to use this analogy but you can only go back to the Third Reich," Ms Adler said.

"That criticism of Israel is automatically assumed to be anti-Semitism just equates to a way of shutting down debate. In Australia, in the early 21st century, we should be able to be more mature than that."

Mr Rubenstein said the coverage received by the group "made a nonsense of the claim that they are somehow suppressed or silenced".

The organisation is modelled on a similar Jewish group launched last month in Britain that includes the Nobel Prize winner Harold Pinter, the comedian Stephen Fry and the filmmaker Mike Leigh.

Peter Slezak, one of the Australian project's founders and a senior lecturer in history and philosophy at the University of NSW, said supporters wanted "to stand up and let it be known that we have the right to question Israeli policy, that we believe in fair treatment of Palestinian people as well as Israelis."

Professor Slezak, whose mother survived the Auschwitz concentration camp in World War II, said he had received a death threat at the weekend after his views were presented in the Jewish media.

"There are people out there in the community who respond to this dog whistling, these references to Jewish-born and so on," Professor Slezak said. "There are simply a lot of people in the community who have basically been brainwashed over the years."

He conceded that the group's views represented a minority of Australian Jews, but said many were "quietly disturbed" by outspoken support for Israeli actions.

The organisation, which opened a website with 120 signatures yesterday, is supported by a list of prominent Australian academics and activists, including the Greens MLC Ian Cohen, the UTS lecturer Eva Cox and the La Trobe University professor Dennis Altman.

It hopes to gather thousands more signatures in coming days, hold forums and encourage further debate about Israel's actions.

Rank：Lurking
Score：40
Posts：2
From：Unknown
Register：03/01/2007 8:05 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：05/03/2007 11:52 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : redrubberrat 
I refer to Questions Your Pastor Will Hate. In reading the Bible the human mind will find contradictions, loopholes, or whatever if it looks hard enough for them. That is because the Bible is a spiritual book, written by men inspired of the Holy Spirit. There is a lock built into it. Only God has the key. The key will be given through the Holy Spirit. The Bible itself says "Ask and it shall be given, seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be given unto you". But sincerity of heart and purpose is required. Men's mind is not as great as God's -- we all know that, or don't we all?
Must God prove Himself to man? His signature is all around, in nature, in creation, in man himself. Is it not enough for Him to say that He sacrificed His Son to redeem man back to Himself so that men might know Him? Will one take a chance and risk living in eternity in a place so vividly described as a "lake of fire and brimstone" if one outrightly and willfully rejects His offer of mercy in the Gospel of Jesus Christ? God is merciful and patient and loving. But He is also just and righteous. If one has turned one's back on God, for whatever reason, be it RF, RCI, GRC, etc. it it time to turn back to Him and find His love and mercy again and have the soul eventually saved. I did not say back to RF, RCI, GRC, but to Him, Jesus Christ, right where you are.
 

Rank：Poster Venti I
Score：6110
Posts：262
From：Unknown
Register：13/03/2005 7:23 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：05/03/2007 11:59 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : redrubberrat

This is worth a look. IT's short and to the pointhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol5OWI7ZJZA

awesome link... just gonna bump it (and the thread) a bit:

HERE IT IS FOR LAZY PEEPS

if it gives you joy, enjoy! life aint pretty without it

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：06/03/2007 1:59 AMCopy HTML

$%*'`[AAAAAHHHHH what in the world]%*'`@Reply to : iatrog

Reply to : redrubberratI refer to Questions Your Pastor Will Hate. In reading the Bible the human mind will find contradictions, loopholes, or whatever ifit looks hard enough for them. That is because the Bible is a spiritual book, written by men inspired of the Holy Spirit. There is a lock built into it. Only God has the key.The key will be giventhrough the Holy Spirit. The Bible itself says "Ask and it shall be given, seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be given unto you". But sincerity of heart and purpose is required. Men's mind is not as great as God's -- we all know that, or don't we all?Must God prove Himself to man? His signature is all around, in nature, in creation, in man himself. Is it not enough for Him to say that He sacrificed His Son to redeem man back to Himself so that men might know Him? Will one tak

So the bible is a closed book. Does this mean the old testament also. If thisis the case than there is a group of people in the wrold who do not have the phost and say that the old testament is there's. Now what is there names again. Gus Jus Jue Jews that's is Jews. They say that this is there book and that they don't need not stinking Holy Ghost. And this new book this new old testament is it not open to peope who do not have the ghost? There are many groups of people in the world who do not need the ghost to use it. I think these people are called Catholics.  Well dont that twist your nickers?

Rank：Posterior Maximus
Score：15160
Posts：701
From：Faroe_islands
Register：07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：06/03/2007 7:12 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : AAAAAHHHHH what in the world [Anonymous]   There are Charismatic Roman Catholics, they speak in tongues and have supposedly received the Holy Spirit.
Maybe someone with a bit of  time to spare might like to tell you exactly what Hollins thinks of Roman Catholicism.
Cheers,
Glad



So the bible is a closed book. Does this mean the old testament also. If thisis the case than there is a group of people in the wrold who do not have the phost and say that the old testament is there's. Now what is there names again. Gus Jus Jue Jews that's is Jews. They say that this is there book and that they don't need not stinking Holy Ghost. And this new book this new old testament is it not open to peope who do not have the ghost? There are many groups of people in the world who do not need the ghost to use it. I think these people are called Catholics. Well dont that twist your nickers? 

"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：07/03/2007 4:52 AMCopy HTML

So what your saying is that the pope likes these people as much as he does his own. Just like most religions there are  divisions  Even in the GRC cult. But this does not make the pope pentecostal.

    Ultratraditionalist Catholics

        Ultratraditionalist Catholics consider themselves nonrevisionist Catholics. They are extremely critical of the changes brought about by Vatican II and wish the church would return to its earlier course. They can be somewhat radical in their defense of "old time" Catholicism. For example, they would be happy if the mass (liturgical service centered around the Eucharist) were still recited in Latin. They hold the traditions and hierarchy of the church in highest esteem (except when the hierarchy steps on their nonrevisionist toes). They would strongly affirm classical Catholicism as revealed in the ancient creeds, councils, conciliar documents (i.e., documents produced during councils), and papal encyclicals (i.e., letters). They are generally suspicious and intolerant toward other divergent groups within Catholicism. One of the best examples of an ultratraditionalist was the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre of Switzerland who stated that the reforms of Vatican II "spring from heresy and end in heresy." During his reign as archbishop, Lefebvre continued to ordain priests even after the pope ordered him to stop, and he continued to use the form of the mass as prescribed at the Counter Reformation Council of Trent instead of its modern form. While staunch in their beliefs and commitment to nonrevisionist Catholicism, the ultratraditionalists are small in number and their influence within the church is not of great significance. The ultratraditionalists should probably be seen as the more extreme segment within the traditionalist camp.

        For a more detailed look (by the radical left-liberal Southern Poverty Law Center) including the issue of anti-Semitism, see THE NEW CRUSADERS.

    Traditionalist Catholics

        The traditionalist Catholics in many ways make up the backbone of the church hierarchy.  A Christianity Today editorial described the group this way: "This important segment of the church, specially powerful among the laity of the national churches, the older clergy, and the bishops and upper level of the hierarchy, adheres to the whole of creedal Roman Catholicism and obedience to the church as interpreted by the pope." The traditionalists are very critical of liberalism and modernism within the church, but they are generally accepting of the reforms found in Vatican II. Although this group's influence diminished somewhat after Vatican II, they have enjoyed a revival during John Paul II's reign as pope. While Pope John Paul may be considered progressive in many of his decisions concerning the church, at heart his doctrinal views are those of a traditional Catholic. This is especially illustrated in his beliefs concerning the Virgin Mary.

    Liberal Catholics

        Liberal Catholics have substantially departed from traditional Catholicism, and one might say from traditional Christianity as a whole. While liberals differ among themselves in the degree to which they depart from classical Catholicism, like their Protestant counterparts they have conceded much to the rationalistic unbelief so prevalent in Western culture since the eighteenth-century Enlightenment period. They have in effect replaced the Bible and church authority with the authority of human reason - [Modernism]. Many liberal Catholic scholars, such as the German scholar Hans Kung, have questioned the infallibility of the pope, church councils, and the Bible. Others, going farther, have clearly abandoned traditional Christological beliefs and the miracles of the New Testament, and have forsaken almost completely the orthodoxy of the ecumenical creeds. Liberals also question the ecclesiastical practice of an exclusively male priesthood, and many have cast off the church's teaching regarding such moral issues as birth control, abortion, and homosexuality. Some within the liberal camp have been strongly affiliated with liberation theology, especially in Latin America. Liberation theology interprets the gospel in terms of liberation from poverty and social oppression, and the reconstruction of society -- usually along Marxist lines.  Catholics who embrace liberation theology often show an amazing disregard of traditional doctrinal issues.

        Another subset within the broader category of liberal Catholics is what might be called "Eastern mystical" or "New Age" Catholicism.  This group seeks to blend Catholic and New Age spirituality.  Orthodox Christian beliefs about God and Christ are, to varying degrees, replaced with distinctive New Age beliefs such as pantheism (God is all and all is God), panentheism (God is intrinsically in the world and the world is intrinsically in God), and emphasis upon the Cosmic Christ (a universal, impersonal spirit or cosmic force).  Probably the leading "Catholic guru" is Dominican priest Matthew Fox with his "creation-centered spirituality."

        Since Vatican II, this liberal camp as a whole has grown significantly within the scholarly ranks of the church, and to a lesser degree among the laity (although both the liberation theology and New Age subsets have strong lay components).  Pope John Paul has attempted to curb this influence, however, by disciplining some of the more outspoken liberal scholars (for example, both Kung and Fox have been disciplined by the church).  This crackdown has been met with some resistance, especially in America.

    Charismatic/Evangelical Catholics

        1992 marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Catholic charismatic renewal movement. Emerging from humble beginnings in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in 1967, the late 1960s and 1970s saw the Catholic charismatic renewal flourish in the church. While it experienced slow decline in the 1980s, it remains one of the most energetic forces in the Catholic church. It is estimated that 10 million American Catholics have been involved in the renewal, and that worldwide Catholic involvement may be as high as 50 to 65 million. Catholics now make up more than a fifth of the worldwide Pentecostal-charismatic constituency. Like the broader movement, charismatic Catholics emphasize the charisma or gifts of the Holy Spirit, the importance of being baptized in the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit-filled life. Charismatic Catholics tend to be more evangelical in belief, emphasizing personal faith and trust in Christ, and the assurance of salvation. Reformed theologian J. I. Packer comments concerning charismatic Catholic piety: It is a fact that in charismatic Catholicism, joyful trust in Christ as one's sin-bearing Savior and loving fellowship with him in his risen life have shifted the traditional devotional focus away from the somber disciplines of self-denial and suffering and away, too, from the anxieties about merit and destiny to which the formulations of the Council of Trent naturally give rise. Does Catholic doctrine as Trent defined it permit assurance of salvation based on once-for-all justification through faith? Opinions, both Protestant and Catholic, differ about that. Nevertheless, Catholic charismatics do observably enjoy this assurance, while yet maintaining humility, a sense of sin, and a life of repentance often more successfully than do their Protestant counterparts. And Protestant and Catholic charismatic teaching on the Christian life is to all intents and purposes identical. Is this not significant for the Christian future? It is true that many charismatic Catholics describe themselves as "born again, Spirit-filled Catholics." Along with possessing a Pentecostal piety, charismatic Catholics generally tend to give Scripture more of an authoritative place in their personal spiritual lives. However, many (though by no means all) charismatic Catholics also have a strong devotion to Mary. While the issue of Marian devotion tends to be a stumbling block between evangelical Protestants and charismatic Catholics, evangelical Protestants surely have more in common with charismatic Catholics than with any other type of Catholics. (2)

    Cultural Catholics

        The majority of Catholics in the world probably fit into the category of cultural Catholics. This group is unlike any other type we have considered above. Their identification as "Catholic" is simply more cultural and social than religious. They might rightly be called "womb to tomb Catholics." They often are born in a Hispanic, Irish, Polish, French, or Italian families -- and are therefore baptized, married, and buried in the Catholic church -- but have little or no concern about spiritual matters. Cultural Catholics do not understand Catholicism, nor do they seriously follow its ethical teaching. But they nevertheless have an emotional commitment to the Catholic church. When they attend Mass, it is out of habit or family obligation, not religious conviction. Being Catholic to them is essentially a cultural identity (they may even be secular or humanistic [or postmodernist] in their thinking). This is not unlike how some Jews are merely ethnically or culturally Jewish, rather than adherents to Judaism. It is also like the person who is Lutheran only because he happens to be born into a German family, or the Anglican who is only Anglican because she was born into a British family. You see, it happens in Protestantism as well. Nominal Catholics, like nominal Protestants, do not understand Christianity, and they do not have a relationship with Jesus Christ. With all due respect, President John F. Kennedy would seem to have fit well the mold of a cultural Catholic.

    Popular Folk Catholics

        Popular folk Catholics are found especially in Central and South America. These Catholics are very eclectic in their religious thinking and practice. They often combine elements of an animistic or nature-culture religion (the primitive religious beliefs that associate the forces of nature and culture with myriads of spirits) with a traditional medieval Catholicism. The result is a syncretistic nightmare. People in countries such as Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina frequently engage in a religion composed of polytheism, occultic spiritism, and a superstitious form of Catholicism. This spiritual smorgasbord enslaves millions of Latin America's peasantry. Certainly, official Catholic teaching does not sanction this kind of syncretistic religiosity. In certain respects, however, the Catholic church remains culpable. First, the Catholic church has been negligent by failing to train these people to reject all forms of paganism and to embrace solely the Triune God of Christianity. Second, the unhealthy and unbiblical aspects of the Catholic understanding of the communion of saints (i.e., the belief in the unity and cooperation among believers in both this world and the next) has contributed to the problem. Even some Catholics in the United States virtually worship saints and the church has failed to take aggressive measures to correct this serious problem of idolatry. It is actually much worse when it comes to devotion to the Virgin Mary, where on a practical level millions of Catholics commit idolatry on a daily basis by worshipping the virgin. This is certainly contrary to official church teaching (i.e., teaching set forth by the Vatican as standard Catholic doctrine), but the Catholic church has been derelict in correcting this serious problem. If the Catholic church wants to convince evangelical Protestants that they merely honor Mary, but do not worship her, then they must step in and stop this gross idolatry. Third, the Second Vatican Council's openness to forms of religious pluralism has greatly exacerbated the problem. Ideas such as the "anonymous Christian" (the belief in the possibility of salvation without explicit Christian faith -- even through non-Christian religions) as set forth by the influential German theologian, Karl Rahner, has acute and distressing repercussions.

The following category represents an update to Kenneth Samples' basic six categories.

    Postmodern Catholics

    Within the past decade, a rapidly growing number of burned-out, liberal and cultural Catholics have embraced the new and radical paradigm of Postmodernism...with a vengeance!  In contrast to Modernism/Liberalism which views humans as "material machines", postmodernism views humans primarily as social beings..."cogs" in a sociological machine.  One postmodernist describes the Enlightenment as a "failed rationalist project which has run its time but which continues to encumber contemporary thought with illusions of a rational route to knowledge, a faith in science and in progress."

    For the postmodernist, there is absolutely no such thing as objective reality...either scientific or religious!  As pure relativists, they believe reality is solely created...in one's mind.  Rationality is simply an expression of Western cultural bias.  People are the product of culture and thus are not self-governing, hence they are often 'oppressed'.  Overarching religious or philosophical systems "commits acts of cultural tyranny by promoting the fiction [called 'metanarratives'] that all knowledge reduces to a set of universally applicable truths" (3).  They further allege that the concept of "progress" is an evil ploy to justify domination by European culture [Catholic, Protestant, and secular Enlightenment] over other cultures.  They adhere to and promote "multiculturalism."

    No longer really theist, postmodernist 'Catholics' are typically hostile to most anyone who makes claim to objective truth.  Much of their hostility is rooted in a deep, emotional resentment and rejection of the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.  However, similar to cultural Catholics, being a Roman Catholic represents their heritage.  Consequently, outspoken fundamentalist and evangelical Christians who hold to inerrant Scripture are taking the brunt of their vitriol rather than fellow Romanists who posit inerrancy in Papal succession and their church.  In America, much of the growing rage against the 'Religious Right' is being sparked by modernists and postmodernists who often have a Catholic or liberal Jewish background.   DRS

Rank：Posterior Maximus
Score：15160
Posts：701
From：Faroe_islands
Register：07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：07/03/2007 3:51 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Anonymous  Yep, Noel hates them ALL. They are the  spawn of the Anti- Christ and the harlot robed in purple.
Only thing is, Noel is actually the Anti-Christ and doesn't realise it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheers,
Glad


So what your saying is that the pope likes these people as much as he does his own. Just like most religions there are divisions Even in the GRC cult. But this does not make the pope pentecostal.Ultratraditionalist CatholicsUltratraditionalist Catholics consider themselves nonrevisionist Catholics. They are extremely critical of the changes brought about by Vatican II and wish the church would return to its earlier course. They can be somewhat radical in their defense of "old time" Catholicism. For example, they would be happy if the mass (liturgical service centered around the Eucharist) were still recited in Latin. They hold the traditions and hierarchy of the church in highest esteem (except when the hierarchy steps on their nonrevisionist toes). They would strongly affirm classical Catholicism as revealed in the ancient creeds, councils, conci 

"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：21/08/2005 6:47 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：07/03/2007 6:23 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Glad-to be out 

Reply to : AnonymousYep, Noel hates them ALL. They are the spawn of the Anti- Christ and the harlot robed in purple.Only thing is, Noel is actually the Anti-Christ and doesn't realise it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Cheers,GladSo what your saying is that the pope likes these people as much as he does his own. Just like most religions there are divisions Even in the GRC cult. But this does not make the pope pentecostal.Ultratraditionalist CatholicsUltratraditionalist Catholics consider themselves nonrevisionist Catholics. They are extremely critical of the changes brought about by Vatican II and wish the church would return to its earlier course. They can be so 

lmaooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!xxo lolololololololololol...........lol!

A man died and went to heaven. He was met by Jesus and Jesus began to show him around. As they walked they saw some amazing things. Some too beautiful and amazing to describe. Eventually they came to a huge wall and the man heard the sound of music, laughing and what basically sounded like a party coming from behind the wall. Curious, the man asked Jesus what was going on behind the wall. Jesus answered, "Shhhh!!! Not too loud. That"s the GRC. They think they"re the only ones here!!!"

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：09/03/2007 2:56 AMCopy HTML

It's funny that one can not believe in a grc god but one can believe in a god at all. What god do you believe in and why? I don't believe in any god.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF0J_Q8bdtw&mode=related&search=

Rank：
Score：0
Posts：0
From：Unknown
Register：06/04/2001 10:54 PM

Re：god vs God

Date Posted：09/03/2007 3:32 AMCopy HTML

What the new pope said what?????

 Why Benedict would have stopped John Paul going to see Bob Dylan

By Peter Popham in Rome

Published: 08 March 2007

At the time he gritted his teeth and sat it out. But now Pope Benedict XVI has admitted that he thought his predecessor's encounter with the singer Bob Dylan was a lousy idea.

In 1997, John Paul II sat on a stage along with 50 cardinals in a vast fairground outside Bologna while slightly below and in front of him, Bob Dylan, wearing a cowboy hat and rhinestone-spangled zoot suit, crunched his way through "Knockin' on Heaven's Door", "It's a Hard Rain" and "Forever Young".

After the second song Dylan ascended to the Pope's throne, doffed the hat, Nashville Skyline-style, and shook his hand.

The Pope then preached a sermon to the 300,000-strong audience. How many roads must a man walk down? "Just one," declared the Pope. What answer is blowing in the wind? "The breath and voice of the Spirit," he insisted, "a voice that calls and says, 'Come'."

At the time the event was seen as one of the more brilliant publicity stunts by the most publicity-savvy pope that ever lived. But in a book published this week, Benedict XVI, the late pope's theological adviser, reveals that he thought the whole thing a very bad idea. "The Pope arrived [at the Bologna Eucharist Congress] tired, worn out," he writes in My Beloved Predecessor. "Just at that moment Bob Dylan, the 'star' of the young, and others whose names I do not recall, turned up. They had a message completely different from that to which the Pope was committed. There was reason to be sceptical - which I was, and in a certain sense still am - to doubt whether it was really right to involve 'prophets' of this type."

Pope Benedict's admission is no surprise. A pianist who relaxes by playing Bach and Mozart, he has made no attempt to hide his dislike of the church's use of pop music to ingratiate itself with the young. Last year he called for an end to electric guitars and modern music in church and a return to traditional music. "The liturgy is not a theatrical text, and the altar is not a stage," he said. He has described "great mass gatherings" of pop fans as "a kind of cult, at odds with the cult of Christianity". He quietly cancelled the Vatican's annual Christmas pop concert.

Gerald O'Connell, an expert on Vatican affairs, commented: "I think the difference in their approaches comes from their very different life experiences. John Paul II went camping and canoeing with young people. He enjoyed singing round the campfire when he was at university. It's a question of different sensitivies. It's a sign of honesty in Benedict that he reveals this." But it is also part of a more general turning away from pop culture on the part of the church - in part a reaction to criticisms of Western materialism by prominent Muslims.

When Lou Reed, Alanis Morissette and the Eurythmics starred at a May Day concert attended by the Pope in his jubilee year, the bishop in charge, Fernando Charrier, said: "Do not be astonished. Rock is an expression of today's world, particularly dear to the young. All [forms of] human expression, when they have dignity, command respect. I do not believe there has ever existed a [form of] rock that is diabolical."

But with the condemnation of the materialist, consumption-mad West by Islamic writers in recent years, the church has had a rethink. "Something we should all give up, not just for Lent but for good," said the National Catholic Register last month, is "the excesses of pop culture ... Our first duty is to opt out of the aspects of pop culture that have become so debased ... The arts have become a cesspool."

If Benedict is a fogey, he is in good company. Meanwhile, his Bobness has only happy memories of Bologna. "That show was one of the best I ever played in my whole life," he said.