Does Anyone Else Believe In Jesus Christ ?

[Mike Christ]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  For example, because we must have faith that the men who wrote the Bible were being completely honest in their writings, objective ethics requires faith that what God said within the Bible, including his mortal figure, is the complete truth, which would then have to assume men with this kind of power can't lie.  Because if God speaks to us as to what is or is not ethical today, we would all come to the same conclusions on what is and isn't ethical, and yet we do not, which implies God has kept quiet about this matter since then.

So how could objective ethics function without first trusting that those who speak for the greatest authority weren't lying?  And if this cannot be accomplished, how do we compensate for the various other religions whose objective ethics clash with Christianity?--e.g., if ethics are objective, they should not clash any more than 2 + 2.

Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

[Spendulus]

*Tear* Real talk.

Music IS my special friend. Ironically I account for about 1k of those 2.3 million views.

Post some Maynard next time if you respond tonight. I can get you started.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2A8H0EZFig

here's some of your Christian nations in action, my friend.  Music is not to hypnotize and reinforce belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCe8Fw8vyM

[Spendulus]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  ....
Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

You'll find if you look, that very deep thinkers have argued and discussed this question at length.  I can tell you the short story on my view, which is that religions, including the bible, are the tools tyrants use to get what they want from people.

Lying, as you call it, and myth/myth building are really not the same thing. 

[Et Filii]

[/quote]

here's some of your Christian nations in action, my friend.  Music is not to hypnotize and reinforce belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCe8Fw8vyM
[/quote]

And I am Irish. Thanks for bringing lyrics about a potato famine to the table. Your 2 for 3 on figuring me out pal.

Although you do bring up a nice point which is the actions of "Christian Nations". However nations are lead by men, or women (respect to you SKoreans) and as humans we fall to sins such as lets just throw out GREED. Your argument is the equivalent to the typical American grouping all Muslims together because a radical sect believe in violence. People do screwed up things and that will never change. I guess I just choose to live my life and make my own decisions regardless of others and their actions, and I invite you to do the same.

[Mike Christ]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  ....
Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

You'll find if you look, that very deep thinkers have argued and discussed this question at length.  I can tell you the short story on my view, which is that religions, including the bible, are the tools tyrants use to get what they want from people.

Lying, as you call it, and myth/myth building are really not the same thing.  

I see your point; just laying out some practical questioning for people who may otherwise not see the need to ask

[dank]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  ....
Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

You'll find if you look, that very deep thinkers have argued and discussed this question at length.  I can tell you the short story on my view, which is that religions, including the bible, are the tools tyrants use to get what they want from people.

Lying, as you call it, and myth/myth building are really not the same thing. 

Man's fuckupification (for lack of a better word I can't remember) of religion for power does not falsify the spiritual truths found in religious texts.

[Et Filii]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  For example, because we must have faith that the men who wrote the Bible were being completely honest in their writings, objective ethics requires faith that what God said within the Bible, including his mortal figure, is the complete truth, which would then have to assume men with this kind of power can't lie.  Because if God speaks to us as to what is or is not ethical today, we would all come to the same conclusions on what is and isn't ethical, and yet we do not, which implies God has kept quiet about this matter since then.

So how could objective ethics function without first trusting that those who speak for the greatest authority weren't lying?  And if this cannot be accomplished, how do we compensate for the various other religions whose objective ethics clash with Christianity?--e.g., if ethics are objective, they should not clash any more than 2 + 2.

Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

Sure. I read the Bible for what it is. A book. There are many types of readings you read each day and they were written by "mere mortals". Consciously and subconsciously you apply things THEY write in magazines and articles to your life. Your faulting yourself due to your disbelief in your fellow man, rightly though is your opinion. Hence why I stated in a previous post you should seek out the truth for yourself.

Do not wait for someone to say something to change your mind. It's your life and you have the gift of free thought and free will, use them.

The bible is not the end all way into heaven. You have to see it for what it is and you will discover the truth has little to do with any book but more to do with you.

[Mike Christ]

Sure. I read the Bible for what it is. A book. There are many types of readings you read each day and they were written by "mere mortals". Consciously and subconsciously you apply things THEY write in magazines and articles to your life. Your faulting yourself due to your disbelief in your fellow man, rightly though is your opinion. Hence why I stated in a previous post you should seek out the truth for yourself.

Do not wait for someone to say something to change your mind. It's your life and you have the gift of free thought and free will, use them.

The bible is not the end all way into heaven. You have to see it for what it is and you will discover the truth has little to do with any book but more to do with you.

I see where you're coming from; however, this still leaves the question at hand: can ethics, as Jesus Christ puts forth, be objective without a middle man?  If so, is it truly an observable set of facts, in the same way an apple can be objectively red or green?

[Spendulus]

here's some of your Christian nations in action, my friend.  Music is not to hypnotize and reinforce belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCe8Fw8vyM

And I am Irish. Thanks for bringing lyrics about a potato famine to the table. Your 2 for 3 on figuring me out pal.

Although you do bring up a nice point which is the actions of "Christian Nations". However nations are lead by men, or women ....

LOL....

My statement was not broad, but specific to context.  Here's Sinead again, taking the opposite point of view, that England and Ireland should love each other and be at peace.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbre5Fs9m8I

[Et Filii]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  ....
Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

You'll find if you look, that very deep thinkers have argued and discussed this question at length.  I can tell you the short story on my view, which is that religions, including the bible, are the tools tyrants use to get what they want from people.

Lying, as you call it, and myth/myth building are really not the same thing. 

The key word in your statement is tyrant.

For some reason I feel a Hitler reference could fit here. Oh wait no Bible used there must have used something else to convince his nation. You forget how impressionable the masses can be or your just not acknowledging it. The further you go back the more illiterate they become and someone has always seized such opportunities for self gain.

[Spendulus]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  ....
Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

You'll find if you look, that very deep thinkers have argued and discussed this question at length.  I can tell you the short story on my view, which is that religions, including the bible, are the tools tyrants use to get what they want from people.

Lying, as you call it, and myth/myth building are really not the same thing.  

The key word in your statement is tyrant.

For some reason I feel a Hitler reference could fit here. Oh wait no Bible used there....

Unfortunately, yes they did have Bibles....

The subjugation of religion as a tool of the State is exactly what Ayn Rand warned about.

Here's another look at what man can do to man, our old friend Sgt. MacKensie.  It's in the old style of talk from what was our neighbors in Scotland.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPr9g3EVz-o

[Et Filii]

here's some of your Christian nations in action, my friend.  Music is not to hypnotize and reinforce belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCe8Fw8vyM

And I am Irish. Thanks for bringing lyrics about a potato famine to the table. Your 2 for 3 on figuring me out pal.

Although you do bring up a nice point which is the actions of "Christian Nations". However nations are lead by men, or women ....

LOL....

My statement was not broad, but specific to context.  Here's Sinead again, taking the opposite point of view, that England and Ireland should love each other and be at peace.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbre5Fs9m8I

We need to upgrade your playlist.

You also typically find that most things are always taken OUT of context.

[foggyb]

Can any Christian explain Jesus Christ's teachings on objective ethics working without trust that an indirect authority can define what is and is not objectively ethical?  For example, because we must have faith that the men who wrote the Bible were being completely honest in their writings, objective ethics requires faith that what God said within the Bible, including his mortal figure, is the complete truth, which would then have to assume men with this kind of power can't lie.  Because if God speaks to us as to what is or is not ethical today, we would all come to the same conclusions on what is and isn't ethical, and yet we do not, which implies God has kept quiet about this matter since then.

So how could objective ethics function without first trusting that those who speak for the greatest authority weren't lying?  And if this cannot be accomplished, how do we compensate for the various other religions whose objective ethics clash with Christianity?--e.g., if ethics are objective, they should not clash any more than 2 + 2.

Furthering this point: is this faith being placed in the lord, or ultimately in the men who wrote of him?

Once a person has faith that there is God (in the proper sense of the word), why be worried that he would deceive or betray that trust? Isn't he omnipotent, faultless, and ubiquitous?

Job 13:15 “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him.”

If you're familiar with the story of Job, that's a man committed to a faith that God has mapped out all things to "work together for my good". That's pretty amazing considering that Job lost everything he had, even his health and his children. It shreds thoroughly the idea that Christianity is for the weak. A weaker man would have given up on God when put in Job's predicament. Charles Darwin did. Intellectual reasoning is helpless when faced with the idea of the super-power that God is. Its like Hamlet contemplating Shakespeare.

[Et Filii]

The key word in your statement is tyrant.

For some reason I feel a Hitler reference could fit here. Oh wait no Bible used there....
[/quote]

Unfortunately, yes they did have Bibles....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPr9g3EVz-o
[/quote]

Just to clarify...

You do not actually believe that the holocaust was because of Christianity do you?

[Et Filii]

Sure. I read the Bible for what it is. A book. There are many types of readings you read each day and they were written by "mere mortals". Consciously and subconsciously you apply things THEY write in magazines and articles to your life. Your faulting yourself due to your disbelief in your fellow man, rightly though is your opinion. Hence why I stated in a previous post you should seek out the truth for yourself.

Do not wait for someone to say something to change your mind. It's your life and you have the gift of free thought and free will, use them.

The bible is not the end all way into heaven. You have to see it for what it is and you will discover the truth has little to do with any book but more to do with you.

I see where you're coming from; however, this still leaves the question at hand: can ethics, as Jesus Christ puts forth, be objective without a middle man?  If so, is it truly an observable set of facts, in the same way an apple can be objectively red or green?

I suppose that would involve faith.

[Mike Christ]

Once a person has faith that there is God (in the proper sense of the word), why be worried that he would deceive or betray that trust? Isn't he omnipotent, faultless, and ubiquitous?

Job 13:15 “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him.”

If you're familiar with the story of Job, that's a man committed to a faith that God has mapped out all things to "work together for my good". That's pretty amazing considering that Job lost everything he had, even his health and his children. Intellectual reasoning is helpless when faced with the idea of the super-power that God is. Its like Hamlet contemplating Shakespeare.

That seems to be the key to the loop; there is absolute faith in God only when unaware that the faith is directly on man, for it is man alone who claims to put forth the word of God; there is no word spoken by God or Jesus that man did not put to paper; because God is omnipotent, all he says is truth; if God says the Bible is factual, it is so.  However, if it is made aware to the believer that their faith is being placed entirely on man's ability to lie, and we know he is perfectly capable and willing to do so, the believer would be repulsed knowing very well that people are flawed, "sinful" beings.  To believe in God as told by the world's religions is to believe that man is perfect and unable to lie, but this is made very evident within even the Bible that man is not, for he otherwise would have no need for God; the God fallacy, then, is that if God is necessary, man cannot reliably speak for him, and if God is not necessary, man would not write of him anyway.

It would seem, then, this cycle is broken most effectively by making the middle man an obvious and unavoidable element which faith must pass through to get to God, else all religions would divert into flavorless deism for though man can trust God, for God is omnipotent, man cannot trust man, especially if man can write himself legitimate by writing God as having said so.

I suppose that would involve faith.

As you can probably guess, faith--that being, complete trust in that which has no proof--brings us no closer to the truth   If we answer a mystery with a mystery, we're left with two mysteries.

[Et Filii]

As you can probably guess, faith--that being, complete trust in that which has no proof--brings us no closer to the truth  If we answer a mystery with a mystery, we're left with two mysteries.
[/quote]

Not true, I have witnessed occurences with my own eyes that lead me to believe otherwise.

I have one for you sherlocks. I work in hospice as a nurse and am at the bedside of many people when they pass. Once upon a time I had a lady under my care that had an obsession with an old gospel hymn. The Old Rugged Cross was the name of it. Every day she would have us play a cd with this song. Every day! I was at the bedside for many days in a row as some people can linger longer than others. On the day she took her last breath...on the exact moment...guess what happened? The radio started playing the song. I did not put the cd in it.

Yea I have faith in things I cannot explain.

[Mike Christ]

Not true, I have witnessed occurences with my own eyes that lead me to believe otherwise.

I have one for you sherlocks. I work in hospice as a nurse and am at the bedside of many people when they pass. Once upon a time I had a lady under my care that had an obsession with an old gospel hymn. The Old Rugged Cross was the name of it. Every day she would have us play a cd with this song. Every day! I was at the bedside for many days in a row as some people can linger longer than others. On the day she took her last breath...on the exact moment...guess what happened? The radio started playing the song. I did not put the cd in it.

Yea I have faith in things I cannot explain.

Every lottery has a winner; if I leaned my head out the window every day and said, "Let it rain!", eventually I'd have a story to tell about how it rained on my command.  In other words, if you're seeking miracles, you're bound to find them; you need no faith for chance.

Look at it another way: if this happened to every person while they passed away, we'd have a real lead to work from; I would have no doubt that some supernatural force was looking over us if every person's favorite song played without intention as they passed on.  If it doesn't happen, not even to most, but we still believe it was intentional, we're left with "God works in mysterious ways" but again, a mystery answers a mystery and we're no closer to the truth than before; in what ways does God work and why does he favor some but not others?  Alas, there's no way to answer this without yet more mysteries, so we cannot be satisfied if it's the truth we're worried about.

So as a test to our findings: sometimes my best friend says exactly what I was thinking; is she a mind reader?

If so, she should always be capable of such a feat, especially on command, especially to those deemed worthy (assuming she had a following.)  Otherwise, it's coincidence.

[Et Filii]

So as a test to our findings: sometimes my best friend says exactly what I was thinking; is she a mind reader?

If so, she should always be capable of such a feat, especially on command, especially to those deemed worthy (assuming she had a following.)  Otherwise, it's coincidence.
[/quote]

No your friend sometimes knows what your thinking because she is your best friend and obviously knows you. A mind reader would need to be a complete stranger to qualify. Have you ever been to a psychic? If you have perhaps you can recall the shake down part when they try to get to know you real well. There is reasoning behind that.

I get what you are saying though about such things only happening sometimes and that is actually something I have struggled with myself. You can take the one who passes peacefully and a sweet song came on the radio as she passes yet I can go to another instance where another woman (a Christian as well) had to suffer a horrible death bleeding out internally until the point of choking to death. Or worse yet a child dying in my care well before their time. Or I could list any crazy death here because the truth is I see this on a weekly basis. Why does it happen like that? I do not know how to answer that and to be honest maybe I am not meant to know. The better question is why do I like my job so much...

In the end all I can answer for is myself, my faith, and my convictions.

[Mike Christ]

No your friend sometimes knows what your thinking because she is your best friend and obviously knows you. A mind reader would need to be a complete stranger to qualify. Have you ever been to a psychic? If you have perhaps you can recall the shake down part when they try to get to know you real well. There is reasoning behind that.

I get what you are saying though about such things only happening sometimes and that is actually something I have struggled with myself. You can take the one who passes peacefully and a sweet song came on the radio as she passes yet I can go to another instance where another woman (a Christian as well) had to suffer a horrible death bleeding out internally until the point of choking to death. Or worse yet a child dying in my care well before their time. Why does it happen like that? I do not know how to answer that and to be honest maybe I am not meant to know.

In the end all I can answer for is myself, my faith, and my convictions.

Right; it's inclined to happen because we're familiar, so though she can't actually read my mind, it sometimes seems as though she can.

You're meant to know, but only if you dare to look; it depends on how you approach these mysteries, and I believe it all begins with a question.  When you begin with an answer, you can only ever change the world around you to conform to your answer, but it's difficult to do this as the truth tends to be unforgiving no matter what you believe, unless you believe in the truth.  Ergo, a foundation without any answer, but possibilities, is the best approach to seeking the truth, as there is no presupposition or bias towards any idea, allowing us to accept what is likely and discard what is improbable; if we realize our beliefs are inconsistent with the truth, we must not change the truth, but change our beliefs, right?

So the question, in this case, is: "Why does person A with belief X receive inconsistent treatment in death when compared to people B, C, and D with belief X?"  My hypothesis is, when considering the data as being inconsistent--sometimes devout Christians have pleasant deaths, sometimes devout Christians do not--is that there is no correlation.  This would imply that one's devotion to God is not relevant to the quality of one's death.  So let's expand on this: "Why does person A with belief X receive inconsistent treatment in death when compared to person B with belief Y?"  Comparing two differing beliefs, we can still see that the ways people die are inconsistent with their beliefs; we can continue expanding on this on and on, until we can reach the conclusion that anyone, anywhere, has no guarantee of a better or worse death than anyone else based on their beliefs, and so we come to a conclusion: death, whatever its driving force, does not discriminate against belief.  These observations remain consistent with our hypothesis, so we can call this a truth in the context of our existing.

This is the general method we can go about seeking the truths of life; all we need is a question, a bit of logic, and an open mind, and we can make sense of anything.