Is it possible for us as men to have a discussion on God

Except a country state changes in its beliefs and attitudes. Hence "Germany's" state values in 1930s/1940s (Nazism) no longer apply.

Religion in general tends to remain pretty steadfast to its ancient belief systems and value systems.

So if one holds a grudge against the church today for its stance on homosexuality (for example), that's explicable because those values/beliefs (on homosexuality) have not changed much in thousands of years.* Whereas Germany has seen the error of its past behaviour/beliefs and reject them today. You don't tend to get that kind of self-criticism in any religion!

So I'm not convinced by that analogy.

*Interestingly, I see the Anglican church worldwide is in turmoil due to the first openly gay bishop to be ordained, who happens to be in the USA. Does that defeat my argument above (in terms of religion not changing its values) or support it (because it has created a crisis within the church as it is unable to handle that change)? Not sure. :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

If you reject the current day church solely for that reason, you should also not go to Germany because by the same reason.

---

Ok... so if your feelings on any particular group or ideology effect how you choose to relate to that group or idealology, your choice should "normally" be consistantly applied?

I see the reasoning... I guess

Greg Frazer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Frazer

Ok... so if your feelings on any particular group or ideology effect how you choose to relate to that group or idealology, your choice should "normally" be consistantly applied?

I see the reasoning... I guess

Greg Frazer

---

Be aware that those are not my words, but just my interpretation of what I think Mark meant to say.
If I interpreted it wrongly, I'll be expecting a (deserved) earful shortly :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Be aware that those are not my words, but just my interpretation of what I think Mark meant to say.
If I interpreted it wrongly, I'll be expecting a (deserved) earful shortly :)

---

You got it right Bruno! I think you and I understand each other pretty well !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majurey

Except a country state changes in its beliefs and attitudes. Hence "Germany's" state values in 1930s/1940s (Nazism) no longer apply.

Religion in general tends to remain pretty steadfast to its ancient belief systems and value systems.

So if one holds a grudge against the church today for its stance on homosexuality (for example), that's explicable because those values/beliefs (on homosexuality) have not changed much in thousands of years.* Whereas Germany has seen the error of its past behaviour/beliefs and reject them today. You don't tend to get that kind of self-criticism in any religion!

So I'm not convinced by that analogy.

*Interestingly, I see the Anglican church worldwide is in turmoil due to the first openly gay bishop to be ordained, who happens to be in the USA. Does that defeat my argument above (in terms of religion not changing its values) or support it (because it has created a crisis within the church as it is unable to handle that change)? Not sure. :thinking:

---

If you have something agalnst the church for something it stands for today that is your business, but if you still got something against the church for something it did a few hundred years ago and no longer does then you're not really being fair, are you?
I do not go to church. I do not like the group think mentality I run across no matter if it is good or bad, although I do believe in most of the principles that christlanity espouses!

This thread has reinforced my opinion that we are living in a time where the religion of the masses is the exaltation of the individual, and not submission to a supreme being. Whether you want to believe it or not, the religion espoused by bpatton, X, GW, and others is that anything is permissible for the individual, because there are no ultimate consequences for any actions.

It seems that morality is now sacrificed on the alter of human desire.

GW said it best, and I paraphrase: I would rather believe in the infinitesimal possibility that we just happened to come into existence, than to answer to a higher power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JMS

If you have something agalnst the church for something it stands for today that is your business, but if you still got something against the church for something it did a few hundred years ago and no longer does then you're not really being fair, are you?

---

I totally agree Mark. But my thinking is that it's very rare for religion to change its main principles, even over the course of a few hundred years! Like Catholicism and contraception, like Christianity and homosexuality, etc. Those are sensitive areas which may have become accepted in the wider society but are still taboo within an ecumenical circle. If I have a beef against a particaulr religion for its beliefs of two thousand years ago, there's a good chance those same beliefs remain in 2007.

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfel7bmFkr4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr

You have reached true enlightenment when you realize that EVERYTHING is an illusion.

---

I think that's just an illusion --- but I could be wrong ;)

Justin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mhailey

This thread has reinforced my opinion that we are living in a time where the religion of the masses is the exaltation of the individual, and not submission to a supreme being.

---

I hope you don't place me in that group. It is not the supreme being that I have problems with, as I already indicated.
the only thing I have a problem with is the idea that I am supposed to defer to an institution that claims sole ownership of the link with God.