"A free thinker is Satan's slave"

[Newby]

Love is 100% relevant to your topic because love is basis of choice.

Love IS our FREEDOM that no man can take from us. Love also rejoices in the truth. We wake in the morning having daily to make choices in everything we do; whether to love, or not to love.

When we love, we yield to God or others, but many times everything in our flesh wants to scream out against it. That is a specific choice and freedom we have.

In other words, I'm presenting to you that God is love. And that love is a choice. If you agree, how can your OP be correct?

.

It can be correct because, as I said, love is not dogma. In fact, absolutely nothing you have presented in this post is unique in any way to Christianity, any form of Christianity, let alone the dogmatic form. I can say the exact same thing as a Pagan, except maybe I would say Goddess or the Gods rather than God -- same concept, though.

To surrender one's heart to love is NOT the same as surrendering one's critical thought to a belief system. And love of God does NOT imply adherence to the rigid behavioral, belief, and feeling codes of traditional Christianity.

Simply put, traditional Christians do not own God, as much as they seem to think they do. Nor do they own love.

I've never seen where 'christians' have made either claim, you're speaking from a false premise.

 

[Newby]

Or afterthought - perhaps I should ask - what do you mean by "traditional" Christianity?

Ah, a good and pertinent question. Traditional Christians share the following beliefs, which may not be an exclusive list:

1) Christianity is the only true religion.
2) The Bible is God's word and is true in every passage. (In most cases, I could add the word "literally" before "true.")
3) There is a very narrow list of beliefs, attitudes and behaviors which can be considered morally acceptable; everything outside that list is sinful and wrong.
4) Everyone who sins (i.e., thinks, feels, or behaves at any time in his/her life outside that narrow band of acceptable thought, feeling, and behavior, which of course means everyone) will be condemned by God to Hell, unless forgiven by God; but:
5) God is willing to forgive any Christians who sincerely repent of their sins. (Non-Christians need not apply unless they become Christians first.)

One may of course follow the teachings of Christ without being a traditional Christian in the above sense, and there are many non-traditional Christians around, of whom you may be one yourself.

What is this 'list' that you keep referencing? Since you know so much about it, provide a link to where it's documented? And since it's so 'narrow', it should be small enough for you to give it to us here in the thread, so we can all know what you're referring too.

 

[Dragon]

Incidentally, Neopaganism (especially the kind I practice) is NOT a belief system. I'm not here to proselytize for Paganism (for one thing, we don't believe in doing that), but since the subject has come up, I should correct some ignorant statements.

There are no doctrines in Wicca. There are ideas, but they are recognized as metaphorical for the most part. We are defined by what we do, not what we believe. Some Wiccans believe that the Gods literally exist. Others believe that they are thought-forms, or archetypes, or creations of the human imagination that tie us into the cosmos. There are rituals in Wicca, and songs, and celebrations of the Wheel of the Year, but these are all things we do, not things we believe. There is magic (among some, not all), but again, this is something we do, not something we believe.

As for morality, I stated it above. The one commandment is to minimize harm, to maximize good. One cannot live without rules, but around that basic desideratum we are free to make whatever rules we find good, each for himself or herself.

We do not believe that our religion is "true" and all other religions wrong. We believe that the Gods are too great for us to encompass in ideas, although we can paint them as pictures or as poems.

The differences between that and traditional Christianity will be obvious to anyone who is honest. And that is all I'll say on the subject.

 

[Dragon]

What is this 'list' that you keep referencing? Since you know so much about it, provide a link to where it's documented? And since it's so 'narrow', it should be small enough for you to give it to us here in the thread, so we can all know what you're referring too.

You are such a fucking liar.

Look, I've presented many things that I claim traditional Christians believe. Instead of playing these idiotic games, go over the things I've said and, if you think traditional Christians DON'T believe some or all of them, point that out. If you can't do that, then tacitly you agree that they do believe those things, and any bullshit like the above you present to obscure this agreement is not going to work.

 

[Newby]

Perhaps I'll come to better understanding of where you are coming from if I may please ask these questions?

Who do you believe Jesus Christ is?

If you had asked that question in the past tense, I would have answered that he WAS a Jewish spiritual teacher who was executed by the Romans at the behest of Jewish religious authorities sometime around 30-35 AD, whose followers continued to follow his teachings as part of their Jewish practices for some time after his death, and upon whose teachings a new religion was very loosely based after the mission of Paul of Tarsus.

Since you asked in the present tense, however, I will say that Jesus IS the main God-form of the Christian religion. There is an association between this God Jesus and the man Jesus referred to above; Christians believe them to be one and the same; I do not.

What do you believe the Bible is? (Made for us by God/His Word; or man made "dogma")?

The Bible is a collection of writings written over a period of several thousand years in three different languages (Hebrew, Biblical Aramaic, ancient Greek), containing the oral history and religious teachings of the ancient Hebrew peoples and a careful selection of early Christian writings. I do not regard either the Bible or any other book as "God's word" in the sense Christians mean that term.

Or, what do you consider "dogma"?

Dogma is any intellectual belief held on the strength of authority rather than reason or evidence, especially if one feels bound by a duty to hold that belief immune from question.

But 'reason and evidence' are subjective? Who's 'reason and evidence'? Yours? Mine? Who determines what's 'reasonable'? Again, false premise.

 

[Dragon]

I've never seen where 'christians' have made either claim, you're speaking from a false premise.

Christians don't claim that theirs is the only true religion, that one comes to God only by through Jesus, and by implication as a Christian?

 

[Newby]

What is this 'list' that you keep referencing? Since you know so much about it, provide a link to where it's documented? And since it's so 'narrow', it should be small enough for you to give it to us here in the thread, so we can all know what you're referring too.

You are such a fucking liar.

Look, I've presented many things that I claim traditional Christians believe. Instead of playing these idiotic games, go over the things I've said and, if you think traditional Christians DON'T believe some or all of them, point that out. If you can't do that, then tacitly you agree that they do believe those things, and any bullshit like the above you present to obscure this agreement is not going to work.

I'm a liar?? How ironic.

Again, what is this list? If it's 'narrow', it should be easy to tell us what's on it?

 

[Dragon]

But 'reason and evidence' are subjective?

No, they are not.

 

[Dragon]

Again, what is this list? If it's 'narrow', it should be easy to tell us what's on it?

Still pretending you don't know how to read, I see.

 

[Newby]

All right, Marie, yes, I guess you would fit the description. Nothing more to say except, as I noted above, God doesn't belong to you, and one does not have to subscribe to all that mind-shackling stuff in order to experience divine love.

She never said He did, your assumptions make you look foolish.

 

[Dragon]

All right, Marie, yes, I guess you would fit the description. Nothing more to say except, as I noted above, God doesn't belong to you, and one does not have to subscribe to all that mind-shackling stuff in order to experience divine love.

She never said He did, your assumptions make you look foolish.

Christians don't claim that theirs is the only true religion, that one comes to God only by through Jesus, and by implication as a Christian?

If you're going to pretend you haven't read something, it's probably best to choose something that isn't on the SAME DAMNED PAGE.

 

[Newby]

The really simple answer to all that is that God is NOT what the Bible says he is.

Based on your reasoning perhaps. You have a nasty habit of trying to state opinion as fact. You think Christians need to humble themselves, look in the mirror, you're not any better.

 

[Dragon]

The really simple answer to all that is that God is NOT what the Bible says he is.

Based on your reasoning perhaps.

Of course. I could refer you above to where I state that reasoning, but then you seem to believe all logic and evidence are "subjective" anyway, and nothing can ever be proven, so it would probably be a waste of time.

I just figured out something. You're going through this whole thread, and responding to each individual post, without reference to anything said in reply, aren't you? And making a huge number of posts when one would make more sense. I think 'll wait until you run down, identify any actual arguments you're making, and refute them then. Let me know when you're done, please.

 

[koshergrl]

Stating your reasoning does not make it reasonable, nor logical.

You are the one who uses subjective logic..you don't use evidence at all. All of your arguments, if they can even be called arguments, are "this makes sense to me so it's logical and true!" That's not an argument. That's just a rant.

And what IS subjective evidence? Is there even such a thing?

 

[Newby]

You have to wonder about people who subscribe to the skewed logic that somehow their freedom is jeopardized by organized ( Christian, never Muslem) religion and at the same time they systematically trample on the freedom of Christians to practice their religion and engage in their 1st Amendment rights.

I might have to wonder about such people if they existed.

The reason that Christianity is of concern while Islam is not, is because we live in the United States, where Islam is a tiny minority and has no potential to take over the government and impose a theocracy. That's not to say some Muslims wouldn't like to. If Islam becomes bigger here (a LOT bigger), I'll be concerned about them, too.

Christians are not being denied the right to practice their faith. They are, however, being denied the privilege of imposing a theocracy. They're not required to like that, but there's no need to let them get away with a false claim of persecution just because of that.

You really do live in la-la land, don't you? Christians are not trying to turn America into a theocrasy, they could have done so if they wished when they founded the country to begin with.

 

[uscitizen]

I'm going to Hell.

I can live with that. Better that than give in to group think...

So there isn't a 'group' out there that thinks just like you? Really?

Why do you think everyone has to belong to a group?
I doubt that there is any group out there who thinks as I do on all issues and to join a group would compromise my beliefs in some way.

 

[koshergrl]

No, he's just pointing out that hjmick is as much a victim of groupthink as anyone else.

 

[Montrovant]

Stating your reasoning does not make it reasonable, nor logical.

You are the one who uses subjective logic..you don't use evidence at all. All of your arguments, if they can even be called arguments, are "this makes sense to me so it's logical and true!" That's not an argument. That's just a rant.

And what IS subjective evidence? Is there even such a thing?

Subjective evidence : I saw something which I cannot show to anyone else (either because it is no longer there or perhaps because I have some sort of 'special' vision) and cannot recreate.

Subjective evidence : I felt something which I cannot cause another to feel. To stick with the theme of this thread, I felt the presence of god.

 

[Newby]

I'm going to Hell.

I can live with that. Better that than give in to group think...

So there isn't a 'group' out there that thinks just like you? Really?

Why do you think everyone has to belong to a group?
I doubt that there is any group out there who thinks as I do on all issues and to join a group would compromise my beliefs in some way.

I'm not the one who said you have to belong to a group, but to believe that you're entirely unique in the way that you think is a bit self centered. The response I was replying to was infering that it's better to be an 'individual', i.e. not think like others, specifically religious people, cause we're all alike, ya know?

 

[koshergrl]

Stating your reasoning does not make it reasonable, nor logical.

You are the one who uses subjective logic..you don't use evidence at all. All of your arguments, if they can even be called arguments, are "this makes sense to me so it's logical and true!" That's not an argument. That's just a rant.

And what IS subjective evidence? Is there even such a thing?

Subjective evidence : I saw something which I cannot show to anyone else (either because it is no longer there or perhaps because I have some sort of 'special' vision) and cannot recreate.

Subjective evidence : I felt something which I cannot cause another to feel. To stick with the theme of this thread, I felt the presence of god.

"
Subjective evidence refers to evidence that one cannot evaluate. One must simply accept what the person says or reject it. Testimony of the parties to a contract is subjective evidence.
Subjective evidence means that testimony from the claimant, corroborated by his/her family and friends, as to whether a specific impairment actually affects the claimant to such an extent as to be disabling. [Hope v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 347 F. Supp. 1048, 1053 (D. Tex. 1972)]. "

So it's not evidence at all. It's just a statement.

Subjective Evidence Law & Legal Definition