The Christmas Secular fall out.

sweatyblackballs

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Posts
298
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
161
Sexuality
No Response
As for the "X" in Xmas, before you get too concerned with it, remember that this is not just an effort to get the world Christ out of the world Christmas. The use of the letter X to denote Christ is traditional from the times when early Christians were trying to avoid persecution. X is the first letter in Χριστος which is the Greek word for Christ. An early abbreviation for Christ was Xp which when superimposed on top of each other is the ancient Chi-Rho symbol. Using X for Christ is not a sign of disrespect. It is a well established Christian tradition.

Please re-read my entire post and my response to NIC160's reference to the 'The Origins of Xmas' ... If you had read my post clearly, you will be able to see exactly what I said in regards to the 'X' ... I am not from an 'Anglican' background ... I am from a 'Pentecostal' church background. The things that applied to 'Anglican' churches such as their use of the 'X' did not and still do not apply to 'Pentecostal' churches. The very article, as I said, mentions the 'church' use of the 'Xmas' ... not biblically ... that is what I mentioned already. Your viewpoint is your own, mine is ingrained from my upbringing. I too know the Word of God inside and out, I used to teach it every Sunday ... that has nothing to do with the 'X' ... that 'X' is a religious church-based, not faith-based, symbol!
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Sin is a fiction to counter the argument that if your God created us and for your given reasons, why did he do such a poor job?

All christian theological thinking is self fulfilling because it begins with the unquestionable premise that god, and our god at that, exists.

It is much easier to study and understand human nature and behaviour without the intellectual shackle of divinity.
 

NCbear

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Posts
1,975
Media
0
Likes
2,613
Points
343
Location
Greensboro (North Carolina, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
All christian theological thinking is self fulfilling because it begins with the unquestionable premise that god, and our god at that, exists.

It is much easier to study and understand human nature and behaviour without the intellectual shackle of divinity.

And this is precisely such a difficult issue to grapple with, intellectually, because truly important things like the origin (and purpose) of existence, the possible future(s) of the planet, and "human nature and behavior" cannot be--to my mind--fully explained/understood without some element of faith. Which is, of course, the suspension of disbelief, of intellectual skepticism.

NCbear (who's still vacillating back and forth, really, between agnosticism and atheism)
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
I'm having a hard time differentiating them, JA. Regrettably, I view Christianity (as practiced in the US today) much less as an expression of personal faith and much more an expression of conservative politics. They seem to be one and the same.
I'm guessing that a big part of the difficulty is that "conservative politics" really means nothing resembling what it did a couple of decades ago. Technically, regardless of where it is applied, "conservative" simply means "resisting change." Yes, that's a simplification, but it gets the point across.

In that context, "political conservatives" and "religious conservatives" should be diametrically opposed, but the religious conservatives coopted and mutated and perverted the conservative political ideals of smaller, less-intrusive government.
 

Axcess

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Posts
1,611
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
JustAsking One of the main problems that I find with the idea of the Original Sin as Catholics and Protestants view it is that all humans not only suffer the consequence of the sin of Adam and Eve but we are guilty of that sin as well!!!!!! The Orthodox Christian view seems more reasonable to me that humans suffer the consequence of that sin ( death , suffering , this imperfect world, our tendecies to do evil etc) rather than the guilt of that sin . Why we are guilty of what Adam And Eve do ? Im only guilty or responsible of my own actions , not of the actions of others . God cant be that unfair. Of course , keep in mind that I'm talking here in a Christian context because like I said before I'm agnostic . The idea of the personal god dont convince me.
I dont believe In Adam and Eve as real historical persons that actually existed and even less that all humans descend from only this original pair. I know that many christians dont believe in Adam and Eve as historical persons but just saying.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
JustAsking One of the main problems that I find with the idea of the Original Sin as Catholics and Protestants view it is that all humans not only suffer the consequence of the sin of Adam and Eve but we are guilty of that sin as well!!!!!! The Orthodox Christian view seems more reasonable to me that humans suffer the consequence of that sin ( death , suffering , this imperfect world, our tendecies to do evil etc) rather than the guilt of that sin . Why we are guilty of what Adam And Eve do ? Im only guilty or responsible of my own actions , not of the actions of others . God cant be that unfair. Of course , keep in mind that I'm talking here in a Christian context because like I said before I'm agnostic . The idea of the personal god dont convince me.
I dont believe In Adam and Eve as real historical persons that actually existed and even less that all humans descend from only this original pair. I know that many christians dont believe in Adam and Eve as historical persons but just saying.
David,
I think you missed my point. Original Sin has not much to do with deeds and blame. It has to do with the fact that we all inherit the same affliction as Adam (metaphorically). Consider the analogy of the alcoholic again. If someone is an alcoholic, it is not because he took a drink the other day. It is because he is addicted to alcohol, whether he takes a drink or not.

So if you define sin as addiction to self-interest in the midst of the misery and suffering of others, you have the same thing. Animals operate out of self-interest, but do not have a choice. All humans, having inherited the ability of consciousness and self awareness are capable of making the choice. This is "original sin as affliction".

You and I can be aware of massive misery and suffering in another part of the world or on the other side of town, and we can choose to address it or we can choose to work in our own self-interest. And regardless of what we do choose (free will choice), like the alcoholic, we are limited in our ability to live up to even our own choices, due to our propensity towards self-interest.

So again, taking a drink does not make someone an alcoholic. Being addicted to drink does make him one. Doing something bad does not make a person a sinner. Being human and unable to not operate mostly out of self interest does. In both cases, sin is a condition and not a choice.

Defined this way, you can see how we are "guilty" of Adam's original sin, and we suffer the consequences of it as well. But "consequences" in this case is that we operate through the "hell" of our own self-interest, and we are also the recipients of that behavior from others.

So Drifter, forget the notion of being guilty and responsible for your own actions in the eyes of God. Think of us more like sin-aholics, who can barely help ourselves from operating out of self-interest, when others are suffering. Think of how you would judge someone addicted to alcohol who is a loved one. You would be thankful for every sober day, and you would be frustrated but not surprised when they fell off the wagon. And rather than punishing them for their lapses, you would treat their affliction.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Sadly JA, I haven't got time for a rerun of socratic dialectic to show that helping others can be an act of self interest in a purely human context irrespective of god, and that what one human may consider sinful another might consider an acceptable act.

But I am sure that you can agree that these situations are quite feasible?
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
D. Wood, I'm still trying to figure out why people, regardless of religious affiliation, can't just simply use the Golden Rule as a template for ethical behavior.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Please re-read my entire post and my response to NIC160's reference to the 'The Origins of Xmas' ... If you had read my post clearly, you will be able to see exactly what I said in regards to the 'X' ... I am not from an 'Anglican' background ... I am from a 'Pentecostal' church background. The things that applied to 'Anglican' churches such as their use of the 'X' did not and still do not apply to 'Pentecostal' churches. The very article, as I said, mentions the 'church' use of the 'Xmas' ... not biblically ... that is what I mentioned already. Your viewpoint is your own, mine is ingrained from my upbringing. I too know the Word of God inside and out, I used to teach it every Sunday ... that has nothing to do with the 'X' ... that 'X' is a religious church-based, not faith-based, symbol!

Your viewpoint is based on popular misconceptions and ignorance. Why you're still clinging to them ardently in the face of them being identified as such is a mystery, though you did the same exact thing in the "What Makes You American?" thread, so it shouldn't be a surprise.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
You could just accept our ignorance, NC.

Consciousness of ignorance drives our desire for knowledge.

I've accepted your ignorance, Drifterwood. No worries, mate. :biggrin1:

And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. (1 Corinthians 8:2)
 

Ethyl

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Posts
5,194
Media
19
Likes
1,707
Points
333
Location
Philadelphia (Pennsylvania, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
D. Wood, I'm still trying to figure out why people, regardless of religious affiliation, can't just simply use the Golden Rule as a template for ethical behavior.

Some people are more interested in what they want regardless of the methods and people used to achieve their goals.
 

Axcess

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Posts
1,611
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I've accepted your ignorance, Drifterwood. No worries, mate. :biggrin1:

And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. (1 Corinthians 8:2)
Actually we are all ignorants . We dont know or dont have the answers to many life questions . We ignore many things that happen in the past and we dont know so much about the universe etc.
To me 2 differents kinds of persons exist . Those that believe that they know everything and those that are aware of their ignorance .
I'm agnostic so i'm aware of my ignorance about many things.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Actually we are all ignorants . We dont know or dont have the answers to many life questions . We ignore many things that happen in the past and we dont know so much about the universe etc.
To me 2 differents kinds of persons exist . Those that believe that they know everything and those that are aware of their ignorance .
I'm agnostic so i'm aware of my ignorance about many things.

Me too, which is why I like that passage from the Bible.
 

Axcess

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Posts
1,611
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
JustAsking you explain the concept of sin way better than most theologians do . I was raised Catholic and priests never discuss the concept of sin like that . They basically said that Adam and Eve or the first humans commit the first sin and the rest of the humanity share the consequence and the blame of that sin . Many protestant ministers said the same thing.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
I knew I shouldn't have had that girl up the back door :wink: :biggrin1:
"Try it, you'll LIKE it!:biggrin1:

Some people are more interested in what they want regardless of the methods and people used to achieve their goals.
Well, I understand that, dear (evidence: our "friends" at Arlington Cemetery), the part that confuses me is how those very same people get so indignant when the tables are turned. Those "I demand that you respect me, but I refuse to respect you" type of people.
JustAsking you explain the concept of sin way better than most theologians do . I was raised Catholic and priests never discuss the concept of sin like that . They basically said that Adam and Eve or the first humans commit the first sin and the rest of the humanity share the consequence and the blame of that sin . Many protestant ministers said the same thing.
Ah, David, you've discovered the joy of social discourse with JustAsking. He's a frustrating blend of brilliant and humble. If you ever have a question about physics, metaphysics, or theology, he's the source I would recommend.

Yes, JA, I'm talking about you like you aren't in the room. You know I'm your biggest fan (well, maybe with the exception of your wife!)
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Sadly JA, I haven't got time for a rerun of socratic dialectic to show that helping others can be an act of self interest in a purely human context irrespective of god, and that what one human may consider sinful another might consider an acceptable act.

But I am sure that you can agree that these situations are quite feasible?
D. Wood,
Sorry, D. I didn't meant to direct that last comment directly at you. I was still answering David's question about the definition of Original Sin and I used your name accidently.

As to your comment, I have to completely agree. All of what I just said, serves to put the entire notion of sin aside as something that is merely inevitable. This is what Paul is saying in Romans and elsewhere, is that under the old system of sin and religious law, the only recourse is guilt, condemnation, and death. This is a stupid way to run a universe, according to St. Paul then, and Martin Luther more recently.

Jesus spent most of his time making this point. He comes to advocate love of neighbor and a gut wrenching compassion towards those who are suffering as a much better framework for living, instead of following religious law dogmatically.

To your point, no one claims that humans acting altruistically out of love can possibly avoid some self interest, and in some cases they can't even avoid doing harm. But given the choice between dogmatic religious law, and acting out of love, Jesus advocates the latter. Anyone reading this would probably agree that love does a better job of guiding human altruism than does religious law.

Jesus even follows up his thesis on altruism with a parable involving a despised and certainly un-holy foriegner committing an act of Altruism, while the holy men, who are attempting to obey religious purity law (thereby avoiding what they think is sin), fail to provide essential service to the beat-up man lying in the road. The point is that law and obligation fail to motivate the holy men towards doing what truly pleases whereas love and compassion does do the trick. Pushed to its limit, Jesus is almost saying that even godless love and compassion (the heathen Samaritan) trumps religion itself (which is something that is often said in these threads.)

If sin is self-interest, and human altruism necessarily will contain some self interest, Luther responds that one should therefore "sin boldly" (meaning go ahead and address misery and suffering, and don't worry about perfection, since such is the human condition.)

So to those who say that all we need is "the golden rule", Jesus pretty much says yes that's right, except without the help of God, you won't be able to sustain it given the human propensity towards self-interest.

Anyway, I am not trying to convert you or even refute the things that are said against religion in these threads. I am just trying to point out the irony that most of the things that are complained about are beliefs and practices of religious fundamenalism and not mainstream Christianity at all.

Ironically, where fundamentalism harps on behavior, guilt, sin, and condemnation, Jesus recommends throwing out the entire rule book, to forget the notion of sin, and replace obligation to God and to Law with love and compassion. Who can argue with that?
 

Axcess

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Posts
1,611
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I would say Justasking is one of the greatest assets of this site . It doesnt matter if we agree with him or not , his post are very well written and profound.:wink::wink::wink:
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I've accepted your ignorance, Drifterwood. No worries, mate. :biggrin1:

And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. (1 Corinthians 8:2)

Actually we are all ignorants . We dont know or dont have the answers to many life questions . We ignore many things that happen in the past and we dont know so much about the universe etc.
To me 2 differents kinds of persons exist . Those that believe that they know everything and those that are aware of their ignorance .
I'm agnostic so i'm aware of my ignorance about many things.

Yes, one of my favorite sayings is, "Seek out those who seek the Truth. Avoid those who think they found it."

JustAsking you explain the concept of sin way better than most theologians do . I was raised Catholic and priests never discuss the concept of sin like that . They basically said that Adam and Eve or the first humans commit the first sin and the rest of the humanity share the consequence and the blame of that sin . Many protestant ministers said the same thing.

David,
Such is the tragedy of American religion. Regardless of the doctrine of their denominations, even mainstream Christians and Pastors in America try to turn it all into some kind of odd Calvinistic/Zwingliistic thing that is obsessed with sin and condemnation. Perhaps it is our heritage of being the refuge for all of Europe's religions fanatics for the past 350 years.

"...Yes, JA, I'm talking about you like you aren't in the room. ...
I get that a lot. Also, I am not very popular at parties.

Thanks for the kind words, DC. Its nice having a loyal fan.

Everyone, have a great Christmas / Xmas / Chanuka / Kwanzaa / Holiday / Solstice / Festivus / Saturnalia / season if I don't talk to you before then.