Yes? No?

Ask the guys who flew into the twin towers.

well, if you intended to kill them, I'm pretty sure it's murder. If not, then it's manslaughter.

rickheel Wrote:Ask the guys who flew into the twin towers.

No, I'm asking you, a Christian.

Killing is killing. It's kind of like being pregnant. No one is sort of pregnant or almost pregnant. They either are or are not pregant.
The term murder is used to describe on particular kind of killing, yet in connotes ideas of malice in the one doing the murdering. Killing is plain wrong no matter how many rationalizations are used to justify killing.

To take a life is not for us to decide, or at least that is how many religious traditions would talk about killing. Actually, I believe that is B.S. I firmly believe I have the rigth to take my own life and I furthermore have the right to take the life of a loved one to alleviate their suffering. Only humans can come up with that decision. Sadly, though, we come to that decision foolhardy, i.e. the murderers who flew into the Twin Towers and the governments who fight violence with more violence, i.e. the United States.

When bombs go astray and kill civilians, that is no different than when freaks fly airplanes into buildings. Those freaks believed they were acting within their rights, likewise our government believes they are acting within their rights. Take away the rationalizations and all you got is fire falling from the sky and poor folks being maimed and killed.

Klutz... are you a religious guy?

Agnosticism--the denial of a human ability to discern what is divine and what is not divine. Basically, I think that our finite brains are incapable of talking about or knowing that which is infinite, i.e. God.

I do, however, believe in some certain mysteries that cannot be explained, but to say that the unexplainable is God or divinity is an ad hoc explanation.

The short answer, uh....no!

I admire a good agnostic much more than a lazy Atheist, but I've never understand the notion that a VERY evident God could be beyond human understanding. Of course there are certain things about the Divine we can not understand... for example a person living in a 2 dimensional world can not understand 3 dimensions... however God has created us with a mental capacity to understand his existence... not much more, but we can understand His love, His anger, His forgiveness and His justice. I'm tired so I'm not gonna go too into it right now, I will later.

BTW... it seems you know more about Christianity than most "Christians" round these parts... It's a shame... I think you would agree that it's a sad day when an agnostic knows more about Christianity than a "Christian".

Hey, I paid attention in catechism.

No seriously, Agnosticism adds up when one tries to define God (that Being which is divine, infinite, perfect, etc). Logically, if God were perfect then why would a perfect God create anything. In fact, it would logically follow that any Being with perfection as an attribute would desire nothing, would do nothing because any perfect Being would deny their own perfection by acting (moving, creating, willing, thinking, etc).

I think the problem lies in how we have defined God. We have made the definition so strict that logically we are incapable of having knowledge of God.

And, as posted earlier, our minds are finite, meaning we are mortal. Our minds will cease to exist at some point. In defies all logical precepts for one to say that one can know that which is infinite, i.e. God.

Enter Kierkegaard here.

Belief in God is illogical, acc. to K-man. It is entirely irrational to believe in and worship a God and that is the whole point because if it were proven that God does exist then there'd be no room for faith.

We have proof that 2+2=4. If you have two apples of the Granny Smith type and two Red Delicious then you have four apples altogether. That is a proven statement, one needs no faith to believe that two and two is four. Likewise, if God is a proven entity, then there'd be no need for the faithful.

KlutzDio I Wrote:Hey, I paid attention in catechism.

No seriously, Agnosticism adds up when one tries to define God (that Being which is divine, infinite, perfect, etc). Logically, if God were perfect then why would a perfect God create anything. In fact, it would logically follow that any Being with perfection as an attribute would desire nothing, would do nothing because any perfect Being would deny their own perfection by acting (moving, creating, willing, thinking, etc).

I think the problem lies in how we have defined God. We have made the definition so strict that logically we are incapable of having knowledge of God.

And, as posted earlier, our minds are finite, meaning we are mortal. Our minds will cease to exist at some point. In defies all logical precepts for one to say that one can know that which is infinite, i.e. God.

Enter Kierkegaard here.

Belief in God is illogical, acc. to K-man. It is entirely irrational to believe in and worship a God and that is the whole point because if it were proven that God does exist then there'd be no room for faith.

We have proof that 2+2=4. If you have two apples of the Granny Smith type and two Red Delicious then you have four apples altogether. That is a proven statement, one needs no faith to believe that two and two is four. Likewise, if God is a proven entity, then there'd be no need for the faithful.

Catechism - one of the greatest things about modern day Christianity. I'm an Episcopalian but God bless the Catholic Church.

1) Your first paragraph is based on the premise that logic is superior to God. If God exists, then he gave us logic skills... Logic skills did not create or define God... They especially do not help us define God. The worst thing one can do is try to define God... God is beyond all definition, for our human definition of God would inevitably be flawed. To talk about God on the presumption that he exists, you must acknowledge the fact that he gave us logic skills. Our logic skills could be very flawed in his eyes, as many things of humans are flawed. Our immune system is flawed, our eyes are flawed, our teeth our flawed, why can our logic skills not be flawed? Trying to decide whether God exists or does not exist using logic is impossible.

2) I would have to agree with your second paragraph. It's gotten to the point at which the word "God" is thrown around as if it has no meaning. We have decided to humanize God and act as if he is some human scorekeeper upstairs keeping track of our mistakes and good deeds. It is beyond our capacity of knowledge to know what God is, although we do know that we were created in his image (whatever that means... think about it).

3) Our mortal minds will cease to exist. As Luther so cleverly put it, "anyone who expects to see harps and angels in Heaven is a fool and has no business there". Heaven and being with God are incomprehensible to our mortal minds. We can not understand how a relationship between a Father, Son and Holy Spirit can be seen as 3 and 1, at the same time. It is illogical to us. Surely our logic is flawed.

4) Belief in God is misunderstood in today's culture. Belief in God should not be whether or not God exists, but the level of love and compassion one has for God. During the Medieval times, faith was not whether or not you believed in God, it was your level of love and trust in God. I also think Kierkegaard is speaking of a different faith than my understanding of faith. He is speaking of a faith as "faith in the fact that He exists". I know many people who believe that God exists and have faith that he exists but don't give a damn, they don't worship Him. If God exists (according to flawed human logic), he surely would not show himself. Such a passionate God, who wants to know who really loves him and who does not, would not show his face off to the entire World, he would hide it, making it harder for people to believe in his existence, thus making it possible for a deeper love. As a great Jewish scholar once said, "The Bible does more to hide God than to reveal him". Amen to that. God wants for a more unconditional love to happen, so he continues to hide himself, so that the potential for evil is greater and the potential for love is just as great.

5) A proven entity according to what? According to humans? The horribly flawed beings that we are? The reason faith exists is because God has the ability to hide himself from human understanding. He has given us the gift of acknowledging his existence (Thank Him for that. Living a Christian life is SO much easier than a non-Christian life). The rest is up to our belief and faith in Him... if we choose to deny it like millions do, God will decide their fate, if they choose to accept his hidden face, the reward is eternal happiness.

Just like to say how pleased I am that someone around here actual thinks about the Divine before speaking about it. Christian or not, I respect you.

KlutzDio I Wrote:When bombs go astray and kill civilians, that is no different than when freaks fly airplanes into buildings.

Follow up question: Is it murder if you kill by accident as opposed to premeditated?

Example:

9/11 hijackers planned their attacks and knew what the targets were.

Civillians killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo etc. were not targeted by the US. They were the result of stray bombs.

They are both killing (obviously, cause someone died), but are they both "murder".

Quote:The term murder is used to describe one particular kind of killing, yet in connotes ideas of malice

I like that.

T-Monay820 Wrote:

KlutzDio I Wrote:When bombs go astray and kill civilians, that is no different than when freaks fly airplanes into buildings.

Follow up question: Is it murder if you kill by accident as opposed to premeditated?

Example:

9/11 hijackers planned their attacks and knew what the targets were.

Civillians killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo etc. were not targeted by the US. They were the result of stray bombs.

They are both killing (obviously, cause someone died), but are they both "murder".

Quote:The term murder is used to describe one particular kind of killing, yet in connotes ideas of malice

I like that.

So is it moral to drop bombs on anyone... especially when the military knows full well there will be civilian casualties?

nate jonesacc Wrote:So is it moral to drop bombs on anyone... especially when the military knows full well there will be civilian casualties?

Just answer the question. I'm not asking if its moral or not. I'm asking if it should be called murder or something else.

T-Monay820 Wrote:

nate jonesacc Wrote:So is it moral to drop bombs on anyone... especially when the military knows full well there will be civilian casualties?

Just answer the question. I'm not asking if its moral or not. I'm asking if it should be called murder or something else.

Whether it's called murder or not, it's still killing (and killing unnecessarily, I might add).

Killing, IMO, is what God was saying through that commandment... That is debatable... but without a doubt killing an innocent person is seen as sin in God's eyes.

I also think that God would assume that people would take his Word with a little more acceptance... He didn't figure that there would be war mongering people trying to use His name... So of course He didn't make the commandment, "Under these circumstances... blah blah blah you can kill."

Thou shalt not murder, kill, whatever fake colloquialism you want to call it. Terse. Short. Concise.

See, Nate, that is what I was talking about in a previous post. You said the "Word" of God.

John opens his Gospel with "in the beginning there was the word..." In the original Greek the "word" was actually the Logos which means rational discourse, the ability to use our logical thinking skills, etc. For this very reason and other more complicated philosophy of mind reasons, I know that any God that may exist uses logic (which comes from the Greek, Logos) in the same way that we use our logical thinking skills.
Why would a Creator bestow upon his creation the use of fundamental logic when that Creator did not need or use the same fundamental logic?
Logic is very important to humans (and other animals) because it allows us to survive in a hostile environment. We use logic to determine truths from untruths and if I hold any idea of God, then that idea is Truth. Logically, one must use their logical skills to determine the Truth, or what is true and what is not true.
Plato, one of the greatest Christian philosophers, said that the passions (emotions) and the intellect (our logic capabilities) are in constant struggle. He said the intellect was given to us so that we could control our passions. Since Kierkegaard and other theologians have described faith as being something very passionate, I doubt that it is Truth simply because any Truth in my book must be intellectually true and not true because someone feels really, really intensely about it.

Brings me to my sermon on belief. I can believe all I want that the world is flat. I can look at globes and go up into space and see the spherical shape of the earth. Yet, I am unconvinced and I firmly believe the earth is flat as a pancake. My belief doesn't make the earth flat, the earth is actually spherical regardless of what I believe or do not believe.
Similarly, passionate beliefs about Jesus or any other religious figure don't make that person holy or divine, it is simply a belief.

And, the way you describe it in your post, the fact that God "hides" his existence from us. Logically thinking, this would make that idea of God very tricky and deceitful which is contrary to any idea of God that I hold.


In closing, I challenge you thus:

Let's say we have enough proof to say that a God does exist and we agree on the nature and definition of what this Being is and is not. That said, why worship this Being? Why would such a Being require his creations to worship Him/Her/It?
And, how does one fulfill this worship requirement? What is proper and improper worshipping?