What would it take to make you happy, TODAY?

[Az]

This is an intersting question, Mrs. T: What's better, hell, or the reality of death ( i.e. nothing )?

[chequita guevara]

No, not really. I find it strange, though.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Azazel
This is an intersting question, Mrs. T: What's better, hell, or the reality of death ( i.e. nothing )?

That depends what hell you believe in.

[Agathon]

Well I am happy today.

Newcastle United 1 - Stinking Scouser Scum 0

5th win in a row too.

[Az]

That depends what hell you believe in.

Disco hell, with demons shoving white chocolades up your ass, and singing "Do the Hustle".

[chequita guevara]

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I only allow it so my kids can make their own conclusions on the relegion as they get older. It gets hard to hold my tongue when they talk to me about it and makes me feel like a hypocrite thats why I asked. To me there is no difference in death and hell. Course i dont think there is a hell anymore either. when your dead your dead thats it.

[Az]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

It's always fun to reminisce.

I only allow it so my kids can make their own conclusions on the relegion as they get older. It gets hard to hold my tongue when they talk to me about it and makes me feel like a hypocrite thats why I asked. To me there is no difference in death and hell. Course i dont think there is a hell anymore either. when your dead your dead thats it.

Well, I would prefer my kids to make ALL desicions about life themselves. That's what my parents did, more or less. It seems that you have certain legitimate limitations on that, so I guess there is little to do.

[chequita guevara]

The problem, Mrs. Tubes, is that religious people do not generally make rational decisions about their religion. That's why the country is 95% religious. The only way to raise your kids to be capable of making their own decisions is to either not talk about it at all around them (and since your husband is doing that, it's not an option for you) or raise them to think criitically about everything.

You don't have to teach them to be atheist or anti-religious. If you just teach them how to be critical, things will turn out alright. Of course, when they start questioning the religion to their father, you may run into another set of troubles. Was the question of religion discussed in the custody agreement?

[Az]

[Ben Kenobi]

I have to ask this does anybody findit hypocritical for me to allow my ex husband to continue teaching my children the ways of the catholic church when i no longer accept or really believe in them any more

I had no problem with having children brought up in the Catholic faith, even when I was still in the Mennonite church, just because I knew they could be happier inside a church than without any faith at all.

I never had that, and I don't want my kids to feel deprived like I did. If you believe your kids will be happier inside the church, than I see no conflict.

The question I think you need to ask, is why do you feel that your church doesn't have the answers for you any more. What discouraged you so much as to be unsure of what the church teaches?

i was married in the church i also got divorced for my ex husband to be remaried in the church he and i must denounce our children and marriage and for a small fee his new mariage would be recgonized. Course then my children would not be recgonize.

You've remarried, and if he still practices, it's a tough spot that you've put him in.

[Ben Kenobi]

The problem, Mrs. Tubes, is that religious people do not generally make rational decisions about their religion. That's why the country is 95% religious. The only way to raise your kids to be capable of making their own decisions is to either not talk about it at all around them (and since your husband is doing that, it's not an option for you) or raise them to think criitically about everything.

I challenge the first statement, as one who was taught to think critically. For me, it didn't make sense to accept the teachings of Aristotle and the accounts of Roman historians as true, while rejecting the accounts of Christ in the Gospels. The Gospels have better manuscript evidence, than any other historical evidence we have for that particular period in time.

I agree that they should be taught to be critical, but also, that such critical thinking need not lead to doubt. The problem is that most people teach this out of a desire to debunk Christianity, while a balanced view, would also affirm.

The challenge of critical thinking, is not to doubt everything, but to form a basis for which we can trust things.

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, I would prefer my kids to make ALL desicions about life themselves. That's what my parents did, more or less. It seems that you have certain legitimate limitations on that, so I guess there is little to do.

Do you believe that kids can harm themselves by the decisions they make? Just because they have the freedom to do so as adults, does not relieve parents of their responsibility to give them the tools they need to survive as adults.

This includes raising a christian child in the church. If you don't want your child to be raised christian, don't have them baptised. If they are baptised, you have made a promise to teach them about the faith in which they are already baptised, and to break this is no different from breaking any other promise.

[Ben Kenobi]

evil is not in the action, but more in the person... someone can be evil and not sin... and likewise, one can sin and not be evil. BTW, I have probably a different idea of what evil is than you do.

Interesting. In what case would you see the former? Someone who is evil, and yet does not sin? And for the latter, how can one sin, and yet not be evil?

Is it possible to distinguish between the sinner and his sin?

I don't agree that we are all sinners. I also don't agree with Christianity's definition of sin. I don't think premarital sex is a sin. I don't think homosexuality is a sin. I don't think working on a sabbath day is a sin.... etc...

And neither am I talking about any of these. I'm talking about hurting other people, either through insulting them, or lying to them, or gossiping about them behind their back.

This is all sinful behaviour and hurts the people around us, and hurts ourselves. I have a really hard time with lying, and it's still hard for me to trust people enough to tell them the truth without holding back.

You can sin through omission, in not doing what you ought to have done too. It's not a matter of 'avoiding evil', but as Christ tells us: to cease to do evil, and to learn to do good.

Speak for yourself. I am strong. I don't commit what I consider to be sins. I don't commit evil acts.

I'm weak. I do what I ought not to do, and I do not do what I ought to be doing.

Do you consider lying to be a sin?

Is murder the worst sin one can do?
I don't know, if a sniper just picked you off from long range, instantly killing you, that would be murder. But a quick, painless death is a lot better than getting severely raped and beaten, IMO. I believe the key to understanding the worst "sin" is all grounded in the amount of suffering one endures. BTW, I also don't believe that simply causing death is a sin. I do think that abortion, which causes death, and doctor assisted suicide for the terminally ill, are not sins. So it's more about suffering, IMO.

What if I told you that the primary agent involved in sin, is not the other people, or even ourselves, but God? How can God suffer from our sins that we commit against him in hurting others?

[Agathon]

I challenge the first statement, as one who was taught to think critically. For me, it didn't make sense to accept the teachings of Aristotle and the accounts of Roman historians as true, while rejecting the accounts of Christ in the Gospels.

That's hardly the same.

Aristotle has arguments for his positions. He doesn't ask you to take anything on trust other than what is plainly evident to every person – τὰ φαινόμενα.

Ancient historians are renowned as liars, yet most of them don't have folk being raised from the dead or walking on water.

Believing in the literal truth of the Gospels is a continuous suicide of reason.