|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who thinks we should add a forum to this board for Philosophy/Religion/Spirituality |
| Yes; open up a new forum |
|
50% |
[ 11 ] |
| No; let it mix in with off-topic |
|
50% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 22 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:47 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Xian wrote: |
| BUT, if someone were to believe that the world may not remain forever, weather it be for religous reasons, war reasons, sickness reasons or environmental reasons, they could have every reason to believe that religions as we know them will remain |
Some form of religion may remain, though that is doubtful as we increase in knowledge and sophistication. A quick look at the long view of history however tells us that current religions such as xianity will not remain. Halleluia! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Merlyn
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Some form of religion may remain, though that is doubtful as we increase in knowledge and sophistication. A quick look at the long view of history however tells us that current religions such as xianity will not remain. Halleluia! |
I agree. There may be some forms of religion that will remain. I would imagine those that are not a part any prophetic tradition. I could see a religion like Daoism surviving as long as it sticks to basic life lessons and stays away from the fantastical elements, i ching, immortals, etc. The prophetic traditions will run into trouble as we expand our knowledge of the universe, and people begin to realize just how big this universe is and how small we each are, and then how really small 3-4 men were in the entire timespan of the universe. I can see this now, and just have to think about the universe from what we already know. Of course, a stronger emphasis on science in schools would be helpful, or perhaps, just special courses on critical thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Satori,
I have a question for you Satori... Do you know you are loved? I don't mean just loved, but seriously, overwhelmingly loved. It's this scandalous love that's just waiting for you.
PS...I am loved too. Check out my website and meet the many people who love me who KNOW me.  If you call that archaic, then I'm a sucker!
| Quote: |
| It is just Christianity has not only said what we do in public, but also in private. Secular humanism would allow everyone to do what they want in public and private. |
I think that is already showing itself not true. Already, those who don't want to see the Christian threads want to put in a place where it can't be seen. I think in theory it's a good idea, but unfortunately, from my own experience secular humanism is about an ideal society without religion. Much more subtle than any "Christian sneak attacks on here." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
Satori,
I have a question for you Satori... Do you know you are loved? I don't mean just loved, but seriously, overwhelmingly loved. It's this scandalous love that's just waiting for you.
PS...I am loved too. Check out my website and meet the many people who love me who KNOW me. If you call that archaic, then I'm a sucker! |
Yes I'm loved thankyou, by my Mum, Dad, brother, girlfriend, and several close friends and relavtives. Thanks for you concern about my wellbeing.
| Quote: |
secular humanism is about an ideal society without religion. Much more subtle than any "Christian sneak attacks on here." |
That's exactly wrong. Secular Humanism is the least prosletysing of all beliefs. You won't find secular humanists going door to door with free books trying to convert people. Secular humanists are quite happy to live in a world where others can freely practice religion, they just don't want it in thier face or thier courts, or government, or schools, or thier bedroom, and rightly so. It's christians that want to see the world converted to thier way of thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Satori,
Can i ask something? Are you extremely artistic? I sense you are very creative and gifted in the arts. For some reason, I see the color orange over your life.
| Quote: |
| That's exactly wrong. Secular Humanism is the least prosletysing of all beliefs. You won't find secular humanists going door to door with free books trying to convert people. Secular humanists are quite happy to live in a world where others can freely practice religion, they just don't want it in thier face or thier courts, or government, or schools, or thier bedroom, and rightly so. It's christians that want to see the world converted to thier way of thinking. |
One, that's not what Christianity is supposed to be about...door to door salesmen. haha. It's supposed to be about close community, caring for one another and giving more than taking. Standing upon for the poor, the orphans and the aliens. While bringing reconcilliation to the environment. Unfortunately, we are a far way away from that representation.
Two, Secular Humanism is so about door to door, but much more intrusive. In a general sense it's on our TV's, at our schools, at the market and everywhere else. It's a world system that ascribes to the gods of greed, pride and lust. Where can you go, where you are not being marketed something or being told to look a certain way or buy into a certain type of morals. To me, Secular Humanism is like the matrix...sucking your life for your soul. Maybe, I'm wrong and so enlighten me, but that's how I see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xian
Joined: 08 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Merlyn wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Some form of religion may remain, though that is doubtful as we increase in knowledge and sophistication. A quick look at the long view of history however tells us that current religions such as xianity will not remain. Halleluia! |
I agree. There may be some forms of religion that will remain. I would imagine those that are not a part any prophetic tradition. I could see a religion like Daoism surviving as long as it sticks to basic life lessons and stays away from the fantastical elements, i ching, immortals, etc. The prophetic traditions will run into trouble as we expand our knowledge of the universe, and people begin to realize just how big this universe is and how small we each are, and then how really small 3-4 men were in the entire timespan of the universe. I can see this now, and just have to think about the universe from what we already know. Of course, a stronger emphasis on science in schools would be helpful, or perhaps, just special courses on critical thinking. |
Science is not seperate from Christianity. I think you mean science from the perspective of some people. Many scientists and mathamaticians have become Christians because of what they have learnt.
You speak as though Christianity has absolutely no logical grounds to stand on. If someone knew their stuff, they could produce a good apologetic to explain much of the claims of Christianity (I am not advocating knowledge as a way to God though, but someone who has a spiritual experience of God should look into such things). Many of the claims (though obviously not all of them) are acknowledged by secular scholars. Eg: The Bible being the most reliable ancient manuscript (I am basing that largely upon proven efficiency of ancient and modern translations and numbers of ancient manuscripts in existance today) or the historicity of Jesus Christ. The question for those who have done thorough studies into 1st century Israel, in particular the beginnings of Christianity, is not whether Jesus existed, but whether He was Who He claimed to be. If people are going to reject something (or accept something), it is very helpful to have some academic ground to back themselves up. Many people have a spiritual belief system who were totally against it originally. Spiritual, not just intellectual.
I doubt that intellectual knowledge is going to make the world better and make people give up faith, no matter what the religion. If that were the case many of the religions and cults around today wouldn't still exist. It is a logical conclusion. In fact, as technoligy and understanding increases, the world seems to becoming more problematic. Not necessarily because of the technology and understanding in itself though, but technology has led to some terrible things happening around the world (BTW, I do thoroughly enjoy technology). Society has benefited greatly over the last 100 years, but it has also decreased rapidly (watch the news), especially in the last century in other ways. Desease, crime, wars, weapons...
Take a look Iraq, humanism vs Islam. Humanism, while it has some great principles, will never eliminate spiritual experience and beliefs, particularly as so much of the world hates the humanistic / intellectual ideals of western nations.
| Quote: |
Secular Humanism is the least prosletysing of all beliefs. You won't find secular humanists going door to door with free books trying to convert people. Secular humanists are quite happy to live in a world where others can freely practice religion, they just don't want it in thier face or thier courts, or government, or schools, or thier bedroom, and rightly so. It's christians that want to see the world converted to thier way of thinking. |
I am not American and I am not stating an opinion about 'the war on terror', but, in effect, this war to make Iraq and Afgahnistan democratic nations to me equates as humanistic prosletysing. Bringing a new way of life and thinking to the people. Humanism doesn't necessarily seek to destroy other religions, but it does to seek to co-exist with other belief systems that don't necessarily want to co-exist with it. This whole discussion is leaning towards Humanism growing and religions decreasing. Again, eliminating freedom.
Anyway, interesting discussion. But don't forget. The Christian posts here, as Kermo said, is often posted by people other than Christians. Often Christians are defending. For example, this thread is not evangelism, it is only a response to some ideas. If it still offends you, skip the thread.
P.S. Several articles on the internet will claim humanism as a religion, including a time of tax exemption and various manifesto's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shortskirt_longjacket
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Location: fitz and ernie are my raison d'etre
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rteacher wrote: |
| The kind of meaningful discussion that has developed on this thread ("Xian" is a welcome addition) would be largely absent on this forum, I think, if the proposed new forum were created. |
No, it wouldn't be absent. As is clear, there are many posters from all sides of the religious issue that like to discuss religion (including me). The reason I'm saying we should have a separate forum is NOT TO RESTRICT FREE SPEECH but to recognize religion for the important and huge topic that it is! Sports has its own forum, Technology has its own forum, Current Events has its own forum...but no one is standing up and saying that their freedom of speech is being restricted! If anything, it's being expanded and formally recognized!
| RTeacher wrote: |
| The "Off-Topic Forum" would be filled almost exclusively with frivolous threads, including classics like "Which Spice girl would you eat...?" |
As it should be. Off-topic means it's about stuff that's miscellaneous...stuff that doesn't belong to a broader category. Religion/Philosophy is a HUGE category, and one with more substance than, as you say, the Spice Girls! I can't believe you aren't insulted that there ISN'T a religion forum!
| RTeacher wrote: |
| Humor and frivolity are good, but a diet comprised exclusively of junk food and sweets isn't very healthy. |
So you're like our mother now? We can have dessert (the spice girls) only if we also eat our vegetables (fiveeagles' threads about who created evil)? I personally don't want someone dictating what I should or shouldn't view based on your definition of what is humorous or frivolous. If I want to read about religion (which, often, I do), I would like a designated place to go. If I'm looking for infomation about where there's a bible study group in Akpujeong and I don't want to see a thread about the cyclops kitty, I'll just click on the religious forum! NO ONE IS TRYING TO RESTRICT FREE SPEECH!
| RTeacher wrote: |
| A few provocative religious posts can supply some essential nutrients and, occasionally, even a little bitter medicine that may cure what ails ya. |
I cannot believe that this is your reason for not wanting a separate forum for religion. I seriously thought people would be like: "Yeah, let's do it! It's a big topic and a lot of posters are interested, so let's create a home for such discussion!" If you don't want a separate forum because you're afraid that people won't mix in their "nutrients" with their "empty calories", then YOU'RE the one who's trying to decide what people read and don't read. I can almost guarantee you that the religion forum will be a hot bed of activity...it's an interesting topic and it deserves its own place. You shouldn't worry that people will just not visit it and not get their "bitter medicine" that you think they so desperately need.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Merlyn
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Science is not seperate from Christianity. I think you mean science from the perspective of some people. Many scientists and mathamaticians have become Christians because of what they have learnt.
You speak as though Christianity has absolutely no logical grounds to stand on. If someone knew their stuff, they could produce a good apologetic to explain much of the claims of Christianity (I am not advocating knowledge as a way to God though, but someone who has a spiritual experience of God should look into such things). Many of the claims (though obviously not all of them) are acknowledged by secular scholars. Eg: The Bible being the most reliable ancient manuscript (I am basing that largely upon proven efficiency of ancient and modern translations and numbers of ancient manuscripts in existance today) or the historicity of Jesus Christ. The question for those who have done thorough studies into 1st century Israel, in particular the beginnings of Christianity, is not whether Jesus existed, but whether He was Who He claimed to be. If people are going to reject something (or accept something), it is very helpful to have some academic ground to back themselves up. Many people have a spiritual belief system who were totally against it originally. Spiritual, not just intellectual.
|
Sure, I understand that science and Christianity can be compatible from the view that the Bible exists, that Jesus existed. But they are not compatible when they come to claims of the miraculous which give this book and these figures their religious significance. I also have no problem with traditional arguments for God's existence, but all these really establish is a first cause. I don't really put much stock at all in a teleological argument. And even if we do adopt these reasons they don't say much about God at all, or that God has any current influence on the world and universe itself. If anything, they support Deism. I have no problems with that.
What I mean about science expanding our minds is that we will see the unlikelyhood that these men had signficant experiences. Because they no longer happen today, and because they likely never happened to these people. How silly that would be for a God to reveal himself over the course of the universe in 3-4 human beings in only one small period of history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Man known as The Man
Joined: 29 Mar 2003
Location: 3 cheers for Ted Haggard oh yeah!
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
to more pressing and important matters
shortskirt, which Spice Girl would you eat? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shortskirt_longjacket
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Location: fitz and ernie are my raison d'etre
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ginger Spice for sure. She'd be the tastiest.
Then I'd eat Posh Spice just because I think she's a waste of space (but I bet she'd taste like crap).
I'd eat Baby Spice last, I suppose (there was a Baby Spice, wasn't there?) because eating babies is just sick.
Speaking of which, here's a joke:
Q. What's grosser than gross?
A. A dead baby
Q. What's grosser than that?
A. A pile of dead babies
Q. What's grosser than that?
A. A live one on the bottom
Q. What's grosser than that?
A. It ate its way to the top
Q. What's grosser than that?
A. It went back for seconds!
And that, my friends, is how you do the Off-Topic Forum properly. You talk about a bunch of absurd sick shit like eating other people and death and conquering death by eating dead people and....wait a sec! Sounds like religion! I take it all back....the Off-Topic forum is the place to discuss religion! This is the place for the absurd and disgusting and irrelevant chatter.
Carry on, then... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bignate
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Hell's Ditch
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a question.......
What would happen if God died?
Seriously......no bullshit about God never dieing, seriously where would all this faith go? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xian
Joined: 08 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Sure, I understand that science and Christianity can be compatible from the view that the Bible exists, that Jesus existed. But they are not compatible when they come to claims of the miraculous which give this book and these figures their religious significance. I also have no problem with traditional arguments for God's existence, but all these really establish is a first cause. I don't really put much stock at all in a teleological argument. And even if we do adopt these reasons they don't say much about God at all, or that God has any current influence on the world and universe itself. If anything, they support Deism. I have no problems with that.
What I mean about science expanding our minds is that we will see the unlikelyhood that these men had signficant experiences. Because they no longer happen today, and because they likely never happened to these people. How silly that would be for a God to reveal himself over the course of the universe in 3-4 human beings in only one small period of history. |
If Deism was correct, then Christianity wouldn't be nearly as big as it is today, particularly among the Pentecostal / Charismatic Churches, which are growing quite rapidly. God didn't only reveal Himself to a few people. No way it would have ever got off the ground. The fact of the miraculous is why many have come to believe in God. Believe me, someone doesn't turn from the verge of Satanism (and other things) to God without some thing a little more impacting that some strange stories about a Jewish man in Palestine 2000 years ago.
God's influence is hard to see if one refuses to look that way. God is very relevant today, but the way man is going is away from God. In mans eyes and as man chooses their own way, God starts to look irrelevant. I guess that is an issue of desiring independance from God.
God has been revealed to many, many people over time.
Science is not the whole basis for God. A Christian would say that science is simply discovering and enunciating things regarding God's creation and work. Take the resurrection. I personally thought that would be the most unbelievable fact in the Bible. But, logically, it is one of the events that scholars, Christian and secular are best able to prove actually happened, drawing on various ancient writings and history. No doubt that many questions are raised about this event and it asumes that one knows that Jesus was a historical character, but the theories against it are full of holes. ie: swoon theory, wrong tomb theory, Jesus wasn't a real person theory. Granted though that it takes some understanding of the history, the events and various other factors.
But, I guess that is part of where I am coming from. Anyone can slag something of as ridiculous without really looking into something seriously for themselves. I guess though I wouldn't look into something if I thought all the proponents were whacko too.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Xian wrote: |
| Way too big |
No offence, but if the resurrection had truly been proven, we would have heard about it. Secular groups are most definitely not powerful enough to keep that kind of information down. The Vatican would be shoving it into every face they could. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xian
Joined: 08 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Xian wrote: |
| Way too big |
No offence, but if the resurrection had truly been proven, we would have heard about it. Secular groups are most definitely not powerful enough to keep that kind of information down. The Vatican would be shoving it into every face they could. |
No offence taken. It is interesting discussion laogaiguk. In turn I hope there is no offense in my stating my points regarding where I am coming from in my explanations. I am simply sharing what I believe and some of what I have learnt.
OK, I don't mean proven as in a proven fact. But the evidence surrounding the resurrection is strong against the theories against it.
As I said, much of this is presuming one believes that Jesus existed as a man.
- A variety of sources, secular and religious, including historians, textual scholars, legal and literary testimonys all support the fact of the resurrection as being a factual event.
- At no time from the arrest until the stone was moved did Jesus go missing
- He was always watched during His 6 trials (3 Roman, 3 Jewish). He suffered the passion and crucifixion that no one survives.
- Death must be proven.
- Roman guards new death. They made their living from it. They even reported that Jesus had died, reporting the blood and water flowing when He was pierced. They risked their lives by lying about JCs death and had no real motive for doing so. Some have argued for the swoon theory, that JC was unconscious on the cross and was revived in the cool air of the tomb. But guards would have known if He were dead. This theory makes liars of the guards.
- American Medical Association Journal itself says that all the evidence points to the fact of JC dying on the cross. If proven, then He is buried and there is a body.
- Events that the Bible reported, like the darkness at noon are documented by secular sources, eg: Thallus and Philegon (maybe Plegus - very hard to remember these odd names).
- A large stone that many men couldn��t move was rolled to the mouth of the tomb. Scholars suggest that it weighed up to 2 tonnes
- Tomb guarded by the most fierce soldiers of the time, the Romans. If they were to fall asleep or fail in their guarding of the tomb, they would be put to death. (Later brided by Jewish authorities with regards to JCs body gone from the tomb).
- The Roman seal was put on the tomb of JC. It is there to protect the tomb from any potential vandals. It was a much feared symbol put there with the authority of the Emperor of Rome. If anyone were to remove it, they risked a Roman death penalty of an upside down crucifixion as a result.
- If somehow Jesus, in His weakened state moved the stone that many men struggled with, how did He get past the guards that were awake. The guards wouldn��t risk lives sleeping (all of them). Did He fight them off and they lied about it?
- If they guarded the wrong tomb, a body would have been found.
- Not even Roman and Jewish authorities claimed that the body was still in the tomb.
- No one has ever found His body.
- After the resurrection, hundreds of people, enemies and friends claimed to have seen Jesus. Some argue that it was some kind of psycological illusion, but really, hundreds at one given instance saw Him. Psycologists themselves claim that hundreds at one time having an illusions is near impossilbe.
- There is the evidence of changed lives. A classic is Saul / Paul. A murderer of Christian. But I guess that is more about a later appearance than the resurrection.
I am sure that other questions arise. There will always be doubts. But anyway, that is a bit of where I was coming from.
Anyway, I think I have let this thread get way off track. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Xian wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Xian wrote: |
| Way too big |
No offence, but if the resurrection had truly been proven, we would have heard about it. Secular groups are most definitely not powerful enough to keep that kind of information down. The Vatican would be shoving it into every face they could. |
No offence taken. It is interesting discussion laogaiguk. In turn I hope there is no offense in my stating my points regarding where I am coming from in my explanations. I am simply sharing what I believe and some of what I have learnt.
OK, I don't mean proven as in a proven fact. But the evidence surrounding the resurrection is strong against the theories against it.
As I said, much of this is presuming one believes that Jesus existed as a man.
|
All I had to read was to there (though I did read it all). I can accept that. I hate nitpicking, and I try never to do it, though (in my opinion) I feel what you just said here and the previous post you made are different enough that I had to question it (I still don't believe after reading what you wrote, but you are right, back to the OP, not to mention the great thing about our societies is we can disagree.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
