Cloning
- Thread starter Bachus
- Start date
If u feed the hungry, comfort the deppresed, visit the lonely, have love for one another, you did accept Jesus Christ, not literally, but figuratively for Jesus is the word incarnate, the virtues of life, Even if your a buddhist and never heard of Jesus Christ, and if u heard of Him, you will not blaspheme His name if your respectfull, kind hearted, and have love for your brothers and sisters (humankind). At the end, it is your deeds that are judged, not your words, or faith, for faith is only a stepping stool for good works.
Again this is like the parable of the servant who said to His master "No, I will not go with you" but with his virtues unknowingly served the master, meanwhile the other guy said "Yes I will serve you master" but have no virtues in Him and doesnt lift a finger to help his neighbors.
But theres a sad catch, notice that usually people are having a hard time loving one another (especially in this end times) because the world is consuming them into developing their original sin instead of their virtues. Usually ppl who r having a hard time loving one another are not believers of God, or are in different religion. Currently speaking, I havent found 1 brother who r atheist or another religion who have great love for his neighbors and spend their life serving the poor and hungry (mayb there is one but I havent found that person). Usually christians are the ones who spend so much time in africa, and south america feeding the poor and comforting the depressed, in fact, usually it is christians who does more voluntary active duty of helping out the community. I have not heard of 1 "atheist community" or "islam charity" that feeds the hungry or helps out the community here where I live, evenm in foreign countries, I havent heard of 1 "buddhist community" who serves the hungry and comfort the lonely, from asia all the way to america. This is where prayers is necessary, that we pray to God to help us develop our virtues.
In fact I havent heard one islam charity or buddhist community from television asking for voluntary help with feeding the poor in africa or any country, I havent heard of one. Instead I hear complains about the pledge of alegions, I hear complain from islam that america is bad, I hear ppl complaining about their lifestyle, money, etc.
Muscleman's methods might be suspect, but he does make a little sense sometimes. I don't understand why you anger so easily, muscleman - you must really learn to control your temper, then you wouldn't have to say you're sorry afterwards!
Remember that the 'fruit' in the Garden of Eden was essentially the 'fruit of the earth' - i.e. food. It could be that because Adam & Eve had eternal life, they didn't need food, but because the serpent made it seem so attractive, they "stole from the earth", and God accordingly ordered them "give back to the earth through toil and sweat", i.e. when you take from God it's just fair that you give back to God. Of course I can't defend this, but it has value in clarifying God's actions and the state of mankind. We are still "taking from God" our life on earth, and have to work to make a living (why is nobody interested in denying that?) But God has changed the rituals of sacrificing food and livestock (the fruit of a farmer's work), cancelling it out by sacrificing Jesus (excuse the distasteful comparison, but 'human food': cf. communion), and asking our praise as sacrifice (Hebrews 13:15:
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise–the fruit of lips that confess his name.)
Cupric: Thanks for the praise, but I really don't deserve it
. To address your questions:
It's a dangerous generalisation to say all people have the potential to know good from evil, I do think so in general - some people are quite literally mad or disfunctional, so might not have that 'talent' - but regardless of which faith, yes. The real issue is that religion does transcend nature (maybe not in merit or authority, but in application and consequence). But people are subject to both God and nature - we can't escape either (that is why Paul complains about his "two natures").
It is important to understand in religion is not so much about being 'right', as being 'in keeping with' God's wishes, resisting the will to do evil at all times. It's a hard task, but in that sense, it's just like working, "working for God's kingdom" (and store up your treasure there). There is always more that you can do - you can never do everything. That was where the Farisees went wrong. The Law is there so that you may know what wrong/sin is. Nature has it's own way of retaliating (someone used gravity as an example of a natural law that has grave consequences if you defy it). Homosexuality is not natural (the consequence is that homosexuals can't reproduce by normal means - they need human help). But they are not outside God's reach. Otherwise adulterers etc. would also be, but they are accepted. Just like clones will have to be. The church is also an institution consisting of many people who have their own opinions, so acceptance is slow, but we believe that God leads, and the church will eventually follow, after some kicking and screaming
Satan doesn't do much other than accuse God (Satan="accuser"), and tempt people to sin against God by making sin seem right and attractive, usually by perverting the truth. This happens easily if you don't know the truth, which is why God wants us to ask Him (pray) and listen to Him (read the Bible, be responsible and obedient). Sometimes the father actually does know better than his children. Witchcraft denies God, and instead deifies nature. Wicca might not be 'evil', but they certainly do not believe in God. Even Hindus, who might actually believe that God exists, do not follow Him. And so on... everything that denies the authorship of God are still committing the same sin as Adam & Eve. Whether you do what is right and natural (sleeping and working) or not, that alone is not enough.
The most important thing to know is that as far as your salvation from death is concerned, doing good is not as important as knowing God (good deeds are part of the 'sacrifice' of thanksgiving - as "fruit of the spirit"). The Bible shows what is wrong, so that we can know what is right.
Romans 7:7...Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet." 8But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead.
Not to condemn us, but to free us:
Romans 7:6-But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. It's a difficult concept, but it is possible to understand, and essential when you read the Bible.
Sorry about the long post - I haven't figured all this out beforehand so much of it is new to me too.
Remember that the 'fruit' in the Garden of Eden was essentially the 'fruit of the earth' - i.e. food. It could be that because Adam & Eve had eternal life, they didn't need food, but because the serpent made it seem so attractive, they "stole from the earth", and God accordingly ordered them "give back to the earth through toil and sweat", i.e. when you take from God it's just fair that you give back to God. Of course I can't defend this, but it has value in clarifying God's actions and the state of mankind. We are still "taking from God" our life on earth, and have to work to make a living (why is nobody interested in denying that?) But God has changed the rituals of sacrificing food and livestock (the fruit of a farmer's work), cancelling it out by sacrificing Jesus (excuse the distasteful comparison, but 'human food': cf. communion), and asking our praise as sacrifice (Hebrews 13:15:
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise–the fruit of lips that confess his name.)
Cupric: Thanks for the praise, but I really don't deserve it
. To address your questions: It's a dangerous generalisation to say all people have the potential to know good from evil, I do think so in general - some people are quite literally mad or disfunctional, so might not have that 'talent' - but regardless of which faith, yes. The real issue is that religion does transcend nature (maybe not in merit or authority, but in application and consequence). But people are subject to both God and nature - we can't escape either (that is why Paul complains about his "two natures").
It is important to understand in religion is not so much about being 'right', as being 'in keeping with' God's wishes, resisting the will to do evil at all times. It's a hard task, but in that sense, it's just like working, "working for God's kingdom" (and store up your treasure there). There is always more that you can do - you can never do everything. That was where the Farisees went wrong. The Law is there so that you may know what wrong/sin is. Nature has it's own way of retaliating (someone used gravity as an example of a natural law that has grave
consequences if you defy it). Homosexuality is not natural (the consequence is that homosexuals can't reproduce by normal means - they need human help). But they are not outside God's reach. Otherwise adulterers etc. would also be, but they are accepted. Just like clones will have to be. The church is also an institution consisting of many people who have their own opinions, so acceptance is slow, but we believe that God leads, and the church will eventually follow, after some kicking and screaming Satan doesn't do much other than accuse God (Satan="accuser"), and tempt people to sin against God by making sin seem right and attractive, usually by perverting the truth. This happens easily if you don't know the truth, which is why God wants us to ask Him (pray) and listen to Him (read the Bible, be responsible and obedient). Sometimes the father actually does know better than his children. Witchcraft denies God, and instead deifies nature. Wicca might not be 'evil', but they certainly do not believe in God. Even Hindus, who might actually believe that God exists, do not follow Him. And so on... everything that denies the authorship of God are still committing the same sin as Adam & Eve. Whether you do what is right and natural (sleeping and working) or not, that alone is not enough.
The most important thing to know is that as far as your salvation from death is concerned, doing good is not as important as knowing God (good deeds are part of the 'sacrifice' of thanksgiving - as "fruit of the spirit"). The Bible shows what is wrong, so that we can know what is right.
Romans 7:7...Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet." 8But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead.
Not to condemn us, but to free us:
Romans 7:6-But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. It's a difficult concept, but it is possible to understand, and essential when you read the Bible.
Sorry about the long post - I haven't figured all this out beforehand so much of it is new to me too.
Last edited:
Have you heard about Red Cross? And its counterpart in islamic countries Red Crescent? Have you heard about UNICEF? Have you heard about Amnesty International? Have you heard about Médecins Sans Frontières? Rather large, international, non-religious organisations, I would say. The members may have religion, but the organsations are non-religious.
There are no atheist organisations, because atheism is not a movement and not a religion (although some people for some reason try to claim it is). Atheism is simply a personal point of view.
And about how to receive The Grace of Christ: There is nothing you can do to earn the Grace, but God (or Jesus) kan GIVE it to you.
You dont even know your own religion! Each of your long posts simply serve to display your incredible ignorance! Perhaps you should educate youself a bit before you start educating others?
Hans
Well Im sorry but I havent heard of those organizations except Red Cross, but surely they are composed of christians, in fact they are supporters of our group which is anti-abortion in my town, maybe in other countries its muslims, and if so then good for them, I have full support on anyone who can do virtues regardless of belief.
Listen, indeed there is nothing humans do to earn anything from God, from grace to eternal life, we deserve nothing, we are sinners and deserves no inheritants from God. You are right, however, through the death of Jesus Christ, we are redeemed and become free from our debts. "grace and truth came into the world through Christ".
Grace can be earned through prayers and spiritual practices (praise and worship). Grace is God's assistance, though we dont deserve it, but the blood of the lamb made us worthy of it. So therefore even if you pray to God, did fasting and goodworks, IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS THAT YOU INHERIT ANYTHING, BUT IT IS BECAUSE OF THE MERCY OF GOD, "It is not you who chose Me, but it is I who chose you".
note: Dont even dare tell me I dont know anything about my faith. LOL
Hans, I did answer the question. I'm saying that cloning is a technology like electricity - it's ethical use depends on moral guidelines, it's religious implications are as far as I can see minimal (at least for the clone). The question is why would you clone a complete human?
My last post was about whether it is possible to know whether something, such as cloning or abortion, is against God's will or not. Eg. whether cloning ist addressed in the Bible, and if it's an abomination of nature. I think what is more important is how we clone, why we clone, and what the consequences are.
I say: let him who is without sin condemn the first clone.
My last post was about whether it is possible to know whether something, such as cloning or abortion, is against God's will or not. Eg. whether cloning ist addressed in the Bible, and if it's an abomination of nature. I think what is more important is how we clone, why we clone, and what the consequences are.
I say: let him who is without sin condemn the first clone.
Jenyar,
Hey, thanks for the thoughtful post. I don't necessarily argree with what you've said, LOL, but I do enjoy hearing what people think, when they are actually thinking. No worries on the length of the post, either.
I want to address what you said about homosexuality. You say the consequence is not being able to reprpoduce "naturally". What about a heterosexual, married, Christian woman that cannot reproduce "naturally". Is she being punished for something she's done wrong too?
What do you think of the idea that God has granted us the ability to figure out things like cloning on purpose? God has changed the rules before, do you suppose he might do so again?
Actually, to be more accurate, Wiccans DO believe in a being referred to as "God", more often Gods plural. Witchcraft doesn't usually deny "God", either - we just believe in different Gods. (I am a Witch, but not Wiccan) I assume in your mindset, the Gods we believe in aren't "God" as you see him, but I assure you, Wiccans definitely do believe in God - they just see God in a different way than the Christians do (and usually in different ways from other Wiccans, it's pretty individualistic). You can even find a few Wiccans that believe in Yaweh and Jesus. You're right about the "deifies nature" bit though, in a sense. Though I wouldn't say we deified anything, it has been deity all along.
Hey, thanks for the thoughtful post. I don't necessarily argree with what you've said, LOL, but I do enjoy hearing what people think, when they are actually thinking. No worries on the length of the post, either.
I want to address what you said about homosexuality. You say the consequence is not being able to reprpoduce "naturally". What about a heterosexual, married, Christian woman that cannot reproduce "naturally". Is she being punished for something she's done wrong too?
What do you think of the idea that God has granted us the ability to figure out things like cloning on purpose? God has changed the rules before, do you suppose he might do so again?
Actually, to be more accurate, Wiccans DO believe in a being referred to as "God", more often Gods plural. Witchcraft doesn't usually deny "God", either - we just believe in different Gods. (I am a Witch, but not Wiccan) I assume in your mindset, the Gods we believe in aren't "God" as you see him, but I assure you, Wiccans definitely do believe in God - they just see God in a different way than the Christians do (and usually in different ways from other Wiccans, it's pretty individualistic). You can even find a few Wiccans that believe in Yaweh and Jesus. You're right about the "deifies nature" bit though, in a sense. Though I wouldn't say we deified anything, it has been deity all along.
I'm not sure what you mean with "changed the rules before" - what are you referring to?
I don't know why you use the word punished. Punished by nature, maybe - we're all imperfect in nature's eyes (or, just as "imperfect" as everything else). Abraham's wife couldn't have children, even though God promised him a great many descendents. So Abraham took the promise into his own hands and had Ismael by his servant. Ismael is the forefather of the Arabs and Muslims. If Abraham trusted God, 9/11 would probably never have happened, because Islam wouldn't have existed.
Fortunately Isaac was born... but my point is there doesn't have to be a 'reason' in the classic sense. People often look for 'reasons' in order to understand what is happening to them, and ways out of it. Often those people only believe in God so that they can blame Him. It doesn't help blaming nature, does it? We are living in a world that belongs to evil, and even Christian hetrosexual women suffer the effects of it. It depends on their belief how they deal with it, and they will probably get a lot of support and prayer from other Christians - there's a lot of opportunity for God to show His love and people to share theirs.
Please tell me more about witchcraft and why you're a witch. Of course I've heard my share, but I'd like to know what it means to you personally.
I don't know why you use the word punished. Punished by nature, maybe - we're all imperfect in nature's eyes (or, just as "imperfect" as everything else). Abraham's wife couldn't have children, even though God promised him a great many descendents. So Abraham took the promise into his own hands and had Ismael by his servant. Ismael is the forefather of the Arabs and Muslims. If Abraham trusted God, 9/11 would probably never have happened, because Islam wouldn't have existed.
Fortunately Isaac was born... but my point is there doesn't have to be a 'reason' in the classic sense. People often look for 'reasons' in order to understand what is happening to them, and ways out of it. Often those people only believe in God so that they can blame Him. It doesn't help blaming nature, does it? We are living in a world that belongs to evil, and even Christian hetrosexual women suffer the effects of it. It depends on their belief how they deal with it, and they will probably get a lot of support and prayer from other Christians - there's a lot of opportunity for God to show His love and people to share theirs.
Please tell me more about witchcraft and why you're a witch. Of course I've heard my share, but I'd like to know what it means to you personally.
By "changed the rules", I mean, for example, God's demands for animal sacrifice. God changed the rules by sending Jesus to replace all those sacrifices for good.
"punish"...well, maybe I'm misunderstanding you. I'm mainly going back to this quote;
I was reading it as if you meant "God" where you say "Nature" - is that what you meant there? If so, I pretty much see "retaliation" as punishment, so that's why I used that particular word.
This is an interesting comment you made;
Do you mean to say that you don't think God is to be trusted, entirely? If so, I'm rather flabbergasted, I think that's the first time I've heard a Christian even imply such a thing!
As to my own personal story, it's pretty simple. I never could bring myself to believe most of the Christian dogma. I grew up more or less agnostic, sometimes calling myself atheist, but honestly closer to an "I don't really know" sort of attitude. I finally decided as a teen that if there WAS a God, Nature surely was it. So I was sort of a quasi-pagan for many years, until I decided it was time for a clearer spiritual outlook. I began doing research on "Mother Nature", discovered it was more than a clever phrase used in skin-care commercials, and eventually stumbled upon witchcraft. I was surprised to discover that many of the little "ways" I had developed for myself were almost identical to many witchcraft rituals, along with a good portion of my beliefs. More research reassured me that there was nothing "bad" about witchcraft, and slowly it dawned on me that I was, indeed, what people call a "witch". Not on purpose, not by design, not because I saw Buffy the Vampire Slayer and thought it would be "kewl"...it simply is the word used to describe people "like me".
"punish"...well, maybe I'm misunderstanding you. I'm mainly going back to this quote;
I was reading it as if you meant "God" where you say "Nature" - is that what you meant there? If so, I pretty much see "retaliation" as punishment, so that's why I used that particular word.
This is an interesting comment you made;
Do you mean to say that you don't think God is to be trusted, entirely? If so, I'm rather flabbergasted, I think that's the first time I've heard a Christian even imply such a thing!
As to my own personal story, it's pretty simple. I never could bring myself to believe most of the Christian dogma. I grew up more or less agnostic, sometimes calling myself atheist, but honestly closer to an "I don't really know" sort of attitude. I finally decided as a teen that if there WAS a God, Nature surely was it. So I was sort of a quasi-pagan for many years, until I decided it was time for a clearer spiritual outlook. I began doing research on "Mother Nature", discovered it was more than a clever phrase used in skin-care commercials, and eventually stumbled upon witchcraft. I was surprised to discover that many of the little "ways" I had developed for myself were almost identical to many witchcraft rituals, along with a good portion of my beliefs. More research reassured me that there was nothing "bad" about witchcraft, and slowly it dawned on me that I was, indeed, what people call a "witch". Not on purpose, not by design, not because I saw Buffy the Vampire Slayer and thought it would be "kewl"...it simply is the word used to describe people "like me".
somehow simmilar story
Latvian heathen here
one thing that is wonderful about latvian paganism is that you can if you want to not believe in any gods (which I of course do) and still be a pagan.
So I'm smthing like an atheistical paganD - hard to understand - yes?)
Latvian heathen here
one thing that is wonderful about latvian paganism is that you can if you want to not believe in any gods (which I of course do) and still be a pagan.
So I'm smthing like an atheistical pagan
D - hard to understand - yes?)No I didn't mean nature. Nature is in the Christian religion the creation of God, just like people, but no more God than people are. Nature doesn't "punish" it merely exists in accordance to it's own laws (which is why theory is so effective in science). People, however, were given a special place in nature: as protector and as stewards, but also as representatives of God. It is a duty, not just a consequence of natural hierarchy.
The problem with nature as a deity, is that nature has no concept of justice, redemption or reward. Anybody who has ever rescued an ant from the bathtub (when I was four or five, I appointed myself Personal Lifesaver of Ants) will know this. Sin against nature is not an unknown concept, but everything in nature leads to death anyway. This problem can be suspended with 'reincarnation', existentialism, etc., but then the importance of this one life becomes even less. Why are you aware of this life more than 'others'? Does it have a special meaning? Or are we just passing though in a vessel called body, looking out the windows at the rolling scenery?
How does nature, with its finite resources and fragile beauty, provide anything other than a place to exist in? Like every individual's way of living a life, witchcraft and paganism are valid ways of life. But you have to compare one truth with another if you wish to gain wisdom. What ultimate truth does nature provide other than death?
The problem with nature as a deity, is that nature has no concept of justice, redemption or reward. Anybody who has ever rescued an ant from the bathtub (when I was four or five, I appointed myself Personal Lifesaver of Ants
) will know this. Sin against nature is not an unknown concept, but everything in nature leads to death anyway. This problem can be suspended with 'reincarnation', existentialism, etc., but then the importance of this one life becomes even less. Why are you aware of this life more than 'others'? Does it have a special meaning? Or are we just passing though in a vessel called body, looking out the windows at the rolling scenery?How does nature, with its finite resources and fragile beauty, provide anything other than a place to exist in? Like every individual's way of living a life, witchcraft and paganism are valid ways of life. But you have to compare one truth with another if you wish to gain wisdom. What ultimate truth does nature provide other than death?
Hiya Jenyar, sorry it's taken me a few days to reply, I've gotten a nasty cold.
True enough. Nature relies on concepts more like balance and recycling. But doesn't a concept like "justice" rely on a concept like "balance"? Just look at a statue of Lady Liberty - she holds a scale in her hands. Reward - well, if nature "retaliates" against homosexuals by not letting them procreate, perhaps it can also be said nature "rewards" people with the "earthly" joys, sex, children, pretty smelling flowers...
Redemption...well, if you mean it in the Christian sense of being "redeemed" from sin, I agree. Nature doesn't believe in sin. But in the more general sense, the way some pinecones require a forest fire to release it's seed speaks of redemption to me.
I suppose not, but I think this is a fallacy, more or less. The only times I can think of this phrase being used, the term "nature" could have been replaced with the phrase "society's morals" or somesuch and result in a more accurate statement. Such as homosexuals being labeled "a sin against nature" - I believe that's nonsense. Nature has plenty of room for variety, and homosexuals could play a vital balancing role in society.
Everything in nature DOES lead to death, that's true enough. But believing in the cyclical nature of Nature tells me that everything in nature leads to life as well, including death. Think of a deer dying in the jaws of a lion....life begets death begets life begets death... It's necessary for death to occur, otherwise there would be no room for new life, ruining the balance and the cycles.
I disagree that it makes this life less important. Think of going to school, you have many classes, but because you have many, it makes any one of them less vital? No...the reason you have so many is because it IS so important to learn so many varied things. Pretty much the same thing with life - I believe the reason I am here is to learn, and there is simply too much to learn in a single lifetime. So I come back, over and over, in different situations, in different times, and each and every one is vital. Each one contains a lesson I MUST learn, and if I do not learn it, I'm doomed to keep coming back to that same lesson, like that PE class I failed in high school.
Why am I more aware of this life than others? Well, simply because I'm in it right now. Personally, I don't really have any specific past-life memories, other than a few vague impressions and odd bits of knowledge I can't explain otherwise. I don't even know for SURE I have incarnated before, or will do so again. But with the knowledge I DO have, it seems the most likely explanation. (For example, nobody could explain how I knew not only WHAT Mah-Jong is, but also how to play simple forms of it when I was 6 years old)
Heh, heh...nature is fragile? Tell that to the next earthquake, tornado, avalance or hurricane you meet. Nature provides us everything - yes a place to exist, but also the physical form we use to think and wonder and create and destroy with. Nature isn't outside of us, we are PART of nature, without nature we would truly not exist at all. Nature what we're made of, body and soul...what more could anybody ask for? And as for finite goes...well, I guess if the universe is finite, then nature is finite too (since they are one and the same, as are we, as is everything). But I'm not sure if I think it is or isn't finite, so I guess I can't agree or disagree with you on that one yet.
Birth, love, balance, empathy, cycles... It's all there for the taking - I can't claim to posess the knowledge necessary to say for sure what THE ultimate truth might be, or even if there is one. But that's what life after life are about - learning.
True enough. Nature relies on concepts more like balance and recycling. But doesn't a concept like "justice" rely on a concept like "balance"? Just look at a statue of Lady Liberty - she holds a scale in her hands. Reward - well, if nature "retaliates" against homosexuals by not letting them procreate, perhaps it can also be said nature "rewards" people with the "earthly" joys, sex, children, pretty smelling flowers...
Redemption...well, if you mean it in the Christian sense of being "redeemed" from sin, I agree. Nature doesn't believe in sin. But in the more general sense, the way some pinecones require a forest fire to release it's seed speaks of redemption to me.
I suppose not, but I think this is a fallacy, more or less. The only times I can think of this phrase being used, the term "nature" could have been replaced with the phrase "society's morals" or somesuch and result in a more accurate statement. Such as homosexuals being labeled "a sin against nature" - I believe that's nonsense. Nature has plenty of room for variety, and homosexuals could play a vital balancing role in society.
Everything in nature DOES lead to death, that's true enough. But believing in the cyclical nature of Nature tells me that everything in nature leads to life as well, including death. Think of a deer dying in the jaws of a lion....life begets death begets life begets death... It's necessary for death to occur, otherwise there would be no room for new life, ruining the balance and the cycles.
I disagree that it makes this life less important. Think of going to school, you have many classes, but because you have many, it makes any one of them less vital? No...the reason you have so many is because it IS so important to learn so many varied things. Pretty much the same thing with life - I believe the reason I am here is to learn, and there is simply too much to learn in a single lifetime. So I come back, over and over, in different situations, in different times, and each and every one is vital. Each one contains a lesson I MUST learn, and if I do not learn it, I'm doomed to keep coming back to that same lesson, like that PE class I failed in high school.
Why am I more aware of this life than others? Well, simply because I'm in it right now. Personally, I don't really have any specific past-life memories, other than a few vague impressions and odd bits of knowledge I can't explain otherwise. I don't even know for SURE I have incarnated before, or will do so again. But with the knowledge I DO have, it seems the most likely explanation. (For example, nobody could explain how I knew not only WHAT Mah-Jong is, but also how to play simple forms of it when I was 6 years old)
Heh, heh...nature is fragile? Tell that to the next earthquake, tornado, avalance or hurricane you meet.
Nature provides us everything - yes a place to exist, but also the physical form we use to think and wonder and create and destroy with. Nature isn't outside of us, we are PART of nature, without nature we would truly not exist at all. Nature what we're made of, body and soul...what more could anybody ask for? And as for finite goes...well, I guess if the universe is finite, then nature is finite too (since they are one and the same, as are we, as is everything). But I'm not sure if I think it is or isn't finite, so I guess I can't agree or disagree with you on that one yet.Birth, love, balance, empathy, cycles... It's all there for the taking - I can't claim to posess the knowledge necessary to say for sure what THE ultimate truth might be, or even if there is one. But that's what life after life are about - learning.
I'd like to know on what grounds you believe in reincarnation. It's a philosophy based on the observation of life, not of individuals. That "knowledge" you have, is the same knowledge that lets you know deep down that people don't mate with horses, or that you're not supposed to marry a tree - nobody taught you that, not even society - if the contrary was an inevitable truth you would have learned it a long time ago for yourself.
Speaking of inevitable truths. Howcome you don't see the connection? Justice (balance) in nature vs. imbalance in people? If we are such a part of nature, why don't we just live in harmony and balance like everything would have without us? Why do we have to strive for freedom, for knowledge - what is it that is so important to learn that you have this continuous thirst for knowledge. If chimps had the same need, why don't they make more effort to communicate with humans, or learn from us since we are so evidently more advanced than them? They can learn - chimps have succesfully been taught sign language - so they have that capacity. But why don't they have the need?
Why do people alone have the concept of sin? I'm telling you that there isn't such a big difference in breaking the balance of nature and sinning against God. You agree that you don't know whether the earth is finite - well, if entropy exists on micro level (eg. cell death), and even at meso level (ecosystems die, species become extinst), it should also happen at a macro level. What you have an awareness of, is that we have an immortal soul, and that the must be an ultimate truth, an ultimate justice.
Nature does not provide a way out the cycle other than the only one we see: death. It does not offer the ultimate justice we need for our souls to live eternally, the most direct projection we can make from nature is that what lives eternally will die eternally. Only God can provide the "restoration of balance" if you want to look at it that way.
Speaking of inevitable truths. Howcome you don't see the connection? Justice (balance) in nature vs. imbalance in people? If we are such a part of nature, why don't we just live in harmony and balance like everything would have without us? Why do we have to strive for freedom, for knowledge - what is it that is so important to learn that you have this continuous thirst for knowledge. If chimps had the same need, why don't they make more effort to communicate with humans, or learn from us since we are so evidently more advanced than them? They can learn - chimps have succesfully been taught sign language - so they have that capacity. But why don't they have the need?
Why do people alone have the concept of sin? I'm telling you that there isn't such a big difference in breaking the balance of nature and sinning against God. You agree that you don't know whether the earth is finite - well, if entropy exists on micro level (eg. cell death), and even at meso level (ecosystems die, species become extinst), it should also happen at a macro level. What you have an awareness of, is that we have an immortal soul, and that the must be an ultimate truth, an ultimate justice.
Nature does not provide a way out the cycle other than the only one we see: death. It does not offer the ultimate justice we need for our souls to live eternally, the most direct projection we can make from nature is that what lives eternally will die eternally. Only God can provide the "restoration of balance" if you want to look at it that way.
On what grounds do I believe in reincarnation? Well, that's a toughie because I'm not yet 100% convinced - it's just the best working theory I have going right now. Partially, there is the simple fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed. All these souls going to heaven doesn't make logical sense to me - where are the new souls coming from? I suppose there could be a finite number of premade souls languishing somewhere, incarnating one by one, being sorted into "heaven" and "hell", but that doesn't really fit in with the cyclical nature of Nature. Nature re-uses everything, over and over and over. Why should my "soul" (which I would describe as an "energy pattern") be any different? It may be that when I die, I won't incarnate wholly as myself, I might be scattered throughout the planet. I guess I'll find out in 70 years or so (hopefully).
No, the "knowledge" I have is from my own observations - I have a THEORY about the afterlife, not direct knowledge. That I know of, anyway, who knows what's buried in my subconscious? And some people DO mate with horses...and what's wrong with marrying a tree? I'm kidding, but I do talk to, and hug, my trees regularly, I find them to be great company. How do you know society didn't teach me these things? People begin learning in infancy, and soak up an amazing amount of knowledge that isn't deliberately given to them. Unless I was actually raised outside of society, I can't see how anybody can tell what I did and did not learn from society.
You keep coming back to this "inevitable truth" concept - I don't necessarily believe in any one Truth-with-a-capital-"T". Truth is subjective MOST of the time, and open to question even when it's not. I have the rather non-Einsteinian idea in my head that SEVERAL truths can be "correct" at the same time, even those that contradict eachother. Several points of view result in several angles on the situation, all of which can be true in themselves but in conflict with other angles.
Well, it's because of the human condition... We're a warlike and curious species, it seems. We don't live in harmony and balance anymore, that much is true. And as Nature wills it, eventually we will return to that balance, even if it takes a major catastrophe to kill off most of our species. Nature doesn't always have everything in complete balance - if she did, there wouldn't be any such thing as winds or tides or weather patterns. We are swinging on the pendulum, and if you ask me, we've gotten pretty close to the apex, and are about due for a downswing any time now. We strive for balance, at least some of us do. And we strive for knowledge because that's how we're built. That's the reason our species has survived as long as it has - we're not physically capable of handling most large predators, we don't photosynthesize our food...we're a weak little bunch of delicate-skinned beings, and our "smarts" is what Nature gave us to keep us in the game. We've outgrown our niche, so as I mentioned, I expect Nature to layeth the smackdown upon us pretty soon to bring us back into balance. I just hope I'm not around to see it, it ain't gonna be pretty.
Chimps...they may be related to us, but they aren't us. Each being is unique from another, and each species is unique from another. If chimps had the same drive we do, they would BE us. But they don't, they have different drives, and live their lives accordingly. Might as well ask why elephants don't try to chase down gazelles like the lions do - why on earth would they want to? (Really - if you were a chimp, would you WANT to involve yourself in our complex and messed-up world? I doubt I would, I think I'd be more interested in when my next meal and round of sex were going to arrive, LOL)
Darn good question. I don't know, I can't tell you, because I don't believe in sin. It seems like a rather goofy concept to me, actually.
Okaaayy...you can tell me all you want, but that's not gonna make me believe it. I don't believe there is any such thing as a sin against God. You can be either in balance with nature, or out of balance with nature, and natural consequences will occur for both. It's not because God is ticked off you worshipped a golden cow statue or had sex with someone with the same genetalia as you.
Don't forget though, that entropy is only part of the story. The pendulum swings both ways trying to achieve balance - creation/birth offsets entropy/death.
Now, hold the phone...I never said I have an immortal soul! I have energy within me that cannot be destroyed, true. But it can be changed. In that sense, yeah, I'm immortal. But in another sense, I'm not me after I die - I may become another human being, or I may become a dozen grasshoppers and that blueish tint in the next aurora borealis. I don't really know. Ultimate truth...back to that again... If you call it an "ultimate balance", I think I could agree - once my soul has gone through just about everything, it should have all the rough edges knocked off (so to speak), resulting in a smoothed-down, balanced soul.
NO! There IS NO WAY OUT OF THE CYCLE! Death is just part of the cycle - it is not an end, birth is not a beginning. There is no end or beginning to a circle. You can choose "A" beginning, and choose "An" end, but truly, it repeats over and over, like a spiral - never in exactly the same spot, but always moving through the same cycles.
Hmmm...what is "ultimate justice", and what does that have to do with our soul's longevity? We are doomed/blessed to be tied to a cycle of death and rebirth that will last until the universe is completely and utterly annihilated (if that can or does ever happen). Perhaps (and this is a big maybe in my mind) there is some truth to the idea that souls can learn to the point that they can actually take conscious control over their incarnations, and choose whether or not to come back. But I don't know if I believe that or not. Sure sounds nice.
No, I disagree. What is balanced about removing significant portions of energy out of the system? (IE the souls now encased in heaven or hell)
No, the "knowledge" I have is from my own observations - I have a THEORY about the afterlife, not direct knowledge. That I know of, anyway, who knows what's buried in my subconscious? And some people DO mate with horses...and what's wrong with marrying a tree?
I'm kidding, but I do talk to, and hug, my trees regularly, I find them to be great company. How do you know society didn't teach me these things? People begin learning in infancy, and soak up an amazing amount of knowledge that isn't deliberately given to them. Unless I was actually raised outside of society, I can't see how anybody can tell what I did and did not learn from society.You keep coming back to this "inevitable truth" concept - I don't necessarily believe in any one Truth-with-a-capital-"T". Truth is subjective MOST of the time, and open to question even when it's not. I have the rather non-Einsteinian idea in my head that SEVERAL truths can be "correct" at the same time, even those that contradict eachother. Several points of view result in several angles on the situation, all of which can be true in themselves but in conflict with other angles.
Well, it's because of the human condition... We're a warlike and curious species, it seems. We don't live in harmony and balance anymore, that much is true. And as Nature wills it, eventually we will return to that balance, even if it takes a major catastrophe to kill off most of our species. Nature doesn't always have everything in complete balance - if she did, there wouldn't be any such thing as winds or tides or weather patterns. We are swinging on the pendulum, and if you ask me, we've gotten pretty close to the apex, and are about due for a downswing any time now. We strive for balance, at least some of us do. And we strive for knowledge because that's how we're built. That's the reason our species has survived as long as it has - we're not physically capable of handling most large predators, we don't photosynthesize our food...we're a weak little bunch of delicate-skinned beings, and our "smarts" is what Nature gave us to keep us in the game. We've outgrown our niche, so as I mentioned, I expect Nature to layeth the smackdown upon us pretty soon to bring us back into balance. I just hope I'm not around to see it, it ain't gonna be pretty.
Chimps...they may be related to us, but they aren't us. Each being is unique from another, and each species is unique from another. If chimps had the same drive we do, they would BE us. But they don't, they have different drives, and live their lives accordingly. Might as well ask why elephants don't try to chase down gazelles like the lions do - why on earth would they want to? (Really - if you were a chimp, would you WANT to involve yourself in our complex and messed-up world? I doubt I would, I think I'd be more interested in when my next meal and round of sex were going to arrive, LOL)
Darn good question. I don't know, I can't tell you, because I don't believe in sin. It seems like a rather goofy concept to me, actually.
Okaaayy...you can tell me all you want, but that's not gonna make me believe it.
I don't believe there is any such thing as a sin against God. You can be either in balance with nature, or out of balance with nature, and natural consequences will occur for both. It's not because God is ticked off you worshipped a golden cow statue or had sex with someone with the same genetalia as you.Don't forget though, that entropy is only part of the story. The pendulum swings both ways trying to achieve balance - creation/birth offsets entropy/death.
Now, hold the phone...I never said I have an immortal soul! I have energy within me that cannot be destroyed, true. But it can be changed. In that sense, yeah, I'm immortal. But in another sense, I'm not me after I die - I may become another human being, or I may become a dozen grasshoppers and that blueish tint in the next aurora borealis. I don't really know. Ultimate truth...back to that again... If you call it an "ultimate balance", I think I could agree - once my soul has gone through just about everything, it should have all the rough edges knocked off (so to speak), resulting in a smoothed-down, balanced soul.
NO! There IS NO WAY OUT OF THE CYCLE! Death is just part of the cycle - it is not an end, birth is not a beginning. There is no end or beginning to a circle. You can choose "A" beginning, and choose "An" end, but truly, it repeats over and over, like a spiral - never in exactly the same spot, but always moving through the same cycles.
Hmmm...what is "ultimate justice", and what does that have to do with our soul's longevity? We are doomed/blessed to be tied to a cycle of death and rebirth that will last until the universe is completely and utterly annihilated (if that can or does ever happen). Perhaps (and this is a big maybe in my mind) there is some truth to the idea that souls can learn to the point that they can actually take conscious control over their incarnations, and choose whether or not to come back. But I don't know if I believe that or not. Sure sounds nice.
No, I disagree. What is balanced about removing significant portions of energy out of the system? (IE the souls now encased in heaven or hell)