Do you believe in God?

[Famine]

It isn't. It is a proof of OUR personal limitations.

Why?

The contention is that God couldn't (which is a limitation on his abilities; anything God can't do is contrary to omnipotence) give a full, complete set of instructions because it would take a lot of libraries to fit it all in.

Well, that's just storage space. Surely it's not beyond the wit of an omnipotent being to... make enough storage space for his very important rules on being good?

In any case we can fit a lot of libraries onto a flash drive now; the Library of Congress would fit onto my PC. Now we have the technology to have a lot of libraries in very small boxes and storage space is no issue, why can't God communicate the actual, complete rules?

Why was he only able to do it in short form, with loopholes, 2,000 years ago and in Hebrew - requiring men to translate it (imperfectly) into other languages, selectively anthologise it, translate it again, modify it for the sensibilities of a variety of kings and rulers, and translate it again - rather than doing it now in all languages, in full, without human editing?


It is amazing how active he was in talking to people back then compared to now.

This is, again, an interesting question.

It was when I first asked it too.

But personal choice develops around 8. Yes, over the age of 11 we have an even better chance of understanding all of the implications.

You're gunning way too young here.

Milestones in cognitive development for children are pretty well established. It's not until early adolescence (median age of 11) that most children form the ability to make their own choices from their own ideas, dealing with abstract concepts and metacognition. At 8 most children are still in the concrete operational stage.

 

[Imari]

"He who has the ears to hear, let him hear"

Jesus knew that most people would not truly understand his messages, he implied that the few who are spiritually awake and aware enough to understand will hear him and what hes truly trying to convey through his words.

Lol, that's a very self-centred reading of that.

It could also be read as "everyone has ears, and so everyone is capable of hearing the message", which sounds like it would be much more in line with Jesus' teachings. You know, the guy who wanted to help everyone.

You think that guy isn't going to communicate as clearly and effectively as possible, that he's going to create riddles that only a few can understand? He's going to do that intentionally so that less people are helped and saved than would have been if he was straightforward?

You sure you believe in the same Jesus as everyone else? Yours sounds like kind of a dick.

There are Christians who only want the best for everyone else whether they're Christian or not, and there are "Christians" who are just so proud of their exclusive little club that other people can't get into because they're too dumb to believe the obvious.

He isn't. He is waiting for us to listen to His voice.

So, he's limited by humans? Humans, the things that you keep telling us are innately flawed and sinful, those are the things that are able to prevent an omnipotent God from acting?

Dude, get your story straight. It sounds like you were on some crazy drugs when you wrote these characters. They're not consistent at all.

 

[Ghost Lap]

You think that guy isn't going to communicate as clearly and effectively as possible, that he's going to create riddles that only a few can understand? He's going to do that intentionally so that less people are helped and saved than would have been if he was straightforward?

Jesus often communicated through parables that those with the spiritual ears to hear would understand and follow. You can make sense of his teachings through your rational mind but it isn't really going to do much for you. This is because you have to hear his words through your heart for them to truly sink in, or rather you have to be spiritually open to recieving them in your heart for them to truly take affect.

"The first shall be last and the last shall be first"

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth"

How would you personally interpret these two sayings?

 

[Meythia]

How would you personally interpret these two sayings?

Soothing the masses to make them not feel totally lost.
"The king/pharaoh/emperor may currently rule over you, but in the end it will be you who has done more to earn your place in paradise."

Just what the king would tell the bishop to tell the sheeps, so both church and government can milk them the most without any resist.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Soothing the masses to make them not feel totally lost.
"The king/pharaoh/emperor may currently rule over you, but in the end it will be you who has done more to earn your place in paradise."

Just what the king would tell the bishop to tell the sheeps, so both church and government can milk them the most without any resist.

So you heard what he said with your physical ears but didn't truly take it to heart with your spiritual ones. You understood logically what was being conveyed but then your logic turns it from something pure to something impure.

What if in this instance the King was God and the Bishop was Jesus, and the lambs were the masses who'm the King was trying to harvest back into the Heavenly kingdom through sending his Bishop to tell them the good word.

 

[Famine]

So you heard what he said with your physical ears but didn't truly take it to heart with your spiritual ones.

If you're hearing writing at all then there's something even more amiss than usual.

Incidentally it's always fun quoting someone who never spoke English (or even encountered the English, either people or language) in English as if its verbatim.

What if in this instance the King was God and the Bishop was Jesus, and the lambs were the masses who'm the King was trying to harvest back into the Heavenly kingdom through sending his Bishop to tell them the good word.

What if organised religion is simply a method of control, and the English version of the heavily edited English translation of a Latin translation of a selectively anthologised tome whose volumes were originally written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, based on non-eyewitness accounts of a man who - if he existed - exclusively spoke Aramaic is an incredibly unreliable reference source designed around the sensibilities of late-mediæval/Renaissance era aristocracy and royalty to keep the masses stupid and subservient?

Oh wait.

 

[Ghost Lap]

If you're hearing writing at all then there's something even more amiss than usual.

You can replace the words "heard" with saw and "ears" with eyes.

What if organised religion is simply a method of control

As are pretty much all of the systems in place in society, it was never the intention of Jesus to create an organised religion but predictably that's what the world has done by using the example of Jesus and his life's work. Jesus was directly opposed to the ways of the world spiritually where as modern Christianity attempts to blend itself in with the workings of the world, hence the lukewarm reference.

to keep the masses stupid and subservient?

May I introduce you to the modern day "education system".

 

[Famine]

You can replace the words "heard" with saw and "ears" with eyes.

Sure, and we can replace lots of other words to different ones too.

Just like everyone involved in the creation of the English-language Bible over the centuries.

May I introduce you to the modern day "education system".

I mean, you can, but a society in which 99.9% of children go through compulsory education to teach them maths, sciences, languages, geography, history, and other religions is not comparable to a society in which only the children of the very wealthiest get any kind of education and the rest are told what to think by men in dresses with a penchant for pederasty from a book they cannot read for themselves.

 

[Meythia]

May I introduce you to the modern day "education system".

(Free) education enables one to make choices that without the knowledge one wont consider viable or possible.
It is quite the opposite of a system that relies on fiction at most and punishment in certian conditions = religion.
Education works based on facts and evidence, and training the mind to take more complex ideas into reality.

 

[Ghost Lap]

I mean, you can, but a society in which 99.9% of children go through compulsory education to teach them maths, sciences, languages, geography, history, and other religions is not comparable to a society in which only the children of the very wealthiest get any kind of education and the rest are told what to think by men in dresses with a penchant for pederasty from a book they cannot read for themselves.

You just said it, its compulsory and therefore doesn't take ones free will of choice into account. It's never truly there to educate you but to implement social and societal conditioning unto young impressionable minds, you are told what to think by so called teachers and if you ever question them or their authority on the matter you're punished for it in some kind of way. It's all a big fugazi that the masses by into and are forced into through fear of punishment and they follow it like good little sheep, ironically not too fundamentally different from the structure of organised and worldly religions.

 

[Famine]

It's never truly there to educate you but to implement social and societal conditioning unto young impressionable minds, you are told what to think by so called teachers and if you ever question them or their authority on the matter you're punished for it in some kind of way.

Just out of curiosity, what exactly do you think the bishopric of the Middle Ages did to questioning minds?

Modern education gives you the tools to educate yourself. Of course not everyone avails themselves of this capability that their ancestors - by design - lacked.

 

[Meythia]

You just said it, its compulsory and therefore doesn't take ones free will of choice into account. It's never truly there to educate you but to implement social and societal conditioning unto young impressionable minds, you are told what to think by so called teachers and if you ever question them or their authority on the matter you're punished for it in some kind of way. It's all a big fugazi that the masses by into and are forced into through fear of punishment and they follow it like good little sheep, ironically not too fundamentally different from the structure of organised and worldly religions.

The bible tells you what to believe, without telling you the result nor how to get to the result, but in a vague way so you can interpret it anyhow you like.
The teacher tells you the process of thought behind a result, and not what to think, and actually accept when you find other ways to come to the same conclusion.

If you question the authority of a bishop you are up for the inquisition with severe punishment.
If you question the authority of a teacher you are up for some extra lessons in social manners with the only consequence being to have to accept ones one failure and/or being wrong on a topic.

The internet is very much an educational tool, among other applications.
Ironically also as the internet was born it was made for porn (not quite sure where this song is from anymore).

 

[MatskiMonk]

You just said it, its compulsory and therefore doesn't take ones free will of choice into account. It's never truly there to educate you but to implement social and societal conditioning unto young impressionable minds, you are told what to think by so called teachers and if you ever question them or their authority on the matter you're punished for it in some kind of way. It's all a big fugazi that the masses by into and are forced into through fear of punishment and they follow it like good little sheep, ironically not too fundamentally different from the structure of organised and worldly religions.

The public school system churns out pretty much the full range of our society, from good people, to *****, from lefties to right wingers, from liberal hippies to people that think migrants should be shot, from people are atheist or agnostic, to most of the followers of most of the religions. If the public school system is supposed to conditioning society in only one way, why is society both so diverse and divided?

Sounds to me like you have a problem with people being educated because then they might realise how blisteringly ******* stupid religion, the bible and faith is.

 

[Ghost Lap]

The public school system churns out pretty much the full range of our society, from good people, to *****, from lefties to right wingers, from liberal hippies to people that think migrants should be shot, from people are atheist or agnostic, to most of the followers of most of the religions. If the public school system is supposed to conditioning society in only one way, why is society both so diverse and divided?

Why do you think the full range of society is forced to go to school, they know that not everyone will fit the mold but they know that by making everyone go to school they will reap a greater success rate of making the majority of the population conditioned to the mold they want and the box they want you in.

It's there to condition you to the typical 9-5 routine and to worry about what your peers think of you through constant exposure to peer pressure and to conform to the crowd through fear of mockery. It's there to teach you not to think for yourself and to never question authority through fear of punishment of some kind. If you fit the mold they want however they reward you in some way much like it was with Pavlov's dogs, all about control of the masses and worldly conditioning.

The reason its free and government funded is because it's not there to truly benefit the individual but rather to ensure the individual becomes a perceived benefit to the society that they're in, if something is free its because you're the end product. If you want true education that has to come from yourself and you mostly don't need anyone to help you with that, all you need is a genuine curiosity or passion for something to drive you forwards in learning about said thing.

 

[Meythia]

Why do you think the full range of society is forced to go to school, they know that not everyone will fit the mold but they know that by making everyone go to school they will reap a greater success rate of making the majority of the population conditioned to the mold they want and the box they want you in.

Because the education system is aimed at producing rational workforce to increase innovation and at the same time strengthen democracy.
The less intelligent people are, the less profit do companies turn, which also means the less taxes the government can rake in.
The less intelligent people are, the less healthy they are living generally.

But also
The less intelligent people are, the more likely they are to fall into loneliness and lazyness.
The less intelligent people are, the easier they fall for rumours, propaganda, fake news.

Education doesnt mean one is intelligent, as both is not the same, but both works together to increase rationale though.
One can be intelligent, but without education still stay stupid.
One can be stupid with education, because simply memorizing doesnt increase the potential of rationalism.
(In the lack of proper linguistic skills, I propably choose the wrong words, but I dont trust automatic translations enough to use them).

 

[Danoff]

where as modern Christianity attempts to blend itself in with the workings of the world, hence the lukewarm reference.

I still don't agree with your reading of that passage, and I note you haven't taken up my invitation to walk through it more clearly.

Quote-mining the bible is a favorite of the pious in this thread. But quote-mining strips away context, and it lets you take your own personal view and graft it in wherever you feel like it. The bible has lots of awful messages, and some deeply authoritarian ones, and yet in this particular case, I think you're taking your own authoritarian bent and grafting it onto the bible. Your interpretation of this passage seems more consistent with Islam.

Specifically, the way you seem to be interpreting this is to say that the causal is the worst possible offender. Followers? Great. Enemies? Great. Casual? so awful.

The reason is because the casual has found a way to de-radicalize the teachings, and it is clear that de-radicalization will potentially spread, because people don't like being radicals. It goes against the nature of the social animal that is the human. Enemies promote radicalization. We see this in the middle east today, where new radicals are born every few seconds due to fierce enemies. If your goal is to radicalize people into obedient soldiers, enemies are not a problem, they're essential. But casuals? They're a real threat to the radical army.

I do not believe your quote-mine landed with this particular one. But I do see your own brand of "babies must suffer" in your interpretation. I think you're grafting your own ends onto religious texts, and this is not something you invented. It is usually something that goes badly though.

Why do you think the full range of society is forced to go to school, they know that not everyone will fit the mold but they know that by making everyone go to school they will reap a greater success rate of making the majority of the population conditioned to the mold they want and the box they want you in.

Everyone can benefit from learning basic concepts of human thought - Literacy, Mathematics, Scientific thought, Logic, Critical Thinking. There is no person on Earth who is better off for not having been exposed to these concepts. They are quite simply that useful.

It's there to condition you to the typical 9-5 routine and to worry about what your peers think of you through constant exposure to peer pressure and to conform to the crowd through fear of mockery.

There is nothing of this in Literacy, Mathematics, Scientific thought, Logic, or Critical Thinking. None of that teaches you anything about 9-5 jobs or mockery. I don't know what you think education is or ought to be, but it's not what anyone else is talking about.

It's there to teach you not to think for yourself and to never question authority through fear of punishment of some kind.

You mean religious education?

 

[Exorcet]

"He who has the ears to hear, let him hear"

Jesus knew that most people would not truly understand his messages, he implied that the few who are spiritually awake and aware enough to understand will hear him and what hes truly trying to convey through his words.



He wouldn't have needed to either, the world was spiritually the same (darkness) mostly everywhere on it and it hasn't really changed much at all 2000 odd years later.

I brought up majority because you said the majority of people hated Jesus. That would be hard to do if he couldn't even meet the majority of people on Earth.

Though if the words of Jesus could not be understood by most and this was known ahead of time, as must be the case for an all knowing god, then what was the point? You say yourself not much has changed, so it doesn't seem like it was a good investment.

Jesus often communicated through parables that those with the spiritual ears to hear would understand and follow. You can make sense of his teachings through your rational mind but it isn't really going to do much for you. This is because you have to hear his words through your heart for them to truly sink in, or rather you have to be spiritually open to recieving them in your heart for them to truly take affect.

"The first shall be last and the last shall be first"

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth"

How would you personally interpret these two sayings?

So we have god given (it would have to be if we had been created as claimed) intellect to make us blind to spiritual matters then? Why wouldn't Jesus just speak logically in that case?

The problem with sayings is that they are open to interpretation. They don't have an inherent meaning. Context can push people toward a given interpretation, but that's it. Without context there is no way to assign anything meaningful to those phrases, unless you take them literally and then apply logic to them which makes the first a contradiction. Metaphors and other such things are not uncommon in human language, but they aren't great at getting a really specific idea across, so not the best choice for a god trying to give an important message.

Why do you think the full range of society is forced to go to school, they know that not everyone will fit the mold but they know that by making everyone go to school they will reap a greater success rate of making the majority of the population conditioned to the mold they want and the box they want you in.

It's there to condition you to the typical 9-5 routine and to worry about what your peers think of you through constant exposure to peer pressure and to conform to the crowd through fear of mockery. It's there to teach you not to think for yourself and to never question authority through fear of punishment of some kind. If you fit the mold they want however they reward you in some way much like it was with Pavlov's dogs, all about control of the masses and worldly conditioning.

The reason its free and government funded is because it's not there to truly benefit the individual but rather to ensure the individual becomes a perceived benefit to the society that they're in, if something is free its because you're the end product. If you want true education that has to come from yourself and you mostly don't need anyone to help you with that, all you need is a genuine curiosity or passion for something to drive you forwards in learning about said thing.

This is a really strange opinion of the education system.

People go to school because we rely on 10000+ years of accumulated knowledge to make the world work comfortably. Teaching predates humanity. Young animals learn from their parents. Humans took this to the next level with greater memory, intelligence, and eventually record keeping. Is there a mountain that occasionally blows up and covers the nearby land with lava? It would be great if that information could spread through your tribe instead requiring every individual to learn that for themselves and only when the mountain erupts into a volcano. Lets write it down. Or tell stories about the past of the mountain that people will be interested in hearing to help them remember.

Fast forward to today. Are viruses bad, but mostly stopped by vaccines? It would be great if this information was shared with the entire population so that go vaccinated and everyone was healthy and productive. This is why we have schools. If you want to argue that it's set to mimic the typical 5-9 job, sure to a degree, though I don't think it's a coincidence that kids go to school during hours where parents are at work and then go home when parents are home. Either way that's a very secondary feature at this point.

Peer pressure and bullying? It happens but it's certainly not the goal. The goal is grouping kids together is to help them learn social skills which they'll need later in life. You've taught them all about vaccines and how to contribute to society great, unless they're too terrified to speak to another human being and just sit inside all day.

Teaching people not to think for themselves. I really don't know where you're going with this. From the very beginning of my education this was encouraged. Of course that doesn't make it universal. There are bad schools, but there is certainly not some collective agree to squash free thought. Ironically religious education comes the closest to that, though in my case I have to give credit, outside of blind faith on core religious tenants they actually did encourage some thought. Anyway from the beginning the text books I've used had little sections labeled "Critical thinking" where they posed a challenging question to the reader to ponder and develop thinking skills. We had science projects where we as students had to come up with experiments from our own curiosity and then conduct them and discover our own results. Later on I was involved in undergraduate research and in the first project that I was involved in my profession informed me that we had discovered results contrary to exist research. This was not seen as a bad thing. At the same time I was also designing my own aerodynamic parts for a student competition.

I think I definitely had some lucking in getting good education, but I wasn't shoveled into some exclusive secret program. There were a lot of other people getting the same education.

If you want true education that has to come from yourself and you mostly don't need anyone to help you with that

Good luck recreating 10000 years of human experimentation alone.

 

[cjsrt4]

"Science is constantly proved all the time. You see, if we take something like any fiction, any holy book, and destroyed it, in a thousand years’ time, that wouldn’t come back just as it was. Whereas if we took every science book, and every fact, and destroyed them all, in a thousand years they’d all be back, because all the same tests would produce the same result!" - Ricky Gervais

I believe in the above quote, but I think I'm just gonna take the easy way out and give Kenneth Copeland 100-200k of my money. That dude can touch your forehead and put God into you and give you a seizure, all while guaranteeing you get into Heaven. MURICA!

 

[Ghost Lap]

Jesus (in writing) advocated for every kind of disciple. It's like you haven't read the book.

Revelation 3:15-16​

“‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. I would rather that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.

Your insightful response to this scriptural evidence was:

This is non-responsive.

A more elaborate explanation if this isn't clear enough for you: https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-lukewarm-faith.html

I still don't agree with your reading of that passage, and I note you haven't taken up my invitation to walk through it more clearly.

What is there to not agree with? Go for it and walk through it more clearly for me then if you will.

 

[UKMikey]

I believe in the above quote, but I think I'm just gonna take the easy way out and give Kenneth Copeland 100-200k of my money. That dude can touch your forehead and put God into you and give you a seizure, all while guaranteeing you get into Heaven. MURICA!

 

[Famine]

scriptural evidence

🤣

 

[Meythia]

Revelation 3:15-16

That passage relates to a situation in which people are so oversaturated with wordly possesions that they are indifferent towards the Lord.
Stll Jesus is there and saying after that, that all that is required to be welcomed is to welcome him - which directly relates to the passage your are quoting in the hopes of invalidation but now you have validated it.

 

[Danoff]

That passage relates to a situation in which people are so oversaturated with wordly possesions that they are indifferent towards the Lord.
Stll Jesus is there and saying after that, that all that is required to be welcomed is to welcome him - which directly relates to the passage your are quoting in the hopes of invalidation but now you have validated it.

👍 Exactly how I read it.

Revelation 3:15-16​

“‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. I would rather that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.

Quote-mining. Let's take a look at your link:

What is there to not agree with? Go for it and walk through it more clearly for me then if you will.

It's not a courtesy that you're due, because you have absolutely refused my invitation for you to do so about YOUR quote. You're asking me to do your work for you, and pretending that you're nice to do so. But because I am actually interested in seeing this through, I'll do it. Let's start with something stupid from your link

In Revelation 3:14–21, the Lord is describing the “lukewarm” heart attitude of those in the Laodicean church, an attitude manifested by their deeds. The Laodiceans were neither cold nor hot in relation to God, just lukewarm. Hot water can cleanse and purify; cold water can refresh and enliven. But lukewarm water carries no similar value. The Laodiceans understood the Lord’s analogy because their city drinking water came over an aqueduct from a spring six miles to the south, and it arrived disgustingly lukewarm. Laodicean water was not hot like the nearby hot springs that people bathed in, nor was it refreshingly cold for drinking. It was lukewarm, good for nothing. In fact, it was nauseating, and that was the Lord’s response to the Laodiceans—they sickened Him, and He said, “I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (verse 16).

Lukewarm water is good for nothing and disgusting? It's so dumb it's actually hard to even respond to. Water is essential to human existence. Hot water is often water that has been boiled and purified. Lukewarm water is hot water that has sat and is still good to drink. Cold water is either from the mountains or modern day refrigeration.

I just... it's hard to not laugh at how dumb this is. Moving on!

The fact that the lukewarm individuals to whom Christ speaks are not saved is seen in the picture of Jesus standing outside of the church (Revelation 3:20). He has not yet been welcomed into their midst. In love, the Lord rebukes and disciplines them, commanding them to repent (verse 19). He sees their lukewarm attitudes as “shameful nakedness” that needs to be clothed in the white garments of true righteousness (verse 18). He urges them to be earnest, or zealous, and commit themselves totally to Him. Our Lord is gracious and long-suffering and gives the lukewarm time to repent.

Wait what?!? The lord is encouraging them to repent and be better followers? Like... better disciples? It's almost as though this passage is advocating for disciples rather than telling them to get lost and taking pride in making them angry. Huh? How could anyone have seen that coming?

The central theme of the NT is that everyone is welcome. It's actually a highly immoral theme, for reasons I've touched on earlier. But even I, a non-scholar of the bible, am familiar with this theme that everyone is welcome. Everyone is invited to accept jesus, have faith, blah blah. Even the worst, even the lukewarm. The whole concept is that everyone is a sinner and everyone can change their ways and join up. Basic stuff really. That's why I was on super solid ground when I said that Jesus advocates for all disciples. Because if there's a theme to this particular myth, it's that. How on earth could you miss that?

I know how. Because you're quote-mining and grafting your own distaste for people onto this book that's written to encourage everyone to join the "flock" of sheep. It's written to encourage EVERYONE. Not some people, all people. Even the ones you don't like. You, on the otherhand, in your effort to paint yourself as Jesus, wear it as a badge of honor to DISCOURAGE just about as many people as you can. There are tons of psychological reasons why a zealot does this, and it happens often, but as I was saying before, it's not consistent with your own purported religion.

Look, I don't like any of it. Your version, the NT version, the Jesus myth, none of it. Christianity is, at its core, immoral. I just also don't like the inconsistency. It bothers me.

Let me give you an analogy. I don't like the harry potter series. Rowling is a bit of a hack writer, don't get me started on her rampant pronoun antecedent ambiguities. They make her reading tedious and confusing, and that's before getting to the almost mind-numbingly inconsistent world she has created. I don't like it. But if someone is spouting harry potter quotes at me and telling me that harry fights gollum on the enterprise, it bothers me.

 

[Duke]

Could the same be said of other things that can lead to addiction, e.g. gambling? Is the problem solely addiction, or do other factors need to be taken into account when we say there's nothing at all "bad" about something?

Not quite sure how we got onto pornography. BUT: There is a difference between something being not INHERENTLY bad and something being "not at all bad".

There is nothing inherently bad about people choosing to let themselves be filmed in sexual situations, provided they are freely consenting adults. There is also nothing inherently bad about consumers viewing pornography, assuming they are not minors.

Is there opportunity for abuse, on both sides of the industry? Certainly - in fact, many opportunities, which must be guarded against. But there is nothing inherently evil about it.

EDIT: BTW, the film I'm referencing is talking about an escort rather than a porn actress, but led me to think about the effects porn can have on participants and consumers and reminded me of said tweet.

While I personally find the idea abhorrent, perhaps having that fantasy outlet prevents the client from acting against his own daughter. It is disturbing, but perhaps it is the least disturbing option. Again assuming that the sex worker has chosen their profession and is not a minor.

 

[Danoff]

While I personally find the idea abhorrent, perhaps having that fantasy outlet prevents the client from acting against his own daughter. It is disturbing, but perhaps it is the least disturbing option. Again assuming that the sex worker has chosen their profession and is not a minor.

Suddenly Woody Allen is coming to mind.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Lukewarm water is good for nothing and disgusting? It's so dumb it's actually hard to even respond to. Water is essential to human existence. Hot water is often water that has been boiled and purified. Lukewarm water is hot water that has sat and is still good to drink. Cold water is either from the mountains or modern day refrigeration.

The analogy is that lukewarm water tastes horrible and makes you feel sick, you would rather water be boiling hot or cold because then it at least has usefulness either way. Jesus is basically saying to be lukewarm is to have no real usefulness, it's to be lost in a middle ground between God's ways and the world's ways and was essentially just wasting his time and the thought of lukewarm believers made him feel sick. Either be fully for God or fully for the world but don't pretend to be for both because it ends up doing more harm than good, one cannot have two masters as he said.

Wait what?!? The lord is encouraging them to repent and be better followers? Like... better disciples? It's almost as though this passage is advocating for disciples rather than telling them to get lost and taking pride in making them angry. Huh? How could anyone have seen that coming?

Again it goes way over your head so I'll simply it for you. He's telling them to repent for being pretend followers of God, using the name of God to simply gather riches for their church and for themselves. "He sees their lukewarm attitudes as shameful nakedness", doesn't sound like he's advocating for anything other than for them to be in all for God (hot) or for them to be of the world (cold) and stop wasting his time pretending to be both ways (lukewarm).

 

[Danoff]

The analogy is that lukewarm water tastes horrible and makes you feel sick, you would rather water be boiling hot or cold because then it at least has usefulness either way.

Lukewarm water doesn't make you sick and doesn't taste horrible. I don't drink boiling water because it would be scalding. And cold water definitely CAN make you sick if it's not purified. It's just... wrong all the way around.

Jesus is basically saying to be lukewarm is to have no real usefulness,

That doesn't sound particularly jesus-like - to say that people are useless.

it's to be lost in a middle ground between God's ways and the world's ways and was essentially just wasting his time and the thought of lukewarm believers made him feel sick. Either be fully for God or fully for the world but don't pretend to be for both because it ends up doing more harm than good, one cannot have two masters as he said.

Again it goes way over your head so I'll simply it for you. He's telling them to repent for being pretend followers of God, using the name of God to simply gather riches for their church and for themselves. "He sees their lukewarm attitudes as shameful nakedness", doesn't sound like he's advocating for anything other than for them to be in all for God (hot) or for them to be of the world (cold) and stop wasting his time pretending to be both ways (lukewarm).

Uh... we're all sinners are we not? This is as much advocacy for them and their flaws as it is for ANYONE and their flaws. How is it that I'm having to explain Christianity to you? These are disciples that are being encouraged to change their ways to be better disciples. It's not Jesus flipping the bird and being happy about alienating people. Again, WWJD

 

[Duke]

Congratulations on proving my point.

You are just looking to be right. Not have a correct answer.

Ummm, again, whut? The need to have AN answer - regardless of genuine accuracy - is 100% the province of the religious. It's non-believers who are comfortable with, or at least willing to tolerate, incomplete answers. We understand they will change constantly as our knowledge is refined. We HOPE they will change constantly.

I have an opposing question:
If God came down, in all His glory, and stood in front of you. Then, He showed you all of His works and creations.
Would it be enough?
THAT is the REAL question.
You want proof. I'm fine with that.
Would you ACCEPT the truth if you had it?

If god came down and presented physical evidence of their existence, for me and others to measure, analyze, and discuss, and the consensus of the scientific community was that this manifestation was indeed a physical god-being, the YES. I would accept this as a working hypothesis that god exists.

That would, of course, be subject to continued refinement based on additional scientific observation. Just like my understanding of everything else in the world.

If god came down and touched their finger to my head and said, "See, Duke, I exist!" without any physical, repeatable evidence that others could measure, I would assume that my brain was acting up and I would go see a neurologist and psychiatrist.

 

[Duke]

The analogy is that lukewarm water tastes horrible and makes you feel sick, you would rather water be boiling hot or cold because then it at least has usefulness either way.

Again it goes way over your head so I'll simply it for you.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Lukewarm water doesn't make you sick and doesn't taste horrible. I don't drink boiling water because it would be scalding. And cold water definitely CAN make you sick if it's not purified. It's just... wrong all the way around.

Boiling water can be used to clean oneself, cold water can be used for drinking, but in the context of the times Jesus lived in lukewarm water would make one sick to consume and would serve no real purpose.

Uh... we're all sinners are we not? This is as much advocacy for them and their flaws as it is for ANYONE and their flaws. How is it that I'm having to explain Christianity to you? These are disciples that are being encouraged to change their ways to be better disciples. It's not Jesus flipping the bird and being happy about alienating people. Again, WWJD

Jesus would probably say to stop being lukewarm about God and stop wasting his time, we're all sinners but either turn your ways around and dedicate your life to God's ways as best as you can or don't bother with God at all and be of the world's ways. But don't pretend to be about God on the surface when your ways of living are very much for the world (Matthew 6:24) (lukewarm).