The bible

[Lollerskates]

I would rather not see you unintentionally do yourself and others harm, regardless as to whether or not there are religious connections to those activities that would contribute to the harm. Is it wrong of me to be concerned for the health and well being of other people just because I am not a Christian?

It isn't about religion really, it is about medical safety. Many people who take the bible and other religious texts as their source of health information die as a result. Think of those preachers and church goers that handle poisonous snakes because they think their faith will protect them, who end up dying because they are bitten and refuse medical treatment. I would rather you not make yourself ill because of medical practices centuries out of date.

Actually, thinking of people like the Amish, they aren't doing so great. Many groups such as that have begun to make exceptions in the case of medicine thanks to the fact that their self-inflicted genetic bottlenecks make them prone to many genetic diseases which are deadly and debilitating otherwise.

You are assuming an extreme, as in how I follow the books of Moses automatically sets me and my family up for medical calamity. The same could be said about living in NYC: a city stacked upon itself, full of trash, mice, roaches, rats and pollution. Or, New Mexico, where the US government has uranium deposits poisoning Native American water supply, and causing birth defects. Yet, I would not say living in NYC inherently means one is subjected to squalor. It is a misunderstanding on my part if I say that. Likewise, especially if you do not see the context of Leviticus, for example (and I gave examples doctors just recently discovered for themselves,) then of course you see how it may be dangerous comparatively, and when executed ignorantly.

It would be hard to convey, but the Word of God is much more erudite than the world would give it credit. You cannot just treat it as an encyclopedia; your view of it will be jaded and cynical. As I said, let me die in my filth if that is what you think I am going to do - as if I do not and would not use common sense, or modern resources because I believe in the words in the books of Moses. The books actually prevent much disease spreading and transmission, but it just does not fit into modernity without giving up luxuries of the modern world.

And, you dont have to be Christian to care, or to pry and impose what you think is your correct and superior philosophy on medical, logical, spiritual, social, economic, etc. life. Anyone can do that. But, no one has to listen to you, appreciate you, or even entertain you. Or me. That is why I said I will do whatever I choose to do as a sovereign human under God. No one owns me, or dictates what I do with my life; I choose whether I want to break the law, love, heed advice, eat, and follow God. No other human does it for me.

 

[Chany]

GoldenBoy89
Formerly Crudo89



Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Haha

 

[Cearbhall]

Actually, our respective viewpoints are contingent on the books, articles, and/or videos we just happened to encounter, read, and possibly amalgamate into our preexisting assumptions.

My preexisting assumption for most of my life was that God exists and Jesus is my savior, and most of what I had been given supported that, so...

 

[Albion]

Actually, our respective viewpoints are contingent on the books, articles, and/or videos we just happened to encounter, read, and possibly amalgamate into our preexisting assumptions. You have your set of sources and psychological predispositions, and I have mine; and we wonder why we've each reached some 'other' conclusion.

That rather cynical view of the matter can't be accurate, since the numbers of people who have CHANGED their beliefs -- in one direction or another -- as a result of encountering books, articles, etc. are many.

 

[niye]

That rather cynical view of the matter can't be accurate, since the numbers of people who have CHANGED their beliefs -- in one direction or another -- as a result of encountering books, articles, etc. are many.

Beliefs, however acquired, affect many of us profoundly enough to change us. This doesn't mean the beliefs are divine or demonic.

...I will do whatever I choose to do as a sovereign human under God. No one owns me, or dictates what I do with my life; I choose whether I want to break the law, love, heed advice, eat, and follow God. No other human does it for me.

Snipped this dramatically, with apologies.

You are human. Humans are social animals, whether they are ranchers or residents of New York City. Your choices are bound by the laws of the group.

Re the Bible: Obey it, so long as you also obey the rules of your community. If you decide to kill your child for disobedience, you will be punished. If you decide to kill the tarot-reader in town, you will be punished. If you decide to kill the Muslims down the road, you will be punished.

If you decide to "pray" your daughter's diabetes away, you will receive a visit from social workers.

Laws change, but the concept of law will last as long as there are humans on the planet.

 

[Lollerskates]

Beliefs, however acquired, affect many of us profoundly enough to change us. This doesn't mean the beliefs are divine or demonic.



Snipped this dramatically, with apologies.

You are human. Humans are social animals, whether they are ranchers or residents of New York City. Your choices are bound by the laws of the group.

Re the Bible: Obey it, so long as you also obey the rules of your community. If you decide to kill your child for disobedience, you will be punished. If you decide to kill the tarot-reader in town, you will be punished. If you decide to kill the Muslims down the road, you will be punished.

If you decide to "pray" your daughter's diabetes away, you will receive a visit from social workers.

Laws change, but the concept of law will last as long as there are humans on the planet.

why is it that you assume I will neglect my children or the other persons around in order to make your argument?

What you all dont understand is punishment or not, I have a sovereign choice as a human to make a choice. That is why people are choosing to break the law, and choosing to accept the consequences of being Christian in their region. If I listened to and followed you, psychosarah, and whomever else just because of your "social" arguments, I would be a lousy parent, believer and person, honestly. I can choose to entertain any of you, believe you, and even follow you. But, I reserve the right to make that choice. I think people forget their sovereignty as humans - despite what the State has to say. And, the time will come when fighting for what you (and perhaps only you) think is right wont be as a tweet, or facebook post. Or, it may be that easy if you roll over and change out of fear or conformity, or fear of non-conformity. Perhaps you will just be scared to die, or imprisoned.

It reminds me of how foolish people are when they say they have to obey/do something they would never do because they had no choice - a gun was to their head. You always have a choice, even if it means choosing to be shot in the head. I choose to reserve my sovereignty as a human, and entertain, believe and accept whomever I choose to regardless of how right the party thinks it is. That is it.

And, FYI, the day is coming when the most minor of infractions will land you in jail, your parents in jail, and your children in protective custody. The laws are already written. Focus on crazy christians and their rants on sovereignty as a human, but you should really be thoroughly reading the laws your nation you seen to champion has passed. And, dont eat your words a decade from now. Read your laws before you champion something that doesn't exist, or is not applicable.

 

[Lollerskates]

Not even God barred people from going against Him. He lets people sin. He just lays out the consequences.

 

[niye]

why is it that you assume I will neglect my children or the other persons around in order to make your argument?

What you all dont understand is punishment or not, I have a sovereign choice as a human to make a choice. That is why people are choosing to break the law, and choosing to accept the consequences of being Christian in their region. If I listened to and followed you, psychosarah, and whomever else just because of your "social" arguments, I would be a lousy parent, believer and person, honestly. I can choose to entertain any of you, believe you, and even follow you. But, I reserve the right to make that choice. I think people forget their sovereignty as humans - despite what the State has to say. And, the time will come when fighting for what you (and perhaps only you) think is right wont be as a tweet, or facebook post. Or, it may be that easy if you roll over and change out of fear or conformity, or fear of non-conformity. Perhaps you will just be scared to die, or imprisoned.

It reminds me of how foolish people are when they say they have to obey/do something they would never do because they had no choice - a gun was to their head. You always have a choice, even if it means choosing to be shot in the head. I choose to reserve my sovereignty as a human, and entertain, believe and accept whomever I choose to regardless of how right the party thinks it is. That is it.

And, FYI, the day is coming when the most minor of infractions will land you in jail, your parents in jail, and your children in protective custody. The laws are already written. Focus on crazy christians and their rants on sovereignty as a human, but you should really be thoroughly reading the laws your nation you seen to champion has passed. And, dont eat your words a decade from now. Read your laws before you champion something that doesn't exist, or is not applicable.

I apologize for using the pronoun "you." I should have used "anyone," etc. I was talking about human beings, not about "you," as an individual.

I agree that no state is always right.



Re law: US is a religious society where secular law overrides Biblical law. Biblical law here is the "law of the gaps," able to matter where secular legislation and public opinion leave room.

One example: It is still possible for a wedding baker to break state law in order to refuse service to a gay couple. There is a legislative "gap" when it comes to civil rights for gays in the US, and public opinion is divided.

That same baker, however, would not be able to take the same stand against a Muslim couple. There are no "gaps," when it comes to protecting people of various religions in the US, and public opinion would be near-universally against him.

In neither case is the baker the sovereign of his fate. Laws and social expectations determine his behavior, as they determine the consequences of his behavior.

...and then there are people on the fringe. There's a lot of wisdom on the fringe, but there is also paranoia, fear, conspiracy theories. The fringe is a hard place to be.

 

[Albion]

Beliefs, however acquired, affect many of us profoundly enough to change us. This doesn't mean the beliefs are divine or demonic.

That's true...but it doesn't change anything in what I wrote. The idea that our beliefs are what they are because of books, etc. that confirmed our "predispositions" sounds good but isn't accurate.

 

[Lollerskates]

I apologize for using the pronoun "you." I should have used "anyone," etc. I was talking about human beings, not about "you," as an individual.

I agree that no state is always right.



Re law: US is a religious society where secular law overrides Biblical law. Biblical law here is the "law of the gaps," able to matter where secular legislation and public opinion leave room.

One example: It is still possible for a wedding baker to break state law in order to refuse service to a gay couple. There is a legislative "gap" when it comes to civil rights for gays in the US, and public opinion is divided.

That same baker, however, would not be able to take the same stand against a Muslim couple. There are no "gaps," when it comes to protecting people of various religions in the US, and public opinion would be near-universally against him.

In neither case is the baker the sovereign of his fate. Laws and social expectations determine his behavior, as they determine the consequences of his behavior.

...and then there are people on the fringe. There's a lot of wisdom on the fringe, but there is also paranoia, fear, conspiracy theories. The fringe is a hard place to be.

Ok. Well if that is what you meant...

I still stand by everything I said, perhaps now not directed to you or your argument, as you seem to understsnd the underlying issue (especially my main points.) I fully understand snd agree that a Christian is to act within the laws of the land in which s/he lives until it conflicts with the word/will of God. I pay taxes, I get my car registered, and so on. But,I do those on my own choice. Mentally, I am a zealot for myself and my family. Thank God I have not had to execute that yet. But, that time is coming closer - from seeming benign issues like spanking (who determines.when a.spanking is a beating,) to extremes like illegally praying and reading the bible. I am not fluid in my beliefs no matter who I upset, and if it means in the future my worship breaks the law, then I will have.to make a choice. (My faith beliefs have already deemed me a satanic heretic on these forums and in real life by my own "brethren," so my skin is quite thick.) It has already been said that people who follow Him will be tried with sword, captivity, fire, and spoil. I dont wish for those things to befall me, but I also realize you dont get tried by the world if you are accepted and embraced by the world - faith, philosophy, intellect and enterprises included.

Having said all of that, I probably agree with you completely in that you were more or less able to convey the point I was trying to make without sounding like a militant believer. Until the country(ies) in which I reside advertise their Police State ststus in an undeniable way, I will always know whst is best for me and my family. Even afterward. Since society changes more than fashion, I rely on the foundation of the word of God - all of it. That is just me as a individual.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Look, some medical practices suggested by the bible are fine, but others are more dangerous than doing nothing at all. The bible will suggest remedies, but it never claims that you have to use them without exception, it never states you can't go with a different treatment.

I suppose your health is your own, but any practice which would expose others besides yourself to harm, even if it is your kids, isn't right. Should I be ok with you holding out a poisonous snake to your kids because scripture says you won't be harmed, or should I go by the evidence of dozens of people dying from doing just that? I don't assume you will do such a thing at all, I really hope you don't, but to assume such a thing is not only ok, but necessary to practice your faith is insane.

In any case, practicing medicine in ways the bible doesn't endorse isn't violating the will of god. It isn't as if god said you had to treat these conditions in this one single way.

 

[Lollerskates]

Look, some medical practices suggested by the bible are fine, but others are more dangerous than doing nothing at all. The bible will suggest remedies, but it never claims that you have to use them without exception, it never states you can't go with a different treatment.

I suppose your health is your own, but any practice which would expose others besides yourself to harm, even if it is your kids, isn't right. Should I be ok with you holding out a poisonous snake to your kids because scripture says you won't be harmed, or should I go by the evidence of dozens of people dying from doing just that? I don't assume you will do such a thing at all, I really hope you don't, but to assume such a thing is not only ok, but necessary to practice your faith is insane.

In any case, practicing medicine in ways the bible doesn't endorse isn't violating the will of god. It isn't as if god said you had to treat these conditions in this one single way.

As I said, your thesis is founded upon the idea that staunch biblical observance constitutes neglect. That is abjectly wrong. Indeed, God expects me to use all resources I have to discern what choices are wise. I have a firm understanding of what He meant especially as a scientist. So, I put my foundation in Him, not the AMA. I could easily start a campaign against parents who have children in large cities, especially male children, in which the concentration of birth control hormones flood the water supply. But, I dont. Every soul is responsible for their own.

To each his or her own. And, I consider being called insane in any medium or situation a compliment in this day.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No, seriously, there are practices supported by the bible which can make you sick and spread disease, especially the ones involving animal blood.

Perhaps. But the Kosher aspects of the OT Law also told the Israelites to "not eat the fat." If there is one particular Kosher idea that would help Americans today, that would be the one.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That rather cynical view of the matter can't be accurate, since the numbers of people who have CHANGED their beliefs -- in one direction or another -- as a result of encountering books, articles, etc. are many.

You've just made my point, unless of course I didn't make my point clear enough. Regardless of where a person's views conclude, those views developed in response to the sources that were encountered.

My point is, people's understandings are contingent on many factors, and it isn't necessarily the case that people aren't being reasonable, but rather that they were reasonable with the contents they had at their disposal.

If new sources are 'added' to the existing 'set' that the person has thus far encountered, a change in the thought matrix comes about. But if a person freezes their investigations, or becomes unwilling to learn further, then it is unlikely those views will change.

Nevertheless, my underlying point is that Christians and Non-Christians typically don't settle their conclusions simply by waking up one day and, 'by fiat' discover that they are now this way or that way in their thinking. For instance, a former Christian most likely did not wake up one day and 'feel' their way completely into atheism. Rather, they found sources that taught new ideas that were then considered and absorbed, possibly even displacing earlier conclusions.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Look, some medical practices suggested by the bible are fine, but others are more dangerous than doing nothing at all. The bible will suggest remedies, but it never claims that you have to use them without exception, it never states you can't go with a different treatment.

I suppose your health is your own, but any practice which would expose others besides yourself to harm, even if it is your kids, isn't right. Should I be ok with you holding out a poisonous snake to your kids because scripture says you won't be harmed, or should I go by the evidence of dozens of people dying from doing just that? I don't assume you will do such a thing at all, I really hope you don't, but to assume such a thing is not only ok, but necessary to practice your faith is insane.

In any case, practicing medicine in ways the bible doesn't endorse isn't violating the will of god. It isn't as if god said you had to treat these conditions in this one single way.

Psstt. Hey!

I really think the 'handling of snakes' item that we find at the end of the Gospel of Mark is simply a response to what was thought by early Christians to have already happened to Paul toward the end of Acts. If you remember, Paul wasn't "looking" to challenge a venomous snake, quite unlike various Pentecostal snake-handlers who do (and sometimes die).

 

[Albion]

You've just made my point, unless of course I didn't make my point clear enough. Regardless of where a person's views conclude, those views developed in response to the sources that were encountered.

Well, that IS NOT what you wrote, so I think we can agree that it's true you didn't make your point.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Well, that IS NOT what you wrote, so I think we can agree that it's true you didn't make your point.

What was it that you thought I 'actually' said? I definitely wasn't being cynical, just descriptive.

...it's funny that you thought I was being cynical.

 

[Albion]

What was it that you thought I 'actually' said? I definitely wasn't being cynical, just descriptive.

I don't know what the mystery is. After all, I quoted you and it's still there in black and white.

Actually, our respective viewpoints are contingent on the books, articles, and/or videos we just happened to encounter, read, and possibly amalgamate into our preexisting assumptions. You have your set of sources and psychological predispositions, and I have mine; and we wonder why we've each reached some 'other' conclusion.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't know what the mystery is. After all, I quoted you and it's still there in black and white.

"Actually, our respective viewpoints are contingent on the books, articles, and/or videos we just happened to encounter, read, and possibly amalgamate into our preexisting assumptions. You have your set of sources and psychological predispositions, and I have mine; and we wonder why we've each reached some 'other' conclusion."

Let me articulate this a little differently. Here we go:

...our respective viewpoints mainly develop by being influenced formally and informally by various media that we just happen to encounter. Usually we amalgamate the new ideas with our preexisting assumptions, and sometimes we synthesize new conclusions. Each of us has our individual set of sources, as well as psychological predispositions; and we wonder why another person who disagrees with ourselves has reached some 'other' conclusion (for surely our set of sources got all the facts right, or so each of us thinks.)

Is the articulation above any clearer, Albion?

So, an example of this would be the fact that you are Anglican, while I am independent Christian. We have different ideas about the 'shape' of the Christian faith; we also very likely have encounter an almost entirely different set of sources (other that the Bible itself, of course). Those sources could originate from any influential person or be a media product made by yet another person, etc.

Please keep in mind that all of this was originally directed to Cearbhall, as she is atheist, and I was merely attempting to shape up the lines of her thinking.

 

[JacobLaw]

Haha

Well now you know. Without the bible we all die, with it we live.