Freethinker Sunday Sermonette: Divine preference

and another God in another country my punish them, if the _do_ support the program. So what ?
Sounds like the usual "God will punish you when you are naughty" which parents tell to their children.

Remind me which Sura of the Koran mandates support for state nuclear power generation.

Or maybe Ayatollahs have a teaching magisterium, like the Pope - it's their job to tell you what sacred book really mean.

Since he seems to be going a little off-piste, I look forward to the Ayatollah settling the vexed matter of copper versus plastic pipes for your plumbing.

Joan Baez' rendition of Dylan's With God On Our Side sends chills up and down my spine. "If God is on our side He'll stop the next war."

Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be a God to stop the next war, to stop destruction of the environment, fouling of the air, drying of fresh water or any other tragedy of the commons, so it seems war has its place.

Why would god even desire to stop the next war?

Is war not a creation of god?

Moreover, why would heaven be any different?

Would not heaven, under god's masterful generalship, offer never ending war?

We humans made gods not the other way around. Being our creations why shouldn't they say whatever we want them to say as holy justification for the unholy deeds we contemplate and do. Verbal atheists like Dawkins and our own Revere frequently come under attack for pointing out the problems with religion. If religion just stayed on as peaceful delusions, denials of death, and encouragement to treating other humans well I am sure Revere would have no need for his sermonettes. But relgion is far more often used to oppress, control and justify inhumanity of such a scale that it surely dwarfs coveting your neighbors wife. Keep up the good work Revere

It's interesting how we conveniently forget that Iran's nuclear program was started by the Shah, with the blessing and support of the United States. Khomeini shut down the Shah's nuclear program in 1979 because he believed it was contrary to Islamic law. The program was only resurrected after his death.

Lewis says: Moreover, why would heaven be any different?
------------------------------------------------

Because of evolution, Lewis.

Evolution tells us that now is different from the past. And the future will be different from now. Do you believe that when Darwin was documenting 'The Origin of Species'; his faith was as strong as a bishop? Was his own confession.

When our society evolves from modernity towards post-modernity; our epistemological methodology has to presuppose broader rationality in order that we can be able to deal with new frontier of knowledge- diversity, heterogeneity and incommensurability.

I suppose that the need of theological reasoning is not necessary to fill this gap, rather it will play its lost role of the coherence of all knowledges and disciplines. The unique dimension of meaning, ethical values and religious concern would be re-discovered again in theology. How terrible that we lose the constant spiritual transformation from keying in theological coherence.

My latest reading from Princeton Seminary's publications: some theologians recommend Evolutionary Epistemology to orchestrate the reasoning by hypothetical realism. I personally find that it is very interesting. It indeed helps us to distinguish the illusory god from God of ultimate reality. The full picture of reality does include The Creator ( whatever you like to call the Name.)

The illusory god is the god of relying on nuclear weapon and any earthly might to replace the obedience to the ultimate reality.

The biblical faith in God by generations of prophetic message has witnessed the final destruction of illusory god.

Therefore, all nations on the earth have to listen carefully. The living God will not let the injustice prevail long.

The suffered voice cried from Burma, God listens and is active in ruling the new world. So do the tears of Tien-an Meng Square's victims reach to God. He Himself will erase the tears one day. His power is over the power of any nations on the earth.

God is love and also is just. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. "Without a proper understanding of God, human are not able to lead successful lives." - by Tomas Hacil

The illusory god is the god of relying on nuclear weapon and any earthly might to replace the obedience to the ultimate reality.

The biblical faith in God by generations of prophetic message has witnessed the final destruction of illusory god by God.

Therefore, all nations on the earth have to listen carefully. The living God will not let the injustice prevail long.

The suffered voice cried from Burma, God listens and is active in ruling the new world. So do the tears of Tien-an Meng Square's victims reach to God. He Himself will erase the tears one day. His power is over the power of any nations on the earth.

God is love and at the same time is just. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Tomas Hancil (Princeton's theologian) said, "Without a proper understanding of God, human are not able to lead successful lives."

Paiwan you say "The living God will not let the injustice prevail long."
The living God if he/she/it exists has let injustice roll down like an avalanche for thousands of years. You sentence implies that the living God can end injustice when this entity so chooses. Therefore every minute this living God holds back, hesitates, refuses to act this living God is responsible for the injustice that is occurring.
Its real simple. If I were given a switch and told I could press it any time I wanted, but for every minute I did not another child would be raped, another prisoner tortured, another human would hack out their lungs with Avian influenza and I hestitated even a second, I would become responsible for all that happened in that time frame that I failed to act. Its real simple. No theologians needed. If the living God will not let injustice prevail long, it implies that the living God had to power to stop injustice. Every moment the living God does not act, the living God in essence is acting to allow injustice to continue. Inaction where action is possible is a form of action. Either the living God is monstrous or the living God is impotent.

pawain you quoted Tomas Hancil (Princeton's theologian) said, "Without a proper understanding of God, human are not able to lead successful lives."

Try thinking for yourself instead of letting others who manage to sound erudite (but are not) thinking for you. How do you explain revere in light of this quote. From what I can tell revere has had a successful life. If that is so, either the statement is false OR the proper understanding of god is non-belief in god.

K: You are right in many ways: let me point them out. The first point of very creationist's argument; the thing is fixed and static from the beginning until now, that kind of god is dead. Second, I hope that you are not offended for my speculation of your reasoning; you are against your religious upbringing which has been more or less fundamentalism- literal interpretation of bible, or stereotypic 'church' like what you depicted your grandma. IMHO, you are right in this struggle and rebellion. Honest to say, I have admired for your critical intelligence.

Your strong sense of justice towards disadvantaged people and marginalized profession to me are wonderful. I have learned from you, indeed.

You must have spent lots effort in thinking in this area. To me, it is a part of proper understanding of God ( I understand you are showing your fist, but let me use the systematic term of my own.) So, overall you have reasonable success in your life- this has been counted by a part of your proper understanding of G.( This time, please do not show your f.)

Perhaps, what I can say a little bit is you need to expand your reasoning more in coherence of the whole system. Some atheists are successful in expanding their reasoning in coherence without adopting the term God, they are bold enough, their decisions. Nevertheless, not every atheist is successful in achieving this endeavor, and it implies that they may live in indecently just like what you are criticizing the religious people.

I am thinking a new analogue for atheism for the justification of theism. Divorce and get married both are justifying marriage.

So, you may say, "I have a tall building which I am not fond of so much. Whether I like to keep it for my whole life, or I need to renovate this building, or demolish it and re-build this building with my latest master plan and dream." This analogue of this building is religion background, hope that you understand.

For some people who have faith in God, they are able to either demolish the building or renovate it. Perhaps, they get better chance to build a gorgeous building. But not every one who claims that they are religious are able to do this, because of their rigidity and bigotry in an illusory god, they are afraid of any change and risk.

While the reality is that everything has been evolving; from simple to complicate, from chaos to order and organization. It has been changing.

You may say, "I agree with the mechanical path of evolution and its rationality, but only scientifically."

Even, your belief is like the above, it is a part of faith already. What Evolutionary Epidemiology tries to elaborate is a coherent expression of this process. For human beings, we can say that, "God is the source, the guide and the goal of evolution."

I hope that the above can help your reasoning to establish your broader coherence. :-)

Paiwan, I am not a frustrated child of a fundamentalist upbringing. I was raised Lutheran but in the more liberal strains. I have not been particularly oppressed by my religious upbringing. In fact I was very much at home in the church for a long time. I think well of the stories and saying put in the mythical Jesus' mouth but they are the same or similar to those put in the mouth's of other saviors.

Evolution is not nice. Replicators, after using up scarce resources turn on each other for energy and minerals. Wolves eat baby rabbits as do their own mommas in a drought year. Lots of eating of other living things going on, much of it of living feeling things that don't want to be eaten. But evolution being mindless cannot be blamed. Saying God is the source, the guide and the goal of evolution is no solutions Paiwan. That means that God, for whatever goals, has set in motion and guided the deaths of trillions of feeling and billions of feeling and self aware creatures. All these creatures didn't get asked if they wanted to be part of God's plan to use evolution to accomplish some end. They just got to suffer for his plan. A sacrifice of one son hardly justifies God for all the human and animal sacrifices that he has ruled over. 150,000 humans die today who didn't even get asked if they wanted to be born, much less be born and die so God could evolve living creatures. If God has somewhere he wants to get life to, he should just use his power to make it happen without all this pain and death.

It may be that there is such a God but I find such a god to be evil. I don't disbelieve in God - I am agnostic on that matter. I just know that a powerful God who acts in human affairs is proven by the facts on the ground to be evil. You can have that God and continue your valiant efforts to justify him. Frankly I find the contortions one must go through to make God good quite amusing.

It's pretty much always sunny in Western Australia -- kinda like California:*) Can a "freethinker" believe in the supernatural concept of God (I imagine an NRG coherency with no temporal boundaries moving back 'n' forth across the multiverse)!?!

Does the question really matter to a lonely (but not) gay male aged 39 imagining -- within the limits of a human intellect -- his probable future. A future in which theocratic-political dogma (subject of posting) appears silly in post-transgenic-pandemic retrospect.

I have no doubts to the mechanical how of transgenic viral evolution but, where's the definitive "proof" I hear Revere, et al, asking... Well, let's squizz our contemp society where "chemical highs" are peddled to ward off depression, etc. I view SSRIs much the same way as genetically modified food -- the BIG BOYS with all the money say the products are completly safe and healthy for you, but...!?!

So, back to the probable future... If I actually get to survive the particular transgenic viral strain of AI (probably Indonesian) which will infect West Oz at some point, how do I picture my days!?! I know there will be horror -- I've known that for a decade -- so I'll get out there and do what I can, but... Defrag the mind!?! My solar battery charger will power (for a while) my walkie -- I'll have the poetry of music...

I watched Joan Baez's rendition of Dylan's "With God On Our Side"... Excerpt: "The reason for fighting I never got straight But I learned to accept it Accept it with pride..."

There's an answer to the power of war -- if gives the paricipants a "natural high", so why a need for SSRIs when God gives the trippy experience of listening to The Dandy Warhols' "The Last High (2003)" on an ocean sand dune, scripted like a Stephen King short story!?!

Jonathon: As you know from my posts, the faith in God is very important to me. So, if you allow me to use my language; God loves you unconditionally and individually. Many friends here and I love you also.

To me, God's love is my survival. Back to your second topic the probable future; use my language again; an exalting future is waiting for you to realize. So, keep yourself well and stretch.:-)

K: I would like to say the same to you. Please don't show your F. to me. I will learn some technology of agnostic from you, I promise :-)

Paiwan, I wish God's love would help a little boy being sexually abused by a priest survive. I wish God's love would help a prisoner being tortured survive. I wish God's love would help someone starving in Darfur survive. I am glad your belief in God's love helps you emotionally survive (in the end none of us survive at least as humans walking on planet earth). Could you somehow get that God to attend to these others as well?

Belief in God has IMO done far more harm than good in the world and should be attacked. I don't mean to attack you personally, just the irrational and dangerous idea of a powerful god.

K: You can not deny that the love and glory of God have not been unfolding ceaselessly. All the facts that you depicted, Darfur, etc., reflected man's sinful nature and evil human society that I have not denied.

How do you know that God's salvation has not and is not active? Just the instance of your care of HIV patients, for the last two years, I have known HIV patients from World Vision's reports. It has happened that my partner serves as reporter for interviewing several cases. Many victims have continued to live with very good spirit and sometimes very touching. Yes, some donations initiated from World Vision USA have taken some lead, and World Vision Thailand therefore now could become a supporting office for Burma. The acceptance and love from others do play very important influences.

Your tone and viewpoint have implicitly judged them, I do don't see they serve well for them and for you.

I don't know how deep is your hatred for people who mentions the love of God. Have you have deep wounds hurt from them? Human beings are not God, you can not transference forever.:-) Can not forgive or what?

Paiwan, I certainly can deny that there is evidence of the love and glory of God. While the world looks beautiful on first glimpse to our eyes underneath is much suffering and death. I am wounded by what I see in the world. I am wounded by seeing babies starve. Innocent babies. Why do they have to suffer for the "sinful nature" of humans or are you going to pull out the theological trick that says that we are sinful at birth due to the sins of Adam and Eve?

At any rate, if God created us, he created us with the potential to sin and therefore is responsible for our sin not us and is responsible for the sins we perpetrate on each other because he lets it go on.

Do you care more for your idea of God than you do for other humans? Does it hurt you more for me to attack your idea of God than it does to know that innocent little girls and boys are being used as sex slaves, children are having arms and legs blown off in Iraq, babies are starving in Haiti and Darfur?

K: I wish that I can believe your reasons "innocent little girls and boys are being used as sex slaves, children are having arms and legs blown off in Iraq, babies are starving in Haiti and Darfur", because a person could not dilute his/her love so much.

Unless he/she is a person full of love, you know that to love is a kind of capability. I am not sure that you are the saint or the pretense, it is my problem to understand your reasons. I am sorry.

Life some how becomes so much less complicated when you give religion the flick. You see things as they really are.

One see's humanity for what it is; cruel, wonderful, insightful, devious, unkind, kind, loving, horrible, intelligent, avaricious, acquisitive, artistic etc. etc. etc

We are all co-existing with each other on a unique planet. Without the crutch of an imagined deity, you realise that you just have to live as best as you can in the society that you have been brought up in. You are born, you live, you die. It is up to the individual to live.

It is just that simple. Nothing else.

Paiwan,

You presume too much about other people and their belief systems.

You appear to presume, that because you believe in an imaginary deity, you have the right to label another person as a saint or the pretense.

The only thing that you need to understand, is this, just because you believe does not give you the right to try to change or convert another persons beliefs.

It just so simple. Live and let live.

Victoria, you said what I have been trying to say more simply. Without religion, stuff just is. Imagine a diety and you have someone to thank for the good stuff, but then you have to blame the diety for the bad stuff eh? Much simpler without a diety - plus you save an hour or two or more of church services.

I am no saint. I have stopped doing anything other than enriching the soil in my garden and being good to the people most close to me. But it truly annoys me that anyone creates a belief of a good God without checking to see if the fellow humans on this planet agree. Hardly a saint to just point out their plight and the fact that their plight does not speak of a good god. Just an observer who is not in denial. Not pretense either, just vision unobstructed by diety beliefs.

K,

I agree with you. All you can do is say that I choose not to believe. However, it is also incumbent upon us not to impose our beliefs on anyone else.

Those that choose to believe in a deity are within their rights to do so. Just as we choose to believe differently.

Live and let live.

Was wondering paiwan if you're Muslim or Buddhist?

It makes little difference however, it does assist in creating a greater understanding of your chosen lifestyle.

Lea: I had Presbyterian background, 50+ years, now attend Catholic mass, I live in a community mixed with major Buddhist and second major Muslim city (Phuket, Thailand). I tend to be ecumenical, perhaps similar to UCC (www.ucc.org ). But there is no UCC here, therefore I choose Catholic. What is yours?

Victoria / K: I assume that the dialogue in deeper level has some chaos, person like me sometimes lack of wit will offend people which I say sorry. As a poetry reads'" I only can give you what you take." For me, no encounter is accident, there is providence. Again, smell of religion :-) and for me, life is difficult. I wish life is as simple as Victoria's reasoning.

Give an example of Charles Darwin; he spent 5 years in Beagle trip, observation and look around, simple fact collection. His discovery of Evolution was originated from his study in Cambridge, partly from the thought which seeded in Natural Theology. So, it is paradoxical. Both (simple and hypothetical realism-my post above) are required if we desire the ascendance. It is my reasoning so far.

Paiwan,

It is just that simple! Other people choose to complicate their lives with religious dogma. I choose not to.

Live and let live.

No religious affiliation paiwan. I do believe in God though.
Let me say you appear to be sincere, loving, kind, and humble paiwan. Attributes everyone could use more of, including myself of course.

Lea: thank you for affirming me that I am sincere. I feel that you are, too.

K: We have three rounds of dialogues so far in this thread, pretty intensive this time. Goodness, six posts this week for exchanging idea with you. I appreciated the points that you brought to me. By the end of this dialogue, I would like you to read Joseph's story (Genesis:37-50). Take care.

Paiwan, I have read the Bible from front to back several times. I suggest you read Joshua and find out what kind of God you worship. Here is a god that orders the complete destruction of a peoples so HIS people can have the land. They are told to slay men, women, children. If this God exists he is NOT loveable.