What unites religion? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-26-2005, 09:48 PM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Thanks for the honest answer.
You're very respectful toward me, even though we don't agree on everything. I like that.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 09:55 PM   #47
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 03:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


You're very respectful toward me, even though we don't agree on everything. I like that.
I honestly respect anyone who has such strong convictions. You have very strong convictions in Christ, and I admire that.

I wasn't raised Christian. I became Christian at an early age though, I rejected it for awhile due to people telling me I was going to hell no matter what if I was gay. But later reconciled my differences.

But thank you.
__________________

__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 04-26-2005, 09:56 PM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Thanks, Do!
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 04:10 AM   #49
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Jesus, as we all know, was a Jew. His message was to the Jews, and under the leading of the Holy Spirit, his disciples and apostles extended that message to teh Gentiles. On a human level, when Christ walked the earth, Jesus accepted everyone, as he had love for all his fellow humans. On a spiritual level, Jesus loves everyone, and accepts into salvation anyone who places their belief in him.

Jesus wasn't a relativist in the way I am talking about relativism. He said "I am the way, the truth and the life" and "no one comes to the father but by me". Those are pretty absolute statements that leave no room for other religions to be correct. Other religions may have some truthful beliefs, but Jesus Christ said that a belief in him was necessary for eternal life. According to Jesus, he himself is the ultimate truth.
cool...if you believe they wrote everything down Jesus said at the time he said it......

Unfortunately, being a relativist like Christ, who felt free to look at the Law from a different angle.....I do not buy it. I understand your position.

But, clearly we disagree.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 04:50 AM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

I do, but I fail to see how being an absolutist and believing in free will are exclusive of each other.
See your own words on page 2......

"Relativism tells people to do what they want"

people doing what they want = free will

__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 04:52 AM   #51
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:28 PM
I really like free will, a direct concequence of the fundamental laws of the universe on matter and energy treated with excessive ammounts of time.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 06:51 AM   #52
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LivLuvAndBootlegMusic


See your own words on page 2......

"Relativism tells people to do what they want"

people doing what they want = free will


i think the problem is that 80s has a poor understanding of what relativism is.

i'm a big old relativist, and yet i don't do what i want when i want because it feels good. neither does any person with any modicum of personal responsibility. but it also isn't convenient for the absolutists to see people living healthy, responsible, purpose-driven lives that are entirely secular in nature as it reduces, if not outright refutes, the usefullness of religion.

and to answer the question posed by the thread: religions across the world are united by 1) fear, and 2) sneaking suspicion that flesh cannot be all we are.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 07:13 AM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LivLuvAndBootlegMusic


See your own words on page 2......

"Relativism tells people to do what they want"

people doing what they want = free will

Let me rephrase that, as I see now that it doesn't convey what I intended

"Relativism tells people that it's morally okay to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt"
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 07:16 AM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



i think the problem is that 80s has a poor understanding of what relativism is.
No, Irvine, I don't. LivLuv misunderstood me, and so I rephrased what I was saying.

Here is the dictionary.com definition of relaivism, which is basically what I've been talking about this entire thread.

A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 07:20 AM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,255
Local Time: 03:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
"Relativism tells people that it's morally okay to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt"
And I personally would agree with that idea. As long as nobody's being physically harmed (emotions are a different story, as not everyone reacts the same way emotionally to something, whereas everyone who gets beat up or something will feel pain) or killed, why exactly shouldn't they be allowed to do whatever they wish?

I mean, if you don't agree with that idea, that's fine-your opinion and all that. I'm just curious as to why you don't agree with it, is all.

Something I definitely agree with is this post here:

Quote:
Originally posted by indra
I'm an agnostic, so I'm not really coming from a particular religion, but it seems to me that any god worth his/her/it's salt would be able to be whatever each culture/peoples needs to be able to "find" that god. Some people find the Christian god most palatable, others find the Hindu or Muslim (or one of many other religions) version works best.

I know that idea garners a lot of resistance (trust me I quickly found that out when I put it forth once before ), but it makes a lot of sense to me. Why would a god make such a wide variety of people on this earth and then force them to all believe in one version of god? Do you honestly believe a GOD couldn't be powerful enough to manifest in various forms so that each of it's peoples could be comfortable with that god?
Yes. My thoughts exactly . I'm not an agnostic like you, as I personally do believe in a higher being of some kind, but regardless, I totally agree with this idea .

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 08:13 AM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel


And I personally would agree with that idea. As long as nobody's being physically harmed (emotions are a different story, as not everyone reacts the same way emotionally to something, whereas everyone who gets beat up or something will feel pain) or killed, why exactly shouldn't they be allowed to do whatever they wish?

I mean, if you don't agree with that idea, that's fine-your opinion and all that. I'm just curious as to why you don't agree with it, is all.
That's where my absolutism comes in. I believe that certain moral standards were passed down by God based on his Holy nature, and that these standards are not dependent on human circumstances at all.

Most of the things that God said are sins are sins that will necessarily hurt others: murder, theft, etc.

But some are sins that won't necessarily hurt others, such as fornication, envy, lust. These are sins because they are against God's holy nature. In the case of fornication, God created sex as a special committment that binds people together as one, and is intended for married couples only.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 08:28 AM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

No, Irvine, I don't. LivLuv misunderstood me, and so I rephrased what I was saying.
No, I didn't misunderstand you, we just have totally different definitions of free will. I believe in the absolute sovereignty of God. Therefore, free will cannot exist because it means that God is not sovereign. But, like I said, we do have different definitions of what free will is, so my idea doesn't necessarily conflict with yours. "Free will" to me not the same thing as the freedom to make one's own choices.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 09:17 AM   #58
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.


Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
"Relativism tells people that it's morally okay to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt"




you don't see the huge leap you're making between these two statements?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 09:29 AM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
"Relativism tells people that it's morally okay to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt"




you don't see the huge leap you're making between these two statements?
"Relativism tells people that it's morally okay to do whatever they want as long as no one is hurt" is a statement of a result of relativism, not the definition, and i never defined it in such a way. Did you not read this:

"My absolutist beliefs tell me that there is only one correct religion or there is no correct religion. I'm not a relativist at all."

or this:

"I'm not sure that we're all on the same page, as far as relativism goes. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with veils, sideburns or even free will. When I talk about relativism, I'm talking about the belief that there are "many roads to God" and "all religions are the same" and all that. In my mind, all religions can't be right, because they contradict each other; Christianity says that Christ is the only way to the father, and Islam says that is not true. How can they both be right?"

or this:

"Two opposites can not both be true. One or both must be wrong."

Every single one of those quotes deals with the definition of relativism

"A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them"
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 10:02 AM   #60
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:28 AM
you're working from a set of assumptions that do not apply to most understandings of what relativism is, especially in a philosophical context.

thus, you cannot extrapolate the idea that anyone can do whatever they want so long as it hurts no one from the dictionary meaning of realtivism, and it also follows that all of the above statements you make are predicated upon a misunderstanding of what relativism actually is. you've defined it in a very, very narrow context, and have used that to create a specific definition of what you want relativism to mean. it's a definition of convenience, not of actual understanding.

so, what is relativism? at it's core, it's defined against objectivity, the idea that something can be understood in the way that science can understand something. in a social science context, it simply cannot. what relativism does is take into account the effect that culture, history, place, and time have upon understandings of such words as, say, "free will" "absolutism" or whatever else. for example, we hold people responsible for their actions, both morally and legally. this practice seems justified as long as people are free to make the choices that they do. but which criteria must a decision meet in order to qualify as free? clearly, a free decision must not be the result of external coercion, but must the decision also be free from any outside influence at all? we are all deeply influenced by external factors ranging from the general laws of nature to specific features of our genetic endowment and social environment (including religion, political ideology, and advertising). these affect not only our particular choices but also, more fundamentally, what we value. since it is undeniable that we are pervasively influenced by such outside forces, the real question relativism poses, is whether, and how, objective understanding is possible amidst all of these influences. the answer, generally, is "it isn't possible."
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com