The Theist Sanctuary

Page 4 of 14 [ 223 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 14 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

06 Feb 2012, 6:14 pm

Moog wrote:

Sylkat wrote:

Dear Shrox, My understanding ( or view) of the 'graven image' reference is that this was to prevent the worshipping of images, or idols. At that time, many Israelites were influenced by the culture and religion of Egypt, and owned and carried idols, images, and charms which represented Egyptian gods. If an image is not in and of itself vulgar or anti-Christian, I don't
see the principle of the scriptures being violated.
Admittedly, this is my own personal viewpoint, but this is what I hope we can discuss with each other here, while respecting and accepting each others' views.

Sylkat

The shift from polytheism to monotheism needed a push.

I believe the shift was actually the opposite. Check this out, from ancient China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangdi

Quote:

The ruler of China in every Chinese dynasty would perform annual sacrificial rituals to Shangdi at the great Temple of Heaven in the imperial capital. During the ritual a completely healthy bull would be slaughtered and presented as an animal sacrifice to Shangdi. It is important to note that Shangdi is never represented with either images or idols. Instead, in the center building of the Temple of Heaven, in a structure called the "Imperial Vault of Heaven", a "spirit tablet" (神位, or shénwèi) inscribed with the name of Shangdi is stored on the throne, Huangtian Shangdi (皇天上帝). During an annual sacrifice, the emperor would carry these tablets to the north part of the Temple of Heaven, a place called the "Prayer Hall For Good Harvests", and place them on that throne.[11]

Sound familiar?

As far as graven images, idols, etc. There's a more modern day (as in AD) debate over it, called iconoclasm. Basically, the early church went through debates of whether or not icons, and/or statues should be allowed in the churches. Either of Christ, Mary, saints, etc. There's been various "states" of the debate. Basically, the argument for them was, remember in the Old Testament, with the temple, there was images of the angels, etc. One of the kings (I forget who) actually destroyed them, because people were worshipping them. The same trends happened in Christianity, too, and I think at the second Council of Nicea, the icons were reaffirmed. Basically, the benefit of having images of stuff outweighed the really small risk of people turning them into idols. But, if you're interested in the debate on the subject, just google "Iconoclast" or just read up on Christian icons, and lots of stuff there.

Oddly, Islam is the only religion that's having a serious debate over that issue. The really hardline Islamists don't believe in television, pictures, etc, and especially of depictions of the prophets, under the auspice that it's idol worship. But, their big problem is...real life.

Last edited by 1000Knives on 06 Feb 2012, 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

shrox
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

06 Feb 2012, 6:15 pm

Dear WP,

Sylkat is the best poster ever!

shrox
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

06 Feb 2012, 6:18 pm

1000Knives wrote:

Moog wrote:

Sylkat wrote:

The shift from polytheism to monotheism needed a push.

I believe the shift was actually the opposite. Check this out, from ancient China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangdi

Quote:

Sound familiar?

As far as graven images, idols, etc. There's a more modern day (as in AD) debate over it, called iconoclasm. Basically, the early church went through debates of whether or not icons, and/or statues should be allowed in the churches. Either of Christ, Mary, saints, etc. There's been various "states" of the debate. Basically, the argument for them was, remember in the Old Testament, with the temple, there was images of the angels, etc. One of the kings (I forget who) actually destroyed them, because people were worshipping them. The same trends happened in Christianity, too, and I think at the second ecumenical council, the icons were reaffirmed. Basically, the benefit of having images of stuff outweighed the really small risk of people turning them into idols. But, if you're interested in the debate on the subject, just google "Iconoclast" or just read up on Christian icons, and lots of stuff there.

Oddly, Islam is the only religion that's having a serious debate over that issue. The really hardline Islamists don't believe in television, pictures, etc, and especially of depictions of the prophets, under the auspice that it's idol worship. But, their big problem is...real life.

I foster a small belief that many religions are echos somewhat of the coming truth.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,961
Location:

06 Feb 2012, 6:24 pm

shrox wrote:

Fnord wrote:

artrat wrote:

... I would like to discuss my faith without being judged and insulted ...

Then I suggest that you preface all of your faith-based religious claims with "I believe..." or "My opinion is..." or even "I assume ..." and no one will have any reason for attacking you for stating an invalid claim as factual.

Maybe you could try to stop policing people's expressions of things that are difficult to express in mere words.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

shrox wrote:

Apparently the TITLE of the thread is beyond your ability to comprehend.

Not at all. Being a Theist, I'm free to post here. It's just that my way of expressing Theism is different from most.

It does not say, "The Everyone Except Fnord Sanctuary", after all. Nor does it say, "The Theists Who All Believe The Same Way Sanctuary", either.

Henbane
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,071
Location: UK

06 Feb 2012, 6:35 pm

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,961
Location:

06 Feb 2012, 6:43 pm

Henbane wrote:

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

While my concept of God is derived from the Judeo-Christian teachings, it diverges where ignorance of scientific principles leads to the belief in "signs, miracles, and wonders", and where the Bible contradicts itself - if any two Bible passages are in conflict, then they are both equally invalid.

For that matter, I am no longer as certain that the Bible is an accurate account as I was when I was an impressionable child.

Henbane
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,071
Location: UK

06 Feb 2012, 6:46 pm

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

So do you assign yourself a label? Like Christian? Monotheist? Atheist? Something else?

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,961
Location:

06 Feb 2012, 6:48 pm

Henbane wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

While my concept of God is derived from the Judeo-Christian teachings, it diverges where ignorance of scientific principles leads to the belief in "signs, miracles, and wonders", and where the Bible contradicts itself - if any two Bible passages are in conflict, then they are both equally invalid. For that matter, I am no longer as certain that the Bible is an accurate account as I was when I was an impressionable child.

So do you assign yourself a label? Like Christian? Monotheist? Atheist? Something else?

"Metasyntactic Variable" seems to cover it.

ASMJT
Deinonychus

Joined: 21 Jan 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: Wherever we decide to go...

06 Feb 2012, 6:50 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0Amt30_QVQ[/youtube]

_________________
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

Henbane
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,071
Location: UK

06 Feb 2012, 6:59 pm

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

While my concept of God is derived from the Judeo-Christian teachings, it diverges where ignorance of scientific principles leads to the belief in "signs, miracles, and wonders", and where the Bible contradicts itself - if any two Bible passages are in conflict, then they are both equally invalid. For that matter, I am no longer as certain that the Bible is an accurate account as I was when I was an impressionable child.

So do you assign yourself a label? Like Christian? Monotheist? Atheist? Something else?

"Metasyntactic Variable" seems to cover it.

Could you explain that term to me in words a slightly stupid person could understand please. I looked it up, and it made no sense.

Do you believe in a god or gods? As in a being that caused the universe to come into existence? Or would that come under 'miracles'?

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,961
Location:

06 Feb 2012, 7:20 pm

Henbane wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Henbane wrote:

What kind of theist are you Fnord?

While my concept of God is derived from the Judeo-Christian teachings, it diverges where ignorance of scientific principles leads to the belief in "signs, miracles, and wonders", and where the Bible contradicts itself - if any two Bible passages are in conflict, then they are both equally invalid. For that matter, I am no longer as certain that the Bible is an accurate account as I was when I was an impressionable child.

So do you assign yourself a label? Like Christian? Monotheist? Atheist? Something else?

"Metasyntactic Variable" seems to cover it.

Could you explain that term to me in words a slightly stupid person could understand please. I looked it up, and it made no sense.

A metasyntactic variable is a word that is a variable for other words - a euphemism. Something that exists to represent something else.

Henbane wrote:

Do you believe in a god or gods? As in a being that caused the universe to come into existence? Or would that come under 'miracles'?

"I believe in Supreme Being, whom I call 'God'" is all the statement of faith that I need. Anything else is religion, theology, or both - areas of study and expression that are based on assumptions, erroneous data, fallacious reasoning, and outright lies.

Or, to put it graphically (and may the mods forgive me)

[Mods or gods Fnord? Well you seem to realise this is against the rules. Keep it out of the kids areas, ta]

MrXxx
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 May 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,760
Location: New England

06 Feb 2012, 7:37 pm

I've found in practice that the Internet in general is a terrible place to discuss my beliefs. Though I never "shove it down" anyone's throat, it is what I believe.

Because it is what I believe, it is reality to me (else I wouldn't believe it ~ it would be nothing more than a theory to me). But it isn't a theory to me. It's reality. It's the way things are.

As such, I find it disingenuous to state it as only "what I believe" leaving the possibility that it is only what I believe, and not the way things are. In other words, if it is only what I believe, and I state it as such, I allow for the possibility that what I believe is incorrect. That said, if I believe it could be incorrect, there isn't much point in believing it is fact, and I may has well have no faith at all.

Therefore, if I AM to speak what I believe, and I truly believe it is fact, I am going to state it as fact, not with a "disclaimer" attached just in case others may not agree with it.

THAT said, this is precisely why I don't get involved with explaining what I believe, because every time I do, the discussion invariably goes off on a tangent about whether what I believe is just an opinion. For me to state it is just an opinion invalidates the truth. The truth is, I don't believe it is just my opinion, and because I don't, I will not state that it is, nor will I bother stating anything in detail about it on the Internet (not anymore anyway ~ I have in the past, and have learned my lesson), because nothing good ever comes of it. Ever.

That's a discussion best held in person. Though even that doesn't always go so well, it's far less likely to be totally non-productive.

So this is why I never discuss religion, politics or philosophy on forums anymore. Because there's always going to be somebody who insists that I shouldn't talk about them in the manner I find is the only way I can in good conscience.

_________________
I'm not likely to be around much longer. As before when I first signed up here years ago, I'm finding that after a long hiatus, and after only a few days back on here, I'm spending way too much time here again already. So I'm requesting my account be locked, banned or whatever. It's just time. Until then, well, I dunno...

Sylkat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Sep 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,425

06 Feb 2012, 8:06 pm

Dear Theist Sanctuarians,

Wow! Thank you, Shrox, what a compliment! What did I do?

Fnord, I think you are a Theist, but due to your usual hesitancy in expressing yourself, I'm only guessing...you need to work on your shyness!

MrXxx, Your post is perfectly stated and I concur on principle. For me, to be presented with sincere beliefs which radically contradict my own, I feel that I owe everyone the acceptance I want extended to me. My perfect example would be wearing a headscarf (hijab?) if I ever could go to a historical Islamic site. My beliefs would not be altered, but I would show my respect for the PEOPLE who revere the significance of their holy place. However, I would respect any Christian woman who would sacrifice the opportunity to enter and tour a beautiful architectural treasure because she could not enter without a scarf. If she felt strongly that she would betray her faith, then her choice would be correct for her.

1000Knives, Thank you so, so much for the Information about the Chinese beliefs....I've got some serious Googling to do!,

Dear Theist Sanctuarians, can anyone remember the name of that saying I quoted? It also said'You are a child of the universe and you have a right to be here'

Thanks in advance,
Sylkat

Sylkat

Cornflake
Administrator

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 73,680
Location: Over there

06 Feb 2012, 8:38 pm

Sylkat wrote:

can anyone remember the name of that saying I quoted? It also said'You are a child of the universe and you have a right to be here'

That would be "The Desiderata", I think:

Quote:

Go placidly amidst the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit. If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain or bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.

Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs; for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals; and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself. Especially, do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.

Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here.

And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul. With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful.
Strive to be happy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desiderata

_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.

Moog
Veteran
Veteran