Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 68100	2006-04-17 06:29:00	Religion in politics	rob_on_guitar (4196)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
447010	2006-04-25 13:42:00	Every wise parent lets their kids 'get on with it". Would you prefer God to control every action you take? Or would you prefer free will? Free will to prosper as well as to stuff up? Both Big Bang and Evolution are theories. Neither has been PROVEN! FACT! There is an element of faith required in believing either of them. Faith based belief.... hmmm... isn't that religion??? unfortunately, what we prefer and what we get are not always the same. we do seem to have free will to prosper and stuff up. but individuals do claim god was responsible for their actions, both when they prosper and stuff up. evolution and big bang are theories derived from observations. i consider the observations as pretty solid proofs that everyone can see. i dont consider a book as true with "because i said so" as proof. i could rant on about said observations, but i dont think pc world would appreciate a several MB post containing ALOT of writings about physics, astronomy, time, genetics, biology and paeleontology. i doubt anyone would like to read all that. if you (reader) would like to, just gooogle it or go to a library.	motorbyclist (188)
447011	2006-04-25 13:46:00	but god's existence, again, is irrelevant. the discussion is about RELIGION is politics, and sofar noone has really said "yes, thats a good idea" although i suppose it is a democracy and in therefore should be allowed to happen, but religions have a habit of discrimination. there could be a "non-scientologist tax" or "mandatory almighty slug worship"	motorbyclist (188)
447012	2006-04-25 14:33:00	but individuals do claim god was responsible for their actions, both when they prosper and stuff up. But individuals can hardly be said to be organised religion. evolution and big bang are theories derived from observations. i consider the observations as pretty solid proofs that everyone can see. Still only theory when all said and done - therefore faith based.	Standing_Amazed (7841)
447013	2006-04-25 20:57:00	................. Still only theory when all said and done - therefore faith based. No, quite the opposite to faith, this illustrates the difference between science and religion. Science uses hypothesis, which is then queried and tested via observations, maths, and scientific reasoning based on the scientific method, and, can be changed to fit the latest findings. Science is not static, unlike most religions. Faith based religion is queried or doubted at ones peril, you could be burned as an heretic, or beheaded by Muslim extremists :)	Terry Porritt (14)
447014	2006-04-25 22:18:00	the discussion is about RELIGION in politics, and sofar no-one has really said "yes, thats a good idea" It's a bit like Communism - a fine idea but no good once fallible people try to run it. If a religious state practised open tolerance towards all citizens and had neutral laws, then it could work. I've already pointed to Israel as a working example. But IMHO the answer is "NO".	Winston001 (3612)
447015	2006-04-26 00:21:00	Before I can whether Religion in Politics is a good idea or not, we must first define what is meant by the word 'Religion'! Jesus came to abolish the religious practices of His day, he spoke out scathingly against the rites, rituals and practices of the religious (who were also policitical) leaders of the day! The 'Temple' model (still pursued today by most 'churches') was replaced by Jesus who gave/gives direct access to (and reconciliation with) God without the need for 'religious practices, temples (church buildings) and Preists' . The Bible does not instruct Christians to become involved in Politics per se, however all Christians are instructed to live like Christ did (speaking out against injustice, compassionately helping the poor and needy, challenging anything 'false' in the teachers and (political) leaders or the day) . Christ lived selflessly and was a pacifist, He does not support Christians killing others at any time, including war time . He does not instruct Christians to 'tithe' (10% by compulsion) to their local church (temple) . Jesus was radically outspoken against selfishness therefore not popular (then or now) . To summarise, Religion in Politics - NO, followers of Jesus Christ's true teachings as Politicians - YES . Is this clear enough?	Clubvw (4586)
447016	2006-04-26 02:05:00	Good post except that it presumes the religion is Christianity. Any Hindus or Moslems reading this must feel rather abandoned. Anyway, I might as well post this question. I don't have a problem with the concept of God and modern science co-existing. I believe that many of the biblical miracles are explicable by science. Except for the Resurrection of Christ. I just cannot see how the laws of entropy can be reversed. When death occurs, chemical changes take place within the body which are essentially one-way. Anyone have any scientific thoughts?	Winston001 (3612)
447017	2006-04-26 02:29:00	Except for the Resurrection of Christ . I just cannot see how the laws of entropy can be reversed . When death occurs, chemical changes take place within the body which are essentially one-way . Anyone have any scientific thoughts? The simple and obvious answer to that is that the resurrection of Christ is simply a myth, it never happened . In fact, what proof is there (outside the Bible, which is no proof) that an individual person named Jesus Christ ever existed at all? My view is that the character of Christ is the embodiment of writings by a number of people to formulate the Christian belief system .	Mackin_NZ (6958)
447018	2006-04-26 02:36:00	There are any number of unanswerable, uncomfortable questions a person can ask, but the first one, the question from which all other questions are descended, is "Why is there an 'is'?" The following web page may have the scientific answer, and suggest at least part of the scientific answer to your question at the same time... www.geraldschroeder.com Guaranteed to make you think! This is wandering from the topic of this discussion thread a little, so will be my last post for this thread at least. Maybe someone could start a new one not related to Politics?!	Clubvw (4586)
447019	2006-04-26 06:27:00	There are any number of unanswerable, uncomfortable questions a person can ask, but the first one, the question from which all other questions are descended, is "Why is there an 'is'?" The following web page may have the scientific answer, and suggest at least part of the scientific answer to your question at the same time... www.geraldschroeder.com Guaranteed to make you think! This is wandering from the topic of this discussion thread a little, so will be my last post for this thread at least. Maybe someone could start a new one not related to Politics?! i already knew that matter was energy, but it was a worthy read nontheless. the problem with attributing existence to a god or other metaphysical cause, is what created that god/metaphysical cause? and so on, in definetly. at present we cannot prove either. i might add that scientists/physists currenty admit that, at present, there is no way of finding what the universe was like before the big bang. so they refer to the big bang as the start of time as we cannot tell how far before then time began. but is it not entirely possible, that time has no start or end? perhaps it goes on infinitely in both directions. one theory is that if everything condenses into a single point in a big crush, then goes bang then crunch, and everything is the same thing, energy, should this universe be identical to the last? determinism is the idea that if we had a big computer and all the necessesary info, we could run a computer simulation of the universe and it would lead to here, and then the future. so how do we have free will? well, we dont then. so is all this doomed to happen? my "free" will seems to be locked into only making one decision, no random probability involved. (also, would the computer not hang in a loop while calculating its own creation of its own creaton ad infinitum? you would have to find all the exact details of everything at a point in the future to tell the future, but it could still find out the previous lotto numbers lol) further digressing, more into philosophy now, how do we know we exist? a greek philosopher (his name escapes me) went crazy to find this. he first disbeleived everything his senses told him. then he found all he knew to exist was his thoughts. and thus the famous line: "I think therefore I am." however, i know i exist. i may be an AI computer entity in a matrix type scenario. i may be all that exists, and all you (or for you, everyone else) may all just be part of your imagination... you could be in a coma in a hospital bed. you could be dead. all one can be sure of is their own existence. (not their body, but their concious mind. a soul perhaps, but maybe not metaphysical, i/you could be a part of the aforementioned computer simulation.) man, that was alot longer than intended, even after shortening it. perhaps a different thread is in order. i agree with Clubvw, religion in politics no, but morally perfect politicians, yes. just like communism. (and i expect someone will try to disagree without reading it twice and actually thinking about it. i didnt say determinism was right, but "i think therefore i am" is true in my mind)	motorbyclist (188)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10