(September 21, 2014 at 7:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: So... back in the real world, for anyone wishing to consider it with me, your imperfection is natural.

... aaaand so we come back to the idea of you worshiping a god who punishes us for the sinful human nature that he himself created.

Gee, that sounds just.

(September 21, 2014 at 7:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: To get away with that nonsense you'd have to think that humans were capable of perfection. A nice delusion if you can get it, and I'm very happy for you.

I'd settle for perfectly human, or if your prefer, humanely imperfect. The only thing we know for sure that is conscious in our way is humans. So whether we're perfect in the way some people imagine it, we're pretty special in being self aware, sapient, masters of symbolic language and all the rest. What is this obsession with perfection?

I don't worry about "perfection". I strongly suspect that word, like "nothing" and "supernatural" will turnout to have no referent. We don't actually have any examples of anything perfect in the sense you find us lacking. We don't know if it is possible or exists. But we exist and we know perfectly well that that is so. Perhaps we are the standard, the only standard for perfection. If I'm wrong, produce the specimen which exceeds us so that I can see for myself.

(September 21, 2014 at 7:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: So... back in the real world, for anyone wishing to consider it with me, your imperfection is natural. You may be elevated to live guilt free, even with your innate imperfections.

Really, fr0d0, who are you or anyone else to question our adequacy as a species? If you believe an infallible being created us, how do you square that? Built in obsolescence?

"Elevated to live guilt free"...uh huh..must be some of that christian "morality" I hear so much about. Thanks, I'll pass.

(September 23, 2014 at 10:47 pm)whateverist Wrote: Really, fr0d0, who are you or anyone else to question our adequacy as a species? If you believe an infallible being created us, how do you square that? Built in obsolescence?

I'm not questioning it. I'm accepting the reality as I see it, and as it's been seen by humanity before us. The guilt which holds us back... is a constant feature of the human psyche. All Christianity is doing here is dealing with a human issue. We as humans have a problem with what our natures lead us to do. Our thoughts and actions.

I don't understand how anyone can disagree with a greater good trumping a lesser suffering. So Rhythm, if your whole company of 7 billion people were all going to suffer extended pain and you could stop that by sacrificing yourself, you're saying you wouldn't do it, and you'd think that moral?

Seems to me like you're taking the most egotistical option.

We have no choice to stop the suffering of Christ. He did that of his own volition. A selfless act. I'm choosing to put him through the suffering by rebellion against him. I do that all the time.

(September 24, 2014 at 4:43 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I'm not questioning it. I'm accepting the reality as I see it, and as it's been seen by humanity before us. The guilt which holds us back... is a constant feature of the human psyche.

Not for all humans - psychopaths in particular lack the emotions of guilt and remorse.

(September 24, 2014 at 4:43 am)fr0d0 Wrote: All Christianity is doing here is dealing with a human issue. We as humans have a problem with what our natures lead us to do. Our thoughts and actions.

So, Christianity is "elevating" us by bringing us closer to psychopaths - yup, that sounds about right.

(September 23, 2014 at 1:24 pm)Michael B Wrote: Fair enough. But it seems to me you just are just meeting aggression with aggression, Rhythm. And that was exactly the cycle of violence that Jesus willingly and voluntarily stood in the middle of, replacing counter-aggression with peace, sacrifice and blessing.

But I don't expect us to have a common view on this, so I shall leave it there and indeed wish you peace +

I think you can try to do right by a divine being without preventing it from achieving its destiny. If you can prevent it from meeting the fate it's 'supposed' to meet, it isn't really divine, is it?

(September 24, 2014 at 4:43 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I don't understand how anyone can disagree with a greater good trumping a lesser suffering. So Rhythm, if your whole company of 7 billion people were all going to suffer extended pain and you could stop that by sacrificing yourself, you're saying you wouldn't do it, and you'd think that moral?

Whether or not I would do it won't change the moral status of those who would accept it, wish for it, or praise it as virtue. Your example, of course, ignores that their own inequity has led to such a situation - as per your religious narrative. Perhaps this eluded you, but it isn't jesus that I see as the villain in the vicarious scheme - it's you.

(you've shit on the very notion of self sacrifice with your example as a defense of your "elevation" to guilt free status....btw - yet another reason that your religion poisons everything it touches)

Yes I know you think it's me/ us. I spoke about it in my post so I can't see how you ignore that to point the finger at me. Like I said, all you seem to be able to focus on is the egotistical human position.

I don't get a choice in that do I? If I could prevent it I would. Thing is though, I'm repeating the same self destructive behaviour that necessitates the sacrifice. I'm being a human being with accepted flaws.

So you accept that Jesus is being the hero here. Taking one for the troops. But the troops should be ashamed and not accept the sacrifice? Wouldn't that kinda make the sacrifice a waste? Sure they all fell over themselves trying to prevent it, but Sgt Dan insisted. Act is done. All those squaddies get liberty. Yet you say they are immoral for taking the gift? Please explain to me how. I just can't see your point.

(September 21, 2014 at 7:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: To get away with that nonsense you'd have to think that humans were capable of perfection.

I once bowled five strikes in a row. Five!!!

Human perfection is one of those hazy areas for me, and I'm not sure that it can be defined because the Bible doesn't really define it either. The JW version, best as I can explain it, would be that we would have full control of all of our decisions and actions. This means that imperfect humans are incapable of such a complete level of self-control, with the implication being that sinful behavior constituted a lack of control. The blame for this is placed on Adam and Eve... even though they were perfect, according to JW beliefs.

There was actually a bit more to it, with human perfection also meaning that we could not become sick and that we would not grow old and die. Which is to say that our bodies would perform at some optimal level forever. I'm curious as to how others define human perfection.

(September 24, 2014 at 3:26 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Yes I know you think it's me/ us. I spoke about it in my post so I can't see how you ignore that to point the finger at me. Like I said, all you seem to be able to focus on is the egotistical human position.

I don't get a choice in that do I? If I could prevent it I would. Thing is though, I'm repeating the same self destructive behaviour that necessitates the sacrifice. I'm being a human being with accepted flaws.

So you accept that Jesus is being the hero here. Taking one for the troops. But the troops should be ashamed and not accept the sacrifice? Wouldn't that kinda make the sacrifice a waste? Sure they all fell over themselves trying to prevent it, but Sgt Dan insisted. Act is done. All those squaddies get liberty. Yet you say they are immoral for taking the gift? Please explain to me how. I just can't see your point.

I hereby disown all responsibility for my faults and mistakes seeing as how I accept the self-sacrificial acts of numerous unnamed persons throughout the world now and in the past.

See how illogical your pretension as a comrade and beneficiary of Jesus' alleged punishment (I mean sacrifice) sounds?