PDA

View Full Version : I was born into a religious southern family. A personal path to belief.



jar
March 7th, 2014, 08:37 PM
I was born into a religious southern family. My granddad on my mother's side was active in the Presbyterian Church while on my father's side they were active in the Episcopal Church. Growing up, bible stories and bible readings were a major source of entertainment and Jesus Loves the Little Children was as familiar as Itsy Bitsy Spider.

When the war ended and dad came back from overseas we moved back north to Baltimore and to Prince of Peace Church. Joe Wood was the main Church influence in those years. He was the priest there, holding services on Sundays in a big old granite church that sat on the corner. The alley behind the church held a car repair shop called Gasoline Alley, and a man who had a zoo in his back yard with cages of monkeys, birds and real alligators and after services we could run down the alley and look over the fence at the wondrous things, cars disassembled and flashes of color as the birds flew about in their big cages, a world of sounds and sights and smells far different from the church above.

The Church itself was cool and dark when you entered, the sun through the stained glass windows played and danced across the dark wooden pews as clouds raced across the morning skies. As the pews filled the temperature rose and you reached for one of the paper fans that sat behind the red Book of Common Prayer or black Hymnal. They had a scene and verse from the bible on one side, advertisements for funeral homes or restaurant on the other. Some said "In Memory of so-and-so. Living with Jesus and in the heart of his family and friends.", and when you asked who so-and-so was your mom would tell you to hush.

As you grew older you were expected to attend classes leading to Confirmation. Joe taught all the classes, and he explained that when you were little, and baptized, your parents and god-parents had taken responsibility for your education and acts, but that now that you were growing up, it was time that YOU took responsibility for yourself.

He also said that it was something to really think about. He said you were confirming, or that you might also find that you were not sure or ready to confirm, what it really was that you believed. He said he would be happier if we didn't get confirmed because we didn't understand things than if we did get confirmed just because it was what our parents wanted.

Part of the process, in addition to classes were days when we got to sit down with Joe and just talk. He had a bucket with cokes and Nehi orange and grape soda and we'd sit side by side at a table and just talk. I remember telling him that "Jesus died for my sins and so if I believed in Him I was saved." and his laugh before he said, "Well, then I guess all this is a waste of time isn't it?"

I must have looked confused because he told me to finish my drink and we'd talk more about it the next week.

That was the moment when I think I first began to get some inkling, some hint of what Christianity was all about.

By our next meeting, I was still totally confused. I asked Joe what I should think, and he told me right away that only I could decide that. Even if I decided not to get confirmed, I was growing up and so it was time I started deciding what I was going to do and believe, and not have others decide it for me.

Then he told me a story.

Long before he had been a missionary in China. The village he was in was very poor, the crops had failed and people were near starving. One of the warlords showed up and told the people, if they would abandon their current master and join him he would see they got food. Just believe in him and all will be okay. Any that did not believe in him would be left to starve to death.

The warlord could have saved everyone, he had wealth and more than enough food, but instead he wanted to save only those who would follow him.
“What do you think of the warlord?”, he asked?

The orange Nehi was cold, and I tasted it on the front of my tongue and in my nose. So different from coke, or the grape Nehi and the questions ran back and forth just behind my eyes.

A week passed and once again I sat down with Father Joe. “What did you decide about the warlord?”, he asked.

“Did he really have enough food for everybody?”, I asked in return.

“Yes he did.”, Said Father Joe.

“Then he should have saved everybody, not just those that believed in him.”, I answered.

I was confirmed that year. The Bishop came in as always for the confirmation service. It was majestic, the great pipe organ filling the church with music that shimmered and shined like fine crystal, the colors of vestments and flags, the flowers and their scent, the breeze that came through the louvered windows, the bands of light through the stained glass windows competing with the flowers on the women’s hats.

The front pews were reserved for the little kids and they paraded in, class by class, looking around for mom and dad and waving shyly when they found them in the crowd. Then those of us who were to be confirmed marched in to take our place between the kids and the adults.

Everyone stood up and the Bishop intoned “Blessed by God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”, and a small voice from one of the front rows was heard . . .

“Why is he wearing funny clothes and a dress?”

The Bishop looked back at Joe Wood, and then turned to continue when Joe said, “Great Question. Everybody, let’s stop for a second and let the little children come up.”

The service stopped as Joe walked down to the steps at the railing. He motioned to the Bishop to come on down and to the teachers to bring the kids up.
Joe and the Bishop sat on the steps there at the railing while the kids came up, several vying to see who got to sit in Joe’s lap. Everything stopped while Joe and the Bishop explained to the kids what the various vestments were, what they were called, why they were worn, how even the knots had special meaning. The Bishop let several kids try on the miter and all of them to look at his ring. He even got up (with some difficulty) and went to get his Crosier, his shepherd’s staff.

After answering their questions Joe said, “Okay, everybody back to the pews.”, and he and the Bishop got ready to begin the service again, when another small voice called out, “Can we sing Jesus Loves you this I know?”

So we did.

After that the service picked up where it had almost begun and it moved right along. We had the collect and the readings, then the presentation of the candidates. The Bishop began the questioning, “Do you reaffirm your renunciation of evil?”

“I do,” we replied.

“Do you renew your commitment to Jesus Christ?”

“I do, and with God's grace I will follow him as my Savior and Lord. “

The Bishop then turned to the audience and asked, “Will you who witness these vows do all in your power to support these persons in their life in Christ?”

“We will.”, came the reply.

We, the candidates and all of the people then repeated those Baptismal vows that our parents and God-parents had taken for us so long before.





Bishop Do you believe in God the Father?
People I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
Bishop Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?
People I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again.
He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
Bishop Do you believe in God the Holy Spirit?
People I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Bishop Will you continue in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in the prayers?
People I will, with God's help.
Bishop Will you persevere in resisting evil, and, whenever you fall into sin, repent and return to the Lord?
People I will, with God's help.
Bishop Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?
People I will, with God's help.
Bishop Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?
People I will, with God's help.
Bishop Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?
People I will, with God's help.




Then the Bishop laid hands on each of us, and in a soft voice, leaning down toward each one, “Strengthen, O Lord, your servant N. with your Holy Spirit; empower him for your service; and sustain him all the days of his life. Amen.”

I remember on the drive home, all of us packed together in the car, mom and dad in the front seat and IIRC at the time, about 4 kids stuffed in the back, one of my parents asked me, “Well, how do you feel now?”

“I think I can do what I need to do.” I said, “I know that you and GOD will help.”

A few years later my parents decided to send me off to a Christian Boarding School. One day we drove up for the interview. The school was located at the top of a steep hill, and just around the bend at the top of the hill. We drove in through white gates with a Gatehouse on each side, down a driveway lined by small trees to a circle before the big white mansion. On the left about halfway down the drive was another white building, it’s green roof matching the roof on the mansion.
We were met at the mansion by a gentleman who introduced himself as Bob French. He was not a tall man, and not as old as my dad, and he said he taught English and lived in one of the gatehouses. He showed us around the mansion, where we would eat, where the infirmary was, then took us on a tour of the grounds. The dorm was another small white building with a green roof, then up the hill to the building I’d seen as we drove in. It was the class rooms for the upper school, and at one time had been the stables for the estate.

After the tour was finished, they asked me if I wanted to go to school there and I said “Sure.”

On the long drive home my mom asked me what I had really thought about the school.

“Did you notice the piles of books, clothes, lacrosse sticks and stuff that were just sitting around?”, I answered, “I think I’d like a place where you could just leave stuff lying around and know that no one will touch it.”

The next fall I went off to school. I had a new pair of pants and a sport coat and blue shirts and a blue sweater. I was scared, and excited, and St. Paul’s had three inviolable rules, you will not lie, cheat or steal or tolerate someone who did. Oh, you could get in trouble for other things, demerits soon became a reality, but lying, cheating or stealing simply were not tolerated. And the students themselves were really the ones that enforced those standards. It was an Honor System.

Living at a boarding school was a new experience. As one of the new young kids you shared a room with three other guys, and life was pretty fully organized. We got up in the morning, dress was shirt and tie, and either a sweater or blazer, and breakfast was at a table by form with the Head Master and most of the faculty. We’d start with grace, and I often prayed that I’d be able to find an egg that was cooked hard as a rock with none of the running yellow part. Day after day GOD watched over me (or maybe the fact that Mary, who did the cooking heard me complaining) and every day I found at least one egg that was really cooked.

After breakfast it was up the hill to Chapel. Every day all the boarders started the day with a short Chapel service, and many of the day students would drift in as well. We also had Sacred Studies as one of the regular classes and every Wednesday a formal Chapel service for all the students. Religion was a normal part of daily life and often included in many of the other classes as well. In math we touched on the contributions made by Islam, in History we touched on the influence of religion in world events, in Biology we looked at the contributions of Mendel and the problems caused by religious restrictions on exploratory anatomy and how that slowed down the advance of medicine.

But the school day came to an end and most of our time was outside of class.

Dark comes early in northern Maryland, and so it was inevitable that most of the time we entertained ourselves. What can be more entertaining to young men than big issues. Somehow, GOD and religion and mankind’s place in all of this seemed to be a regular topic of discussion. The evenings were long and the conversations often heated. When the weather allowed we’d sit out on the porch, arguing while we waited for our turn up on the ping-pong table, when bad we’d sit around in the front room, or visit one of the Master’s houses where we could huddle in front of the open fire letting ideas rise like sparks from the logs.
It was there, in those long conversations where some of the questions raised by Father Joe and my parents began to get resolved. It was a period of opening horizons, my every belief being challenged by minds as quick and intensive as my own, by experience far greater than my own and by whole new moral systems, the Works of Mencius, the Gnostic Gospels, the philosophies of Greece and Germany, the writings of Thoreau and Frost and Twain and Lewis and Tolkien and Hemingway and Camus and Seller and Yeatman, the moral vison of Steinbeck and Woody Guthrie.

It was when some of the things became clear.

A GOD that chooses who will be saved doesn’t make sense. A GOD that creates all and then goes through and picks and chooses who will be saved is just plain cruel and arbitrary and not something to be worshiped.

A GOD that wants to be worshiped is just too silly a thought. Maybe some picayune God might worry about what folk thought of Her, like the little girl who worries that her corsage might not be right, too big, or too small, or the guy that worries about his tie not being in style or that people think he looks funny, but GOD cannot be so insecure.

The idea of “Once saved always saved” just made no sense. That’s one of those simplistic ideas that gives folk an out. “Anyone who does something really wrong obviously wasn’t saved in the first place”, or so their argument went. That just felt way to much like a copout and just another example of mental gymnastics, a way of cheating and making excuses.

I think maybe the Honor System was beginning to change from just a set of rules to a way of life.

It was in the second year at St. Paul’s that I went back and really started rereading the Bible and listening to what was in there. That year Mr. French took a bunch of us boarders out one evening to look through his telescope.

The universe got much larger that night, far bigger than the imagination of one teenager, and old perceptions fell away. For the first time I saw a galaxy, not a star, but millions, maybe billions of stars.

That summer I got to spend some time exploring some of the old worn foothills of Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Age was everywhere, in the worn groove in the rock above the pond where Turkey Run cascaded down into the pool where my sister fed the Native Trout, in the layers exposed in the cuts that had been made to widen Route 40 and in the sidings along Hornets Nest Road where it wandered over the hills. There was age in the fossil shells sticking out of the Calvert Cliffs and the giant sharks teeth I found there.

The world got old that summer and the universe got big, very big, awesome and exciting.

Life at a boarding school was amazing. For the first time in my life I was immersed in a culture where everyone was as smart as me and most far smarter. No one, not students, not faculty accepted anything simply on belief. They challenged everything. And that challenge was pervasive. In Sacred Studies we had to build the case for theism, to prove that GOD did exist. Once we could defend that our arguments were torn to shreds and we had to build the case for atheism, that GOD did not exist. In turn, those arguments were challenged and refuted.

The discussions with the other kids were the most challenging. The Masters were often Socratic, asking questions to get YOU to think. The other boarders though gave no slack, took no prisoners. You either supported your position or it was toast. It wasn’t important what the position was, no one cared whether or not you agreed with them, but by GOD you better be able to support what YOU believed.

Life went on. Later in life I got to live all over the United States. I lived in Maryland and Virginia and North Carolina and South Carolina and Georgia and Pennsylvania and Arizona and Texas and California. I got to see old rocks and new mountains and find fossils and explore canyons and see flash floods and experience earthquakes and tornadoes and hurricanes. I got to meet and work with some of the brightest folk around, ones that constantly challenged me to do new things, learn new things, to grow. I got to spend a couple decades in the company of biologists and in the company of computer folk that were pushing the limits of what could be done. I got to help found a whole new industry, to get in early when no one knew what could be done and when nothing was impossible, to help create the foundation that others later built upon.

Through all of my life, I was blessed to be in the company of people that were running forward, people who created, people who questioned.

Over time I realized that those lessons learned from Joe Wood, from my Parents, from the other kids at the school were correct.

In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth.
GOD looked on what he had created and found it was Good.
Through a gift from GOD mankind was given the ability to know what is right from what is wrong.
GOD charges us to try to do Right, and to try not to do Wrong.
GOD is not cruel.
We are not condemned.
GOD chose ALL people.
We will be judged based on our own behavior.
Any other GOD seems small and evil.

Paul-H
March 8th, 2014, 12:03 AM
Is this an appropriate place for storeys of people and their Imaginary Friends

If there is a god then he/she/it is the most evil entity to ever exist, and as religion is always behind the vast majority of the world evil it is about time that all religion was banned world wide, For Religion is Evil

Tony Rex
March 8th, 2014, 12:45 AM
Another enjoyable read, jar. Thanks for sharing your personal journey. We all have one, or none. I respect either way, even apparently some would not. I reckon FPGeeks lounge is big enough to accomodate all.

May I suggest FPN lounge for those who can't tolerate this?

kia
March 8th, 2014, 01:01 AM
It's the perfect place for any story of any person and their friends, real or imagined.

Sharing is what makes us, or breaks us. It molds us, or tears us. What we see, what we learn, what we believe, is all through sharing and debating and questioning of thought, emotion, ideas, tradition, new paths, buried in the sand or far above us in the heavens. Questions are good, they lead to answers for ourselves. What I believe is not what someone standing next to me believes, but we all believe in something, even if nothing. And I believe in your right to believe as you choose, and in my right to believe as I choose.

jar
March 8th, 2014, 07:04 AM
Is this an appropriate place for storeys of people and their Imaginary Friends

If there is a god then he/she/it is the most evil entity to ever exist, and as religion is always behind the vast majority of the world evil it is about time that all religion was banned world wide, For Religion is Evil

An interesting position. I personally agree that the god, particularly the Christian god, as often marketed would be truly evil if it were to exist. But I find ignorance not religion is behind most evil.

orfew
March 8th, 2014, 07:13 AM
I am not a religious person, but I did greatly appreciate your story. It seems to me it described the processes of learning and growth very clearly. I respect that.

jar
March 8th, 2014, 07:15 AM
A very good friend asked:
“Ok, for the sake of allowing you to articulate your liberal and progressive theology (which I very much would like to hear) how is God's goodness evidenced by my fundamentalist Christian nephew contracting insulin dependent diabetes at the age of ten? “

That is a great question and goes to the heart of the issue. Why do bad things happen?

This may seem like I'm rambling but honest there is a point to all this and I'll return to your nephew before the end of this post. But first, let's step back a short way in time.

About 65 million years ago an asteroid smashed down into the Gulf of Mexico a few hundred miles from where I live. That was a momentous event. For a long period of time the dinosaurs had been the dominate life form on the planet. They had been very successful and lasted far longer than we have and had expanded into all of the niches that humans now occupy. They lived in warm and cold, high and low, forest and plain, swamp and meadow.

The asteroid strike 65 million years ago must be considered a very bad thing for the dinosaurs. So we can ask the same question as about your nephew. Why do bad things happen?

Well, here is the fundamentalists chance to show the big picture, how it was bad for the dinos but good for us, right? Well, no, that's not the argument I hope to make.

Although the changes after the asteroid strike did open up environmental opportunities that mammals expanded into, I do not see the strike as some act of GOD to bring about humans. Instead, it was a normal result of the universe we live in, one of the random and unfeeling incidents we have both mentioned before.

Basically, over the last 65 million years or so all of the evolution of the mammals has happened. That's pretty quick, a rush job as it were, and it shows. If you look at the result (and IMHO this single fact is enough to blow any thoughts of Intellegent Design out of the water), what evolved are critters that are just barely good enough. This is true of every mammal out there. None of them are really well designed overall. They are all a collection of mismatched parts and Rube Goldberg engineering. They get sick. They break. They wear out way too soon.

The Fundamentalist might say, "Well, that's all after the fall and before then man was perfect." Fine, they may believe that but frankly, there is no evidence to support such a contention and trying to do so simply opens up way to many other issues. The result of such mental gymnastics is a theology that is an even bigger Rube Goldberg than life as evolved.

Back towards the topic.

If we look at life today we find similar effects and issues regardless of species. Animals and plants get sick. They have systems that don't function or they break. It's pretty normal.

But finally, this gives me the opportunity to point out some of the things I see that show GOD is good.

First, the system.

IMHO GOD designed a universe that is, unlike the individuals in it, self healing. We can see this at every scale, every level. If we look out way beyond our local neighborhood we can see stars exploding, galaxies colliding. Yet the result of such catastrophes is not an end but a beginning. New stars and galaxies form, new elements are made, we get the iron that forms the core of our planet and our very existence from such events.

Closer to home we can see the same thing. The catastrophe 65 millions years ago was healed. The system is designed to assure that if life exists, it will evolve to fill the available environments regardless of what they are. If tomorrow something happened that wiped all mammals from the face of the earth, something else will evolve to fill the world again.

Even if all life were destroyed, it's likely it would start again. It certainly happened at least one time before and most likely, several times. Since we know that life began even if we do not know how, there is no reason to believe it could not happen again.

So the system GOD created is pretty good. It works well and seems to be self healing.

Now let's return to your nephew. He is typical of all the life we see around us. Every living thing we've found so far is subject to disease, to injury, to the limitations of the individual critter. Animals break bones. They get sick. They wear out. Their systems vary from individual to individual.

Unfortunately, your nephew has diabetes. I'm sorry. I wish it were otherwise.

There is one thing though that also brings me back to the Good GOD, something I've mentioned before. It's something unique to humans that I see as evidence of that Good GOD.

We can treat his diabetes. In fact, we are at the point where we can do more for him than ever before. And there is a very good chance that in the not too distant future we may be able to prevent such incidents.

Humans, through the scope, extent and intent of their capabilities can do things to help. If he were any other mammal, suffering any disease or breakage, he would be on his own. The other primates do not set and brace broken limbs. They do not treat the diseases that inflict others of their kind, much less other species.

That brings me to the fourth attribute that I've mentioned in the past, Empathy.

Humans have empathy that extends beyond their immediate family, their species, their clan, their nation. They are the only critters that actually intentionally try to improve the lives of other critters regardless of relationship. The concept of a veterinarian is uniquely human.

Yes, when I look around, I see the product of a Good GOD.

kia
March 8th, 2014, 09:26 AM
I wish I could click "Thanks" many times, Jar. You so eloquently - and patiently - put into words the thoughts many are unable to express adequately, regardless of subject or media. Now that I do have the time I'd always wished I had before, I hope I can also achieve this level of giving for my own journey.

Flounder
March 8th, 2014, 11:57 AM
I'm not religious, I consider myself a cultural Christian. At the same time, I do believe the world would have been a better place if Julian the Apostate had better luck, or had Justinian left the philosophical schools open. I very much enjoyed the story as an example of the benefits of a strong family unit and growing up in a cohesive society.

Manny
March 11th, 2014, 02:03 AM
*It's only for a moment you were mine to hold. The plans that heaven has for you will all too soon unfold...*

That was the start of a song I learned, so I could sing it to my daughter--as a present-- 3 Christmases ago; and it was difficult to do without choking up; she was 12 going on 18. Oh, little did I know what heaven had planned for me.

As a father, there is nothing, NOTHING, I wouldn't do for my only child. Realizing this, I thought of all that my father goes through to ensure that his three children had all he could possibly offer, and then some.

*So many different prayers I'll pray for all that you might do, but most of all I'll want to know you're walking in the truth. And if I never told you, I want you to know, that as I watch you grow...

*I pray that God would fill your heart with dreams, and that faith gives you the courage to dare to do great things.

*I'm here for you whatever this life brings. So let my love give you roots, and help you find your wings*

And, I remember thinking, as I pounded away on the piano, just me and my "little girl", how throughout my life I've always received blessings, great and small--more than I can count...but I didn't truly appreciate them for what they were, until that Christmas morning.

"If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?"

jar,

I couldn't bring myself to ruining your thread with a handwritten thingie, but thank you so very much for the inspiration.

manoeuver
March 11th, 2014, 11:47 AM
Jar- I'm always happy to read an account of faith from a principled critical thinker. Far too few of these around. Thanks.

tandaina
March 11th, 2014, 12:08 PM
It is no secret I'm an Episcopal priest. Long haired hippy friend of Jesus over here. ;)

A wise theologian once told me this excellent "test" for any theology you hear: If the behavior being attributed to God, were it done by a person, would get them arrested; it is probably bad theology.

I was trained a scientist/engineer first. I bring a great deal of math/logic to my theology. Basically if you believe in a loving God (and mean that) then a whole lot of the hogwash that floats around out there simply can't be true. You get a vengeful angry son killing God, or a loving one, not both.

Annie
March 11th, 2014, 12:32 PM
It is no secret I'm an Episcopal priest. Long haired hippy friend of Jesus over here. ;)

A wise theologian once told me this excellent "test" for any theology you hear: If the behavior being attributed to God, were it done by a person, would get them arrested; it is probably bad theology.

I was trained a scientist/engineer first. I bring a great deal of math/logic to my theology. Basically if you believe in a loving God (and mean that) then a whole lot of the hogwash that floats around out there simply can't be true. You get a vengeful angry son killing God, or a loving one, not both.

I can only hit 'thanks' on this once, which is a shame because I really like this.

jar
March 11th, 2014, 02:23 PM
It is no secret I'm an Episcopal priest. Long haired hippy friend of Jesus over here. ;)




Of course we have to remember that Jesus was not a Christian but a good Jewish boy and reformer.

pengeezer
March 11th, 2014, 04:08 PM
I guess that I'm going to be in the minority,but that's not unusual--been there many times.

I'm one that believes in the Eternal God,the One that made the earth,all that's in it,as well
as the universe. He spoke all of that into existence,and gave breath into the life of man.Some
things that happen that make no sense He allows to happen,and I have no answer for how
or why those things happen. But despite what we may think or act,He is still in control. When
things happen to me that I find unfair and can do nothing about(and there have been many),
I still have to trust Him and know that what He has done/is doing is for my best.

He is fair,merciful,and extremely gracious--sending rain on the just and unjust(Matthew 5:45).


John

jar
March 11th, 2014, 05:30 PM
For example, why do tribal communities tend to repress women?

And also ask why that is not true of many tribal societies.

Simplistic answers are most often just simplistic.

tandaina
March 11th, 2014, 06:02 PM
and as religion is always behind the vast majority of the world evil it is about time that all religion was banned world wide, For Religion is Evil

A humanist blaming religion for evil is a lot like creationist attributing the existence of the universe to God. But it is hard to investigate God, so the creationist must stop there. It is not nearly so hard to investigate human behaviors and thought processes, so a humanist should not stop. A lot of behaviors can be understood in terms of survival benefits in the context of evolution. For example, why do tribal communities tend to repress women? This is no mystery, and religion has nothing to do with it. However, to realize this sort of thing, you will have to look deeper.

Yes. You can find as much good as evil in any religion. Saying that because there is evil in religion, it should be banned would be like saying that there is evil stuff on the internet, it should be banned. Or that Germany produced Hitler, so Germany should be annihilated. Or any other silly mass generalization.

Just as I would never say that because my religion (or any) is good in my life it should be required in the lives of others; I rather expect to not have the opposite imposed!

pengeezer
March 11th, 2014, 06:22 PM
and as religion is always behind the vast majority of the world evil it is about time that all religion was banned world wide, For Religion is Evil

A humanist blaming religion for evil is a lot like creationist attributing the existence of the universe to God. But it is hard to investigate God, so the creationist must stop there. It is not nearly so hard to investigate human behaviors and thought processes, so a humanist should not stop. A lot of behaviors can be understood in terms of survival benefits in the context of evolution. For example, why do tribal communities tend to repress women? This is no mystery, and religion has nothing to do with it. However, to realize this sort of thing, you will have to look deeper.

While it is hard to investigate God and His mysteries,the real issue is that most people don't want to go
down that path--there is a responsibility as to what to do with the information they have learned and
most don't want to deal with that responsibility.


John

VertOlive
March 11th, 2014, 07:29 PM
And a word from my personal hero:

"Many people perceive Christianity as something institutional -- rather than as an encounter with Christ -- which explains why they don't see it as a source of joy."

-Pope Benedict XVI, May 2004

pengeezer
March 12th, 2014, 07:20 AM
While it is hard to investigate God and His mysteries,the real issue is that most people don't want to go
down that path--there is a responsibility as to what to do with the information they have learned and
most don't want to deal with that responsibility.

I think maybe you generalized my meaning too much. I was not referring to the broad range of theological musings, rather to something very specific. The creationism analog of the humanist looking deeper to the sources of evil would be to ask why or how God came to exist. The catechism answer is that He always existed, hence these questions have no applicability. This is an article of faith.

In the case of your statement,I had to generalize,as all questions that involve God Himself(or a Deity
or Supreme Being to others)start from the general and go to the specific. In the search for how
things came into existence,we look to something higher than ourselves,for it's obvious that we
didn't create things to run perpetually nor do we have the power to do so. This means that
whether it be God that created the universe,or evolution or some Being,we still have to exercise
faith in the ability of the universe to begin and continue as it does. No matter how a humanist
looks to how or why evil occurs or who started or allowed it to happen,he/she has to exercise
faith in the answer that they come up with,right or wrong.

The important point of my statement to yours was that responsibility to new wisdom occurs when
we understand what that wisdom means and how it affects us. Many people understanding the
ramifications of Christianity or religion know what is required personally of them and don't want
to go any further--they are afraid of the cost.


John

jar
March 12th, 2014, 07:25 AM
For example, why do tribal communities tend to repress women?

And also ask why that is not true of many tribal societies.

Simplistic answers are most often just simplistic.

I'm not sure I follow your intent. I'm just a little weary of secular humanist fantasies about religion being evil. Where evil exists, people are evil, and I see no reason to suppose humanity would change with or without the religious themes that many humans paint on top of their social, political, cultural, economic, and occasionally sociopathic or psychotic motivations.

Well, my point is as was mentioned in the OP that often religions have been and are today evil; in particular Christianity has been by far the most efficient and successful practitioner of genocide so far. Even today Christianity is one of the greatest proponent of willful ignorance and opponent of critical thinking around. That is particularly true in the US.

As a Theist and a Christian I need to be honest about religion and in particular Christianity, recognize where religion has failed, acknowledge and repent those failures and try not to repeat those failures.

writingrav
March 12th, 2014, 10:37 AM
I have tried to stay out of these threads, but the tone is turning precisely in such a way as to justify the forbearance of topics such as religion and politics from the forums. FPN may have been heavy handed in its treatment of Manny (whose use of Scripture for pen-mediatative purposes does not bother me in the least, I appreciate both the artistry and the sentiment) however ongoing discussions of these topics inevitably result in unpleasantry. Perhaps there would be wisdom in self-policing this development?

mhosea
March 12th, 2014, 11:13 AM
More than happy to oblige.

Jon Szanto
March 12th, 2014, 11:30 AM
Let us all be of good heart, no matter the source we attribute that goodness to, and be glad that we are able to speak to one another about these things instead of being stifled and locked.

jar
March 12th, 2014, 12:36 PM
I have tried to stay out of these threads, but the tone is turning precisely in such a way as to justify the forbearance of topics such as religion and politics from the forums. FPN may have been heavy handed in its treatment of Manny (whose use of Scripture for pen-mediatative purposes does not bother me in the least, I appreciate both the artistry and the sentiment) however ongoing discussions of these topics inevitably result in unpleasantry. Perhaps there would be wisdom in self-policing this development?

Fortunately so far I have seen no unpleasantness at least in this thread. As long as discourse is civil why should any subject be exempt from discussion or criticism?

Flounder
March 12th, 2014, 01:34 PM
“ Humans, through the scope, extent and intent of their capabilities can do things to help. If he were any other mammal, suffering any disease or breakage, he would be on his own. The other primates do not set and brace broken limbs. They do not treat the diseases that inflict others of their kind, much less other species.

That brings me to the fourth attribute that I've mentioned in the past, Empathy.

Humans have empathy that extends beyond their immediate family, their species, their clan, their nation. They are the only critters that actually intentionally try to improve the lives of other critters regardless of relationship. The concept of a veterinarian is uniquely human.

Yes, when I look around, I see the product of a Good GOD.

FWIW, I think there are better analogies if we're pointing out how awesome we are. On the scale of balance, humans are total jerks to the other species we share the planet with. We've exterminated or enslaved them wherever we've set foot and continue to do so on an industrial scale. A few vets don't count for much.

I'm sure we've all read the occasional article of animal altruism, dolphins rescuing sailors etc. Here's a few I've enjoyed:

Sperm whales chumming up with a dolphin suffering from scoliosis (http://www.weather.com/news/sperm-whales-dolphin-20130124)
A dog and an orphaned orangutan palling up (http://www.dogheirs.com/larne/posts/855-orphaned-orangantan-and-hound-dog-are-best-friends)
Hippos rescuing a gnu fro some asshole crocodile (http://time.com/21520/watch-hippos-rescue-gnu-from-crocodile-attack/)

I don't buy into the idea that empathy is the preserve of man.

Manny
March 12th, 2014, 01:42 PM
As long as I can keep clicking that "Thanks" icon--on the bottom left of the post--I'm good.

Flounder
March 12th, 2014, 01:56 PM
As long as I can keep clicking that "Thanks" icon--on the bottom left of the post--I'm good.

I'm trying to think up an iconoclast pun, but I've got nothing.

Titivillus
March 12th, 2014, 02:05 PM
This is one of those times I wish I had the Faith that others show.

Manny
March 12th, 2014, 02:17 PM
This is one of those times I wish I had the Faith that others show.

Well, this is one of those times I'm glad I didn't delete the images like this one (http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/096741c5-df75-460a-80f8-d8b8fa4ad90e_zps2ba742df.jpg) from the FPN.

jar
March 12th, 2014, 02:30 PM
“ Humans, through the scope, extent and intent of their capabilities can do things to help. If he were any other mammal, suffering any disease or breakage, he would be on his own. The other primates do not set and brace broken limbs. They do not treat the diseases that inflict others of their kind, much less other species.

That brings me to the fourth attribute that I've mentioned in the past, Empathy.

Humans have empathy that extends beyond their immediate family, their species, their clan, their nation. They are the only critters that actually intentionally try to improve the lives of other critters regardless of relationship. The concept of a veterinarian is uniquely human.

Yes, when I look around, I see the product of a Good GOD.

FWIW, I think there are better analogies if we're pointing out how awesome we are. On the scale of balance, humans are total jerks to the other species we share the planet with. We've exterminated or enslaved them wherever we've set foot and continue to do so on an industrial scale. A few vets don't count for much.

I'm sure we've all read the occasional article of animal altruism, dolphins rescuing sailors etc. Here's a few I've enjoyed:

Sperm whales chumming up with a dolphin suffering from scoliosis (http://www.weather.com/news/sperm-whales-dolphin-20130124)
A dog and an orphaned orangutan palling up (http://www.dogheirs.com/larne/posts/855-orphaned-orangantan-and-hound-dog-are-best-friends)
Hippos rescuing a gnu fro some asshole crocodile (http://time.com/21520/watch-hippos-rescue-gnu-from-crocodile-attack/)

I don't buy into the idea that empathy is the preserve of man.

And I agree. I tried to make that clear. It is the scope and extent that is different when it comes to humans.

Please don't think I ignore the fact that other critters show such traits, after all my belief is that God is the creator of all that is, seen and unseen. I would imagine that pond scum is every bit as dear to GOD as any other creation.

Nor do I deny that humans often behave badly.

Jon Szanto
March 12th, 2014, 02:34 PM
Just as an aside, I've made a suggestion to the admins (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/6262-Suggestion-for-a-new-sub-forum-PRS?p=70555#post70555). If you have a moment, please take a look and offer any thoughts, as it comes pretty specifically from this general thread...

Cookies
March 12th, 2014, 07:40 PM
“ Humans, through the scope, extent and intent of their capabilities can do things to help. If he were any other mammal, suffering any disease or breakage, he would be on his own. The other primates do not set and brace broken limbs. They do not treat the diseases that inflict others of their kind, much less other species.

That brings me to the fourth attribute that I've mentioned in the past, Empathy.

Humans have empathy that extends beyond their immediate family, their species, their clan, their nation. They are the only critters that actually intentionally try to improve the lives of other critters regardless of relationship. The concept of a veterinarian is uniquely human.

Yes, when I look around, I see the product of a Good GOD.

FWIW, I think there are better analogies if we're pointing out how awesome we are. On the scale of balance, humans are total jerks to the other species we share the planet with. We've exterminated or enslaved them wherever we've set foot and continue to do so on an industrial scale. A few vets don't count for much.

I'm sure we've all read the occasional article of animal altruism, dolphins rescuing sailors etc. Here's a few I've enjoyed:

Sperm whales chumming up with a dolphin suffering from scoliosis (http://www.weather.com/news/sperm-whales-dolphin-20130124)
A dog and an orphaned orangutan palling up (http://www.dogheirs.com/larne/posts/855-orphaned-orangantan-and-hound-dog-are-best-friends)
Hippos rescuing a gnu fro some asshole crocodile (http://time.com/21520/watch-hippos-rescue-gnu-from-crocodile-attack/)

I don't buy into the idea that empathy is the preserve of man.

I have to agree quite vehemently. I would, in fact, say the absolute opposite is true. Humans are horrifically cruel creatures, especially to those animals who cannot fight back. We lock them in cages, cut off their beaks, and grind baby chicks alive. We take animals more intelligent than dogs and stick them in pens so small they will never be able to turn around in their entire lives. electrocute, gas, and break necks of animals for fur. We perform muelsing, dock and castrate sheep for wool. Neither of these materials are required for survival in the modern age. And we not just let these cruelties happen but actually support these industries because...?

Likewise there are numerous other animals that take care of each other regardless of relationship. Many animals will adopt strays outside of their clan. Elephants famously take care of their orphaned calves. Chimpanzees mourn for dead social mates. Dogs routinely put their lives on the line to save their masters (or even strangers). Non-human animals are capable of caring beyond their own lives. Unlike humans however, non-human animals are not capable of cruelty solely for the sake of amusement. Humans kill for sport.

There are some great people in this world capable of empathy beyond description. But the vast majority are indifferent and idle in response to cruelty.

Please be aware, I am not saying that your points about your religion don't stand. Simply that your points about human empathy are quite flawed in my views.

Sailor Kenshin
March 13th, 2014, 06:39 AM
I have to agree quite vehemently. I would, in fact, say the absolute opposite is true. Humans are horrifically cruel creatures, especially to those animals who cannot fight back. We lock them in cages, cut off their beaks, and grind baby chicks alive. We take animals more intelligent than dogs and stick them in pens so small they will never be able to turn around in their entire lives. electrocute, gas, and break necks of animals for fur. We perform muelsing, dock and castrate sheep for wool. Neither of these materials are required for survival in the modern age. And we not just let these cruelties happen but actually support these industries because...?

Likewise there are numerous other animals that take care of each other regardless of relationship. Many animals will adopt strays outside of their clan. Elephants famously take care of their orphaned calves. Chimpanzees mourn for dead social mates. Dogs routinely put their lives on the line to save their masters (or even strangers). Non-human animals are capable of caring beyond their own lives. Unlike humans however, non-human animals are not capable of cruelty solely for the sake of amusement. Humans kill for sport.

There are some great people in this world capable of empathy beyond description. But the vast majority are indifferent and idle in response to cruelty.

Please be aware, I am not saying that your points about your religion don't stand. Simply that your points about human empathy are quite flawed in my views.


Studying animal behavior was my childhood passion. As an adult, we had three kittehs who were part of our family for nearly 20 years and who at times seemed 'human' and whom I still miss.

Animals commit genocide. They kill and eat their young. They kill for fun. Put two doves in a cage together and they will peck each other to death.

Nature is complex. It is what it is. Behavior is complex. The vast majority of humans are not indifferent but struggling to survive.

But only humans are capable of good and evil, because only humans understand the difference.

jar
March 13th, 2014, 07:49 AM
“ Humans, through the scope, extent and intent of their capabilities can do things to help. If he were any other mammal, suffering any disease or breakage, he would be on his own. The other primates do not set and brace broken limbs. They do not treat the diseases that inflict others of their kind, much less other species.

That brings me to the fourth attribute that I've mentioned in the past, Empathy.

Humans have empathy that extends beyond their immediate family, their species, their clan, their nation. They are the only critters that actually intentionally try to improve the lives of other critters regardless of relationship. The concept of a veterinarian is uniquely human.

Yes, when I look around, I see the product of a Good GOD.

FWIW, I think there are better analogies if we're pointing out how awesome we are. On the scale of balance, humans are total jerks to the other species we share the planet with. We've exterminated or enslaved them wherever we've set foot and continue to do so on an industrial scale. A few vets don't count for much.

I'm sure we've all read the occasional article of animal altruism, dolphins rescuing sailors etc. Here's a few I've enjoyed:

Sperm whales chumming up with a dolphin suffering from scoliosis (http://www.weather.com/news/sperm-whales-dolphin-20130124)
A dog and an orphaned orangutan palling up (http://www.dogheirs.com/larne/posts/855-orphaned-orangantan-and-hound-dog-are-best-friends)
Hippos rescuing a gnu fro some asshole crocodile (http://time.com/21520/watch-hippos-rescue-gnu-from-crocodile-attack/)

I don't buy into the idea that empathy is the preserve of man.

I have to agree quite vehemently. I would, in fact, say the absolute opposite is true. Humans are horrifically cruel creatures, especially to those animals who cannot fight back. We lock them in cages, cut off their beaks, and grind baby chicks alive. We take animals more intelligent than dogs and stick them in pens so small they will never be able to turn around in their entire lives. electrocute, gas, and break necks of animals for fur. We perform muelsing, dock and castrate sheep for wool. Neither of these materials are required for survival in the modern age. And we not just let these cruelties happen but actually support these industries because...?

Likewise there are numerous other animals that take care of each other regardless of relationship. Many animals will adopt strays outside of their clan. Elephants famously take care of their orphaned calves. Chimpanzees mourn for dead social mates. Dogs routinely put their lives on the line to save their masters (or even strangers). Non-human animals are capable of caring beyond their own lives. Unlike humans however, non-human animals are not capable of cruelty solely for the sake of amusement. Humans kill for sport.

There are some great people in this world capable of empathy beyond description. But the vast majority are indifferent and idle in response to cruelty.

Please be aware, I am not saying that your points about your religion don't stand. Simply that your points about human empathy are quite flawed in my views.

Yet humans are the only species that has created Parks where humans provide protection to other species, that created environmental laws, that restrict themselves when it comes to treatment of other species and the environment itself.

Cookies
March 13th, 2014, 10:19 AM
I have to agree quite vehemently. I would, in fact, say the absolute opposite is true. Humans are horrifically cruel creatures, especially to those animals who cannot fight back. We lock them in cages, cut off their beaks, and grind baby chicks alive. We take animals more intelligent than dogs and stick them in pens so small they will never be able to turn around in their entire lives. electrocute, gas, and break necks of animals for fur. We perform muelsing, dock and castrate sheep for wool. Neither of these materials are required for survival in the modern age. And we not just let these cruelties happen but actually support these industries because...?

Likewise there are numerous other animals that take care of each other regardless of relationship. Many animals will adopt strays outside of their clan. Elephants famously take care of their orphaned calves. Chimpanzees mourn for dead social mates. Dogs routinely put their lives on the line to save their masters (or even strangers). Non-human animals are capable of caring beyond their own lives. Unlike humans however, non-human animals are not capable of cruelty solely for the sake of amusement. Humans kill for sport.

There are some great people in this world capable of empathy beyond description. But the vast majority are indifferent and idle in response to cruelty.

Please be aware, I am not saying that your points about your religion don't stand. Simply that your points about human empathy are quite flawed in my views.


Studying animal behavior was my childhood passion. As an adult, we had three kittehs who were part of our family for nearly 20 years and who at times seemed 'human' and whom I still miss.

Animals commit genocide. They kill and eat their young. They kill for fun. Put two doves in a cage together and they will peck each other to death.

Nature is complex. It is what it is. Behavior is complex. The vast majority of humans are not indifferent but struggling to survive.

But only humans are capable of good and evil, because only humans understand the difference.

No, this is not true. Animals are capable of cruel actions. They are not capable of cruelty. They do not have the capability to understand their actions. Yes, animals eat their young. But this is as a way of survival. They kill to train, they kill to eat, they kill out of fear. We kill because hunting and stalking lesser animals is fun to us. We eat young animals for pleasure. We torture or animals before we eat them, and yes, some other animals do the same. The difference here is that we know better. A lion doesn't say to itself "Well... I could bite this zebras neck before I start eating its stomach so it dies more quickly... but no" Non-human animals act solely on instinct ingrained in them since the creation of their species and are incapable of higher thought. And even if there were an animal that were capable of understanding the difference, that wouldn't effect my point. Humans have the ability to think and act in contrast to pure instinct.

You say the vast majority of humans are not indifferent, but I don't see it. How many people spend even one day a week doing something for those who struggle? How many volunteer at an animal shelter once a month? How many donate canned goods? How many donate a dollar for the food bank when their cashier at the grocery store asks (I worked as a cashier and I can tell you it's about 2%).

The idea that we let the torture in farms happen, that we let others go hungry, that we allow muelsing because we are struggling to survive is nonsense. You don't need wool to survive. You can give a few hours of your time to someone or something who needs it. You don't need to support factory farming to survive. You don't need to go hunting to survive. And yet only 25% of my country volunteered last year. There are 3 billion people living in poverty. 10,000 species going extinct every year. Millions of acres of rainforest being cut down. 150 billion animals are tortured before they are killed for food every year.

And 25% of people think doing something is worth it. If that's not indifference than I don't know what is.

Cookies
March 13th, 2014, 10:27 AM
Yet humans are the only species that has created Parks where humans provide protection to other species, that created environmental laws, that restrict themselves when it comes to treatment of other species and the environment itself.

But what does that have to do with anything? Humans are the only creatures with the ability to produce parks. And within these countries that create parks we still have abhorrent factory farming practices where animal welfare laws are ignored. Did you know that if you treat a dog the same way you treat a meat pig you would be arrested for animal cruelty? But we let it go because... bacon. We have circuses that cage animals, beat them, and break them so we can be entertained. Animal welfare laws are ignored because... well at least these people have jobs. We are bulldozing the last bits of forest and field so we can create houses, because we are running out of room. Because despite the fact that there are hundreds of millions of orphans who need homes, humans continue to procreate and create more humans without regard to anything other than themselves.

But because a handful of people had the foresight to create some parks (most of which are for human pleasure) somehow... I'm not actually sure what the point was.

jar
March 13th, 2014, 10:53 AM
Yet humans are the only species that has created Parks where humans provide protection to other species, that created environmental laws, that restrict themselves when it comes to treatment of other species and the environment itself.

But what does that have to do with anything? Humans are the only creatures with the ability to produce parks. And within these countries that create parks we still have abhorrent factory farming practices where animal welfare laws are ignored. Did you know that if you treat a dog the same way you treat a meat pig you would be arrested for animal cruelty? But we let it go because... bacon. We have circuses that cage animals, beat them, and break them so we can be entertained. Animal welfare laws are ignored because... well at least these people have jobs. We are bulldozing the last bits of forest and field so we can create houses, because we are running out of room. Because despite the fact that there are hundreds of millions of orphans who need homes, humans continue to procreate and create more humans without regard to anything other than themselves.

But because a handful of people had the foresight to create some parks (most of which are for human pleasure) somehow... I'm not actually sure what the point was.

Well the point is really pretty simple.

Humans do create parks and reserves and have animal cruelty laws and I love bacon. Humans show concern for people they will likely never meet, that are outside their family, tribe, neighborhood, nation, vicinity. No other animal seems to do that.

Humans do those things.

All humans? No, but still it is humans that do those things.

Do we do enough? Perhaps not but fortunately we also have the capability of reason and being persuaded.

And let's be realistic. We are NOT bulldozing the last bits of forest and we actually plant more trees than we cut down.

Making absurd claims doesn't help at all and most animals procreate with less regard than even humans.

Cookies
March 13th, 2014, 11:21 AM
Yet humans are the only species that has created Parks where humans provide protection to other species, that created environmental laws, that restrict themselves when it comes to treatment of other species and the environment itself.

But what does that have to do with anything? Humans are the only creatures with the ability to produce parks. And within these countries that create parks we still have abhorrent factory farming practices where animal welfare laws are ignored. Did you know that if you treat a dog the same way you treat a meat pig you would be arrested for animal cruelty? But we let it go because... bacon. We have circuses that cage animals, beat them, and break them so we can be entertained. Animal welfare laws are ignored because... well at least these people have jobs. We are bulldozing the last bits of forest and field so we can create houses, because we are running out of room. Because despite the fact that there are hundreds of millions of orphans who need homes, humans continue to procreate and create more humans without regard to anything other than themselves.

But because a handful of people had the foresight to create some parks (most of which are for human pleasure) somehow... I'm not actually sure what the point was.

Well the point is really pretty simple.

Humans do create parks and reserves and have animal cruelty laws and I love bacon. Humans show concern for people they will likely never meet, that are outside their family, tribe, neighborhood, nation, vicinity. No other animal seems to do that.

Humans do those things.

All humans? No, but still it is humans that do those things.

Do we do enough? Perhaps not but fortunately we also have the capability of reason and being persuaded.

And let's be realistic. We are NOT bulldozing the last bits of forest and we actually plant more trees than we cut down.

Making absurd claims doesn't help at all and most animals procreate with less regard than even humans.

There's no reason to be rude to me. Telling me I'm being absurd is why these types of threads never last long. You can disagree with someone and still be civil.

And as I've stated, Yes! Animals procreate and kill and maim just like humans. The difference is that we know better. Deer don't understand they're overpopulated. Humans see evidence of this everyday. Bears don't understand they don't have to kill that human that is just out camping.

Yes. Some humans show incredible empathy. Non-human animals are incapable of this, so the comparison is irrelevant.

This is the difference. You allow pigs to be kept in gestation crates their entire lives, to be electrocuted and inhumanely slaughtered because you like bacon. Not because you need it for survival. Not because your animal instincts tell you to do so. Because you like it. And that is the difference I was speaking about. Non-human animals don't know that eating the stomach of an animal before it bleeds out is cruelty. We know what we do is cruel, and we do it anyway. Because it's convenient. Because just not thinking about it is easier than trying to do something differently. Animal cruelty laws protecting animals with pet status negate this in your opinion?

As for cutting down trees. Yes, we are absolutely ridding ourselves of remaining habitats. I am very active with Defenders of Wildlife and WWF and I see people everyday who try get around zoning laws to build on animal habitats. I see the destruction of habitat so we can have palm oil and lumber. As people are becoming more conscious in these areas many companies are beginning to plant trees for each one they cut down. But yet we still destroy millions of acres of forest a year. We are running out of (http://visual.ly/how-long-will-it-last) almost every natural resource we have. But that doesn't stop us.

Manny
March 13th, 2014, 01:07 PM
Cookie, your passion for the advocacy of all that is on God's green earth--that is not human--is much appreciated, and I HONESTLY mean this. But jar stated "making absurd claims", and not "you are being absurd".

Flounder
March 13th, 2014, 01:10 PM
Back to ecclesiastical matters & the chap above, I've never really understood where he stands on animals. They don't get into heaven... but they weren't kicked out of the garden of Eden either. So what are they doing here on Earth? I'm not being facile, honestly.

jar
March 13th, 2014, 01:24 PM
Back to ecclesiastical matters & the chap above, I've never really understood where he stands on animals. They don't get into heaven... but they weren't kicked out of the garden of Eden either. So what are they doing here on Earth? I'm not being facile, honestly.

If by the "chap above" you mean me, my belief is that if there is an afterlife then anything that ever lived will likely be represented in that afterlife and regarding religious representation, that there will likely be far more atheists, agnostic, Buddhists, Taoists, Muslims, Jews, Satanists, Animists, followers of Confucius, Mencius, the Norse, Greek, Roman religions than there will be Christians represented.

The story of the Garden of Eden is actually one of my favorite subjects back when I was teaching adult and child Sunday school.

If you really stop and examine the story found in Genesis 2&3 is appears to be a "Just so story" that tries to explain why we fear snakes, why childbirth seems more painful for humans than other critters, why we farm instead of being hunter gatherers, and two particular things, why women should be subject to the man (remember it reflects the mythos of the day) and why we live in a moral based society instead of an amoral one.

Jon Szanto
March 13th, 2014, 01:28 PM
If by the "chap above" you mean me...
I'm betting he didn't, but thanks for jumping in! ;)

Flounder
March 13th, 2014, 01:31 PM
Yep, I mean the boss, the big man.

Cookies
March 13th, 2014, 01:32 PM
Cookie, your passion for the advocacy of all that is on God's green earth--that is not human--is much appreciated, and I HONESTLY mean this. But jar stated "making absurd claims", and not "you are being absurd".

Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see it as much of a distinction. The difference between "making absurd claims" and "being absurd" is semantics. Do reasonable people make absurd claims?

I think people on this thread, regardless of whether they agree or disagree with his opinions, have been mostly tolerant. So when I state my beliefs, to be greeted with 'you're making absurd claims' without even remotely taking my statements into consideration is quite rude. I'm sure he would not appreciate me responding to his take on god with. "You're making absurd claims" So when I am speaking about something that I have made my mission in life, something I obviously care very deeply about. I would appreciate a little more civility.

He stated "I believe ignorance not religion is behind most evil." Yet he let his ignorance drive his response to me. If you want people to respect your beliefs. A good place to start is respecting the beliefs of others. It's clear that my points are not going to be given the benefit of even a small thought, so I'll leave.

Jon Szanto
March 13th, 2014, 01:35 PM
Yep, I mean the boss, the big man.

Ok, now you're really confusing things! Which one?

http://img2-2.timeinc.net/people/i/2011/news/110704/clarence-clemons-440.jpg

jar
March 13th, 2014, 01:36 PM
Yep, I mean the boss, the big man.

Okay. Gottcha. But again, the reason given in the story found in Genesis 2&3 is covered. The God character in that story was afraid that since humans had acquired the great gift and responsibility of knowing the difference between right and wrong, good and evil, they might eat from the Tree of Life and so live forever.

There's nothing in that story about any afterlife.

Flounder
March 13th, 2014, 01:40 PM
Cookies, I think the distinction is that your point is considered valid (Man is responsible for deforestation, city sprawl, 'illegal' logging by his own definition, encroachment of greenbelt lands, etc) but that the hyperbole you've employed to deliver that point is absurd, in that we are not yet down to the last bits of field and forest yet.

Flounder
March 13th, 2014, 01:49 PM
my belief is that if there is an afterlife then anything that ever lived will likely be represented in that afterlife and regarding religious representation, that there will likely be far more atheists, agnostic, Buddhists, Taoists, Muslims, Jews, Satanists, Animists, followers of Confucius, Mencius, the Norse, Greek, Roman religions than there will be Christians represented.

So long as we're getting into syncretism, I'd like to give a shout out to the Jainists. I consider Jainism the most benevolent religion to date.



The story of the Garden of Eden is actually one of my favorite subjects back when I was teaching adult and child Sunday school.

If you really stop and examine the story found in Genesis 2&3 is appears to be a "Just so story" that tries to explain why we fear snakes, why childbirth seems more painful for humans than other critters, why we farm instead of being hunter gatherers, and two particular things, why women should be subject to the man (remember it reflects the mythos of the day) and why we live in a moral based society instead of an amoral one.

This is where I fail as a proper Christian, where allegory begins and ends.

jar
March 13th, 2014, 02:01 PM
So long as we're getting into syncretism, I'd like to give a shout out to the Jainists. I consider Jainism the most benevolent religion to date.



The story of the Garden of Eden is actually one of my favorite subjects back when I was teaching adult and child Sunday school.

If you really stop and examine the story found in Genesis 2&3 is appears to be a "Just so story" that tries to explain why we fear snakes, why childbirth seems more painful for humans than other critters, why we farm instead of being hunter gatherers, and two particular things, why women should be subject to the man (remember it reflects the mythos of the day) and why we live in a moral based society instead of an amoral one.

This is where I fail as a proper Christian, where allegory begins and ends.

Not sure what you mean with the last sentence but agree I certainly should have included Jainism and Hinduism in general.

drgoretex
March 22nd, 2014, 02:36 PM
Well, I must say that this has thus far been a rather enjoyable read. Thanks, Jar, for initiating the discussion, and Mods for allowing it. Very refreshing to hear discussion of matters of faith -something that is most dear to our hearts (whether it is a set of beliefs that is commonly called a 'Faith', or a set of beliefs that is commonly felt to be a 'lack of faith', but which is in a sense, also a faith nonetheless). Having to utterly avoid topics like these, while certainly 'safe' for avoiding the strong feelings and words, has always seemed so smothering and artificial, like avoiding the elephant in the room. :)

Anyhow, carry on.

Ken

Pendragon
March 29th, 2014, 07:09 PM
I have to agree quite vehemently. I would, in fact, say the absolute opposite is true. Humans are horrifically cruel creatures, especially to those animals who cannot fight back.
That would include everyone here, including you and I, correct? That is assuming we are all human.


We lock them in cages, cut off their beaks, and grind baby chicks alive. We take animals more intelligent than dogs and stick them in pens so small they will never be able to turn around in their entire lives. electrocute, gas, and break necks of animals for fur. We perform muelsing, dock and castrate sheep for wool.

Well, I have never done any of those things. I guess that means I am subhuman.


Unlike humans however, non-human animals are not capable of cruelty solely for the sake of amusement. Humans kill for sport.

What about cats that toy with mice before killing them? I doubt the mice enjoy that very much. And what about raccoons, which will go into a henhouse or pigeon loft and kill every living thing there before running off with just one dead animal? Chimpanzees are capable of uncompromising brutality (http://mbalimbali.com/blog/?p=109) and vengeance. Violence and savagery are not limited to homo sapiens.

And all humans kill for sport and never for food?


There are some great people in this world capable of empathy beyond description. But the vast majority are indifferent and idle in response to cruelty.

If that misanthropic view of the world were true, our species would have destroyed itself a long time ago. There are many people in this world capable of great empathy and kindness. Unless one hangs around with the wrong sort of people, it is readily apparent that most folks deplore cruelty.

HughC
March 31st, 2014, 05:02 PM
Yet humans are the only species that has created Parks where humans provide protection to other species, that created environmental laws, that restrict themselves when it comes to treatment of other species and the environment itself.

But what does that have to do with anything? Humans are the only creatures with the ability to produce parks. And within these countries that create parks we still have abhorrent factory farming practices where animal welfare laws are ignored. Did you know that if you treat a dog the same way you treat a meat pig you would be arrested for animal cruelty? But we let it go because... bacon. We have circuses that cage animals, beat them, and break them so we can be entertained. Animal welfare laws are ignored because... well at least these people have jobs. We are bulldozing the last bits of forest and field so we can create houses, because we are running out of room. Because despite the fact that there are hundreds of millions of orphans who need homes, humans continue to procreate and create more humans without regard to anything other than themselves.

But because a handful of people had the foresight to create some parks (most of which are for human pleasure) somehow... I'm not actually sure what the point was.

Well the point is really pretty simple.

Humans do create parks and reserves and have animal cruelty laws and I love bacon. Humans show concern for people they will likely never meet, that are outside their family, tribe, neighborhood, nation, vicinity. No other animal seems to do that.

Humans do those things.

All humans? No, but still it is humans that do those things.

Do we do enough? Perhaps not but fortunately we also have the capability of reason and being persuaded.

And let's be realistic. We are NOT bulldozing the last bits of forest and we actually plant more trees than we cut down.

Making absurd claims doesn't help at all and most animals procreate with less regard than even humans.

There's no reason to be rude to me. Telling me I'm being absurd is why these types of threads never last long. You can disagree with someone and still be civil.

And as I've stated, Yes! Animals procreate and kill and maim just like humans. The difference is that we know better. Deer don't understand they're overpopulated. Humans see evidence of this everyday. Bears don't understand they don't have to kill that human that is just out camping.

Yes. Some humans show incredible empathy. Non-human animals are incapable of this, so the comparison is irrelevant.

This is the difference. You allow pigs to be kept in gestation crates their entire lives, to be electrocuted and inhumanely slaughtered because you like bacon. Not because you need it for survival. Not because your animal instincts tell you to do so. Because you like it. And that is the difference I was speaking about. Non-human animals don't know that eating the stomach of an animal before it bleeds out is cruelty. We know what we do is cruel, and we do it anyway. Because it's convenient. Because just not thinking about it is easier than trying to do something differently. Animal cruelty laws protecting animals with pet status negate this in your opinion?

As for cutting down trees. Yes, we are absolutely ridding ourselves of remaining habitats. I am very active with Defenders of Wildlife and WWF and I see people everyday who try get around zoning laws to build on animal habitats. I see the destruction of habitat so we can have palm oil and lumber. As people are becoming more conscious in these areas many companies are beginning to plant trees for each one they cut down. But yet we still destroy millions of acres of forest a year. We are running out of (http://visual.ly/how-long-will-it-last) almost every natural resource we have. But that doesn't stop us.

As what would be termed a "rancher" in the US I'm fully aware of the issues you mention and the emotions that they bring forth. The Aust. cattle live export industry is constantly having animal cruelty issues raised, mainly by those opposed to it selectively finding poor end users operations and overlooking the better facilities, very effectively btw but sometimes at a very high cost ( some years ago the Aust. Govt. reacted to an Animals Australia clip and temporarily banned exports to Indonesia who promptly told us to "go away", the end result of this and less than ideal seasonal conditions was hundreds of thousands of cattle died of starvation with no market, a high cost in human terms as well). How an animal is slaughtered depends on many things such as facilities, religion, need and culture. Without doubt humane slaughter is the aim if animals are to part of our food chain ( and that's the case in Aust.), still to those who view the animals solely as food this seems less of a consideration. Likewise caged animals/birds are highly emotive issues with free range eggs v caged eggs being an example, caged egg production in Aust. looks set to increase for one reason, biosecurity, as large free range facilities are more susceptible to "bird flue" from the wild bird population.

As for your previous comments on sheep, I can say that muelsing achieved far greater animal welfare outcomes than it causes especially where sheep run in large areas as being eaten alive by maggots isn't very good either , I realize it may not look nice but the reality is only skin is removed, much like skinning your knee and while I would have preferred not to perform it the animal welfare benefits justified it ( I no longer run wool sheep and don't perform muelsing anymore). Wool is a natural fibre, reducing fossil fuel usage (oil) reduces synthetic fibre production as well so natural fibres may well have a greater future than at present and, of course, all wool sheep become part of the food chain in the end. If you take a broader view of wool production it also includes a food component and increase the sheeps longevity as opposed to meat sheep production, so not all bad for the sheep. Some procedures such as castration are a necessary procedure, that's the reality when you work with large numbers. Often overlooked is that most who raise animals are interested in their welfare and healthy animals make more money.

No doubt natural habitats are declining and as population grows the pressure increases, less people goes a long way to solving a lot of these issues but that's not going to happen in my lifetime. Here they've tried various schemes and legislation to reduce tree clearing, an issue to me as it limits my land usage given my family has managed our property timber resources with an eye to timber sustainability. In a bizarre twist I could gain "carbon credits" by planting trees yet not for having maintained a healthy tree population for a century!! I'd have to clear the trees I've got ( get fined for that) and plant new ones. Personally I think in the long term in a number of countries it'll be a compromise between "green" environmental groups and land users/owners to achieve "best possible" outcomes that increase food production while maintain as much diversity as possible. Probably a "pipe dream" but the Aust. experiment with expecting farmers to bear all the financial cost to provide a community benefit is not a sustainable model.

You've touched a lot of issues that need to be addressed in a positive way. Without a doubt some animal practices need improvement and some practices need to be better understood.

Regards
Hugh

Flounder
March 31st, 2014, 05:42 PM
The Aust. cattle live export industry is constantly having animal cruelty issues raised, mainly by those opposed to it selectively finding poor end users operations

I think I know what you're referring to, couldn't watch the footage. Sickening savagery.

HughC
March 31st, 2014, 07:59 PM
The Aust. cattle live export industry is constantly having animal cruelty issues raised, mainly by those opposed to it selectively finding poor end users operations

I think I know what you're referring to, couldn't watch the footage. Sickening savagery.

The "infamous" Indonesian clip. While it occurred there are some lingering doubts whether this was "normal" operating procedure or the men playing up to the camera and/or the possible exchange of money given the clip was done by a professional outfit from the UK ( so I'm led to believe). Still it should never have occurred regardless of how the clip was obtained. Anyway that one clip ended up causing unimaginable damage mainly from a Govt. in deep trouble seeing a ban as a vote winner, the lack of a plan B....what to do with all those cattle...showed how stupid a decision it was. To add insult a state owned Indonesian company then purchased a number of cattle runs from those "busted" by the ban !! In reality no winners only losers.

Regards
Hugh