Bible Questions?

What laws are those that you've seen? On this planet?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQyg4ayWUM"]YouTube- Report on Freedom of Religion or Belief

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32743&Cr=religion&Cr1=

Not exactly sure what you meant by, 'On this planet'. I don't get out much, let alone get to other planets.

None of the laws have passed, but they are debating and considering how much freedom religious institutions should have. While I don't disagree with her point, it is my speculation of mine that it could lead to other debates.

 

I'm leary of plugins, so I didn't download it. But I think I misunderstood your statement. I thought you were talking about laws against religious belief in general. There are governments in various countries that restrict particular religious expressions: some Muslim governments restrict Christian practices, Hindu governments in some of the Indian states have restricted proselytizing by Christian missionaries, France prohibits Muslim women from wearing the hijab, Germany has had a go-around with Scientology (not without good reasons), and Communist governments in general aren't friendly to religion of any kind. These are restrictions on practices rather than beliefs per se, and most of them are a product of religious zealotry, but it's appropriate to be concerned about them. If Al Qaida or the Taliban had their way, we'd probably be converted to Islam or be eliminated. On the other hand, there's a good deal of legislation going the other way. For example, in my state gays are prohibited from marrying or adopting children--the latter restriction being as recent as 2008. Whatever the official justification, the support came from the religious right. The state legislature threatened to investigate the University of Oklahoma for allowing Dawkins to speak on its campus, which is regularly used by Christian speakers. It's still common at public school events to have a very Christian invocation and prayer by an Evangelical Protestant preacher, constitutional law notwisthstanding. It cuts both ways. And wasn't it Ann Coulter, self-styled "Christian", who said we should forcibly convert all Muslims?

On the subject of Armageddon, it's not hard to think of a number of scenarios that could bring it about. Nuclear Iran comes readily to mind!

 

Sorry about the plugin and the confusion. The site automatically converts youtube links and parses them into plugin code; I tried to fix it but I'm not exactly sure how. There are good cases where restriction is necessary such as the cases that come up where religious parents refuse to give their children medical treatment or refuse to put them in any kind of schooling.

True restrictions can go both ways and that goes for about everything in life. The concern I have is how the overall hatred of religion may create laws that are written in such a way to directions it's attention to belief, but not the person, so how is it possible to separate the two? Belief and the person are interconnected, outlaw a belief and you can outlaw the person.

I never liked the butting in of religions and politics. When ideology/religion is politicised, it can become very dangerous...

Please don't get me started with Ann Coulter

Iran is a very plausible scenario. Another is worrying about the successor to Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-Un; His father says that he is a 'brilliant comrade' and his mother calls him, "The morning stars son"

*Gulp*

 

I guess I haven't seen that much hatred of religion by non-religious folks, although Sam Harris comes close. Some atheists will occasionally voice Dawkins' idea that parents should be prohibited from raising their kids in a religious tradition, but so far that's a really fringe viewpoint. Hatred of some religions by other religions seems to be a much bigger problem. And yes, along with Iran there is North Korea to worry about. That has less to do with religion than mental illness. I agree wholeheartedly that when religion/ideology become politicized they become dangerous. On that note, the willingness of Christian leaders like Falwell, Robertson, and Dobson to become Republican political brokers, and Rick Warren to play footsey with Obama, is disturbing.

 

Yes, religion is pressing it's hand into areas that it should not be. And just in talking to some in these forums you feel a wave of back lash coming. At the very least there is a lot of looking down their nose at religions and calling believers ignorant and what they believe fairy tales and calling God the invisible man in the sky.

I do not believe Armageddon to be a nuclear war, if one is to believe the Bible, that war is not indiscriminate like a nuclear war would be but it seems to be very selective as to who lives and dies.

 

In the other forums that I visit, I often find threads that belittle religion and any mention that there may be a right and wrong and they tear you to shreds. Also tell us that we're nuts and that 'your kind has caused this world so much suffering and pain'; even stating that 'our kind' need to go so that 'we can progress'. I also noticed a revival of the idea behind eugenics and some have suggested that elderly sickly people should be put to sleep because resources are limited and that 'it only makes sense'.

 

Religion is still very powerful and thus at this point you will not see a lot of outcry against it by public figures but if you talk to people on the street you begin to hear talk about doing something about religious extremists.

Rudenoodle has just recently brought up both Jim Jones and the Branch Dravidians in this thread and there is not much talk about what Christians have done to help people in disaster areas.

SunshineChild, in another thread said; The Bible also seems to suggest killing homosexuals, disobedient children, people who work on Sabbath, .... is perfectly fine.

And in another thread even you, Okiefreak, who say you are a Christian, said of Christians that they could; unwittingly become an advocate of genocide, sexism, racism, slavery, homophobia and other abominations that are contrary to the central message of Jesus.

From all this and more, I see that it would not take a lot of work to get mankind to turn against religion.

 

I have seen and heard the same things.

 

It would take quite a lot of work to get me to turn against religion, but some expressions of it strike me as dangerous and contrary to the teachings of Jesus. Does this mean I want to destroy or persecute these believers? Absolutely not. But it does mean I want to be as active as I can in promoting what I consider to be humane Christian values and opposing those that I reagard as pharisaical. But Jesus did the same thing, and some people found him dangerous.

 

You do realize I was not commenting on your ability or lack there of to turn against religion. I merely was saying that even Christians are beginning to see that some Christian religions are capable of doing and believing some very bad things and if that is true how much more so is that true for those that have no religion at all.

As for "Christians" not turning against religion, two scriptures readily come to mind:
Consequently let him that thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall. (1 Corinthians 10:12)
In fact, the hour is coming when everyone that kills YOU will imagine he has rendered a sacred service to God. (John 16:2)

 

What is this verse refering to?

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. 3And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— 4was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. (2 Corithians 12:2-5)

 

if a old man cant afford to bury his wife and has to have her re cremated is that a sin on here part or his? or does God forgive them?

 

Why is cremation a sin?

 

The Church used to say it was, as somehow an impediment to the resurrection of the body.

 

Thanks.

But just thinking about it, why would God need to use the mangled body of a car accident victim to resurrect someone, when God can recreate a whole new body for them out of the dust on the ground or for that matter it would seem he could use the ashes as easily as rotted corpse for making a body for a resurrected one. What about someone who died in a fire, does that mean God can't resurrect that one? It seems sometimes the "Church" can say some pretty silly things.

 

Well it seems the person Paul was referring to was himself and it seems the paradise he was referring to seems to be the spiritual condition of God people in the last days.

 

I thought it was?

 

Maybe it is but I don't know why it would be.

 

Philippians 2:5-8

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
​

What are we to make of this section? While it is saying that Jesus is not equal to God because 'he didn't consider it something that can be grasped'. It does seem to mention that he became a mere servant. If Jesus is an Angel, then would he not already be a servant? Why would it say that he turned himself into a servant if he already was one?