* Überdonkey * on 30/1/2004 at 00:38

---

theBlackman: I was talking about a religious man's madman; I've heard from many people that God somehow communicated with them.

The given outlook is not necesarily that God doesn't talk to people; that's a commonly held outlook, but it's not yet strong enough to be a full-force "metaphysical law".

Also, abnormality isn't sufficient to be labelled mad, generally, genius or not. You need to be non-functional, break certain rules, not play certain social games, etc (well these are all forms of abnormality, but you have to be specific).

Agent Monkeysee on 30/1/2004 at 00:53

---

Sure. But it doesn't sound like a kind of anger unfathomable for mere mortals. I can think of plenty of circumstances where I would be similarly justified in being angry.

It sounds like righteous anger is simply justified anger wherein the discontent is rooted in a violation of God's perfection. So people can't experience righteous anger by definition since no person posesses God's perfection. It's not the anger itself that's alien and unattainable, merely the association of the anger with a particular quality that has been affronted.



Haha, your definition of Christian is so exclusive it has looped around and become inclusive.

theBlackman on 30/1/2004 at 01:15

---

Although the numerous quoted references, and the conversations are interesting, and in some cases informative. There really is little basis for "arguement" (Quotes used deliberately).

A discussion of differing views of the subject(s), as we have is quite intriqueing. But to get nasty about "belief" because of faith is just arguing to no point, except to bolster the ego of the differing sides.

When dealing with a "faith" issue, such as promulgated by Zaccheus's responses, no rational evidence is going to change a "faith" view one iota.

Over the years numerous verification of the historical validity of some of the Bible's script has been done by archeologists, geologists, and others of the science (hands on realists) community.

The location of oil pools mentioned in the Bible, the location of Sodom and Gammorra, and evidence of the destruction of same by fire. The location of the temple of Solomon, etc.

As a historical referrence the Bible is continually being supported.

As far as the miracles of Christ, his relationship with God, and the subsequent growth of the religion. These are accepted by many "on FAITH". An emotional condition that cannot be refuted by simple words, or by other "earthly" proofs.

Goggleboy on 30/1/2004 at 03:28

---

In the case I described that's probably spot-on accurate. I don't feel like telling the whole story at the moment (since it would probably exceed the character limit) but for the most part "psychopath" is also an accurate description. There is definitely a measured purpose behind her actions, and even though the doctors diagnosed her with psychosis, it could very well be a facade to garner sympathy. I've been anxious for a while that one day she's going to decide to act out violently once again and feign psychosis to make the authorities believe she wasn't in control of her actions.

But any claims of faith she makes ought to be taken with a grain of salt.

Udasai on 30/1/2004 at 05:30

---

Having just reread the part of Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" dealing with Christianity...

One major thesis of his is that religious intolerance was essentially invented by the Jews, and subsequently spread and institutionalized by the Christians. The pagans usually respected other peoples' gods because, hey, a god is a god.

Thanks to the Zoroastrian "good vs. evil" dichotomy, the Jews and the major religions that arose from them (Christianity and Islam) came to hate the unbelievers as minions of the "evil god".

The Jews apparently were just generally hostile to the pagans but did not seek to purge them. They did not (and still do not) seek converts, since it is a racially based religion (you are either in the tribe or not based upon your mother's Jewishness). Eventually God would just let everybody else die in time, and then resurrect his chosen people. Originally, and this is obvious in the Old Testament, JHVH was just a surly tribal god of limited powers. Over time, the Jews picked up on the neo-Platonic abstract God, same as the Christians. Probably giving up the animal sacrifices after the destruction of the second temple forced a degree of abstraction. Anyway, Judaism is just a clique of racists with a large periphery of agnostic, impassive, or deluded adherents today. If you doubt that, consider the cool reception of the African Jews.

The Christians actively sought converts, and so grew in numbers quickly with their appeal to the hopeless slaves and dregs of the Roman Empire. Eventually, Constantine institutionalized the religion, and by the Nicean Creed established an "orthodox" Christian faith borrowing heavily and directly from the neo-Platonists. As a result of his decree, intolerance of doctrinal deviation caused the so-called Christians to go on a persecutorial rampage for a thousand years, making the intermittent persecution of the Christians under the emperors prior to Constantine seem benign. The original concept of Christianity, which is similar to Buddhism in its denial of self, was disposed once it became the official religion, because a faith which tells you to ignore transient temporal distractions and instead prepare for the eternal afterlife CANNOT be compatible with temporal governance. That means the Christianity of Jesus and the disciples has been dead for over 1500 years.

Islam made the persecution of infidels a point of faith (as opposed to a derived tool of governmental policy). Either surrender to Allah or face his wrath NOW. This actually became more temperate over time as the Islamic empire expanded. It further disposed of the failed prophecies of the Testaments. However, it encoded dark age Arab culture as a commandment of God and so could not change with modern times. Modern Moslems are internally conflicted by the evident failure of their religion, and surly as a result.

I think we should kill all adherents of intolerant belief systems.