Religion II

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Fight with death. God as party animal. What is real?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMK0prafzw0

Real wild stuff Cincy, are those the folks you like to chill with...?

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Everyone's spiritual quest is their own. I hope you have one. I know 3 things about myself. I can be moral without a god. I can be optimistic without a heaven. I am never going to cease looking for both.

If you're addressing me, Cincy, I agree. I hope I have one also, but I'm after a bit more than optimism.

Yes, one can be moral without a god. Human nature would be what it is with or without a god, and a thing deserves to be treated according to its nature, deserves to attain the ends for which it is designed- goodness in the case of humans. It is the materialists who deny purpose in nature. It was the atheist Sartre who said "no god, no morality".

Aside from all that, I just found Vigor's love-in humorous more than anything, due to the differences that were relativized among the trio.

If you weren't addressing me...oops.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

Real wild stuff Cincy, are those the folks you like to chill with...?

South African Hillbillies with a ghetto mentality. They'd be fun as hell to party with for sure!. At 44 I am an old man to this young crowd though!

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

If you're addressing me, Cincy, I agree. I hope I have one also, but I'm after a bit more than optimism.

Yes, one can be moral without a god. Human nature would be what it is with or without a god, and a thing deserves to be treated according to its nature, deserves to attain the ends for which it is designed- goodness in the case of humans. It is the materialists who deny purpose in nature. It was the atheist Sartre who said "no god, no morality".

Aside from all that, I just found Vigor's love-in humorous more than anything, due to the differences that were relativized among the trio.

If you weren't addressing me...oops.

I wasn't addressing you specifically. There is something in me that is not of reason but isn't self destructive. Soul is a good of an answer as any. Maybe it's residual Catholicism and that special feeling I had as a kid in church. I need more than reason. More than religion. My soul and mind outgrew that. I like the Jungian concept of the collective unconscious because at the very least in this hostile world it almost is optimistic and universal in our quests. I know it's not. But I like it. To your one statement though I don't think human nature would be moral without a god which is why I take great pride in my statement. I believe in god. God isn't writin best sellers though!

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Light

No offense, but you sound like someone pretending to know something that you quite clearly don't from your own words. Your criticism is very cliche, superficial and somewhat senile. Here's the senile part:

I gave a link that includes thousands of archived NDE's. Yet you embarrass yourself by saying more people believe they have been abducted by aliens. You don't even educate yourself when the data is put right in front of you before opening your mouth again and sounding senile because the data already contradicts you, and you have no data, only your close minded opinion.

If you had an intelligent criticism you would have cited some of those NDE's and said this cannot be true because of this or that specific reason. Instead you paint with a broad brush your "expert" senile, close minded, baseless position. Very immature.

I think it is fairly accurate to say that you know little or nothing about "NDEs"--other than "stuff you read somewhere." If you did, we might have an interesting exchange. Posting a "link that includes thousands of archived NDE's" is not exactly qualification to discuss such in other than a superficial manner. I lack the time (and interest) for such silliness. When it comes to NDEs and related topics, I don't do superficial.

[Light]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

There are many types of love, Light, and some find it uncomfortable discussing love...but I do not...love of brother, love of God, love of Man, passion, erotic, hetero and homo erotic, love for animals, love for the earth, tough love, etc, etc,....I think people shy away from talking about love because it is such a fluffy topic....

There's only one love that counts and that is the love I am talking about. It is not a love of anything. It is love itself. It lives within you. If you don't know that love, you don't know love.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

I wasn't addressing you specifically. There is something in me that is not of reason but isn't self destructive. Soul is a good of an answer as any. Maybe it's residual Catholicism and that special feeling I had as a kid in church. I need more than reason. More than religion. My soul and mind outgrew that. I like the Jungian concept of the collective unconscious because at the very least in this hostile world it almost is optimistic and universal in our quests. I know it's not. But I like it. To your one statement though I don't think human nature would be moral without a god which is why I take great pride in my statement. I believe in god. God isn't writin best sellers though!

I was quoting Aristotle on the human nature aspect, but for some here, that automatically means it's an idea I haven't contemplated and accepted, just repeated on autopilot.

My Catholicism isn't residual. I'm all in. I consider the Church the extension of the Incarnation through time, warts and all. I recently returned from a used car dealership, where my self-evidential acceptance of the Fall of man was reaffirmed. I just don't see the severe weakness in us all as the failure to seek "Enlightenment"--I've never met someone who claimed "enlightenment"--and I haven't begun to list my reasons for the incoherence of Materialism here.

I don't think I can get to the self-sacrificial love of Christ, which leads to a correctly understood "divinization" ("theosis" in the East) without first his help/grace.

[Hank]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

If you're addressing me, Cincy, I agree. I hope I have one also, but I'm after a bit more than optimism.

Yes, one can be moral without a god.

, and a thing deserves to be treated according to its nature,

- goodness in the case of humans. It is the materialists who deny purpose in nature. It was the atheist Sartre who said "no god, no morality".

Aside from all that, I just found Vigor's love-in humorous more than anything, due to the differences that were relativized among the trio.

If you weren't addressing me...oops.

Given the implicit assumption that the "designer" of human nature would be God,How could a thing be the same absent it's designer?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by Light

There's only one love that counts and that is the love I am talking about. It is not a love of anything. It is love itself. It lives within you. If you don't know that love, you don't know love.

Need more specifics here...Too fluffy for me...Love itself..?

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

I was quoting Aristotle on the human nature aspect, but for some here, that automatically means it's an idea I haven't contemplated and accepted, just repeated on autopilot.

My Catholicism isn't residual. I'm all in. I consider the Church the extension of the Incarnation through time, warts and all. I recently returned from a used car dealership, where my self-evidential acceptance of the Fall of man was reaffirmed. I just don't see the severe weakness in us all as the failure to seek "Enlightenment"--I've never met someone who claimed "enlightenment"--and I haven't begun to list my reasons for the incoherence of Materialism here.

I don't think I can get to the self-sacrificial love of Christ, which leads to a correctly understood "divinization" ("theosis" in the East) without first his help/grace.

We are all just talking out loud here. This is enjoyable. We are horseplayers with bright shiny souls in addition to mutuel needs! How we go about finding meaning in things is completely up to the individual. I was an angry atheistic individual 25 years ago. My soul was being suffocated. I wasn't an atheist. I had retained everything I believed in but was inspired by much of what I had read. It was necessary. Never since have I tried to work out the philosophical technicalities about how I feel and what I believe. I try to take a more pragmatic approach. Sum up what you think and believe down to the most basic of terms. Add it to real life. My cousin is an avid Christian and we talk and celebrate the goodness of life and the lord deep into the night often! The spiritual need is the universal. It is the way and the truth and the light. As long as we do it together and don't try to take possession of it and over apply too much reason too it. That's my take..

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by Hank

Given the implicit assumption that the "designer" of human nature would be God,How could a thing be the same absent it's designer?

Hi, Hank.

Utilizing Aristotle's four causes (Matter, Form, Source, End), one doesn't have to go beyond matter and form to have the same knowledge of nature, God or no.

And we can know the nature of a thing--human beings--empirically. Knowing what is good for human flourishing can be greatly determined by knowing the ends for which our nature "points to", i.e., natural law.

[Hank]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

I was quoting Aristotle on the human nature aspect, but for some here, that automatically means it's an idea I haven't contemplated and accepted, just repeated on autopilot.

My Catholicism isn't residual. I'm all in. I consider

I recently returned from a used car dealership, where my self-evidential acceptance of the Fall of man was reaffirmed. I just don't see the severe weakness in us all as the failure to seek "Enlightenment"--I've never met someone who claimed "enlightenment"--and I haven't begun to list my reasons for the incoherence of Materialism here.

.

How could an extension of the "Divine logos" develop "Warts"?And lets not play games here. These "warts" are more akin to huge malignant tumors.MURDER TORTURE, SLAVERY,CHILD RAPE, NAZI RAT LINES ....warts?Would not the GRACE you speak of be bestowed upon the leaders of "THE" organization that holds itself out to the world as an extension of the Divine logos?

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Light

No offense, but you sound like someone pretending to know something that you quite clearly don't from your own words. Your criticism is very cliche, superficial and somewhat senile. Here's the senile part:

I gave a link that includes thousands of archived NDE's. Yet you embarrass yourself by saying more people believe they have been abducted by aliens. You don't even educate yourself when the data is put right in front of you before opening your mouth again and sounding senile because the data already contradicts you, and you have no data, only your close minded opinion.

If you had an intelligent criticism you would have cited some of those NDE's and said this cannot be true because of this or that specific reason. Instead you paint with a broad brush your "expert" senile, close minded, baseless position. Very immature.

I apologize for my response. I should have ignored your comments, or simply acknowledged that you have every right to believe whatever you choose to believe. In any event, I hope you will accept my apology. My response was inappropriate, and I regret it. Unfortunately, I cannot delete it.

[Hank]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

Hi, Hank.

Utilizing Aristotle's four causes (Matter, Form, Source, End), one doesn't have to go beyond matter and form to have the same knowledge of nature, God or no.

And we can know the nature of a thing--human beings--empirically. Knowing what is good for human flourishing can be greatly determined by knowing the ends for which our nature "points to", i.e., natural law.

This does not answer my question,the subject was 'human nature" not a table or chair.Material and form have no real relevance here. What is the material cause human nature ? What form does it take? And discerning the telos of something empirically is possible,but this does not negate the need for the initial design that had telos in mind.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by Hank

How could an extension of the "Divine logos" develop "Warts"?And lets not play games here. These "warts" are more akin to huge malignant tumors.MURDER TORTURE, SLAVERY,CHILD RAPE, NAZI RAT LINES ....warts?Would not the GRACE you speak of be bestowed upon the leaders of "THE" organization that holds itself out to the world as an extension of the Divine logos?

So my usage of a common phrase, in a casual conversation to someone else in a brief post, while failing to mention every sin committed by every Catholic for all time, is just being evasive. Actor says your "huge malignant tumors" are just a human construct. I apparently make a flippant remark to ignite your pilot light, he undermines your whole view of reality. "Where was Hank during the Holocaust"?

Thinking means connecting thoughts. But I understand emotion can get in the way sometimes. Assuming the structure of the church, Christ would necessarily have to work with sinful man. Not man who uses the wrong salad fork...man who is capable of all the things you mention, whether inside or outside the church, though a few of your grievances betray your eager acceptance of the usual narrative. Not gonna elaborate.