| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2003 5:04 pm Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
 |
|
CB - I find your approach, and positions, quite familiar, because I
used and held them for so long.
I also detect a trace of anger, I am quite familiar with that, too.
In your desire to "break chains", are you sure you are not forging
another set of them ? LE |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 12:26 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
On 18 Aug 2003 03:14:33 -0700, nothingnobler@hotmail.com (Chain Breaker) wrote:
| Quote: | That's quite plausible. It's easy to believe that Jehovah would torture
people forever for failing to eat frog legs once a month, or for shaving
their toes, or whatever the abomination of the week is. The God described
in the Bible is capable of promoting practically any absurd regulation.
And it is common for Christians to seize on some out-of-context proof text
in the Bible, ignoring the rest, and use that to condemn everyone around
them. That doesn't mean it's necessarily happening here, though. You've
just asserted that it is, without evidence, and I haven't seen any
Adventists (except the one guy who doesn't understand time zones and can't
spell "IDL") confirm it. I just don't see any indication that the
Adventist church considers Saturday to be *intrinsically* any holier than
any other day. It's just traditional. I think you're attacking a straw
man. It's better to use arguments like "there is no evidence that any kind
of god exists or that the history in your Bible is (in?)accurate", "Jehovah > is
documented as being a psychopathic serial killer", or "If you were born in
Saudi Arabia, you'd be going to hell. Does that make sense to you?" -- if
those don't convince people (and they usually don't) then nothing will.
Certainly not annoying details like this. (Joel)
Adventists seem to have gone strangely quiet on this. There is
evidence there if you look, though. More about that later. As for your
other comments, I think I will take your advice.(CB)
Augustine has an often-quoted passage about how Christians shouldn't make
dogmatic statements about nature that the rest of the world believes to be
wrong, because it makes them look like idiots. I think it works both ways
-- non-christians shouldn't make dogmatic statements about a Christianity
that Christians don't believe in. (Joel)
Yes, I am aware that most of Christendom don't give a rat's ass about
the old seventh day Sabbath for various reasons. Some believe that
*(A) under the new covenant the holy day was changed to Sunday, and
(B) no day is any more special than another. In hindsight, I think I
was way too ambitious trying to prove the unreliability of the bible
writers on such an obscure point, I will grant you that. I don't think
I realised how apathetic Christians are generally, about a command
that is, after all, a part of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. They pay a lot of
lip-service to the ten commandments but I doubt many could even name
them all. I am, however, AMAZED at the apathy and lack of knowledge in
THIS newsgroup on this issue. (CB)
*BTW An excellent book, written by an Adventist, that demonstrates the
stupidity of Christians in group (A) is: From Sabbath to Sunday - by
Samuele Bacchiocchi. (CB)
|
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Saturday is the Sabbath, so your
endorsement of this book is meaningless.
Rob |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 12:45 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
CB - I, as the result of a catastophic event in my life, and the
Church's response to it, first rejected the church ( SDA) then God.
For close to twenty years I was a hater of the Judeo Christian concept
of a God, lumping it with fishes as Gods, or UFO pilots as Gods.
I concentrated quite happily on scholarly agnostic philosophy, and
studying the founders of the SDA movement, to learn every negative thing
about them, for the purposes of debunking and ridiculing them.
My rage at God and the church have cooled, and although I doubt I will
ever be an SDA again, I choose to concntrate on the kindness and
goodness of the vast majority of them.
As to God, I simply came to the conclusion that if one asks questions
about the universe or the meaning of it, and us within it, the answers
are singularly depressing without factoring in the concept of a
personal, loving God.
An accident of the cosmic scale, with absolutely no meaning or purpose,
is utterly unacceptable to me.
As I believe Descartes said, " If I believe, and am wrong, I lose
nothing, If I don't believe, and am wrong, I lose everything".
So now, I am trying to live a kinder, gentler form of Christianity, and
I have learned that anger and resentment against the ignorance of
others, generates and wastes alot of negative energy,that those with
whom I am angry could'nt care less about.
the concept of "total freedom", within the framework of true
agnosticism, total uncertainy about the existence of God, and what he
represents, at least, for me, created an angst and frustration that pure
hedonism couldn't numb, and those feelings became chains themselves.
That is who I am, and what I meant.LE |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chain Breaker
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:02 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
Tell me who you are, Lamarr!
| Quote: | CB - I find your approach, and positions, quite familiar, because I
used and held them for so long.
|
Hi again Lamarr - Tell me where you are in your thinking and we will
discuss. I may be wrong but I get the feeling you can't quite make the
break. Am I close?
| Quote: | I also detect a trace of anger, I am quite familiar with that, too.
|
I'm not angry with individuals. But, with a system that lied to me
personally for thirty years, and which I now see as holding up the
progress of free thinking humans, I figure I'm entitled to some
"righteous indignation". I'm impatient and gung-ho at times. But am I
honest? Yes!
| Quote: | In your desire to "break chains", are you sure you are not forging
another set of them ? LE
|
Dunno what you mean. CB |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Andrew
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 7:52 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
| Quote: | the concept of "total freedom", within the framework of true
agnosticism, total uncertainy about the existence of God, and what he
represents, at least, for me, created an angst and frustration that pure
hedonism couldn't numb, and those feelings became chains themselves.
|
How true and descriptive of the experience of many - until they find that
"total freedom" can come only through a total surrender to their Creator
and Redeemer - Jesus Christ .. who is the REAL *Chain Breaker.* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Joel Hoffman
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 10:38 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:14:33 -0700, Chain Breaker wrote: [snip]
| Quote: | I have none -- it just makes the most sense to me. And I doubt the
questions ever really comes up. For most of their alleged history the
Jews lived in communities in a more or less small geographical area,
and they all kept the Sabbath as a shared holiday. To keep the Sabbath
out of sync with the community is apparently the same as not keeping it
-- so it is important to distinguish between Saturday being the day God
ordained, and Saturday being the way everyone else does it. And I
interpret the Bible to say the second -- but then again I also
interpret it to mean that the Sabbath was eliminated along with
circumcision and the rest of the Mosaic law. (Joel)
The question certainly never, ever came up in bible times because nobody
realised it was an issue. THAT WAS MY POINT. (A point becoming more and
more obtuse by the minute because no one seems to give a shit, even the
one's I thought would!) (CB)
|
Course not.  There are probably some interesting tangents to this
related to the traditional design of calendars and their effect on the
subconscious mind.... (Joel)
If I were an Adventist, I'd probably claim that the "six days of work,
then one day of rest" is not the definition, but merely a description of
the progression of events in the normal case, when there is no global
travelling involved. You go to a new place, you use the local Sabbath.
Maybe that's too reasonable. Would be nice if someone would clarify this.
(Joel)
| Quote: | My intention was never to attack Adventists but to challenge them to
think outside their tight denominational boundaries, and hopefully,
eventually find themselves free from ALL religious, mental constraints.
You may not find what you're looking for on websites. But, for a start,
you could get hold of the book "The Great Controversy" by Ellen G White.
Read especially her references to the Sabbath and particularly in
relation to end times. This woman is believed to be the prophetic spirit
within the Adventist church; you will find ample proof of the role they
believe the Sabbath will play in the end times, as the church still
holds to her teachings. (CB)
|
Yes, /challenge/ is more what I meant than /attack/. Poor choice of words
on my part. Interesting... I briefly looked at "The Great Controversy" as
well as "The Desire of Ages," and did a search of the information
available here: http://www.egwestate.andrews.edu/ . It's better than a lot
of more modern sci-fi. (I wonder if, in 50 years, there will be a religion
based on C.S. Lewis's space trilogy.) The closest thing I could find to a
definition of the sabbath is "Friday sunset to Saturday sunset" and no
indication of whether an isolated community would be wrong to have a week
that's not synchronous with the standard one. Interestingly, she
definitely was against keeping the Sabbath at times other than evening to
evening -- not just because "the Bible says so", but because of a vision:
http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc25.html#c25
But I think this is flexible enough to handle the odd person that Teresita
described, who makes a lateral journey around the earth, properly keeping
the Sabbath, and arrives back at her origin but with the Sabbath a day out
of sync from everyone else. She would just start keeping the Sabbath at
the same time as everyone else, and there would really be no problem.
What's the alternative? Should she retrace the journey the other way?
(Joel)
Lots of cricket noises coming from the Adventists' direction.... (Joel) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 2:34 pm Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
CB - Yes, I read much of the same material, although I find BR,
personally, to be rather a house of cards in a variety of areas.
Really, the choice is fundamentally a simple one.
Believe that you, your family, and everyone else has the flicker of life
for a relative nanosecond in time, compared to eternity, that these puny
lives have no meaning, no purpose, and came into existence by a process
that will never b understood, OR
Believe that the universe is the result of creation by a powerful,
omnipotent being, and that lives are more than nothing, which
proposition A above makes them.
It is a matter of faith, either way.
Proposition B sounds very pollyannish, but proposition A sounds
downright foolish.
Those are the two choices to be made.
You spoke of "religion", but that is not what I am talking about,
"religion" is man made and corrupted by the inherent greed for riches,
esteem, and power of mankind.
The evidence on either side is far from conclusive, so faith must be
exercised in choosing either conclusion.
I have decided to put my faith into the claims of Christ, and I don't
believe in religion, I believe in him.
I could be completely wrong ( I doubt it) but if I am, in the end, I
will be no deader than you, and I will have died with a hope that you
will not have to comfort you at the end, you will only have your
"truth", which proclaims that your entire existence was a bad joke, that
you cannot laugh at. LE |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chain Breaker
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 3:26 pm Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
| Quote: | CB - I, as the result of a catastophic event in my life, and the
Church's response to it, first rejected the church ( SDA) then God.
For close to twenty years I was a hater of the Judeo Christian concept
of a God, lumping it with fishes as Gods, or UFO pilots as Gods.
I concentrated quite happily on scholarly agnostic philosophy, and
studying the founders of the SDA movement, to learn every negative thing
about them, for the purposes of debunking and ridiculing them. (LE)
|
Lamarr - I appreciate your candor. Allow me to make a very important
distinction between your experience and mine. Your opposition to God
came about as a result of the church's bad (?) response to the
catastrophic event in your life. It sounds like it was not a weighed,
rational decision on your part but an emotional one. My story and
yours are poles apart. I was happy to be a Christian and my faith and
sense of certainty about the future had never been stronger. My
decision to leave the flock was entirely rational and came about after
reading mountains of material that challenged traditional Christian
thinking, and weighing up the evidence or lack of evidence, however
you wish to express it. Don't think this was an easy decision for me.
It was the most traumatic decision I had ever made in my life. It came
down to this: What did I cherish more, comfort or truth? I chose
truth. I don't know why, I just did. (CB)
snip
| Quote: | As to God, I simply came to the conclusion that if one asks questions
about the universe or the meaning of it, and us within it, the answers
are singularly depressing without factoring in the concept of a
personal, loving God. (LE)
|
I don't have a comforting answer for this conundrum, none at all. But
I will share with you some words that whilst not particularly
comforting are honest and conducive of courage:
"Religion, since it has its source in terror, has dignified certain
kinds of fear, and made people think them not disgraceful. In this it
has done mankind a great disservice: all fear is bad. I believe that
when I die I shall rot, and nothing of my ego will survive. I am not
young, and I love life. But I should scorn to shiver with terror at
the thought of annihilation. Happiness is none the less true happiness
because it must come to an end, nor do thought and love lose their
value because they are not everlasting. Many a man has borne himself
proudly on the scaffold; surely the same pride should teach us to
think truly about man's place in the world. Even if the open windows
of science at first make us shiver after the cosy indoor warmth of
traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigour,
and the great spaces have a splendour of their own." Bertrand Russell.
Why I am not a Christian. p43.
I think I will leave it there, Lamarr. All the best. (CB) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:10 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
CB - I am not attempting to prove, anything.
I cannot prove the creation by God, the state of anything before the big
bang, whether there are, or are not parallel universes, or why the
universe is expanding, when Hubble, quite correctly, based upon the
evidence predicted that the universe should be slowing down. Nor can I
prove that there is a mysterious force causing this speeding up, nor has
anyone seen the "black matter" that seems to exist in the universe.
I am not sure that you have studied logic, but what you call "limp
wristed" is in fact, perfectly logical.
You demand proof, but there is none that is unequivcical.
Nor, can you produce any proof that what I believe did not occur.
I have cited a number of cosmological theories and facts, that cannot be
proven, but apparently are true.
They fly in the face of the accepted laws of physics, just as a guy
coming back from the dead is contrary to the laws of biology.
So, if the cosmological anomolies that appear to exist, exist, then I
can just as easily accept the exception to the biological rules.
You have faith, that cannot be proven, just as I do.
You have made a choice, because you believe a particular interpretation
of the evidence ( just like the OJ jury did), your choice is not based
upon absolute proof.
I have made a different choice, based upon the evidence, and also, no
absolute proof.
It is a matter of choice.
Cosmology says that everything, including time and space, exploded from
a single dot of matter smaller than the period at the end of this
sentence.
Further cosmologists propose that what existed before the big bang will
never be known, or understood, because it was an event outside of the
universe, and we are bound by the universe.
So that ultimately is your faith, you choose to accept what can never be
explained, making you just one more worthless piece of dust in a
universe that is destined to expand forever, and burn out till it is
perfectly cold and dark, and never has ever had any meaning or purpose,
and is all utimately worthless dust.
So, in the your cosmic scale of things, nothing makes any difference,
good, evil, pain, starvation, it is all the same, why worry ? Be happy
!
No, you may make that choice, but true logic dictates that this is
totally and completely absurd.
Animals evolved for billions of years, for no reason !
I will keep my faith, thank you, it makes alot more sense than yours. LE |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:30 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
Rob, Rob, Rob - Do you think CB finds Jesus Christ as unequivocal ?
No
He obviously denies Christ.
So, what is your beef with me on this one ? LE |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chain Breaker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:46 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
| Quote: | CB - Yes, I read much of the same material, although I find BR,
personally, to be rather a house of cards in a variety of areas. (LE)
|
BR is not the reason for my outlook. I just happened to like that
quote of his and thought it was appropriate. (CB)
| Quote: | Really, the choice is fundamentally a simple one.
Believe that you, your family, and everyone else has the flicker of life
for a relative nanosecond in time, compared to eternity, that these puny
lives have no meaning, no purpose, and came into existence by a process
that will never b understood, (LE)
|
"Nanosecond of time, compared to eternity," "puny lives," "no
purpose."
Very emotive language but not a substantive argument for the existence
of God. (CB)
| Quote: | OR
Believe that the universe is the result of creation by a powerful,
omnipotent being, and that lives are more than nothing, which
proposition A above makes them. (LE)
|
So we should just make up an omnipotent being to give everything
meaning? (CB)
| Quote: | It is a matter of faith, either way. (LE)
|
How is not believing in God a matter of faith? Strange logic. (CB)
| Quote: | Proposition B sounds very pollyannish, but proposition A sounds
downright foolish. (LE)
|
B sounds pollyannish but you like it so that makes it right for you.
On the other hand you cannot empirically disprove A, but you don't
like it, so that makes it wrong for you. Strange logic again. (CB)
| Quote: | You spoke of "religion", but that is not what I am talking about,
"religion" is man made and corrupted by the inherent greed for riches,
esteem, and power of mankind. (LE)
|
All belief in God is religion and man-made. Prove otherwise. (CB)
| Quote: | The evidence on either side is far from conclusive, so faith must be
exercised in choosing either conclusion. (LE)
|
This is incorrect thinking. *You* must have faith because you assert
that a God exists which you can't see or prove. From my point of view
there is no evidence of your God so I don't need faith. (CB)
| Quote: | I have decided to put my faith into the claims of Christ, and I don't
believe in religion, I believe in him. (LE)
|
Claims without a sound historical foundation, no evidence for the
resurrection or miracles, and based only on a few anonymous hearsay
reports written by biased unknown believers. (CB)
| Quote: | I could be completely wrong ( I doubt it) but if I am, in the end, I
will be no deader than you, and I will have died with a hope that you
will not have to comfort you at the end, you will only have your
"truth", which proclaims that your entire existence was a bad joke, that
you cannot laugh at. LE
|
Do you really think limp wristed logic like that is appealing? What is
really a bad joke is when someone wastes their whole life pining for
some pie in the sky hope of eternal life instead of living the life
they NOW have, to the full, as best they can. (CB) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:20 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
On 19 Aug 2003 16:46:09 -0700, nothingnobler@hotmail.com (Chain Breaker) wrote:
| Quote: | CB - Yes, I read much of the same material, although I find BR,
personally, to be rather a house of cards in a variety of areas. (LE)
BR is not the reason for my outlook. I just happened to like that
quote of his and thought it was appropriate. (CB)
Really, the choice is fundamentally a simple one.
Believe that you, your family, and everyone else has the flicker of life
for a relative nanosecond in time, compared to eternity, that these puny
lives have no meaning, no purpose, and came into existence by a process
that will never b understood, (LE)
"Nanosecond of time, compared to eternity," "puny lives," "no
purpose."
Very emotive language but not a substantive argument for the existence
of God. (CB)
OR
Believe that the universe is the result of creation by a powerful,
omnipotent being, and that lives are more than nothing, which
proposition A above makes them. (LE)
So we should just make up an omnipotent being to give everything
meaning? (CB)
It is a matter of faith, either way. (LE)
How is not believing in God a matter of faith? Strange logic. (CB)
Proposition B sounds very pollyannish, but proposition A sounds
downright foolish. (LE)
B sounds pollyannish but you like it so that makes it right for you.
On the other hand you cannot empirically disprove A, but you don't
like it, so that makes it wrong for you. Strange logic again. (CB)
You spoke of "religion", but that is not what I am talking about,
"religion" is man made and corrupted by the inherent greed for riches,
esteem, and power of mankind. (LE)
All belief in God is religion and man-made. Prove otherwise. (CB)
|
You conceded you can't prove a negative but now you turn around and challenge
someone else to prove a negative thereby erecting a straw man. But in so doing
you've only succeeded in denigrating your own logic and credibility.
Rob |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:21 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 19:10:25 -0700 (MST), shmogie1@webtv.net (Lamarr Edwards)
wrote:
| Quote: | CB - I am not attempting to prove, anything.
I cannot prove the creation by God, the state of anything before the big
bang, whether there are, or are not parallel universes, or why the
universe is expanding, when Hubble, quite correctly, based upon the
evidence predicted that the universe should be slowing down. Nor can I
prove that there is a mysterious force causing this speeding up, nor has
anyone seen the "black matter" that seems to exist in the universe.
I am not sure that you have studied logic, but what you call "limp
wristed" is in fact, perfectly logical.
You demand proof, but there is none that is unequivcical.
|
You are wrong. Jesus Christ is the unequivocal proof of death and resurrection
from the dead. To deny that Jesus Christ is the unequivocal proof of death and
resurrection from the dead is to deny Jesus Christ. And there is no room for
middle ground here - to say there is no unequivocal proof is tantamount to
being lukewarm, and lukewarm does not cut the mustard.
Rev 3:16 "So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will
vomit you out of My mouth. (NKJV)
Rob |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Chain Breaker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 11:16 am Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
| Quote: | You conceded you can't prove a negative but now you turn around and challenge
someone else to prove a negative thereby erecting a straw man. But in so doing
you've only succeeded in denigrating your own logic and credibility. Rob
|
Rob, let's put an end to your foolishness once and for all.
Does the god Zeus exist? Yes or No? If you answer yes, then I say
worship him along with Yahweh as they are both gods. If you answer no,
then I say prove he doesn't. If you say you can't prove he doesn't,
then I say worship him along with Yahweh until you can, because he is
a god.
The exact same argument you are so proud of, I have just demonstrated
can be used to demand faith in Zeus!
Any right thinking person, I guess that leaves you out, knows the onus
of proof is clearly on those who demand they KNOW god exists, not
those that say they see no proof. (CB) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lamarr Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:03 pm Post subject: Re: A Question for Sabbath Keepers |
|
|
CB - I love the "you people" statements !
In the end then, we are both perfectly free to believe what we choose,
and that is the way it should be.
I am curious, however, ultimately, as an apparent atheist, or at least
an agnostic, do you ever try to answer questions like "why are we here",
or do you simply ignore questions of this type ? LE |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
