This country has grown as a Christian nation. The bible has been, and still is, used in about every public ceremony we conduct. Nearly all governmental swearing-ins use a bible as the testament of truth. We see the bible in the funeral services conducted by nearly all the fraternal organizations.
I believe it will be a long time before things change, but I do believe they will change. Science has provided us with provable examples of the creation of the universe and all living things. The Big Bang and evolution should be part of everyone's education. When mankind finally accepts the fact that there is no supernatural, loving God out there who has control of everything, we will have to take another look at the religious texts.
Religious "faith" is so powerful that it makes men willing to die. The faithful have been killing one another for over two thousand years. The faithful on both sides in our Civil War thought God was on their side.
Question: How does your religious "faith" affect your decisions?
Larry J. Kluth
(Lt.Col. USAF Ret.)
Mesa
Suelee posted at 5:02 am on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
What a bunch of religion-bashing hooey. Everyone does what they do in life based on their values and belief systems (that may or may not involve a formal religion). No one lacks a value or belief system (even atheists believe there is no God). If you go to work everyday, you might have a value that it is important to support yourself and your family and you definitely believe that your employer will pay you for your efforts (that might even be called "faith).
Yes, faith impacts EVERY decision that humans make. The author's assertion that if that faith is based on religious principles then mayhem is the sure result is not logical. How would you explain Mother Teresa and others living a life of love and service to others?
Daniel In The Lion's Den posted at 10:41 am on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
I believe in religion as a mode of life resulting from my faith in God. Communism contends that all religious "faith" must be overthrown because it inhibits the spirit of world revolution i.e. world peace.
William Z. Foster, the former head of the Communist Party in the United States, said this: “When a Communist heads the government of the United States–and that day will come just as surely as the sun rises–the government will not be a Capitalistic government but a Soviet government, and behind this government will stand the Red Army to enforce the dictatorship of the proletariat.”
What would this mean to you (Larry J. Kluth) and me in our daily lives?
When mankind finally accepts the fact that there is no supernatural, loving God out there...by doing so he gives up his unalienable GOD given rights.
As a Lt.Col. USAF Retired, what were you fighting for when you fought for our freedoms? I'll answer that...You were fighting to protect our GOD given rights!
Cerulean posted at 5:06 pm on Sat, Dec 3, 2011.
Rich,
I did a search on DeSade. I ended by reading a short version of, Philosophy in the Boudoir. I must admit I blushed but found this one very good!
sockratties posted at 9:26 am on Fri, Dec 2, 2011.
Rich - I agree, but with a small change: “then proceed to explain a universe that we only know, can see, reason or feel about .0000001% of in terms of that thing.”
You need to put an infinite number of zeros between the decimal point and the one. For every answer we discover there are even more questions uncovered. Our knowledge grows from limited observation within our tiny microcosm, then is expanded and exploited by a few self chosen experts, each with their own agenda. Professor Stephen W. Hawking recently reversed his theory on black holes and decided that there are parallel universes co-existing which explain his previous findings. That should sell a few more books. Maybe a couple of those universes are Hades and Heaven.
Listening to scientists pontificate on the universe or the existence of a creator is like listening to the Pope speak on abstinence as birth control. It’s all just speculation. We are much like the blind men describing an elephant based on the small part each has touched, except we don’t have the advantage of knowing what we’re trying to describe.
We need theorists who search for truths, both scientific and spiritual. Just as astrology evolved into astronomy and alchemy evolved into chemistry, perhaps theology will evolve into a search for truth that opens doors to discovery rather than closing them.
Rich posted at 6:03 pm on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
VofReason
"Science has provided us with provable examples of the creation of the universe and all living things. "
No, but change it this way and it might give you a clue: ""Science has provided us with marginally probable examples of the creation of the universe and a few living things. "
The problem that exists is that, as humans we find one small thing we believe, and then proceed to explain a universe that we only know, can see, reason or feel about .0000001% of in terms of that thing.
VofReason posted at 1:44 pm on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
1) defeat socialism. Let’s see, never saw in the Bible that someone should take from others to give to someone else.
2) defeat tax and spend deficit spending. Same as above
3) trim back, way back, entitlement programs. Same as above.
4) repeal the most recent healthcare legislation that is going in effect. Same as above.
5) cut taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone. D. People should determine how to spend the bulk of the money they earn.
6) raise taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone same as above.
7) learn to work together and make compromises. True. How much compromise from Dale’s Jesus- Obama?
8) don't compromise on your principles. Bingo
9) initiate some infrastructure spending to creat jobs. Bingo- not the Government- actual Businessman.
10) withdraw from a) Iran b) Afghanistan a) now b) as soon as possible c) never. Didn’t realize we were in Iran.
11) cut spending on defense a) across the board with cuts elsewhere b) only on those programs not in my district c) not at all. In fact, increase it.. Governments primary role is Defense and infrastructure.
12) re-examine our foreign relations with a) Israel [they no longer have interests in common with us], b) Egypt, c) Jordan, d) Syria, e) Iran, f) Afghanistan, g) Palistan, h) China, i) Myanmar, j) Saudi Arabia, k) Japan, i) North Korea, j) South Korea, l) Indonesia, m) Samalia, n) Venezuala, o) Cuba p) Nicaragua q) Mexico r) Canada s) Iraq t) Vietnam, u) you name them
13) Stop funding abortions. Bingo
14) Pray for rain in Texas
15) End free trade with a) Mexico b) Canada c) China d) Japan e) Germany f) Great Brittan g) France h) you name it
16) Build that "dang fense" a) between here and Mexico or b) here and California. And California.
VofReason posted at 1:37 pm on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
"Science has provided us with provable examples of the creation of the universe and all living things. " Fallacy that people throw out without any proof. Okay Mr Know it all, please show me where science has created life? Once? And where is that Universe recipe that the science has given us the example of? Poor fool. You really think getting God out of people is what will heal us?
Accuracy posted at 11:01 am on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
"Faith" affect your decisions? People of faith must not remain silent, uninformed and uninvolved in the 2012 election. Because when they know the “what,” they will insist the “who” makes the right decisions.
The what:
∙ Big government is the problem. We the people must control it, or it will control us. Depending on the federal government as our source is idolatry.
∙ Current deficit spending is the problem. Spending must be brought under control now, because out-of-control government spending, mismanagement of the people’s money and excessive, intrusive regulation is stealing. Otherwise, it will continue to lead to a economic disaster.
∙ Excessive, foolish taxation is the problem. Revamp the tax code and it will stimulate economic growth.
∙ High unemployment is the problem. Create jobs and it will ultimately enable us a better economy nation-wide.
∙ ObamaCare is the big problem. Overturn or severely trim the ObamaCare law, which is an improper exercise of federal authority. It is requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties.
A big part of the Tea Party movement insist on the “who” – So that national leaders will rise above partisanship and reason together, seeking effective solutions to serious challenges and problems.
Rich posted at 10:29 am on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
Clarification for Dale. Faith? It's too ambiguous a term. I am basically a Gnostic and my belief is that we all contain the original pattern of the universe before motion. Motion essentially creating chaos, but a chaos that expands and contracts back to the original state. While this is the big bang and entropy, it is also the Gnostic principle of Ouroboros, the dragon who eats his tail. The metaphysical base determines what I believe.
Belief is in turn governed by what I know which is received three ways: what I sense, what I reason and what I feel. It's a rather ancient idea Aristotle/Plato/Epicurus is one group. Perhaps the most accessible is the Hume/Liebnitz/DeSade group. David Hume contended that, although we couldn't prove sense impression, it was all we could know. Liebnitz hung knowledge on logic, eventually creating a logical system that replicated his invention of calculus, DeSade, seeing both, rebelled against them replicating Epicurus' that it is all feeling, pain is wrong, pleasure is right and your feelings were paramount in understanding the universe. In other words the belief I adopt is that it is consistent with observation, logically consistent and it feels right emotionally. Is it religion? Is it faith? That hangs on the metaphysics, if the view of the universe I've adopted is correct, then my theory of knowledge is.
Does that answer the questions better?
sockratties posted at 7:57 am on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
It’s interesting that even in this subject it is perceived as them or us. There is a confusion with “religion,” “faith,” and “belief.” The terms are not interchangeable. We all have beliefs. Some of us have faith. Some belief systems are organized into religions. Religions define belief systems for many.
Rich makes a good point. Mankind blew up Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Mankind found a new tool and as always found a way to use it as a weapon. That’s happened since we came out of the cave. Start with the stone axe and end up with a nuclear bomb. Now that’s progress.
Mankind also looked up in the sky, saw the sun and figured out that the sun had a profound effect on the environment. He immediately tried to bribe the sun. He has been trying, with offerings, promises, prayer and ritual ever since. We still have crop failures, earthquakes, tsunamis and war, but we still keep trying. That’s faith.
Believing in science doesn’t mean that science and faith are mutually exclusive. It may mean rejecting superstition and the supernatural. Thinkers of antiquity believed in their gods which were invented to answer questions science could not. We still don’t know much, so we still need to create answers. True scientific belief would conclude that there may or may not be a creator or greater power, but if we ever find that answer, that greater power will not be supernatural.
Think of Schrödinger’s Cat; until proven, both answers are true.
Dale - I hope that’s not a picket fence you always sit on. It could get uncomfortable given the amount of time you’ve been sitting there.
Dale Whiting posted at 6:35 am on Thu, Dec 1, 2011.
Rich, Cerulean and JSBeals,
I crunched for time right now so I'll have to get back to you all later this evening [Thurs]. Rich, you answered my issues, but failed to show us how application of your "faith" [and it's pretty clear you have none] determines your answers. But I like most of your answers anyway!
JSBeals, don't be affraid of trick questions. Normally each has a trick answer!
Cerulean, I'm looking forward to reading your responses and commenting on them.
See you all later, Guys!
JSBeals posted at 10:45 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
I can't make head or tails out of anything anyone's posted on this thread - maybe it's the hour.
Larry, I would like to answer your question at the end of your letter, but I feel as though it is a trick question. You put "faith" in quotes to signify that it is not faith and you state that there is no God. So why ask the question? Perhaps for bait? If so, most took it hook line and sinker, and some ran down the rabbit hole with it. However, to answer; religion is for man, faith for is God and my faith affects a good portion of my decisions. I would ask you, how does your lack of faith affect your decisions?
Cerulean posted at 9:33 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
“Where one "truth" appears to conflict with some other "truth," either one, the other or both are wrong or misunderstood."
Light has a dual nature. Light behaves as both a particle or a wave depending on who is watching. I prefer to think that both inclinations of light are truth, that there are no absolutes and that it is OK.
I also mostly agree with Mark Twain (175 yrs. Old today) when he wrote, “I bring you the stately matron named Christendom. Returning bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored from pirate raids in Kiao-Chou, Manchuria, South Africa, and the Philippines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies.”
The only words I would change are “matron” to patriarch, and from “her soul” to his soul, as I think this Christendom is patriarchal. I tend to be more comfortable with the Patroness our Lady of Guadalupe and I have more belief in the wisdom of the Hopi Corn Maiden. I would have joined the camp that Moses smite for worshiping the golden calf of Hathor.
Rich posted at 6:42 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
This seems like fun, if accuracy won't play, I will.
1) defeat socialism- Well, it's never worked. Reduced a major power to smaller corrupt states in Russia, reduced the Empire on which the Sun couldn't set into a welfare island of crybabies. Seen both, and don't care for the implications here.
2) defeat tax and spend deficit spending. Sure, I'm paying for massive, bloated ineffective, insensitive, wholly incompetent bureaucracy. If I'm going to pay I need a little bang for the buck.
3) trim back, way back, entitlement programs. of course, we're crippling brilliant people who could advance all us, across the world. Van Gogh wouldn't have picked up a brush with cradle to grave welfare.
4) repeal the most recent healthcare legislation that is going in effect. Definitely, it will decrease the responsibility of medicine, decrease it's effect and put all our lives in jeopardy. The patient already has no say in paying for his treatment, the patient overpays in front. Without the pressure to do well, most people don't, and being assured of payment in front rather does away with the most important incentive to do well
.
5) cut taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone d)See 2)
6) raise taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone again see 2) and add e) no one.
7) learn to work together and make compromises. Nope, be yourself, do it your way and be guaranteed the freedom to do it that way.
8) don't compromise on your principles. Of course not
9) initiate some infrastructure spending to create jobs. Nope, reduce government to grow business, save up, pay off some debts, and act responsibly to build infrastructure.
10) withdraw from a) Iran b) Afghanistan a) now b) as soon as possible c) never
a) b) a) War never did anything that can be remotely termed a plus.
11) cut spending on defense a) across the board with cuts elsewhere b) only on those programs not in my district c) not at all. In fact, increase it. Just limit it to defense of our shores, it gets a lot smaller immediately.
abimopectore posted at 5:34 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
As much as I love science since I work in the field, unfortunately there too many people who use it loosely as if it was the answer to everything. It would behoove those who use it as the reason to disprove something or things which it truly doesn't have any idea about to read the many challenges and limitations that characterize our "supposed" knowledge of science. I'll you give two examples where such limitations are clearly delineated:
1) Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
2) Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems
If you are capable of understanding the implications of only these two examples, you'd realize the author wouldn't be so quick to dismiss religious beliefs because of the radicalized nature of the few who only subvert the religious meanings of their beliefs for their own ends and would see that science doesn't provide ALL the answers that man has searched for since the beginning of his existence.
Dale Whiting posted at 4:35 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
OK Accuracy, I'll bite.
Operating on your brand of Christianity, applying it to the question of "How does your religious "faith" affect your decisions?" what must be do? I'll start with a list of things I've heard from others:
1) defeat socialism
2) defeat tax and spend deficit spending
3) trim back, way back, entitlement programs
4) repeal the most recent healthcare legislation that is going in effect
5) cut taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone
6) raise taxes on a) the 1%, b) 2% c) 50% d)everyone
7) learn to work together and make compromises
8) don't compromise on your principles
9) initiate some infrastructure spending to creat jobs
10) withdraw from a) Iran b) Afghanistan a) now b) as soon as possible c) never
11) cut spending on defense a) across the board with cuts elsewhere b) only on those programs not in my district c) not at all. In fact, increase it.
12) re-examine our foreign relations with a) Israel [they no longer have interests in common with us], b) Egypt, c) Jordan, d) Syria, e) Iran, f) Afghanistan, g) Palistan, h) China, i) Myanmar, j) Saudi Arabia, k) Japan, i) North Korea, j) South Korea, l) Indonesia, m) Samalia, n) Venezuala, o) Cuba p) Nicaragua q) Mexico r) Canada s) Iraq t) Vietnam, u) you name them
13) Stop funding abortions
14) Pray for rain in Texas
15) End free trade with a) Mexico b) Canada c) China d) Japan e) Germany f) Great Brittan g) France h) you name it
16) Build that "dang fense" a) between here and Mexico or b) here and California
Come on Accuracy, apply your faith to at least one of these issue!
Accuracy posted at 2:22 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
Larry J. Kluth’s Question: How does your religious "faith" affect your decisions?
------------------------------------------
The question which demands focused prayer and active participation is, “What must we do?” rather than “Who should we elect?”
Christians must respond, because now is the time that Americans must first understand “what must be done” to revive the country before we can identify who can best help do it.
Dale Whiting posted at 2:13 pm on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
And Rich,
I also appreciate your position. If what we come to understand evolves as we evolve our ability to comprehend and understand, then arguably there is no ultimate truth. Ultimate truth could be an unreachable target. Maybe so. Maybe not. If so, if untimate truth is unreachable, then there is no such think as omniscience. But then respecting what each thinks truth is still has merit. You will not find any Mormons burning the Quran!
But the point Ltc. Larry was addressing was "religion motivates war," and that is totally uncalled for. If we respect each other's version of "truth" then we have nothing to fight for or against. Mormons like Romney, Huntsman, Harry Reid, etc. claim the priviledge of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience and allow all others to do the same. Let them worship where, when, what or how they choose. And you know, Christ did not teach anything that contradics this thought which was first put to pen in these latter days by that farm boy.
So just maybe that farm boy was on to something, Freedom of Religion, all religions, not just ones own.
Rich posted at 11:39 am on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
"Truth does not depend upon the subject it addresses. Rather it stands independently. There is no religious truth, no scientific truth, and no social or moral truth, but only a truth which is the ultimate truth. Where one "truth" appears to conflict with some other "truth," either one, the other or both are wrong or misunderstood."
Does this stand examination? If we accept the big bang, Aristotle or any of a myriad of thinkers, no. Before motion existence was a pattern, motion changed it, but because the motion remained moving the change was transitory. Truth before and after the first mover would be different.
The Greeks, especially in the Hellenistic era, understood and advanced the concept of evolution, it didn't originate with Darwin. Even Hellenic Greeks like Leucippus, Democritus and Epicurus had beginning concepts of evolution, though the last two were more de-evolutionists.
Religious works are the most commonly burned books in history, some like Gnostic Gospels and the Mayan's Popul Vul are only fragments today, we don't have them in their entirety. In many cases religions turn on what is God, hence what is the truth? Is it the eternal pattern that existed before motion? Or is it the first mover, the creator? These are two opposite principles, yet, if you accept Aristotle, Aquinus, Averroes and numerous other thinkers, religious leaders and the scientists who came up with the big bang, both must exist. It has always seemed odd to me that proponents of one, should be so adamant in destroying the conclusions of the other. Perhaps, in the end, it is your farm boy's insistence that there is an 'Ultimate Truth' that trips us up.
Dale Whiting posted at 10:30 am on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
Ltc Larry,
I see and appreciate your points, all of them. The apparent conflict between science and religion has existed for millennia. It plagued some of the most innovative, creative minds of our time and times before. And this plague might end as you predict. But I think not. Allow me to answer your question by introducing you to a thought introduced in the early 19th century by a farm boy from upstate New York.
Truth does not depend upon the subject it addresses. Rather it stands independently. There is no religious truth, no scientific truth, and no social or moral truth, but only a truth which is the ultimate truth. Where one "truth" appears to conflict with some other "truth," either one, the other or both are wrong or misunderstood.
Can you imagine teaching evolution to the Greeks? Not having sufficient backgrounds in the diversity and origin of species, and seeing a complexity in life they could not understand, the Greeks invented their "truth," a panoply of gods living on a high mountain with super powers, this to explain the mysterious "whys" in an otherwise inexplicable world. Monotheists took a different approach, one separating the "divine characteristics" of God from the mundane characteristics of man. We could go on and on. But man has searched for meaning and a way to explain life and the world about him since the beginning of time. So truth evolves as man becomes more able to understand and comprehend its complexities.
Today's religious creationists see a method behind evolution, some sort of divine guidance. That may be a total cop out. Point is, we can choose to be doubters, choose to be people of faith, or not choose either. I like the Jody Foster flick, "Contact." The Matthew McConaughey, character summed things up pretty well. Carl Sagan wrote that story and did an excellent job.
But the intimate point is, we ought not to impose our religion on others. We have engaged in far too many Crusades in the name of one faith or another. And no one can effectively argue that Christ would have led or approved of any Crusade. Your ultimate point about religion being at fault may be correct. I would qualify it as mans using religion as his shield and justification for not being the party at fault. And man must place fault.
But those who have acted as founders of religion all have had a dream, a dream of peaceful co-existence, not warring amongst nations and peoples. So don't you go calling the US a Christian Nation and not expect a dispute from me! One cannot read Matthew 5 and conclude form it that the US is Christian.
And just in case you’re wondering who that New York farm boy was, there are two Republicans among the leading eight candidates who pay homage to his ideas. And those who lead that denomination said in addressing that nut of a pastor from Florida who burned Qurans last year their regret that anyone would consider burning sacred scripture, in effect qualifying the Quran as equal with the scriptures of all other faiths.
Rich posted at 8:55 am on Wed, Nov 30, 2011.
Seems to me scientific faith is worse. No religion created Hiroshima. As to knowledge, evolution is presented pretty well in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary and Pistis Sophia, the big bang is originally Aristotle and bolstered by Thomas Aquinus and Averroes. E=MC2 is a medieval idea "Inside every grain of sand lies the soul of a star." Our reason and knowledge comes from what we sense, what we reason, and what we feel. Theology is the only discipline that contains all three. Science begins at what we sense, and stays there. The counter-observational is discounted, a myth, an illusion, reason ends at probability when it is rather obvious that any universe based in probability would collapse into chaos rapidly. Science is the most destructive faith of all.
"Question: How does your religious "faith" affect your decisions?" Not at all in most cases, nor does it with most people. Lay people don't understand their religion well enough to decide much of anything by it and take someone else's word for it. Any philosopher from about 400 BC on could have told you what Mr. Hubbell would see, any knowledgeable Roman Catholic or Sunni Moslem from about the twelfth century on could tell you that what Mr. Wilson and Mr. Penzias heard was there all along. Both medieval alchemists and Hindu Brahmans were aware of most of modern physics, probably only the truer parts of it. The thing was, none of these people made a city go boom. Only scientists do that.