No you could not be more wrong. The following definition of Atheism was given to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S. Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d (MD, 1963). "An Atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An Atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work for now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction, and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and enjoy it. An Atheist believes that only in the knowledge of himself and the knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfilment. He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man. He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter. He believes that we are our brother's keepers; and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.” So to sum it up an atheist is a morally better person, than any theist could aspire to be. The atheist does good things simply because it is the right thing to do, and simply for the betterment of his fellow man.
I think the idea that Mary was not knocked up by Joseph came much later.* The Council of Nicac in 325 AD, established which books were to be included in the Bible, what the basic tenants of the Christians faith had to include ("I believe in god the father,... and in Jesus Christ his only son...") which is still called the Nicacan creed. They proscribed 18 other rules / recommendations (called "canons" that apply to church officials mainly) for early Christians but not one mention of Mary or that Christ had not been conceived the regular way kids were made then and now. Read an English translation of the Catholic's church's official record here: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum01.htm The pope claims to be guided by God, in spiritual dogma and thus anything he later proclaimed is truth. Mary's virgin birth of Christ was one of the later reveled "truths." An effort to avoid logical inconsistency or confusion with the idea that all men are born in sin, I think. The church has Christ as both man and god, but the man part should be without sin - Virgin birth addressed that problem. * I'm not sure, but think that later glorification of Mary and the virgin birth of Christ is NOT part of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Does any reader know? What about the Coptic Christians? I also think Luther made the priest a little insecure - the idea that men could go directly to god, without an intermediary, made it desirable for Mary to play the role of intermediary too - she was always available, when no priest was. The Catholic Church is having a tough time recruiting enough men to be the priests it needs. If the current pope has a long reign, and I hope he will, I bet God revels to him that it is OK for priest to marry. There are already a few married priests - married ministers of other Christian religions who converted to Catholism can keep their wives. Why not all priests can have wives, if they want to? This is and old question within the church, and source of a joke too: Elderly priest in opposition to priest marrying says: "Mark my words - first thing the priests will want after marriage, is divorce!"
geeser, thank you; you surprised me in a good way with that piece. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I wouldn't go as far to compare atheists and theists as one being "better" from a moral perspective as there are exceptions to all rules. @ Mazulu, why do you feel this way about atheism? What's interesting about atheism from my view is it doesn't have anything to prove. It allows for freedom of thought without the burden of religious dogma. At first blush, it's not uncommon for a believer to view an atheist as self centered. But, as a principle, atheism is not a concept based on self. Atheism is designed to look out for the betterment of society, without the need to rely on religion as a conduit to achieving that end. If you believe in God, Mazulu, that is your option. But, just try to look at atheism with a broader view. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yeah, that's pretty interesting, Billy. The Catholic Church and Christianity as a whole, still teach the dogma of Mary's "perpetual virginity." You might find it interesting to research, that spirits and "gods" impregnating humans was a Greco-Roman "belief" and so this "story" falls in accordance with that. Things that make you go hmmm! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I will have you know I have been visited by many a succubus in my time. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
As I understand it the Catholics admire Mary nearly to the level of Jesus, for she becomes the Mother God, so can you courageously say she was just "the mother of Jesus".
Right on, wegs. You're a smart one. I knew you were. You’re on your way, now...congrats! :bravo: This is short and sweet, I swear. [video=youtube_share;3r-7Sv6jA8A]http://youtu.be/3r-7Sv6jA8A[/video] P.S. Maybe this article would help your boyfriend understand what you’re going through. A Big Welcome Take care! :wave:
In the Catholic Church, she is revered. I wouldn't say she's viewed as being on the same plain as Jesus, but she receives a lot of honor as her role in the birth of Jesus. It's a misconception that people pray TO her, rather, she is an intercessory between mankind and Jesus, in terms of prayer. IF anyone believes the story to begin with, that's how it really goes. lol Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Want to read something rather intriguing? How Islam views Mary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_in_Islam She's mentioned more in the Qur'an than in the entire NT! Here's some info you requested re: the Orthodox Church, looks like it believes in Mary's 'perpetual virginity.' (she remained a virgin, for life) http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/answer/1347/ I laughed for real. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! As far as legends go, fair enough. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oh, Trooper...tears in my eyes. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Means a lot. I watched the video clip & the link. You really surprised me stopping in here. ((hugs))
The idea in the various mythologies is that somewhere in the tangle of legends there is a demi-god (half God, half human). It probably serves to cement the physical presence of the deity, but it also explains why some of the rulers are themselves worthy of worship -- some of them conveniently took the title of demi-god. But this causes a dilemma for the cult believers. The human mother needs to be impregnated by a god. People got pretty creative with this. An immaculate conception occurs in the fathering of Krishna -- Vishnu actually passes directly into her womb. Not only is this version of immaculate conception suitable for children, but it probably appeases the child-like ideation of the primitive mind which is struggling to comprehend how such a union might be possible. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm faced with a battle for you wegs now that Trooper and her artillery have arrived on the scene. I don't believe the battle is over even though I am overwhelmed by what has been happening. I am fighting from what appears to be a losing corner. O Lord give me hope of victory. Amen
Why don't just stop fighting everyone and leave folks alone with their own decisions and keep your mind on your own business. All your fighting accomplishes is conflict in the world. Just stop.
Can you imagine living in such a strange era when people actually believed this crap? :bugeye: There's no winners or losers, here. Religion often convinces people that a battle must be fought and won. (for souls?) Be happy for me. Ok? Don't worry so much. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Religion has run out of justifications. Thanks to the telescope and the microscope, it no longer offers an explanation of anything important. Where once it used to be able, by its total command of a worldview, to prevent the emergence of rivals, it can now only impede and retard—or try to turn back—the measurable advances that we have made. Sometimes, true, it will artfully concede them. But this is to offer itself the choice between irrelevance and obstruction, impotence or outright reaction, and, given this choice, it is programmed to select the worse of the two. Meanwhile, confronted with undreamed-of vistas inside our own evolving cortex, in the farthest reaches of the known universe, and in proteins and acids which constitute our nature, religion offers either annihilation in the name of god, or else the false promise that if we take a knife to our foreskins, or pray in the right direction, or ingest pieces of wafer, we shall be “saved.” ―God Is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens
If only it was that simple. All the conflict in the world is contained in this battle. You could be right. "Just stop" - tell the Syrians the same please.
total worldview garnered by telescopes and microscopes? More evidence that your average popular atheist attempting to borrow from the authority of science is as capable in philosophy as your average car mechanic is in quantum physics with statements like these, Christopher Hitchens obviously isn't either :shrug:
You are playing peace keeper?:huh: I thought that atheists were using the authority of science to destroy all religion as being just for stupid people. Atheism is clearly not about making personal decisions about one's own spiritual life, it's about ridiculing people of faith. I don't think there should be any peace, not while atheists denigrate and disparage all religion.
Can you imagine that in the 21st century, at the peak of technological capability, that science cannot tell us what dark matter is? Or dark energy? Or how the bb came into existence? Or how the physics laws and constants are upheld? Yet we are expected to abandon our beloved churches, we are expected to turn our backs on our spirituality because it can't be confined to a bottle or looked at under a microscope. Religion is a celebration of CONSCIOUSNESS, and how we are connected to the divine Creator of the universe. We are valueable and we are important, in spite of the hateful words of atheists to denigrate and belittle humanity and individual humans.
Eh, I was always pretty much an agnostic. I went through some periods of zealous behaviour in my life, and then I went through periods of questioning/agnosticism. Now I am an agnostic atheist. Yes, you can be an agnostic atheist. Religion/spirituality is all nonsense, as far as I am concerned. We don't know exactly how the Big Bang came into existence, but there exists a number of theories based on congruent mathematical formulae. At least scientists endeavour to find more answers instead of claiming "God did it!".
