Oh, she's great, even when your sober. :lol: Here's a link if you guys want to check out the song I quoted. It really fits into the discussion about religion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7vpIrJ4xms
Another example of science overblown: My professor friend had a reporter come to do a story on his work, but the reporter got the story way overblown to the point that industry engineers and business men were contacting him asking about commericialization of a product that isn't even possible using his research! Moral: Beware what you read!
Exactly. The problem is that the most of what the general public reads about modern scientific research is written by reporters, who don't understand the science, and/or don't understand the significance/relevance of the science.
This debate is more or less dead but I have to express my complete agreement with Eso's initial post. Czech were always witnesses of ideological struggles in their past. In the times of first Slavic nation, the Great Moravia, two missionaries were sent there from the Byzantine empire as local rulers wisely tried to be independent from Rome (not exactly from Rome, Rome was not the problem, the problem was, that we were to small and insignificant to have our own bishop or archbishop, so by the dependency on Rome we would have been dependent on German Empire). But the power of Rome was not easy to be avoided (on the contrary, the power of Byzantine Empire was continuously faltering under raids of Arabs, Turks, Bulgars,...) so the Byzantine priests were expelled and substituted with latin priests (the language of liturgy was changed from the Old Church Slavic, that was somehow comprehensible to the locals, to Latin). Then we became an integral part of the Holy Roman Empire (we were not Germany, just a part of a very loose federation, but still officially a vassal state). After the outbreak of Hussite revolution, the country experienced a great economic crisis, but the Hussite revolution was total victory over Rome. But still both religions existed and education flourished. Aeneas Silvius Picolomini (later pope Pius) when travelling through Czech lands sarcastically commented that any old crone has a greater connaissance of the Scriptures than a prelate. But then, the recatolisation came. Many of our great personnages left the land as they were protestants. The problem was that catholicism was an instrument of foreign powers in their efforts to subdue the Czech lands. In the times of first republic, this was pointed out strongly and we even ceased diplomatic relations with Rome. Following 60 years were lethal to any religion as it was said that the people had become allergic to any ideology. Most Czech people are somehow aware of this and are very careful when they meet a real ideology. Of course, as there was said, we do not like when someone tries to "save us"... it really implies that otherwise we are damned. Also there is a problem not mentioned anywhere there. It is the issue of the term "Christ". Despite we are one of the least religious countries all over the world, there is still very strong catholic tradition of perceiving christianism. Well... ordinary Czech does not give a damn about it but still he is exposed to those refering rather to God than to Jesus. Our swearing is full of references to God and it is primarily God that is thought to be the object of reverence, not Christ (Christ is also, but still it is somehow secondary). The main problem is, that there are many sects that refer to Jesus with all their proclamations "Jesus will save us all" and alike. Much of those are crazy people... those fools that often change their ideological belief as they change socks. One week they are christians, another they are maoists, yet another they are radical environmentalists... Another sort of people refering more to Jesus than to God are the witnesses of Jehova who are not held in very high esteem here and are still considered a sect (read: dangerous and insidious) among general population. So when someone begins to speak about Jesus, he is not to be surprised when everyone leaves the room. Well, not that talking about God was a very common topic but still, to Czech it sounds better when you say "God loves you" than "Jesus loves you" even if it is more or less the same for you. Very complex question, is it not. addendum: Concerning the science and creationism - creationism is outside the science. Science tries to work with empirical facts and one of its methods is socalled Ockham's razor, the principle of not multiplying entities. In other words, it is a requirement of the simplicity of description (but still completness!!!) and when there is a problem and you have several solutions, you choose the one with less presumptions. That means that when you are doing research on the origin of the universe, you must not include God into it. Why? Because it is a very severe presumption (that means an additional entity, very large and significant entity) and cannot be empirically verified (what is worse, it cannot be DENIED, and deniability is one of the basic requirements of scientific theory). Science can only investigate the universe and its laws, trying to make general statements about them, but cannot try to proove or disproove the existence of God. To conclude: creationism is not scientific (which does not at all mean it cannot be true...).
You're right! Unfortunately because of the communism and Roman Catholic church the name Jesus sounds absurd and even silly. Anyway bible says in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life". Jesus also loves everyone, therefore he went on the cross. he said:"No one takes (his life) it away from me, but I lay it down by myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again." Jesus is "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." and he said "Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works." Another verses says:"For by him were all things created, in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things are held together. He is the head of the body, the assembly, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." And: " I and the Father are one." And I could go ahead... . So it seems to me that Jesus and Father God have their own minds but they are one and there is no different between "God loves You" - "Jesus loves You" :wink: :wink: ... the whole question is how it sounds.
It is also that way in the States. If you say "God loves you" people don't worry too much about it. But if you say "Jesus loves you" some people look at you with worry that you might next shave your head, put on a tunic, and start chanting "harichrishna" or something. :roll: So I don't say things like that often (a regret I may have when I stand before God's throne) but I figure the best way to demonstrate the love of Christ is to show it rather than say it. By God's grace, I try to do that, but I must admit, I sometimes fail. Thank God for mercy.
Nobody is perfect. :wink: Dobrý!! :wink: The love has an act. The act of His compassion was the cross.
Yes, that was precisely what I was trying to say. I do not think it has anything to do with communism nor with Trinitas Dei (what is Jesus Christ's precise relation to God, the Father), just the more common expression is with "God" and similar expressions with "Jesus" are mainly reserved to those ridiculous sectarians (not that there is anything wrong with such expressions inherently - in case someone would like to get offended :twisted: ).
I must respond to Craigmc's assertion that the Bible was written 400 years after Jesus lived by an emporor. This sounds like an errant idea found in the decidedly unscholarly "research" of Dan Brown's poorly written little mystery about Leonardo. In fact the Old Testament is thousands of years older and archeological evidence and scholars support this. As far as the reliability of the subsequent publishings of the Old Testament scrolls for accuracy, Jewish scholarship has demanded from the beginning that scribes copy with complete accuracy when creating new scrolls. They are supervised and if even one "jot or tittle" is not correct, even at the very bottom of a scroll, law demands that it be destroyed and the scribe would have to begin his task again. Not even the classics, like Homer's epics required that kind of due diligence, and no one questions their accuracy. As far as people writing the scrolls 40 years after Jesus and that they didn't know him, I respectfully suggest that you don't have your facts right. Three out of the four gospel writers walked daily with Jesus and were eye witnesses to his ministry and life. Any "differences" between their accounts are more a matter of perspective and purpose than factual differences. Each gospel writer wrote for a different purpose, to reveal a different aspect of Jesus and to a different audience. For instance Luke wrote for the gentiles and Matthew for the Jews, emphasizing how Jesus fulfilled all of the messianic prophecies. ( An astronomically impossible feat for one person to intentionally set out to fulfill by mechination) Likewise, most of the epistles and the book of Revelation were written by Jesus's contemporaries. The book of Acts was written by Luke, who lived through it. Serious scholars and archeologists, both Christian and non Christian say there is plenty of evidence and historical record outside of Biblical accounts to support much of what is said. For instance: Josephus of Arimathea. Roman records also report on many of the events and persons. All this is to say that one should not dismiss the claims that Jesus made and indeed the very existence of Jesus based on the repitition of some half baked accusations that aren't even true. Lack of scholastic integrity is not a reason to dismiss Jesus and the claims he is making about himself and the condition of man. The very arguments that people use to dismiss Christianity out of hand to me prove one of the basic tennets of the faith: that man is sinful. How much more proof do you need than the selfish, hateful and even depraved things man does even in the name of Jesus? Perhaps this ability to do evil is the thing that people talk about being saved from by Jesus. This requires, the Bible says, a relationship with Jesus that begins by acknowledging that proclivity to be selfish and hateful. What each of us does about Jesus is up to ourselves. We can choose to ignore him, dismiss him because of what others have done in his name, or to angrily and stubbornly say, "There is nothing I need saving from." But really, is there one of us who can honestly say we have never been selfish or hateful? I know I can't. For years those who claim to be Christians have used the man made religion of Christianity (organized religion) as a cudgel to tell those who are not Christians what is wrong with them. The true Christians and those who are Christian only in name, will have to answer for that. We are called to show love and charity, to point the way to Christ. Instead we point our fingers accusingly at those we think are different and wag them like the cranky old neighbor who fusses at all the neighborhood children. For that I apologize. And because of that, I understand your anger. I issue you an intellectual challenge: Find out for yourself (not what other people tell you) who Jesus claimed to be and who he was, and how reliable scriptures are. Just ask, whoever might be there, unseen, to let you see the truth. Then, if you still feel the same way, fine. But you at least owe yourself that. Before you scoff, ask yourself what about this topic makes you have such strong feelings and reactions to it. You have spent a lot of time and thought on something you say is ridiculous and deserving of contempt. I appreciate your having an open mind about this and a willingness to listen.
I would like to respond to Geauxboy's observations about creationism, one fellow cajun to another. I agree that the account of creation in Genesis is not science. The purpose of the Bible is not to instruct us in the truths of science. The purpose of the Bible is to reunite man with his Creator. But while I was studying science concurrently with Genesis, I realized something remarkable: "Let there be light" is a poetic description of the Big Bang. As a matter of fact, the order of creation which is so beautifully and poetically outlined in Genesis, is the same order that life has evolved on earth according to modern science. How did the author of Genesis know that? By the way, a lot of people in Louisiana who think they are of French ancestory are really German. Apparently the French (not American) leaders of the port of New Orleans couldn't pronounce the German names, and changed their names to French. Apparently one thing all nations share is a form of national chauvinism (a French word).
Someone here mentioned a "personal relationship with Jesus", an expression that always intrigued me. Can someone enlighten us about how such a relationship works?
Eva, I think that is a great question and one that is much more complicated than I can do justice to, but I will try, based on my experience, my knowledge of the Bible, and the experiences that others have shared with me. We have to go all the way back to the Garden, to the place before man decided not to trust God but to disobey Him. This resulted in a broken relationship with God. Before the first man and the first woman broke this relationship, Genesis talks about God walking with them in the garden in the cool of the evening. He created them in his image so he could be with them. When they broke that trust, they broke the relationship. ( How many marriages have seen this very consequence.) However, before He expelled them from the garden (His presence) he made a promise that He would send one to get back the relationship, to restore His fellowship with man. For years and years, as chronicled in the Old Testament, God kept revelaing Himself to the Jews (they were chosen for this purpose and to provide the savior). He gave men prophecies about the Messiah. Christians believe that Jesus is that savior (Messiah) and that he fulfilled all of those prophecies, a feat which Mathematical probabilites demands extremely arduous and unattainable by chance or mechination. Jesus claimed to be both fully man (so He could take on our punishment for our sin) and fully God (the only perfect man ever born who was with out sin). Many people assert, some even in the church, that Jesus wasn't God, that he was just a good teacher. But Jesus himself does not give us that option. He claimed to be God. And if he isn't, as CS Lewis said, he is either a madman along the lines of someone who thinks he is a fried egg or He is a demon, or evil for making such claims and leading people astray. All of this has been background to provide a context for your question: Jesus said that Eternal life (eternal life is being in the presence of God for eternity after a relatively short time on earth as opposed to be forever separated from God, which is what we call Hell) begins with this: that we know God. Jesus, since he is God is how we know Him. Before Jesus, the only way humans could know God is by what He revealed about Himself in the scriptures. He also revealed a character of love, steadfastness, compassion, justice, and mercy. Jesus became the incarnation of all of that. To have a relationship with Him we spend time in His word, we worship Him (Corporately and individually) both in services and in serving others, we share what God is doing in our lives to conform us to His likeness or in serving others, and finally, we spend time in prayer. This may be awkward at first, but the more I pray, the more natural it becomes, so that as I go through my day making choices, it is as if Jesus is walking beside me, guiding me in the way to go. I think it is amazing that the God of the universe who sustains all creation, does this, but he promised he would be with us to the end. Before he ascended into heaven after the resurrection he spent more time with his disciples, whom he made apostles, meaning that they were to share His good news, but that they were also to share with and care for people. To boil it all down, to me a relationship with Jesus means spending time in his word and in prayer, and serving and loving the people he brings into my life or just across my path, just as he did, sacrificing his own rights. I hope this helps you understand and to see that being a follower of Christ bares little resemblance to the image portrayed by the parts of organized religion that are in the news. A good example of someone who is well known who lived out this relationship is Mother Teresa. And for all the good she did, and all the people she loved in the name of Christ, she was not perfect while on this earth.
Thank you, saillael, for answering my question. In your opinion, would you be a good, caring person without the help of Jesus? Or, rather, why do you need Jesus to be a good, caring person?
I know this question was for saillael, but I'd still like to chime in if I may. As being a friend to several atheist, I know it is possible to be a good and caring person without believing in Christ. However, I believe the goodness and caring aspect of my atheistic friends came from Christ when He created them. Christ placed that goodness in them whether they know him or not. To develop a relationship with Christ is to accept who God is and accept that we are not perfect beings. All of us have done or said something in life that has been selfish or mean. So to accept Christ is to accept that we have sinned, that we are not perfect. God, however, is perfect and will not allow himself to look upon sin or be in relationship with sin. Therefore, Christ intercedes for us, covers our sin so that we may have access to God (enter into heaven in death). Like saillael stated, when we acknowledge that we are not perfect beings and that God is, therefore we need Christ, we develop a relationship with him through prayer and reading the Word. I'm sorry, but it is not something that can really be explained. Take the question "When will I know I'm in love" A- "if you are in love, you will know". You have to have a relationship with Christ to really know what it is. If you would like to really know. Simply acknowledge that you are not perfect, that God is, and that Christ can serve as your intercessor. Then pray and read your bible. You will develop one and you will know first hand what it means. Even if you are not sure if you believe there is a God or Christ, you can still try this and then know for sure. I may not believe a pen with ink in it will write. But if I pick it up and use, it will still write whether I believe it or not. Then I may become a believer. :wink:
I know I will regret this post, but whatever What about people, who are "evil" from neurological reasons? We know now, that personality of human can by completelly changed by surgeon procedure on brain. One careless cut and good, loving man is changed to selfish sociopath. Do you really believe, that "be perfect" is good thing? Is it advisable goal, be perfect? Or maybe it's only illusion. Or maybe this time pen writes, but next time will not. You expect, that nothing is certain and everything is changing all the time. You are not afraid of uncertainty, you welcome it. Then you can become a sceptic. Then you will start dring beer and eat knedliky and make fun from tragedies a you can become Czech
To truly address this, one must engage in the long discussion of how God created us with free will to choose Him or Satan. Satan is the master of evil; created as an angel of God but given the gift of free will, fell from heaven choosing pride and self-satisfaction over serving God. Humans also have free will and being tempted by Satan and our selfish nature can choose to follow evil. I've not read this study, so I don't want to comment on a study with which I'm unfamiliar. However, I can point out the debate that many neurological socio-pathological behaviors are blamed on demon-possession rather than neurological deficiencies, such as schizophrenia. I'm not claiming that debate to be absolute truth because I've not really searched into it, but it is a debate that is out there and could be given as an answer to your question. I don't advise anyone to "be perfect" because it's an unobtainable goal. However, through Christ, we can stand before God blameless and spotless because Christ bears our sins and takes them for us. For example, perhaps you broke the law and had to serve time in prison. Yet I agreed to serve your time and the government agreed to let me serve your time for you. You could stand before the government a free man, clear from your sentence because it is served. That is why I told her she might become a believer. She also may not become a believer. I know it won't be an illusion, but she might choose to believe it is. :wink: It takes faith to believe. Perhaps I should have said an "undefective ink-filled pen" but you get my analogy. Don't regret it. Some of us Americans embrace Freedom of Speech and don't wear our feelings on our shoulders. :wink:
Absolutely not! For human being it's impossible. Perfect is only God. Good news is God do not reproaching our falls (because of Jesus). Relationship with God - the reason why the Old and New testament has been written. The human being was created for the relationship with God. Everyone has a "empty" place inside which can be saturated only in His presence. That's why people searching and searching many things, more money, yoga, religion, drugs .... . they have everything and they're still empty inside. You can own whole earth and could be a most miserable person. The best thing is some experience with God- You can find out He is live, He's thinking, He has a feelings ... . I used to be the last person who would be believing in "some" God. But when You try and enjoy His power in your life- than You must change your meaning. My mother was supposed to be dead for twelve years; she's still alive now. My sister was supposed not to be born; she's ten now. When You see something what nobody can explain You have to start thinking. Even when the Doctors said it were obvious miracles. Than all chatter is gone and You know that You know that ... :wink:
Thank you, dzurisovak, that explains a lot. What it boils down to is the fact that Jesus is a life insurance filter for people who can't face their acts alone. For those who are comfortable with their imperfection this need does not arise. I guess we Czechs just aknowledge our imperfection as a part of the human condition and -- instead of torturing ourselves -- we simply move on.
