Explain this logically christians....

[Kathryn]

it's a part of the christian principle. but what makes christian principles exclusive to the christian faith?



is that a principle or a belief?



your beliefs are not your principles.
you seem to be avoiding the question. what principle do you have that non believers do not have...you need to know what principle they don't have in order for you to separate your principles from non believers.

I never said that Christian principles are exclusive. What I said is that calling a principle a CHRISTIAN principle is accurate, because the Christian faith teaches it - and Christian beliefs underscore and support those principles. I even went on to say that an atheist could embrace some of the same principles and accurately call them atheist principles.

Why did you choose to ignore that very salient point of mine? It seems critical to this conversation.

I then went on to dissect the Apostle's Creed - which is a widely accepted example of basic Christian BELIEFS - and clearly showed you how I apply those BELIEFS to my personal PRINCIPLES.

 

[Kathryn]

I gotta tell you something, waitasec - I'm getting pretty bored with our conversation. I feel like I'm talking to, I don't know, someone on a cell phone who is only hearing every other word I say. It's not that I feel like giving up - it's more like I just feel that the conversation is not condusive to actually edifying communication at this point.

 

[Commoner]

I "misunderstood" because this is not at all what you originally asked. Even so, my original answer suffices.

Ok, mea culpa! Who cares? Can you give me an example of such a principle or not?

You're the one who challenged me regarding the difference between hope and belief. I was simply clarifying.

No, I didn't.

I didn't say I didn't have any inkling of what heaven is. I said I don't have a clear understanding of the whole concept. For instance, what it will look like, how we will relate to family and friends, that sort of thing. But I have a very clear understanding and belief that heaven is offered to us after we die, that it is a place where there is no more sorrow, no more pain, no more tears, no evil - that it will be our home and that it is offered to us through God's grace.

That's a belief - not just a hope. And that belief in no way undermines the integrity of my lfe decisions.

How could it not? As you said, your values are a part of your religious faith. How could they possibly not undermine the integrity of your decisions if they are based upon beliefs the validity of which you are unable to demonstrate properly?

When you give support to these supernatural claims, how are you exempt from any responsibility for bad things that happen that could not happen if the belief in these claims did not exist? When you use them to try and "help" others through tough times, how does that not effect the integrity of your decisions?

 

[waitasec]

I never said that Christian principles are exclusive.

so when you say i follow christian principles you are not setting your principles apart from anyone else?

What I said is that calling a principle a CHRISTIAN principle is accurate, because the Christian faith teaches it - and Christian beliefs underscore and support those principles. I even went on to say that an atheist could embrace some of the same principles and accurately call them atheist principles.

it's called ethical principles...
i never separate my principles by a label as far as christian or atheistic...
they are the moral code we all abide by, everyone of us...

now how is the christian principle any different?

Why did you choose to ignore that very salient point of mine? It seems critical to this conversation.

I then went on to dissect the Apostle's Creed - which is a widely accepted example of basic Christian BELIEFS - and clearly showed you how I apply those BELIEFS to my personal PRINCIPLES.

if anyone can apply these principles without any particular belief why the need for this particular belief?

 

[Kathryn]

so when you say i follow christian principles you are not setting your principles apart from anyone else?

i never separate my principles by a label as far as christian or atheistic...
they are the moral code we all abide by, everyone of us...

Surely you're not saying that everyone universally embraces the same principles. You honestly think that everyone embraces the same moral code and ethics?

if anyone can apply these principles without any particular belief why the need for this particular belief?

People can choose to embrace or deny principles. Often their beliefs guide them to accept certain principles as truths.

 

[waitasec]

Surely you're not saying that everyone universally embraces the same principles.
You honestly think that everyone embraces the same moral code and ethics?

can you provide evidence that shows otherwise?

People can choose to embrace or deny principles.

absolutely.

Often their beliefs guide them to accept certain principles as truths.

which is why i am asking, if anyone can apply ethical principles without any particular religious belief why set aside your religious belief as the reason for attaining these principles?

 

[Kathryn]

which is why i am asking, if anyone can apply ethical principles without any particular religious belief why set aside your religious belief as the reason for attaining these principles?

What are you talking about "setting aside?"

My personal principles which I apply to my actions on a daily basis are based on and built on the foundation of my religious beliefs.

Others may embrace and apply their own principles -which may or may not be shared by me - for their own reasons and based on their own beliefs.

So what?

 

[waitasec]

What are you talking about "setting aside?"

why would you call it your "christian principles" other than saying ethical principles...they are the same thing.

My personal principles which I apply to my actions on a daily basis are based on and built on the foundation of my religious beliefs.

it's your religious belief that is set aside because you give your religious belief the credit for you attaining the same ethical principles non believers have.
and i don't understand why.

Others may embrace and apply their own principles -which may or may not be shared by me - for their own reasons and based on their own beliefs.

So what?

which are different than yours how?

for instance.
my belief is we are all equal. no one is better than the next guy.
is that different from your belief?

 

[Kathryn]

why would you call it your "christian principles" other than saying ethical principles...they are the same thing.

Because they ARE Christian principles. What you're asking is the same as asking me why I call French bread "French bread" - when it's just bread. SURE it's just bread, but it's ALSO French bread! Someone from some other country may make a similar bread, or even an identical bread, and they may call it something else, and we may both be right. They may call it Italian bread, and I may call it French bread, and we'd both be right. But to say that neither of us is right, and insist that it only be called bread as if it could only be called one thing, is inaccurate and a skewered way of approaching diversity.

Hey, guess what. I'm American. I'm also a Texan. Hey, I'm also a native Louisianan. How can I be all three?

it's your religious belief that is set aside because you give your religious belief the credit for you attaining the same ethical principles non believers have.
and i don't understand why.

I don't understand your angst about this. I am merely relaying my own personal experience. You act as if I believe that others who reach the same moral conclusions via a different path are somehow inferior to me. I don't believe that and I've never said or implied it.

my belief is we are all equal. no one is better than the next guy.
is that different from your belief?

Not that I can see. Yay, we agree on something! But guess what - not everyone believes that. Some belief systems encourage people NOT to believe that ethical principle. So in that case, I would disagree with that aspect of their belief system and would use terminology to differentiate between their belief system and mine.

 

[Commoner]

I don't understand your angst about this. I am merely relaying my own personal experience. You act as if I believe that others who reach the same moral conclusions via a different path are somehow inferior to me. I don't believe that and I've never said or implied it.

But that is important - how you reach a conclusion. Even someone who happens to have reached the same conclusion as I, but has done so for bad reasons, is wrong. For instance, there is this notion that gets tossed around from time to time by various theists - that atheists are just atheists because they're "angry at god". Well - such a person might very well reach the same conclusion regarding the afterlife, for instance, but I would still consider them to be "in error".

And you have reached the same conclusions as I have on many moral and ethical questions, I'm sure. I'm pretty confident in my assumption that we both think stealing is, in general, immoral. Yet, if your reasons for thinking this way really depend solely on your religious faith - and not a logical argument as to why stealing is wrong, then I feel you are not justified in your belief. If, however, you - as well as I - have a logical argument that demonstrates why stealing is immoral, then that is necessarily the foundation on which your belief regarding the (im)morality of stealing stands, not your religious faith.

(BTW - so, when you say "christian principles", that implies to many people that you mean to say your principles are founded on your religious faith - not that they are merely the same as those described by christianity.)

 

[waitasec]

Because they ARE Christian principles. What you're asking is the same as asking me why I call French bread "French bread" - when it's just bread. SURE it's just bread, but it's ALSO French bread!
Someone from some other country may make a similar bread, or even an identical bread, and they may call it something else, and we may both be right. They may call it Italian bread, and I may call it French bread, and we'd both be right. But to say that neither of us is right, and insist that it only be called bread as if it could only be called one thing, is inaccurate and a skewered way of approaching diversity.

Hey, guess what. I'm American. I'm also a Texan. Hey, I'm also a native Louisianan. How can I be all three?



I don't understand your angst about this. I am merely relaying my own personal experience. You act as if I believe that others who reach the same moral conclusions via a different path are somehow inferior to me. I don't believe that and I've never said or implied it.



Not that I can see. Yay, we agree on something! But guess what - not everyone believes that. Some belief systems encourage people NOT to believe that ethical principle. So in that case, I would disagree with that aspect of their belief system and would use terminology to differentiate between their belief system and mine.

i think the gist of all this is
the same ethical principles are attained because everyone is the same.
when you say i live my life by my "christian principles" you are setting yourself apart from those who do not have the same belief as you. am i wrong?
i want to know why you feel your beliefs are set aside when at the end of the day everyone, believers and non believers, apply the same principles to their daily lives?
is it because your religion would have you believe you are saved, is that what sets you apart?

(and no i am not jealous of an arbitrary state of mind )

it seems that's what sets you apart even though we are both capable of doing the same things in the here and now?
and it's because you "are saved" and believe you will go to heaven is what sets you apart from someone like me?

so would it be fair to say, your "christian principles" are based upon your belief of being saved which is the foundation for setting yourself apart from the unbelievers?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

But it is a problem, because it is entirely redundant and makes taking care of the ox harder.

If it was easy, would it mean anything?

Helping an old man across the street. Sure, performing the act is good, but it seems extreme to say that ignoring the opportunity is evil.

Extreme why? Because if you didn't you wouldn't feel bad about not doing so?

Mobius disagrees.

The strip still has two sides...

 

[PolyHedral]

If it was easy, would it mean anything?

Well, yes. It'd mean you have an ox working for you.

Extreme why? Because if you didn't you wouldn't feel bad about not doing so?

Because there's got to be some limit where an act is so trivial that applying the label "evil" isn't reasonable.

The strip still has two sides...

The physically constructable version does, but it's not supposed to.

 

[Copernicus]

The problem with calling principles "Christian" is that Christians can disagree wildly with each other on just what they are and how they arrive at them. Many, if not most, Christians believe that their faith motivates their principles, but the truth is that they get them from the same place that we all do--our childhood upbringing, our friends, and our society. People of faith are just accustomed to using their religion as a reason for adhering to those principles, and they tend to believe that people without their faith have little or nothing to guide them.

What are some Christian principles? Well, tolerance of slavery is one. Opposition to slavery is another. Opposition to abortion could be another, as could defending the right of a woman to make her own choice in such a matter. People pray to defeat the enemy, and they also use religion to refuse to fight in a war. Christians both hate and love homosexuals for Christian reasons. Being against looting, pillaging, and murder are just common sense in any social species. Religion is a motivation or excuse for the principles that guide one's life, but calling them "Christian" circumvents the need to defend them rationally.

 

[Beta]

I already knew how you came up with the number of 6000 years. What i am asking you is how did you come up with the 6000 years of suffering?

Exodus 20:9 doesn't support the suffering part of your argument.



Wait, bible reference please? You are making a very big argument here and you need bible reference to back it up. Where in the bible does it say God's conclusion over mankind?

You seem to live in a world without suffering ?
Ex.20v9 does not have to mention the fact but numerous scriptures point to it all the same. Suffering began with the death of righteous Abel back in Gen.and has continued down through mankind in ever-increasing force. No one who looks around him can deny the pain and agonies of mankind unless they are totally void of human compassion.
As far as concluding all under sin see Gal.3v22; Rom.3v23.

 

[Beta]

2011 ?

He's late

God is always on time with what he does.
It might just be that our calculations over thousands of years have slipped. I'm not worried !

 

[Koldo]

You seem to live in a world without suffering ?
Ex.20v9 does not have to mention the fact but numerous scriptures point to it all the same. Suffering began with the death of righteous Abel back in Gen.and has continued down through mankind in ever-increasing force. No one who looks around him can deny the pain and agonies of mankind unless they are totally void of human compassion.
As far as concluding all under sin see Gal.3v22; Rom.3v23.

The problem here is that you are assuming things. Exodus 20:9 has no relation with suffering. For all we know, the 7th day will still have suffering.

Gal.3v22 and Rom.3v23 are talking about sin. Not about suffering. They are different things. And once again, it has nothing to do with your argument of 6000 years of suffering.

 

[Kathryn]

i think the gist of all this is
the same ethical principles are attained because everyone is the same.

Everyone does not reach the same ethical conclusions or opinions. Some people think that premarital sex is morally OK and others believe it's morally wrong. Some people believe that divorce is OK in any circumstances and others believe it is never OK. Some people believe that late term abortion is morally acceptable regardless of the reason, and others believe it is never acceptable for any reason. Then there are all sorts of opinions in between.

when you say i live my life by my "christian principles" you are setting yourself apart from those who do not have the same belief as you. am i wrong?

Hey, I am a Texan. Am I setting myself apart from those who aren't, or am I merely stating a fact about where I live? It depends totally on context. If this were 1862 that would perhaps be a very important distinction. At a sales conference it's just a location regarding where I work.

i want to know why you feel your beliefs are set aside when at the end of the day everyone, believers and non believers, apply the same principles to their daily lives?
is it because your religion would have you believe you are saved, is that what sets you apart?

What is all this "setting apart" stuff? Those are your words, not mine. My Christian faith works for me, works in my life, betters my mental, emotional, physical and spiritual state of living.

My Christian faith makes me a better person. That doesn't mean it makes me better than anyone ELSE. It merely means that it makes me better than I am without it.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

it seems that's what sets you apart even though we are both capable of doing the same things in the here and now?

I have no idea what you're capable of. All I know is that I am not worth any more than you are and that my life is no more special or valuable than yours - or anyone else's.

[QUOTE
and it's because you "are saved" and believe you will go to heaven is what sets you apart from someone like me?
][/QUOTE]

Your emotional baggage, not mine. I have no idea where your eternal destination lies. I am not responsible for that, nor am I responsible for judging you.

Carry on.

I do think it's ironic that you seem so hung up on whether or not I'm judging anyone else - and yet you constantly try to judge MY moral position on things. How many times do I have to tell you that I'm not judging your beliefs - that I'm merely explaining my own position as applied to my own life?

so would it be fair to say, your "christian principles" are based upon your belief of being saved which is the foundation for setting yourself apart from the unbelievers?

Ummm, no. I know you want so desperately for me to fit into this Wicked Judgmental Christian prototype that you've built up in your head, but I'm not your girl for that one.

My "Christian principles" provide a framework of moral values and a belief system that guides me to be a better person and to make better choices in life than I would if left to rely on my emotions alone, or even my (humanly limited) "rational thought process." My faith teaches me to seek wisdom and understanding, but when I do not understand something and simply can't seem to grasp it, that in spite of my lack of understanding, my faith is firm. I believe that God will give me understanding and increased wisdom over time - after all, He has done so in the past.

I am not trying to be "set apart" and "better" than "unbelievers." My gosh, I don't even use those phrases - they sound foreign to me. Jesus Himself reached out across cultural barriers and clearly lived a life of love and tolerance for sincerity and honesty in any form, though He did have a pretty short fuse for hypocrites.

I try to pattern my life after His example.

 

[Koldo]

Kathryn, in other words, the Christian principles are simply a set of principles. It doesn't mean they are inherently christians, it just means there is a specific set of principles that is a christian set.

So to solve the big discussion when you say "Christian principles", you mean "Christian set of principles".

I suppose that is what you meant.

However, i don't think there is just 1 Christian set of principles out there. This is mainly because the definition of Christian is simply someone who follows Jesus' teachings. Some people add Paul's teachings to the mix, for example, which leads to many different Chritian set of principles that share the same root.

 

[Beta]

The problem here is that you are assuming things. Exodus 20:9 has no relation with suffering. For all we know, the 7th day will still have suffering.

Gal.3v22 and Rom.3v23 are talking about sin. Not about suffering. They are different things. And once again, it has nothing to do with your argument of 6000 years of suffering.

Seems we read the Bible differently !