Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
Religious tenants like welcoming the stranger.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is a religious extremist?
- Thread starter stevecanuck
- Start date
Religious tenants like welcoming the stranger.
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
The problems are things like the institution of slavery.
Religious extremists fought back by running away, forming communities, welcoming the stranger and fighting Holy Wars against their former masters.
Doesn't this statement contain an equally subjective judgement on your part?
The Sermon on the Mount, the Apostle's Creed, etc., all speak in positive terms about an expected divine judgment of and violent retribution against Christianity's enemies. It's very much in the core of the religion.
Sure. In the days of slavery, a lot of the abolitionist movement came from the religious extremists of the day.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
The question is if all of the world including all of human behaviour can be done objectively. As far as I can tell that is not possible for morality as it appears to be subjective.
What do you mean by "done?"
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Here are 2 defintions of objective:
-expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations.
-of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers.
Definition of OBJECTIVE
expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations; limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum… See the full definition
Can you do a moral claim or action as objective in at least of those senses?
Augustus
…
Opinions on complex abstract phenomena generally contain at least some degree of subjectivity, yes.
I had no question about what 'objective' means.Here are 2 defintions of objective:
-expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations.
-of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers.
Definition of OBJECTIVE
expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations; limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum… See the full definitionwww.merriam-webster.com
Can you do a moral claim or action as objective in at least of those senses?
I was confused as to what you meant by "done" when you mentioned all the world and human behavior being done objectively. Again, you say "do." Do what? What is it that's being done?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
A human behaviour that entail a judgment, where the judgment is subjective as a process.
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
Craig Hicks wore his god on his hip.
Is he a religious extremist or an idolater?
Is he a religious extremist or an idolater?
Yes. That's what I was alluding to in my previous responses. All judgments are subjective, though some may appear on the surface to be more objective than others.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Don't know who that is.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yes, but for morality they all seem to be subjective.
I thought gods were bigger than that.
Or does Craig Hicks just have big hips? I don't know who Craig Hicks is.
Just to be clear: you're talking about the guy who killed his neighbours over a parking dispute, right?
... and suggesting that because he was really into guns, this made guns his "god" or "religion"?
If I understand you correctly, then no. That's not how any of this works. Just being obsessed with something doesn't make it a religion.
Edit: though I'd personally consider him an extremist example of gun culture.
Spice
StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
The Sermon on the Mount list the Beatitudes, blessings to come, and in no way relates to this Apoplectic mumbo-jumbo that was twisted and wrung out of the early teachings in the 6th century to control the masses through fear and intimidation. And even in the Apostles Creed, the words of judgement say nothing of horrific punishment as the "controllers" formulated out of many of the texts. That's why I stated the "history, or tradition" to clarify what has been used and abused from the loving message of hope, brotherhood, and endurance that is the core to Christianity in is pure and abiding form. And yet many churches close their services with “as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.”
Banach-Tarski Paradox
*Banned*
Could have been a false god, which, despite being designed and engineered for omnipotence, landed him in prison for rest of his life.
In his worldview, he may have been fighting for his freedom.
“It’s idolatry, putting trust in weapons. And weapons are made like gods. … Weapons are always false gods because they make money. It’s profiteering.”
---Sister Megan Rice---
The Prophets of Oakridge