What is the point of saying grace before a meal?

[Jeremiah Ames]

Kierkegaard said this 200 years ago. How is that possible!!!! ** ×

Enlightenment?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I say Ikudakimasu (said: Ikudakimas!), which is Japanese for 'I gratefully receive'. It is to express gratitude for all the living beings that went into my eating in some way. The once living organisms (usually plants) I'm eating and the people that worked to bring that meal to my table. It's a brief expression of gratitude, and it reminds me I'm not an island unto myself.

In traditional Japanese thought, it is also said with gratefulness to the Kami/gods and any unseen beings that may give people blessings.

 

[David T]

Enlightenment?

Well he is really is a poet philosopher. And it depends on what you mean enlightenment. A very broad term btw.

 

[columbus]

You are ignorant of certain differing sexual orientations.

No I am not.

Stick it up your whatever.
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Nope and if the impoverished countries that are Christian and want to give thanks can. Thanks for America being blessed and being to help.them. Or not it's their choice nobody is forcing or expecting anything. Just because a country is struggling does not mean God is punishing them. That is false equivalency.

What false equivalency? You were the one who implied that God picks winners when you said that living in a country where food is bountiful is something to thank God for. Well, if God is the one who chooses how the bounty is distributed, then God is to blame for the places where food is scarce.

A good example is the lower crop yields in the U.S.S.R due to Lysenkoism - Wikipedia. The famine was due to poor leadership, not God.

And this was a problem your God couldn't overcome? What other limitations and imperfections does your God have?

Not when a country is impoverished due to poor leadership, dictatorship, or war torn that does not or cannot provide for it's citizens. See above Lysenkoism.

So human actions like "poor leadership" can thwart the will of God?

 

[columbus]

It makes no sense to make an analysis ahead of each time you want to thank God for anything, based upon whether someone already made thanks for it.

So I don't.
That's not what I posted. I said I don't think it's important what words you use.
It's not like I am a theist.
Tom

 

[Sleeppy]

No I am not.
Tom

You're not?... OK.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

As I've often heard it said, there's no such thing as a free lunch, so no one, not even God, is actually "giving" us any food. The way food prices are these days, it would appear that those who supply us with food are being well compensated for their efforts, so even they don't need any more thanks than what they're getting.

If we were Not given a supply of 'rain and sun' I think we would Not have any food.
I find it is God who prepares rain for the Earth as per Psalms 147:8, So credit is Not given to man preparing rain.
Who would say God sets food prices, or that there is Not enough food to go around.
I find at Psalms 136:25 it is God who gives food to everyone, so it's greedy people who do Not distribute the food.
If people followed Jesus' instructions as found at Matthew 5:43-48 I think their efforts would benefit all.
So, if a person does Not want to thank God for his 'daily bread' then what about being thankful for sun and rain.
God is Not partial because He makes the sun shine and the rain fall for everyone, so it is God's initial efforts that supplies the food.

 

[Enoch07]

false equivalency? You were the one who implied that God picks winners when you said that living in a country where food is bountiful is something to thank God for. Well, if God is the one who chooses how the bounty is distributed, then God is to blame for the places where food is scarce.

If someones country has poor leadership that is man's fault. Which is why it is a false equivalency.

And this was a problem your God couldn't overcome? What other limitations and imperfections does your God have?

Why would He? If you don't allow people to suffer the consequences of their own decisions then how do you expect them to grow? Lysenko chose to go against well established farming techniques and practices. It backfired on him and he had to face the consequences of being responsible for starving his nation. Had Good intervened and made the crops grow anyways, the horrible example set by Lysenko would have been positively reinforced. I mean if your ok with thousands of scientist being put to death for disagreeing with Lysenko then thats on you.

So human actions like "poor leadership" can thwart the will of God?

Nope, but decisions have consequences. Without consequences we cannot learn from our mistakes. Something tells me you are of the give every child a participation trophy kind of person.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If someones country has poor leadership that is man's fault. Which is why it is a false equivalency.

So when a country prospers, it’s because of good leadership, not God?

Why would He? If you don't allow people to suffer the consequences of their own decisions then how do you expect them to grow?

Someone with poor judgement and a full belly has a better chance of learning and growing than someone who starved to death.

Nope, but decisions have consequences. Without consequences we cannot learn from our mistakes. Something tells me you are of the give every child a participation trophy kind of person.

In your analogy, the “participation trophy” is food. Yes: I would give every child food. Wouldn’t you?

 

[Enoch07]

So when a country prospers, it’s because of good leadership, not God?

Both

Someone with poor judgement and a full belly has a better chance of learning and growing than someone who starved to death.

That why we are blessed in the U.S with bountiful food. So that they do have a full belly. Lysenko suffered his fate though by being known as a maniac pseudo-scientist killer.

In your analogy, the “participation trophy” is good. Yes: I would give every child food. Wouldn’t you?

The children do. Which is why Christians say grace. Because we are thankful we have enough food to feed ourselves and others, including those children.

The participation trophy was not a about the children though. It was about Lysenko and you know that. So that being said do you think Lysenko should be given a participation trophy for "trying" to feed his nation? Or should he have suffered the fate he did for almost starving them to death?

 

[columbus]

You're not?... OK.

No.
I am not ignorant about sexual orientation.
Tom

 

[Grandliseur]

The Japanese saying doesn't mention any gods (it translates as just "I gratefully receive") and it can be construed as being directed to the people who served, prepared, or harvested the food.

It would be interesting if their custom could be traced back to origin. There is indication in Japan that some part of the 10 tribes of the Dispersed 10 tribe nation of Israel came here. I wonder if this is connected !

 

[Koldo]

You are ignorant of certain differing sexual orientations. Is that ignorance valuable to you?

If you're heterosexual, try homosexuality. The most straightforward method would be to have homosexual relations.

How valuable is your ignorance of differing sexualities?

Do you mean that we become homosexuals if we engage in homosexual relations ?
You are showing ignorance.

 

[Sleeppy]

Do you mean that we become homosexuals if we engage in homosexual relations ?

Typically, that would be an indication.

Do you gain further knowledge of homosexuality, by having homosexual relations?

 

[Koldo]

Typically, that would be an indication.

Do you gain further knowledge of homosexuality, by having homosexual relations?

Not really. You can't know what it is like to be homosexual without being homosexual.
Either way, I don't get why you have picked such a terrible example in the first place. You are clueless on homosexuality.
Try another one.

 

[Sleeppy]

Not really. You can't know what it is like to be homosexual without being homosexual.
Either way, I don't get why you have picked such a terrible example in the first place. You are clueless on homosexuality.
Try another one.

Not really? Or not at all?

 

[Sleeppy]

You are clueless on homosexuality.
Try another one.

I know it's an area of extreme sensitivity for some, but the combativeness and deflections aren't really necessary.

 

[Koldo]

Not really? Or not at all?

Not at all if you are strictly talking about homosexuality in itself.

I know it's an area of extreme sensitivity for some, but the combativeness and deflections aren't really necessary.

I don't mind the subject. It is just that you don't even know what is homosexuality.
You think that I, or any other man for this matter, could become, or even know what it is like to be, homosexual by simply having sex with a man. This shows how clueless you are.
How about picking another example then ?

 

[Sleeppy]

Not at all if you are strictly talking about homosexuality in itself.



I don't mind the subject. It is just that you don't even know what is homosexuality.
You think that I, or any other man for this matter, could become, or even know what it is like to be, homosexual by simply having sex with a man. This shows how clueless you are.
How about picking another example then ?

Definition of HOMOSEXUALITY


I picked this example, because I knew it had potential to inflame, exposing dishonesty- if there proved to be any.