Go to God as The Universe as an Organism
- Add a comment
- Go to YOUR LAST CHANCE
blanchedubois
so you really don't want to convert anyone then. is that what you are saying? yo don't have to try with me -- just say something -- try to convert some unknownperson out there whom you just might save from the condemnation of hell by your words. If you don't want to do this, then if that person goes to hell and he/she wouldn't have if he/she had read what yo had to say -- don't you think that's your fault?
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 5, 2005 at 6:20 AM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-X
Oh, God. If you don't get it, then no one's going to "enlighten" you. The "still, small voice" inside you, when your head stops chattering. That's the best definition I can give for God.
posted by
Blanche.
on December 4, 2005 at 7:06 PM
| link to this | reply
Okay, try this.
The Christian vision of God covers the moral spectrum: the disciplinarian, protective Father; the compassionate, forgiving Son; the Spirit living in each of us, tying it all together. This provides a basis for moral or ethical judgment (not of people but of behavior, i.e. what ought I to do?). Science can't do it. Science tells what is, not what ought. For deciding what ought, we need to go back to ultimate truth -- so as to keep our moral arguments from falling into circular logic, i.e. justifying our claims based on other claims that we manufactured for the purpose of making subsequent claims, and so on. Behind it all is God. We should act loving, then, because God wills it, not because we like it or because we cannot find a good reason not to do so. We should keep church and state separate because the state is profane (profane as in non-sacred) and the church must be kept sacred, untainted by politics -- because keeping the church sacred is the will of God. We should do as Jesus did -- give of ourselves; not hoard wealth; love all, even our enemies -- because God wills it. Maybe not a wholly satisfactory argument, but the best I can do.
posted by
Dyl_Pickle
on December 4, 2005 at 6:59 PM
| link to this | reply