Freud on Religion

[TUDOR]

Faith has no boundries and I believe there is room for God & Science.

[moimeme]

Anti-intellectualism is alive and well on LoveShack given the above,

 

Nothing I said could be construed to be anti-intellectual. At least not by someone who is intelligent.

 

Let me try to break it down for you in simpler terms:

 

We do not know enough science to say that God and Science are not, in the end, one and the same. This is an argument FOR intellectual analysis - that based upon science which we have yet to discover. It is not anti-intellectual to say that neither science nor man has yet developed sufficiently to comprehend things now considered 'supernatural'.

 

Eclipses used to be thought of as dragons eating the sun. Science taught us differently. Thinking God and things psychic are 'supernatural' could be the 21st C version of seeing dragons where maybe quantum mechanics are at play. A hundred years hence, I expect, we'll be laughed at for thinking that God and Science are separate. Eventually, I am certain, we will see the two converge.

[XNemesisX]

The only thing that I'm afraid of, is scientists convincing our future generations that there's no God. That's what I think is their the ultimate goal.

 

Moose I am honestly not trying to be a smart a** at all here but how much education do you have? Because you seem too smart to make a statement like that and I am kind of in shock by some of the things you say on here.

[blind_otter]

Originally posted by Moose

Give me a break. Where's your proof? You're half right......they did come from the same SOURCE.....God created them.

 

See, this is why science and religion are different. You don't require proof to believe what you believe. Science asks the very question you, rolling your eyes, ask me.

 

The proof is in the fossil record, which fundamentalist Baptists have said to me, before, were put there "by the devil" to mislead us. I've also been told by the same fundamentalists that "If God meant for the races to mix, he would have made them that way" -- accusing me of being a creation of satan because I am of mixed race. I've also been told by the same fundamentalists that the earth is flat, and only 8,000 years old, because that's what the bible says.

[Illusion24]

Freud referred to an illusion as something that is made up almost completely of wishful thinking with no evidence for it nor against it. Therefore, an illusion COULD be true, but like most wishful thinking, it is usually false.

 

 

That's interesting...I studied psychology for about a year and even thought he's crazy, he makes so much sense. It kinda f*cks with you.

[Moose]

Originally posted by XNemesisX

Moose I am honestly not trying to be a smart a** at all here but how much education do you have? Because you seem too smart to make a statement like that and I am kind of in shock by some of the things you say on here.

I don't see what's so shocking.....it's a valid concern.

I've also been told by the same fundamentalists that the earth is flat, and only 8,000 years old, because that's what the bible says.

Hmmm, the bible says that? Where? And I've already told you what I think about fossils. There's too much missing data to form a conclusion. I don't think they were put there by the devil though. Any proof we find of other creatures who walked the Earth are there because like anything else God created them.....they died, and left traces.

Science asks the very question you, rolling your eyes, ask me.

Science will waste their time trying to figure it out. I asked the question, "where's your proof", to clue you in that it's impossible to prove. I don't care to know any explanations really.

[blind_otter]

Originally posted by Moose

I don't care to know any explanations really.

 

Then you limit the world that you experience. That's why I like questioning things. I still believe in divinity, but refuse to have my belief hinge merely on what I am told.

[MySugaree]

I don't care to know any explanations really.

 

Thank your God, Moose, that many of us feel very differently.

[Moose]

Then you limit the world that you experience. That's why I like questioning things. I still believe in divinity, but refuse to have my belief hinge merely on what I am told.

No it doesn't. Just because I don't care to hear an explaination on how others perceive how life came about doesn't restrict my experiences in how I perceive it.......I just do so differently.Thank your God, Moose, that many of us feel very differently.

What's that supossed to mean? That it's a good thing you dismiss creation? Or that wasting your time trying to find out saved all of us somehow? I don't follow......

[blind_otter]

I like listening to other people's perspectives, whether I believe in them or not, because that makes my personal world more rich and interesting. I find reading up on different religious beliefs, different cultures -- utterly enriching. I love the idea of travelling, and experiencing things that are DIFFERENT.

 

To go through the same thing, limit myself to status quo, and restrict my exposure to things that are different or dismiss them entirely, seems like a shame. But whatever floats your boat.

[Moose]

Originally posted by blind_otter

I like listening to other people's perspectives, whether I believe in them or not, because that makes my personal world more rich and interesting. I find reading up on different religious beliefs, different cultures -- utterly enriching. I love the idea of travelling, and experiencing things that are DIFFERENT.

 

To go through the same thing, limit myself to status quo, and restrict my exposure to things that are different or dismiss them entirely, seems like a shame. But whatever floats your boat.

I see what you mean. Please don't think that I don't find science interesting, or that I dismiss it entirely. I just don't except these theories of evolution or that there's some explaination that we came from particles from the cosmos mixed together perfectly to form the intelligent beings that we think we are now. I guess we'll all find out one way or another.

[alphamale]

Originally posted by Moose

I just don't except these theories of evolution or that there's some explaination that we came from particles from the cosmos mixed together perfectly to form the intelligent beings that we think we are now. I guess we'll all find out one way or another.

why is it, MOOSE, that many people that are "religious" are so closed minded? I've never understood that mentality.

[blind_otter]

Originally posted by Moose

I see what you mean. Please don't think that I don't find science interesting, or that I dismiss it entirely. I just don't except these theories of evolution or that there's some explaination that we came from particles from the cosmos mixed together perfectly to form the intelligent beings that we think we are now. I guess we'll all find out one way or another.

 

If man is made in the image of God, we have the potentiality for greatness, more so than fallibilty.

[BlockHead]

blind_otter

OR high quality heroin.

Yes. Spend $100s of billions for what could be done on more fertile and plentiful American farmland for the price of some seed, tractors, and a few full time farmers.

 

alphamale

why is it, MOOSE, that many people that are "religious" are so closed minded? I've never understood that mentality.

Oh really...

[Moose]

Originally posted by alphamale

why is it, MOOSE, that many people that are "religious" are so closed minded? I've never understood that mentality.

I guess the same can be asked about those who aren't, "religious", ALPHA......answer that, and you'll most likely answer your own question.

If man is made in the image of God, we have the potentiality for greatness, more so than fallibilty

Yes, but I believe it's only through God that greatness can be obtained.

[alphamale]

Originally posted by Moose

Yes, but I believe it's only through God that greatness can be obtained.

that is your opinion, MOOSE, but the reality is that many people have achieved greatness even if they did not believe in God or a particular religion.

 

one that comes to mind is albert einstein who did not embrace judiasm until much later in his life.

[Moose]

that is your opinion, MOOSE,

That's what the, "I believe", was put there for.....

but the reality is that many people have achieved greatness even if they did not believe in God or a particular religion.

one that comes to mind is albert einstein

Apparently you and I don't share the same defintion of, "greatness"......Mr. Einstein was a mere man. He was intelligent.....but nothing else seperated him from any other person....what's so great about him?

[ConfusedInOC]

Originally posted by Moose

I guess the same can be asked about those who aren't, "religious", ALPHA......answer that, and you'll most likely answer your own question.Yes, but I believe it's only through God that greatness can be obtained.

 

Amen, Moose.

[d'Arthez]

Yes, but I believe it's only through God that greatness can be obtained.

 

Nonsense, unless you mean greatness in a spiritual sense. But that is implicitly claiming a spiritual monopoly, which is absurd. And depending on the strictness which you view sins, you would have committed a sin. But Einstein would have always qualified for the spiritual greatness, even when he had not yet embraced Judaism.

 

One wonders what a Christian person would think of a Socrates, who chose to die, instead of retracting the truth.

[Moose]

But Einstein would have always qualified for the spiritual greatness, even when he had not yet embraced Judaism.

How do you figure? What is your definition of friggin' greatness????

One wonders what a Christian person would think of a Socrates, who chose to die, instead of retracting the truth.

I'd have to say that he would've been a clear example of how much conviction one can have towards their beliefs.....and I for one am equally willing to do the same for what I believe in too......probably not the answer you were expecting....huh?

[blind_otter]

Francis Crick was a noted atheist.

 

He was one of a pair of scientists (Watson and Crick) who discovered the double helix shape of DNA, thus creating an explosion of information on how the genetic code works and eventually leading to the achievement of animal cloning.

[d'Arthez]

Originally posted by Moose

How do you figure? What is your definition of friggin' greatness????

By reading things Einstein wrote: his views on morality, religion, politics et cetera. These things could not have been written by a non-spiritual being, and according to my judgement, fallible as it is, very few people have attained the same level of greatness in that sense.

Einstein was both a scientist and a religious person.

 

I'd have to say that he would've been a clear example of how much conviction one can have towards their beliefs.....and I for one am equally willing to do the same for what I believe in too......probably not the answer you were expecting....huh?

 

It was the answer I expected, Moose, and you did not disappoint me.

That is because your belief is important to you, just as Socrates belief in the truth was important to him. People can differ in belief systems, but there are a few things we always find commendable to sacrifice ourselves for, regardless of our belief systems. "Truth" is one of them. But for a person who does not believe in "Truth", sacrificing one's life for it always appears as something absurd.

I don't think any religious person does not admire Socrates for the stance he took. He did not believe in the Christian God, but that does not make a difference for his greatness.

 

In essence "greatness" can only be judged by us, on the basis of deeds. What is the driving force behind the deeds, is something we don't know. It may be a religious or a non-religious idea, that is held by that person. A desire to improve ourselves and the situation of mankind, can exist both with a religion, or without religion.

[Chris777]

Interesting, coming from someone who began a post by suggesting nobody's all good or all bad. Apparently, however, the same principle does not apply to science.

 

Actually my aim was to point out that we are all individually corrupted.

 

And that Just because a seemingly inteligent phrase might have come out of hitlers mouth, that he had no more validity than Ghandi(both of whom i personally disagree with)

 

I don't see how anyone can dog on Freud. He alone pretty much established psychology as a science.

Psychology is not a science it is a pseudo science. All thought in psychiatry is based on opinion or hypothesis, hense the wide variances in opinions on the causes of so called mental illness.

You cannot tell me that because americans use 90% of the worlds psychiatric medication, that 90% of all mentally ill people life in the us.

 

 

But anyway, I don't understand the Christians' obvious offense to the non-Christians POV. Do you feel threatened or are you scared someone might make you aware of the inconsistency in your religion?

" No I believe my religion, not nessesarily those who claim to be a part of it, and therefore i am concerned when any idea, or doctrine steers people from the truth,"

 

I would liken it to the secularlist decrying the conservatives for not wanting to give out condoms in school.

 

 

I have learned that sometimes you cannot convince someone of anything even if you have proof right in front of you that goes against what they believe. They still won't believe it. A lof of Christians are embracing science, Moose and Confused, because it's obvious that there is proof for it. A lot of Christians are now accepting that even with the Big Bang and evolution, it doesn't necessarily disprove God but it does disprove some of the bible (if you take the bible literally).

 

a puzzle without all the pieces is still a puzzle , not a picture of exacting fact

 

Comparing the faith in religion to faith in science is ridiculous. It's like comparing apples to oranges. I don't even feel like writing a big post about this right now but it's just completely ridiculous to say that someone's faith in science is the same as religion. These are stories PEOPLE wrote a LOOONG time ago. How in the world can you even compare your religion to something that has been tested, retested, and proved. Religion is subjective, science is objective. You can't compare objective to subjective!

 

People can "frame" subjective "evidence" In such a manner that it has the appearance of reality.

Look at movies, they are getting better and better of compositing image and sound into the image of reality, even though they are not. The same is true of science.

 

 

Christians are going to have to embrace science unless they want to stay in the dark ages. Just like Freud said, its unbelievable how people can still hold on to outdated beliefs. How are we going to move forward and become more modernized and evolved if we refuse to look at scientific evidence? You better be prepared to revise your belief systems.

I have I used to believe all the so called "proofs" you have spoken of, untill I examined their validity myself.

 

Furthermore, how do you know that what you "hear" from God isn't just your own thoughts? What Freud says makes perfect sense. It could be your wishful thinking and your own thoughts and wishes being "God." Man's worst fear is their life being meaningless and humans also fear "nothingness." It's just too much for some people to handle. This is where religion comes in.

Could not the exact same phrase be used on Freuds own theories?

 

Until I see God with my own eyes and/or Jesus and hear him talk to me in person then I am not going to be so sure they exist. Heh, even then I would probably question my eyes and ears and wonder if I wasn't hallucinating.

 

I really just don't think God will punish anybody for not believing or for questioning things. I'm sure he wants us to be intelligent and not gullible believe-everything-they-hear mindless sheep.

Their is a reason I believe the bible is True, and anything that contradicts it is by definition Satanic (adverse) because if it is true then everyone who doesn't follow it will end up in damnation. Kind of like everyone being on the titanic, and even though the boat (at first) didnt appear to be sinking, It was in fact, and those that refused to get in the lifeboats, for whatever reasons died, just like those that slap away the son of God as a fiction will end up not going to heaven as it was offered to them , and they chose not to believe.

As for mindless sheep Not all that claim christianity match what the bible says, Ye shall know them by their fruit.

Another way to think about it, if you are in fact up for some free thinking, is If the bible was True hypothetically speaking, then how is it the devil would best discredit its truth?

bait and switch, free market, devaluation, or all of the above?

Again If the bible is truth then all other religions, faiths, beliefs, "facts", and theories, are wrong. period.

 

Where is the fun in that for him? Who said it was his amusemant?

 

 

Granted, and the ideas of defence mechanisms and other of his theories are certainly useful, but the whole theory about psychology being primarily about one's sexual issues is definitely not. He started out great, but then headed way off in the wrong direction. Analyzing personalities according to toilet training difficulties is just nuts LOL.

Again my point of why does , just some of his so called work deserve praise and credit? and the rest is tossed into the garbage.

 

Logical positivists, in their way, are as intractable about their belief in the ultimate rightness of their version of knowledge as are the fundies about their version of religion.

I am stating what I read in the bible, I tried to reconcile it to science , it doesn't work. then I began to look at the seperate opposing components, and examine their validity. they didnt work outside of biblical truth.

Now keep in mind, I am NOT making any excuse, or trying to add elaboration on things that arent expressly written in the bible, and I choose to let go of them, IE Dinosaurs, other than dragons, and behemouths, and leviathans, I make no further explanation of so called dinosaur bones.

Remember the term dinosaur was recently coined (historically), and that just like people are so accustomed to pointing out about the bible being written a long time ago, variants have rose out of them historically like the languages out of babylon.

 

"I find it amusing that people of each generation who claim that science is ultimate behave as though they have reached the epitome of all knowledge - despite the fact that every generation discovers new evidence to refute the 'definitive knowledge' of the generations before. "

During my poblic education the universe aged from 5 billion years, to what is it supposed to be now 12-15 billion? Everyone is so quick to jump on the new fad theory bandwagon, before carefully examining them for themselves.

 

We still don't understand why aspirin works, yet we use it all the time. You could call that a matter of 'blind faith' as well, I suppose.

MOst medications are that way, yet few question them.

 

Anti-intellectualism is alive and well on LoveShack given the above, and many other, posts on this Thread

Intellectual does not equate to wisdom.

and judging by the tone of your post you assume it is from a lack of intelligence rather than looking at the balances. and seeing them tipped far over to one side, and it not nessesarily being correct.

 

 

Your question reveals a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. Humans and modern day primates simply descended from the same ancestor. One group went in one direction, the other went in another direction. It depends on the demands of the specific environment in which the off-shoot groups live. How does creationism address the different sub species of humanoids, like neanderthals?

 

First off I dont follow any "isms" I follow scripture.

now on to evolutionary theory, EVolution as a theory ONLY works in a SYSTEM, A biosphere if you will since that is one of the most popular terms.

 

Humans and modern day primates simply descended from the same ancestor.

AS did ALL LIFE according to evolutionary theory.

roll back time a few million-billionyears (or whatever Evolutionist will believe the formation of life occured) And you will end up with a SINGLE cell (I wont even get into all of the systems involved in the simplest of life forms, I will for the sake of demonstration grant you that a systemic life form spontaneously appeared to make a demonstration.)

So back to the ONE single cell that appeared on a STERILE earth (at least in the sence of life forms, not minerals) it existed in some environment, for sake of length lets say an ocean.

1 It needs to eat

What does it eat? Chemicals? or is it photosynthetic? doesnt really matter, as it can only be one of the 2 possibilities, it cannot be both.

2 It needs to reproduce (again a bit iffy, as it just spontaneously appeared, but ill concede for sake of demonstration)

 

If a lifeform is in a sealed environment, with only itself and its offspring existing, how it it that it has any competition?

I mean if it is basically a mass of clones eating the same thing, with no enemies, other than say sunlight how is it that so called natural selection can even occur if its in a closed environment?

 

Another thing to Nibble on Say one of its off spring, decided it did not like the taste of whatever chemical it was consuming, and it just spontaneously turned cannibalistic and started eating its Brothers-sisters-parents(self) why is it that it did not eliminate itself to begin with?

 

those are 2 of the biggest querstions that I find lacking in the blind acceptance of evolutionary theory.

 

"

 

It depends on the demands of the specific environment in which the off-shoot groups live.

That is assuming that a fully functioning ecosystem is established already, something I have yet to see evolution address.

AS for the bible It states god made all the creatures, and their systems, (both internal biological, and environmental systems) in a matter of days.

 

One group went in one direction, the other went in another direction.

It depends on the demands of the specific environment in which the off-shoot groups live.

 

Tower of babel is one example.

 

Another "explanation" is that the offshoots are those of animals, and not men , animals can breed traits, yet it is not nessesarily something that spontaneously occurs naturally.

Hence we have the reversion of domesticated animals, and crops reverting back to the wild if they are released.

How does creationism address the different sub species of humanoids, like neanderthals?

Given some so called evolutionary ancestors are no more than fingers, and teeth, even giving them recognition as remotely human is stretching credibility at best.

 

Another explanation, though not nessesarily one i agree with is the Nephelium (offspring of angels, and women), but that is just as outlandish as evolution.

 

I personally am not gravely concerned, I see the damage that we as "scientific" humans have inflicted on the earth in the past 50 years, I have no doubt, as to our capability of it in the past.

Look at the pyramids, and easter island (modern science just barely has a clue as to how they were constructed) Yet it doesn't stop these so called Detectives.

 

"Yeah but Moose, a lot more Christians are accepting science and they don't believe it disproves God. Do you think science disproves God? I just don't understand why you think that science necessarily disproves God or your religion. Why does it have to be one or the other?"

This was basically my belief my whole life , until around 5 years ago. I was brought up in a "religious" family, yet I can't say i was instructed in it other than a vague concept of morality, which is basically what i In my Ignorance assumed the bible to be until I personally started reading it. and even then I tried to make a "melting pot" out of all religions, and science.

But their were too many verses, that just did not jive with science, or other religions.

Jesus confirmed , both the Creation, as well as the Flood. Now either he Lied, or he believed them, and If he was who he said he was He witnessed them.

really the bottom line is it is either true or false.

I for most of my life was under the assumption it was false/ or myth,(allegory) but after going in circles trying to reconcile everything, like a puzzle, I realized God is Not the author of confusion, and I Tried something New, something I personally had never heard of anyone else doing. assuming I was wrong, and the bible was right. Thats when Everything started falling into place.

something I suggest others to try If they dare.

 

I just don't see why so many people are thinking that its one or the other? Or that science is evil. Please enlighten me on that Moose because I really don't understand why you are so scared of science and why you don't want to believe it.

It s not that I fear it, as I stated earlier I used to believe it. Its that I see It as the Greatest tool of the devil, in the so called modern times, as it is dogmaticly believed by millions unquestioningly.

 

Or that science is evil. how exactly is it good?

also look at it historicaly and tally up its "good" points (pennecillin) and its not so good points

(bioweapons) and see which side of the scale is heavier. (note as well that anti biotics are BREEDING resistant bacteria)

 

If Deism teaches a belief in God, then what is the difference between Deism and the other religions like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.? Deism is, as stated above, based on nature and reason, not "revelation." All the other religions make claim to special divine revelation or they have requisite "holy" books. Deism has neither. In Deism there is no need for a preacher, priest or rabbi. All one needs in Deism is their own common sense and the creation to contemplate.

All of the other religions save (biblical) christianity claim to have "teachers"

"wise men" "leaders" etc. yet look at where they lead people? (in circles)

 

the whole purpose of christianity in a nutshell, is to get people to go back to God, and in case you dont know God is not going to be permanently residing on this earth, as it will be destroyed.

(and yes i know of paralells between other so called beliefs, but they are merely distractions from the strait and narrow path.)

the bible says to wait on God, Not Go wage a war of violence. the bible also warned of all of the false "prophets" that would follow the first coming of christ.

(mohammed, joseph smith, are good examples)

other religions are not anywhere near the same as christianity, they are in COMPETITION

AGAINST christianity . SATAN by definition is ADVERSARY. therefore anything that opposes the bible is foundationally satanic. (and it does not matter if you pray to some false god or not, you stand against God ultimately)

The Bible doesn't call Christians to kiss butt and try and make everyone happy, It tells us to sheperd the flock.

 

Unlike the revealed religions, Deism makes no unreasonable claims. The revealed religions encourage people to give up, or at least to suspend, their God-given reason. They like to call it faith. For example, how logical is it to believe that Moses parted the Red Sea, or that Jesus walked on water, or that Mohammed received the Koran from an angel? Suspending your reason enough to believe these tales only sets a precedent that leads to believing a Jim Jones or David Koresh.

thats is why deism is just treading water, but motionless, until it drowns.

The bible Calls the parting of the red sea a miracle, along with jesus walking on water.

A miracle is the power of God, the almighty who knows no bounds,( even science) as both your examples so aptly point out. Impossible to man. But not to God.

 

mohammed was Seduced by a deceiving spirit, (or demon if you will)

 

See, this is why science and religion are different. You don't require proof to believe what you believe. Science asks the very question you, rolling your eyes, ask me.

 

The proof is in the fossil record, which fundamentalist Baptists have said to me, before, were put there "by the devil" to mislead us.

The bible says nothing of this

I've also been told by the same fundamentalists that "If God meant for the races to mix, he would have made them that way" -- accusing me of being a creation of satan because I am of mixed race.

Again other that cultural ideals from different races(religions, in particular) The bible speaks nothing of this.

I've also been told by the same fundamentalists that the earth is flat, and only 8,000 years old, because that's what the bible says.

The bible does not state any of that. in fact their are verses speaking of the CIRCLE of the earth.

no where in the bible does it say the earth is flat.

and the age has never been Explicitly given, (tyough many infer it)

 

"Then you limit the world that you experience. That's why I like questioning things. I still believe in divinity, but refuse to have my belief hinge merely on what I am told."

I want to limit my world experience, not everything should be experienced.

Getting hit by a mack truck on a freeway, would not be advisable, neither would drinking gasoline,or houghing on a running cars tail pipe.

The bible is designed to show man THE(only) way to God. Not to show man a hundred different paths around the countryside, and all the nice little bed and breakfast joints, while a Tsunami, or earthquake, or whatever natural disaster is on the way.

 

"Thank your God, Moose, that many of us feel very differently."

I don't know about you, but I dont want the knowledge, that dumping chemicals into the environment causes cancer, and birth defects, I dont want the knowledge that drinking drano, will melt a persons insides, I dont want the knowledge of hiroshima. Look at both sides of the coin that is science.

 

like listening to other people's perspectives, whether I believe in them or not, because that makes my personal world more rich and interesting. I find reading up on different religious beliefs, different cultures -- utterly enriching. I love the idea of travelling, and experiencing things that are DIFFERENT.

To go through the same thing, limit myself to status quo, and restrict my exposure to things that are different or dismiss them entirely, seems like a shame. But whatever floats your boat.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, I am merely Giving you an example, of other

"ideas you are opening yourself to"

Mein Kamph

the writings of the KKK

Charles Manson

Kiddie porn

All of those are examples of other "ideas" though not nessesarily good ones, or ones you would want to incorporate into your world view.

 

I dismiss all of thise entirely , and have no desire to expose my mind to them.

 

I don't care to know any explanations really.

Thank your God, Moose, that many of us feel very differently.

I don't want the knowledge of how drinking drano at gunpoint will kill a person.

I don't want the knowledge of how pollution, causes cancer, and birth defects,

and I dont want the knowledge of Hiroshima.

And that Is why I Feel that way. Science has 2 sides like a coin, the one it puts on to the public flaunting its "good" deeds. and then its backside erupting out poisons, and nuclear waste.

which do you suppose will leave the biggest impact behind for future generations?

 

why is it, MOOSE, that many people that are "religious" are so closed minded? I've never understood that mentality.

Because I have weighed the things that I am "closed minded" to In the light of the bible and found them lacking.

some of which are listed above.

I assume you aren't "open minded" to everything are you alpha?

 

If man is made in the image of God, we have the potentiality for greatness, more so than fallibilty.

that is in itself why we have fallen. remember a nuke is "potential" energy, doesn't mean it needs to be released.

 

but the reality is that many people have achieved greatness even if they did not believe in God or a particular religion.

one that comes to mind is albert einstein

That would depend on your definition of greatness.

For many their is a fine line between greatness and infamy.

many still adore adolf after all.

 

Nonsense, unless you mean greatness in a spiritual sense. But that is implicitly claiming a spiritual monopoly, which is absurd. And depending on the strictness which you view sins, you would have committed a sin. But Einstein would have always qualified for the spiritual greatness, even when he had not yet embraced Judaism.

what defines Greatness other than god? since we are all his handywork?

One wonders what a Christian person would think of a Socrates, who chose to die, instead of retracting the truth.

Well intentioned does not define greatness.

Even the noblest of intentions can end up in disaster.

 

we are all creations of dirt, how is it any of us can be great?

[ConfusedInOC]

Chris, do you have the "Reader's Digest" copy of this post?!

 

I'll read this later, but about my POV, I am not offended by an non-christian POV. As I said before, God is the judge of everyone before him, not I.

 

More later. There are good and bad days with your Ex and today I am having one of the bad days.

[XNemesisX]

Chris I couldn't make it through you whole post either, but I will read it thorougly later. I have a lot to say in response.

 

Try using the quote button for your posts when you quote someone. It makes it easier to follow. You just click the quote button before you paste the quote then you hit the quote button again to close it.