The Meaning of Life

[chaz wyman]

Abraham is smiling...

-Imp

If only his lips had not rotted away!

[reasonvemotion]

No the difference is that as a non christian my hedonism does not involve me is guilt or shame.
I just saw Dawkins latest programme; Sex Death and the Meaning of Life, he interviews a person that has done a survey of pre-marital sex, masturbation and porn use comparing Christian and non religious folk in the US.
His findings were interesting - there is NO difference in incidence - the only difference is that as the religious get older there is a 5+% increase in porn in the religious, not found in the non-religous. The main difference is in attitude. All though wanking and fornicating is as common the religious people live a life of guilt and denial

This idea of sin penetrates even the secular, with reasonvemotion making an assumption that hedonism, being 'selfish', is negative.

Dawkins, oh my.

Interesting comment CW. When you say "religious" that encompasses a huge span of different beliefs, I will comment from a person who when discussing "God" refers to the Scriptures. I have no religion as such. Indeed if you read for example, Song of Solomon, it is clear about the sexual enjoyment between a man and woman.

The only law is that the two be man and wife.

Any person who is familiar with the Scriptures would not feel guilt, it is a celebration between a husband and wife and living a healthy life according to the Scriptures only underlines the benefits. A strong sexual drive well into old age.

Dawkins and his survey are making a gosepl out of sex, when it is natural function and expression for every man and woman.
Sex is not an obscenity, war is an obscenity.

I correct you CW, I said "worldy" hedonism.

[Felasco]

When you say "religious" that encompasses a huge span of different beliefs,

Yes, this point bears repeating. Religion is huge. Attempting to judge religion as a whole is a lot like asking "Is nature good or bad?"

The only law is that the two be man and wife.

As example, within the Catholic community, just one religion, there is a huge controversy underway regarding gay marriage. Some adamantly support, while others adamantly oppose, with many in the middle.

Catholic leaders have recently pushed huge political campaigns on this topic in some states, but in the recent election were soundly defeated, largely by their own followers.

It's a very mixed bag, as religion so often is.

[chaz wyman]

No the difference is that as a non christian my hedonism does not involve me is guilt or shame.
I just saw Dawkins latest programme; Sex Death and the Meaning of Life, he interviews a person that has done a survey of pre-marital sex, masturbation and porn use comparing Christian and non religious folk in the US.
His findings were interesting - there is NO difference in incidence - the only difference is that as the religious get older there is a 5+% increase in porn in the religious, not found in the non-religous. The main difference is in attitude. All though wanking and fornicating is as common the religious people live a life of guilt and denial

This idea of sin penetrates even the secular, with reasonvemotion making an assumption that hedonism, being 'selfish', is negative.

Dawkins, oh my.

Interesting comment CW. When you say "religious" that encompasses a huge span of different beliefs, I will comment from a person who when discussing "God" refers to the Scriptures. I have no religion as such. Indeed if you read for example, Song of Solomon, it is clear about the sexual enjoyment between a man and woman.

The only law is that the two be man and wife.

Any person who is familiar with the Scriptures would not feel guilt, it is a celebration between a husband and wife and living a healthy life according to the Scriptures only underlines the benefits. A strong sexual drive well into old age.

In my experience it does not often matter a rat's kidney how rational people interpret the bible, there are many other passages that contradict it. And you have to judge on the messages that the religious impose on one another, not what it actually says in the bible: abstinence before marriage; fidelity during marriage; divorce is a failure even a sin; , mastrubation is bad for you so is porn, and abortion is right out. This is the message of the christian churches.

Dawkins and his survey are making a gosepl out of sex, when it is natural function and expression for every man and woman.
Sex is not an obscenity, war is an obscenity.

.

You are speaking from ignorance. It was not Dawkins survey; neither was he making a gospel out of sex. I here some odd things on this Forum, but this get's the prize of the week.

The survey was designed to analyse what moral message was the successful result of Christian indoctrination.
The 'religion' the survey focused on did not 'span' vary far. The survey was done in the USA, and in this case religious, meant Christian which has at its heart 'virtues' of fidelity, chastity, purity, pre-nuptial virginity, and is anti-porn.
The survey showed that despite exhortations to avoid these sins, christians were not different from others and thus did not heed to moral lessons, and in the case of porn, used it more than those non-religious (possibly because christian wives without sex through notions of shame forcing males to find their release in other ways)

[chaz wyman]

When you say "religious" that encompasses a huge span of different beliefs,

Yes, this point bears repeating. Religion is huge. Attempting to judge religion as a whole is a lot like asking "Is nature good or bad?"

The only law is that the two be man and wife.

As example, within the Catholic community, just one religion, there is a huge controversy underway regarding gay marriage. Some adamantly support, while others adamantly oppose, with many in the middle.

Catholic leaders have recently pushed huge political campaigns on this topic in some states, but in the recent election were soundly defeated, largely by their own followers.

It's a very mixed bag, as religion so often is.

It's clear you have not seen the program either.

[reasonvemotion]

Firstly, I need to make a correction to my last post. I know it was not Dawkin's survey and I should have typed "the survey" not "his survey". My apologies.

The survey showed that despite exhortations to avoid these sins, christians were not different from others and thus did not heed to moral lessons, and in the case of porn, used it more than those non-religious (possibly because christian wives without sex through notions of shame forcing males to find their release in other ways)

Are you so credulous you believe everything Dawkins or the survey said?

You say, or was it Dawkins or the survey, that it is the Christian wives feeling "shame" so consequently withhold from their husbands, which in turn is the husband's justification to seek sex elsewhere. Excuse me while I guffaw, primarily at your interesting choice that it be the wife who feels shame.

A Christian wife would know this from the Scriptures............

"because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband".
there is no shame regarding sex in the Scriptures an excerpt from Song of Solomon... A bundle of myrrh is my well-beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts.


The power of choice is man's alone. Christian or non.

The 'religion' the survey focused on did not 'span' vary far.

hence I doubt its validity.

[chaz wyman]

Firstly, I need to make a correction to my last post. I know it was not Dawkin's survey and I should have typed "the survey" not "his survey". My apologies.

The survey showed that despite exhortations to avoid these sins, christians were not different from others and thus did not heed to moral lessons, and in the case of porn, used it more than those non-religious (possibly because christian wives without sex through notions of shame forcing males to find their release in other ways)

Are you so credulous you believe everything Dawkins or the survey said?

I'd take a scientific survey over your impression of the same issue any day.


You say, or was it Dawkins or the survey, that it is the Christian wives feeling "shame" so consequently withhold from their husbands, which in turn is the husband's justification to seek sex elsewhere. Excuse me while I guffaw, primarily at your interesting choice that it be the wife who feels shame.

No - it was in brackets to indicate that it was my rationalisation. How do YOU account for the fact that religious men use porn more than NON religious men?


A Christian wife would know this from the Scriptures............

"because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband".
there is no shame regarding sex in the Scriptures an excerpt from Song of Solomon... A bundle of myrrh is my well-beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts.

Few Christian know much about the scriptures. If asked they will tell you that the primary function of sex is reproduction.
Add to this the freedom women feel from the bounds of marriage, and chastity (the highest of chrtistian values) goes well with the withholding of sex from the male. Divorce rates are also as high in religious families but the denial that such a sin has been committed is often something that is carried for the rest of their lives in shame. Another fact discussed on the program.


The power of choice is man's alone. Christian or non.

Eh? How about the woman's right to choose?


The 'religion' the survey focused on did not 'span' vary far.

hence I doubt its validity.

It interviewed thousands apparently.


You do not have to look far to find that sex is DIRTY in the bible.
Leviticus
15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
15:18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:19 And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.
15:20 And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean.
15:21 And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:22 And whosoever toucheth any thing that she sat upon shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:23 And if it be on her bed, or on any thing whereon she sitteth, when he toucheth it, he shall be unclean until the even.
15:24 And if any man lie with her at all, and her flowers be upon him, he shall be unclean seven days; and all the bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean.

Here's a nice bit of mathew.

5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

IE. If you so much as look at a woman to whom you are not married cut off your ...?

Divorce is never permissible.
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Matthew 19:6
Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery. -- Mark 10:11
Whosoever putteth away his wife and marrieth another, committeth adultery. -- Luke 16:18

But none of this is relevant. Christianity in the USA teaches chastity until marriage; exclusivity and fidelity during it; divorce is bad and a second marriage is adultery; homosexuality is a sin; and so is masturbation; porn is evil.
Why does this teaching make no difference amongst the religious and non -religious.

[reasonvemotion]

There are 929 chapters in the Old Testament and 260 chapters in the New Testament. This gives a total of 1,189 chapters (on average, 18 per book) and there are 23,145 verses in the Old Testament and 7,957 verses in the New Testament. This gives a total of 31,102 verses,[15] which is an average of a little more than 26 verses per chapter.

I am certain there are many more than the 16 verses you have given to support your stance, that give praise to the sexual union between man and woman. What a lot of people don't realize is that sex is not just something that is to be done casually for temporary pleasure. "When you are intimate with someone in a sexual way, you are actually becoming one with that person on a deep spiritual level that goes far beyond just temporary thrills".

Yes, homosexuality is an abomination according to the Scriptures. What is natural about inserting a penis in an orifice that is meant to expel waste from the body?

"To be 'in the world, but not of it,"

that is the Sufi ideal and also expressed in a similar way in the Scriptures.

[SpheresOfBalance]

I see that the meaning of life is to live, and that to live is to enjoy life, ALL life, that the universe has yielded equally, as it all is the product of the universe, one way or another.

Yes all is well until you are judged to become the product for man...666 has reason.

Let he whom is without sin cast the first stone, then in truth no man should cast a stone.

So you actually believe in all that bible shit? The bible is a bunch of archaic crap written by a bunch of no accounts with varying questionable constitutions, scientists have very good evidence that Ezekiel was in fact an epileptic. I wonder what all the others were smoking, eating, or had been afflicted with in those days of no real doctoring to speak of. I believe most were frustrated domineering psychopaths, possibly gay with a need to stick their noses in everyone else's business, because theirs sucked.

I hate to tell you this, my dear boy, but in the end it shall 'only' be you laying their on your death bed. Those that would 'tell' others how to live their lives, as if they have the one true rule book in their hands, are fools that have a need to dominate, and nothing more! They're psychotic!

Better to mind your own business if you 'fear' that death bed, my son! Because I obviously see it playing out quite differently, than 'for' you, my dear boy.

[chaz wyman]

There are 929 chapters in the Old Testament and 260 chapters in the New Testament. This gives a total of 1,189 chapters (on average, 18 per book) and there are 23,145 verses in the Old Testament and 7,957 verses in the New Testament. This gives a total of 31,102 verses,[15] which is an average of a little more than 26 verses per chapter.

Oh - are they ALL about sex???

I am certain there are many more than the 16 verses you have given to support your stance,

And you provided - how many??? Was that less than 16, or more?

that give praise to the sexual union between man and woman. What a lot of people don't realize is that sex is not just something that is to be done casually for temporary pleasure. "When you are intimate with someone in a sexual way, you are actually becoming one with that person on a deep spiritual level that goes far beyond just temporary thrills".

Yes, homosexuality is an abomination according to the Scriptures. What is natural about inserting a penis in an orifice that is meant to expel waste from the body?

"To be 'in the world, but not of it,"

that is the Sufi ideal and also expressed in a similar way in the Scriptures.

The scriptures are of no importance as I said, even though I quoted 14 verses more than you.
If you were reading, I reflected on how people understand christianity in general terms and so few know the scriptures in detail.
Unless you are denying those norms which I quoted, I think this post of yours has very little of interest.

[reasonvemotion]

C.W. wrote:

If you were reading, I reflected on how people understand christianity in general terms and so few know the scriptures in detail.

In China alone 100 million copies of the Scriptures have been printed. The Gutenberg Bible was the first book printed in 1455. "The French philosopher Voltaire, a skeptic who destroyed the faith of many people, boasted that within 100 years of his death, the Bible would disappear from the face of the earth. Voltaire died in 1728, but the Bible lives on". The Bible has been read by more people and printed more times than any other book in history and has been translated into over 1,400 languages.

Can prove or disprove "so few" know the scriptures in detail?

It would have made more sense if you had said fewer people who read and know the Scriptures live their lives accordingly.

[Felasco]

Yes, homosexuality is an abomination according to the Scriptures.

I was gonna jump in here and try to defend you, as theists are always out numbered on philosophy forums. But you've successfully changed my mind.

I find it interesting that homo-haters, who almost always seem to be men, always reference male homosexuality, and never seem to recall that half the gays are lesbian. There might be a useful clue in there somewhere.

[reasonvemotion]

I was gonna jump in here and try to defend you, as theists are always out numbered on philosophy forums. But you've successfully changed my mind.

I find it interesting that homo-haters, who almost always seem to be men, always reference male homosexuality, and never seem to recall that half the gays are lesbian. There might be a useful clue in there somewhere.

Try to defend me? LOL

"There is a useful clue in here somewhere", and here it is, your other half.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

So have I successfully changed your mind again?

[Felasco]

Well, hmm, let's see...

I'm really hoping to mellow out in to laid back Willy Nelson kinda dude in my old age, and give up childish things, like forum wars.

But, it's a work in progress, and there's still time to engage the fool in me, should that interest you.

Homophobia is a good ticket in, as it seems to be a form of idiocy that still gets under my skin.

If it's butts you're worried about, start a new thread on this topic, and prepare to have your little butt kicked all over the forum. You've been warned.

Or not, as you prefer. That'd be ok too. I wouldn't mind if somebody handed me a joint and an old guitar instead, and we just forget the whole thing.

We return now to our regularly scheduled program.....

[reasonvemotion]

Bring it on!