"Free will was given to man by god."

[Age]

...which goes to show even god can screw up! But what the hell, since we invented it we can claim certain prerogatives.

Yeah, free will was a big mistake. He shoulda stuck to bio-robots.

WHY was 'free will' supposedly a big mistake?

What will come to fruition, that is; Eventually living eternally in Peace and Harmony, with EVERY one, together as One, could only Truly come about with and from FREE WILL.

So, there is obviously NO mistake, let alone a BIG mistake, of course other than the ones 'you', human beings, are making when this is being written.

[Belinda]

This belief although it accorded with Christianity...

No, it did not. Christianity holds that the natural world does not belong to man, but is held in stewardship by mankind, and mankind is accountable for managing it well or abusing it. Genesis 1.

Glad you said that, Immanuel. The stewardship idea is comparatively new. In the past there have been Christians who used the belief in man's God-given superiority to justify blood sports, factory farming, old fashioned zoos, animal circuses, bear-baiting, bull fighting, foie gras, whaling, and white veal.

[Immanuel Can]

The stewardship idea is comparatively new.

Nope. It's not new at all. It's at least as old as Genesis, and has been fundamental in Christian and Jewish theology as long as there have been Jews and Christians.

However, if you judge an idea by how it's been abused instead of obeyed by some, then there would be no good ideas in the world at all. Science itself was used to justify the Holocaust, and the value of equality was used to justify the Russian pogroms and purges, and the Chinese re-education camps.

[Belinda]

I sometimes wonder, Immanuel, why it is, since your morals are much the same as mine, you feel it matters if each ethic must be vetted by The Bible.

[henry quirk]

...which goes to show even god can screw up! But what the hell, since we invented it we can claim certain prerogatives.

Yeah, free will was a big mistake. He shoulda stuck to bio-robots.

WHY was 'free will' supposedly a big mistake?

It wasn't and isn't: I was makin' with the snark.

[Age]

The stewardship idea is comparatively new.

Nope. It's not new at all. It's at least as old as Genesis, and has been fundamental in Christian and Jewish theology as long as there have been Jews and Christians.

And is this "stewardship idea" is one of the very reasons why people of "christianity" and "jewish" theology actually believe they have to the right to judge "others" and punish them as they see fit.

However, if you judge an idea by how it's been abused instead of obeyed by some, then there would be no good ideas in the world at all.[/quote]

I would suggest LOOKING AT all ideas and getting rid of the ones that are judged to be bad and/or wrong, like a lot of the ideas of religion, and just keeping the good ideas, which can only come from the agreement of ALL, would be a much better thing to do, then this attempting to "justify" your religion if OBEYED is the right way to go.

Science itself was used to justify the Holocaust, and the value of equality was used to justify the Russian pogroms and purges, and the Chinese re-education camps.

And the obeying of this religious "stewardship" idea was and STILL IS being used to 'try to' "justify" the abusive behaviors of adult human beings.

'you' can 'try to' "justify" any thing you like for as long as you like, but this will NEVER remove the FACT that 'you', "yourself", do WRONG, and use your religion as a "justification" for that WRONG DOING.

[Age]

I sometimes wonder, Immanuel, why it is, since your morals are much the same as mine, you feel it matters if each ethic must be vetted by The Bible.

In one word, BELIEF.

If one thing is BELIEVED to hold the answers to everything, then that thing will be vetted for every thing.

(As evidenced and proven below).

[Immanuel Can]

I sometimes wonder, Immanuel, why it is, since your morals are much the same as mine,

Are they?

I don't know that I'm in a position to know your moral values. I might know some, if I interpret them from some of your messages, but I would not dare say I know them all. So I wonder that you know what mine are.

Here is what Jesus Christ Himself said should be our moral orientations:

One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

(Matthew 22: 35-40)

But you seem to suggest that what Jesus Christ called the first moral value is not a good moral value; for you write...

you feel it matters if each ethic must be vetted by The Bible.

That's interesting. It seems you perhaps like the second commandment, but not the first.

[Age]

I sometimes wonder, Immanuel, why it is, since your morals are much the same as mine,

Are they?

I don't know that I'm in a position to know your moral values. I might know some, if I interpret them from some of your messages, but I would not dare say I know them all. So I wonder that you know what mine are.

Here is what Jesus Christ Himself said should be our moral orientations:

One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

And at least this one answers clarifying questions, and responds, when challenged/tested.

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’This is the first and greatest commandment.

And this One is best loved FULLY.

And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
(Matthew 22: 35-40)

This is because thy True Self is thee One and the SAME.

See, the reason why things like this were not written in a Truly clear and very simple and easily understood way, was because human beings are just in a continual state of learning. Human beings had not evolved enough and so were not ready to grasp and FULLY understand the True message, the whole message, and nothing but the message. So, writings became miscommunicated, misinterpreted, and misleading, then all to easily misunderstanding and confusion came about, which is very easily proven True when religions, themselves, and their "teachings" are LOOKED AT from the Truly OPEN or Objective perspective.

But you seem to suggest that what Jesus Christ called the first moral value is not a good moral value; for you write...

you feel it matters if each ethic must be vetted by The Bible.

That's interesting. It seems you perhaps like the second commandment, but not the first.

But as you so rightly pointed out, you do NOT know their position.

And, I do NOT see how you arrived at that "conclusion" from what was written here.

[gaffo]

do cats/dogs/worms with brains.......have minds (or spirits/souls).

I have no idea what the constitution of animals is, save that they are distinct from human beings, not being the subject of a separate creative act, and are not said to be at all in "the image of God." There is no talk of "animal sin" or of "animal salvation." There's never any mention of animals having either "soul" or "spirit." However, there is Biblical language about the larger creation, the whole Earth, around human beings being "redeemed" when human beings are.

What does that entail? I have no precise way of knowing, save that it's good.

I personally view that as a limitation of your Religion (and the other 2 Western Religions - Islam and Judaism) - they are "Human centric".

unlike at least Hinduism, and maybe Buddism and a few other animist (alive and now extinct forms of).

------------

per Judaism (and i assume your religion affirms the central tenets of Judaism). Animals were sinless prior to the Fall of Man, and after the Fall, the animals nature included sin/sinfull acts (prior to the Fall the Lion ate strew (slept with the lamb/etc, after he ate the lamb) - so man's Fall "infected the "World Order" (it corrupted and killed the original Eden/Kingdom of God om Earth).

It also cut the spiritual cord between the animals and man - where prior to the Fall man and animals could talk to each other, after we have - man vs the animals. man is cleaved from the animals and the latter changed in nature due the former's fall.

refer to Jubaless, an excellent work forgotten and negated by all Christians and most Jews today - but revered by both 2000 yrs ago (like Book of Enoch in this regard)


---------------

oh and BTW "breath/breathing" (and why it was written in Genesis that "god breathed life into the clay Adam") = "having a soul". So animals have souls per that definition (Genesis' definition).


thanks for reply!

[gaffo]

do cats/dogs/worms with brains.......have minds (or spirits/souls).

I have no idea what the constitution of animals is, save that they are distinct from human beings, not being the subject of a separate creative act, and are not said to be at all in "the image of God." There is no talk of "animal sin" or of "animal salvation." There's never any mention of animals having either "soul" or "spirit." However, there is Biblical language about the larger creation, the whole Earth, around human beings being "redeemed" when human beings are.

What does that entail? I have no precise way of knowing, save that it's good.

I will add - to my prior reply to you which you may have read - that Jews (some) in Christ's time, were vegetarians.

for the reasons i mentioned before - Lions become infected my Adam's sin and so become eaters of meat.

and so to be a good Jew was to not allow your conversion as a man to eat as the lion eats, and instead eat only plant food.

[gaffo]

do cats/dogs/worms with brains.......have minds (or spirits/souls).

I have no idea what the constitution of animals is, save that they are distinct from human beings, not being the subject of a separate creative act, and are not said to be at all in "the image of God." There is no talk of "animal sin" or of "animal salvation." There's never any mention of animals having either "soul" or "spirit." However, there is Biblical language about the larger creation, the whole Earth, around human beings being "redeemed" when human beings are.

What does that entail? I have no precise way of knowing, save that it's good.

Descartes who believed minds were separate things from brains also believed animals other than men lacked minds and were automata. This belief although it accorded with Christianity was responsible for men having no guilt about cruelty to animals.

prior to Descartes' backsliding into affirm "the other - i.e. God exists" he was a Solipist (5 yrs older than myself when i found what he did (never heard of him as a 16 yr old kid - i just came to his conclusion independently).

he was great as a 21 yr old, not so much afterward.

[gaffo]

The stewardship idea is comparatively new.

Nope. It's not new at all. It's at least as old as Genesis, and has been fundamental in Christian and Jewish theology as long as there have been Jews and Christians.

yep.

[gaffo]

I sometimes wonder, Immanuel, why it is, since your morals are much the same as mine, you feel it matters if each ethic must be vetted by The Bible.

good question, interested in emanuals reply.

[Immanuel Can]

I will add - to my prior reply to you which you may have read - that Jews (some) in Christ's time, were vegetarians.

If so, they were "vegetarians" who killed and sacrificed animals, or they were not Jews at all. Temple sacrifices were an absolute requirement of ancient Judaism.