The Upper Room

6:10 AM

@DoesElishaspeak? My first thought exactly was: "Holy Balls! Why is this post so long?"

Then I was reminded of someone.

curiousdannii

11:53 AM

@fredsbend data.stackexchange.com/meta.christianity/query/221516/…

There are some 30KB answers too! data.stackexchange.com/christianity/query/64341/…

2:06 PM

@fredsbend Ah, the "good old days"... :P

@curiousdannii I was surprised by how low the bar was for getting onto the top-500 list. Then I looked and saw that Meta.C.SE has 1,009 questions. Makes sense now.

Caleb

2:40 PM

@curiousdannii @fredsbend I'm really surprised I don't feature more prominently on those charts.

@fredsbend My thought was, "Why is this not posted as an answer/rebuttal under my meta post?" Then I saw it wasn't even posted on meta...the guy is really confused about what is what (as if his post didn't give that away).

5:05 PM

@curiousdannii I'm not surprised at all that I'm on both those lists.

@Caleb What I don't understand is his claim that if it is a secular site and he is not allowed to proselytize then he has absolutely no use for it.

Caleb

6:06 PM

@fredsbend Is that the only bit that didn't make sense? He lost me on the first bit objecting to my statement that "we" all here are not all Christians, then goes on to say his only purpose is proselization. 'Cause that makes sense. After that it's all jost rambles.

I just flagged a question as a dup, because one of the answers on both questions is 99% identical

I am looking through questions that resemble one that I just posted.

6:28 PM

@Caleb Well, yes there's a few logical errors in his statements, but I still understood what he said and understand why he's made those conclusions, although logically invalid.

It reads more like a rant than anything else. When I have that impression, I read as if 90% of the post is unnecessary, so I can see the kernel of the complaint.

7:04 PM

@fredsbend would it be better if I asked if they were commandments? and if they have been nullified. it's clear in the old testament that these things are not to be done, period.

I am not asking if they are a sin or not, I am asking if they are still a sin. that makes a difference, right?

7:21 PM

@Malachi Why should it? Both are a category of "Is this a sin?"

@Malachi That's the point. If the Bible were clear, cut, and dry, then we wouldn't even have this question.

The Bible does not straight up nullify any of them.

There's some areas that indicate things have changed.

I think that there is a clean cut answer to whether or not these laws are still a sin or not.

am I wrong?

@Malachi Well, why the question then? If you think there's a clear answer I'd like to read it. You should post a self answer then.

@fredsbend I think some Christians get too carried away with proselytizing and assume on first impulse that their job is to proselytize. It makes me chuckle sometimes that they would proselytize indiscriminately.

let me come back to that later. I have a busy weekend ahead of me. maybe I will come to an understanding over the weekend

Maybe some Christians need to re-think their theology a bit . . . because this indiscriminate overt proselytizing is not always appropriate.

7:36 PM

@DoubleU You need to understand their frame. They believe that there is an eternal destiny for everyone and your choices now while living are your only chance to affect your eternal destiny. So, there is a sense of urgency, or at least, uncertainty (we don't know when people will die).

Essentially, the value of a single soul is infinite, while social acceptance, etiquette, and even human life, does not have equal value.

Which leads to why I believe Christianity is a dangerous religion.

You can seem my comments in this room to learn more about that: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/20134/…

Christians have a reason to die and kill. The non-religious do not.

And we cannot even prove unequivocally that this reason, that there is an eternal soul that needs saving and protection, even exists.

An interesting thing I've wondered is if Annihilationists are apathetic in regards to this. "Yes, an eternal soul is lost, but at least they are not in eternal torment." It seem like there is less pressure to proseltyze.

However, the two annihilationist groups I know of, JW and SDA, are the most in-your-face proselytizers I know.

Hey @El'endiaStarman. Having a good Friday?

@fredsbend So far so good, yup.

cool.

No school today?

I start a block schedule tonight. 6-9 tonight and for the next three Fridays, plus 8-5 tomorrow and for the next three Saturdays.

Years ago, I had a course that was 8-4 (or something like that) M-F then we took a test on saturday. Course complete.

Did that every other week for a summer semester.

I liked it. I still remember a good portion of the material from them.

Compared to how little I remember from traditional courses that I've had ...

7:52 PM

Not today, no. My two (last!) classes are on Tuesdays and Thursdays and I have a work shift Monday and Wednesday mornings and Saturday night. Add in church on Sundays and Friday is basically my one free-the-whole-day day per week. :P

@El'endiaStarman And spending it here with us on SE. I didn't know we were that special to you.

@fredsbend I do that every day...

Oh, so you're one of those SE addicts.

@fredsbend Well, I've visited the main site 496 days in a row...

I wonder if that's something you can investigate with the data explorer...

!!! I think the best I've done is 117.

@El'endiaStarman I was told that's private info, so I'd bet not. It's only for your personal review.

wax eagle

8:02 PM

yeah, I don't think that's DE info. You could figure out who has posted/commented the most days in a row though (if you're a sql whiz)

I got a good beating for even suggesting it on MSE: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/185435/…

@fredsbend Caleb said in this chatroom that the Salvation Army doesn't do baptism, because the Salvation Army doesn't believe in the soul. If that is true, then that is surely an exception to your claim. :)

@fredsbend Unless you include humanism and rationalism. Yep, humanistic and rationalistic Christians exist. :D

@fredsbend Are you sure? A non-religious person may adhere to a deadly political philosophy . . .

@DoubleU "Christians". According to some people. Including me.

@fredsbend If Dan were still here, he would say that the ELCA promotes universalism. The Episcopal Church probably also promotes universalism. The United Church of Christ church that I visited once seems to promote universalism and discourage proselytism.

@fredsbend I didn't know that SDA adherents proselytized. But I do know that they promote vegetarianism.

I think universalism in practice places less weight on proselytism and more weight on lifestyle evangelism.

Prayer

Prayer (from the Latin precari "ask earnestly, beg, entreat") is an invocation or act that seeks to activate a rapport with an object of worship through deliberate communication. Prayer can be a form of religious practice, may be either individual or communal and take place in public or in private. It may involve the use of words, song or complete silence. When language is used, prayer may take the form of a hymn, incantation, formal creedal statement, or a spontaneous utterance in the praying person. There are different forms of prayer such as petitionary prayer, prayers of supplication, t...

On this Wikipedia page, there is a form of prayer that is rationalistic.

If such prayer exists, then I would say, yes, I do pray in that specific, narrow sense of the term.

I wonder if reading the scholarly literature on biblical hermeneutics or reading something from the National Catholic Reporter would count as prayer in the rationalistic sense.

8:38 PM

@DoubleU I'd have to look into that more.

@DoubleU A good point. So I suppose the moral is "avoid dangerous ideologies, whether religious or not".

Perhaps, though, I think dangerous politics is more relevant to power hunger, which I think we can classify as a sociopathic issue.

@fredsbend When you said you became agnostic on your profile, what do you mean? Do you mean in the nonreligious sense, or do you mean something like a Christian agnostic? Dan, who frequents the Christianity.SE as an Eastern Orthodox adherent and expert, said that he's a Christian Agnostic, a position that is supported by the Orthodox Church.

Jun 22 '13 at 14:17, by Caleb

@Anonymous The Salvation Army doesn't save anybody's soul.

wax eagle

9:01 PM

@DoubleU that's a significant twist to say he said they don't believe in souls

9:12 PM

@waxeagle Ah, I see the context! I think I may have misremembered the original words before I cited Caleb.

In that case, I am ill equipped to answer, as I know nothing about the Salvation Army's soteriology.

@fredsbend The value of a single soul is infinite, perhaps; but it doesn't necessarily follow that the value of the act of saving a single soul is infinite.

@DoubleU From my profile:

> I am now agnostic. Much of that is currently based on the fact that God does not seem real in my life and I cannot find a suitable answer to the problem of evil. I'm still receptive to there being a god(s), but I do not believe Christianity accurately describes him/them.

I'm not sure what else to say ...

@fredsbend Is your wife still Christian?

Does she attend church?

How are you going to raise the kids?

Are you going to remove them from Sunday school?

What if they have church friends?

@fredsbend Do you still attend church, though?

@fredsbend What about Christmas and Easter?

Are you going to have family reunions?

@MattGutting I don't think I said that, but it kind of does flow, actually. Many things have been done for the soul's sake at the body's expense. That is the point I was making. The whole idea of an eternal soul whose destiny is dependent on actions done now makes this kind of thinking easier, palatable, and tolerable.

@DoubleU Too much. I cannot answer these succinctly and I really don't feel like getting into it at the moment.

@fredsbend Do your parents know about your agnosticism? Have you told them?

9:20 PM

There's some info here: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/19909/…

@DoubleU No. Only a few people know. I don't think my Dad would care too much. I'm not sure my mom would care too much either. Neither are particularly religious, but they've had their moments.

@fredsbend I have heard that some nominally Christian families send their kids to church because of family tradition. Did they do that to you?

@fredsbend I think it can flow from this; but I don't think it must flow from this. It's entirely possible to do a lot of things for one's own immortal soul (tearing out your eye or chopping off one's hand come to mind) without believing that one must do things equally forceful for someone else's.

@DoubleU No. I went to private school because it was a slightly better environment than the public schools where I grew up. And that school happened to be Christian, associated with an AoG church.

@MattGutting You don't have to make that conclusion, but I don't see how you cannot. Augustine talked about this stuff at length and supported that non-believers be persecuted in the form of floggings, taxes, etc. for the sake of their soul.

@fredsbend Private schools also cost more, because they are not funded by the state. Public schools get their money from taxes. The public schools in my community receive a large helping of money from expensive, upper middle class suburban houses.

A: When was it first said in Christianity by a Church Father that heretics must be tortured physically?

He's very convincing, and that is what's scary, and I'm certain he's been quoted in defense of the Inquisition.

1

The Definition of Torture The first thing to identify in such a question is the definition of torture. Torture is a fluid term and similar or even exact same actions may seem like torture against one person but not against another, so there is a subjective nature to the question. There is also ...

9:26 PM

@fredsbend That happened to a guy I talked to in RL. He was raised Presbyterian but went to a Catholic high school because of academics, and his dad later converted to Islam. He became atheist, but he's quite knowledgeable on religion, like paganism.

I mention Augustine in that post.

@DoubleU Sounds like it was quite a ride.

@fredsbend Eh? What do you mean?

@DoubleU Presbyterian/Catholic/Islam influence, plus compounded with study on many others. Lots to sift through to make a decision. Most people lack the intellectual capacity to wade thought that, so they avoid it altogether and claim agnostic (meaning, "I've never really looked into any of it") or just follow the tradition of their society/family.

> Later, Augustine came to the conclusion that "compulsion" and violence were acceptable to turn the heretic from his ways, arguing that Paul was struck by Christ Himself before his conversion and became the most successful apostle. Augustine was accepting of fines, imprisonment, banishment, and moderate floggings.

@fredsbend Sometimes, following the tradition of their society or family means getting Christmas presents during Christmas.

@fredsbend So . . . are you looking forward to a new belief system?

@DoubleU No. I'm looking forward to not having one at all. No second guessing, no archaic morality, no preposterous claims to justify. I just live. I stand on my own with what I am.

9:37 PM

@fredsbend Have you looked into rationalism and secular humanism?

Yes. They're too tainted by religion haters. I don't want to claim I belong to a group that spends more time mocking and hating than in rational discourse.

Like I said, I'm looking forward to just being what I am. I don't want any label. I'd like to find a way to even abandon "agnostic".

@fredsbend TRiG is a secular humanist. He also contributes constructively to the Christianity.SE, and I learn a lot from him about the Jehovah's Witnesses. :D

But I use it as a descriptor, not a definer.

@fredsbend Will "post-Christian" describe you?

@DoubleU I think TRiG has shown on many occasions his visceral disdain for most of Christianity. I like him as a person, but I think if we were RL friends we'd have to limit our discussions on religion.

2

9:41 PM

@fredsbend Well, Aquinas did believe that the state had an obligation to punish heretics. On the other hand modern Catholics (for example) don't believe that's acceptable.

@DoubleU I don't know what that would mean. It seems to imply that there is a pretty set way that Christians leave the faith. I can say assuredly that there are commonalities, but each conversion is unique.

@MattGutting Have you seen this: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/20134/…

@fredsbend Let me google that for you.

@MattGutting I think if people are being intellectually honest, they must consider the state of the soul worth protecting over the body every time. If removing a person's hand saves them, then how can you neglect to take that action?

@DoubleU Well, if Barna has something to say about it then it will at least be interesting.

gtg for now. Kids, homework, nap. I got a busy day ahead of me (lol. it's 1:45PM).

9:56 PM

@fredsbend The thing is, if removing a person's hand saves them, but removing their hand without their consent condemns you, how shall you choose?

@MattGutting Why would it condemn you? The command is to make disciples, not respect their blaspheme.

@fredsbend But will cutting off their hand without permission make them disciples, or push them away?

Must go though. You must be on the west coast; I'm on the east and it's 5:00. Time for the Weekend!

@MattGutting Is there a difference between a disciple made by his own convictions and one made by coercion? If they both carry on in the work that you did to convince them, then no there is no functional difference. Souls still be saved.

I'm arguing devil's advocate at the moment, but I'm not sure how well.

My main point is that Christians in the past justified such things and I believe they would again under the right circumstances.

So perhaps the logic is flawed, but invalid reasoning never stopped people before.

Back to advocating:

There seems to be an implied imperative, because of the invaluable nature of the soul, that the ends of a soul saved justifies any means, except the forfeiture of another soul.

10:15 PM

@fredsbend You need to tend to your kids, do homework, and nap.

Go right now.

We will still be here in 24 hours.

@DoubleU ok, dad.

curiousdannii

11:22 PM

@Malachi Which questions? I'm someone who believes duplicateness shouldn't depend on answers at all, but only the questions. (I don't like how some other sites do it.)

@fredsbend Christians have reason to die. I don't see where you'd get that they have reason to kill though.

@fredsbend There's always apatheism... it's the #1 religion of Australia!

@fredsbend You can't coerce someone into having genuine affection for God. So I'd be inclined to say that any coerced conversion is not a real conversion.

That's also why I'm not too concerned about Christian parents "brainwashing" their kids. Every parent imparts some worldview to their kids. Two cultures like the US and Aus that are so similar actually have very different ways of thinking. Many people are brought up in the US to embrace libertarianism and to be pro gun, and they have different rationalities to those who reject those

You can teach someone a morality, but I think affection must be personal

Which means I am actually concerned about Christian parents who do a bad job of raising their kids if they focus on morality rather than trying to introduce God as a person