Announcement Announcement Module
No announcement yet.
Let's put the God/morality issue to rest Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
Just to note: color, per se, doesn't really exist. Color is merely the way humans (and evidently some other animals) interpret different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation. It is a human (animal) perception. We don't really even know if what Merlyn 'sees' as red is the same 'red' that Eagledad 'sees' when both of them observe the same wavelength of electromagnetic radiation.
- 1 Like
>>Yes, how is a made-up god an "untouchable source of moral direction" when the scout can just change his god's mind the next day?<<
"God's mind didn't change, the scout's understanding of god's wisdom changed from his daily experiences of life."
No, it's MY example. If you want a scout to use YOUR example, you need to create your own, new, example. In MY example, the scout changes his god's mind the next day. And that's just fine with the BSA, apparently.
YOU again are trying to impose an "unchangable" god, because that fits YOUR theology; you can't impose YOUR restrictions on OTHER PEOPLE'S gods. Other people can have gods whose minds get changed by humans, and you can't say otherwise. Get your own god.
>>In MY example, the scout changes his god's mind the next day. <<
Impossible, God is unchangable. Man is flawed and changes her mind all the time.
>>Other people can have gods whose minds get changed by humans, and you can't say otherwise.<<
That's not god, that's the alter ego trying to beef up insecurities caused from being raised by angry atheist fathers. Scouting can help that kid.
"Impossible, God is unchangable."
There you go again, telling other people what their god MUST be like, because YOU insist on what THEIR theology MUST BE.
"That's not god"
Yes, it is. Other people can have gods whose minds are changed by humans. Who resigned and made you Pope?
"that's the alter ego trying to beef up insecurities caused from being raised by angry atheist fathers."
You forgot "cheapskate Jews" and "lazy blacks" in your insulting stereotype.
>>You forgot "cheapskate Jews" and "lazy blacks" in your insulting stereotype.<<
Athiest is an insulting stereotype?
It seems you've been reduced to either being an idiot, or pretending to be an idiot. I won't bother trying to decipher which.
Folks, I don't really know what 'flagging' really does so I just flagged the last few posts to experiment with it.
It seemed like a good time to try it out.
Trevorum commented02-12-2013, 01:23 PMEditing a comment"Flag a post feature is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising messages, and problematic (harassment, fighting, or rude) posts."
Since the Super-duper Moderators don't seem to get these "reports", my guess is that only the Quasi-deity Moderator (Terry) recieves them.
So what does Flagging do? Does it go on your Permanent Record?
I just posted 3 comments and they just endlessly sit there with a pop-up saying "Working..."
Some of the threads show that there are long threads with current posts today, but they the thread only shows 1 page and nothing current. You have to use the Filter drop down to find the most current post.
If I leave this forum, it won't be because of the incivility and personal invective (that just makes it feel like one of my family reunions), but because you can spend 10 minutes typing a response and have it vanish into the electronic aether.
I have no idea if this post wll make it. It's like a message in an electronic bottle.
AZMike, as you well know, EVERYTHING that goes onto the internet is part of your 'Permanent Record', lol. BTW, good luck on finding that photo of me and my buddies in embarrassing Halloween costumes from 1979.
As for the complaint desk, that is a good comment and I hope you repeated it to the appropriate thread for those things....if you could get it to 'work'.
My solution has been to hit the 'Post' button and then do something else for about 5 minutes. Then I just hit the 'refresh' button on the browser and usually the post is right there where I expected it to be. I do sympathize with the bewildered feelings of navigating this new site. But isn't that part of the adventure??
P.S. Your family sounds interesting. Do they come armed?
This is Arizona, even our clergy are packin'. Usually, granny has us check the larger ordnance at the door. Especially if any of us have been sipping some of our "driving whiskey" on the way over.
Usually, granny has us check our larger pieces of ordnance at the front door, especially since the 1998 reunion, aka "The Coconino County War."
- Feb 2002
I have made a couple of tries at writing a comment on the exchange between Eagledad and Merlyn about my religious beliefs, and on Eagledad's comments to me, but it was taking too long to write, so for now I will just say this:
I find it amusing that my religious beliefs are the subject of discussion. They are a little too complicated to describe in one sentence and I do not feel like getting into a whole discussion about them. I suppose that some of my beliefs are similar to those of the "Deists", but to say that I am a "Deist" isn't really accurate. That word sounds too much like I go to Deist meetings or something. I don't really like to label my religious beliefs. When people ask me what religion I am, I usually say either "Jewish" or "Reform Jewish", or if I wish to be more specific and it is clear that the person is asking about actual religious beliefs as distinct from my ethnic, cultural and traditional background (which is, unreservedly, Jewish), I might say "mostly Jewish." (I realize that that isn't very specific.) There is a lot of overlap between Deism and Judaism anyway, though even most Reform Jews believe that God plays some active role in the world. Not all, though. I celebrate the Jewish holidays with my mother and brothers and their families, and I celebrate the Christian holidays with my wife and her family, but I am there mostly for the peace and brotherhood and goodwill toward men and family companionship and food, rather than some specific religious belief.
At one point Eagledad summarized one of my earlier statements as saying that God created the universe and then packed it in, or something like that. I didn't quite say that. I honestly don't know what God did after he (using the conventional pronoun) created the universe. And at the risk of offending people, I don't think it really matters, or at least, it doesn't matter to me. But the point is, I have no reason to believe that God is active in this world, or that he gave mankind any moral commands, or that (again I don't want to offend anyone) God had anything to do with the Bible or any other holy books. And to respond to another of Eagledad's comments, I don't think that means God is "incapable" of having a relationship with mankind. I just don't happen to believe that such a relationship exists. Whether it would be within God's "ability" is really beside the point. (For me; I guess I keep feeling compelled to say, for me, although I notice that when many other people talk about their beliefs, they don't see the need to qualify them, maybe because they think their beliefs are the Absolute Truth.)
Somewhere along the line, Eagledad took something else I wrote and, I think, completely misinterpreted it and said I was showing "ignorance and pride" and some other things. I haven't gone back and seen exactly what he said, or what I had said first. But I think he was responding to something I didn't really say.
That's about it for now.
Well said NJ, I don't think you change anything either of us said. I just can't understand how a person can believe God created the universe but isn't actively involved with man. That is the shortest way I know to say it. I admit that the bible is alive and active in my life, so your belief is a mystery.
As for the other thing, you said the BSA was not founded with god as an untouchable source of morality. I simply pointed out that was because that was the normal accepted view of god during the time the BSA was created.
A little history, the bible was the most common source for learning to read up into the Industrial Revolution because people couldn't afford a lot of books. So it's no mystery that the general population credited god with morals of the culture of the time. Of course the BSA has expanded it's list of acceptable gods, but that didn't change how the the oath and law are used to help scouts grow in character.
Hope that helps clear things up.
NJCubScouter commented02-13-2013, 09:56 AMEditing a commentBarry says to me:
"As for the other thing, you said the BSA was not founded with god as an untouchable source of morality. I simply pointed out that was because that was the normal accepted view of god during the time the BSA was created."
I went back and found what I actually said, which was:
"So if the BSA policy on religion was founded on the basis that you say it is, I don't belong in the BSA either. But it isn't, and I do."
I can see how you got one from the other, the problem is that I was a little careless with my verbs. I said "was founded", and then I said "is" (isn't) when I really meant to be speaking in the present tense both times. Regardless of what the thinking was in the 1910's, if the CURRENT basis for the religion requirement is that there can be no morality without God, it doesn't make any sense, because the BSA allows in members who do not believe that God is the source of all morality. I meant to be speaking about the present day, and as you point out, "the BSA has expanded it's list of acceptable gods."
As for the Oath and Law, the vast majority of the principles stated in them do not require a belief in God -- especially if you believe, as I do, that it was mankind that came up with the idea that it is good to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, etc. etc. (along with the Ten Commandments and all other statements about what is lawful/unlawful or good/bad), all by ourselves. Obviously, if "avowed atheists" were to be permitted in the BSA, "reverent" would need to be redefined or at least clarified. I think an atheist can still be "reverent", similar to the way that our hypothetical "Deist" can. "Duty to God" would need to be addressed. Do you need to believe in God to promise to do your duty to God? I guess that would be an issue. The Declaration of Religious Principle would need to be changed. I think all of these obstacles could be overcome if there was a consensus to try to overcome them, but there probably isn't, at least for now.
Uhhhh, which ones are unacceptable? I was under the impression that when it came to gods, it was 'anything goes' for BSA.
One more thing, do you think BSA started during the Industrial Revolution?
Hal_Crawford commented02-14-2013, 11:47 AMEditing a commentThe period between the 1860s and the start of World War I is referred to as the "second industrial revolution." The birth of scouting falls within that period. Further, the reasons that BP founded the Scouting movement could be traced to the changes in society brought about be the industrial revolution.
Hal_Crawford commented02-14-2013, 11:53 AMEditing a commentThe period between the 1860s and the start of World War I is referred to as the "second industrial revolution." The birth of scouting falls within that period. Further, the reasons that BP founded the Scouting movement could be traced to the changes in society brought about be the industrial revolution.
packsaddle commented02-14-2013, 03:14 PMEditing a comment"the reasons that BP founded the Scouting movement could be traced to the changes in society brought about be the industrial revolution."
In that spirit, I could just as well trace it to the development of language and symbolic logic as well as the rise of agriculture, and the inventions of fire and the wheel, lol.