Author Topic: Solomon on Sunday Morning  (Read 228 times)

Offline Solomon Zorn (OP)

Re: Solomon on Sunday Morning
« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2017, 02:30:35 AM »
You're right was my bad I misread your statement.

I haven't been involved in organized religion for going on ten years but that was due mostly to how NT teachings were applied and how people acted. I have serious doubts about some of the teachings of the NT. However there are many passages that are simpatico with the Sermon on the Mount. Apart from any religion because I believe we owe our existence to a Creator, that elevates humanity because the universe was created for us we aren't just the unintended by product of laws of physics. This provides a philosophical reason to regard fellow humans as special.
Okay, Drew...it's Monday morning, and I'm violating my...whatever...here's all I have to say...something that we might actually be able to agree on:The concept of Love, is much more important, than whether or not there is a creator...

What do you say?

To put it another way, John said, "God is Love," but I say, "Love is God..." Which is correct? And is there, essentially, any significant difference?

Can I get an AMEN?
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 02:44:05 AM by Solomon Zorn »
If God Exists, Why Does He Pretend Not to Exist?
Poetry and Proverbs of the Uneducated Hick

http://www.solomonzorn.com

Offline Baruch

Re: Solomon on Sunday Morning
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2017, 06:18:30 AM »
Laughing Buddha asks, "Messianic complex, and actual messiah...is there really a difference?"

Who needs a fake messiah, when human beings are Earth angels?  The rabbinic POV is that all messiahs are fake messiahs.  If Jesus were the Messiah, then history would have ended 2000 years ago.  In the Apocalypse, the direct encounter with G-d, there are no survivors.

And yes, "love is G-d" is subtly not the same as "G-d is love".  Depends on what the cause is vs the effect ... or the third interpretation ... that they are the same ... in which case the action of love isn't mutual, it is reflexive.  My POV is that humans have to take the initiative in all things, G-d is passive.  The active G-d of Bible mythology is ... not realistic.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 06:23:20 AM by Baruch »
שלום

Re: Solomon on Sunday Morning
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2017, 04:56:34 PM »
In the Apocalypse, the direct encounter with G-d, there are no survivors.

God sounds like the Dread Pirate Roberts...




God Not Found
"I am an expert of electricity. My father occupied the chair of applied electricity at the state prison."
W. C. Fields

Offline Cavebear

Re: Solomon on Sunday Morning
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2017, 05:39:03 AM »
It sometimes seems to me that christians try to re-explain the text of the bible in much the same way that Trump supporters try to explain away his tweets...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead