Another Big Big Thread of Religious Discussion

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Swordchucks

Because good and evil are both relative concepts. Good is good only in relation to evil. If there was no evil, how could something be 'good'? It would simply be normal.

Yeah, but 'normal' would be pretty darn good.

I mean I have to be honest, I would be totally okay with a world where things being good was just the normal way of things.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Originally Posted by ZAKtheGeek

I remember this from the old thread. Quoth Krylo:

...okay, that's not all that relevant. The point here is that, regardless of evil, there can easily be "neutral" actions, and then also good ones. Just because there's no evil doesn't mean everything is good. Simple example: I'm looking at an apple. Is there any evil in this action? No. Does that make it an act of good? No. It's neutral.

Originally Posted by Fifthfiend

Yeah, but 'normal' would be pretty darn good.

I mean I have to be honest, I would be totally okay with a world where things being good was just the normal way of things.

Yes, I realize that normal being good would be great, and there are neutral actions, but wishful thinking doesn't actually coincide with reality.

Zak, you've brought up an excellent point though. There is no 'absolute zero' good. Its a spectrum. There are neutral actions. But in order for there to be a 'good' side of that spectrum, there has to be an 'evil' side. You can't get away from it. One extreme always opens up the possibility for another extreme.

The very fact that one could choose to stop the rape, also presents one with the choice to join in. Any situation that allows one to be 'good' also gives the chance for one to be 'evil'. Henceforth, the very existence of good forces the existence of evil. It sucks, but thats life I guess.

[Telephalsion]

I feel that good and evil are both very perspective things, they are labels and they aren't set in stone.
What appears to be an evil act, might spark good events, and what seems like a good action might just as well spark evil reactions.
Some people feel that one should always do the most good choice that presents itself, while others might feel that it is okay to do something evil every now and then if it allows them to perform greater good.

[ZAKtheGeek]

Zak, you've brought up an excellent point though. There is no 'absolute zero' good. Its a spectrum. There are neutral actions. But in order for there to be a 'good' side of that spectrum, there has to be an 'evil' side. You can't get away from it. One extreme always opens up the possibility for another extreme.

The very fact that one could choose to stop the rape, also presents one with the choice to join in. Any situation that allows one to be 'good' also gives the chance for one to be 'evil'. Henceforth, the very existence of good forces the existence of evil. It sucks, but thats life I guess.

This seems totally different from what you were saying before... I'm not talking about whether evil is possible, but whether it actually happens. In a world where nobody ever takes the evil choice, some choices are still good, while others are only neutral. That's all I'm saying.

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Originally Posted by ZAKtheGeek

This seems totally different from what you were saying before... I'm not talking about whether evil is possible, but whether it actually happens. In a world where nobody ever takes the evil choice, some choices are still good, while others are only neutral. That's all I'm saying.

No its not. I didn't say for a person to choose good, they must also choose evil. I'm saying by the very virtue of the possibility of good, there must also be the possibility of evil. You don't have to choose to be evil.

Taken in the context of God, for God to have created the possibility for good, he must have created the possibility for evil as well. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction and all that. In a world where nobody ever takes the evil choice doesn't make it that evil doesn't exist. It just means nobody chooses to take that path. That world might not even be possible, so I would think its far more likely for both good and evil to exist together.

[ZAKtheGeek]

Well, okay, that makes sense. It's kind of misleading, the way you talk about it, because I would think the mere potential for evil to be done and evil actually being done are very different things. Like, when you say, "evil exists," I think of the latter.

[Nique]

Maybe it's more accurate to say, the potential for evil exists?

[I_Like_Swordchucks]

Well today I realized I'm totally disillusioned with my current church (not my faith, just in case we're clear). I don't even think I'm the only one.

We got a new minister at the new year, and he started off okay. Lately though, he's become a bit psychotic. He fired the overseas mission committee (who were currently funding a school building project in Haiti), he fired the children's pastor because she was a young divorcee (her ex-husband is my brother so I have no reason to take her side, yet I do), he has compared himself to Jesus at least on two occasions and has used that as a reason why he doesn't have to associate with everybody in the church ('Hey, Jesus had only 12 close confidants'), and today he basically stood up and said women were meant to be seen and not heard. He also doesn't interact with anybody he considers an attractive woman.

Now I realize that parts of the Bible are anti-women, but Jesus himself was very much not, and treated women much like equals. And in CURRENT society, that is an incredibly dumb and sexist thing to say.

Naturally, tithing has dropped considerably because he's nuts, and then he stands up and tells people that giving money to OTHER charitable or religious organization doesn't count towards the ten percent everybody owes THIS church and that people have all been failing on their commitment to God, and saying that he's been doing an amazing job and he thinks its ungodly for people to not support him like that.

In short, I'm totally switching churches. There's no other churches my denomination in my recent vicinity.... but I don't even give a rats ass. Should I go Baptist, Wesleyan, or Presbyterian?

[42PETUNIAS]

I don't know too much about those denominations, but I would advise you to look at how those churches deal with specific issues, and how that matches your opinions, and talk to people who attend these churches, and see what they think about how the church is run.

[Loki, The Fallen]

I would recommend 'Baptist' or 'Assembly of God' churches. My experiance has found that their masses tend to be more of a calibration of the faith, with much singing, prayer, and excellent sermons.

In the past, my parents took me to a Methodist church and a Catholic one. Looking back, it was a good experience to see them. Mellow and quiet would probably be the way I could describe them, especially the Catholic church. There was much concentration on traditional rites and such, the communion, the specific hymns and prayers and clothing, it was very strict and orderly. Not that it was a bad thing at all (Granted at the time I was like 8, so I was mostly 'Why is this so boring! The sun is shining I want to go outside!') but now I can appreciate how serious they take those traditions, how those must mean a fair amount to them.

First introduction to an Assembly of God church was exciting to me. My extended family in Pennsylvania took me there. A bunch of people smiling, something I didn't notice as much at my previous churches. It seemed like a much happier place in comparison. (Not that the pastor didn't take on difficult passages, or serious topics. They did that often.) It was also a slightly larger church (Twice the size of my previous ones, but still no-where near 'Mega-church' level.) with multiple pastors, and they seemed to rotate who would give the sermon.

I have yet to run into a church where the pastors were nearly as... different as the one you describe. My past experience found that most were very personable, to all regardless of sex, etc. Never heard them talk about being 'Anti-' things. It seemed more like they would relate the information, talk about the really important parts, say what one should do. But never had one say 'Women should sit down and shut up' or anything near that. And have NEVER heard them tell people how to donate.

It really depends on your preference, as 42 said, you should explore the churches in your area, as far out as you'd be willing to travel on a weekly basis. When doing so, keep in mind what is most important to you in a church, there may not be one that matches all of your opinions. Also, maybe try some that haven't been mentioned. There may be a branch or small fellowship that seems to work better for you. Sometimes titles can be just titles, nothing more.