Quoted from Sandra

Dude, that's why the call it faith. And more power to those who have it.

Oh, definately. Even though I'm critical of organized religion, the very last thing I want to do is to try to make someone lose his faith.

But here's my problem:

Definition of faith:
Faith is a belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven.

Isn't it a bit risky to base your entire way of life and moral codes on what is basically some sort of gut feeling?

Quoted from Bobber

I know, I wanted to hear Jane's interpretation. Ridiculous story by the way.

The interpretation is correct. These are 2 ancient cities in the Middle East, which were destroyed by God as a punishment for the immoral sexual behavior of their people, shocking and homosexual. The story implies that, If people practise sodomy the world will go to the dogs, no kids will be born, no each sexes` nature will be emphasized. all will become just one sex, kindda neuter. Hard to say if it`s a woman or a man- unisex. Unisex is the banner of our times, the world is becoming colourless, dull, monotonous. Who likes it?

Quoted from Jane

the world is becoming colourless, dull, monotonous. Who likes it?

You mean right now? I don't think the world's ever been as diverse as it is now...

Quoted from Joost

I will... As soon as someone can prove to me that it really is God's word...

I read a book about a scientist who proved that there was a code in the words and lines of the Bible which repeated itself at regular intervals, not a single human could have followed this code, it was and is beyond a human capacity. I don`t remember the name of the scientist, but i will look it up and tell you.

Quoted from Joost

You mean right now? I don't think the world's ever been as diverse as it is now...

I mean in terms of male-female! The distinction is being erased. Go to the USA, they all look alike, I haven`t seen a single pretty girl in Washington. What about The Netherlands, do you have real nice girls? Is there any distinction?

Quoted from Joost

Oh, definately. Even though I'm critical of organized religion, the very last thing I want to do is to try to make someone lose his faith.

But here's my problem:

Definition of faith:
Faith is a belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven.

Isn't it a bit risky to base your entire way of life and moral codes on what is basically some sort of gut feeling?

Vow! You are wrong! something that can be proved sooner or later is not faith, It`s a thesis, supposition. Faith is smth that can`t be proved, only after your death, maybe.

Quoted from Jane

I read a book about a scientist who proved that there was a code in the words and lines of the Bible which repeated itself at regular intervals, not a single human could have followed this code, it was and is beyond a human capacity.

Quoted Text

The Great Pyramid (the Pyramid of Khufu, or Cheops in Greek) at Gizeh, Egypt, demonstrates the remarkable character of its placement on the face of the Earth.

The Pyramid lies in the center of gravity of the continents. It also lies in the exact center of all the land area of the world, dividing the earth's land mass into approximately equal quarters.  

The north-south axis (31 degrees east of Greenwich) is the longest land meridian, and the east-west axis (30 degrees north) is the longest land parallel on the globe. There is obviously only one place that these longest land-lines of the terrestrial earth can cross, and it is at the Great Pyramid! This is incredible, one of the scores of features of this mighty structure which begs for a better explanation.

Quoted Text

The precision with which the Pyramid of Khufu (the Great Pyramid) was executed is often the source of marvel and speculation. The orientation of the Great Pyramid in relationship to true north is such as to cause it to be declared the "most accurately oriented edifice on earth." That is to say, its four sides are directed to the four cardinal points of the compass with less than 3 minutes of one degree off true north [the Second Pyramid of Giza exhibits a consistent accuracy of alignment which is also extremely impressive: just 6 arc minutes from true north].
By comparison, the Paris Observatory is 6 minutes of one degree off true north.

If you consider that the Pyramids were built almost 5.000 years ago, I would say that this is beyond human capacity. But does it prove anything about ancient Egyptian religion?

Quoted from Jane

The distinction is being erased.

I think that's a good thing. I think that males and females as human beings are originally much more alike than we realize. Most of the differences between males and females are purely cultural and traditional. That whole traditional role pattern of the man going off to work to bring home the bacon and the woman staying at home and doing whatever she can to keep her husband satisfied doesn't mean much to me. I like independent women with a mind of their own.

Quoted from Jane

What about The Netherlands, do you have real nice girls?

Plenty!  

Quoted from Jane

Vow! You are wrong! something that can be proved sooner or later is not faith, It`s a thesis, supposition. Faith is smth that can`t be proved, only after your death, maybe.

If you think that my definition of 'faith' is wrong, than blame Wikipedia, not me.  

Joost, you are really very clever! I like it and enjoy it very much! Great! But if you put the blame on Wikipedia, then why do you subscribe to it, to this definition? Do not quote it then. Besides, we meant another kind of faith, not scientific but religious. You should see the difference.

I am really happy about the girls in The Netherlands, or else it seems there are only sexless creatures walking around everywhere.

About the distinction. I meant not the social one and changing roles in family life, babysitting and stuff like that. What i meant was appearance distinction. The world is beautiful cause there are men and women in it. You know, all the time i resist the temptation of going on to speak about the issue of political correctness, which has a lot to do with contributing to unisex world. This is what it is - unisex.

Quoted from Jane

But if you put the blame on Wikipedia, then why do you subscribe to it, to this definition? Do not quote it then. Besides, we meant another kind of faith, not scientific but religious. You should see the difference.

It's not that I don't agree with the definition, I thought you didn't agree with it.

I learned pretty much all the English I know in school, by watching TV and from looking things up in dictionaries, so sometimes I find holes in my vocabulary. For online conversations in English I often use Google (to check the spelling), translation sites (if I can't find the word I'm looking for) or Wikipedia (for definitions) to find the right words to express myself as good as possible.

Quoted from Jane

The interpretation is correct. These are 2 ancient cities in the Middle East, which were destroyed by God as a punishment for the immoral sexual behavior of their people, shocking and homosexual. The story implies that, If people practise sodomy the world will go to the dogs, no kids will be born, no each sexes` nature will be emphasized. all will become just one sex, kindda neuter. Hard to say if it`s a woman or a man- unisex. Unisex is the banner of our times, the world is becoming colourless, dull, monotonous. Who likes it?

My reading of the distruction of  "Sodom & Gomorrah" Jane is that it had nothing to do with homosexual sex , it was more to do with it been a wicked place for the stranger to visit .
Sodomites were men and women  , it's not a city of men ?
They were guilty of economic crimes " Whats mine is mine " , they were cruel to beggers and a violent people .
It was a place of gang rape and fornication , acts i read as hetrosexual .
It does not explicitly mention sex between men and men , it speaks of "The Strange Flesh " which is just as likely to mean bestiality or necrophillia ? as it is to mean homosexual acts ?
Thats the Christian interpretation , the original Jewish text on which it is based does not emphasize the sexual , it's more to do with the inhabitants lacking a sense of hospitality to the stranger .

Quoted from DaveRam

My reading of the distruction of  "Sodom & Gomorrah" Jane is that it had nothing to do with homosexual sex , it was more to do with it been a wicked place for the stranger to visit .

There are several different theories. The homosexuality theory is one of them.

But that's one of the problems I have with those so called Holy Books.

If God is perfect (which He obviously must be if He created everything), than it shouldn't be a problem for Him to give us humans a clear set of rules that we can work with. And it seems to me that the ideal way of doing that would not be to let some of your followers write a book and leave it at that for a few thousand years. Cause it's inevitible that the message will be distorted through the ages by translation errors, censorship, wrong interpretations, people with wrong intentions, and what not. Just look at where we're now, 2008 years AD... We have the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Qur'an, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita... Nobody knows for sure which one is truely the word of God... If any... And for every Holy Book there are as many interpretations as there are believers...

So I think it's silly to believe that we will be punished in the afterlife just because we chose the wrong theory to follow...

Quoted from Joost

There are several different theories. The homosexuality theory is one of them.

But that's one of the problems I have with those so called Holy Books.

If God is perfect (which He obviously must be if He created everything), than it shouldn't be a problem for Him to give us humans a clear set of rules that we can work with. And it seems to me that the ideal way of doing that would not be to let some of your followers write a book and leave it at that for a few thousand years. Cause it's inevitible that the message will be distorted through the ages by translation errors, censorship, wrong interpretations, people with wrong intentions, and what not. Just look at where we're now, 2008 years AD... We have the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Qur'an, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita... Nobody knows for sure which one is truely the word of God... If any... And for every Holy Book there are as many interpretations as there are believers...

So I think it's silly to believe that we will be punished in the afterlife just because we chose the wrong theory to follow...

The relationship of God with his believers is often described as one analagous to a father with his children. Staying with this analogy, it would be no surprise that you (or I, or anyone else) don't understand why certain things are done in certain ways. That doesn't mean things are wrong, just that we don't have the "big" picture.  Your statement more or less assumes a co-equal "let's all sit down and understand each other" sort of relationship between God and his believers. That's not really a common one, for what it's worth!

Quoted from Joost

There are several different theories. The homosexuality theory is one of them.

But that's one of the problems I have with those so called Holy Books.

If God is perfect (which He obviously must be if He created everything), than it shouldn't be a problem for Him to give us humans a clear set of rules that we can work with. And it seems to me that the ideal way of doing that would not be to let some of your followers write a book and leave it at that for a few thousand years. Cause it's inevitible that the message will be distorted through the ages by translation errors, censorship, wrong interpretations, people with wrong intentions, and what not. Just look at where we're now, 2008 years AD... We have the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Qur'an, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita... Nobody knows for sure which one is truely the word of God... If any... And for every Holy Book there are as many interpretations as there are believers...

So I think it's silly to believe that we will be punished in the afterlife just because we chose the wrong theory to follow...

Well, as said above, that is why it is called "faith", not "knowledge", or "theory".  

Even within any one of the major religions there are widely varying interpretations of the will of God, and so it's no surprise they also exist between them. If one believes in the afterlife, though, it wouldn't seem that unreasonable for there to be consequences to choices made in this life. So in that case it might not be as silly as you describe... it seems easy enough to imagine that a self-sacrificing altruistic care giver (like Mother Theresa, perhaps, though I really don't know a lot about her) would have an easier time avoiding being "punished in the afterlife" than some greedy robber baron who knowingly causes pain and destruction for their own personal benefit.

I've noticed that it's not that unusual to hear people that have had bad experiences with the religous community, either directly or indirectly, then go on to broad brush believers in God as evil, intolerant, bad, etc. IMO, there are good apples and bad apples in every group of people, and this applies to religous people as well as non-believers. It's ironic (I think that's the right word) that these same people's self-proclaimed identity is often one of extreme tolerance of differences among humanity - but it's quite OK to relax the standards of avoiding prejudgement/prejudice when considering the religous community!

Just for the record, this isn't meant to describe you Joost, I've had absolutely no indication at all that you are anything but one who loves their fellow man (in the general sense ) This is just something that came to mind as I started typing. I hope I don't come across as a right wing nut case ... but then who does?