PaulS

John, Did you have a look at Rom's guidance? Here it is repeated in case: Click on yourself top right hand corner Account settings Notification settings Mentions and My Content Highlight email You should be able to activate either or both site notifications and personal email notifications. Cheers Paul

This seems to me to be very similar to non-religious meditation. I utilize an app called 1GiantMind which follows the same process, but focuses on using the word 'ahum' repetitively, and encourages you to not force your thoughts but just gently come back to the word 'ahum' when you mind drifts and starts thinking. I really find it stress-reducing and beneficial.

At 8.01 the speaker says "But these contradictions in no way discount the message that these authors were trying to communicate". I don't know how everybody else understands integrity and truth-telling, but for me, if the author is making stuff up just so they can present their view, then I think it is very reasonable to discount their message, or at the very least, question it. Perhaps instead of contradiction we are simply often dealing with storytelling that has no factual basis.

Hi LouAnn, I'm all the way over here in Australia so not much use to you for recommendations, but I hope you find something that suits your needs. Cheers Paul

Other than quoting somebody (like I have you here - so you should have received a notification that I replied to your comment) the only other way I think is if it is your thread (like it is WandaM's here) then they should also receive a notification that somebody has commented in the thread they initiated. So in short, WandaMc should get notifications that somebody has commented in their thread.

Thanks John. I will investigate Quora further. I guess you get what you pay for, hence our higher annual fee which covers the cost of the hosting and the licence/platform to use their (Invisions) Forum software. Thanks for the offer to assist with costs - I have sent you an email.

I think this is why Christians (in general) have fought/do fight tooth and nail to decry evolution as a scientific fact - it destroys the original sin story of Adam and Eve. Those who do accept evolution (but still believe in Jesus being a sacrificial savior) then have to come up with a new narrative, such as original sin coming into being when human beings developed self-consciousness, but still, that eliminates the whole Satan as a fallen angel story too.

Too true 4BeanMix. This forum costs $540usd per year just to cover the hosting costs. However, I wouldn't want to discourage participation here or restrict access to the forum archives by requiring people to pay for use. A couple of members have generously contributed a month's or two fees and at the moment I simply encourage people who find value in participating here to consider donating by Paypal to 1paulsmedley@gmail.com (that's me). I'm still trying to work out ways to generate enough to cover costs here, and would welcome any other suggestions from anyone. Cheers Paul

I didn't know until today that that unless you come from the Sakha Republic (Yakutia), mine will always be the biggest!

Just thought I'd share this pic showing the size of my state (Western Australia) against Texas and some others. I had a bit of a giggle when it reminded me of my visit to Texas in 1990 when a taxi driver called us liars and tried to kick us out of his cab. He had been bragging about 'big' Texas (we soon came to learn it was a bit of a 'tourist' thing) and telling us it took half a day to drive the length of Texas. We told him it took nearly two whole days to drive the length of our State. He simply couldn't believe us.

Yes, but he also said that in that state the person suffers the pain of the deprivation of God - eternally. He calls it eternal damnation and self-inflicted punishment. He blames the individual for it as he says they deserve it because they have freely and definitively separate themselves from God. It's just a softer version of the fire and brimstone version of hell. Maybe it helps them feel better about their loved ones suffering eternal damnation.

Undoubtedly there are strains of Christianity that don't teach this (yay!) but I doubt it is the majority of the Christian religion. The largest denomination for instance, Catholicism, will preach how Jesus is the required salvation if one should wish to live in Heaven (the alternate not so much promoted but very much insinuated). Of course, that said, there are progressive Catholics too - they're just a minority. Anglicans are possibly more progressive with a slightly better acceptance of homosexuality for instance, but many of those branches still believe in Hell as a place of justice for those that didn't make the right choice in this life! But Anglican doctrine still promotes the Nicene Creed which promotes the belief that Jesus is coming again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. There too belief is required as they believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I think the United Church is probably the most progressive among that lot, but they number less than a couple of million worldwide. Anglicans aside, who make up about 110m of the +2.5billion Christians in this world apparently, there are still the Baptists (100m), the Lutherans (90m), Calvinists (80m), Methodists (80m), 7th Day Adventists (22m), and the some 500m Modern Protestants, who do believe in this narrative of one being condemned to Hell unless they make a certain choice. I think the tide is turning, and Progressive Christianity is contributing, but it is a mighty sea.

So, in general (in the main), I don't think Christianity stops at just teaching children they are born with the capacity for cruelty, destruction etc, but worse, that this is their base nature as 'sinners', born into sin. They are not worthy of God unless they believe certain beliefs.

Yeah, that seems pretty harmless. Unfortunately, I don't think that is the Christian position in the main. I would also teach children that the human capacity for destructive behavior, of which we are all capable, is just as fundamental as the human capacity to love. The former is not a default behavior that we are inherently ruled by.

I tried to help my mother understand why I don't believe in Hell, with similar logic. But she couldn't process it. I told her that by her understanding she should expect me to go to Hell as I didn't believe Jesus died for my sins or that I needed to believe that. In fact, I said I would want to go to Hell simply to demonstrate solidarity with all those poor wretches that other Christians think deserve eternal torture! That being the case, how could she be happy for all eternity in Heaven, whilst knowing her son was suffering eternal torment. Luckily for her, I was baptized at 14 when I 'chose' to accept Jesus (like a 14 year old can appreciate such with all of their life experience!) and that's all she needs to satisfy herself. As for "... nobody today really believes their child is born evil" I beg to differ - there are plenty of Christians still believing that message and passing it on. Today I see teaching children this harmful message as child abuse, but because it is 'Christianity', people are free to harm their kids with it. I was raised in a bible-believing, Jesus-accepting household. I was taught that I was born a sinner and that if I didn't ask God or Jesus for forgiveness and accept Jesus into my heart, I would be condemned to Hell for all entirety and forever separated from my family. My sister stayed true to the faith, married young and moved to Mexico as a missionary (they run a cafe there and convert Mexicans if they can). I on the other hand joined the police force at 18yrs and learnt about justice, mitigating factors, risking your life for people you don't know, etc, and from that experience, I could never understand 'God and Mercy', as I had been taught, ever again.

Maybe. Or maybe he's living his judgement of it. Maybe, but maybe he's not aligned with his dharma, and instead is farming!

I've always loved that story and take a lot from it in regards to a philosophy about how to consider what happens in one's life, but even the farmer still takes action in his life - he farms. Presumably he views farming as beneficial in some regard or another, or why else farm? Why not sit around meditating, or hunting, or working in a factory? So similarly, I was asking how others view Christianity - having some benefit or not? For what it's worth - I agree with you - maybe it has been beneficial, maybe it hasn't. But I think more accurately it's a case of perhaps sometimes it is beneficial, and at other times, no. But I still take your point - even in those times, whether such is beneficial or not, is still a 'maybe'.

We participate in life and we either consciously or subconsciously rank where we sit on the 'life satisfaction' scale. We all sit at different spots. A poor and destitute person may feel euphoric about life and a rich person may feel suicidal, but at the end of the day we all make judgments about our life experience, so this is what I see as simply as 'better or worse'. So, has Christianity contributed to better or worse for people's life experience, is what I am asking (but more on a wholesale scale, like entire cultures). I guess in a deterministic universe that doesn't make sense, but in an indeterministic one it is still a fair observation I think - Probabilistic causation.

No problem.

Incongruous? How so? I've re-read all that I've written here, but failing a misinterpretation based on maybe your own personal bias (I know much is lost in not having a face to face discussion), I can't see how I've contradicted anything I have said. Is it because I am asking the questions that perhaps you have pre-supposed my views? I asked questions such as what people thought about Christianity doing any good in the world. I asked what others thought about Christianity maybe contributing to the world become a better place - if it was responsible for making the world a better, fairer, place, or could/would/might that have happened anyway? Etc (see initial post). I then said your post reminded me of the Inuit/priest story - my intention being that the indigenous Inuit deduced he was better off before receiving the Priests understanding of God/sin/hell. Not sure how you interpreted it. Then I pretty much agreed with you that much pre-Christian indigenous culture had much to offer, but I went on to say that such is often lost to history by the overlaying dominant culture of the day (usually Christianity). Then I clarified what Rom thought I was asking by saying "I think what I'm asking is that do people see beneficial understandings and teachings from Christianity, that don't exist outside of Christianity, being shared with the world, so that they are regarded as a 'positive' development, that wouldn't have otherwise came about except for Christianity?". That's not a loaded question, it's just a question. So I guess I'm not really sure why you are confused, unless you thought I was pushing the barrow for Christianity in general, but I really can't see where you get that from in my posts.

The point was the Inuit didn't ever understand God/sin/hell like the Priest was telling him how he 'needed' to. I think most can imagine the God/sin/hell message Christian priests would have taken to the Inuits. Agreed. Good question. Are Christian beliefs more valid? Maybe in some instances, but overall I don't think so. Cool.

I do. No.

I simply used the terms 'minor' and 'dominant' in the context that one culture, even if it was once upon a time the dominant culture for that region, ultimately it was dominated by a more dominant culture, hence it being minor and not the major (dominating) culture that won through in the end. Doesn't make it right - but just making the point that some more dominant cultures basically obliterated the previous culture. Indigenous Australians were the dominant (only) culture in Australia for about 90,000 years. Then along came anglo saxon culture and it obliterated indigenous culture.

I think what I'm asking is that do people see beneficial understandings and teachings from Christianity, that don't exist outside of Christianity, being shared with the world, so that they are regarded as a 'positive' development, that wouldn't have otherwise came about except for Christianity?

It's a good point - too often, in our ignorance, we don't know about the strength of these 'minor' cultures and too often understand the world from the point of view of 'dominant' cultures. Well, at least maybe I do anyway