REAL debate thread for RELIGION

[GrayMouser]

I occasionally come across articles from "First Things"; well-written, serious, and informative.

Though I usually disagree with their positions

Edit: not always; I strongly support their crusade against postmodernism, deconstructionism, and cultural relativism.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Nurvi, a coupla quick questions for you to hopefully get to this weekend. I usually can't post on weekends, so I thought I'd ask you some questions instead

About your posts on your beliefs -

1. Do you think those beliefs are true? I mean, if you could be sitting somewhere where you could see everything, would these things have actually happened?

2. Why do you think they're true, if you think they are? IOW, what would you tell someone if they asked why you think they're true?

3. If you don't think they're true, why did you bring them up? (I mean this in a nice way )

I'll try to check this weekend for your responses.

As usual Rian, your questions are intelligent and thought-provoking. Sorry it took me so long to answer, I'm very busy with limited computer access.

EDIT: I noticed I didn't completely answer the questions, so I'm fleshing out my answers.

Onwards...

1. I do indeed believe my beliefs are true. Truth is a complex thing, which is why I have so much difficulty explaining my worldview. I used the alternate dimension analogy to explain what I mean about everything being possible, and existing. However, I feel that the universe is more complex than that, much more than I can begin to comprehend or imagine. Considering that we don't even have the ability to physically leave our own solar system, I think that there is more than enough room for my worldview in this wide universe. Consider this as well. Humans cannot create something from nothing. If we make fire, the fuel had already been provided to us. If we gain knowledge, we are building on what we already know. Where did the seeds of our knowledge come from? They came from the Creator. If we cannot create something from nothing, then our thoughts must already exist. I also believe in rarer cases, the Creator is using our thoughts to create something knew. Maybe that's part of why we were created in the first place, as instruments of the Creator. Much beauty has been brought to the world because of humanity's belief in a higher power. (Obviously, there are individuals who do not believe in a higher power, but I'm referring here to whole societies.)
If I could see everything, then I (for the sake of argument) would have an understanding (or mental capacity) of God. I could then see that my limited human view of the universe was approaching the truth.

2. I got ahead of myself in part 1 there. I would tell someone the above ^ if I attempted to explain my worldview to them. (Promptly causing them to become confused and disoriented. )
I would say to them, why does anyone hold their personal beliefs? Because they feel right? Because that is how they love God? Because their beliefs allow them to understand the world around them? That is why I hold my own beliefs as well. And who's to say a worldview is absolutely true, or absolutely wrong?

I forget what we had already agreed about truth, but I thought I'd add this:

A Truth: I am a woman.
It is true that I am a woman. If you were to say this, you would not be incorrect. However, gender is a social construct, therefore, that fact that I'm a woman is not an absolute truth.

An Absolute Truth:
Even attempting to think of an Absolute Truth makes my brain hurt. I don't think any human being is qualified to recognize an absolute truth, though this belief is part of my worldview, and not necessarily absolutely true.
An Absolute Truth is one that is without one single shred of doubt, correct. I was going to use God exists as an absolute truth, but I can't because I am incapable of recognizing an absolute truth.
Therefore, if it is absolutely true, I would not know this, and cannot say so. The simple fact that there are people who do not believe that God exists supplies the tiny shred of doubt that ensures that this is not an absolute truth.
It would take a being that could see more of the Universe than us meager humans to recognize whether or not this was in fact an Absolute Truth.

3. As I do think my beliefs are true, question answered. However, one could bring up such ideas if they were not true, for the sake of discussion and knowledge. (That's why I brought them up anyway actually, but I do believe them. I am not playing the devil's advocate here, but rather, expressing my worldview for the purpose of discussion and understanding.)

I'm going to PM you to make sure you see that I've finally responded.

Though this discussion has turned into one between Rian and I (as has happened many a time in this thread ), others have participated in the past, and everyone is welcome to discuss this subject if interested. Just so you know we're not being exclusive here. Thread hijakers? Us? *French accent* Nevair!

Cheers, Nurv

[Rían]

Rats! No time to answer! Dratted school stuff!

*bumps thread up to remind herself to answer*

[Rían]

A coupla quick thoughts on your post, then gtg and prob. can't get back to the Moot until next week

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
If we cannot create something from nothing, then our thoughts must already exist.

I don't quite agree with this - I don't see 'thoughts' as physical things. The brain is the 'thing', and part of the design of the brain is that it can think about things. But that's a minor point to me.

I also believe in rarer cases, the Creator is using our thoughts to create something knew. Maybe that's part of why we were created in the first place, as instruments of the Creator. Much beauty has been brought to the world because of humanity's belief in a higher power.

I agree that much beauty (Tolkien's works spring to mind ) has been brought into the world thru humanity. And that is one way that we are made in God's image, as the Bible says - we like to create.

A Truth: I am a woman.
It is true that I am a woman. If you were to say this, you would not be incorrect. However, gender is a social construct, therefore, that fact that I'm a woman is not an absolute truth.

I disagree that gender itself is a social construct. Perhaps gender ROLES could be considered social constructs, tho - is that what you meant? Gender is physically observable and biologically testable (things like XX vs. XY chromosomes) throughout ALL societies. And yes, there are some unfortunate people that are some male and some female, but we recognize that they AREN'T just male or female, because we KNOW what male and female are.

An Absolute Truth is one that is without one single shred of doubt, correct. I was going to use God exists as an absolute truth, but I can't because I am incapable of recognizing an absolute truth.
Therefore, if it is absolutely true, I would not know this, and cannot say so. The simple fact that there are people who do not believe that God exists supplies the tiny shred of doubt that ensures that this is not an absolute truth.

Perhaps you and I mean different things by absolute truth. To me, doubt has nothing to do with it. If someone on Entmoot doubts that I'm a woman, their doubt does not affect the fact that I'm a woman. I look at ab. truths as those things that are, in fact, the true state of being, and that we could actually observe if we had the right equipment and ability.

It would take a being that could see more of the Universe than us meager humans to recognize whether or not this was in fact an Absolute Truth.

Yes, we humans can't always see and recognize an absolute truth - we often lack the equipment and/or the ability. But that doesn't change the fact that absolute truth exists, IMO.


Cheers back to you Have a nice weekend!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
A coupla quick thoughts on your post, then gtg and prob. can't get back to the Moot until next week

I wrote all these great comments on your post, and Entmoot had some sort of wierd error to do with images in my signature, and I don't have time to write them again. (I also don't have any images in my sig. )

I will say that I agree with you about your definition of truth.

It is also worth pointing out that what you described as gender is in fact sex. There are two human sexes that are scientifically testable. Gender remains a social construct. Most societies use the idea of one gender for each scientific sex. But there are cultures who have more than two genders (I believe some Coast Sailish people [SW British Columbia] are two-spirited, but I don't have my old anthropology notes.)

Anyway, that's not too important, but it's an interesting side track.

Cheers, Nurv

[Mercutio]

Not knowing if this has been discussed prior to my arrival at the Moot...

What are y'all's views on Holy Communion (Christian, and...I suppose non-Christian's too would have opinions on this topic )

I, for one, am a consubstantiationist (Christ is present in, with, and under the elements).

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by Mercutio
Not knowing if this has been discussed prior to my arrival at the Moot...

What are y'all's views on Holy Communion (Christian, and...I suppose non-Christian's too would have opinions on this topic )

I, for one, am a consubstantiationist (Christ is present in, with, and under the elements).

your'e Lutheran right?

I believe in transubstantiaion...the body anmd blood are transformed into Christ (body, soul, divinity) but still retain the properties of bread and wine.

(if you can't guess, I'm Catholic )

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by Arien the Maia
You're Lutheran, right?

Yes.

[Nurvingiel]

My veiews on Communion... I've never really thought about it before, so very interesting question.

I love communion, and it was an important part of the service for me (and everyone) in the church where I grew up. (I'm Anglican.) As a side note, I haven't really gone to church very much at all since I moved away from my home city, but I have very fond memories of it.

At our church anyone is welcome to receive communion. You don't have to even be baptised or regularly attend the church. Also, you're not required to take communion if you don't want to, and some people don't. Since we don't have First Communion, children who want to can also have communion. (First Communion is a Catholic practice, but a lot of Anglican churches do it to, I'm pretty sure. Catholicism and Anglicanism have quite a bit in common overall.)

We always have great instrumental music during communion, and music is my favourite part of the service. For Anglicans, the wine and the bread are symbols of the blood and the body of Christ. One of the important differences with Catholicism is that in the Catholic communion, it is the body and the blood of Christ. I didn't actually intend to get into a comparison of the two denominations (is that the right word?), but as they do have a lot in common, it just seemed appropriate. That would be my rambling view on communion.

Anyway, for me Communion is a very spiritual event (for lack of a better word). I would want absolutely anyone who wished to take part in this wonderful sense of community with God and the other people at Communion. It, along with music and Sunday school, are my favourite parts of church.

I really meant to start reading the Bible this summer, but I still haven't even obtained a copy of it yet. I thought I'd have a lot of free time - hah. Have any of you guys read the Bible?

[Mercutio]

Our Lutheran synod (ELCA) welcomes any baptized member of the faith (Christianity) to take communion with us. Some, such as the Wisconsin Synod, only allow members of the Wisconsin Synod to communion with them.



On another note, what are the opinions on "contemporay" music in religious services versus "traditional"?

[Janny]

Well Merc, the Vatican made moves to ban the use of the guitar in Church services. While I welcome the intention, it's an amazing way to aleinate people...
I like traditional music, but more importantly, I like the traditional style. There are many fine hymns which aren't traditional in terms of timeframe but are beautiful and appropriate. On the other hand there is a lot of cringeworthy rubbish... stuff I wouldn't want to dedicate to God as the best man can do in praise...

Nurv, I haven't propery read the Bible, but I did scan a lot of it for Bible references for my GCSE religious studies exam...

[sun-star]

Originally posted by Janny
Well Merc, the Vatican made moves to ban the use of the guitar in Church services. While I welcome the intention, it's an amazing way to aleinate people...

Speaking as one who plays the guitar, I assume...

Sometimes churches don't get much of a choice between traditional and modern music, because they're limited in the number of instruments available - that's how it is at my church. Personally I prefer traditional hymns, but "Immortal, Invisible, God only wise", much as I love it, doesn't really work on guitar

Some modern hymns, as Janny says, fail quite spectatularly in their attempts to be meaningful, but others are very good. Depends what helps each individual, really.

[Mercutio]

It seems like the "contemporary" stuff turns the worship service into something totally about your personal/emotional experience rather than focusing on God. And also, many of the "contemporary" hymns have no depth to them. Its just "I love you Jesus" "You saved my soul" repeated a thousand times. Moreover, there is a reason why for hundreds of years people sang hymns in religious services. The common layperson withouth any musical knowledge/instruction can handle them. They are built with simple chord changes on almost every beat. So many contemporary songs are like the pop songs-- it takes so long to change chords, so to make up for that lack of ...anything...they have to have a complicated melody that an average person can't just pick up and sing. As a result, they use only a few songs constantly because it takes so long for people to learn them.


Grr. At least our church has 2 traditional services (and 1 contemporary).

P.S. We are in a Lutheran church, so communion is extremely important. At first, the contemporary folks wanted to not have communion every week! The heresy! Our pastor has done all he can to tone it down, but still...

[Janny]

A personal favourite of mine to loathe is 'We are the Easter people (allelujah is our song)' This, with its annoying melody and happy clappy rhythm, is bad enough but it is not only sung at Easter...

I don't understand how anyone could possible want to remove the communion from a mass! You use 'the heresy' almost ironically, but I suspect you're getting quite close to it...

You sound very informed about church music, have you studied it?

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by Janny
A personal favourite of mine to loathe is 'We are the Easter people (allelujah is our song)' This, with its annoying melody and happy clappy rhythm, is bad enough but it is not only sung at Easter...

I don't understand how anyone could possible want to remove the communion from a mass! You use 'the heresy' almost ironically, but I suspect you're getting quite close to it...

You sound very informed about church music, have you studied it?

Not really...well...I've been taking organ lessons for a year now. And we get tons of journals in my house, and my dad talks about all kinds of stuff all the time...so I pick up a good bit about how it works/why it works, etc.

[Beruthiel's cat]

Originally posted by Mercutio
It seems like the "contemporary" stuff turns the worship service into something totally about your personal/emotional experience rather than focusing on God. And also, many of the "contemporary" hymns have no depth to them. Its just "I love you Jesus" "You saved my soul" repeated a thousand times. Moreover, there is a reason why for hundreds of years people sang hymns in religious services. The common layperson withouth any musical knowledge/instruction can handle them. They are built with simple chord changes on almost every beat. So many contemporary songs are like the pop songs-- it takes so long to change chords, so to make up for that lack of ...anything...they have to have a complicated melody that an average person can't just pick up and sing. As a result, they use only a few songs constantly because it takes so long for people to learn them.


Grr. At least our church has 2 traditional services (and 1 contemporary).



P.S. We are in a Lutheran church, so communion is extremely important. At first, the contemporary folks wanted to not have communion every week! The heresy! Our pastor has done all he can to tone it down, but still...

As a somewhat lazy Lutheran, I couldn't agree with you more!! It isn't that contemporary hymns are "bad" per se. Singing them occasionally (perhaps one song per service) may be meaningful to some worshippers who come from different backgrounds and have found Christianity through that route.

But I grew up in a very traditional Lutheran atmosphere and love the traditional hymns and organ music. It is as much an enhancement to worship and a personal connection to God as prayer to me.

Communion is also an important part of worship. The congregation I grew up in was huge (it had three services each Sunday as well as Sunday School and a Lutheran elementary school). Communion was not served at every service because of the time element (the 8:30 service could run into the 9:45 service could run into the 11:00 service), though communion was offered at at least one service each week (usually the 11:00). I've found that to be the case in most congregations I've been in since then -- communion is not offered at every service due to time constraints.

I'm surprised your church has a contemporary service. Most Lutheran churches are reluctant to give an entire service over to the "new" stuff.

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by Beruthiel's cat
As a somewhat lazy Lutheran, I couldn't agree with you more!! It isn't that contemporary hymns are "bad" per se. Singing them occasionally (perhaps one song per service) may be meaningful to some worshippers who come from different backgrounds and have found Christianity through that route.

But I grew up in a very traditional Lutheran atmosphere and love the traditional hymns and organ music. It is as much an enhancement to worship and a personal connection to God as prayer to me.

Communion is also an important part of worship. The congregation I grew up in was huge (it had three services each Sunday as well as Sunday School and a Lutheran elementary school). Communion was not served at every service because of the time element (the 8:30 service could run into the 9:45 service could run into the 11:00 service), though communion was offered at at least one service each week (usually the 11:00). I've found that to be the case in most congregations I've been in since then -- communion is not offered at every service due to time constraints.

I'm surprised your church has a contemporary service. Most Lutheran churches are reluctant to give an entire service over to the "new" stuff.

yeah. Amazingly, we have communion at all three services every week. My mom runs the "altar guild" who set everything up/clean everything up, change the color linens, etc. Its quite a job. I help out with that a good bit.

I'm taking the liberty to quote an email we received from one of our good friends.

One link led to another and I ended up at this site
(address below) and a fairly interesting take on
worship wars. The author is more optimistic than I am,
but maybe he's subscribing to Christian hope rather
than man-made optimism.

Still, maybe these scattered drops of cool water will
eventually coalesce into a stream to wash through the
churches and carry out those who insist on
incorporating performance into worship.

[...]

here are the lyrics (they're lyrics, not words or text) of a ditty we 'sang' last Sunday. I trust you've never been subjected to the tune:

Once Again
Jesus Christ, I think upon Your sacrifice,
You became nothing, poured out to death,
Many times I've wondered at Your gift of life,
and I'm in that place once again.
I'm in that place once again.

Chorus:
Once again I look upon the cross where You died,
I'm humbled by Your mercy and I'm broken inside
Once again I thank You, once again I pour out my life.

Now you are exalted to the highest place
King of heavens where one day I'll bow.
But for now, I marvel at this saving grace,
and I'm full of praise once again, I'm full of praise
once again.
Chorus:
plus
Coda:
Thank You for the cross, thank You for the cross, thank
you for the cross, my friend.
Thank You for the cross, thank you for the cross,
thank You for the cross, my friend.
Repeat.

I've adhered to the music's eccentric capitalization of
the word 'you' in the coda.
Something to ask the author: now just who poured out a
life???

Here's the link mentioned above:
http://www.modernreformation.org/mr0...r0102song.html

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by Mercutio
Our Lutheran synod (ELCA) welcomes any baptized member of the faith (Christianity) to take communion with us. Some, such as the Wisconsin Synod, only allow members of the Wisconsin Synod to communion with them.



On another note, what are the opinions on "contemporay" music in religious services versus "traditional"?

my best friend is a member of the Indiana/Kentucky Synod...she tried to explain the differences to me once but I got confused (what a suprise! ) so what are the differences?

as far as I know that only denominations allowed to take the Eucharist (Communion) in the Catholic Church are Catholics (both Roman and Eastern Rites) who are in the grace of God (i.e. no sin on their soul....confessed to God and asked to be forgiven) and I'm pretty sure the Orthodox are allowed to take Communion at our Churches and vice versa b/c we both recognized each others 7 sacraments as valid and both confess the same belifs about the Eucharist and Transubstantiation.

as far as contemprary music goes...well what can I say...I don't relaly like it. I prefer the organ and piano and choir to drums and guitars...although a guitar by itself is ok...it's the drums and stuff that I hate!

[Mercutio]

"Contemporary worship" is turning a God-focused religious service into entertainment. The reason it exists is because our entire culture is based on entertainment and emotional response. It's all they see, so it's all they want.

The differences...I'll get back on that one.

[Mercutio]

If you want to read something for awhile, here is a nice article published in "First Things" (I mentioned that journal earlier) about Lutherans, which includes a history, what the different organizations/synods are, their differences of opinion, etc.

"The Lutheran Difference"