Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



LPF's Religion

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
@Paul;
You have concluded you and I disagree on the premise "that children misbehave naturally" But does not your own stateman refute your conclusion and prove the contrary?
When you said "I don't believe children mean to misbehave" doesn't that prove the premise "that children misbehave naturally" hereby proving the validity of the question?
So it would seem you and I do agree about the premise of the question.

So the question remains;

"Why do you have to teach a child to behave and never to misbehave. Why does the misbehavior come naturally?
 
Last edited:



paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
18,026
Points
113
Behavior is behavior. By your definition it is only misbehaving when you disagree with it. By that definition why would you ever consider teaching a child not to do what you approve of? It makes no sense on the face of it. No never needs to teach a child not to do anything a parent approves of. I contend that the behavior is not misbehaving. My only concern is for their safety. There are old adages like why the mother allows her infant to touch the fire? It is a lesson learned that will never need repeating. They learn from experience that the fire is hot and to be aware of that. Many people have taught their kids in this manner. So, your question makes no sense to me at all. And if it is to show an analogy as your god as a parent, it fails even more so. If god exists, he is not a father or mother. He is god, and never communicates with anyone I am aware of except in terms that a secular person or scientist would never accept. Either way, your question fails as I do see behavior as misbehavior.
 

Nutball

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
299
Points
28
Adam was created with infused knowledge how how to function in the world according to God's will, and according to the nature of existence (like knowing how to walk, what to eat,...). I don't know what would have happened with his offspring if he didn't sin, and satan wasn't pestering us. Maybe he'd tell them right from wrong, and they'd obey. Even children these days really do pick up firmly on the slightest of details, examples are used as comedy in old TV shows where the perfectly logical innocent child just repeats what he's taught, and the adults can't seem to explain their way out of some complicated loophole. It is possible his offspring would be born with similar infused knowledge, and it is possible that they would misbehave innocently until taught otherwise. Misbehaving is relative, and is better judged by intention. A failure in advanced understanding may blind a child into "misbehaving" because they think they are doing good. Their intention is harmless. Parents these days often are not good enough about properly teaching their children the right things early enough.

Naturally misbehaving... yes and no, but more so no than yes. I think
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
18,026
Points
113
That's because it is easier to tell a child to be seen and not heard, or to beat (spank) them than to teach them. It is lazy parenting. If you take the time to teach your children instead of beating them, they have no need to lie and can understand reasons for what a parent wants them to think is good and why the bad is the way it is. It does take a great deal of patience, though. That is from personal experience. Of course a toddler can't make these rationalizations. So, that is where the patience and skillful parenting comes into play. But, it is hard to do, and most parents are too lazy to adhere regardless of how they are feeling. I did it because I was hit as a small child and I swore if I ever had children I would not do that. Besides, I fell in love with my daughter the moment I saw her. She has always been worth the effort.
 

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
Behavior is behavior. By your definition it is only misbehaving when you disagree with it. By that definition why would you ever consider teaching a child not to do what you approve of? It makes no sense on the face of it. No never needs to teach a child not to do anything a parent approves of. I contend that the behavior is not misbehaving. My only concern is for their safety. There are old adages like why the mother allows her infant to touch the fire? It is a lesson learned that will never need repeating. They learn from experience that the fire is hot and to be aware of that. Many people have taught their kids in this manner. So, your question makes no sense to me at all. And if it is to show an analogy as your god as a parent, it fails even more so. If god exists, he is not a father or mother. He is god, and never communicates with anyone I am aware of except in terms that a secular person or scientist would never accept. Either way, your question fails as I do see behavior as misbehavior.

Man I sure hope someone else can decode this. Try as I might I just can't follow. At least I agree with one of your statements "it makes no sense on the face of it" :confused:

Here's to hoping there a whole bunch of typos in here. :thinking:

Edit;
about the only I can glean from this, is you can't understand this question;

"Why is it you always have to teach a child to behave and never to misbehave. Why does the misbehavior come naturally?"

This question is as plain as the nose is on anybody's face.


First you start off with some double speak,"behavior is behavior" (are you saying there are not two types of behavior, good and bad?). Than make a unfounded claim of what my definition of "behavior" is. Which I've only stated the fact that I believe there is a "good" and there is a "bad". Than made some statements that makes absolutely no sense at all. "no never needs to teach a child not to do what anything a parent approves of" What? Need my secret agent decoder ring on that one.

Than you just jump from one thought to another (some which I would agree with) but going no where with, accept to foster your belief that you are right, and I'm wrong.
Than repeat your "I can't understand your question" routine.

Than you jump into some thought about an anolagy about how God is God and not a Father. Which how would you know, you don't believe in Him, so how could you possibly know anything about someone you don't believe in?~~( But you say this, because secretly, you do believe the possibly there is a God, you just want Him not to be the God of the Bible.)

:thinking:
 
Last edited:

Nutball

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
299
Points
28
I thought I explained why they do but don't naturally misbehave. You can, and most people mistakenly do, teach them to misbehave. They go to schools with other children instead of being home schooled, so other children spread errors they were taught. I'm sure satan and original sin have something to do with it, probably for the most part because the parents start by not giving the best examples and teachings, so the children turn out not the best, and the cycle continues.

I answered my question about if you can keep the commandments without loving God.

Matt ch22: 36-40, and John 14:15
 

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
1)I thought I explained why they do but don't naturally misbehave.

2)I answered my question about if you can keep the commandments without loving God.

Matt ch22: 36-40, and John 14:15

I would agre with about 95% of what you wrote. The missing 5% is because this first statement (#1) confuses me a bit? Seems like a double negative?

(#2) Doesn't it feel great to answer your own questions? I think they call that growth. :gj:


Ps, you realize your statement(s) are only true if there is an eternal standard of "right and wrong" :thinking:
 
Last edited:

Nutball

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
299
Points
28
True with ANY standard of right and wrong? Maybe? That was sort of the intent and scenario accounted for.

Do but don't meaning they do naturally misbehave, but they really don't do it naturaly on their own and with much guilt. It is caused by others, and is the natural outcome of the situation, but not necessarily natural to the individuals (that they misbehave).
 

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
It is this inward "natural mishaviour" that Christ came to change. Where it would be as natural for someone to behave as it is now to misbehave.

Knowing that just because a person turns from 5 to 50 the inward nature toward misbehavior hasn't changed, they just have learned to cover it with "their version" of better behavior. It is this Christ came to change.


Ps, It is way that personal relationship with Him is so vitality important. It is that, that grows the new creation.
 
Last edited:

Alaskan

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
12,787
Points
113
I have never been able to buy into the statements from some religious organisations or individuals that we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless saved by Jesus Christ, what about all of the people who lived before? I cannot believe any true God of good could possibly set things up to be that way.... unless, this kingdom they speak of us just a Jesus club, a place for Christians to go while the rest of us have our own places and I don't mean hell.
 

Encap

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2011
Messages
5,702
Points
113
I have never been able to buy into the statements from some religious organisations or individuals that we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless saved by Jesus Christ, what about all of the people who lived before? I cannot believe any true God of good could possibly set things up to be that way.... unless, this kingdom they speak of us just a Jesus club, a place for Christians to go while the rest of us have our own places and I don't mean hell.

There is no arguing religions or religions conceptualizations of whatever kind --they are closed system of imaginings and imaginings within imaginings about the imagined - all of everything exists only within it's own system. Nothing exists outside it's system except in terms of that system. No answers or questions outside any religions closed system exists in it.
Is the reason mental illness often hides and does hide behind the mask of religion.

People believe whatever makes them feel comfortable for whatever reasons objective reality or other peoples concepts, imagining, and/or take on reality do not necessarily enter into it.

There are two kinds of human thoughts: Those that handle the physical that does exist and...those that handle the non-physical that is fiction that doesn't exist. The physical and the non physical are identical, both are ideas within the scope of our thinking.
Because our minds deal exclusively with ideas, our minds treat in-distinctively the physical and the non-physical. In reverse our minds find it natural to project back into the real physical world the non-physical. This is has been and probably always will be a direct source of confusion and problems everywhere on the planet where people exist.

An object or an active phenomenon is real or exists on the double condition that we are able to first perceive it then describe it. Mental concepts that lack physical collateral cannot be perceived physically. In short---perception and description are needed to be confident that something is real or does exist in reality. And our inability to describe that which doesn't exist, corroborates that nonexistence.

Example: Even though we have no idea what matter, gravitation and light rays are (in reality), and even though our human interpretations of these things are only ideas (concepts and pictures) we know that these ideas do coincide to real things. We can touch matter, gravitation makes an object fall and light from the sun heats our skin.
 
Last edited:

Nutball

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
299
Points
28
It is setup that way to bring greater glory to God. He created us, we sinned, He went way above and beyond with infinite mercy to save us, so more glory to him that He would do so much for a tiny nearly insignificant part of creation that He doesn't need.

All of the people who lived before Jesus waited in some place, of which I know little about, until Jesus came and "opened the gates of heaven" as it is commonly referred to. The bad people before him didn't need to wait to go to Hell though. They waited because they had original sin still and baptism had not been established yet until done so by Jesus. If any were baptized and died before Jesus died, it is likely they didn't go into heaven until Jesus did because Jesus still had to pay our infinite debt.

How do you learn without arguing? I admit many people stubbornly argue circularly, in which case someone is either not learning, or both parties are not presenting information to be learned because they lack the facts to support their claim sufficiently. Unfortunately it is hard to have all of the facts easily and readily available for solid proof, but usually enough is readily available to make the use of faith the best option at the time.
 

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
I have never been able to buy into the statements from some religious organisations or individuals that we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless saved by Jesus Christ, what about all of the people who lived before? I cannot believe any true God of good could possibly set things up to be that way.... unless, this kingdom they speak of us just a Jesus club, a place for Christians to go while the rest of us have our own places and I don't mean hell.

You are correct, He didn't set things up that way.

This exact question is dealt with in Romans 2; 11-12,
Romans 2:11-12 (KJV)
11) For there is no respect of persons with God.
12) For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

It starts off in verse 11 stating the fact that there is "no respect of person with God" meaning He judges all people equally. Having bought that truth forward, he continues with verse 12, "how a person is judged"? We see a person is judged on "the light that they had the opportunity to see", not the amount of it. Represented by the two groups of people. Those that had the light (law) and those that did not (without law). It's just what they "did" with whatever light they had, (whether it be large or small.) This determines their fate. For God is "no respect of persons" all people have the same opportunity toward salvation before him, whether or not they have ever heard the name of Jesus. i.e. (the law vs the without law)

Ps,again nobody's talking about "organized religion" only whether you have a personal relationship with your Creator.

Edit; it does continue down to verse 16 describing why/how this is true, if your interested. (i.e. because they had the law inwardly )
 
Last edited:

InfinitusEquitas

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2011
Messages
15,449
Points
113
 

BobMc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
3,835
Points
113
Man Infinitus, I really like your avator. I bet it took a while to charge all the batteries, here's to hoping you've got more than one charger, otherwise that must have been a full time job. :crackup:

Than turn all those on, take a picture, and than rush to turn them off. Been there myself. But the picture is so worth it. :gj:

Edit, ok, off subject a little, but I really like your avator. :bowdown:
 
Last edited:

Alaskan

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
12,787
Points
113
If you tell an Atheist their beliefs are a kind of religion, you can always get them to fight back.... perfect trolling subject, agreed.
 




Top