lumberjim, apologies for the angry post. Your second post put things more into context for me. I agree with you that it's abhorrent that people feel like they're free to do as they please to animals (and I'd include trees, waterways, soil, etc) because it 'says so in the Bible'... that's an example of people using their religious texts to sanction their own selfishness. Maybe it's because I was raised by hippie Catholic parents (a rare breed), but I think 'stewardship' is a much better, and probably more accurate, interpretation. I just can't accept that we would be allowed to screw up the earth.

Here's my opinion about the matter. Think about this for a sec: you give your son a car for his graduation gift. He says, "thanks, Dad," and proceeds to treat it like crap, bashing the hell out of it, putting diesel fuel in it, forgetting to top up the oil, running 80 km/h in second gear, etc. Aren't you going to pretty cheesed? If I were that dad, I'd start thinking I shoulda kept the car for myself. He obviously doesn't know how to take care of the stuff I gave him. (noblesse oblige, as TS said.)

So it's my opinion that environmentalism and friendliness-to-animals is an integral part of Christianity that Christians just can't afford to ignore. It makes me very angry when Christians say that environmentalism is somehow incompatible with Christianity.

wow, am I ever off-topic!

no problem. i don't think you were out of line. and it would seem as though you are certainly not one of the afforementioned dumbasses. i see that you've been here a while, but as it's the first I recall encountering you, welcome to the sphere of my awareness. yah hippie freak! :)

Hi--um, not to rock anymore religious boats but didn't the Qu'ran go through Abraham to? Isn't he the spiritual father of all three monotheisms? 'Course that doesn't help the little beastie, does it? I think it's fab that we started with a picture of a bull jumping into water and got to religion...way to go!

This often happens in the cellar. There are basically two waring groups. The Christians with their constant pushing of their ridiculous beliefs that have absolutely no scientific basis, and the atheists (or at least non believers), who strongly believe in the value of scientific research and analysis.

I can feel the heat building up under my chair already... :sweat:

No bulls were injured in the creation of this thread. ;)

thanks for the welcome, bluesdave---and I want to make it clear that I am hedging my bets on everything--I don't even like to say "agnostic"--BUT to play devil's advocate (all apologies to the "real" one!) nobody thought Troy was real, either. If you asked me to prove my own exsistence I don't know if I could! (but that's just me...)

Wrong again. Anyone, who has spent any time here at all, knows we have many fault lines in the cellar and many gradations of competing spiritual religous and irreligous concepts regarding scientific truth... watch your step newbie, you're on one right now.[/half joking]

"I think, therefore I am" is enough to prove one's own existence. But there's no way to prove one's own existence to another.

i think that if you punch them in the mouth, and they bleed, you've proven your existence. then they'd have to think about the blood running down their chin, and what caused it.

You are way too sensitive Griff. I never said that everyone in the cellar falls into one of two groups. It wasn't necessary for me to fill in every detail. The fact that some people fall between the two extremes, does not negate my statement at all. Some of you people seem to think that every posting has to be a PhD dissertation. That's ridiculous. I did my time at university nearly 30 years ago, and I'm trying to enjoy life a little now.[/not joking] :mad2:

Right on LJ! :thumb:

No blood letting! And I hope I don't have to have a Ph.D dissertation on anything because I don't have one. Shucks! :blush:

Oh, not at all.

If you were to punch me in the mouth and I were to bleed all over my chin, that would prove to me that <STRONG>I</STRONG> existed, yes. But that's about it. My imagination could easily conjure up such an eventuality juuuust fine without your being involved at all, thankyouverymuch.

I'm not even entirely convinced that it would constitute proof that I existed.

If I think, and therefore am, and I tell you that I did, in fact just punch you in the mouth.......you could argue that imagination point all day long. if the assumption is that anything could be a figment of imagination, then the only thing that is certainly real is your imagination. In any case, you are not in control of that imagination, so the difference between actual existence and imagined is irrelevant. You live in my reality, I live in yours. ~~I feel so close to you now....and all because I punched you in the mouth~~

I think Happy monkey said something like that in about 1/3 of the time....

Real men (and women), don't have to. :lol: