2005-10-30 13:41 conversation with Sinaas

From HypertWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Chat conversation between Woozle and Sinaasappeltje, #worldvillage, 2005-10-30 13:41:

<sinaasappeltje>: So, woozle, share with me please a pearl of wisdom
<TheWoozle>: Wisdom? Hmm...
<TheWoozle>: Well, there's the classic one we always tell the kids: "You can't always get what you want; but if you try, sometimes you get what you need."
<TheWoozle>: But you'd probably like something more original...
<sinaasappeltje>: hihi :D
<TheWoozle>: (Hmm, I should make a list of great philosophy found in popular music...)
<sinaasappeltje>: No, I like something that you heard or read somewhere lately, that was phantastic for you
<TheWoozle>: Yeah, that's more or less what I'm trying to think of...
<TheWoozle>: It hasn't been a very revelational week, I'm afraid.
<TheWoozle>: But the next interesting bit of wisdom I come across, I will make a note so I can tell it to you. :-)
<sinaasappeltje>: jaa!
<sinaasappeltje>: Oh, and you had a note.. nem?
<TheWoozle>: Ohh..
* TheWoozle pulls up the note
<sinaasappeltje>: About rules, and churches. and 'coping'
<TheWoozle>: You were trying to resolve a conflict...
<TheWoozle>: ...between what the church was saying, and your own views derived from your surroundings/upbringing.
<sinaasappeltje>: yes
<sinaasappeltje>: indeed
<TheWoozle>: And I had two interpretations (I added a third one after you signed off).
<TheWoozle>: (1) You are being tempted and mislead by the bad example of your surroundings; you are being shown sinful things in a context which makes them seem acceptable, and you must devote yourself to more intensive study of doctrine and orthodoxy so that you will once again realize the sinfulness of these new ways. Etc etc.
<TheWoozle>: (2) Humanity's ability to cope with certain types of behavior is now much improved from when the church's rules and mores were originally created, and perhaps the rules should be revised to reflect this.
<sinaasappeltje>: oh, no, not what 'the church says'I usually don't care about that. I only care about the source he
<TheWoozle>: (The phrasing is not *quite* right on that one...)
<TheWoozle>: Ahh, ok, then "what Jesus said"?
<sinaasappeltje>: yes :D
<TheWoozle>: I will have to rephrase #3 slightly...
* sinaasappeltje has read two now 5 times, but still doesn't understand
<TheWoozle>: (3) Something in between -- while we can cope better with certain behaviors, some people take this too far. So maybe we need to revise our understanding of Jesus's teachings, while still following the spirit of his message.
<sinaasappeltje>: I will get it through babelfish... what a shame :$
<TheWoozle>: Let me try a different take on #2...
<sinaasappeltje>: ah, no I got it!
<sinaasappeltje>: babelfish was extremely helpful
<sinaasappeltje>: But goodness.. I very much disagree
<TheWoozle>: (2 rev. 1) The things Jesus said were said in a particular time and place that is very different from how we live now. Maybe the exact details of the rules don't really apply any more, and the *spirit* of kindness and lovingness is best maintained by using our own judgement to decide the details of how we should act.
<sinaasappeltje>: One is what I mean
<sinaasappeltje>: One is very good
<TheWoozle>: Personally, *I* would certainly disagree with (1). It was one of two extremes.
<sinaasappeltje>: Oh no.. *never* never your your own judgement
<TheWoozle>: Why so?
<sinaasappeltje>: Because we aren't all good, and all powerfull. Were stupid sinful humans
<TheWoozle>: How about... not our judgement as individuals, but as a group?
<sinaasappeltje>: eep.. that wouldn't work
<TheWoozle>: I really need to read up on exactly what Jesus's message was in the first place...
<sinaasappeltje>: Well, he has more then one ;)
<TheWoozle>: ...so I can understand better (a) why it should be absolute and unchanging, and (b) how it translates into things like being against abortion under any circumstance, against euthanasia, against suicide, etc.
<sinaasappeltje>: But if you want qoutes, the chpater 'John'has the most. Then you should read Jonh
<TheWoozle>: Ok.
<sinaasappeltje>: It is absolute unchanging
<sinaasappeltje>: It need to be. Our God is consistent He is the same now and in the past
<sinaasappeltje>: Apparantly we need that
<TheWoozle>: Yes... but are we?
<sinaasappeltje>: no.. we are not
<TheWoozle>: And should we be?
<sinaasappeltje>: No.. but our devotion to God should be the same as the first christians
<sinaasappeltje>: But our society became so hedoistic that we can't
<TheWoozle>: Fair enough... but is it reasonable that the laws which apply to us should always remain the same, if we do not remain the same?
* TheWoozle zips upstairs to look for a reference book
<sinaasappeltje>: Well, youre talking about 'laws'as in the ten commands?
<sinaasappeltje>: Or the laws in the Old Testament?
<TheWoozle>: Laws as in what you believe.
<sinaasappeltje>: oh.. As in..?
<TheWoozle>: As in Jesus's messages and all that... the belief set which you are trying to reconcile with the reality of day-to-day life.
<TheWoozle>: (There was a book I read last year which goes into considerable detail about the history of the Bible and how the various parts of it arrived in their present form, what we generally think of as "The Bible" today... and how some of the sections seem to flatly contradict each other, e.g. as regards Jesus' teachings...)
<TheWoozle>: (...because I wanted to see what it had to say about the John chapters in that regard.)
<sinaasappeltje>: Oh, and what?
<TheWoozle>: (But I can't find it quickly.)
* TheWoozle is now browsing "1 John"
<sinaasappeltje>: Ah.. 'The word is God and God was the word' :D
<TheWoozle>: I thought that was Genesis...
<sinaasappeltje>: That always confuses me, even now
<sinaasappeltje>: No, Genesis is 'De aarde was woest en ledig... '
<TheWoozle>: heh
<sinaasappeltje>: ( No idea in English )
<sinaasappeltje>: I should purchase an English bible..
<sinaasappeltje>: well, anyway, the 'laws'.. Yes, they are good for this time, I think
<TheWoozle>: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
<TheWoozle>: "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
<TheWoozle>: And so on.
<sinaasappeltje>: Because the biggest law of all is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and souls
<sinaasappeltje>: so.. when you have this overwhelming love for Someone.. you *want* to do as he tells you, and be as Him
<sinaasappeltje>: nem?
<TheWoozle>: right...
<TheWoozle>: So do you find conflict between modern life and the Ten Commandments?
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes.. But I think in biblical times they had it too
<TheWoozle>: you don't happen to remember which book they're in...
<sinaasappeltje>: And I had a long period that I didn't understood that they weigh equally heavy
<TheWoozle>: oh, wait, I can probably find them on wikipedia.
<sinaasappeltje>: Exodus
<TheWoozle>: exodus. ok...
<sinaasappeltje>: Oh,I can tell you them
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes? Or are you looking up?
<TheWoozle>: Trying to find...
<TheWoozle>: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_commandments
<TheWoozle>: (was easier than finding it in the bible online thingy...)
<sinaasappeltje>: exodus 20, vers 17
<TheWoozle>: side note: there's a Mount Sinai Church and Mount Sinai Road on the way to Zander's school ;-)
<sinaasappeltje>: So, the second commandment,
<sinaasappeltje>: 'You shall have no others Gods'seems not appropriate for this time
<sinaasappeltje>: ( iam just making an example)
<TheWoozle>: Hmm, yes...
<TheWoozle>: Actually, that's a good example of my point.
<TheWoozle>: (The (2) point)
<sinaasappeltje>: But.. when you think more, there are other gods, whch you give all your time, attemtion, love even etc too
<sinaasappeltje>: Like, money, power etc
<sinaasappeltje>: so these are the modern gods
<TheWoozle>: So... would it be reasonable to say that those gods (money, power...) are false gods, whereas the "other gods" worshipped by other faiths are actually just different manifestations of the Christian God?
<sinaasappeltje>: I don't fully comprehend.. :$. What's whereas?
<sinaasappeltje>: oh, sorry, I already got it
<TheWoozle>: (can be read as "but")
<sinaasappeltje>: Hmm, no I don't think so.
<sinaasappeltje>: I have heard christians say that Allah is just the Middle east form of our God
<sinaasappeltje>: But I very much disagree
<TheWoozle>: So... people who worship other such gods are actually sinning?
<sinaasappeltje>: You recognize our God by it's love. Our God is the only God preaching love and forgiveness
<TheWoozle>: What about Buddah?
<sinaasappeltje>: Ach, Buddha
* TheWoozle goes to look up Buddah information...
<sinaasappeltje>: he was made up!!
<TheWoozle>: In what sense?
<sinaasappeltje>: In .. the sense that the Chinese people made him up
<sinaasappeltje>: He actually existed, but then died, and the decided to worship him. But. what good does he preach?
<TheWoozle>: Well... according to this article, the term "Buddha" means "enlightened one" and generally refers to "anyone who has discovered enlightenment (bodhi), although it is commonly used to refer to Siddhartha Gautama, the historical founder of Buddhism."
<sinaasappeltje>: You know, woozle, I don't say that other 'gods'don't have power, like Allah, or Krishna, or whatever
<sinaasappeltje>: but they have as much power as we give them
<TheWoozle>: So I the founder wasn't made up, and beyond that I don't think they're talking about a particular person.
<sinaasappeltje>: Jaj, yes, but he was a man! The only one who didn't want nirvana
<TheWoozle>: So the next question is, does Buddhism teach love and forgiveness...
<sinaasappeltje>: It surely doesn't. It teaches us to find love in ourselves
<sinaasappeltje>: But .. let's face it.. we don't have that much love just from ourselve
<TheWoozle>: From what I remember (the article is maddeningly short), Buddhism is all about achieving Nirvana through karmic acts.
<TheWoozle>: And forgiveness and love would certainly be karmic.
<sinaasappeltje>: yes.. but Buddha didn't :D
<TheWoozle>: Didn't achieve Nirvana?
<sinaasappeltje>: oh.. yes... But Buddha doesn't give us love
<sinaasappeltje>: So we have to do it with what we have.. And we don't have that much from ourselves
<TheWoozle>: He certainly believed in moderation...
<sinaasappeltje>: The way I see it.. is that we still bear a little bit of God's image ( as he maded us to his resemblence) and therfor the capacity to love
<TheWoozle>: "Gautama discovered what Buddhists call the Middle Way—a path of moderation away from the extremes of self-indulgence and self-mortification."
<sinaasappeltje>: so, the closer we get to Him, the more love we feel and receive.. and therefor can spread
<TheWoozle>: But let's see, where does "love" figure in for Buddhism...
<sinaasappeltje>: Ay, Iam sorry, I'll read your buddha stuff now ;)
* TheWoozle reads more...
<sinaasappeltje>: Well.. but..no, read what
<sinaasappeltje>: ah hat
<sinaasappeltje>: Persze
<sinaasappeltje>: Merde, my brother needs to use the computer
<TheWoozle>: Their idea of "love" seems to be perhaps buried in the idea of losing one's self(ishness) when achieving Nirvana...
<TheWoozle>: Ahh, ok.
<sinaasappeltje>: no, talk more please
<sinaasappeltje>: when he comes again, i'll close
<TheWoozle>: Tell him he's interrupting profound international discourse on the nature of God and love! ;-)
<sinaasappeltje>: That's not something to be joking about here ;)
<sinaasappeltje>: hihi
<TheWoozle>: I'll have to reseach some other religions for you, because it seemed to me that there were others that were of at least as loving a nature as Christianity...
<sinaasappeltje>: and besides.. he's twelve ;)
<TheWoozle>: ...even if they don't explicitly use the word "love" in their teachings.
<sinaasappeltje>: Well, there really aren't.. I just didn't take this belief
<sinaasappeltje>: I thought about it and made research
<TheWoozle>: Right...
<TheWoozle>: ...and I'm trying to understand where the line of division is.
<sinaasappeltje>: And I know christians are intolerant about other religions, but we *have* to be
<TheWoozle>: (between the Christian God and those of other religions)
<sinaasappeltje>: line of division, what?
<TheWoozle>: and, yeah, why *does* Christianity have to be intolerant of "other" gods?
<sinaasappeltje>: Because God is a jealous God! He is the only one worth praise!
<TheWoozle>: "line of division" = what separates two similar but different things; "where do you draw the line?"
<sinaasappeltje>: He doesn't tolerate other gods to be worshipped
<sinaasappeltje>: ah.. difficult..
<TheWoozle>: Well, ok, take the simplest example -- the Jewish god is the same one worshipped by Christians.
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes
<sinaasappeltje>: Only..
<sinaasappeltje>: no, yes, go on
<TheWoozle>: But they don't believe in Jesus.
<sinaasappeltje>: no
<TheWoozle>: So that makes them sinners?
<TheWoozle>: But that's a different topic, really.
<sinaasappeltje>: They don't believe in Jesus, but they will
<TheWoozle>: Ok, here's a hypothetical example.
<sinaasappeltje>: I believe at the end, everybody will.
<sinaasappeltje>: You know, there is only one unforgivable sin
<TheWoozle>: What if we discovered a previously unknown country of people living somewhere...
<sinaasappeltje>: ah..
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes, I know where your going
<TheWoozle>: ...who say they worship this creature called "qwertyuiop", who is loving and kind and otherwise sounds very much like our buddy The Christian God.
<TheWoozle>: How do you determine if it's the same one?
<sinaasappeltje>: okay.. Iam not pleased about 'buddy', but OK
<TheWoozle>: that was to tease ;-)
<sinaasappeltje>: Ah.. well, please don't
<TheWoozle>: Fair enough.
<sinaasappeltje>: okay, so, how do they know about qwertyuiop?
<sinaasappeltje>: And, how do they interact with qwertyuiop?
<TheWoozle>: Well, let's see... maybe they have a book of holy writings, said to have been written by the hand of qwertyuiop himself, through one of their prophets...
<sinaasappeltje>: And does qwertyuiop has a Son who died for our sins, so we may live in eternity, if we accept His gift?
<TheWoozle>: And they interact with qwertyuiop by venturing out into His world and opening their minds to attempt to understand His intent.
<sinaasappeltje>: hoehah.... venturing.. what's that?
<TheWoozle>: "to venture" = to go forth
<sinaasappeltje>: wha.. It's sounds a bit vague, but Ok
<sinaasappeltje>: And the Son? Does he have one?
<TheWoozle>: I'm guessing the Son question is important. Thinking...
<sinaasappeltje>: The Son is the essence of christianity
<TheWoozle>: Well, if they didn't know anything about a Son, then it would either mean that it wasn't the same God, or else that it was the same God but that for some reason He was holding out on them, withholding part of his Kingdom from them... does that seem right so far?
<sinaasappeltje>: Hm.. yes, but I don't think God would witholds us the Kigdom..
<sinaasappeltje>: Why would he do that?
<TheWoozle>: I don't know... but it would obviously make it questionable that qwertyuiop was also "God".
<sinaasappeltje>: Iam struggling with this too, actually
<sinaasappeltje>: Because I find it tough to say the we stupid rich western people have the only true God
<TheWoozle>: It seems to me that it all depends quite a bit on how *literally* you interpret the Bible, especially certain parts of it.
<sinaasappeltje>: But I know the God I believe in *is* the only true God.. It's difficult, Because ofcourse not everybody knows Him and worships Him the way we do in Western Europe
<sinaasappeltje>: So how would we recognize
<TheWoozle>: I mean, if your deity (God, qwertyuiop, or whatever Its name is) *literally* somehow had a human son, despite not being human himself, then that implies a lot of very particular things about the nature of God...
<TheWoozle>: ...which would obviously disqualify the deities of most or all other religions.
<sinaasappeltje>: I don't know what deity is
<TheWoozle>: deity = a god, not necessarily Christian
<sinaasappeltje>: Oh.. yes, that's true, then..
<TheWoozle>: But if the point is not so much that this *literally* happened... if the point is that God made a really huge sacrifice, of something which was a deep part of himself (his own flesh and blood)...
<TheWoozle>: ...in order to save humans from "eternal damnation", which could also be a lot of different things...
<TheWoozle>: then... well, I guess it would still be difficult to find any other religions which would fit the requirements.
<TheWoozle>: But it makes a bit more sense to me to put it that way, at least.
<TheWoozle>: "The important thing about our religion (Christianity) is that our God made this really huge sacrifice to save us. Would your god do something like that for you?"
<TheWoozle>: That's a question you can discuss, without reverting to the level of "this is what I believe and that's that", which is where most inter-religious discussion tends to end up.
<sinaasappeltje>: Okay.. so would your god?
<TheWoozle>: (For instance, you can have a conversation about why that's important -- or why another religion might not think it's important, or think that something else is more important.)
<TheWoozle>: My god. Hmm. Assuming for the moment that I have one, or something that could be interpreted as one...
* TheWoozle ponders
<TheWoozle>: It's like trying to figure out what myth I would make about the world if I knew nothing about history or religion -- what kind of god would I create?
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes, what God would you like to have?
<TheWoozle>: I do think it's a meaningful question, because it relates to how we see ourselves in relation to the universe -- which is something everyone does, religious or not...
* TheWoozle ponders some more
<sinaasappeltje>: Yes.. and you should, while thinking, keep in mind the genration that come after you.. so look at the consequences of the decision your own personal god would make
<TheWoozle>: Heh...
<sinaasappeltje>: ( sorry for the bad english )
<TheWoozle>: (I won't say the joke which came to mind, then, because it would be joking about deities...)
<sinaasappeltje>: ..
<TheWoozle>: Ok, I'll put together a god for you, though that's perhaps over-anthropomorphizing (let me know if you need a definition on that... (-; )
<TheWoozle>: (well, a god for *me*, I mean, in response to your question)
<sinaasappeltje>: yes, I know the fancy word, go on
<TheWoozle>: The god I would imagine is doing an experiment with the universe. He wants to know what we can come up with that is beautiful.
<TheWoozle>: Maybe it's just his personal curiosity, or maybe we're helping him to solve some larger problem in his world. I don't know.
<sinaasappeltje>: so.. we are already in the world? Or he made us?
<TheWoozle>: He created the universe, and he came up with the laws which allowed us to come into existence.
<sinaasappeltje>: Ohja
<sinaasappeltje>: Can I ask questions about your god, on do you want to talk more?
<sinaasappeltje>: on=or
<TheWoozle>: There's a matter of some doctrinal debate in the Church of Woozle about whether the Big Bang happened *after* he created the universe, or whether he just set things up to look like there was one...
<TheWoozle>: ("Church of Woozle" not being named for the church's god but for its leading philosopher)
<sinaasappeltje>: He doesn't create you as being someone who knows the mysteries of the universe?
<sinaasappeltje>: You would still have debates and life-quesions?
<TheWoozle>: ...but either way, this god does not punish curiosity; our minds are part of his experiment, and part of his goal, and if we didn't use them we would be "sinning" against him (though sinning isn't a crime, either; it's just not optimal).
<TheWoozle>: So it's okay for someone to go around saying "god doesn't exist!" or whatever; there is no heresy in the Church of Woozle.
<TheWoozle>: Now, your questions...
<TheWoozle>: No, he doesn't create anyone knowing everything.
<sinaasappeltje>: ah.. fascinating
<TheWoozle>: In fact, I'm not sure it's possible for anyone to know everything, given the rules he created... except, possibly, for himself...
<TheWoozle>: ...or perhaps other entities in his realm, whatever that may be.
<sinaasappeltje>: so, another thing.. you *would* want there to be a god? Or, doesn't a world without a god seems much more attractive to you?
<TheWoozle>: That's a good question, and I don't have a quick yes/no answer...
<TheWoozle>: With a god, things seem perhaps warmer and safer... but more constrained.
<TheWoozle>: It's a bit like being someone's pet.
<TheWoozle>: A pet cat may have a longer and happier life than a wild one.
* sinaasappeltje has a supercool mental image of woozle on a line
<sinaasappeltje>: sorry..
<TheWoozle>: But a wild cat might evolve into something else, eventually.
<sinaasappeltje>: yes..
<sinaasappeltje>: and what about yourself being incomplete as..just yourself?
<TheWoozle>: On the other hand, if we were somehow helping this hypothetical god with some larger problem...
<TheWoozle>: ...then that would be *extending* our purpose, perhaps more so than it constrains it.
<TheWoozle>: Like a monkey who gets to be the first animal in space, perhaps.
<sinaasappeltje>: Argh, I really have to go..
<sinaasappeltje>: my brother want
<TheWoozle>: On the other hand, if you're that monkey, you don't care much about the longer goal because you're only barely capable of understanding it -- and you don't have the communications skills to have it explained to you.
<TheWoozle>: Ok
<TheWoozle>: Aldas bekesseg!
<sinaasappeltje>: please hold your thoughts, ok, and think some more about your own hypthetical god