Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,416 Year: 3,673/9,624 Month: 544/974 Week: 157/276 Day: 31/23 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Straightforward, hard-to-answer-questions about the Bible/Christianity
anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 8 of 477 (547832)
02-23-2010 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by slevesque
02-23-2010 12:39 AM


Paper, Over and Under
I have one, perhaps two (as in gluing two religions together, and then ignoring both in favor of mere commentary from those with diagnosable conditions under the DSM-IV-TR).
Why doesn't the 'church' stop using the Ten Commandments (particularly that one about bearing false witness) and the Sermon on the Mount (particularly about feeding the poor, healing the sick and bringing peace where once was strife) as toilet paper?
My objection is not with the basic ideals of Christianity itself, it is with how it has been abused for selfish purposes. Makes one wonder how that OT god of wrath and jealousy could be asleep for so long, indeed perhaps rigor mortis has set in.
Edited by anglagard, : uncapitalize the term god in referring to the OT, since almost no one follows the rules (ultra-Orthodox Jews excepted), very few can honestly say they believe in this OT god.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by slevesque, posted 02-23-2010 12:39 AM slevesque has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 10 of 477 (547836)
02-23-2010 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Buzsaw
02-23-2010 8:38 AM


Buzsaw writes:
Relative to Jehovah, the Biblical god who is a jealous god, sooner or later, deception and false gods etc become dangerous and bloody, be it Christian deception as per the Dark Ages or otherwise as per Islam and isms such as secularistic communism, etc. History seems to attest to that.
Considering your supposed support of human slavery as per the OT, are you not guilty of race-ism?
Also on a minor note, how come when you post about your favored deity you refuse to capitalize the word God?

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Buzsaw, posted 02-23-2010 8:38 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2010 10:01 PM anglagard has replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 89 of 477 (548554)
02-28-2010 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Buzsaw
02-24-2010 10:01 PM


Thanks Buz
Buzsaw writes:
I don't support human slavery. I report that it was sanctioned in the OT, nor did Jesus or the apostles condemn it, nor did they express support for it. It was a part of all human cultures on the planet at one time or other. That doesn't mean that I support it. I don't know where you got that notion, Anglagard.
Thank you for a clear answer. With some of your responses over the last few months, I was getting, what to me, were some mixed messages.
As well, the Greek word for god, theos is not capitalized, nor is the word Lord/kurios/master or the term, holy spirit. None of these words are proper names which should be capitalized. The translators chose to take it upon themselves to capitalize the names figuring it showed respect. I do capitalize Holy Spirit and God sometimes, depending on how I use them, though I don't think it matters a lot. I'm generally of the opinion that the translators should translate exactly as the manuscript states rather than taking it upon themselves to change what has been inpired by God. (I caped here more or less so not to offend some who don't understand this as I often do) If I said "the god, Jehovah," I do not cap "god."
Thanks for clearing that up, as a supposed heretic, I was just curious.
Edited by anglagard, : provide proper tense as in changing you to your

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2010 10:01 PM Buzsaw has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 252 of 477 (558981)
05-06-2010 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by Pauline
05-05-2010 11:32 PM


Re: A farce by any other name ...
Dr. Sing writes:
Okay.
If this debate is useless, then this debate is........over.
I'm not going to post anything more.
If you were expecting to convert people to your own unique interpretation of what constitutes the divine, guess what, you are alone in your relationship to God.
This forum is for those who question, not those who follow without question. As for the viability of which side is more moral or ethical, let history be the judge.
If there is one, just one, atheist out there who honestly, and willingly agrees that we should not and cannot apply the scientific method to understand the supernatural, I might continue my side of discussion.
Are you explicitly stating that your purpose in this forum was to convert rather than to learn? As if you have already declared yourself perfect in the eyes of God and require no further progress. What a small god you worship.
I'm not angry or ticked off. My problem is, if you guys aren't willing to let go of it right now... the debate, most probably, is gonna end at "me: so, ____ is why we need to believe God. You: But where is the physical evidence for God, why should I even believe in a God I don't even see????"
I'm not for this.
Did you really expect to convert any old timers here to your version of reality without having the deep knowledge and understanding of both scripture and science that so many have?
This forum is not for kids, please 'know thyself' first.
Go ahead and run away from knowledge and self-examination, eventually you will regret your selfish egotism in the face of God.
The only emotional response I have for you is one of sadness, for that of a soul who insists upon being lost over false pride.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Pauline, posted 05-05-2010 11:32 PM Pauline has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Pauline, posted 05-06-2010 12:40 AM anglagard has replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 254 of 477 (558983)
05-06-2010 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by Pauline
05-05-2010 11:32 PM


Re: A farce by any other name ...
Dr. Sing writes:
Okay.
If this debate is useless, then this debate is........over.
I'm not going to post anything more.
If you were expecting to convert people to your own unique interpretation of what constitutes the divine, guess what, you are alone in your relationship to God.
This forum is for those who question, not those who follow without question. As for the viability of which side is more moral or ethical, let history be the judge.
If there is one, just one, atheist out there who honestly, and willingly agrees that we should not and cannot apply the scientific method to understand the supernatural, I might continue my side of discussion.
Are you explicitly stating that your purpose in this forum was to convert rather than to learn? As if you have already declared yourself perfect in the eyes of God and require no further progress. What a small god you worship.
I'm not angry or ticked off. My problem is, if you guys aren't willing to let go of it right now... the debate, most probably, is gonna end at "me: so, ____ is why we need to believe God. You: But where is the physical evidence for God, why should I even believe in a God I don't even see????"
I'm not for this.
Did you really expect to convert any old timers here to your version of reality without having the deep knowledge and understanding of both scripture and science that so many have?
This forum is not for kids, please 'know thyself' first.
Go ahead and run away from knowledge and self-examination, eventually you will regret your selfish egotism in the face of God.
The only emotional response I have for you is one of sadness, for that of a soul who insists upon being lost over false pride.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Pauline, posted 05-05-2010 11:32 PM Pauline has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 256 of 477 (558989)
05-06-2010 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Pauline
05-06-2010 12:40 AM


Re: A farce by any other name ...
Dr. Sing writes:
Are you out of your mind?
I am of many minds, some even seemingly contradictory. So if someone asks if "Are you out of your mind?" I must ask which one.
In what way have I attempted to proselytize you here?
According to my religion, if you curse the works of God, then you are against God. Now perhaps you can persuade me differently.
Is my asking for a common ground to have a debate not valid?
If you demand an absolute literal reading of the Bible in the face of the fact Jesus often spoke in terms of parables, despite the obvious works of God which are more important for understanding than the words of men, there is no common ground.
I obviously don't live by any edict to stone Wal Mart shoppers to death and neither do you.
Have I said ONE THING that is intrinsically, authentically derived from MY mind? The 8 points I gave you are not mine. They're from my faith.
What is the difference between your opinions and your faith? Have you not presented them as one and the same?
There are so many things that atheists and theists don't agree on when it comes to faith. And in a faith debate, when I ask for momentary allowance of just ONE point of disagreement in order to have a discussion, this is the response I get?
How utterly frustrating!
Since you said you were leaving, and evidently have not left, one wonders about your commitment to the Ten Commandments.
Evidently I shamed you into staying, at least for one more post. (sorry )
I have read some of your posts, and I have thrown down the gauntlet. Either man up or run, don't whine.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Pauline, posted 05-06-2010 12:40 AM Pauline has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024