|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:39 am Post subject: 41 |
 |
|
| They're all the same problem, God not making it clear that these stories aren't true. If some are true or based in truth, God could have said which one those are or at least let us know that not all of them are true. By clear, I mean actually telling us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Scurra
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:37 am Post subject: 42 |
|
|
Yes, they are all the same problem. But BraveHat articulated what the problem was quite well - it's with you, not with God.
I'm not wanting to sound rude, because the "you" here is a generalisation. But the journey of faith is exactly that - a journey. You never stop travelling it. Anyone who thinks they have arrived is typically deluding themselves. It's like learning about anything. The more you are willing to learn, the more you realise how much more there is to learn. At the moment, it appears that you are bothered by one particular issue for which it is evident that no-one has been able to give you an answer which you find satisfactory. That's fine. All anyone else can do is try to articulate their position more or less successfully - and on forums like this, it's usually less! (The problem comes, it seems to me, when someone says "here's the explanation that works for me - you're a fool or a heretic if you don't adopt it" no matter how inappropriate it is for you.)
Perhaps we could start with the definition problem again. Would you like to clarify exactly what you mean by "true" in the statement "God not making it clear that these stories aren't true"?
I think that every story in the Bible is "true". But I'm far enough out on the fringes to be generally happy with the idea that nothing in the Bible actually happened.* As it happens, that has made my faith stronger, rather than weaker. But I can completely understand why other people might find it does the opposite.
*well, OK, so things like the Letters of Paul or even the Exile to Babylon probably happened but that's not quite the same thing. And before anyone says anything, suggesting that if I don't believe the "Resurrection" happened in the way it is described in the Bible then I am therefore disbarred from being a Christian, well, that would be a very long discussion indeed. And not one I really want to get into here because it would basically involve about forty years of "personal testimony" 
_________________
still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:48 pm Post subject: 43 |
|
|
Chuck - like Scurra, I can understand what your issue is and, in fact, I've been sleeping on it all night because I didn't want to rush to a response.
All I can say for now, which may or may not echo what Scurra said, is that there are certain psychological elements within us that are motivated by mystery and that are deadened by having things spelled out in certain terms. We GL'ers in particular should understand this. Suppose, when Kevin posted the Three Hat's puzzle, he wrote
| An imaginary Kevin Lin wrote: |
| ...For what seemed like hours no one spoke even though they would have if he had been wearing a certain color hat. |
Obviously, if he had written it that way, it would have directed the reader's mind on which path to take in solving the puzzle, and weakened the reader's reliance on his own ability to figure out which path to take, thus weakening that ability itself. What Kevin, and most of us, do naturally when posting puzzles is to give only that information without which solving would be impossible. The more info given that the reader can provide for him or herself, the less rewarding the solving is, and the weaker we are as solvers. All Kevin needed to write was "no one spoke."
Likewise with God. The only kind of information that should be given to us in certain terms, is that which would be impossible for us to come to ourselves. IOW, each one of us is given everything we need. We just need to apply ourselves to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:42 pm Post subject: 44 |
|
|
The comparison of God to Kevin Lin, by the way, is purely circumstantial  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:51 pm Post subject: 45 |
|
|
Now I get it. The authors of the bible wrote stories and later we develop biology, physics, geology, and history from which we deduce that some of the events described in those stories didn't really take place even though some of them are described to have happened in historic settings and mention real people who lived in those times. We've fully solved the puzzle when we come to realize that there aren't any gods, angels, demons, and afterlives. We learn the lesson that something isn't necessarily true just because it sounds good.
Thanks, everyone. I'm now fully enlightened and understand religion completely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:07 pm Post subject: 46 |
|
|
| Chuck wrote: |
| Now I get it. The authors of the bible wrote stories and later we develop biology, physics, geology, and history from which we deduce that some of the events described in those stories didn't really take place even though some of them are described to have happened in historic settings and mention real people who lived in those times. |
I'm with you so far. Although I'd like to understand how we deduced through those disciplines that some of the events never took place.
| Chuck wrote: |
| We've fully solved the puzzle when we come to realize that there aren't any gods, angels, demons, and afterlives. |
Whaa? How does that follow?
| Chuck wrote: |
| We learn the lesson that something isn't necessarily true just because it sounds good. |
I would hope so. It isn't necessarily "false" either. There are certain propositions about which truth value is both scientifically undeterminable and irrelevant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:14 pm Post subject: 47 |
|
|
Chuck, that's about right.
The final bit about God's not existing comes from finding the hypocrisy of his actions versus his philosophy (No killing, except for me, etc.).
I loved the bit about infallibility and knowing everything, and God's decision to create a group of humans that he knew would eventually get corrupt and he would get to kill them all (except for Noah, of course). I wonder if we were supposed to think that he enjoyed it (both the killing and the making). It's like when my three-year old builds a tower out of blocks.
It is a shame though that the stories led to so much killing and all that, but we're mostly getting past that (obviously it still happens, but not as much as when religious people had more power). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:19 pm Post subject: 48 |
|
|
We know that the Noah's Ark story didn't really happen because the various animals couldn't have gotten to their current continents, there being oceans in the way.
We know when we've solved a puzzle because the solution makes sense.
While some desirable things might be true, the lesson is still valuable when shopping for a used car, buying Florida real estate, and choosing a religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:50 pm Post subject: 49 |
|
|
| Chuck wrote: |
We know that the Noah's Ark story didn't really happen because the various animals couldn't have gotten to their current continents, there being oceans in the way.
We know when we've solved a puzzle because the solution makes sense.
While some desirable things might be true, the lesson is still valuable when shopping for a used car, buying Florida real estate, and choosing a religion. |
Those are some good examples. The religion is even more costly than the others though, with 10% of your income, and a significant time investment. But the analogy still works. If someone is promising you something (especially if it's something that you cannot see, or know about) in exchange for a lot of your hard earned money, it's important to be suspicious. The religious people probably feel just as suspicious of other religions (Christians toward Hinduism, etc., but fail to use the suspicion fully) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:04 pm Post subject: 50 |
|
|
| Especially when I'm not allowed to even see the product, can't talk to customers who have seen it, and am being threatened with eternal torture if I don't buy it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:05 pm Post subject: 51 |
|
|
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| The final bit about God's not existing comes from finding the hypocrisy of his actions versus his philosophy (No killing, except for me, etc.). |
How is that hypocrisy if He's the only one qualified to kill with right judgement? It's not like humans are on the same operating level as God. Are you a hypocrite if you tell an 8 year old kid not drive your car?
Also, there are a number of translations of that commandment which say "thou shalt not murder". Killing from necessity is not murder. Add to that the idea of an afterlife, and you take away any notion of the killing harming the killed. What's left is the effect the killing has on those connected to the killing, both the victims (loved ones) and perpetrators.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| I loved the bit about infallibility and knowing everything, and God's decision to create a group of humans that he knew would eventually get corrupt and he would get to kill them all (except for Noah, of course). I wonder if we were supposed to think that he enjoyed it (both the killing and the making). It's like when my three-year old builds a tower out of blocks. |
Interesting how you are viewing God's actions in relation those of a child, when they can just as easily be viewed in relation to those of a parent. If your three-year old, instead of building a tower with the blocks, was chucking them at other children, would you not take the responsibility of taking those blocks away and restricting your child for the sake of the other children? Again, within the context of the Old Testament, the afterlife is a reality, so God "killing everyone" is essentially just removing them from the earth plane. In fact, the entire premise behind there being a God and eternal souls is that earth life is temporary and that God is the judge of who stays and who goes. So why would God taking people indicate any kind of fallibility?
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| It is a shame though that the stories led to so much killing and all that, but we're mostly getting past that (obviously it still happens, but not as much as when religious people had more power). |
As I mentioned before, I find it hard to believe that simply believing those stories is the cause of the killing and all that, for the simple fact that many people believe them and don't kill and all that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:21 pm Post subject: 52 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| In fact, the entire premise behind there being a God and eternal souls is that earth life is temporary and that God is the judge of who stays and who goes. So why would God taking people indicate any kind of fallibility? |
emphasis mine.
I loathe this bit, when used to sell the afterlife. Spend what you know you have for something that may never come.
So, try and explain the infallible God creating people that he knows he will have to kill (that's the analogy of my three year old; he builds the tower to knock it down). Why create a bunch of people you will have to kill later, knowing you get to kill them later? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:26 pm Post subject: 53 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| How is that hypocrisy if He's the only one qualified to kill with right judgement? It's not like humans are on the same operating level as God. |
He has lots of hypocrisy other than this, we don't need to go into all of it. There are books on it that do it more justice than I could here.
| BraveHat wrote: |
| As I mentioned before, I find it hard to believe that simply believing those stories is the cause of the killing and all that, for the simple fact that many people believe them and don't kill and all that. |
Perhaps. I am not saying that religion is the cause of many of the wars that occurred in its name. Many of those were about power, but religion was a tool that made it possible. I do think 9/11 was a religious based event. I think lots of atrocities are. Science doesn't generally prompt people to kill lots of others. Just saying.
Last edited by Johny Fake on Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:56 pm Post subject: 54 |
|
|
Funny thing, this morning my wife decided to take my kids to church to allow me time to do some chores (she's not a believer, but our neighbors have invited us several times and it seems like a nice social thing to do). We have never talked to our kids about religion, it's just been absent from our lives. My oldest son, only 8, asked not to go. He said "there is no God, so why should I go to church?"
He has had to accompany me in doing the chores. I am spending some of the time explaining religion. I explained how many people here (U.S.) beleive in God, and many people in other places, like where uncle Steve lives (Switz.) don't beleive in a God. He asked "can we move to Switz. so I can stop arguing with kids about this?"
The discussion has turned to tolerance, and why it is always a good idea to not argue against others' Gods (especially true here in the South). I admit to being a bit concerned about other 8-year old kids', and what they might do for their God. Someday, I'll show him the GL, where he can speak his mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:01 pm Post subject: 55 |
|
|
| I wrote: |
| Are you a hypocrite if you tell an 8 year old kid not drive your car? |
Oh my god, dude, I didn't realize you actually had one!!
I'll respond to your other posts later, but I just had to comment on this lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:19 pm Post subject: 56 |
|
|
Yep. 
I literally have the 3-year old too, with the block towers!
BTW, my wife is back now. I explained my conversations with the 8-year old. She said, "Well that explains the double-take, and strange look I got from the para-pro teacher from his class (at church)."
Oh, and I'm taking the 8-year old driving today, just to make you think again about the whole religion thing. Wish us luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:22 pm Post subject: 57 |
|
|
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| I wrote: |
| In fact, the entire premise behind there being a God and eternal souls is that earth life is temporary and that God is the judge of who stays and who goes. So why would God taking people indicate any kind of fallibility? |
I loathe this bit, when used to sell the afterlife. Spend what you know you have for something that may never come. |
Yes, I can see how that would be an insane risk when put in that context. But I'm pretty sure there is a certain level of Faith that is not so much about investing in some completely unknown future event, as it is in investing in what one believes is lasting, both in life and beyond death. Things like Truth, Love, Goodness, Joy, etc. are things that people believe prevails forever, or if not absolutely forever, then virtually so. What religion says is "Yes, there is a Supreme source for all these things you intuit should and must last forever and here is a means by which to align your soul with them."
I don't know how many people have ever been in the predicament of being told "I love you" with the expectation of you returning the response, but with you not actually feeling it at that moment. If you say "I love you" even though you don't actually feel it, you may be rewarded for the moment with no hurt feelings, confusion or pain, and rather joyous pleasantry to get on with the day. At the same time, the fact that it's false and obligatory dilutes the meaning of the phrase itself and becomes untrustworthy over time the more you respond in the same way. If you have faith in the value of not lying, you may struggle with how to avoid it in that moment, and that person may be hurt. But if you end up doing something towards that person inconsistent with your claim (such as breaking up with them, or simply not hanging out with them as much as someone who loved them would), which you are apt to do since it is a false claim, they will not feel as betrayed because they were given clues as to where you stood. The reward attained is the preservation of Truth: consistency between what is and what is presented. This reward benefits others in the long run as well as yourself. And may last after you are dead. Certainly the practice of it will.
There are other examples for Love, Goodness, Joy, etc. The idea of eternal life is consistent with the intuition of these things being eternal.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| So, try and explain the infallible God creating people that he knows he will have to kill (that's the analogy of my three year old; he builds the tower to knock it down). Why create a bunch of people you will have to kill later, knowing you get to kill them later? |
I think I gave a sufficient answer to this question in my analysis of the Noah story in Post 39. Your inclusion of the phrase "get to kill them" implies a sadistic glee which is a complete non-sequitur from the story. Not that I blame you, but I would need more evidence, either from the bible or from theist responses, that any of us think God somehow enjoyed removing the bulk of humanity from earth.
The short answer, and this is just speculation on my part, is that their deaths were neither good nor bad (from God's perspective), but simply part of the renewal process. Again, all that "death" means in old testament terms is removal from the earth plane, so the souls could be dealt with by God in some other way that didn't interfere with His creation. There is no implication of what happened after death to the souls of those wiped out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:24 pm Post subject: 58 |
|
|
| more to come, gotta scoot over to rehearsal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:09 pm Post subject: 59 |
|
|
| Even if the universe has an intelligent creator and even if it's going to provide eternal life after death, I have no reason to believe that the people telling me what this being wants me to do really actually know. The creator could just as easily hate worship as want it. Am I supposed to invest my worldly goods when such an act would as likely to be offensive to God as not, and probably wouldn't matter at all? If it did want me to do something, it would most likely tell me about it. Instead, I've had people in funny robes telling me that the all-powerful creator of the universe would be offended if I ate meat on Friday. Am I supposed to believe that these people or others like them actually know anything at all about God? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:19 pm Post subject: 60 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| Again, within the context of the Old Testament, the afterlife is a reality, so God "killing everyone" is essentially just removing them from the earth plane. |
Could you show me where the "old testament" says anything about an afterlife?
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:58 pm Post subject: 61 |
|
|
Antrax, I predict the response will be something like....it doesn't say anything about there not being one...
| Chuck wrote: |
| Even if the universe has an intelligent creator and even if it's going to provide eternal life after death, I have no reason to believe that the people telling me what this being wants me to do really actually know. The creator could just as easily hate worship as want it. Am I supposed to invest my worldly goods when such an act would as likely to be offensive to God as not, and probably wouldn't matter at all? If it did want me to do something, it would most likely tell me about it. Instead, I've had people in funny robes telling me that the all-powerful creator of the universe would be offended if I ate meat on Friday. Am I supposed to believe that these people or others like them actually know anything at all about God? |
Good question. Once the people in the robes start also asking for money, for you to fight a war for them, etc., the answers become more clear don't they?!? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scurra
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:09 pm Post subject: 62 |
|
|
| Johny Fake wrote: |
| Good question. Once the people in the robes start also asking for money, for you to fight a war for them, etc., the answers become more clear don't they?!? |
Yeah. It's called "politics". Or is there a qualitative difference when they wear a smart suit instead? They do pretty much the same thing though - "follow me, and do as I say, and life will be better for you <aside>oh, wait, no it won't. It'll be a lot better for me though..."
If someone stands up and says "this is the truth and don't question it", then the first thing you should do is to question it. That's a basic principle of science, isn;t it, and there's no reason why it doesn't apply to religious faith as well.
All I would argue is that once people do start questioning things, that doesn't necessarily mean that they will all end up in the same place and to presume that they would - and, worse, that if they don't end up where you are, they must be deluded - is the worst form of arrogance (which is my main beef with people like Dawkins and Hitchens.)
_________________
still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: 63 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| more to come, gotta scoot over to rehearsal |
BH, I want you to consider, if you will, the following scenario.
You are a traveler from another time/planet/whatever, and you are unfamiliar with the cultures of our world. You arrive here to study and learn. You give your best to learn all about our cultures. You learn of the religions of old (no longer practiced), the current popular religions of our time, and the religions of new (often referred to as cults). As you study it all at the library, you learn everything that there is to know, from what is available to the masses. Hypothetically (obviously), how do you think you would perceive each of the major religions/new religions/old religions?? I know you don't know, but I'm asking for your best attempt to answer, to see the world through un-tinted lenses.
Another one: If we ever encounter a superior alien race, will it change your thoughts on religion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:13 pm Post subject: 64 |
|
|
| Scurra wrote: |
| Yeah. It's called "politics". Or is there a qualitative difference when they wear a smart suit instead? They do pretty much the same thing though - "follow me, and do as I say, and life will be better for you <aside>oh, wait, no it won't. It'll be a lot better for me though..." |
Perhaps religion was originally a parody of government, but some idiot took it for face value.
That sounded wrong. Religious people are not idiots, it's the not getting the joke that implies idiocy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scurra
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:14 pm Post subject: 65 |
|
|
| Johny Fake wrote: |
| That sounded wrong. Religious people are not idiots, it's the not getting the joke that implies idiocy. |
Indeed. I won't bother to supply the punchline, since you've got one that makes you happy, and I've got one that makes me happy.
(incidentally, what makes you think you are seeing the world through un-tinted lenses? I would hope you don't think you are.)
_________________
still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:21 pm Post subject: 66 |
|
|
Good point.
But, when I try to consider the outsider perspective, none of the religions make much sense. They all have some good ideas, all of which exist without the religion (and all of which were around prior to the religions). Jesus had some great philosophy, regardless of the fact that he was Jewish. I like his ideas, and use them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:47 pm Post subject: 67 |
|
|
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| He has lots of hypocrisy other than this, we don't need to go into all of it. There are books on it that do it more justice than I could here. |
At least give me a title. Though the problem with that is I may read that/those book(s) and find it very inconvenient/time-consuming to write a complete rebuttal. It is much more feasible, considering that this is not my full-time job, to rebut point for point in a forum such as this one. You may get a better response if you cite actual points from those books.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| I am not saying that religion is the cause of many of the wars that occurred in its name. Many of those were about power, but religion was a tool that made it possible. I do think 9/11 was a religious based event. I think lots of atrocities are. Science doesn't generally prompt people to kill lots of others. Just saying. |
emphasis moi. The atom bomb (from Science) was also a tool which made it possible to kill lots of others. The fact that a phenomena makes possible profoundly evil use of it is simply not enough to discredit it's entirety. Trusting other adults with our children makes possible their being abused. Having a freeway or autobahn makes possible accidents of profound carnage. Having a working throat makes possible death by choking. So frickitty what? We will not make the world a better place by trying to do away of any one of them. We will only increase paranoia.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| Oh, and I'm taking the 8-year old driving today, just to make you think again about the whole religion thing. Wish us luck. |
I'll try out your otherworldly traveler excercise later, but I want to respond to these in chronological order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:06 pm Post subject: 68 |
|
|
| Chuck wrote: |
| Even if the universe has an intelligent creator and even if it's going to provide eternal life after death, I have no reason to believe that the people telling me what this being wants me to do really actually know. The creator could just as easily hate worship as want it. Am I supposed to invest my worldly goods when such an act would as likely to be offensive to God as not, and probably wouldn't matter at all? If it did want me to do something, it would most likely tell me about it. Instead, I've had people in funny robes telling me that the all-powerful creator of the universe would be offended if I ate meat on Friday. Am I supposed to believe that these people or others like them actually know anything at all about God? |
I agree. You don't need to believe that these people know what they're talking about, and conversely, you don't need to believe that they don't, either.
I hope people don't think my goal here is to convert atheists. By questioning the way people discredit religion or the idea of God, I'm not asking anyone to believe anything I'm saying about Him or even to believe that I know what I'm talking about. I'm not only perfectly happy that you judge for yourselves, I prefer it. I'm simply trying, as a theist, to point out the fallacies of some atheist critiques. If people are rejecting one idea they feel is a jumped-to conclusion by jumping to conclusions of their own, it's incumbent upon me as someone who believes he sees the fallacies, to point them out. I expect nothing less of others who see fallacy in my points. Chuck, Antrax, and Zag, to name a few, have all pointed out fallacies in some of my points for which I'm grateful and I rescinded those points. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:19 pm Post subject: 69 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
| I wrote: |
| Again, within the context of the Old Testament, the afterlife is a reality, so God "killing everyone" is essentially just removing them from the earth plane. |
Could you show me where the "old testament" says anything about an afterlife? |
You got me there. I'll admit I was assuming there is such a reference. Sloppiness and affectation on my part.
A more appropriate line of reasoning for my point would be "since the Old Testament doesn't espouse the lack of an afterlife, and God is the Supreme Being, would it be a stretch to assume that he could easily preserve the soul of someone who he had to remove from Earth? Wouldn't it be presumptuous to assume that His killing of people was some final end to their entirety?" Johnny's prediction was right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:42 pm Post subject: 70 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| Wouldn't it be presumptuous to assume that His killing of people was some final end to their entirety?" Johnny's prediction was right. |
Seems presumptuous to assume otherwise. about the afterlife, not me being correct.
BH, I apologize for being nonchalant and unspecific in referring to God's hypocrisy. I thought the "thou shalt not kill" one was quite good, but you countered that God has different rules to abide by. If he's rightly allowed to kill, lots and lots of people...even everyone, I presume if he wishes, it will be hard to find any wrongful behavior (where else can I go?).
Some other things I have heard are in the bible, from reliable sources: two men lying with each other is an abomination, we should kill someone if they worship another God (immediately even, do not question or wait for an explanation), we should kill someone if they are working on the Sabbath.
There was a relatively recent book written by someone that tried to live a full year adhering to all the rules of the bible. I'll get the title to you soon. He couldn't do it completely, otherwise he would have broken several laws, including murder, and would be in prison.
Last edited by Johny Fake on Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:46 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johny Fake
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:45 pm Post subject: 71 |
|
|
The Year of Living Biblically
From the Amazon review:
| Quote: |
| In the end, he says, "I'm now a reverent agnostic. Which isn't an oxymoron, I swear. I now believe that whether or not there's a God, there is such a thing as sacredness. Life is sacred." Not a bad outcome. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:52 pm Post subject: 72 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| Chuck wrote: |
| Even if the universe has an intelligent creator and even if it's going to provide eternal life after death, I have no reason to believe that the people telling me what this being wants me to do really actually know. The creator could just as easily hate worship as want it. Am I supposed to invest my worldly goods when such an act would as likely to be offensive to God as not, and probably wouldn't matter at all? If it did want me to do something, it would most likely tell me about it. Instead, I've had people in funny robes telling me that the all-powerful creator of the universe would be offended if I ate meat on Friday. Am I supposed to believe that these people or others like them actually know anything at all about God? |
I agree. You don't need to believe that these people know what they're talking about, and conversely, you don't need to believe that they don't, either. |
But not knowing whether or not they're right, what's the rational thing to do? I risk offending God, if he exists, no matter what I do. If I do nothing, at least I get to save time and money. For all I know, that might be what God wants me to do.
| Quote: |
I hope people don't think my goal here is to convert atheists. By questioning the way people discredit religion or the idea of God, I'm not asking anyone to believe anything I'm saying about Him or even to believe that I know what I'm talking about. I'm not only perfectly happy that you judge for yourselves, I prefer it. I'm simply trying, as a theist, to point out the fallacies of some atheist critiques. If people are rejecting one idea they feel is a jumped-to conclusion by jumping to conclusions of their own, it's incumbent upon me as someone who believes he sees the fallacies, to point them out. I expect nothing less of others who see fallacy in my points. Chuck, Antrax, and Zag, to name a few, have all pointed out fallacies in some of my points for which I'm grateful and I rescinded those points. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:56 pm Post subject: 73 |
|
|
| Scurra wrote: |
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| Once the people in the robes start also asking for money, for you to fight a war for them, etc., the answers become more clear don't they?!? |
Yeah. It's called "politics". Or is there a qualitative difference when they wear a smart suit instead? They do pretty much the same thing though - "follow me, and do as I say, and life will be better for you <aside>oh, wait, no it won't. It'll be a lot better for me though..." |
Yes. It's also called commercialism and the people in the funny robes are either religious figures or Snuggie (tm) infomercial actors. I would like to add, however, that sometimes it's not even better for the politician...the mercantile mentality has so melded into our Western conversation that even politicians with non-predatory intentions often slip into it.
| Scurra wrote: |
| If someone stands up and says "this is the truth and don't question it", then the first thing you should do is to question it. That's a basic principle of science, isn;t it, and there's no reason why it doesn't apply to religious faith as well. |
Love that. I'd call it a basic principle of skepticism, though. Ok, ok, but my scalpel was craving that piece of hair.
| Scurra wrote: |
| All I would argue is that once people do start questioning things, that doesn't necessarily mean that they will all end up in the same place and to presume that they would - and, worse, that if they don't end up where you are, they must be deluded - is the worst form of arrogance (which is my main beef with people like Dawkins and Hitchens.) |
Emphasis me, but Scurra gets all the credit. He captured in words exactly the mentality I try to combat when I see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaz
Vote: Zag
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:04 am Post subject: 74 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
| BraveHat wrote: |
| Again, within the context of the Old Testament, the afterlife is a reality, so God "killing everyone" is essentially just removing them from the earth plane. |
Could you show me where the "old testament" says anything about an afterlife? |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol
Specifically...
Jacob, not comforted at the reported death of Joseph, exclaims: "I shall go down to my son a mourner unto Sheol" (Genesis 37:35).[9]
Psalm 6:4-5 "Turn, O LORD, deliver my life; save me for the sake of your steadfast love. For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise?"
Psalm 18:5-7 "The breakers of death surged round about me; the menacing floods terrified me. The cords of Sheol tightened; the snares of death lay in wait for me. In my distress I called out: LORD! I cried out to my God. From his temple he heard my voice; my cry to him reached his ears.
Psalm 139:8: "If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there."
Is that enough?
_________________
The enemy's base is down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 1:00 am Post subject: 75 |
|
|
| Johnny Cash wrote: |
BH, I want you to consider, if you will, the following scenario.
You are a traveler from another time/planet/whatever, and you are unfamiliar with the cultures of our world. You arrive here to study and learn. You give your best to learn all about our cultures. You learn of the religions of old (no longer practiced), the current popular religions of our time, and the religions of new (often referred to as cults). As you study it all at the library, you learn everything that there is to know, from what is available to the masses. Hypothetically (obviously), how do you think you would perceive each of the major religions/new religions/old religions?? I know you don't know, but I'm asking for your best attempt to answer, to see the world through un-tinted lenses. |
Interesting. You asked a similar question in This old thread to which I gave a detailed response in post 175.  I'm not sure what to add, except that perhaps I would remain a weak atheist (undecided). In reality, I don't happen to be a weak atheist, because the ideas that point to God (and Christianity in addition) make too much sense to me and fit in too much with my experiences. However, in that hypothetical situation, where my only experience of religion is in a library, I would most likely be a weak atheist. To be a strong atheist, I'd have to believe that religion is all delusion. I can't even conceive of a valid reason to believe that. None at all.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| Another one: If we ever encounter a superior alien race, will it change your thoughts on religion? |
I can definitely picture it changing my understanding of religion, and what religion is referring to by "God", but I can't picture it convincing me that all beliefs about God are error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BraveHat
Last of the Daedalians
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 2:18 am Post subject: 76 |
|
|
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| I wrote: |
| Wouldn't it be presumptuous to assume that His killing of people was some final end to their entirety?" Johnny's prediction was right. |
Seems presumptuous to assume otherwise. |
Interesting. I suppose I had always assumed the Jewish people believed in the afterlife (though I may have actual experiential evidence that I just can't access right now, so it may not be an assumption per se) and since the Old Testament is the main scriptural basis of Judaism, I made an additional assumption that it must have featured somewhere within it's texts an assertion of the afterlife. Chaz pointed out some passages (THANKS!! ) that suggest that maybe my automatic assumption was based on actual information. In any case, Christianity affirms both an afterlife and the five books of Moses as authoritative, so if you look at the Noah story in the context of Christianity, the souls of the people who were wiped out still exist today. Whether or not they had a chance of Bliss in the afterlife is a relevant, but undeterminable issue.
| Johnny Fake wrote: |
| Some other things I have heard are in the bible, from reliable sources: two men lying with each other is an abomination, we should kill someone if they worship another God (immediately even, do not question or wait for an explanation), we should kill someone if they are working on the Sabbath. |
I am not a biblical literalist. In fact, I firmly believe that most things in life that are not scientific demand interpretation. However, just because an Oracle requires interpretation doesn't mean than any old interpretation will do the Oracle's message justice. Some interpretations are closer to reality than others, in my opinion.
The proper context for understanding homosexuality in religious terms is not two-dimensional. I have no idea the kind of homosexuality being condemned in Leviticus. Does it mean all possible cases of two men engaging in sexual intercourse, even in sanctified circumstances, or is it speaking of cases where lust is the strongest supporting factor of the relationship, in which case homosexuality is no different than an immoral heterosexual relationship, though it those times it may have been more common for a homosexual relationship to be purely lust-based. Is homosexuality practiced differently in spiritual terms today than it was in biblical times? Were the circumstances surrounding homosexuality more conducive to sexual immorality than they are today? Is this condemnation as severe as condemnation of deeper sins? Also, the Bible mentions nothing about pedophilia. Was homosexuality considered sexual abuse in those days the way pedophilia is today? Was the general mentality so vastly different that there were protected and sanctified circumstances in which to have sex with a child, but none in which to have sex with another man? Which particulars of Biblical morality were relevant only to the cultural mores of the time and which are relevant to the fact of being human? My relationship with the Bible is one of reverence, fascination, and, most of the time, suspension of judgement. As a member of my time and culture, I am embroiled in the ethos of my time and culture. It is very difficult to separate from it. Perhaps we need a new Bible for this era. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:47 am Post subject: 77 |
|
|
| BraveHat wrote: |
| A more appropriate line of reasoning for my point would be "since the Old Testament doesn't espouse the lack of an afterlife, and God is the Supreme Being, would it be a stretch to assume that he could easily preserve the soul of someone who he had to remove from Earth? Wouldn't it be presumptuous to assume that His killing of people was some final end to their entirety?" Johnny's prediction was right. |
Disagree. All that love for his children thing, that's Christianity. The Hebrew God, the "old testament" God is vengeful as fuck. All those bits about how God will always love you, how you can always be saved, that's not Judaism. Our God gets pissed at you, at best you die, at worst the Hebrews are enslaved by one of the adjacent nations, that God uses as his whip, that is when he's not telling us to perform genocide on them so we can have their land that he decided we should have.
So you can believe whatever you want to make God more pleasant to you, but don't drag the "old testament" into it, because the stories there are about God sending bears to eat children who made fun of one of his prophets, not about how he forgives sinners or chooses the path of least of resistance when solving problems. I think the part I like best is in Job when Job complains God screwed him over, and God's response is basically "I am God. You are not. I do what I want and you go with it. If you have a problem with it, go create your own universe". That's our God, and if you're going to pretend the old testament portrays Him in any other light, kindly cite examples and don't rely on "it doesn't say the exact opposite of what I'm saying".
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 6:53 am Post subject: 78 |
|
|
| Chaz wrote: |
| Antrax wrote: |
| BraveHat wrote: |
| Again, within the context of the Old Testament, the afterlife is a reality, so God "killing everyone" is essentially just removing them from the earth plane. |
Could you show me where the "old testament" says anything about an afterlife? |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol
Specifically...
Jacob, not comforted at the reported death of Joseph, exclaims: "I shall go down to my son a mourner unto Sheol" (Genesis 37:35).[9]
Psalm 6:4-5 "Turn, O LORD, deliver my life; save me for the sake of your steadfast love. For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise?"
Psalm 18:5-7 "The breakers of death surged round about me; the menacing floods terrified me. The cords of Sheol tightened; the snares of death lay in wait for me. In my distress I called out: LORD! I cried out to my God. From his temple he heard my voice; my cry to him reached his ears.
Psalm 139:8: "If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there."
Is that enough? |
Enough for what? Beyond the fact most of your quotes are from psalms, which are an add-on and not really a part of the Torah, they also don't say anything about a mythical afterlife. Kindly read the article you're citing:
| Quote: |
| In Judaism She'ol[3] is the earliest conception of the afterlife in the Jewish Scriptures. It is a place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of lifestyle and where they are "removed from the light of God |
The closest thing we originally had for an afterlife is the idea that when the messiah comes, he will raise all the dead (which I always thought would be really confusing). The concept of "good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell" was copied from the Christians much, much later and doesn't appear in the torah (tired of writing "old testament" all the time, and besides that creates confusion when people cite songs written by Hebrew kings and refer to them as scripture).
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaz
Vote: Zag
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:11 am Post subject: 79 |
|
|
| Antrax wrote: |
Enough for what? Beyond the fact most of your quotes are from psalms, which are an add-on and not really a part of the Torah, they also don't say anything about a mythical afterlife. Kindly read the article you're citing:
| Quote: |
| In Judaism She'ol[3] is the earliest conception of the afterlife in the Jewish Scriptures. It is a place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of lifestyle and where they are "removed from the light of God |
The closest thing we originally had for an afterlife is the idea that when the messiah comes, he will raise all the dead (which I always thought would be really confusing). The concept of "good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell" was copied from the Christians much, much later and doesn't appear in the torah (tired of writing "old testament" all the time, and besides that creates confusion when people cite songs written by Hebrew kings and refer to them as scripture). |
And here I thought I was being extra diligent in finding things which directly related to your request (Sheol instead of just references of Hell), instead of the normal method.
1. I didn't know Psalms wasn't part of the Torah. 
2. I think the story of Jacob and Joseph stands on its own, though I do think the story has A LOT more impact if the followers didn't believe in an afterlife.
I may take a few days to look into this (or I may just flake, but either way I'll) report back with findings (or excuses.) I'm thinking that my route of attack will be along the lines of "when the messiah comes more will be revealed." etc etc. I'll let you know if I find something, or if I don't, or if I just flake altogether. Any good place to get a Torah?
_________________
The enemy's base is down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrax
ESL Student
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:59 pm Post subject: 80 |
|
|
You misinterpret the story about Jacob and Joseph. It's an expression that sort of means "I'm so sad I could die", it's not an actual wish to physically go there like some Greek hero, but you'd have to actually know Hebrew to know that (similar to that "don't give false witness" commandment).
The Torah is the first five books of the Hebrew bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Then you have the Nevi'im which is also scripture, and are comprised of the next 8 books. Only the "Ktuvim" (literally: written) have the add-on stuff like the scrolls and songs and all that. I think the first one is psalms.
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
