Thread: For An Intelligent Conversation On Spirituality/Religion

Originally Posted by paco

Wait, Wait, Wait, you mean that the above hilite does not infer superiority?

not at all, that's why it's in quotes. it's mocking.

Originally Posted by sicboater

SPOON!!!

I see turd stirrin'!

Can I say "takes one to know one" without admitting how I know I can say that?

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I have a question?????

Which Religion is the right one??? who is going to Heaven, Nirvana Shamballa, Valhalla or wherever..... or are they all right???? all wrong???...

For a love gift of $29.99 I will send you Hoglahoo's Guide to Religion and for another offering of only $99 I will send you my free pamphlet entitled "Who is right? Me or the other guy?"

You will also receive a shoddily manufactured ribbon to symbolize your newly discovered truths.

PM me

Originally Posted by norman931

I risk running afoul of some of my more fundamentalist brethren, but here is my take on this:

The Bible is NOT the founding document of Christianity. It is a collection of books about God written by men who wrote under the inspiration of God. As the noted non-believer Bart Ehrman has written (I have two of his books), the Bible has since suffered from translations, interpolations, interpretations, editors, adulterous kings, etc. It would be nice to have a 100% completely accurate translation of the Bible from the original manuscripts, but we don't. So I take it for what it is, warts and all.

Christianity was not founded by a document, but by a person. The whole point of the matter is that this person is WORTH knowing. If a person has WORTH, then the people who know him acknowledge his WORTHSHIP. (This is a roundabout etymology of the word worship.)

The early Christians didn't even have the New Testament, as it hadn't been written yet. Many of them couldn't read anyway, which is still the case today. But if God is real, then he remains a reality in spite of any flaws in books written about him, or jerks who make money hawking his name.

In my classes, I occasionally tell stories that involve people my students have never met: my sister, my best friend, my old boss, my ex-girlfriend, etc. As far as my students know, these could be real people, or I might have made them up. But if my sister came to class one day, I can imagine some possible comments: "I had pictured her completely different." Or, "She seems really nice; Now I don't believe those stories you told about her anymore."

So, if God is real, and you meet him someday, don't be too surprised if you find out that he's not the total jerk many have made him out to be.

I'm enjoying this thread. I like to hear from atheists and agnostics as well, and I respect their views. They have taken the time and effort to think things through, which unfortunately can't be said of all religious people.

PEACE!

Norman, I am not saying you have done this, but some believe that some of the newer versions of of the Bible are translations of translations of translations,... etc. Most and notice I am saying most not all have been translated from the earliest copies that are available. Also translating from Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, words used in english can be mis read. An example would be the word Love in the English text it is open to a variety of meanings that could cloud the text, but by looking up the word in it's original language, case, and context it could mean, a friendship type of love or an unconditional type of love which would make the text more precise.


Also most writtings of the ancients have been written at a much longer period from the time of the subject than the New Testament and there accepted. I believe and this is an approximation that the books New testament were written within 30 to 90 years of Jesus's ministry, but not compiled into a single book, however used as scripture just as much as the Old Testament.

Originally Posted by GregJDS

I have to disagree with ya jockey, if all world religious books are deemed "books of advice" then you should be able to find bits of usefull information in them in the form of allegory or simple advice. I would say that all religious books have some good advice in there somewhere, and also many imperfections.

The imperfections are what make religions differnent, all on different paths to the top of the mountain. Wheras @ god(the mountain top) they all converge into the same thing.
Religions are just like tour guides(and often corrupt tour guides), take away the tour guides and the mountaintop is still there.

Anyway the idea that those books either have everything to teach you or nothing to teach you doesnt make sense as they must have some good advice, I can think of serveral bilbical stories that teach simple lessons that are usefull. Like that one where the old lady gives a little bit from the little she has and the rich man gives more than her but little compaed to what he has. You could rip that small story out of the bible and use it on its own as a wise piece of information.

I was brought up catholic but i am not one now, i never belived in god and didnt listen to anything told to me as a kid about it. But i still remember the stories and some of them are wise and usefull. At the moment I do think there is a god who is consciousness like we are.

Anyway all them books from all around the world are just like human bodies. They may not be 100% perfectly healthy but can still be partialy functional. Most peoples bodies are not 100% as perfectly healthy as possible but they still are functional to a certain percent. I would say the same is true of all the books that exist on a planet where that is true of all the people writing these books.
As for books written by god I dont know, the bible seems to have had some editing along the way(council of nicea). The closest thing that looks like god may have said it is an indian book called the bhagavad gita which explains alot of good advice, but again written/spoken by god i dont know.

Well my advice is to take good advice from wherever you can find it and not to get hung up on where it is found , even if it means a christian leaving one of their books to go elswhere or an athiest dipping in and taking a few bits from the bible. As long as your not bending truth to fit your own wishes then it should serve you well. Something as usefull as truth should never be bent, the same way a usefull razor shouldnt be bent as its gonna be more hassle to fix it.

This is where the difficulty comes in. A Christian believes the Bible is the truth and if made to say anything other than what it says'[IN CONTEXT], is bending the truth.

Also nowadays truth has become relative and why, in my opinion because some became uncomfortable with it so it is now what makes one comfortable. Example[ it may be true for you but not for me ]
No truth is Truth.. Now I know what i am going to get. Who decides? right? That's where Christians have their God, An all knowing being.

Just for fun let's take God out of the bible. How many think the world would be a more sociable, peaceful,equitable place if the commandments [less the worship ones] just the man to man ones, were followed?

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Can I say "takes one to know one" without admitting how I know I can say that?

For a love gift of $29.99 I will send you Hoglahoo's Guide to Religion and for another offering of only $99 I will send you my free pamphlet entitled "Who is right? Me or the other guy?"

You will also receive a shoddily manufactured ribbon to symbolize your newly discovered truths.

PM me

Know this is in fun but truth is we have these types under the guise of christianity and they give it a very bad name

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Can I say "takes one to know one" without admitting how I know I can say that?

For a love gift of $29.99 I will send you Hoglahoo's Guide to Religion and for another offering of only $99 I will send you my free pamphlet entitled "Who is right? Me or the other guy?"

You will also receive a shoddily manufactured ribbon to symbolize your newly discovered truths.

PM me

Originally Posted by paco

This is where the difficulty comes in. A Christian believes the Bible is the truth and if made to say anything other than what it says'[IN CONTEXT], is bending the truth.

I would take issue with that statement. While most Christians may agree with you, there are many Christians who do not take the bible as the literal truth. Some believe that parts of it are downright wrong.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

I would take issue with that statement. While most Christians may agree with you, there are many Christians who do not take the bible as the literal truth. Some believe that parts of it are downright wrong.

Again i must say they are only professing to be christian because saying it is not the truth would be calling their God a LIAR. See 2 Timothy 3:16
and a Christian believes his GOD.

Last bit of insite, and this is not singling out anyone here just a general statement:

FOR THOSE WHO WON'T BELIEVE THERE IS NO EXPLANATION; FOR THOSE WHO DO NO EXPLANATION IS NECESSARY.

Originally Posted by paco

Again i must say they are only professing to be christian because saying it is not the truth would be calling their God a LIAR. See 2 Timothy 3:16
and a Christian believes his GOD.

This is called the "No true Scotsman" or the Self sealing fallacy. (No true Scotsman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) You're judging "Christians" by your own definition. Many Christians have a different definition, some that would even exclude you.

Another problem is that you're arguing that the Bible supports it's own infalibility, yet another christian who feels the Bible may be in error couldn't accept that assertion.

Here's something else to think on. Consider these two statements; A)"the Bible is either all true, or it's not", & B)"the Bible is either all true, or it's all false". These two statements are not the same. In the case of "A", there is still the possibility of some of the bible being true, though some of it is false. Statement "B" says that if one thing in the bible is false, it negates the truth of every other statement in there. I think many Christians would agree with statement "A", that if something in the bible were shown to be wrong, it would not really undermine their faith. Would it undermine yours?

Originally Posted by icedog

I like that Alex but I'm not sure the fundamentalist Christians will agree with you. For example, regarding the Bible Paco just said, "It's either all true or not worth the paper it's written on."

I'm sure they DON'T agree. But when have fundamentalists ever? The thing about a funamentalist is that he's not open to reason or even empathy towards those that don't agree with him.

So I tend to not care what they think. I'll listen to them, think about what they've said and then discard the stuff that sounds like nonsense.

If they want a new definition of the word Christian....then they'll have to come up with their own word for it. Because by the dictionary's (and MY definition...and probably Jesus Christs definition too) anyone whose truly intent to follow Christs' teachings and his example is a true Christian.