Page 22 of 32 [ 498 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 ... 32  Next

ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,279

23 Jul 2021, 10:49 am

^
God seems to be Yawheh who (I think) started off as their war god, which might explain why he's so violent. Makes no sense to me that he somehow morphed into this 3-in-1 love and peace thing, and yet he's supposed to have not changed at all. It's also hard to see how anybody can believe stuff that doesn't make sense, but according to Romans 1: 18-31 I have no excuse; anybody who doesn't believe is a complete bastard. Strikes me it doesn't matter which religion we choose, or whether we choose none, we're going to be hated and slandered.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=CEV



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,608
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

23 Jul 2021, 12:25 pm

RetroGamer87 wrote:
So we're discussing the trinity now? The Christian God started out as the Jewish God. They have more claim to that god than anyone. What do they think of the trinity?

Quote:
Oneness and indivisibility of God
In Judaism, the idea of God as a duality or trinity is heretical — it is even considered by some polytheistic.[1] According to Judaic beliefs, the Torah rules out a trinitarian God in Deuteronomy (6:4): "Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one."

Judaism teaches that it is heretical for any man to claim to be God, part of God, or the literal son of God. The Jerusalem Talmud (Ta'anit 2:1) states explicitly: "if a man claims to be God, he is a liar."

If a man claims to be God, yes, he's a liar. That's not the issue. The issue is whether God appears in distinguishable forms as the Father, in the flesh LIKE a man, and in spirit. The Trinity doctrine never has been one that can be easily explained. God the Father is self-explanatory--God as the creator of all things. God appeared throughout the OT as "The Angel of the Lord" who ALSO identified as God Himself. Which is it? God? Or an angel? It seems what is intended is that God is both. Even in Eden God is described as walking in the garden. If God is a spirit being, how can he walk anywhere? God is omnipresent, so he doesn't need to walk anywhere. What Genesis describes is a physical presence rather than spiritual. The Holy Spirit can be identified with, for example, the Shekinah cloud. The Israelites at various times interacted with God on a physical level, observed God's glory at a distance. They acknowledged God as father with an attitude of fear that if they were to be in God's actual presence they would die. Like it or not, there is Old Testament support for the Holy Trinity.



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,179
Location: Tulsa, OK

23 Jul 2021, 2:51 pm

KimD wrote:
carlos55 wrote:
Religion has its faults but you have to worry about what replaces it.

With religion you have respect for life & charity.

While humanist beliefs are positive, would society naturally follow humanism?

How would the poor or disabled fair in a such a society.


Humanist principles include things like altruism, responsibility, honesty, and integrity. It's based on reason and self-examination--human knowledge is flawed and therefore people should be on guard to minimize erroneous assumptions and poor judgment.

Would people follow it? Tell me this: do people actually follow the holy dogma they espouse?

The humanists I know--and you can lump me in with them, informally--follow their principles (or try to) because they genuinely believe in them, not out of obligation to their family tradition, because of imagined supremacy, or because they're afraid of hell.

What is the motivation in the Humanist Philosophy to follow the principals listed above?



XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,030
Location: The Oort Cloud

23 Jul 2021, 2:54 pm

To not be a sh_tty person.

If you need the threat of hellfire to be a decent human, then I'd hate to be around you if you ever have a crisis of faith.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,279

23 Jul 2021, 5:26 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
If you need the threat of hellfire to be a decent human, then I'd hate to be around you if you ever have a crisis of faith.

Right, an atheist who behaves decently is likely that way because their conscience motivates them, while a theist who believes the heaven-and-hell story has more selfish motives. But scripture insists there's no such thing as a decent atheist, and I've heard a theistic view that the deity sees decent behaviour as worthless if it's not done out of obedience to him. The people atheists help would usually see it differently.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,931

23 Jul 2021, 6:12 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
KimD wrote:
carlos55 wrote:
Religion has its faults but you have to worry about what replaces it.

With religion you have respect for life & charity.

While humanist beliefs are positive, would society naturally follow humanism?

How would the poor or disabled fair in a such a society.


Humanist principles include things like altruism, responsibility, honesty, and integrity. It's based on reason and self-examination--human knowledge is flawed and therefore people should be on guard to minimize erroneous assumptions and poor judgment.

Would people follow it? Tell me this: do people actually follow the holy dogma they espouse?

The humanists I know--and you can lump me in with them, informally--follow their principles (or try to) because they genuinely believe in them, not out of obligation to their family tradition, because of imagined supremacy, or because they're afraid of hell.

What is the motivation in the Humanist Philosophy to follow the principals listed above?



As Scholarly Motivated Folks Do
Most Definitely Understand the
Nature of the Human Beast too...

Same Thing That Motivates
Bonobos to LiVE iN Peace

And Harmony As Love
Does In Bonobo Essence
When Not Threatened By
'Invaders' In Threat of
Removing Subsistence;

The Nature of Altruism
That Includes Offspring Who
Are Loved in a Mammalian Way
of Nurturing From Birth Developing
Wiring of Mirror Neurons That Feel the
Pain And Pleasure of Others Bonding with

The Neurohormone Oxytocin; Otherwise known
As Natural Love As Even Flesh and Blood Healthy

Dogs and

Cats Do Living

In Naturally Loving

Environments This way...

REALLY Sorry, If You Don't LiVE iN
An All Natural Loving Environment

Like A Naked Bonobo Tribe; Yet Honestly,

Humans Should Be Able to Do Better if they Are Healthy And Well Living In Balance...

No Doubt That 'A Jesus' Who Lovingly Accepts Everyone These Days, Would Likely Ever

Be Fully Accepted

in Any

Closed

Minded

Clothed Church,

Ignorant of Naked Love For All;
All Warm And Furry For Us Without
Bald Ape Bodies too; IN OTHER WORDS me too...



_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


KimD
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 May 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 418

23 Jul 2021, 7:47 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
KimD wrote:
carlos55 wrote:
Religion has its faults but you have to worry about what replaces it.

With religion you have respect for life & charity.

While humanist beliefs are positive, would society naturally follow humanism?

How would the poor or disabled fair in a such a society.


Humanist principles include things like altruism, responsibility, honesty, and integrity. It's based on reason and self-examination--human knowledge is flawed and therefore people should be on guard to minimize erroneous assumptions and poor judgment.

Would people follow it? Tell me this: do people actually follow the holy dogma they espouse?

The humanists I know--and you can lump me in with them, informally--follow their principles (or try to) because they genuinely believe in them, not out of obligation to their family tradition, because of imagined supremacy, or because they're afraid of hell.

What is the motivation in the Humanist Philosophy to follow the principals listed above?


I think XFilesGeek put it very well!

I also agree with ToughDiamond.

In my own words…humanists are motivated by their own conscience, compassion, and a desire to live (and help others to live) a decent and meaningful life. While they may very well find wisdom and inspiration in the world’s spiritual leaders, they also find it in the words of scholars and philosophers. They don’t wait for Word From On High or depend on an afterlife of reward or punishment to guide their way. They also don't use religion or deity to justify or excuse their actions.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,576
Location: Aux Arcs

23 Jul 2021, 10:09 pm

It’s the carrot or the stick.
You do good for a reward or to avoid punishment.
Doing good should be it’s own reward.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,076

23 Jul 2021, 10:30 pm

The biblical god Yahweh is thought be a manifestation of the Sumerian god Enki, This aligns with the biblical journey in the old testament of Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees where they bought Enki with him when they arrived in the lands of the Philistines. The Sumerians are never mentioned in the bible because the earliest jews are Sumerian refugees escaping the babylonians (after all it's their book). Afterward Enki evolved among the Jews as they absorbed Semitic beliefs and language and in Egypt they were heavily influenced by the Egyptian god Amun-ra among others and became less like Enki and more like a sun-god and We see Yahweh as a entity among the Moabites following Moses exodus around 1300BC which fits nicely with the historical time frame.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,875
Location: Adelaide, Australia

23 Jul 2021, 11:45 pm

Did Jesus ever claim to be the Messiah, in his own words? Or was that something said about him by other people?


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,279

24 Jul 2021, 12:44 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Did Jesus ever claim to be the Messiah, in his own words? Or was that something said about him by other people?

The latter. Almost nothing is known about the historical Jesus except that he was baptised by John the Baptist, preached for about 1 to 3 years, and was crucified, i.e. there is no hard evidence of anything he actually said. Matthew, Mark and Luke never say that he made any such claims. Only John's gospel, written after the other 3, quotes Jesus as claiming himself to be something of the kind, and John is known as "the evangelist," i.e. he had an agenda of his own when he wrote his book. There's a plausible theory that Jesus was simply a revolutionary preacher who got crucified, and that the resurrection and position as the Messiah were added to the story after the fact.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 32,521
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

24 Jul 2021, 1:31 am

Well why should you love a god, that at will can decide it is the end of his entertainment and just apocalypse the whole world. I never understood why I should worship such a god, why so I can be part of his carpet rug in heaven? Like would it really be so different than being a carpet rug in hell? And at least I figured I'd relate to demons better than I'd relate to angels of heaven. I mean hell even when I still belived you'd go to hell for rejecting god....I still rejected him. And was like 'Ok so what, am I going to be smited now!?'

But now I know none of that exists, and its a peaceful feeling.


_________________
There's a magic spider on the wind
He spins a web for you
And if you wish upon a spider
All your wishes will all come true
-Nekrogoblikon


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,076

24 Jul 2021, 1:44 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
I never understood why I should worship such a god, why so I can be part of his carpet rug in heaven? Like would it really be so different than being a carpet rug in hell? And at least I figured I'd relate to demons better than I'd relate to angels of heaven. I mean hell even when I still belived you'd go to hell for rejecting god....I still rejected him. And was like 'Ok so what, am I going to be smited now!?'.


My best guess is devil worshipping metals heads, pious christians, pretentious hypocritical religious folk are all heading to the same destination when they die.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,076

24 Jul 2021, 1:49 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Did Jesus ever claim to be the Messiah, in his own words? Or was that something said about him by other people?


The latter. The early messianic jewish sect (the essenes) were fed up with Roman rule and needed a popular figure to attract followers to their cause against Rome. Claiming Jesus as the messiah was designed to bring legitimacy to their movement. When gentiles started getting absorbed into the sect then that's where the movement became less Jewish and evolved by 400AD into the organised denominational religious bodies we see today (catholics and orthodox) completely separated from its Jewish roots.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,608
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

24 Jul 2021, 5:59 am

ToughDiamond wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
Did Jesus ever claim to be the Messiah, in his own words? Or was that something said about him by other people?

The latter. Almost nothing is known about the historical Jesus except that he was baptised by John the Baptist, preached for about 1 to 3 years, and was crucified, i.e. there is no hard evidence of anything he actually said. Matthew, Mark and Luke never say that he made any such claims. Only John's gospel, written after the other 3, quotes Jesus as claiming himself to be something of the kind, and John is known as "the evangelist," i.e. he had an agenda of his own when he wrote his book. There's a plausible theory that Jesus was simply a revolutionary preacher who got crucified, and that the resurrection and position as the Messiah were added to the story after the fact.

Pretty much this. The main flaw with that theory is that revolutionaries’ movements tended to die with them. The “thieves” crucified with Jesus likely were insurrectionists as was Barabbas. Early on the Jews carried out a program of martyring Christians when religious leaders reasoned that killing Christians was actually driving more people INTO the faith. They decided that the best way to go was to leave them alone and let it fade out on its own. If the growth of the church was what God intended, killing everyone wouldn’t stop it. John ended up exiled to a Greek island while Paul ended up in prison in Rome. People in the context of that time period wouldn’t have rushed to join something that would have ended in their deaths if they thought there was any room for doubt about the resurrection. Too many people had seen Jesus afterwards.

Also, Christianity overwhelmingly stands out in that Christians were taught to cooperate with their enemies for the sake of keeping the peace while Rome tightened their grip on Jewish resistance. It succeeded as a religion because of their willingness to cross ethnic lines. Most Jews I’ve spoken to advise outsiders NOT to convert because of how difficult it is. The laws of Noah are sufficient for righteousness and are a slightly expanded version of what Jesus taught summarized in the Great Commandment: Love God, love your neighbor.



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,279

24 Jul 2021, 10:09 am

AngelRho wrote:
The main flaw with that theory is that revolutionaries’ movements tended to die with them. The “thieves” crucified with Jesus likely were insurrectionists as was Barabbas. Early on the Jews carried out a program of martyring Christians when religious leaders reasoned that killing Christians was actually driving more people INTO the faith. They decided that the best way to go was to leave them alone and let it fade out on its own. If the growth of the church was what God intended, killing everyone wouldn’t stop it. John ended up exiled to a Greek island while Paul ended up in prison in Rome. People in the context of that time period wouldn’t have rushed to join something that would have ended in their deaths if they thought there was any room for doubt about the resurrection. Too many people had seen Jesus afterwards.

The "god of the gaps" perspective is a logical fallacy. In terms of your assertion, you're saying that a phenomenom you think happened but can't explain (rapid rise of your religion in the face of persecution) shows that the resurrection must have happened. It's plausible that a supernatural resurrection might convince an eye-witness that they'd wake up in heaven if they were executed for refusing to quit their church, but it's not the only plausible explanation. The belief in a happy afterlife as a reward for appeasing a deity had never been exactly uncommon in the first place.

We can't even be sure how intense the Jewish persecution of the church was. Biblical scholars widely agree that Luke-Acts presents a skewed picture of the hardsjips faced by the early church, and there is wide agreement that a strong anti-Jewish streak runs through Luke–Acts, even if it is not always consistent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecuti ... _Testament

There's also the martyr effect. Irish nationalism wasn't particularly popular in Ireland before the British government murdered James Connolly. But after they'd done that, it grew remarkably. It's said that when the US government murdered protestors at Kent State University, public outrage tipped the balance and forced them to pull out of Vietnam. Martyrs are frequently much more influential after death than before, though I don't know of any who physically came back to life.