Why The Judaeo-Christian God Makes No Sense to Me

Post Reply New Topic

I agree that secular law was developed from traditions that pre-dated Christianity.

There is nothing new in Christianity. All of it was plagiarized from other wiser traditions that were corrupted by Christian interpretations.

Here is a prime example of Christianity's corrupting effect. Original sin that was our original virtue.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/ ... -theodicy/

‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x84m5k ... -of-3_news

Any questions?

Regards
DL

Not what I meant. As an example, freedom of religion in an Earthly hierarchy is a Christian idea, thought of by Christians, fought for by Christians, opposed by Christians, forged in the blood, fire and regret of many Christian wars. The idea of a secular country with secular institutions is an evolution of that line of thinking, not a special snowflake hidden tradition fighting from within.



This is nothing new to me. I used to be the snarky atheist, I know many of these "gotcha" facts. They don't threaten any Christian with a basic understanding of the history, this is what happened. Yes, Christianity took over old pagan festivals, sounds pretty sensible to me. Yes, Christianity does not exist in a knowledge vacuum, it takes good ideas and sometimes makes them its own (like the Gnostics hohoho).


Good. Original virtue is a terrible doctrine, if you could sum up the history of the 20th century in a sentence it would be "There is nothing more dangerous than a man who thinks he is good." Belief in original virtue would eventually legitimise all feelings and desires. Original sin demands you assume all your basest instincts are probably bad and think before you act.



This amazing idea is how Orthodox Judaism became an extremely closed faith, that legitimises treating non-Jews like dirt. Do you think this is a good idea? One you would agree with as a Gnostic? or are you just firing off anti-Christian arrows in order to avoid thinking about the difficult ideas I've expressed in the last few posts?

That's not entirely fair to Western philosophy, ideas adopted from other parts of the world, or laws made to curtail the excesses of absolute monarchy.

Oh brother!

The question of God's existence/non-existence has nothing to do with science!! !! ! It's a purely philosophical question, like the question "Is the concept of an objective reality flawed?" which, by the way, those who practice the scientific method assume the answer to be "no".

It does skim over some details, but I did say almost. It is not nearly as great a revisionist crime as GB's claim. Also, curtailing monarchy is not necessarily non-Christian. Christianity, unlike a certain other religion, isn't big on politics and societal organisation. Jesus is all about saving souls, not the minutia of creating nations and empires. Some of the apostles have some thoughts, but if you were to sum up the Bible on these things it would be "it doesn't matter that much, it's probably going to turn out unfair, unjust and generally crappy whatever you do".

Inquisitions belie what you put.

Any who stick up for religions like Christianity which promote homophobia and misogyny are just as immoral as those who openly preach for those two evils.

Regards
DL

I can agree with this.

Those who practice it well, when speaking of moral tenets, will say yes.

Give us a couple of your objective moral tenets if you think there are any.

Regards
DL

He's one of my favorite biology-related quotes.

"In short, if all the matter in the universe except the nematodes were swept away, our world would still be dimly recognizable, and if, as disembodied spirits, we could then investigate it, we should find its mountains, hills, vales, rivers, lakes, and oceans represented by a film of nematodes. The location of towns would be decipherable, since for every massing of human beings there would be a corresponding massing of certain nematodes. Trees would still stand in ghostly rows representing our streets and highways. The location of the various plants and animals would still be decipherable, and, had we sufficient knowledge, in many cases even their species could be determined by an examination of their erstwhile nematode parasites."
- Nathan Cobb

We are allegedly made in God's image, and yet we are not the most successful species on planet earth. Not by a longshot.

For whom does the earth exist? Well ... nematodes ... unless you count bacteria.

The most numerous (and, therefore, successful) life forms on the planet are the primitive beasts who cannot even comprehend the divine. Some of these creatures are even immortal. For example, some hydrozoans are immortal. Why was the gift of immortality bestowed upon the lowly hydra? Could it be that we are not actually divine in origin?

Furthermore, I'm sick of the whole "complex cells can't come from non-living matter" crap. Archaea don't even have any organelles. Furthermore, organic chemicals can and do arise from natural chemical reactions. Abiogenesis makes perfect sense. In fact, abiogenesis may still be happening in chemically active areas.

If anyone here doesn't know what archaea are, then I won't explain what they are. If you don't know what archaea are, then biology is not your forte. Begone.

You argue like a child GB. I'm not above arguing like one too, when the occasion calls: What do you know about the link between Gnostic Christian thought and the National Socialists of Germany? Does that reflect poorly on your faith? Are you guys Nazis lololol?

That depends on how one defines success.

Won't this mentality create elitism? "If I think you are not worthy of God's grace then why should I treat you with respect?"or something of that nature.

You say I argue like a child, while not showing what you are referring to, and while ignoring the simple request I made for you to show what exactly you were claiming in terms of objective morals, and you answer by trying to link Gnostic Christians and myself, I guess, to Nazis.

Who be the child here, child?

Regards
DL

Yes it creates elitism. That is part of the reason why Gnostic Christianity is a Universalist religion and cannot discriminate against women and gays the way Christians do.

We also have no need to lie to our people and invent false concepts like hell to create false fear to loosen the purse strings of the gullible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=668D_MeV1nY

Regards
DL

There is no point continuing. You do not even want to understand Christians, Christianity or the history of Christendom.
My final comment on this: There is a link between Gnosticism and the Nazis, there was a revival around the time and it is said to have influenced Hitler's thoughts as much as Nietzsche. While it was partly because the Cathars hated Jews about as much as they did, it was mainly because Gnosticism puts man above God. When man is the being who decides what is moral and righteous, man can and will twist it to his liking, just as they did. That is why it is inferior to any belief system that takes morality out of reach of men's hands.

Selective memory.

Hitler's banker was the Vatican Bank.

Man has always set the morals in this world, given that there is no God popping up to say otherwise.

Natural law says that the ideal of any species is one of their species.

Christians or other religious that do not recognize that and the fact that their laws are man made are showing how stupid they are.

Regards
DL

why would a loving and all-powerful god allow one, let alone thousands, of children to starve in africa? surely someone with infinite power could do better.