, so what we have is a set of texts that are tied to the era in which they were written, both in context and in language.
What that leads to is a God who has chosen to tie himself to that era. He for his own reasons chose to tell all before and all after to fuck off. They are not as important as one particualr group at one point in time. He's all powerful. He obviously could have chosen to get do otherwise. He could have prevented a lot of the killing he hates so much. Instead, he caused it on purpose.
Any other interpretation makes him less than god. Really sad people buy into that purely evil crap.
Maybe read all of the text. Rather than just what you want to use. But, you seem to be like the Fundies that take a piece of the text to support their beliefs.
Ummm... Dipshit, that's the only part the Fundies read. That's the point.
I'm as Christian as you are,.... <interpretation>explaining how he's not as equally Christian<interpretation>... I don't know if you've noticed...He wants us...Questioning your faith and what is written in the Bible is perfectly acceptable
And right there is the inherent problem in any dogmatic religious system.
Oh, you probably won't start blowing each other up and shit. Well, you know that about yourself (presumably) Do you know that about him? Does he know that about you? You do realise that a metric assload of people were tortured and murdered by people "As Christian as you are" over the years over far more trivial differences?
Why is it that you can't accept the simple fact that nobody knows the answers? How about we try to find them out but without creating a power structure to dogmatize it and without adding in the tremendous profitability of scamming the believers and coercing them into hideous acts of torture and murder?
It has everything you claim to believe in, but without the smug certainty. Why not that, rather than insisting that some fucking desert nomads magically got the answers directly from a god that has since fucked off leaving evil fucking bastards to use that dogma to fuck people over constantly ever since?
Question: Do you avoid all fabric blends? It is a serious question, because even so many literalists do not, and it is very clearly stated as a mandate (Leviticus 19:19)
Yet because he was so devoted to his faith, he taught himself Greek and Hebrew so that he could read older (and presumably less corrupted) versions of the Bible. I always admired him for that. In context, I consider it an amazing achievement. I'm not sure how it profited him, but he certainly thought it was worth the effort.
Did his views and interpretations change based upon his work? If so, how?
As long as they teach Flying Spaghetti Monsterism of course. I want to see that belief system in a textbook, dammit.
As long as they give equal space to Invisible Pink Unicornism. Or else you'll have a big political fight on your hand (unlike the current situation;-).
The downside is that in a religious context, those ideas would be classified as extremist whackjob cults or somesuch. In a scientific context, they are identical to the "standard" religious views. That's what makes them so great.
Granted, I'd love to see them get the great place in history that they have earned.
The fact that you pretty much HAVE to accept that parts need to be interpretted doesn't make that the whole thing is bunk. It just opens up the debate about how to interpret. But the view that the book is all literally true is untenable and is also too dogmatic to allow for any real discussion.
But exactly the same flaw you point out is inherent in interpretation only multiplied by everyone who reads it.
When you interpret the bible you need to consider things like the culture, the language, the audience, the author's circumstances, etc.
The author is God. If there is anything that needs to be taken into account, he already knew that, and he knew every way it would be interpreted *and* misinterpreted. Kind of totally fucks up the whole no killing bit. That is the inescabable reality of trying to attribute divine anything to anything so tragically flawed.
Yes. Absolutely and without reservation. I desperately want a world in which each person's morality is defined by their relationship with the Holy Spirit
So if my holy spirit told me to beat you down, tie you up, and rape and murder your family in front of you you would be happy that there would be no consequences from society?
I have two questions based on your post if you'd care to answer.
As an intellectual non-Christian, I found it disturbing that the Nicene Council just categorically removed entire texts of the Bible, and that early coptic and gnostic texts were ignored.
Why did you find this "disturbing" It's typical human nature. The winners write history. Plus, read "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". That is how the New Testament was edited into place. As a way to consolidate power. Basic methods of control and all.
True devotion to the Bible (and therefore, to God)
Being of a religious bent as you are, shouldn't that implication go the other way (or maybe not) ? Don't you think that might be a fundamental problem? It certainly seems to give a good explanation for all the murdering done in the name of interpretations.
but my intention was to comment on how many Christian sects have incorrect beliefs about Catholics like the "saint worship" and their viewing of societies like the Knights of Columbus as "secret societies."
Ahhh. I took you more literally than you intended I guess.
I thought you were...commenting rather than "commenting on" if you get my meaning.
I only have anger for any sect of anything when they try to push it on me and mine.
I'm not a fan of the Catholic Church because they have used their position mainly for murder, oppression and their own power for millenia. I'm not a fan of Fundie churches because they're trying to destroy every principle this country was founded on.. you know that dirty word.. Liberalism.
Sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying, I just have morals and I don't see any of that in what any churches I see are pushing. Quite the opposite. Feel free to correct me if you think I'm mistaken.
For me, I have faith in the Bible because (by faith) I have chosen to believe it is God's literal word. As such, I will follow its teachings the best I can.
Seriously, how do you deal with the fact that the editing (of the new testament at least) was done by various groups of Bishops in power struggles throughout the Roman empire who used other groups refusal to accept their interpretation as an excuse to murder their opposition?
There were lots of writings from the time, and many (Gnostic) from hundreds of years earlier. Only certain ones were put into the "official" version and they were decided by murderers as a way to consolidate their own power.
I'm genuinely curious how you justify your faith in the editing skills of ruthless evil men to pass on to you a message of love.
However, if I believed that the Bible had man's interpretation in it, then I would view it as any other book. For me it's all or nothing.
It did. Man was the editor. Perhaps you believe that God told them which writings to pick. How then, do you justify the mass of people that God ordered tortured and murdered to get it accomplished in such a way as to put the torturers and murderers in charge? Seems contradictory to me, but I'm just a poor unenlightened heathen.
It's a new term...but there have always been people who have taken their religion too far. History is rife with these jerks.
Yep, and they won. Winners write the history. That's why all modern interpretations of religions are based on whatever the most ruthless of the users (against the believers ) of the religions felt would serve them best. Sad but true.
I thought that was a joke, and it was pretty funny until I realized that it was actually meant to be serious.
Dude, seriously read through the rest of his crap. You will laugh, you will cry..you might even want to gouge your eyes out by the end, but that's not why I'm saying to read it;-)
Of course, with their leaders perpetuating myths like saint worship and cabalistic societies, it's little wonder some of their followers are a bit confused.
Of course, the Fundies are no better with their whole "A being powerful enough to create *everything* only likes you if you're willing to believe in him *precisely* in a way written down by desert nomads and explicitly without proof." That way being, of course, that he made us the way you are but if you act according to how he made you you'll burn. Well, unless, of course, you accept that he loves you so much that in order to forgive you for acting how he designed you to act he figured the only way he could actually forgive you for such horrendous transgressions was to torture and murder his own son. Oh yeah, and he'll erase any verifiable evidence for that too.
So really, there's not much for a moral person to like in any of that.
Claims that humans descended from apes are *not* scientific, strictly speaking, because they are not reproducible.
Of course, it's generally only creationists who trot out that old argument. Nobody with even a passing understanding of the subject would make such a claim. It's the fact that all of their arguments rely on such strawmen that make them, quite justifiably, objects of ridicule among decent, sane people with any concept of integrity.
Gah! Never mistake preview for submit; a worthy answer long gone! And even in work-offline mode mozilla can't recall the preview text. Bah!
Oh, come on. Don't blame Mozilla or, God forbid, yourself.
It's clearly the designer. He's embarassed by how idiotic your arguments are that he felt he had to step in on this one and prevent you from making him look even more ridiculous. Seriously, there's a bit of a noodle stain on your cheek where he smote you. You might want to check that out.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like an incredible man.
Thanks for the response.
, so what we have is a set of texts that are tied to the era in which they were written, both in context and in language.
What that leads to is a God who has chosen to tie himself to that era.
He for his own reasons chose to tell all before and all after to fuck off. They are not as important as one particualr group at one point in time.
He's all powerful. He obviously could have chosen to get do otherwise. He could have prevented a lot of the killing he hates so much. Instead, he caused it on purpose.
Any other interpretation makes him less than god.
Really sad people buy into that purely evil crap.
Maybe read all of the text. Rather than just what you want to use. But, you seem to be like the Fundies that take a piece of the text to support their beliefs.
Ummm... Dipshit, that's the only part the Fundies read. That's the point.
Well, I suggest you start with stoning the homosexuals to death, then go from there.
You god damned heathen.
Stone the shrimp eaters first *then* the homosexuals.
What kind of a fucked up MegaloChurch did you go to anyhow?
I'm as Christian as you are, .... <interpretation>explaining how he's not as equally Christian<interpretation>... I don't know if you've noticed...He wants us...Questioning your faith and what is written in the Bible is perfectly acceptable
And right there is the inherent problem in any dogmatic religious system.
Oh, you probably won't start blowing each other up and shit. Well, you know that about yourself (presumably) Do you know that about him? Does he know that about you? You do realise that a metric assload of people were tortured and murdered by people "As Christian as you are" over the years over far more trivial differences?
Why is it that you can't accept the simple fact that nobody knows the answers? How about we try to find them out but without creating a power structure to dogmatize it and without adding in the tremendous profitability of scamming the believers and coercing them into hideous acts of torture and murder?
It has everything you claim to believe in, but without the smug certainty.
Why not that, rather than insisting that some fucking desert nomads magically got the answers directly from a god that has since fucked off leaving evil fucking bastards to use that dogma to fuck people over constantly ever since?
Seriously, think it through.
Question: Do you avoid all fabric blends? It is a serious question, because even so many literalists do not, and it is very clearly stated as a mandate (Leviticus 19:19)
Equally as evil as being gay or eating lobster.
I know there is a God because I received irrefutable proof.
No you didn't. You would be the most famous person in the history of the world, or you would be denying that proof to everybody else.
You had an experience that you chose to interpret that way.
If I'm wrong, prove me so.
Or was it just for you. Why does God love you so much more than pretty much every other person that ever lived?
Yet because he was so devoted to his faith, he taught himself Greek and Hebrew so that he could read older (and presumably less corrupted) versions of the Bible. I always admired him for that. In context, I consider it an amazing achievement. I'm not sure how it profited him, but he certainly thought it was worth the effort.
Did his views and interpretations change based upon his work?
If so, how?
Just curious.
As long as they teach Flying Spaghetti Monsterism of course. I want to see that belief system in a textbook, dammit.
;-).
As long as they give equal space to Invisible Pink Unicornism. Or else you'll have a big political fight on your hand (unlike the current situation
The downside is that in a religious context, those ideas would be classified as extremist whackjob cults or somesuch.
In a scientific context, they are identical to the "standard" religious views.
That's what makes them so great.
Granted, I'd love to see them get the great place in history that they have earned.
The fact that you pretty much HAVE to accept that parts need to be interpretted doesn't make that the whole thing is bunk. It just opens up the debate about how to interpret. But the view that the book is all literally true is untenable and is also too dogmatic to allow for any real discussion.
But exactly the same flaw you point out is inherent in interpretation only multiplied by everyone who reads it.
When you interpret the bible you need to consider things like the culture, the language, the audience, the author's circumstances, etc.
The author is God. If there is anything that needs to be taken into account, he already knew that, and he knew every way it would be interpreted *and* misinterpreted.
Kind of totally fucks up the whole no killing bit.
That is the inescabable reality of trying to attribute divine anything to anything so tragically flawed.
Why "dumbed down"? Because human beings are stupid, selfish and sinful.
That's the created in God's image bit?
There's no way we can understand God because he is holy and righteous and we aren't anything remotely close.
So he fucked us over for his amusement? I'm failing to get the "in his image" bit. Or possibly, you are?
Those are serious questions. Do you have answers?
Yes. Absolutely and without reservation. I desperately want a world in which each person's morality is defined by their relationship with the Holy Spirit
So if my holy spirit told me to beat you down, tie you up, and rape and murder your family in front of you you would be happy that there would be no consequences from society?
I think that was kind of the OPs point.
You did say without reservation.
You should put your trust in god, not the bible.
But which one or ones of the thousands of gods should I put my trust in?
I have two questions based on your post if you'd care to answer.
As an intellectual non-Christian, I found it disturbing that the Nicene Council just categorically removed entire texts of the Bible, and that early coptic and gnostic texts were ignored.
Why did you find this "disturbing" It's typical human nature. The winners write history. Plus, read "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". That is how the New Testament was edited into place. As a way to consolidate power. Basic methods of control and all.
True devotion to the Bible (and therefore, to God)
Being of a religious bent as you are, shouldn't that implication go the other way (or maybe not) ? Don't you think that might be a fundamental problem? It certainly seems to give a good explanation for all the murdering done in the name of interpretations.
but my intention was to comment on how many Christian sects have incorrect beliefs about Catholics like the "saint worship" and their viewing of societies like the Knights of Columbus as "secret societies."
Ahhh. I took you more literally than you intended I guess.
I thought you were...commenting rather than "commenting on" if you get my meaning.
I only have anger for any sect of anything when they try to push it on me and mine.
I'm not a fan of the Catholic Church because they have used their position mainly for murder, oppression and their own power for millenia. I'm not a fan of Fundie churches because they're trying to destroy every principle this country was founded on.. you know that dirty word.. Liberalism.
Sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying, I just have morals and I don't see any of that in what any churches I see are pushing. Quite the opposite.
Feel free to correct me if you think I'm mistaken.
Where do you get the idea that God screwed up?
;-)
Well from the people who claim he's all knowing, all powerful, and *benevolent* of course
For me, I have faith in the Bible because (by faith) I have chosen to believe it is God's literal word. As such, I will follow its teachings the best I can.
Seriously, how do you deal with the fact that the editing (of the new testament at least) was done by various groups of Bishops in power struggles throughout the Roman empire who used other groups refusal to accept their interpretation as an excuse to murder their opposition?
There were lots of writings from the time, and many (Gnostic) from hundreds of years earlier. Only certain ones were put into the "official" version and they were decided by murderers as a way to consolidate their own power.
I'm genuinely curious how you justify your faith in the editing skills of ruthless evil men to pass on to you a message of love.
However, if I believed that the Bible had man's interpretation in it, then I would view it as any other book. For me it's all or nothing.
It did. Man was the editor. Perhaps you believe that God told them which writings to pick. How then, do you justify the mass of people that God ordered tortured and murdered to get it accomplished in such a way as to put the torturers and murderers in charge? Seems contradictory to me, but I'm just a poor unenlightened heathen.
Jesus didn't ordain any women, so the Church doesn't either. If you find this unfair, feel free to become Episcopalian.
Or alternatively, dedicate your "moral" organization to raping children and covering it up. For centuries.
It's a new term...but there have always been people who have taken their religion too far. History is rife with these jerks.
Yep, and they won. Winners write the history.
That's why all modern interpretations of religions are based on whatever the most ruthless of the users (against the believers ) of the religions felt would serve them best. Sad but true.
I thought that was a joke, and it was pretty funny until I realized that it was actually meant to be serious.
;-)
Dude, seriously read through the rest of his crap. You will laugh, you will cry..you might even want to gouge your eyes out by the end, but that's not why I'm saying to read it
I have had many drunken discussions of this with my friend Nirav Mehta, a quantum theorist working on the three-body problem.
;-)
Damn, Dude. You're a mean drunk. I would have at least mentioned that Poincare proved it couldn't be solved
Of course, with their leaders perpetuating myths like saint worship and cabalistic societies, it's little wonder some of their followers are a bit confused.
Of course, the Fundies are no better with their whole "A being powerful enough to create *everything* only likes you if you're willing to believe in him *precisely* in a way written down by desert nomads and explicitly without proof." That way being, of course, that he made us the way you are but if you act according to how he made you you'll burn. Well, unless, of course, you accept that he loves you so much that in order to forgive you for acting how he designed you to act he figured the only way he could actually forgive you for such horrendous transgressions was to torture and murder his own son. Oh yeah, and he'll erase any verifiable evidence for that too.
So really, there's not much for a moral person to like in any of that.
Claims that humans descended from apes are *not* scientific, strictly speaking, because they are not reproducible.
Of course, it's generally only creationists who trot out that old argument. Nobody with even a passing understanding of the subject would make such a claim.
It's the fact that all of their arguments rely on such strawmen that make them, quite justifiably, objects of ridicule among decent, sane people with any concept of integrity.
Gah! Never mistake preview for submit; a worthy answer long gone! And even in work-offline mode mozilla can't recall the preview text. Bah!
Oh, come on. Don't blame Mozilla or, God forbid, yourself.
It's clearly the designer.
He's embarassed by how idiotic your arguments are that he felt he had to step in on this one and prevent you from making him look even more ridiculous.
Seriously, there's a bit of a noodle stain on your cheek where he smote you. You might want to check that out.