The Easter/resurrection rumble thread [warning: this is a free for all]

[bob]

@bob

Interesting. What’s the “new” answer to the problem of theodicy? [/quote]

@confuzious

Good question. However, theodicy actually being a problem is based on the assumption there is a deity who is all good and all powerful, so one must first have that assumption to even ask that question (unless they are simply asking in a theoretical sense).

It is a problem for Christians because it makes it difficult to assert that there is a god (as desribed in scripture) in the first place.

[quote=“bob”]God created a situation whereby many people are constitutionally incapable of faith and yet will be judged precisely on that basis.

@confuzius

Believers tend to believe no one is INCAPABLE of faith, thus this part of the questions falls away.

They can believe that all they like. It doesn’t change a thing. I couldn’t come to have faith (a delusion) about Christ being my saviour if I tried, or rather at one point I tried and couldn’t because the whole thing felt so contrived. Beliefs arise out of experience and mental operations that are not subject to conscious control. You can’t force yourself to really believe anything that you don’t and if you think you can you should try to believe something that you don’t.

@bob

Would a loving god do that? Where’s the “new” way of responding to that question? Does god simply reward the delusional? To have faith in the Bible at this point would mean you were crazy and/or ignorant and/or low IQ.

@confuzius

You did just assert that EVERYONE that believes in the bible is either a. crazy, b. ignorant, c. stupid or d. all of the above. There are many intelligent, sane and quite knowledgeable people who believe in the bible. There are also plenty of ignorant, crazy stupid people who are atheists. So, yeah, this statement was more your own rant than anything to do with the question of theodicy.

No, the facts are available. The more you know about the Bible the more you realize that it wasn’t inspired by God. If you don’t come to that conclusion you are delusional. Lots of really well educated people are delusional, that’s true, but they are able to maintain that because they form organizations of people who all seek to find comfort in the same delusion. One person with a sincere belief on supernatural events is a psychotic, millions is a religion

@bob

Is that what it takes to be forgiven for acting on (or even thinking about) the urges that god supposedly gave us?

@confuzius

If you had no urges to overcome, what would be the point of reward and punishment? Reward is given for fighting those urges-since it is VERY difficult to overcome them, hence you are worthy of reward. Nuttin good ever came easy as they say.

I don’t know. What IS the point of reward and punishment? The real problem here though is that god rewards delusional thinking, as though it is a virtue. It isn’t.

[quote=“bob”]
The Bible is supposed to be the inerrant word of god and is filled with errors. Have the modern theologians really been coming up with answers to problems like this? [/quote]

@confuzious

Yes, as have theologians for centuries.

No. What they have been doing is backing themselves ever more tightly into a silly little corner. At some point they will disappear altogether, hopefully.

[quote=“bob”]
Seems to me quite a few have been analyzing the data and deciding themselves the thing whole thing makes not a a squirt of sense. LOTS of people drop out of seminary precisely because the more you know about religion the more likely you are to see through it. Some students push through and share a dumbed down version of Christianity but many aren’t that corrupt.[/quote]

@confuzius

From my experience, most share the ‘dumbed down’ version. Even in Judaism, what do your think the Reform and Conservative movements do? These are seminaries that are actually built upon the dumbed down versions.

See above.

[quote=“bob”]
God is unchanging and all knowing. How does that jive with the fact that the God of the old testament knew so little about science,[/quote]

@confuzius

Oh, he knew, we didn’t.

He didn’t know how long iy would take for the light that comes from the sun to reach earth. People will argue that Genisis is supposed to be an allegory, which it probably is, but that is just another way that supernatural beliefs are disappearing from religion. At some point it won’t be religion anymore. That is our goal.

@bob

was a psychopathic murderer, and concerned himself only with the fate of an insignificant (relative to all the other civilizations Chinese, Aztec, North American Aborigine etc. existing at the time) and yet was supposed to be, well, GOD and a loving one at that.

@confuzious

Because the Jews are awesome (now I’m just being silly).

We rack up a score for the good guys then I take it. God sharing his word with one historically pretty insignificant group of people makes no sense, which is a problem for us atheists because what we would expect is that people not sighn on with a belief system that makes no sense.

[quote=“bob”]
And Jesus associated with that monster. Where is the sense in THAT!

Christianity isn’t always negative in it’s effects, but is always completely irrational at it’s core. That has been made crystal clear. If people want to sustain delusions that is their right, what should not (IMHO) go unchallenged is the notion that that position warrants “respect.” The person might deserve respect, his right to hold a position certainly deserves respect, [color=#BF0000]but notions of supernatural agents? That is lunacy,and of a kind that invariably leads to atrocity[/color]. [/quote]

@confuzius

How so? (does this SINGLE point bring about that effect?)

It is used by leaders to justify theocratic government based on some individuas supposedly having unique access to God. This stuff is REALLY basic.

[quote=“bob”]
The theocratic leadership of Tibet prior to the Chinese invasion was as brutal and cruel as the Taliban would set up now. There are very good “moral” reasons why the supernatural elements of religion need to be constanly challenged. That is demonstrated, abundantly, by the history of moral and scientific advancement. Regardless, nut jobs are still a majority in a lot of places, arguing that, for example, that evolution is “just” a theory. What they don’t get is that it is “just” a theory in the sense that “gravity” is “just” a theory. Indeed the theory evolution at this point is better established than the theory of gravity. There is no question that evolution occurred and is still occurring, what is at issue is the precise mechanisms by which it occurs, but there is no way the average person knows that, precisely because liars and their fools maintain, to this day, an inordinate influence over public discourse.[/quote]

@confuzius

You kinda took a bunch of issues, threw them in the blender, and wrote this paragraph. Too much to unpack in any meaningful sense.

Religious delusions are an obstacle to progress. That’s the point I was trying to make.

[Confuzius]

@confuzius

Believers tend to believe no one is INCAPABLE of faith, thus this part of the questions falls away.

@bob

They can believe that all they like. It doesn’t change a thing. I couldn’t come to have faith (a delusion) about Christ being my saviour if I tried, or rather at one point I tried and couldn’t because the whole thing felt so contrived. Beliefs arise out of experience and mental operations that are not subject to conscious control. You can’t force yourself to really believe anything that you don’t and if you think you can you should try to believe something that you don’t.

blah blah blah, personal ranting, nothing worth commenting on here.

@confuzius

You did just assert that EVERYONE that believes in the bible is either a. crazy, b. ignorant, c. stupid or d. all of the above. There are many intelligent, sane and quite knowledgeable people who believe in the bible. There are also plenty of ignorant, crazy stupid people who are atheists. So, yeah, this statement was more your own rant than anything to do with the question of theodicy.

[quote=“bob”]
No, the facts are available. The more you know about the Bible the more you realize that it wasn’t inspired by God. If you don’t come to that conclusion you are delusional. Lots of really well educated people are delusional, that’s true, but they are able to maintain that because they form organizations of people who all seek to find comfort in the same delusion. One person with a sincere belief on supernatural events is a psychotic, millions is a religion [/quote]

same.

@confuzius

If you had no urges to overcome, what would be the point of reward and punishment? Reward is given for fighting those urges-since it is VERY difficult to overcome them, hence you are worthy of reward. Nuttin good ever came easy as they say.

[quote=“bob”]
I don’t know. What IS the point of reward and punishment? The real problem here though is that god rewards delusional thinking, as though it is a virtue. It isn’t. [/quote]

same.

@bob

The Bible is supposed to be the inerrant word of god and is filled with errors. Have the modern theologians really been coming up with answers to problems like this? [/quote]

@confuzious

Yes, as have theologians for centuries.

@bob

No. What they have been doing is backing themselves ever more tightly into a silly little corner. At some point they will disappear altogether, hopefully.

AH, something worth commenting on!

This comment was very ignorant. You clearly have no idea what they have been doing.

[quote=“bob”]We rack up a score for the good guys then I take it. God sharing his word with one historically pretty insignificant group of people makes no sense, which is a problem for us atheists because what we would expect is that people not sighn on with a belief system that makes no sense.

The funny thing is, the theologians asked this question over a thousand years ago, heck, nearly goin on 2 now! (but of course all they do is 'back themselves into a corner) oh wait, ignorance, yah…

[quote=“bob”]
And Jesus associated with that monster. Where is the sense in THAT!

Christianity isn’t always negative in it’s effects, but is always completely irrational at it’s core. That has been made crystal clear. If people want to sustain delusions that is their right, what should not (IMHO) go unchallenged is the notion that that position warrants “respect.” The person might deserve respect, his right to hold a position certainly deserves respect, [color=#BF0000]but notions of supernatural agents? That is lunacy,and of a kind that invariably leads to atrocity[/color]. [/quote]

@confuzius

How so? (does this SINGLE point bring about that effect?)

@bob

It is used by leaders to justify theocratic government based on some individuas supposedly having unique access to God. This stuff is REALLY basic.

The belief in supernatural agents is not solely responsible for this.

[quote=“bob”]
The theocratic leadership of Tibet prior to the Chinese invasion was as brutal and cruel as the Taliban would set up now. There are very good “moral” reasons why the supernatural elements of religion need to be constanly challenged. That is demonstrated, abundantly, by the history of moral and scientific advancement. Regardless, nut jobs are still a majority in a lot of places, arguing that, for example, that evolution is “just” a theory. What they don’t get is that it is “just” a theory in the sense that “gravity” is “just” a theory. Indeed the theory evolution at this point is better established than the theory of gravity. There is no question that evolution occurred and is still occurring, what is at issue is the precise mechanisms by which it occurs, but there is no way the average person knows that, precisely because liars and their fools maintain, to this day, an inordinate influence over public discourse.[/quote]

@confuzius

You kinda took a bunch of issues, threw them in the blender, and wrote this paragraph. Too much to unpack in any meaningful sense.

[quote=“bob”]
Religious delusions are an obstacle to progress. That’s the point I was trying to make.[/quote]

one for my tender, heart in a blender…

less is more sometimes, then we can actually have a conversation.

[bob]

If you don’t want to discuss these issues that is OK by me. You started out by saying that new theology has finally ironed out many of the inconsistencies of the faith based religions. If there is anything to what you are saying, give us some examples. That should be easy enough to do, again “if” there is anything at all to what you are saying. And, before you start, I realize that many of the arguments against Christianity have been around forever. What I don’t believe is that there has ever been any satisfactory resolution your way. And the reason there hasn’t been any satisfactory resolution your way is because your belief system is crazy. What is happening in the modern world is that a bunch of really good (meaning intelligent, educated, ethical) people are finally making an issue of hammering that fact home. Most of them have acquired some clarity of purpose on this simply because religion is PROVING itself to be so dangerous in the MODERN world. That is my take on things. If I am wrong and there actually is some new theology worth sharing go ahead and share it. If you can’t we can agree that you were being, let’s say, less than truthful in your original assertion and we can call it a day.

[Vay]

This is long-ass dialog for me to jump into, but I did want to say, on this point:

@Bob

They can believe that all they like. It doesn’t change a thing. I couldn’t come to have faith (a delusion) about Christ being my saviour if I tried, or rather at one point I tried and couldn’t because the whole thing felt so contrived. Beliefs arise out of experience and mental operations that are not subject to conscious control. You can’t force yourself to really believe anything that you don’t and if you think you can you should try to believe something that you don’t.

@Confuzius

blah blah blah, personal ranting, nothing worth commenting on here.

Actually I’d say there’s more here than personal ranting. Although the scope of this twin study is limited, it suggests religiosity (like most things) is influenced by genetic factors:

Genes contribute to religious inclination

So I suppose this is God deciding for Its own mysterious reasons which individuals should find the way to faith easier or harder. For testing purposes, perhaps? Very tricky, Gods is. Incidentally, as I was adopted as an infant, raised strongly Catholic and then gave up my faith as an independent adult, the study definitely reflects my own experience!

And if wonder if homosexuality is included in this:

@Confuzius

If you had no urges to overcome, what would be the point of reward and punishment? Reward is given for fighting those urges-since it is VERY difficult to overcome them, hence you are worthy of reward. Nuttin good ever came easy as they say.

While the factors in determining homosexuality (genetic, epi-genetic, environmental) aren’t clearly understood (last I checked), what we can be darn sure of is that homosexuals no more choose their own sexuality than do heterosexuals. And the Bible is beautifully explicit in how homosexuals should nevertheless be “punished”.

I’d say really most other moral choices are not much different. We are like cars rolling forward in time; we have a momentum going (although it may be opaque or invisible to us), and thus we can’t “choose” who we already are at any given moment when a moment of decision appears to us. To quote Schopenhauer, “You can do as you will, but you cannot will as you will”. That, IMO, is perhaps the most succinctly profound expression of the conundrum of free will.

And I agree with Bob: why should there be reward and punishment, other than promoting survival and reproduction? Evolution and game theory explain things much better than do religion in that regard.

[Vay]

@bob

If you don’t want to discuss these issues that is OK by me. You started out by saying that new theology has finally ironed out many of the inconsistencies of the faith based religions. If there is anything to what you are saying, give us some examples. That should be easy enough to do, again “if” there is anything at all to what you are saying. And, before you start, I realize that many of the arguments against Christianity have been around forever. What I don’t believe is that there has ever been any satisfactory resolution your way. And the reason there hasn’t been any satisfactory resolution your way is because your belief system is crazy. What is happening in the modern world is that a bunch of really good (meaning intelligent, educated, ethical) people are finally making an issue of hammering that fact home. Most of them have acquired some clarity of purpose on this simply because religion is PROVING itself to be so dangerous in the MODERN world. That is my take on things. If I am wrong and there actually is some new theology worth sharing go ahead and share it. If you can’t we can agree that you were being, let’s say, less than truthful in your original assertion and we can call it a day.

Bob, I sympathize with your position (obviously) - still, if you look at Fortigurn’s carpet-bombing of a post in the early portion of the “Benefits of Religion” thread, it seems to suggest religiosity has its practical advantages. Obviously there’s some ambiguity there, as the Scandinavian countries lead the world in happiness, well-being and non-religiosity, but still, there could be other factors (geographic, cultural, perhaps even genetic) at work. Hard to say, really.

My own thought is that the potential harms of religion are significant and numerous; on the other hand, religiosity does seem to be an evolved tendency and so, in some ways, participating in religion “naturally” contributes to our well-being. (Keep in mind, this is an “is” vs. “ought” observation, if you know what I mean.)

[Confuzius]

@bob

If you don’t want to discuss these issues that is OK by me. [color=#BF0000]You started out by saying that new theology has finally ironed out many of the inconsistencies of the faith based religions.[/color]

Sigh, no its not what I said, Look above! (it may even still be on the same page, or you may have to go back ONE) but just to make it easy, I will actually quote myself.

“But all of your problems with the logic have already been raised. Modern critical scholarship on scriptural incosistencies (such as JEPD and whatnot) were LONG ago noticed, acknowledged and even dealt with by theologians. We may think we have figured all sorts of stuff out only recently, but we haven’t. The questions we ask today on our computers are the same questions people asked by candlelight over a thousand years ago. What has changed, are the answers.”

So, take a nice long gander. Never said anything was, um, how did YOU put it, “finally ironed out”. I said there were new answers to old questions.

[quote=“bob”]
If there is anything to what you are saying, give us some examples.[/quote]

Now here we go!

But where to start? There are so many.

But I will start with YOUR question:

@bob

God is unchanging and all knowing. How does that jive with the fact that the God of the old testament knew so little about science, was a psychopathic murderer, and concerned himself only with the fate of an insignificant (relative to all the other civilizations Chinese, Aztec, North American Aborigine etc. existing at the time) and yet was supposed to be, well, GOD and a loving one at that.

See: Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Avoda Zara, 2b "R. Johanan says: This teaches us that the Holy One, blessed be He, offered the Torah to every nation and every tongue, but none accepted it, until He came to Israel who received it. "

There are paralell accounts of this, some much more detailed, but I a not going to go and track them all down.

A scriptural problem: Genesis 1 & 2 (if you are unfamiliar with this problem, google is your friend): http://www.js.emory.edu/BLUMENTHAL/GenTradRashiRashbam.html

Now, I am not saying that things have been, as YOU put it IRONED OUT, but that simply the same textual, theological and even ethical questions we are raising on this forum and in universities around the world concerning the bible, are questions that have been asked for over 1000 years.

questions=same
answers=different

thats wut me said

@bob

That should be easy enough to do, again “if” there is anything at all to what you are saying.

Twas, took me maybe 7 mins or so. Its not what you actually asked for, as you put words in my mouth, but it is proof of what I originally said.

[quote=“bob”]And, before you start, I realize that many of the arguments against Christianity have been around forever. What I don’t believe is that there has ever been any satisfactory resolution
your way
. [/quote]

You need to read more closely, I started my original post in this forum with “I’m Buddhist” soyah, this is why I am getting short with you. You dont actually seem to read anything closely…but like to go off on rants.

[quote=“bob”]
And the reason there hasn’t been any satisfactory resolution your way is because your belief system is crazy. [/quote]

Whatya got against Mahavairocana?

[quote=“bob”]
What is happening in the modern world is that a bunch of really good (meaning intelligent, educated, ethical) people are finally making an issue of hammering that fact home. Most of them have acquired some clarity of purpose on this simply because religion is PROVING itself to be so dangerous in the MODERN world. That is my take on things. If I am wrong and there actually is some new theology worth sharing go ahead and share it. If you can’t we can agree that [color=#FF0000]you were being, let’s say, less than truthful in your original assertion and we can call it a day[/color].[/quote]

No, you evidently can’t read however.

[bob]

For a Buddhist you certainly seem to have a keen interest in defending the Bible. That “may” be because your own religion posits it’s own silliness (reincarnation) or it may be for some other reason.

Anyway, it’s true. I over-stated your case.

Interesting to see that Johanan says in the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Avoda Zara, 2b " that God sent out his word to all nations and none accepted it. My word that’s impressive. Certainly clears up whatever misconceptions I might have had. Thank god for modern theology. There are sure to be records of these exchanges in the historical texts from other counties I take it. My guess is that you could google that and find a dozen or more examples. I mean you can find practically “anything” on google these days.

[bob]

[quote=“Vay”] Genes contribute to religious inclination
[/quote]

Nice. from that article…

About a dozen studies have shown that religious people tend to share other personality traits, although it is not clear whether these arise from genetic or environmental factors. These include the ability to get along well with others and being conscientious, working hard, being punctual, and controlling one’s impulses.

It “may” be that some of the benefits ascribed to “faith” (should really be refered to as religious delusion) actually stem from a set of genetic predispositions, of which a tendency to accept whatever religion is around is one.

That makes sense and goes some distance in explaining that nutty vibe that they often give off. It’s the same screw loose in the lot of them.

[Confuzius]

@bob

For a Buddhist you certainly seem to have a keen interest in defending the Bible. That “may” be because your own religion posits it’s own silliness (reincarnation) or it may be for some other reason.

I didn’t defend the bible, and you dont have to be an asshole, (or maybe just like faith is impossible for you, not being an asshole is as well?). And I seriously doubt you even understand reincarnation (especially as in Buddhism there is no soul…yah, I am sure you dont get that). I never defended anything, you are just so full of hate and rage that anyone saying ANYTHING that is REMOTELY possibly, if taken in a certain light, stretch and then misconstrued…could perhaps, off chance might, not insult the bible or its believers, you get all red in the face, jump to conclusions, quit reading the post and start typing a bunch of crap based on your own emotions.

I said there was a certain logic to biblical and theological interpretation based on certain ontological assumptions that deals with the same questions people ask today, thats all.

But somehow, I am now some big crusader, defending the xian faith. You’re not really good at this are you?

[quote=“bob”]

Anyway, it’s true. I over-stated your case.

Interesting to see that Johanan says in the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Avoda Zara, 2b " that God sent out his word to all nations and none accepted it. My word that’s impressive. Certainly clears up whatever misconceptions I might have had. Thank god for modern theology. There are sure to be records of these exchanges in the historical texts from other counties I take it. My guess is that you could google that and find a dozen or more examples. I mean you can find practically “anything” on google these days.[/quote]

You asked for proof of my case, I provided it. Never said it would wound your troubled soul.

Yes, you can google just about everything, but since you seemed incapable of doing so, I thought I would oblige since you asked.

[bob]

@Confuzius

I didn’t defend the bible, and you dont have to be an asshole, (or maybe just like faith is impossible for you, not being an asshole is as well?). And I seriously doubt you even understand reincarnation (especially as in Buddhism there is no soul…yah, I am sure you dont get that). I never defended anything, you are just so full of hate and rage that anyone saying ANYTHING that is REMOTELY possibly, if taken in a certain light, stretch and then misconstrued…could perhaps, off chance might, not insult the bible or its believers, you get all red in the face, jump to conclusions, quit reading the post and start typing a bunch of crap based on your own emotions.

That’s not really what happened. In the first place I am not in the least angry.

“But all of your problems with the logic have already been raised. Modern critical scholarship on scriptural incosistencies (such as JEPD and whatnot) were LONG ago noticed, acknowledged and even dealt with by theologians. We may think we have figured all sorts of stuff out only recently, but we haven’t. The questions we ask today on our computers are the same questions people asked by candlelight over a thousand years ago. What has changed, are the answers.”

That bugged me though because it:

1. Said that theologians had “dealt with” Biblical inconsistencies. To my knowledge they haven’t satisfactorily “dealt with” any of the big issues.
2. You implied that some new answers had been forthcoming. Sorry, but I can’t see evidence of that.

All that I really wanted to do was clear that up. At this point in history it is becoming harder and harder to defend the notion that the Bible is the inspired word of God. That is true mainly because of new archeological evidence (flight from Egypt - apparently never happened, but then surely you heard,) and because of fresh efforts to apply a textual analysis to the Bible as though it were any other work of literature, or in some cases to simply share with the public problems that have been well known for ages but not shared with the flock. That is where we are actually at.

It is true that I don’t know much about reincarnation except that it provided a framework for the caste system, probably one of the most repressive systems the world has ever seen. Buddhism itself (I am reading Emotional Awareness by the Dali Lama and some psychologist. Good book. Has a lot of information on controlling afflictive emotions) was the basis of for a brutal theocracy in Tibet until just recently. I sincerely doubt that the Dalai Lama would run the country that way again if given a chance. He has been influenced too much by science and secular humanism for that.

[Confuzius]

[quote=“bob”]
That bugged me though because it:

1. Said that theologians had “dealt with” Biblical inconsistencies. To my knowledge they haven’t satisfactorily “dealt with” any of the big issues. [/quote]

Yeah, they dealt with them. You inserted the whole satisfactory/conclusiveness of it, not me.

[quote=“bob”]
2) You implied that some new answers had been forthcoming. Sorry, but I can’t see evidence of that. [/quote]

New answers HAVE been forthcoming! There’s plenty evidence of that (I think you can use google). But here is one example that I linked to, I will say it briefly, the one concerning Genesis 1 & 2.

Briefly: 2 contradictory stories about the creation of humankind.

Classic religious answer (one among many): God first told the story in sort of a “short hand” (in ch. 1) and then gave the details (ch. 2)

Modern critical answer: different texts from competing traditions/versions that were lumped together when the ‘final’ version was redacted.

Voila! There you have it! (use google if you need clarification, google “genesis 1 and 2” there’ll be tons of shit)

[quote=“bob”]
All that I really wanted to do was clear that up. At this point in history it is becoming harder and harder to defend the notion that the Bible is the inspired word of God. That is true mainly because of new archeological evidence (flight from Egypt - apparently never happened, but then surely you heard,) and because of fresh efforts to apply a textual analysis to the Bible as though it were any other work of literature, or in some cases to simply share with the public problems that have been well known for ages but not shared with the flock. That is where we are actually at.[/quote]

I never defended the historicity of the bible…you jumped to that conclusion.

[quote=“bob”]
It is true that I don’t know much about reincarnation except that it provided a framework for the caste system, probably one of the most repressive systems the world has ever seen. Buddhism itself (I am reading Emotional Awareness by the Dali Lama and some psychologist. Good book. Has a lot of information on controlling afflictive emotions) was the basis of for a brutal theocracy in Tibet until just recently. I sincerely doubt that the Dalai Lama would run the country that way again if given a chance. He has been influenced too much by science and secular humanism for that.[/quote]

There are many different forms of Buddhism.

The Dalai Lama has already stated, many times that if Tibet was to become independent again, it would not go back to the way things were.

The Dalai Lama has also attempted to step down from being the political leader of the Tibetan people…the ‘govt’ in exile refuses to let him.

And however troubling the Tibetan theocracy was (not denying that) to call it “one of the most repressive systems the world has ever seen” is quite an overstatement I must say, but what is the use in dwelling in the “bad vs. worse” kind of arguments?

[bob]

[quote=“bob”]
That bugged me though because it:

1. Said that theologians had “dealt with” Biblical inconsistencies. To my knowledge they haven’t satisfactorily “dealt with” any of the big issues. [/quote]

Yeah, they dealt with them. You inserted the whole satisfactory/conclusiveness of it, not me.

[quote=“bob”]
2) You implied that some new answers had been forthcoming. Sorry, but I can’t see evidence of that. [/quote]

[quote]New answers HAVE been forthcoming! There’s plenty evidence of that (I think you can use google). But here is one example that I linked to, I will say it briefly, the one concerning Genesis 1 & 2.
Briefly: 2 contradictory stories about the creation of humankind.

Classic religious answer (one among many): God first told the story in sort of a “short hand” (in ch. 1) and then gave the details (ch. 2)

Modern critical answer: different texts from competing traditions/versions that were lumped together when the ‘final’ version was redacted.

Voila! There you have it! (use google if you need clarification, google “genesis 1 and 2” there’ll be tons of shit)[/quote]

Yeah, but I was looking for new answers that would support the notion that some supernatural element had anything to do with the writing of the text. Isn’t it obvious at this point that that was what I was talking about? I mean, in the process of explaining to me that what I thought you were talking about wasn’t really what you were talking about (though quite a good case has been made at this point that that “is” what you were talking about,) didn’t it become clear what I was talking about? I never doubted that theologians (especially the faith based kind) weren’t busy cooking up some nonsense or other trying to explain how the creator of the whole bloody universe managed to come up with such a crappy book. What I douted was whether any of that nonsense would amount to anything.

Essentially my position is this:

1. Yes, people tend toward magical thinking. For example, I was at the zoo yesterday trying out my infinite compassion (not kidding at all here) on an old monkey. I am watching her wonder around all creaky looking, hair falling out, skin all blotched, and I wondered if she ever got any. I am thinking to myself, by god that is one butt ugly looking monkey, but who knows, right? Anyway, just at that moment she wonders around and sort of plops herself down on this younger, reasonably virile looking monkey (just surmising here, it’s so tough to assess the virility of monkeys actually) and tries to stir up a little action. It was a sort of blase affair with no result to speak of but for a second I had the feeling that god was talking to me. I mean what else could explain such an extraordinary co-incidence? The fact that monkeys spend half their lives screwing? Yes, when I later speculated on the event I concluded that is likely what it was. But for a moment there I was sure that a miraculous event was occurring and it felt wonderful, even though the implications of the sign were less than optimistic.

In other words I “get” it. It feels really good to believe in the supernatural. However…

2. No, there are no miraculous events. Whatever it was that created the universe (if indeed anything did,) it hasn’t a speck of concern for anything that happens on this earth. If it did the world wouldn’t contain so much pointless suffering.

3. Yes, delusions to the contray can be adaptive, especially to the individual.

4. No, they most certainly aren’t always adaptive, especially to the broader world.

5. The challenge to humanity is to sort through this mess. It’s an important challenge because if we don’t sort it out progress on all manner of initiatives will be stalled and people will increase the rate at which they kill each other over their delusions.

I summarize this now because it is pretty much the last thing I will have to say on the issue, hopefully, for a long while. Good luck.

[Confuzius]

@bob

Yeah, but I was looking for new answers that would support the notion that some supernatural element had anything to do with the writing of the text.

Why would you do that?

[quote=“bob”]
Isn’t it obvious at this point that that was what I was talking about? I mean, in the process of explaining to me that what I thought you were talking about wasn’t really what you were talking about (though quite a good case has been made at this point that that “is” what you were talking about,) [/quote]

No, pretty poor case, look back at my original post…I even quoted it for you AGAIN.

[quote=“bob”]
Essentially my position is this:

1. Yes, people tend toward magical thinking. For example, I was at the zoo yesterday trying out my infinite compassion (not kidding at all here) on an old monkey. I am watching her wonder around all creaky looking, hair falling out, skin all blotched, and I wondered if she ever got any. I am thinking to myself, by god that is one butt ugly looking monkey, but who knows, right? Anyway, just at that moment she wonders around and sort of plops herself down on this younger, reasonably virile looking monkey (just surmising here, it’s so tough to assess the virility of monkeys actually) and tries to stir up a little action. It was a sort of blase affair with no result to speak of but for a second I had the feeling that god was talking to me. I mean what else could explain such an extraordinary co-incidence? The fact that monkeys spend half their lives screwing? Yes, when I later speculated on the event I concluded that is likely what it was. But for a moment there I was sure that a miraculous event was occurring and it felt wonderful, even though the implications of the sign were less than optimistic. [/quote]

Whoa…

[quote=“bob”]
In other words I “get” it. It feels really good to believe in the supernatural. However…

2. No, there are no miraculous events. Whatever it was that created the universe (if indeed anything did,) it hasn’t a speck of concern for anything that happens on this earth. If it did the world wouldn’t contain so much pointless suffering.[/quote]

Now you sound like a Buddhist, be careful…

[quote=“bob”]
3) Yes, delusions to the contray can be adaptive, especially to the individual.

4. No, they most certainly aren’t always adaptive, especially to the broader world.

5. The challenge to humanity is to sort through this mess. It’s an important challenge because if we don’t sort it out progress on all manner of initiatives will be stalled and people will increase the rate at which they kill each other over their delusions.

I summarize this now because it is pretty much the last thing I will have to say on the issue, hopefully, for a long while. Good luck.[/quote]

Another whoa, goodluck as well!

[Karuna_Dharmakaya]

How come when christians try to convert you they dont ever tell you these things about their deity?
EXAMPLE:HELLO all im a christian would you like to know about our god jesus the god of old and new test?did you know jesus once told us that we could sell our daughters into slavery (EX 21:7) and that as slave owners we had the right to beat our slaves almost to death as long as they dont die(EX 21:20-21)jesus also told us that we should kill people who try to convert us (DUET 13:6-18) also all these things listed below is NOT evil or sins (1 JOHN 3:4) since SIN is a TRANSGRESSION of the LAW it is NOT a sin to FOLLOW the law and do these things below.

(1)DUET 17:1-5 STONE UNBELEIVERS like me IS THIS GOOD or EVIL.
(2)DUET 13:6-18 KILL UNBELEIVERS (who try to do the same thing christians do SPEAK about ur faith) is this GOOD or EVIL?
(3)LEV 24:16 KILL those who SPEAK bad things about ur deity STONE them is this GOOD or EVIL? could u do this
(4)EX 31:15 STONE those to death if they WORK on the SABBATH(dont work on sunday or DIE)NUMB 15:32-36 AS ur GOD COMMANDED they STONED him to DEATH for PICKING UP STICKS,is this deity GOOD or EVIL?
(5)EX 21:17 if u CURSE(insult) ur parents U ARE TO BE KILLED is this good or EVIL?
(6)LEV 20:10 now i understand adultery is WRONG BUT what is MORE WRONG adultery or KILLING people who are ADULTERERS?if u wife cheats LEAVE HER dont BEAT her BRAINS in with a ROCK please dont FOLLOW this BOOK it will LEAD u and THOSE people in the past to HELL,IS this GOOD of EVIL?
(7)LEV 20:13 KILL GAYS is it GOOD or EVIL to kill gays for having the same sexual desire as U?
READ DUET 20:1-20 this is the LAWs of war where the christian deity ORDERED men to go an MASS MURDER everything that BREATHED man WOMAN AND CHILD(INFANTS) to STEAL land that wasnt even theirs.and here is PROOF of their DEITY sanctioned GENICIDE.JOSH,10:40,JOSH 6:21-27,DUET 20:13-14,NUMB 31:17-18,ISAIH 13:15,NUMB 21:34-35,DUET 2:30-34,JOSH 11:8-15,NUMB 25:1-9,JOSH,6:20-21
(8)Is good or evil to Stab to death the babies of your enemies?(1 sam 15:1-3)Numb 31:17-19

REALLY are these things listed the good teachings of a Pure higher being or a devil?

[the_chief]

[quote=“Karuna Dharmakaya”]How come when christians try to convert you they dont ever tell you these things about their deity?
EXAMPLE:HELLO all im a christian would you like to know about our god jesus the god of old and new test?did you know jesus once told us that we could sell our daughters into slavery (EX 21:7) and that as slave owners we had the right to beat our slaves almost to death as long as they dont die(EX 21:20-21)jesus also told us that we should kill people who try to convert us (DUET 13:6-18) also all these things listed below is NOT evil or sins (1 JOHN 3:4) since SIN is a TRANSGRESSION of the LAW it is NOT a sin to FOLLOW the law and do these things below.

(1)DUET 17:1-5 STONE UNBELEIVERS like me IS THIS GOOD or EVIL.
(2)DUET 13:6-18 KILL UNBELEIVERS (who try to do the same thing christians do SPEAK about your faith) is this GOOD or EVIL?
(3)LEV 24:16 KILL those who SPEAK bad things about your deity STONE them is this GOOD or EVIL? Could you do this
(4)EX 31:15 STONE those to death if they WORK on the SABBATH(dont work on Sunday or DIE)NUMB 15:32-36 AS your GOD COMMANDED they STONED him to DEATH for PICKING UP STICKS,is this deity GOOD or EVIL?
(5)EX 21:17 if u CURSE(insult) your parents U ARE TO BE KILLED is this good or EVIL?
(6)LEV 20:10 now i understand adultery is WRONG BUT what is MORE WRONG adultery or KILLING people who are ADULTERERS?if u wife cheats LEAVE HER dont BEAT her BRAINS in with a ROCK please dont FOLLOW this BOOK it will LEAD u and THOSE people in the past to HELL,IS this GOOD of EVIL?
(7)LEV 20:13 KILL GAYS is it GOOD or EVIL to kill gays for having the same sexual desire as U?
READ DUET 20:1-20 this is the LAWs of war where the christian deity ORDERED men to go an MASS MURDER everything that BREATHED man WOMAN AND CHILD(INFANTS) to STEAL land that wasn’t even theirs.and here is PROOF of their DEITY sanctioned GENICIDE.JOSH,10:40,JOSH 6:21-27,DUET 20:13-14,NUMB 31:17-18,ISAIH 13:15,NUMB 21:34-35,DUET 2:30-34,JOSH 11:8-15,NUMB 25:1-9,JOSH,6:20-21
(8)Is good or evil to Stab to death the babies of your enemies?(1 sam 15:1-3)Numb 31:17-19

REALLY are these things listed the good teachings of a Pure higher being or a devil?[/quote]

The Eleventh Commandment: Knock it off with the fucking SHIFT key already

[bismarck]

[quote=“Karuna Dharmakaya”]How come when christians try to convert you they dont ever tell you these things about their deity?
EXAMPLE:HELLO all im a christian would you like to know about our god jesus the god of old and new test?did you know jesus once told us that we could sell our daughters into slavery (EX 21:7) and that as slave owners we had the right to beat our slaves almost to death as long as they dont die(EX 21:20-21)jesus also told us that we should kill people who try to convert us (DUET 13:6-18) also all these things listed below is NOT evil or sins (1 JOHN 3:4) since SIN is a TRANSGRESSION of the LAW it is NOT a sin to FOLLOW the law and do these things below.

(1)DUET 17:1-5 STONE UNBELEIVERS like me IS THIS GOOD or EVIL.
(2)DUET 13:6-18 KILL UNBELEIVERS (who try to do the same thing christians do SPEAK about your faith) is this GOOD or EVIL?
(3)LEV 24:16 KILL those who SPEAK bad things about your deity STONE them is this GOOD or EVIL? Could you do this
(4)EX 31:15 STONE those to death if they WORK on the SABBATH(dont work on Sunday or DIE)NUMB 15:32-36 AS your GOD COMMANDED they STONED him to DEATH for PICKING UP STICKS,is this deity GOOD or EVIL?
(5)EX 21:17 if u CURSE(insult) your parents U ARE TO BE KILLED is this good or EVIL?
(6)LEV 20:10 now i understand adultery is WRONG BUT what is MORE WRONG adultery or KILLING people who are ADULTERERS?if u wife cheats LEAVE HER dont BEAT her BRAINS in with a ROCK please dont FOLLOW this BOOK it will LEAD u and THOSE people in the past to HELL,IS this GOOD of EVIL?
(7)LEV 20:13 KILL GAYS is it GOOD or EVIL to kill gays for having the same sexual desire as U?
READ DUET 20:1-20 this is the LAWs of war where the christian deity ORDERED men to go an MASS MURDER everything that BREATHED man WOMAN AND CHILD(INFANTS) to STEAL land that wasn’t even theirs.and here is PROOF of their DEITY sanctioned GENICIDE.JOSH,10:40,JOSH 6:21-27,DUET 20:13-14,NUMB 31:17-18,ISAIH 13:15,NUMB 21:34-35,DUET 2:30-34,JOSH 11:8-15,NUMB 25:1-9,JOSH,6:20-21
(8)Is good or evil to Stab to death the babies of your enemies?(1 sam 15:1-3)Numb 31:17-19

REALLY are these things listed the good teachings of a Pure higher being or a devil?[/quote]
Your entire premise is wrong. Those passages are in the Bible, but Jesus never said any of them. Those are the laws given unto Moses. Where he actually got them from is anyone’s guess. God? Maybe, said Moses. Personally, I don’t know as I wasn’t there.
Even the New Testament (what Jesus said, i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) can only be described as “allegedly said”. Also, you should remember that the OT is basically the Jewish/Hebrew texts that the Vatican put together with the texts written after 70AD by (again, allegedly) followers of Jesus. Also, the Vatican decided to leave out various gospels and the Bible doesn’t really represent the entire picture. In any event, it would be a massive stretch to say “Jesus said” anything you quoted above from the OT.

[Confuzius]

[quote=“bismarck”][quote=“Karuna Dharmakaya”]How come when christians try to convert you they dont ever tell you these things about their deity?
EXAMPLE:HELLO all im a christian would you like to know about our god jesus the god of old and new test?did you know jesus once told us that we could sell our daughters into slavery (EX 21:7) and that as slave owners we had the right to beat our slaves almost to death as long as they dont die(EX 21:20-21)jesus also told us that we should kill people who try to convert us (DUET 13:6-18) also all these things listed below is NOT evil or sins (1 JOHN 3:4) since SIN is a TRANSGRESSION of the LAW it is NOT a sin to FOLLOW the law and do these things below.

(1)DUET 17:1-5 STONE UNBELEIVERS like me IS THIS GOOD or EVIL.
(2)DUET 13:6-18 KILL UNBELEIVERS (who try to do the same thing christians do SPEAK about your faith) is this GOOD or EVIL?
(3)LEV 24:16 KILL those who SPEAK bad things about your deity STONE them is this GOOD or EVIL? Could you do this
(4)EX 31:15 STONE those to death if they WORK on the SABBATH(dont work on Sunday or DIE)NUMB 15:32-36 AS your GOD COMMANDED they STONED him to DEATH for PICKING UP STICKS,is this deity GOOD or EVIL?
(5)EX 21:17 if u CURSE(insult) your parents U ARE TO BE KILLED is this good or EVIL?
(6)LEV 20:10 now i understand adultery is WRONG BUT what is MORE WRONG adultery or KILLING people who are ADULTERERS?if u wife cheats LEAVE HER dont BEAT her BRAINS in with a ROCK please dont FOLLOW this BOOK it will LEAD u and THOSE people in the past to HELL,IS this GOOD of EVIL?
(7)LEV 20:13 KILL GAYS is it GOOD or EVIL to kill gays for having the same sexual desire as U?
READ DUET 20:1-20 this is the LAWs of war where the christian deity ORDERED men to go an MASS MURDER everything that BREATHED man WOMAN AND CHILD(INFANTS) to STEAL land that wasn’t even theirs.and here is PROOF of their DEITY sanctioned GENICIDE.JOSH,10:40,JOSH 6:21-27,DUET 20:13-14,NUMB 31:17-18,ISAIH 13:15,NUMB 21:34-35,DUET 2:30-34,JOSH 11:8-15,NUMB 25:1-9,JOSH,6:20-21
(8)Is good or evil to Stab to death the babies of your enemies?(1 sam 15:1-3)Numb 31:17-19

REALLY are these things listed the good teachings of a Pure higher being or a devil?[/quote]
Your entire premise is wrong. Those passages are in the Bible, but Jesus never said any of them. Those are the laws given unto Moses. Where he actually got them from is anyone’s guess. God? Maybe, said Moses. Personally, I don’t know as I wasn’t there.
Even the New Testament (what Jesus said, i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) can only be described as “allegedly said”. Also, you should remember that the OT is basically the Jewish/Hebrew texts that the Vatican put together with the texts written after 70AD by (again, allegedly) followers of Jesus. Also, the Vatican decided to leave out various gospels and the Bible doesn’t really represent the entire picture. In any event, it would be a massive stretch to say “Jesus said” anything you quoted above from the OT. [/quote]

But according to mainstream xianity, jesus=god. So if it was recorded in the old testament, which is the word of god recorded by moses, then essentially jesus said it…just not in his human form, in his god form or what have you.

[bismarck]

Sorry, I have no idea what “xianity” is. Sounds like it comes from the same educationally challenged school of thought as terms like, “JLo”, “Xtina” or “Brangelina” …

Next thing you know we’ll be talking about “xmas”, the birth of “JC”, and I’m afraid I couldn’t keep up. Piesay.

Genesis (and elsewhere refers to Him the same way) says Jesus was the Word, and the Word was with God etc. So you could interpret that in many ways. I, for one, wouldn’t go so far as to say “Jesus said” any of the above, but go for it if you want to. There’s more I’d like to add, but I need to go work. Perhaps later.

[Confuzius]

[quote=“bismarck”]Sorry, I have no idea what “xianity” is. Sounds like it comes from the same educationally challenged school of thought as terms like, “JLo”, “Xtina” or “Brangelina” …

Next thing you know we’ll be talking about “xmas”, the birth of “JC”, and I’m afraid I couldn’t keep up. Piesay.[/quote]

mai kei ki…I will try not to leave you in the dust with my hip use of internet slang.

[quote]
Genesis (and elsewhere refers to Him the same way) says Jesus was the Word, and the Word was with God etc. So you could interpret that in many ways. I, for one, wouldn’t go so far as to say “Jesus said” any of the above, but go for it if you want to. There’s more I’d like to add, but I need to go work. Perhaps later.[/quote]

Genesis don’t say that, its a gospel, I think John? Yeah, its paraphrasing (rephrasing) genesis there, but thats not Genesis. Genesis does not mention Jesus.

Jesus is not mentioned, anywhere in the Old Testament.

However, xian (I think its spelled k-r-ch-i-yun) exegetes have always attempted to provide verses where Jesus was ALLUDED to in the Old Testament (but of course they would, right?).