EADD Theology Megathread

[Raasyvibe]

TD:

You can't prove the existence of god, you can't disprove 'his' existence either. But equally you can't disprove there is a flying spaghetti monster ruling over the universe, or a pig elephant with 6 legs.

No-one is claiming that God can be proven. Not on an empirical basis. But, for philosophical reasons, we accept this is deliberate... particularly in dealing with and exposing human sin. Also we wouldn't be able to have this very debate if God could be proven. Lot's of possibilities for us and this planet arise, when we remove proof of God.

There are so many religions, even if one is right, statistically your religion is likely to be the wrong one.

There comes some kind of coalescence between religions though. There are many people, for instance, who believe in "something" but do not ascribe themselves to any religion. Then many religions meet each other in ethic and values. For instance, as a Christian I have developed tremendous respect for Bhuddism which seems to also encapsulate human spirituality.

In essence, it is a question of spirit. Some people recognise the love and beauty that exists within, and attribute it to God. Then there are denominations amongst religions (Christianity also) which are more control based, and are not of the same spirit.

If it makes you feel better deciding the christian faith is 'the right one' fair enough... but had you been born in India or china you would likely think the religion there was the true one. .

Yes of course many people are bought up into a religion. They have their whole family history, influence of relatives and national traditions against them. Tremendous pressure, and heartbreaking to violate all that they've known.

However, if Christiannity is true, this is attested by those who are bought up in these countries, yet defy all expected norms, defy their traditions and upbringings, and turn to Christiannity regardless:

For instance, watch this youtube video of a Muslim girl, bought up in a Muslim family, in Saudi Arabia which is nearly 90% Muslim - who breaks through all this and finds Christ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysfr7rxlT94

In fact the bible is full of a discrimination as well as 'good' moral values. It's an appalling idea, heaven and hell. The very idea a good person who doesn't believe Jesus died for his sins, would go to hell while a murdering rapist who repents and believes would go to heaven is total bollocks

Don't get me started on how 'eternal' happiness/heaven is a bullshit idea too. You need lows to feel highs. Heaven would get boring.

You are cherry picking what to believe within the bible too. Why give more credibility to homosexuality being wrong but ignore the bits that say you can't wear certain clothes, or eat seafood, or animals which are 'unclean' and have hooves. Eating bacon is against the word of god.

People choose to believe some bits and not others. Cherry picking. Even if it was the word of god, by doing this it is tainted by 'man' and loses any validity it may have had. People justify their own prejudices by quoting/believing certain segments in the bible. Especially the homosexuality being morally wrong bit.

The bible is full of contradictions/judgments and bollocks along with some good moral values of course. It is so obvious it was designed/wrote by clever people back in the day to control the masses with the idea of heaven/hell. Be good or else.

I am not an atheist by the way.

Ok... it's you're understanding of the bible and how it works which is needs looking at here. These are common misconceptions on the Old Testament that you have bought to light. Forgive me for not responding in length to this right now but I've done it about 5 times on this thread now.

Recently, to PinkPaver who asked about God ordering Abraham to kill his son -

Mrs P. God often comes across as a bit of a callous tyrant in the OT. This contradicts what we're told of God, later in the bible.

John 4:8 - Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love

So what's the dealio with him telling Abraham to kill his son?

You have to think about what the verse is saying to you. Make a differentiation between the imagery and the meaning. The practical, spiritual meaning drawn from the imagery is what God is. The imagery in the OT, which is often very tyrannical and barbarical, is a method of revealing the spiritual truth and is not to be taken literally.

Let me give you an example:

Do you know the story of Job?

Satan and God are having a dispute about whether or not he'd lose his faith if they pissed him off enough. So God says to Satan, "OK, do ya' worst!"... Satan curses the crap out of him - starts off with physical pain - "smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown"... then when that didn't work he starts off killing his wife and family...

Now, of course, the story is a load of crap. God would not have had a discussion like that with Satan, being omniscient he would have known the outcome to begin with.

But the spiritual meaning? It's talking about faith. It differentiates between a self-fulfilling faith and true faith

"Satan added a further allegation to his complaint, if you will. In Job he added the charge that Job only worshiped God for what he could get out of it. "Is it for nothing that he worships you?" Satan charges. 'You protect him every inch of the way and you bless everything he does. Of course he worships you! But when the going gets tough, he'll curse you!""

Job remained faithful through the cursing... it's also showing the devils role in trying to break faith. It took the implementation of a made-up story, to demonstrate and build our understanding of faith.

Likewise, as is a lot of the OT, the imagery is not necessarily real, but it is used to make a real point.

Abraham killing his own son is particularly interesting, because later God must sacrifice his own son Jesus.

Again, it is unlikely God actually told Abraham to do this... but the story is teaching the reader an understanding of Obediance to God and making sacrifice to God. In this story Abraham is making the true sacrifice that God later makes through Jesus.

The OT is a book to build, develop and give an understanding of faith in God... but it's really important to understand the stories are most often allegorical.
It's quite a fascinating book to read, when you start to break through the exterior... and see what the stories are really saying

 

[Raasyvibe]

Rickolasnice:

Who are you to say that the guy who was told by God that the book of Mormon is real is delusional?

I see the point that you are making. Claimed religious experiences can certainly not be taken as proof, to anyone other than the individual.

The problem with "claimed experiences" is that they can easily be exaggerated/made up if it suits someones bias for a religion.

What was remarkable about the screenshot that I presented, is that the experience was in a PRIVATE message (or not quite so now, haha)... to another Christian. There was no audience to win over; no atheists to convert, no point to be proven. It was a genuine story. Whereas your Mormon example, as with many others, has the problem that it could have been an exaggerated/ delusional story to win over more people to the church of Mormon, for all we know.

For the record I never posted it to win any points, but as a point of interest to the thread.

Your pretty much making your beliefs up on the spot as you have changed your mind on a few things throughout this thread. But anyway..

That's bullshit. There was one time, I gave a detailed answer to a proposed contradiction in Genesis. Later on I looked into this further, and had to retract my answer as, in spite of further research, I felt my answer was not credible. that's just one honest mistake in regards to scrutinizing scripture. I'm hardly "making my beliefs up on the spot". Do you see why I call you biased?

There have been more.. I cba to find them but there have been.

I'm certainly not "making my beliefs up on the stop", that's just a demeaning perception. (Bias again) I've updated my understanding of scripture here and there, as no-one is perfect and it's a huge subject... but I've never changed my beliefs for anyone, anywhere.

And yes raas.. I am biased.. As are you.. As is EVERYONE.

Bias: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice


Just an example....

Eminem is born-again Christian

Eminem? Naooo! Say it aint so Raas!

though I accept this was a more flippant answer.

If you were honest on the subject, surely you'd be interested that an artist you respect has turned into a born-again Christian? And that he may have good reason? But no... you just express upset at the outcome, because it does not suit your bias.

You have this real negative perception towards religion; a true opposition towards it.

 

[knock]

However, if Christiannity is true, this is attested by those who are bought up in these countries, yet defy all expected norms, defy their traditions and upbringings, and turn to Christiannity regardless:

For instance, watch this youtube video of a Muslim girl, bought up in a Muslim family, in Saudi Arabia which is nearly 90% Muslim - who breaks through all this and finds Christ

What about the girl I know who was brought up in a Christian family but who is now a muslim, does that support or undermine your argument? Or is this line of thought actually just a load of fucking nonsense?

 

[StoneHappyMonday]

 

[knock]

that did occur to me

 

[Raasyvibe]

What about the girl I know who was brought up in a Christian family but who is now a muslim, does that support or undermine your argument? Or is this line of thought actually just a load of fucking nonsense?

I could see this one coming.

It get's a bit more complicated; because you have to question why that person broke free of her upbringing. I also know of a girl bought up in a Christian family in this country who turned to Islam. The answer is she was dating a muslim man and very much under the influence of him, not because Allah had freed her.

I guess you have to look into the individual cases with honesty, and question their credibility, to gain a real understanding. There's no black and white answer, it becomes a matter of judgement. So, naturally, opposing opinions are inevitably going to hit a

Anyway, the point I was making to TD, is when people say "You're naturally going to follow the religion because of your nationality", this is true for many, because their commitments to their own families and culture. But it is certainly not true for everyone, hence the fact we find these cases where people will shed the religion they were bought up in favour of another which has been completely alien.

 

[pinkpapaver]

Man can become god hhimself, but only in his own eyes. When man is god in the eyes of others it all gets messed up. Of course man being god that man has to behave and help keep the balance with the earth and that. I'll watch beowolf now anyway.

 

[knock]

I could see this one coming.

Not clearly enough to avoid it

It get's a bit more complicated; because you have to question why that person broke free of her upbringing.

Do you. Why do you have to question it? There must be literally thousands of such cases, we must have to question each case, presumably you've done this homework.

I also know of a girl bought up in a Christian family in this country who turned to Islam. The answer is she was dating a muslim man and very much under the influence of him, not because Allah had freed her.

But Allah works in mysterious ways, who are you to say which way is valid?

 

[Raasyvibe]

Not clearly enough to avoid it



Do you. Why do you have to question it? There must be literally thousands of such cases, we must have to question each case, presumably you've done this homework.



But Allah works in mysterious ways, who are you to say which way is valid?

TD's point was that ones upbringing determines which religion they will join. This is defied by many who surpass this expected norm.

Now, how genuine these cases are... whether they are true spiritual revelations, or psychological delusions, is something we cannot empirically test...it's like all supposed religious experiences... so I am not using this individual case to prove outright Christianity is the true religion

What these individual cases do, however, is negate the idea that your religious belief is solely founded and limited by your upbringing and location.

And PinkPaver, I spent ages responding to your Q's also, yet you've no comment. Worse than Shambles.

 

[knock]

TD's point was that ones upbringing determines which religion they will join. This is defied by many who surpass this expected norm.

Fine, TD is wrong, what we do now depends on everything up to this point, there is no line drawn at the end of "upbringing".

What these individual cases do, however, is negate the idea that your religious belief is solely founded and limited by your upbringing and location.

OK I would never support the idea that upbringing and location are the sole causes of anything.

 

[Cornishman]

Just heard a random knock on the door.

Answered it and there's a woman telling me "I'm just here to spread the word of God and...

ME: 'Sorry I'm an Atheist"

Her: "Are you?? REALLY??" with the biggest look of shock/disbelief on her face.

Me: (with a big grin on my face) "Yes" *shuts door in face*.

Maybe I should knock on their door to tell them about the invisible flying talking chameleon with downsyndrome that I happen to believe created the universe and everything in it.

 

[rickolasnice]

Hey raas.. Did the angel speak to Joseph or Mary regarding the birth of Jesus? And what was said?

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[a] because he will save his people from their sins.”

26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

 

[knock]

Clearly gabriel spoke to both mary and joseph separately, or one of his pals spoke to joseph. No inconsistency there.

 

[rickolasnice]

And raas.. you're still ignoring the contradictions (and historical innacuracy) between Matthew, Luke and John about where Jesus was born and why he was born there.. Funny how you quoted and replied to every part of my post except that bit, huh?

Throughout this whole thread you have been very careful what bits to reply to not because you think they are more relevant and you don't have enough time or whatever, but because there are some things that you can't answer as the whole thing doesn't fit in your belief system.

I still haven't heard your opinion on the Arabic Gospels of Infancy or the Infancy Gospels of Thomas.. Hmm..

1 After that again he went through the village, and a child ran and dashed against his shoulder. And Jesus was provoked and said unto him: Thou shalt not finish thy course (lit. go all thy way). And immediately he fell down and died.

I missed this before

Bias: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice

Earlier in same post:

The problem with "claimed experiences" is that they can easily be exaggerated/made up if it suits someones bias for a religion.

What was remarkable about the screenshot that I presented, is that the experience was in a PRIVATE message (or not quite so now, haha)... to another Christian. There was no audience to win over; no atheists to convert, no point to be proven. It was a genuine story. Whereas your Mormon example, as with many others, has the problem that it could have been an exaggerated/ delusional story to win over more people to the church of Mormon, for all we know.

Now, if I can be spiritually receptive... it's possible a Hindu, a Mormon or a Muslim also feels presences. The only problem is, if they really experience these presences... they will attribute these experiences to the wrong religion.

 

[rickolasnice]

 

[knock]

^ exactly, points 9 and 10 show that Christianity (and many other other religions) are only so ubiquitous because they were used as tools, by the ruling classes, to keep the rabble in order.

 

[rickolasnice]

Kid Jesus got your tongue, raas?

 

[Raasyvibe]

And raas.. you're still ignoring the contradictions (and historical innacuracy) between Matthew, Luke and John about where Jesus was born and why he was born there.. Funny how you quoted and replied to every part of my post except that bit, huh?

no, no, no.

I've expressed before that... "epistemology", is my weak point.

Due to the time and effort these posts take (And after 39 pages I've realised discussing theology is a waste of time, due to underlying factors affecting ones perception) I was answering all the questions that didn't require me to start reading into it all and researching to find an answer.

The idea that i'm stumped and deliberately trying to avoid your suggested scripture flaws is just not true at all...that's just more of that biased-perception/impaired-judgement thang I was talking about earlier.... it's literally an issue of time, and avoiding the points which require researching into.

Theology is all a matter of perception for you, Ricko. Your heart is geared towards the absolute negative. You believe all the atheist memes without questioning them, and will not listen or understand a religious response. Forgive me for not spending hours researching and thinking about it, towards someone who is incompatible with a proponent of religion.

Not having a go at you, maybe you have very good reason to be negative towards religion. And at least your providing the greatest opposition out of any other poster, and that's what debates all about.



Anyway, in that spirit, let's answer a few of your complaints:

Hey raas.. Did the angel speak to Joseph or Mary regarding the birth of Jesus? And what was said?

___________________

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[a] because he will save his people from their sins.”

26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

_____________________

Clearly gabriel spoke to both mary and joseph separately, or one of his pals spoke to joseph. No inconsistency there.

This ones the easiest to answer. And the fact Knock can't see the answer also, and is blindly defending you despite how silly this point is, suggests to me he too has that "biased perception/impaired judgement" thang going on also.

The angel Gabriel spoke to Mary, in person. Not Joseph.

Joeseph however receives a dream from an angel. This is necessary because he wasn't to know that she was pregnant from "the holy spirit", the bible says he was going to divorce her.

Mary is giving birth to the most eminent human of all time; God's chosen son to save mankind. And it happens in a miraculous way. Of course divine intervention (in this case, an angelic appearance) is mandatory else she wouldn't know what was going on!

This couple are raising God's son in a miraculous way.... of course both will be subject to divine intervention... how else could they cope with what is going on? How else would they know it's genuine? Think about it. Really can't see how you can complain at the scripture here.

I still haven't heard your opinion on the Arabic Gospels of Infancy or the Infancy Gospels of Thomas.. Hmm..

Well what's the point in looking at the texts that didn't make the bible?

What you're forgetting is that the author of the bible is GOD. it is after all "His word". If God intended for us to listen to the words of Thomas's gospel, he would have included it. Clearly however he didn't.

_________________

This is another of your ignorant memes digged up which don't stand up to thought and logic.

Just because it's in bullet points doesn't make it any more true. Just a quick look and you can see it's more biased anti-religious nonsense, readily accepted by those who share the same biased perception.

"Truth 4" - What are the contradictions and errors in the gospels, might I ask you? I've no doubt these "contradictions" are simply Mr Sherlocks misunderstanding of scripture, and can be swiftly answered.

And

"Truth 9" is obsolete also.

If God wants to spread the word of his religion, and make it prominent across the world... working through the emperor is a good way to do it. The emphasis is on the importance of "spreading the word", not on how nice a person Constantine was. Though I accept we want to see that his conversion to Christianity was genuine.

"The psychotic pagan emperor who boiled his wife in a hot tub and murdered his son" ... it doesn't tell you in the short sentence, of course, that his wife tried to kill him so his Son could take over as emperor.

Throughout history treason has always been punished extremely harshly. Guy fawkes' possee springs to mind.

The leaders had no choice. They didn't have modern day surveillance and were extremely vulnerable. Literally, hundreds of emperor's were murdered for power. The only method they had to deter treason, was extremely harsh punishments. If they were soft on those commiting treason they simply would never last.

The meme doesn't take this into account, because, of course, it's more biased drivel

 

[rickolasnice]

How many times are you gonna mention bias after i have given examples of you being biased.. just in the opposite direction. Everyone is biased. That is why science uses double blind studies, to eliminate bias in a scientific setting.. point being: everyone is biased.

So you really believe that Jesus was born of a virgin birth.. Even though this concept was seen in other religions from that area around the same time. It's not obvious to you that Luke / Matthew stole the idea as to make Christianity more user friendly for conversions? Did Jesus ever claim to have come from a virgin birth?

Things Christianity stole from other religions (not the only things but i cba to look up the others right now)
http://see_the_truth.webs.com/

So the conflicting stories aren't conflicting because one says the angel was in a dream and the other in person..

Your mental gymnastics is getting pretty good..

What about the differences in Jesus' genealogy? And why was that necessary if Jesus didn't descend from Joseph / David in the first place?

Well what's the point in looking at the texts that didn't make the bible?

What you're forgetting is that the author of the bible is GOD. it is after all "His word". If God intended for us to listen to the words of Thomas's gospel, he would have included it. Clearly however he didn't.

O really? So it is OK to stone people to death for working on the sabbath day and it is ok to sell your daughter off as a slave?

Are you referring to the OT passages which Christians accept do not come from the loving God that Jesus represented?

Doesn't seem to look like you believe yourself, sometimes. Or maybe.. you've just changed what you believe.. In this case it would contradict your points throughout most of this thread..

"Truth 4" - What are the contradictions and errors in the gospels, might I ask you? I've no doubt these "contradictions" are simply Mr Sherlocks misunderstanding of scripture, and can be swiftly answered

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-contradictions

Careful raas.. that page'll really put your mental gymnast skills to the test.

"Truth 9" is obsolete also.

If God wants to spread the word of his religion, and make it prominent across the world... working through the emperor is a good way to do it. The emphasis is on the importance of "spreading the word", not on how nice a person Constantine was. Though I accept we want to see that his conversion to Christianity was genuine.

Damn.. Are you super serial right now? I mean.. God damn..

 

[pinkpapaver]

Just heard a random knock on the door.

Answered it and there's a woman telling me "I'm just here to spread the word of God and...

ME: 'Sorry I'm an Atheist"

Her: "Are you?? REALLY??" with the biggest look of shock/disbelief on her face.

Me: (with a big grin on my face) "Yes" *shuts door in face*.

Maybe I should knock on their door to tell them about the invisible flying talking chameleon with downsyndrome that I happen to believe created the universe and everything in it.

And the world keeps on turnin' and the seasons are a changin'.

How's the chameleon Cornish