MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
Or not. Let's carry on
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
- Thread starter MissThundercat
- Start date
- Status
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
There are numerous perspectives. One that I think has merits is how the needs of civilization vary based on societal progress. If you look at 2000BC vs. 34BC...you'd find a very different world (as you would 34BC vs. today). In 2000BC, I wouldn't be surprised if sexual abuse was rampant. Therefore, the primary divine messages needed to progress society might be different.
I gave you that answer because I know that's the type of answer your looking for. In reality, we can't prove that God is omnipotent and we can't prove that He's not. So the question is kind of moot and we Christians don't spend much time wrestling it. Its really about the implications of the whole thing that matter...and that's an ongoing discussion by itself.
Regarding the OT..most of the time there's no difference between the OT and the Gospels. Differences between the OT and Gospels seem to be super common on this thread because that's pretty much all skeptics want to talk about. 'My interpretation' is that where there's a difference of opinion between the OT and the Gospels, Jesus trumps. This is 100% - hence the reason that the OT is the foundation and the Gospels are the faith. By and large, mainstream Christianity puts Jesus as God first...and those who don't follow specifically Jesus, do not fit the definition of Christian.
There are numerous perspectives. One that I think has merits is how the needs of civilization vary based on societal progress. If you look at 2000BC vs. 34BC...you'd find a very different world (as you would 34BC vs. today). In 2000BC, I wouldn't be surprised if sexual abuse was rampant. Therefore, the primary divine messages needed to progress society might be different.
I gave you that answer because I know that's the type of answer your looking for. In reality, we can't prove that God is omnipotent and we can't prove that He's not. So the question is kind of moot and we Christians don't spend much time wrestling it. Its really about the implications of the whole thing that matter...and that's an ongoing discussion by itself.
Regarding the OT..most of the time there's no difference between the OT and the Gospels. Differences between the OT and Gospels seem to be super common on this thread because that's pretty much all skeptics want to talk about. 'My interpretation' is that where there's a difference of opinion between the OT and the Gospels, Jesus trumps. This is 100% - hence the reason that the OT is the foundation and the Gospels are the faith. By and large, mainstream Christianity puts Jesus as God first...and those who don't follow specifically Jesus, do not fit the definition of Christian.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
No, this is disingenuous or ignorant. The heart of biblical exegesis has been such differences, and that work has been carried on by deeply religious Christians for the very good reason that they cared what God was trying to tell them.
You still don't seem to understand that skeptics don't think much about the Bible -- it's just another work of fiction to us. We also don't think much about believers who are happy to believe and let others do the same or not. What we do think about is the believers who are also fanatically trying to jam their interpretations down everyone else's throat, and whose interpretations are (unsurprisingly) usually both historically and logically inept.
No, this is disingenuous or ignorant. The heart of biblical exegesis has been such differences, and that work has been carried on by deeply religious Christians for the very good reason that they cared what God was trying to tell them.
You still don't seem to understand that skeptics don't think much about the Bible -- it's just another work of fiction to us. We also don't think much about believers who are happy to believe and let others do the same or not. What we do think about is the believers who are also fanatically trying to jam their interpretations down everyone else's throat, and whose interpretations are (unsurprisingly) usually both historically and logically inept.
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
Do not confuse different foci for differences. Per passage, the two texts do not directly conflict that much. This by deeply religious theologians and more mainstream Christians alike.
For a nonbeliever 'who doesn't care' and hates people 'jamming their interpretations down everyone's throat'...aren't you kind of the champion averaging about 25% of posts on a thread that shouldn't concern you?
Do not confuse different foci for differences. Per passage, the two texts do not directly conflict that much. This by deeply religious theologians and more mainstream Christians alike.
For a nonbeliever 'who doesn't care' and hates people 'jamming their interpretations down everyone's throat'...aren't you kind of the champion averaging about 25% of posts on a thread that shouldn't concern you?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
I'm fascinated by myth. Why would you deny me that discussion?
And show me once where I've tried to impose my beliefs on you. You can worship Russell's teapot all you want. That's cool by me. Just don't tell me that my lack of gullibility implies a lack of ethics because that will get you sucking on rhetorical soup.
I'm fascinated by myth. Why would you deny me that discussion?
And show me once where I've tried to impose my beliefs on you. You can worship Russell's teapot all you want. That's cool by me. Just don't tell me that my lack of gullibility implies a lack of ethics because that will get you sucking on rhetorical soup.
Good point, but what is your "rock" (so to speak) on which you build your ethics?
unofan
Well-known member
Don't be an *******. What other rock is needed?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
There is no rock. Everything is change. Everything is a negotiation. It is up to us. We wake up and remake the world every day.
There is no rock. Everything is change. Everything is a negotiation. It is up to us. We wake up and remake the world every day.
Does that imply there is a line in the sand that you can cross?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
I have no idea what this means.
Ethics are human, as distinct from animal. The characteristic of human is social and negotiated -- "of mind." We have games and languages and laws and gods that we made up out of our own heads. So too do we have ethics.
So the bedrock of ethics is human-ness. It's the opposite of divine decree or natural law. It's invention, not discovery. And it changes, at least around the edges, all the time, like every other one of our inventions.
I have no idea what this means.
Ethics are human, as distinct from animal. The characteristic of human is social and negotiated -- "of mind." We have games and languages and laws and gods that we made up out of our own heads. So too do we have ethics.
So the bedrock of ethics is human-ness. It's the opposite of divine decree or natural law. It's invention, not discovery. And it changes, at least around the edges, all the time, like every other one of our inventions.
Last edited:
Based on past posts....
Will you ever vote R?
Will you ever embrace a Bostonian?
If relocated, would you move to Birmingham, AL?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
Soo...you try to 'convince' others - while others 'jam it down your throat'. And others are gullible because they believe but not you - yet you somehow 'know' a 100% unknowable truth. This discussion doesn't interest me.
Soo...you try to 'convince' others - while others 'jam it down your throat'. And others are gullible because they believe but not you - yet you somehow 'know' a 100% unknowable truth. This discussion doesn't interest me.
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
Christianity's problem right now is that it's perceived as bitter, hateful, resentful, and that it sends a message of "God only loves you if you're white, conservative, heterosexual, cisgender, and you believe exactly like us." In private, such as my conversations with Rev. Jen, is that 98% of Christians aren't like that. I just wish the 98% would start speaking up and saying "*******s don't speak for us."
The reverend has helped me understand that she's in the silent majority. I walk into Grace Episcopal and I don't get a second look for wearing a skirt or carrying a purse.
Christianity's problem right now is that it's perceived as bitter, hateful, resentful, and that it sends a message of "God only loves you if you're white, conservative, heterosexual, cisgender, and you believe exactly like us." In private, such as my conversations with Rev. Jen, is that 98% of Christians aren't like that. I just wish the 98% would start speaking up and saying "*******s don't speak for us."
The reverend has helped me understand that she's in the silent majority. I walk into Grace Episcopal and I don't get a second look for wearing a skirt or carrying a purse.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
leswp1
Well-known member
Re: Religion Thread: We Could Say a Prayer
Its all true. Christians are spearheading the building of houses, helping the otherwise homeless, delivering water to the third world and helping the broken cope with other difficulties in their own communities. But these people are largely 'helpers' and are otherwise quiet. Unfortunately, there aren't very many Christians helping folks to understand the inspirational nature of the Christian path and amazing nature of this silent majority.
For example, who comes to mind when you think of the most charitable Americans? Bill Gates? Let him speak for himself:
"I’ve been very lucky, and therefore I owe it to try and reduce the inequity in the world. And that’s kind of a religious belief. We’ve raised our kids in a religious way; they’ve gone to the Catholic church that Melinda goes to and I participate in."
"The moral systems of religion, I think, are superimportant."
Its all true. Christians are spearheading the building of houses, helping the otherwise homeless, delivering water to the third world and helping the broken cope with other difficulties in their own communities. But these people are largely 'helpers' and are otherwise quiet. Unfortunately, there aren't very many Christians helping folks to understand the inspirational nature of the Christian path and amazing nature of this silent majority.
For example, who comes to mind when you think of the most charitable Americans? Bill Gates? Let him speak for himself:
"I’ve been very lucky, and therefore I owe it to try and reduce the inequity in the world. And that’s kind of a religious belief. We’ve raised our kids in a religious way; they’ve gone to the Catholic church that Melinda goes to and I participate in."
"The moral systems of religion, I think, are superimportant."
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
- Status