The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

[unofan]

I fully get how one could see God as the same for all these religions. As I myself have for my whole life. But to your point...

Jesus does say he's the same as God and as the OT God...and he is. But what He infers and really outright says is...that our understanding of the OT God/Holy Spirit is incorrect. And as God, Jesus should know. So in the end, if you believe God is like a lampshade - He/She exists - and His/Her meaning is 'meaningless'...then God is the same for all. If you believe the purpose of God is what's important (as I do) than God as the Word is very different in Christianity.

Cudos to Bob for pulling this together.

So we're saying the same thing, but ascribing different meanings to it due to our differing beliefs. (I'm not going to rehash the other arguments your statement raises that have been beaten to death in this thread).

This is kinda my point.

 

[burd]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

And that's not some old testament text, but Jesus talking.

Said who said who said who said?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

Said who said who said who said?

He gets a pass. All the believers' statements carry an implicit "According to my faith (which is of course true), ..." Else they wouldn't hold the faith.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

Exactly. Allah=Jehovah=Yaweh, they're all names for the God of Abraham.

The religions are different, the deity is the same.

That is totally inconsistent with the Old Testament. Part of the warring among the tribes was a war among the deities of the time using their believers as proxy soldiers (that is how the texts read, I mean). Followers of Ba'al warred with followers of Yahweh in part to determine Which was the One True God and which was the imposter.

As the saying goes, "history is written by the winners." If the followers of Ba'al had defeated the Israelites decisively in battle, would Yahweh be anything more than a technical footnote to history??

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

Christians believe that those who do not believe in Jesus, even those who do not believe in God, cannot be murdered because of those beliefs.

Some sects of Islam teach that it is perfectly acceptable to offer non-believers the choice of (a) conversion, (b) death, or (c) extortion / tribute. Some sects of Islam teach that it is okay deliberately to lie to non-believers to lull them into a false sense of security so that you can catch them off their guard. there is a story about how Mohammed himself negotiated a peace treaty, then when the enemies laid down their arms, he invaded and slaughtered them.

It may well be more empirically correct to say that some followers of Islam believe their Deity to derive from the Old Testament and they revere Jesus as the second-most important prophet after Mohammed, while other followers of Islam believe their Deity to be a different God altogether than the God worshipped by Christians and Jews. Whether we agree with them or not, we cannot ignore their knives, guns, and bombs.

 

[unofan]

That is totally inconsistent with the Old Testament. Part of the warring among the tribes was a war among the deities of the time using their believers as proxy soldiers (that is how the texts read, I mean). Followers of Ba'al warred with followers of Yahweh in part to determine Which was the One True God and which was the imposter.

As the saying goes, "history is written by the winners." If the followers of Ba'al had defeated the Israelites decisively in battle, would Yahweh be anything more than a technical footnote to history??

Who said anything about Baal?

Christianity is Judaism + a messiah Jesus
Mormons are Christians plus the prophet Joseph Smith
Islam is Judaism + a prophet Jesus + a prophet Mohammed.

No one is saying the religions are identical. But again, they all worship the God of Abraham in one form or another.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

No one is saying the religions are identical. But again, they all worship the God of Abraham in one form or another.

So you say.

How is it that this God tells some followers not to kill those who don't follow Him, while supposedly the very "same" God tells other followers that they must kill those who don't follow Him?

You claim it's the same God and the followers are getting a garbled message.

The followers claim it actually is a different God entirely.

Why should we accept your claim as a professed non-believer over the claims of the actual followers themselves?




The "Allah" of Islamic State is not the same "Allah" as worshipped by Muslims in India or Indonesia who peacefully exist side-by-side with Hindus and Christians.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

Who said anything about Baal?

We will pray with those old druids
As they drink fermented fluids,
Waltzing naked though the woo-ids,
And it's good enough for me.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

I think there is a general misunderstanding about the role of the Old Testament in the New Testament age. I found this on a link on WELS website.....

"In a small town in Texas people entering the city limits in cars must honk their horn so that those on horses would not be startled. That’s the law. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? But it isn’t difficult to see that at one time it might have served a very valuable purpose.

When a Christian looks back at the Old Testament, some of the laws seem pretty ridiculous. For example, how could God ever require people not to eat pork, or to work on Saturdays? Of course, God’s laws are never ridiculous. But it is true that many of them served a purpose only for a limited time.

So why did God give all of those ceremonial laws of the Old Testament to the Israelites? One of the purposes for giving them those laws is one of his purposes whenever he gives laws. Whenever God reveals his will to human beings, one of the things he wants them to realize is that they are sinful. God’s laws set the bar for us. They tell us how God wants us to live. And inevitably they lead us to realize that we haven’t measured up to that bar. They lead us to realize that there is a problem between us and God that needs to be solved.

Another purpose for giving the Israelites those laws was to keep them distinct from the other nations of the world. Long before God gave any of those laws, he had made a promise. He promised a man named Abraham that one of his descendants would be the Savior of the entire world (Genesis 12:3). God cannot make a promise that he does not fulfill. Therefore, because he had promised that the Savior of the world would come from Abraham’s descendants, he needed to keep Abraham’s descendants distinct as a people. Therefore he gave them a unique set of laws that ensured that they would remain a unique nation. Finally, God gave Old Testament laws for the purpose of reminding the people of the coming Savior. With this purpose we especially think of what are often referred to as ceremonial laws – laws that had to do with the people’s worship life. An example of a ceremonial law is the Sabbath day law. The Sabbath day law stated that the last day of every week, Saturday, was to be a day of physical rest for the people. In fact, the word Sabbath means “rest.” On that day they were not to do any work.

The purpose of that law was to point ahead to the coming Savior. Jesus, the Savior of the world, was going to bring true rest for all people. Not a day off each week. Instead, eternal, spiritual rest. Jesus was going to fix the problem between God and mankind caused by sin. You and I do not need to work to make our relationship with God right. Jesus did all the work. We get to rest.

So what changed? Basically, Jesus came. He did all of the things that God promised he was going to do. And because Jesus came, God’s Old Testament laws were no longer necessary. The people of Israel no longer needed to be a distinct nation. In the same way, the people no longer needed to be reminded of the coming Savior. They rejoiced in the fact that the Savior had already come. The apostle Paul expressed this truth when he wrote, “Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ” (Colossians 2:16,17)."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslim vs Christianity....Christians and Muslims both point back to Abraham. God said the Savior will come though Isaac, Abraham's son he had with Sarah. Prior to this, Abraham also had a son with Hagar, a slave, his name was Ishmael. God told Abraham and Hagar that Ishmael would to great things, however, nothing related to saving the world from sin.

Genesis...
19 Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac.[d] I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.” 22 When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him.

I have no idea where the Muslims take it from here, but Christ did descend from Isaac, fulfilling God's word.

 

[unofan]

So you say.

How is it that this God tells some followers not to kill those who don't follow Him, while supposedly the very "same" God tells other followers that they must kill those who don't follow Him?

You claim it's the same God and the followers are getting a garbled message.

The followers claim it actually is a different God entirely.

Why should we accept your claim as a professed non-believer over the claims of the actual followers themselves?

How is it you read The NY Post and think, "This is the best newspaper ever!" while the rest of us read it and think, "This is complete shiat."

Never underestimate the power of self delusion.

My claim is backed up by actual theological history. Yours is based on truthiness

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

How is it you read The NY Post and think, "This is the best newspaper ever!" while the rest of us read it and think, "This is complete shiat."

Never underestimate the power of self delusion.

My claim is backed up by actual theological history. Yours is based on truthiness

The Post is funny, though. And their sports coverage is pretty good.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

I think there is a general misunderstanding about the role of the Old Testament in the New Testament age. I found this on a link on WELS website.....

"In a small town in Texas people entering the city limits in cars must honk their horn so that those on horses would not be startled. That’s the law. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? But it isn’t difficult to see that at one time it might have served a very valuable purpose.

When a Christian looks back at the Old Testament, some of the laws seem pretty ridiculous. For example, how could God ever require people not to eat pork, or to work on Saturdays? Of course, God’s laws are never ridiculous. But it is true that many of them served a purpose only for a limited time.

So why did God give all of those ceremonial laws of the Old Testament to the Israelites? One of the purposes for giving them those laws is one of his purposes whenever he gives laws. Whenever God reveals his will to human beings, one of the things he wants them to realize is that they are sinful. God’s laws set the bar for us. They tell us how God wants us to live. And inevitably they lead us to realize that we haven’t measured up to that bar. They lead us to realize that there is a problem between us and God that needs to be solved.

Another purpose for giving the Israelites those laws was to keep them distinct from the other nations of the world. Long before God gave any of those laws, he had made a promise. He promised a man named Abraham that one of his descendants would be the Savior of the entire world (Genesis 12:3). God cannot make a promise that he does not fulfill. Therefore, because he had promised that the Savior of the world would come from Abraham’s descendants, he needed to keep Abraham’s descendants distinct as a people. Therefore he gave them a unique set of laws that ensured that they would remain a unique nation. Finally, God gave Old Testament laws for the purpose of reminding the people of the coming Savior. With this purpose we especially think of what are often referred to as ceremonial laws – laws that had to do with the people’s worship life. An example of a ceremonial law is the Sabbath day law. The Sabbath day law stated that the last day of every week, Saturday, was to be a day of physical rest for the people. In fact, the word Sabbath means “rest.” On that day they were not to do any work.

The purpose of that law was to point ahead to the coming Savior. Jesus, the Savior of the world, was going to bring true rest for all people. Not a day off each week. Instead, eternal, spiritual rest. Jesus was going to fix the problem between God and mankind caused by sin. You and I do not need to work to make our relationship with God right. Jesus did all the work. We get to rest.

So what changed? Basically, Jesus came. He did all of the things that God promised he was going to do. And because Jesus came, God’s Old Testament laws were no longer necessary. The people of Israel no longer needed to be a distinct nation. In the same way, the people no longer needed to be reminded of the coming Savior. They rejoiced in the fact that the Savior had already come. The apostle Paul expressed this truth when he wrote, “Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ” (Colossians 2:16,17)."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslim vs Christianity....Christians and Muslims both point back to Abraham. God said the Savior will come though Isaac, Abraham's son he had with Sarah. Prior to this, Abraham also had a son with Hagar, a slave, his name was Ishmael. God told Abraham and Hagar that Ishmael would to great things, however, nothing related to saving the world from sin.

Genesis...
19 Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac.[d] I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.” 22 When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him.

I have no idea where the Muslims take it from here, but Christ did descend from Isaac, fulfilling God's word.

There's a lot to absorb here, but thank you for taking the time to write out a detailed and fascinating perspective.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

You're use of lampshade is different than mine. I made the statement to say non believers seem to think that God is as meaningless as an inanimate object (i.e., lampshade). And it is that meaningless that leads them to assume God is the same as that of another religion.

Faiths are lampshades; gods are lightbulbs.

There are a zillion lamshades out there, each of which distorts light differently. These are the various rules and regulations: no pork, no blow jobs, no pre-marital blow jobs. You can throw lampshades called "Christianity," "Islam," or "Judaism" on the same lightbulb and get very different effects.

There are also a zillion lightbulbs out there, each of which emits light differently. Zeus was a somewhat different lightbulb but seems to at least have come from the same factory as the Biblical God (i.e., deus). And then there are those funky aboriginal and eastern lightbulbs with wild shapes and colors. Groovy.

The first order error is to mistake the lampshade for the light. This is the literalist error.

Now, not only do lightbulbs only emit certain kinds of light, but other things besides lightbulbs emit light.

Therefore, the second order error is to mistake the lightbulb for the light. This is the theist error.

The essential thing is the light itself. At the end of the day, humans don't require a specific lightbulb any more than a specific lampshade. What we need to keep from fumbling around in the dark is light.

There are more and less effective lampshades (and for that matter lightbulbs) according to the room you're trying to light up. We don't all live in the same room.

Interestingly...you're thinking we're looking at light through different lampshades of religion. A use of lampshade to alter a view. I think this is off the mark. And to carry this discussion further, that's created from you using visual aids on reality itself...as in glasses that distort your whole view. Let me explain why.

I think you'll find if you take those sunglasses off that in reality there are no lampshades...only lightbulbs. Lightbulbs are not 'gods' or God...but rather a direction, purpose, code (you could say God powers the light). For an individual, the light given off is actually this code that drives their perspectives and actions. In this more constructive and appropriate analogy, non believers just go without a light.

Not the lampshade type and I don't see things as literally as you do. Took a very interesting Bible class from our Pastor who took great pains to be clear the Jews/Hebrews who were writing at the time the texts were put down were not detail oriented (hence the different versions of the story in Genesis) but they were set on getting the message across. They told the story in a way that was going to get the point across to the Jews at the time. This was the tradition, the correct way to communicate their knowledge of God. Early Christians were JEWS who believed the Messiah had come. One of our interns was a Jewish convert and his interpretation (based on his understanding of Judiasm) of Biblical instruction would be very different from what it sounds you believe.

I believe God is the Word but I also believe that looking at the Word from the 21st century and trying to interpret it without understanding the context gives opportunity for argument regarding the meaning. There were many Gospels, scriptures the Church decided to exclude in the early centuries. Those were human decisions. IN that context I am more open to praying about what I read and not feeling absolutely sure I understand everything clearly. That is the beauty of the Bible. Every time I read it it speaks t me in a different way.

I agree 100% with everything you said (and have been advancing these tenants for months now...where I've seen few others advancing concepts like God=the Word and contextual issues).

The only thing I disagree with is your assumption of me being a literalist. Remember I'm the one guy that said that if Jesus didn't resurrect that it wouldn't change my faith (and in fact raised the possibility of the resurrection itself being a metaphor).

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

So we're saying the same thing, but ascribing different meanings to it due to our differing beliefs. (I'm not going to rehash the other arguments your statement raises that have been beaten to death in this thread).

This is kinda my point.

No we're not saying the same thing. You are saying....

But again, they all worship the God of Abraham in one form or another.

...by assuming God's existence is all that matters. In other words, God's meaning and purpose is irrelevant. I'm telling you God's meaning and purpose is what matters because that's all there is. So the God is different.

We as Christians are often told what we believe by non believers. We must believe that God is a meaningless dude sitting on a cloud and because it is this view that non believers disbelieve in...any other view of God is 'not fair' to a believer/non believer discussion. Suffice it to say the 'meaningless dude sitting on a cloud' perspective has little to do with Christianity.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

The only thing I disagree with is your assumption of me being a literalist. Remember I'm the one guy that said that if Jesus didn't resurrect that it wouldn't change my faith (and in fact raised the possibility of the resurrection itself being a metaphor).

I must have been unclear; I had no such assumption in mind for you -- I was just (as usual) blue skying.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

Busy day today with my trifecta post.

I think there is a general misunderstanding about the role of the Old Testament in the New Testament age. I found this on a link on WELS website.....

"In a small town in Texas people entering the city limits in cars must honk their horn so that those on horses would not be startled. That’s the law. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? But it isn’t difficult to see that at one time it might have served a very valuable purpose.

When a Christian looks back at the Old Testament, some of the laws seem pretty ridiculous. For example, how could God ever require people not to eat pork, or to work on Saturdays? Of course, God’s laws are never ridiculous. But it is true that many of them served a purpose only for a limited time.

So why did God give all of those ceremonial laws of the Old Testament to the Israelites? One of the purposes for giving them those laws is one of his purposes whenever he gives laws. Whenever God reveals his will to human beings, one of the things he wants them to realize is that they are sinful. God’s laws set the bar for us. They tell us how God wants us to live. And inevitably they lead us to realize that we haven’t measured up to that bar. They lead us to realize that there is a problem between us and God that needs to be solved.

Another purpose for giving the Israelites those laws was to keep them distinct from the other nations of the world. Long before God gave any of those laws, he had made a promise. He promised a man named Abraham that one of his descendants would be the Savior of the entire world (Genesis 12:3). God cannot make a promise that he does not fulfill. Therefore, because he had promised that the Savior of the world would come from Abraham’s descendants, he needed to keep Abraham’s descendants distinct as a people. Therefore he gave them a unique set of laws that ensured that they would remain a unique nation. Finally, God gave Old Testament laws for the purpose of reminding the people of the coming Savior. With this purpose we especially think of what are often referred to as ceremonial laws – laws that had to do with the people’s worship life. An example of a ceremonial law is the Sabbath day law. The Sabbath day law stated that the last day of every week, Saturday, was to be a day of physical rest for the people. In fact, the word Sabbath means “rest.” On that day they were not to do any work.

The purpose of that law was to point ahead to the coming Savior. Jesus, the Savior of the world, was going to bring true rest for all people. Not a day off each week. Instead, eternal, spiritual rest. Jesus was going to fix the problem between God and mankind caused by sin. You and I do not need to work to make our relationship with God right. Jesus did all the work. We get to rest.

So what changed? Basically, Jesus came. He did all of the things that God promised he was going to do. And because Jesus came, God’s Old Testament laws were no longer necessary. The people of Israel no longer needed to be a distinct nation. In the same way, the people no longer needed to be reminded of the coming Savior. They rejoiced in the fact that the Savior had already come. The apostle Paul expressed this truth when he wrote, “Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ” (Colossians 2:16,17)."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslim vs Christianity....Christians and Muslims both point back to Abraham. God said the Savior will come though Isaac, Abraham's son he had with Sarah. Prior to this, Abraham also had a son with Hagar, a slave, his name was Ishmael. God told Abraham and Hagar that Ishmael would to great things, however, nothing related to saving the world from sin.

Genesis...
19 Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac.[d] I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.” 22 When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him.

I have no idea where the Muslims take it from here, but Christ did descend from Isaac, fulfilling God's word.

My thoughts on this:

The purpose of the pre-Christ law I believe was as a reminder and focus to keep the God's adherents on the path. As in, we're in a club due to our code of laws. That was important to make sure that the whole concept was shepherded through difficult times. The tools at use here (laws) that are similar to other tools in the Bible. I'm of the opinion that some of that Paul did and said was instrumental in advancing the message through the early Aegean and into the Roman empire. Potentially his relevance today is secondary next to that of Jesus...but it was critical in getting Jesus' message across.

Again, the one paragraph begins with 'so what changed'. The answer is everything. And IMO that's both the crux of the discussion and why God is different here.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

I must have been unclear; I had no such assumption in mind for you -- I was just (as usual) blue skying.

Yeah. That comment was in response to leswp.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

We as Christians are often told what we believe by non believers. We must believe that God is a meaningless dude sitting on a cloud and because it is this view that non believers disbelieve in...any other view of God is 'not fair' to a believer/non believer discussion. Suffice it to say the 'meaningless dude sitting on a cloud' perspective has little to do with Christianity.

Well, we non-theists are often told by theists what we believe, too.

I have to admit the "meaningless God" isn't a concept I think of often, and I never associate with any theism that is anything more than Deism in disguise. The "Meaningless God" is really just Nature: the sum of all that happens for no reason. To me one natural divide between theism and atheism is whether one believes "everything happens for a reason." I believe in essence that "nothing happens for a reason," in the sense of consciously and with a plan.

My catechism could be:

1. Nothing in the Universe cares except for us.
2. So, care!

 

[unofan]

No we're not saying the same thing. You are saying....



...by assuming God's existence is all that matters. In other words, God's meaning and purpose is irrelevant. I'm telling you God's meaning and purpose is what matters because that's all there is. So the God is different.

We as Christians are often told what we believe by non believers. We must believe that God is a meaningless dude sitting on a cloud and because it is this view that non believers disbelieve in...any other view of God is 'not fair' to a believer/non believer discussion. Suffice it to say the 'meaningless dude sitting on a cloud' perspective has little to do with Christianity.

You're not a mainstream Christian, though. There's a reason Kepler's description of you as a Buddhist/Christian hybrid fits very well. The fact that your faith isn't dependent on Jesus' resurrection is further proof of that.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Religion Thread: A Believer-Atheist Alliance

You're not a mainstream Christian, though. There's a reason Kepler's description of you as a Buddhist/Christian hybrid fits very well.

That wasn't me. I think it may have been Rover.