God as God and Jesus Christ as God

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 12, 2015 4:14 AM GMT
    Dr. Bart Ehrman

    In what sense is Christ both man and God?

    Steefen (YouTube video writer/producer, WBFbySteefen)

    What is God? The Hebrew Bible says God is I AM.
    God is existence. In a simpler expression: God is Life.

    The Biblical Jesus Christ (as opposed to the historical Jesuses who make up the biblical Jesus) was written to be salvation personified. A person stumbles on two steps? As they stop the fall, the person cries out, "Jesus Christ!"

    The biblical Jesus and the New Testament are about salvation from Death of the spirit/soul, from Death of one's incarnation, from Death of one's sanity, from Death of a child's happiness.

    I AM / Life is equivalent to Salvation from Death.

    God and Jesus are one and the same.


    Dr. Bart Ehrman

    Christ was a pre-existent divine being (Paul's Philippians 2: 6-11).

    Steefen

    Yes, salvation, pre-existed before it was personified in the biblical Jesus. Just read Psalms. You can stop at the 23rd Psalm. Even in the valley of the shadow of death, in the Egyptian amduat, souls are restored, rod and staff comfort the dead (over the sarcophagus of King Tut-ankh-amun), who march through hours of death, but saved from Death to Life.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Sep 12, 2015 4:41 AM GMT
    Think of water, ice and steam .... all the same, but 3 different forms
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 13, 2015 1:55 PM GMT
    Reply from Steve

    Steefen, my name is Steve but "Steve" is not my definition or my meaning.

    "I am" is what God told Moses he could call him--that is, his name. His name is not his definition.

    Also, "Life" is much much narrower phenomenon than existence. Dead planets, rocks, and poisonous wells exist but have no life.

    Also, although people pray to Jesus when they feel they are loosing their minds or their children's happiness or their body, it is pretty clear in the New Testament that salvation might mean the restoration of the nation Israel or the Kingdom of God but mostly it refers to the salvation of souls, the reparation of the gap between God and people.

    Just because there is language in both the Old and New Testaments does not mean the Old Testament is talking about Jesus.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2015 7:13 PM GMT
    Maybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2015 11:35 PM GMT
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
    I went my entire childhood life (up till my mid 20's) believing the bible, and "reading it" fairly regular; but never read it front to back in chronological order...just picked out scriptures here and there.

    Then I finally read it in its entirety. Been atheist ever since.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2015 11:45 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
    I went my entire childhood life (up till my mid 20's) believing the bible, and "reading it" fairly regular; but never read it front to back in chronological order...just picked out scriptures here and there.

    Then I finally read it in its entirety. Been atheist ever since.

    LOL! Paul, you are incomparable. And I agree with your message entirely.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2015 12:47 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    paulflexes said
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
    I went my entire childhood life (up till my mid 20's) believing the bible, and "reading it" fairly regular; but never read it front to back in chronological order...just picked out scriptures here and there.

    Then I finally read it in its entirety. Been atheist ever since.

    LOL! Paul, you are incomparable. And I agree with your message entirely.
    I like to compare myself to grains of sand on the beach. If I had a bottlw of Fireball for every grain of sand on all the world's beaches, I wouldn't have to buy any liquor for at least a week!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2015 3:29 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    paulflexes said
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
    I went my entire childhood life (up till my mid 20's) believing the bible, and "reading it" fairly regular; but never read it front to back in chronological order...just picked out scriptures here and there.

    Then I finally read it in its entirety. Been atheist ever since.

    LOL! Paul, you are incomparable. And I agree with your message entirely.


    Then Paul and you are taking a page out of the biblical Jesus' playbook:

    The biblical Jesus became an atheist against the Hebrew god and didn't want to have anything more to do with the Hebrew god's people.

    It's all in the Bible: 1) the god of the Ten Commandments did not approve of cannibalism or the consumption of blood; 2) if there was cannibalism going on it was a sign that the consumers of humans had been DEFEATED; 3) if there was consumption of blood going on, that god turned his face away from those consuming that "wine" and that god separated his people from those consuming that "communion, bread and wine, body and blood." The biblical Jesus gave up on god and the scriptures. The historical Jesuses lived through unspeakable horrors in their defeats in Galilee, in Jerusalem, and even at the Temple of Jerusalem when the Romans put down the Jewish Revolt.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 16, 2015 6:32 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    paulflexes said
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.
    I went my entire childhood life (up till my mid 20's) believing the bible, and "reading it" fairly regular; but never read it front to back in chronological order...just picked out scriptures here and there.

    Then I finally read it in its entirety. Been atheist ever since.

    LOL! Paul, you are incomparable. And I agree with your message entirely.
    There is hope for you. The description of an Atheist means = A non believer in a Creator and a Devil. The question is then, who created Earth and Life? Atheists believe in 'The Big Bang' undeniably and evolution. Satanist, Agnostic, Gnostic, Wicken, Atheist, whatever description, these are all words that Satan himself has used to cloud our imagination into becoming 'Non-believers'. One last scripture: John 3:16 For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son. That whosoever believe in him, should not perish but have eternal life. Go ahead 'Quote' or 'Un-quote' as you like, this is what these Forums are designed for. Did you know that the name 'Jesus' even appears 25 times in the Qu'ran? A quote from the Qu'ran in my own words, "From clay, he shaped a bird. Then he blessed it. It then came to life and flew away."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2015 12:26 PM GMT
    Domino_dancer saidThere is hope for you. The description of an Atheist means = A non believer in a Creator and a Devil.


    Nope, you're adding to it already I'm afraid! The plain, unmodified, simple, default, language-driven, etymological definition of Atheist is someone who does not believe in a god or gods. That's all there is to it! Why? Because you can have a god that is not a creator god. Therefore, the definition of Atheist is not as specific as what you suggest.

    Is the Devil a god? A deity? If the answer is yes, then okay, people who don't believe in the Devil are Atheistic. If the answer is no, then Atheism doesn't address the Devil. Atheism says nothing about supernatural claims in general. Many Atheists believe in ghosts, for example. Atheism only deals with a belief in a god, regardless of that god's purpose, origin, or deeds.

    The question is then, who created Earth and Life? Atheists believe in 'The Big Bang' undeniably and evolution.


    Too many claims on Atheism and Atheists! Not all Atheists believe the Big Bang hypothesis, nor do all Atheists believe in Evolution. Look at Raelians for an example of this. As for "undeniably", I'd say it's because Evolution is undeniable, and that the Big Bang hypothesis is the theory currently in the forefront, explaining how we got here, with the most supporting evidence behind it...but I'm not going to go into science detail in this post. I'm just addressing simple understanding of what an Atheist (by definition) is.

    Also, you use the phrase, who, in the line, "who created Earth and Life." A small sign of bias from the start I'm sorry to see. Who or What I could live with at a pinch, but me, for example, it's only the What part that I'm interested in, not who. I don't believe there was a who.

    Satanist, Agnostic, Gnostic, Wicken, Atheist, whatever description, these are all words that Satan himself has used to cloud our imagination into becoming 'Non-believers'.


    First, prove it.
    Second, imagination is separate from the logical thinking circuits in our brain.
    Third, the terms Agnostic and Gnostic deal with what you know, not what you believe
    Fourth: "whatever description" is exceptionally vague. Maybe similar descriptive words would do better.
    In any case, however, I do not believe your claim that a supernatural being you label "Satan" is somehow behind the use of certain words--sounds with usages, but without intrinsic meaning, that we create and interpret to convey information, and that we give meaning to. Words don't have magic powers.

    One last scripture: John 3:16 For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son. That whosoever believe in him, should not perish but have eternal life.


    Usually I skip scriptural references, you might as well be quoting Star Trek at me--but what the fuck, every time I read that it makes me more and more sickened. If my dad told me to go and be tortured, and then get myself killed in what could be described as Roman-era suicide by cop, and then force people to be thankful to him for it...? What is praise worthy about sending your son to get killed? God made this fucked up situation in the first place. If that biblical God had done things right and properly (dare I say perfectly?) the first time, he wouldn't have needed to kill his son in the first place.

    Go ahead 'Quote' or 'Un-quote' as you like, this is what these Forums are designed for.


    Thank you mate; cheers, I will!

    Did you know that the name 'Jesus' even appears 25 times in the Qu'ran? A quote from the Qu'ran in my own words, "From clay, he shaped a bird. Then he blessed it. It then came to life and flew away."


    Aaaand I'm glad this is at the end cause I'm stumped. It's a neat fact--I knew Jesus was mentioned in the Quran, but I didn't know the exact tally--but I'm not sure what the point is in relation to this topic or otherwise. Or if that quote is from Muhammad, or Jesus, or the narrator, or one of the storytellers, or what. You say "in your own words," so I'm just a little lost, there.

    In any case, that's enough typing for now!
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Sep 18, 2015 6:13 PM GMT
    I sort of admire Kodiak for attempting to quash superstitious nonsense, but at the same time none of the believers have the wherewithal to process any of his posts, so it's a wash.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2015 7:21 PM GMT
    HottJoe saidI sort of admire Kodiak for attempting to quash superstitious nonsense, but at the same time none of the believers have the wherewithal to process any of his posts, so it's a wash.


    Aww. Well I appreciate the admiration! But, I do want to point out--for my part, I never, ever make an assumption about an individuals intelligence or mental state. I try to treat everyone equally--I try to break things down as simply as I can, but there is a minimum comprehension level when dealing with things that are especially scientific in nature.

    Ignorance can be solved with Education. So the only thing I will ever assume, is that the person I'm communicating with is interested in dispelling their Ignorance. In learning more. Willful Ignorance however, I have no time for, and absolutely despise the individual--not just their opinions, but the person themselves--for being satisfied with their ignorance, and not seeking to learn more about the world they live in.

    For my part, I like responding to these posts for a few reasons:

    1) It's great practice for me! Logical exercises and critical thinking are important--so much so that when I don't have opposing arguments to consider, I look at my own arguments, to see if they hold up. I look at my beliefs, put them under the microscope and ask myself why I believe what I do, and if I don't find a good reason, I label that belief as "suspect"!

    2) It's hopefully great for others who are on my side! People who agree with my opinions or positions can read what I've written, and see if it holds up. If they agree with it, great! If they disagree with one of my arguments, great! I just hope they take the time to respond to me, and tell me why I may need to re-examine my position, or arguments.

    3) It's hopefully great for others who disagree with me! By typing my super long posts, I do my best to provide as much detail as possible, so that people who disagree with me can at the very least, read through my post, to find out why I hold my opinions.

    4) It's hopefully great for the person I'm directly quoting! I try to organize all my huge posts so that the quotes are easy to see, and my responses are easy to analyze. There's a lot of text, which I'm apologetic for, but I'd hope that anyone who is serious about truth, about listening to people and trying to come to a better understanding of the world around them--will take the time to read, analyze, and attempt to understand what I'm offering. If they don't, that's fine too.

    So, that's why I make the big posts I do: there's a minimum of four exclusive benefits I get out of them! If number 4 doesn't work out, that's fine! I benefit from 1, 2 and 3! If 3 and 4 don't work out, that's fine too, because I'm still benefiting from 1 and 2!

    But yeah, after that one topic on evolution, I'm afraid I've dismissed any intentions of responding directly to StephenOABC. After reading his responses, and finding that he was being evasive and not responding anywhere near directly to the criticisms I made against his 'arguments', and finally seeing him bring up a point he made at the very beginning while seeming to not understand what was brought up later in regards to Evolution answers his question...well, too bad. I mentioned my dislike of "Willful Ignorance" at the beginning of this post, and after the back-and-forth, I need evidence that he is not being willfully ignorant, before I am willing to continue the dialogue. But until then like I mentioned, I'm still benefiting from the posts I make.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Sep 18, 2015 7:47 PM GMT
    Why don't scientists take mystical forces into account when they run lab experiments? I mean aren't god and the angels intervening in our lives in every way?

    Think about it. If there was a god picking and choosing our fates, then the scientific method would be useless.

    Therefore I say any scientist with integrity should be a militant atheist, and everyone who prays is just superstitious.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2015 2:38 AM GMT
    Domino_dancer saidMaybe you should study The Bible more, if you want to that is? Start by reading, 1John 1:1-6.


    Domino_Dancer (leaving the below unsaid):

    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.

    2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.

    3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

    4 We write this to make our joy complete.

    5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

    6 If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2015 2:51 AM GMT
    Domino_dancer

    John 3:16 For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son. That whosoever believe in him, should not perish but have eternal life.


    Kodiak

    Every time I read that it makes me more and more sickened.

    If my dad told me to go and be tortured, and then get myself killed in what could be described as Roman-era suicide by cop, and then force people to be thankful to him for it...? What is praiseworthy about sending your son to get killed?

    steefenoabc

    Ask military families and paramilitary families.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2015 2:57 AM GMT
    Domino_Dancer

    Did you know that the name 'Jesus' even appears 25 times in the Qu'ran? A quote from the Qu'ran in my own words, "From clay, he shaped a bird. Then he blessed it. It then came to life and flew away."


    Kodiak

    I'm not sure what the point is in relation to this topic or otherwise.

    stephenoabc

    He's probably telling you he takes that statement from Al Qu'ran as a historical fact. Adam was created from clay. Jesus as a child could give life from clay, therefore he is God.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 2:23 PM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    Kodiak said:

    "If my dad told me to go and be tortured, and then get myself killed in what could be described as Roman-era suicide by cop, and then force people to be thankful to him for it...? What is praiseworthy about sending your son to get killed?
    "

    Ask military families and paramilitary families.



    I'm going to tear into those six words you put down, and save this entire post to try and ensure you will always have an opportunity to apologize for that comparison you made. So, let's begin, and to make this easy:
    Red text represents the Abrahamic God and Jesus story arc.
    Blue text represents the military family analogy.


    What's the difference between a dad telling their child to join the military, and the Abrahamic God telling Jesus to die for humanity's sins. Well, let's start with the big one:

    HE'S GOD.
    HE HAS THE POWER TO STOP ALL WARS. HE HAS THE POWER TO CHANGE THE LAW THAT HE CREATED, TO REMOVE MANKIND'S SIN WITHOUT SACRIFICING HIS ONLY FUCKING CHILD.


    But what decision does God make? He decides instead of using his power to save humanity, he'll indulge in bloody human sacrifice in which he gets to enjoy watching his only son get tortured. Your God is either too weak to do anything about changing the law, or too stupid to not realize there are better ways of going about it.


    Dad, on the other hand, is not God. He doesn't have magical powers, he has absolutely no power over whether or not his child joining the military even goes to a combat zone. No power over whether that child encounters enemy forces, and engages in combat. Furthermore, in the United States at least, military service is not mandatory--the child joined the military of their own free will (if they were forced into it against their will by the Dad, that'd be immoral on the Dad's part).

    As well as Dad not having power over where their child is deployed, or what MOS they're trained into, Dad also doesn't have foreknowledge of what is going to happen once their child is in the military. Dad doesn't know whether the child is going to be tortured and then executed. Dad just knows that there's a good cause behind their child's joining the military, but it's a cause that can be fulfilled without their child having to be brutally slain. That's right! You don't have to die to be in the military. It's not in the contract or anything (wasn't in mine, at least)!


    Jesus on the other hand, had no choice. Whether Jesus is God, or the son of God, or both, or some other stupid nonsensical thing--Jesus was, according to those bronze-age mythologies, put here for one purpose: to be brutally tortured by his father's command, and then executed in a vile manner. Was their good reason behind it? "Saving mankind from their sins?" Well, you'd have to assume sin actually exists, but you'd also have to assume God had no other option. Why?

    Because if God had the option to save mankind without killing his only child, wouldn't he have taken it? Probably not, to be honest. The Old Testament speaks volumes about his baleful personality and lust for blood, and the New Testament seems to demonstrate just how far he's willing to go to get his fix for meat sacrifice, with the human sacrifice being his penultimate fetish. Oh, and here's another one:


    Dad didn't create the hostile forces their child may encounter during the course of their military service. These forces that dad's child will fight have developed over the years from a host of negative influences, ranging from sociological deficits, to political turmoil, economic instability, and religious motivation, culminating in a society that seeks to assert their dominance over others using violence and all the other tactics of warfare.

    But dad didn't create all those factors that led to those forces deciding war was the only option. Dad didn't let those opposing forces fester like some malignant growth, which eventually became a sizable enough faction to warrant sending soldiers to combat it. Dad didn't stand idly by while these "evils" evolved into the reprobate scum who refuse to be brought into the 21st century...and then decide the only option was to commit their child to a foreseen and certain death.


    I'll be honest, it took me a while before I could respond to you on this one, mostly because the words "sadly delusional fuck" kept echoing in my head. That you would even think of sharing such an inane and inept concept--that you could even imagine that such a disgusting reference to the military would be analogous to the insanity of a mad God sending their child to die when such a thing was unnecessary and easily circumvent.

    But it's okay. You can share your opinion, and I can disagree with it. And since I'm currently enlisted, and waiting for my day to go to basic, I'll forgive you. Because as far as I can tell, you've done nothing but become so enamored with your belief, that you're willing to drag humanity down to the same level as your God. You don't have the confidence, or the freedom of will, to realize that you're better than that God--that you have the ability to be a thousand times more moral than anything that old-world deity was ever written to be.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 3:28 PM GMT
    HottJoe saidI sort of admire Kodiak for attempting to quash superstitious nonsense, but at the same time none of the believers have the wherewithal to process any of his posts, so it's a wash.


    Not at all. I never posted because I saw no need to. However, because you've posted this, I will.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 3:39 PM GMT

    Kodiak, first I'd like to tell you I married an atheist. I'm Christian.

    You said, "HE'S GOD.
    HE HAS THE POWER TO STOP ALL WARS. HE HAS THE POWER TO CHANGE THE LAW THAT HE CREATED, TO REMOVE MANKIND'S SIN WITHOUT SACRIFICING HIS ONLY FUCKING CHILD.

    But what decision does God make? He decides instead of using his power to save humanity, he'll indulge in bloody human sacrifice in which he gets to enjoy watching his only son get tortured. Your God is either too weak to do anything about changing the law, or too stupid to not realize there are better ways of going about it."

    It reads as though what you know of Christianity is US Evangelism.

    Here's another take. Men wrote books, powerful books used to control others via god. In them were large numbers of rules and laws, some of which were appalling. God wasn't like that at all, however. So....god comes down into human form, knowing full well he'd (human male) be killed. Sure enough, they killed him, then god sat back and forgave them to prove that god was nothing like what they written in those books; that miserable cold vengeful wrathful implacable god, impatient of worthless man, waiting for an unwary moment to strike him down in his sin. Interestingly, a lot of Christians don't care for this perspective, though some of us do.

    Try seeing Christian faith as many rather than one. HottJoe as well, like most Americans, have apparently been exposed to aggressive literalist bible inerrancy Evangelistic belief. It is only one branch of faith though. One I do not care for or recognize.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 4:49 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Kodiak, first I'd like to tell you I married an atheist. I'm Christian.

    It reads as though what you know of Christianity is US Evangelism.

    Here's another take. Men wrote books, powerful books used to control others via god. In them were large numbers of rules and laws, some of which were appalling. God wasn't like that at all, however. So....god comes down into human form, knowing full well he'd (human male) be killed. Sure enough, they killed him, then god sat back and forgave them to prove that god was nothing like what they written in those books; that miserable cold vengeful wrathful implacable god, impatient of worthless man, waiting for an unwary moment to strike him down in his sin. Interestingly, a lot of Christians don't care for this perspective, though some of us do.

    Try seeing Christian faith as many rather than one. HottJoe as well, like most Americans, have apparently been exposed to aggressive literalist bible inerrancy Evangelistic belief. It is only one branch of faith though. One I do not care for or recognize.


    My first thought, "Yeah, that's a new and interesting way of looking at things! A new perspective I'll keep in mind as I continue to discuss this subject with others". My second thought is, "Prove it."

    Because the mere fact that your view is in conflict with the hundreds of thousands of evangelicals shows there's a discrepancy here that has rarely been addressed, and as far as I can tell, never been solved. The idea that your concept of god and that god's actions differs from the concepts of an entire population, means we need to sit down and use an objective standard to identify which of you is right. Because clearly you both can't be--if both sides have mutually exclusive views of that god, then only one of them can be right (though, all of them could be wrong).

    So though I appreciate the angle, it's really nothing new to me. Time over in Europe allowed me to meet all manner of individuals who had various beliefs, and time in the southern United States let me discover even more views on Christianity. But, time in Alaska, allowed me the opportunity to think of all sides involved, and come to the conclusion that, while everyone has their particular view, not everyone has the evidence to demonstrate why their belief in mythology should trump the belief of others.

    I appreciate you sharing your view on it, I believe knowledge is power, and feel good having knowledge that other people have other takes on this whole thing--but I have no way to validate that view, and determine whether that's actually what happened or not. It's an interesting idea, but it seems to be just an idea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 7:31 PM GMT

    Hey Kodiak,

    Well....Evangelicals are not an entire population, by any stretch. Theirs is only ONE way of Christian faith, and there are many, from Metropolitan Community Church (which is gay) to Episcopalians to Pentecostals to Baptists to Catholics to Unitarians to Amish to Mennonites to Westboro (that's only part of the long list). They all have ONE thing in common, that the others are incorrect.

    Then there are those of us that follow no church or organized faith.

    ...and it can't be proved, which is why it's called faith and a belief. Any intelligent Christian can tell you the book is flawed, limited, and can contradict itself quite finely. One example is the edict to admonish one another etc, then conversely, that revilers are sinning. lol

    Christ said two things, love one another as you would yourself, and love what made you and everything, more. The rest is a cornucopia of sin trivia.

    My athiest husband has more Christian ethic (see above instruction from Christ) than a great many Christians.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 8:11 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Evangelicals are not an entire population, by any stretch. Theirs is only ONE way of Christian faith, and there are many, from Metropolitan Community Church (which is gay) to Episcopalians to Pentecostals to Baptists to Catholics to Unitarians to Amish to Mennonites to Westboro (that's only part of the long list). They all have ONE thing in common, that the others are incorrect.


    They believe that the others are incorrect, true. They believe that you are incorrect. You believe that they are incorrect--so how do we determine which of you has got it right?

    Then there are those of us that follow no church or organized faith.


    That may be so, but if that's the case, you might as well be making up your own religion. There's no way to tell.

    ...and it can't be proved, which is why it's called faith and a belief.


    Exactly! Well, no, not exactly. Kind of.

    Faith, definitely. But belief does not equal faith. This is a point of contention for many people, but I'll share my view here:

    Belief is "an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists." We must be convinced of something in order to believe it.

    Faith is summed up as "belief without evidence." Faith alone can convince people of something existing, thus, Faith is a pathway to Belief.

    Evidence is "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."

    Now, Evidence is the single most useful factor in determining our beliefs. We are convinced for many reasons, but Evidence should be at the forefront, because without Evidence, you would only have Faith--and Faith would equate to nothing more than Gullibility--believing something without evidence.

    I'm not making a jab at religion here, but honestly, Faith is the tool of con-men, trying to make you believe something that isn't true. They want you to put faith in something, to exploit you.

    In order to believe something, you need to be convinced of it--and we can be convinced for good or bad reasons. As far as I'm concerned, I find Faith to be a bad reason to believe, because Evidence overrides Faith.

    If you have Evidence, you don't need Faith.

    Any intelligent Christian can tell you the book is flawed, limited, and can contradict itself quite finely. One example is the edict to admonish one another etc, then conversely, that revilers are sinning.


    So Christians who don't think the book is flawed, aren't intelligent?

    Maybe they don't think it's flawed because they've been convinced that it isn't flawed, for bad reasons. Maybe they believe through faith because they haven't taken the time to look at the evidence--eg, what the bible actually says?

    Christ said two things, love one another as you would yourself, and love what made you and everything, more. The rest is a cornucopia of sin trivia.


    Christ said more than two things, then! As for the rest being an abundant supply of sin trivia...maybe we should go over that? Cause that's kind of cherry picking from what I can tell. Maybe we should call out the bad stuff, and bring it up in order to better understand just who this Christ dude was, and what he really thought. He didn't seem the sort to say trivial things, I'd imagine that his other words are also of importance.

    My athiest husband has more Christian ethic (see above instruction from Christ) than a great many Christians.


    And I don't see why that's a good thing. Frankly, I don't think the 'Christian ethic' or this concept of 'A good Christian' really holds. I've seen some people who said they were Christians who were nice people. I've seen people who were assholes who were Christian. I've seen people who don't believe in god who were a helluva lot nicer and thoughtful and empathetic than other people who were considered 'good Christians'.


    Anyway, I'm not trying to launch some sort of assault here. I'm actually indulging in a bit of recreation at the moment, and just typed this up every few minutes I've had a break. What I'm doing is what I explained in an earlier post of mine--I'm reading through your response, and offering a critique. By all means, keep responding with your own opinions as well! The back and forth is useful for everyone.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 8:26 PM GMT


    The two things Christ said we should do (I should have been clearer). Everything else hinges on those two things.

    As for cherry picking, that's the whole point. The book does have one very interesting power, what someone takes from it and what they do with it, tells everyone else what kind of person/Christian they are.

    As for belief, meh, semantics. People believed the earth was flat, with no proof, until someone proved it was round.

    You know, Bill and I never have discussions quite like this, being atheist, he simply doesn't care about religions and all the claptrap. He does care, though, about its negative impact through misuses, and that list is pretty appalling, in obvious and subtle ways.

    Again, though, I feel you and many others here look at Christianity through the lens of fundie evangelism, which is horrible, but is what you're familiar with.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2015 8:40 PM GMT

    Kodiak said, "Anyway, I'm not trying to launch some sort of assault here. I'm actually indulging in a bit of recreation at the moment, and just typed this up every few minutes I've had a break. What I'm doing is what I explained in an earlier post of mine--I'm reading through your response, and offering a critique. By all means, keep responding with your own opinions as well! The back and forth is useful for everyone."

    Oh hey, I know you're not. It's a pretty amicable back-and-forth. I enjoy the company of atheists very much. They pull the blinkers off tunnel vision, lol.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Sep 21, 2015 9:00 PM GMT
    A vote for HottJoe is a vote for Christians and atheists alike!!

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4116288