The Atheism Thread - Part 6

[Warhammer]

That dude had it coming.

 

[Gee]

Demoted? He was a mod?

 

[KevanG]

Nope but he lost around 200 of his posts for spamming. He was almost at the avatar stage.

 

[BestGirl]

The OT god is definitly a wraging dick.

Back in 100-200AD when the church was still figuring out just what the hell it was about there were some groups that considered the OT god a seperate entity from God the Father and Jesus. They called the OT god the Creator. An imperfect lesser being which was capable of mood swings. Their argument was "how could an all powerful all knwlowing always right being have moods? Moods imply a change and why would a being like god get emotional and change?"

I heard there was an early Christian philosopher who believed that whenever the OT God did or instructed the Israelites to do something evil that it was actually Satan pretending to be God.

Regardless, it's interesting to know that early Christians were just as puzzled about the contradictions between the OT and NT God as modern Christians.

Demoted? He was a mod?

He had his post count busted down to 70.

 

[Breogan]

Nope but he lost around 200 of his posts for spamming. He was almost at the avatar stage.

He had his post count busted down to 70.

By the hand of Mgod.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

The mods work in mysterious ways.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Society's loss, those posts being deleted.

 

[Marvolo]

I heard there was an early Christian philosopher who believed that whenever the OT God did or instructed the Israelites to do something evil that it was actually Satan pretending to be God.

Regardless, it's interesting to know that early Christians were just as puzzled about the contradictions between the OT and NT God as modern Christians.

Its pretty interesting stuff indeed. The view that the bible came to us in one coherent book with zero contradictions with verses and chapters is a fairly recent one. Early christians, namely the ones before the Church had put the book together, had many different ideas about pretty much everything. Over time the church councils and politics hammered away at this speculation until they had a doctrine and dogma. I think it was Origen who said the bible is full of biblical truths but that doesnt mean everything in it is history or fact. He was particularly opposed to taking the creation story literally. He consideredbit a foolish notion. However, he believed their were biblical truths in the story that could only be seen if we didnt try to fit the story into history. For him this idea of viewing the whole bible as fact and history was like trying to fit a square peg in a rpund whole and doing so lost some of its truth and meaning.

This type of thinking and different interpretations were all over the place, and it led to some very interesting paths christianity might have taken. One group of early christians focused heavily on prophecy and received prophecy from women. Had this form taken off Christianity would be unrecognizable. It would have been built around continuing prophecy and female prophets instead of a set book.

 

[KevanG]

I think it was Origen who said the bible is full of biblical truths but that doesnt mean everything in it is history or fact.

The book says that it's truths about itself are true? That sounds reasonable.

 

[Marvolo]

The book says that it's truths about itself are true? That sounds reasonable.

Not literal truths. Truths as in valuable lessons worth learning. Im inclined to agree with him too. There are truths (lessons) to be learned from the creation story [and many stories in the bible and other holy texts] and in my mind its pretty clear that it was meant to teach lessons and not be read as history. That line of thought really doesnt sit well with some chiristians tho.

 

[KevanG]

I get that. I've also been inclined to treat everything in there as more of a layout of ideas on how to live, not something has to be taken directly or else.

 

[Marvolo]

I get that. I've also been inclined to treat everything in there as more of a layout of ideas on how to live, not something has to be taken directly or else.

That's my practice as well. A thousand plus years ago, give or take, I could see the reason for literal interpretations and strict adherence, but it doesnt really work today. That doesnt mean these books cant be used. We just have to find healthy ways to apply them to our modern lives. That's blasphemous to some ears, but it works for me.

 

[childeroland]

At the very least, some of those gnostic and hermetic texts (some of the stuff about the evil God, demiurge) can be read just as literature. They can be quite beautiful.

 

[Dr.]

You guys know the snake handling preacher that thought his faith would keep him from dying? Then, he died from a snake bite? Well now his son is doing the same thing!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...on-takes-rattler-killed-dad-article-1.1701252

...I think its a good illustration of how people will hold onto religion and all the claims that come with it, even when the expectations don't meet with reality.

“…For the Bible tells me so.” Or does it?

The most relevant and oft-cited reference to “snake handling” occurs in the Gospel of Mark (chapter 16, verses 17 and 18): “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”

Problem is… the vast majority of scholars agree that Mark 16 originally ended with verse 8. This verse describes women (including Mary Magdalene) visiting Jesus’s tomb and discovering it empty. They are told that Jesus has risen and that this news should be conveyed to the other disciples. But according to original Mark, the women “fled from the tomb and didn’t say anything to anyone, for they were afraid” (Mk 16:8) The End. A tad anticlimactic - especially since the other Gospels describe the risen Jesus interacting with the disciples, convincing “doubting” Thomas, ascending into heaven, etc. So later scribes decided that Mark, likewise, should have a more explicit account of the post-Crucifixion Jesus; and verses 9 to 20 were added - which just happened to include commentary about the faithful being invulnerable to snake bites.

 

[BestGirl]

Not literal truths. Truths as in valuable lessons worth learning. Im inclined to agree with him too. There are truths (lessons) to be learned from the creation story [and many stories in the bible and other holy texts] and in my mind its pretty clear that it was meant to teach lessons and not be read as history. That line of thought really doesnt sit well with some chiristians tho.

I don't know, pre-Enlightenment people believed some really crazy things. The writers of the Bible may have intended for the creation stories to be understood literally.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

Bought 'The God Delusion'. Great read so far.

 

[Marvolo]

Bought 'The God Delusion'. Great read so far.

Yeah it is!

 

[Warhammer]

About the whole thing with Old Testament God, I remember trying to defend the Tower of Babel one time. Somebody showed me a popular reddit post where someone called God a child and insecure about it. I said that God did what he did because human beings were arrogant by trying to reach God by their own means and not by God's means. However, I put a disclaimer saying I'm aware of how much of a dick it makes God sound. I'll admit it. It's kinda hard not to see it that way.

 

[Marvolo]

About the whole thing with Old Testament God, I remember trying to defend the Tower of Babel one time. Somebody showed me a popular reddit post where someone called God a child and insecure about it. I said that God did what he did because human beings were arrogant by trying to reach God by their own means and not by God's means. However, I put a disclaimer saying I'm aware of how much of a dick it makes God sound. I'll admit it. It's kinda hard not to see it that way.

I think there are good lessons in the Babel story.

[Dont get ahead of yourself and over-reach.

Dont be arrogant with your successes. Failure can follow even the greatest successes.]

The Bible says God brought the tower down, but IMO God is a metaphor for the destruction and calamity that can follow hubris and trying to do too much too fast. Itd a good lesson imo.

Ive heard the argument from baptists that the tower of babel is God's warning against a one world government and that things like the UN and the EU or any attempt to unite the world is a sign of the coming apocalypse. I call BS on that.

Tho I think there is a very strong possibility that the Jews who wrote the story used it as a warning and as a way to stop the tribes from uniting with outsiders. I, however, dont think that a united world is the sign of doom. Thats just paranoid nonsense.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I was having a similar conversation with two religious guys in college. I forget what we were talking about, but I criticized God for being unfair. They said that you get to do that when you are creator of the universe.

So God created a universe to rule over as a dick. Let's worship!

 

[Marvolo]

I was having a similar conversation with two religious guys in college. I forget what we were talking about, but I criticized God for being unfair. They said that you get to do that when you are creator of the universe.

So God created a universe to rule over as a dick. Let's worship!

Being a petty dick seems very human to me. Not the actions of a higher being. One would expect a being of that caliber to be above that stuff.

 

[MrsKent26]

I was having a similar conversation with two religious guys in college. I forget what we were talking about, but I criticized God for being unfair. They said that you get to do that when you are creator of the universe.

So God created a universe to rule over as a dick. Let's worship!

It always amuses me how religious people are content with de facto "just cause!" logic. I wrote a paper back in the day about how it's utterly impossible for God to be both benevolent and omnipotent given how he governs us and yet people insist he is both with either nonsensical or nonexistent arguments.

Considering that I find more than enough to talk about on the batman/superman board, I rarely venture to the community forum. I'm glad I did so today, as I had no idea this dandy thread existed. My lack of religion gets me in trouble more often than not, so this place seems highly appealing.

 

[The End]

Acceptable answer to any objection,


"He's God!"

 

[MrsKent26]

Acceptable answer to any objection,


"He's God!"

Indeed. It's perplexing that people can argue with such arrogance for an idea that has no grounding logic whatsoever. Although I think the absurdity of it spurs them on. When someone tries to win an argument by trotting out an answer like that, what kind of rebuttal can be made to it? Nothing. Because it doesn't allow for one. They mistakenly think they have won, when really they've conceded to having no argument at all.

 

[KevanG]

You missed the fun times with PW. 3/4 of his posts are gone but if you check his post history I'm sure you can get a general idea of how he his.

Actually he seems to be gone altogether now.