God vs Athiesm: Which Is More Rationale?

[hobelim]

Cows go around on all fours as do pigs so that wasn't God's criteria. Therefore what you said about Mohammed sounds irrational and absurd.

Cows are kosher, they ruminate, swine are not kosher because they do not ruminate. Teeming vermin who go down on all fours are another species entirely.

The only reason that what I said sounded absurd to you is because you have not taken the time or gone through the trouble to comprehend that kosher law is not literally about the flesh of one creature or another but it is about the teaching of one type of human being or another that reflects the defining attributes of described creatures whether clean or unclean.

In the beginning the talking serpent is condemned by God to crawl on its belly. In kosher law it is forbidden to eat the flesh of any creature that crawls on its belly. Make the connection.

Kosher law has literally nothing whatever to do with, cows, swine, or teeming vermin who go down on all fours much less what a person can or cannot serve for dinner. It is about the teaching of one type of person or another who by their displayed behaviors resemble one or another described creature. You already know that people are compared to cattle, pigs, vermin, snakes, bottom feeders, parasites, vultures, dogs, wolves, sheep, goats. etc., as has been done in every language and culture ever since people could talk.

The flesh of any given animal represents the teaching of any given person who acts like one or another animal. When Jesus said, eat my flesh, he was teaching exactly this.

If I shouldn't take the story about a talking snake literally why should I have to take Paul's teachings literally?

Good question, but one you wouldn't have to ask if you had done your homework. Paul claimed to have received a revelation from Jesus himself yet contradicts Jesus on many key points foundational to salvation. His description of what people should expect was a description based on ignorance about the hidden meaning behind the figurative language that Jesus used. If he had received a revelation from Jesus he would have explained the metaphors. He would not have described an event impossible to ever happen in this reality according to a literal interpretation of figurative language..

My understanding of Abraham's story is that he decided that idols did not equal gods and he established a covenant with one god of the many gods available. Their arrangement was mutually exclusive but that didn't mean Abraham didn't believe other gods didn't exist. Only much later did that concept creep into Judaism.

I know it must seem overwhelming. First things first. Stop speculating based on erroneous assumptions. Cleanse your mind from all previous judgements and then read the stories as if you were an educated and intelligent 21 century adult already well aware of whats possible and impossible who is trying to discover for the first time, deliberately, the hidden teaching in stories written to educate ancient children about the realities of this world and how to avoid the captivity of losing your mind to some slithering lowlife while living among the many varieties of human animals laying in wait out there in the wilderness that they would one day have to face.

If you want to avoid 40 years or more of hard study, learn to ask better questions. You probably don't have any time to waste.

 

[alang1216]

Cows are kosher, they ruminate, swine are not kosher because they do not ruminate.

kosher law is not literally about the flesh of one creature or another

This last I've never heard before and the two seem to contradict each other. Keeping kosher explicitly means not eating swine and that is the practice. You can read whatever you want into the text but it sounds to me like it was meant to be taken literally.

If I shouldn't take the story about a talking snake literally why should I have to take Paul's teachings literally?

Good question, but one you wouldn't have to ask if you had done your homework. Paul claimed to have received a revelation from Jesus himself yet contradicts Jesus on many key points foundational to salvation. His description of what people should expect was a description based on ignorance about the hidden meaning behind the figurative language that Jesus used. If he had received a revelation from Jesus he would have explained the metaphors. He would not have described an event impossible to ever happen in this reality according to a literal interpretation of figurative language.

You take Jesus figuratively but Paul you take literally? That seems your bias.

My understanding of Abraham's story is that he decided that idols did not equal gods and he established a covenant with one god of the many gods available. Their arrangement was mutually exclusive but that didn't mean Abraham didn't believe other gods didn't exist. Only much later did that concept creep into Judaism.

I know it must seem overwhelming. First things first. Stop speculating based on erroneous assumptions. Cleanse your mind from all previous judgements and then read the stories as if you were an educated and intelligent 21 century adult already well aware of whats possible and impossible who is trying to discover for the first time, deliberately, the hidden teaching in stories written to educate ancient children about the realities of this world and how to avoid the captivity of losing your mind to some slithering lowlife while living among the many varieties of human animals laying in wait out there in the wilderness that they would one day have to face.

If you want to avoid 40 years or more of hard study, learn to ask better questions. You probably don't have any time to waste.

So what makes my assumptions erroneous and your interpretation of hidden teachings valid? Sounds like we just have different interpretations of the text so you saying mine are erroneous without showing me why they are is useless and arrogant.

 

[hobelim]

This last I've never heard before and the two seem to contradict each other. Keeping kosher explicitly means not eating swine and that is the practice. You can read whatever you want into the text but it sounds to me like it was meant to be taken literally.

It sounds that way because the subject is hidden and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and was deliberately intended to go over the heads of people who do not think very deeply about it. Most of scripture was written during or after brutal times of oppression and exile. One could openly teach people to refrain from the flesh of swine but if they told them to not listen to the teaching of the oppressors, who do not think very deeply, it would have gotten them immediately maimed imprisoned or killed.

You take Jesus figuratively but Paul you take literally? That seems your bias.

And not without reason. Understanding figurative language cannot be faked. Wouldn't you notice if someone tried to fake being fluent in english?

So what makes my assumptions erroneous and your interpretation of hidden teachings valid? Sounds like we just have different interpretations of the text so you saying mine are erroneous without showing me why they are is useless and arrogant.

Fair enough.

I agree it would seem like one interpretation is as valid as any other, but I assure you, it only seems that way.

Remember, you said yourself that the idea that kosher law is about teaching and not about food is something that you have never heard before.

Try to see how the entire law and prophets confirms this before you dismiss it all as crazy talk without thinking very deeply about it.






"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again." Mathew 13:44


"I will give you hidden treasure, riches stored in secret places, so that you may know that I am the Lord, the God of Israel who summons you by name." Isaiah 45:3


"Time was when many were aghast at you, my people, and so now many nations recoil at sight of him, and kings curl their lips in disgust; for they see what they had never been told and things unheard before fill their thoughts." Isaiah 52:14

 

[Votto]

I just find it hard to believe if there is something in this universe powerful and smart enough to create everything, I don't think he would be a totalitarian conformist mass murderer that hates free will. Doesn't make sense to me.

That's just it. God isn't a totalitarian conformist mass murderer that hates free will. The "totalitarian conformist mass murderer that hates free will" is the imagined being that does not exist. God does.

Totalitarians take away our free will that God gave us freely. Man seeks to take away what God had ordained.

And why do we have free will? That is the question.

According to my faith, God is love.

So what is love? Love demands a choice to love the other back. Without it, love does not exist

For a God who has all power and knowledge, what would interest you? Would it be the soulless universe or would it be the one thing you have chosen to relinquish control over which is your free will?.

 

[alang1216]

This last I've never heard before and the two seem to contradict each other. Keeping kosher explicitly means not eating swine and that is the practice. You can read whatever you want into the text but it sounds to me like it was meant to be taken literally.

It sounds that way because the subject is hidden and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and was deliberately intended to go over the heads of people who do not think very deeply about it. Most of scripture was written during or after brutal times of oppression and exile. One could openly teach people to refrain from the flesh of swine but if they told them to not listen to the teaching of the oppressors, who do not think very deeply, it would have gotten them immediately maimed imprisoned or killed.

Are you saying that every Jew that keeps kosher has missed the meaning of scripture and doesn't think deeply about? That would apply to just about every practicing Jew for millennia. I have my doubts. To me the Bible is like a Rorschach ink blot, whatever you want to see, you'll see. Doesn't mean it is there, it just means we are great at connecting dots and seeing conspiracies.

 

[hobelim]

This last I've never heard before and the two seem to contradict each other. Keeping kosher explicitly means not eating swine and that is the practice. You can read whatever you want into the text but it sounds to me like it was meant to be taken literally.

It sounds that way because the subject is hidden and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used, and was deliberately intended to go over the heads of people who do not think very deeply about it. Most of scripture was written during or after brutal times of oppression and exile. One could openly teach people to refrain from the flesh of swine but if they told them to not listen to the teaching of the oppressors, who do not think very deeply, it would have gotten them immediately maimed imprisoned or killed.

Are you saying that every Jew that keeps kosher has missed the meaning of scripture and doesn't think deeply about? That would apply to just about every practicing Jew for millennia. I have my doubts. To me the Bible is like a Rorschach ink blot, whatever you want to see, you'll see. Doesn't mean it is there, it just means we are great at connecting dots and seeing conspiracies.

Moses taught that there was a particular way to follow the law that the people would turn away from after his death. That was a very long time ago. Whenever the people who held the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven were killed during whatever conquest and subsequent diaspora all that remained was a menu. Conforming to the menu until if ever a better revelation came is no disgrace.


"Come, all who are thirsty, come, fetch water; come, you who have no food, buy corn and eat, not for a price. Why spend money and get what is not bread, why give the price of your labor and go unsatisfied? Only listen to me and you will have good food to eat, and you will enjoy the fat of the land. Come to me and listen to my words, hear me, and you shall have life." Isaiah 55:1-5

 

[alang1216]

Moses taught that there was a particular way to follow the law that the people would turn away from after his death. That was a very long time ago. Whenever the people who held the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven were killed during whatever conquest and subsequent diaspora all that remained was a menu. Conforming to the menu until if ever a better revelation came is no disgrace.

It seems you are connecting dots that nobody else can see. Do you have your own religion?

 

[hobelim]

Moses taught that there was a particular way to follow the law that the people would turn away from after his death. That was a very long time ago. Whenever the people who held the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven were killed during whatever conquest and subsequent diaspora all that remained was a menu. Conforming to the menu until if ever a better revelation came is no disgrace.

It seems you are connecting dots that nobody else can see. Do you have your own religion?

Ugh. If you think that no one else can see all I can tell you is that religion is a thing of the past. I am keystone of the Yahad of God, the habitation of light.

If it makes you feel any better, you can think of me as just another nut job all dressed up as Don Quixote, certainly harmless, even amusing, in a guilty pleasure sort of way...

 

[alang1216]

Ugh. If you think that no one else can see all I can tell you is that religion is a thing of the past. I am keystone of the Yahad of God, the habitation of light.

If it makes you feel any better, you can think of me as just another nut job all dressed up as Don Quixote, certainly harmless, even amusing, in a guilty pleasure sort of way...

OK, I will.

 

[hobelim]

Ugh. If you think that no one else can see all I can tell you is that religion is a thing of the past. I am keystone of the Yahad of God, the habitation of light.

If it makes you feel any better, you can think of me as just another nut job all dressed up as Don Quixote, certainly harmless, even amusing, in a guilty pleasure sort of way...

OK, I will.

Thats great! Always look at the bright side of life. lol...You can even think that it was your decision.

You probably don't realize this either, but I have been known to indulge in a few guilty pleasures myself from time to time.

 

[alang1216]

Ugh. If you think that no one else can see all I can tell you is that religion is a thing of the past. I am keystone of the Yahad of God, the habitation of light.

If it makes you feel any better, you can think of me as just another nut job all dressed up as Don Quixote, certainly harmless, even amusing, in a guilty pleasure sort of way...

OK, I will.

Thats great! Always look at the bright side of life. lol...You can even think that it was your decision.

You probably don't realize this either, but I have been known to indulge in a few guilty pleasures myself from time to time.

At least you sound human so follow your heart.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[hobelim]

Ugh. If you think that no one else can see all I can tell you is that religion is a thing of the past. I am keystone of the Yahad of God, the habitation of light.

If it makes you feel any better, you can think of me as just another nut job all dressed up as Don Quixote, certainly harmless, even amusing, in a guilty pleasure sort of way...

OK, I will.

Thats great! Always look at the bright side of life. lol...You can even think that it was your decision.

You probably don't realize this either, but I have been known to indulge in a few guilty pleasures myself from time to time.

At least you sound human so follow your heart.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Human? Ha! I sure fooled you..lol

good to see that you have enough sense to stop wandering around in the desert for long enough to fill your empty canteen.

Anyway, its been fun. Thanks for playing along....

 

[Dr Grump]

When a scientist sets out to discover whether some theory or claim made by another person is the truth or not, what do they do? They attempt to repeat the 'experiment' by which that person arrived at that conclusion. True? And to insure against the contamination of any result they first sterilize the environment, all tubes and beakers etc., and calibrate any instruments that would be used in that pursuit and then follow the instructions given. True?

In a similar way, the claim that there is a God was made by people in scripture and the means by which God was revealed to them was also recorded, the instruction given in the law.

There is no microscope, telescope, and no sterile laboratory in which to repeat such an experiment . There is no technology, there are no instruments that can measure or detect what is incorporeal. the human mind is the only place and the only instrument capable of that search.

The problem inherent with that is that the average human mind is heavily contaminated, any results derived from information being processed in such an environment would inevitably be at best inaccurate.

What then?

Purify your mind and be refined and your consciousness will ascend to the realm of living beings capable of perceiving the living God and you will evolve into a new creature... To do that you must conform to the instruction given in the law according to the teaching of Jesus about the figurative nature of the words and hidden subjects.

Do it and God will reveal himself to you. Then you will have the evidence in hand.


My word of caution, make sure that you have the substance to deal with the truth. Once your mind has been opened, you will be put to the test. Whatever happens after that, your life will never be the same...

Again, nothing but belief. No tangible evidence.

 

[hobelim]

When a scientist sets out to discover whether some theory or claim made by another person is the truth or not, what do they do? They attempt to repeat the 'experiment' by which that person arrived at that conclusion. True? And to insure against the contamination of any result they first sterilize the environment, all tubes and beakers etc., and calibrate any instruments that would be used in that pursuit and then follow the instructions given. True?

In a similar way, the claim that there is a God was made by people in scripture and the means by which God was revealed to them was also recorded, the instruction given in the law.

There is no microscope, telescope, and no sterile laboratory in which to repeat such an experiment . There is no technology, there are no instruments that can measure or detect what is incorporeal. the human mind is the only place and the only instrument capable of that search.

The problem inherent with that is that the average human mind is heavily contaminated, any results derived from information being processed in such an environment would inevitably be at best inaccurate.

What then?

Purify your mind and be refined and your consciousness will ascend to the realm of living beings capable of perceiving the living God and you will evolve into a new creature... To do that you must conform to the instruction given in the law according to the teaching of Jesus about the figurative nature of the words and hidden subjects.

Do it and God will reveal himself to you. Then you will have the evidence in hand.


My word of caution, make sure that you have the substance to deal with the truth. Once your mind has been opened, you will be put to the test. Whatever happens after that, your life will never be the same...

Again, nothing but belief. No tangible evidence.

No, the claim made in scripture is that God exists, the way to confirm his existence has been made clear.

If you have no tangible evidence you have not done what is necessary to prepare your mind to perceive and stand in the presence of the living God.

Your dismissal amounts to claiming that there is no tangible evidence that smoking pot will make you high without ever taking so much as a toke.

Sheesh. All that is required is thinking deeply enough to clean house and purify your mind and then not doing stupid things. How lazy can you possibly be? How hard is that?

The least you could do is try.

 

[Weatherman2020]

When a scientist sets out to discover whether some theory or claim made by another person is the truth or not, what do they do? They attempt to repeat the 'experiment' by which that person arrived at that conclusion. True? And to insure against the contamination of any result they first sterilize the environment, all tubes and beakers etc., and calibrate any instruments that would be used in that pursuit and then follow the instructions given. True?

In a similar way, the claim that there is a God was made by people in scripture and the means by which God was revealed to them was also recorded, the instruction given in the law.

There is no microscope, telescope, and no sterile laboratory in which to repeat such an experiment . There is no technology, there are no instruments that can measure or detect what is incorporeal. the human mind is the only place and the only instrument capable of that search.

The problem inherent with that is that the average human mind is heavily contaminated, any results derived from information being processed in such an environment would inevitably be at best inaccurate.

What then?

Purify your mind and be refined and your consciousness will ascend to the realm of living beings capable of perceiving the living God and you will evolve into a new creature... To do that you must conform to the instruction given in the law according to the teaching of Jesus about the figurative nature of the words and hidden subjects.

Do it and God will reveal himself to you. Then you will have the evidence in hand.


My word of caution, make sure that you have the substance to deal with the truth. Once your mind has been opened, you will be put to the test. Whatever happens after that, your life will never be the same...

Again, nothing but belief. No tangible evidence.

They have eyes, yet cannot see.....

 

[The Irish Ram]

Cant prove one either way. So is saying one is rational, actual irrational?
Kinda why I consider myself agnostic. I don't doubt a supreme being, I just doubt man made religion.
Weatherman2020, Is it rational to believe in God?

Yes TN you can prove it. One can predict the future.

Is it rational to believe in God? Let's ask Pascal:
The conclusion that Pascal’s Wager draws from this is that belief in the Christian God is the rational course of action, even if there is no evidence that he exists. If the Christian God does not exist then it is of little importance whether we believe or disbelieve in him. If the Christian God does exist then it is of great importance that we do believe in him. In order to cover ourselves in all circumstances, therefore, we ought to believe that the Christian God exists.

In other words, If I believe in God and die and it ends there, no heaven, I have lost nothing. But, If I don't believe in God, and it turns out to all be true, what I have lost is my eternity.

 

[Dr Grump]

[QNo, the claim made in scripture is that God exists, the way to confirm his existence has been made clear.

If you have no tangible evidence you have not done what is necessary to prepare your mind to perceive and stand in the presence of the living God.

Your dismissal amounts to claiming that there is no tangible evidence that smoking pot will make you high without ever taking so much as a toke.

Sheesh. All that is required is thinking deeply enough to clean house and purify your mind and then not doing stupid things. How lazy can you possibly be? How hard is that?

The least you could do is try.

What a vacuous analogy. I have to clear my mind to believe in something that only faith can deliver? What do you do for an encore? Try and persuade the Flat Earth Society that the world is round?

 

[hobelim]

What a vacuous analogy. I have to clear my mind to believe in something that only faith can deliver? What do you do for an encore? Try and persuade the Flat Earth Society that the world is round?

I see, you really are that lazy.

I didn't say to clear your mind, so you can 'believe', I said to think deeply, and by doing so, purify your mind. You should probably go back to sleep. Only the pure of mind can stand in the presence of the living God.

Sometimes when a vessel designed for a holy purpose becomes defiled or contaminated in such a way it can never be cleansed or restored. What has become effectively useless gets summarily tossed in the trash.

Its the Law.

I can live with that.

 

[Dr Grump]

What a vacuous analogy. I have to clear my mind to believe in something that only faith can deliver? What do you do for an encore? Try and persuade the Flat Earth Society that the world is round?

I see, you really are that lazy.

I didn't say to clear your mind, so you can 'believe', I said to think deeply, and by doing so, purify your mind. You should probably go back to sleep. Only the pure of mind can stand in the presence of the living God.

Sometimes when a vessel designed for a holy purpose becomes defiled or contaminated in such a way it can never be cleansed or restored. What has become permanently useless gets tossed in the trash.

I can live with that.

No what you see is a skeptic who doesn't believe that the so-called Christian god (who is nothing more than a reinvention of other, older gods anyway).

Oh! I should go back to sleep because only the pure of mind can stand in the presence of the living god (whatever that is) So you are one of those arrogant douches who think you are somehow special? That somehow this god chose 'you' to be so pure of mind. IOW, you have to walk sideways through a door because your head is too big to fit through a door normally. Ha! I don't even believe, yet even I know that if somehow your god did exist he would think you nothing but an arrogant ass and be embarrassed that you are one of his followers.

 

[hobelim]

What a vacuous analogy. I have to clear my mind to believe in something that only faith can deliver? What do you do for an encore? Try and persuade the Flat Earth Society that the world is round?

I see, you really are that lazy.

I didn't say to clear your mind, so you can 'believe', I said to think deeply, and by doing so, purify your mind. You should probably go back to sleep. Only the pure of mind can stand in the presence of the living God.

Sometimes when a vessel designed for a holy purpose becomes defiled or contaminated in such a way it can never be cleansed or restored. What has become permanently useless gets tossed in the trash.

I can live with that.

No what you see is a skeptic who doesn't believe that the so-called Christian god (who is nothing more than a reinvention of other, older gods anyway).

Oh! I should go back to sleep because only the pure of mind can stand in the presence of the living god (whatever that is) So you are one of those arrogant douches who think you are somehow special? That somehow this god chose 'you' to be so pure of mind. IOW, you have to walk sideways through a door because your head is too big to fit through a door normally. Ha! I don't even believe, yet even I know that if somehow your god did exist he would think you nothing but an arrogant ass and be embarrassed that you are one of his followers.

You are not a skeptic you are a cantankerous old prick wallowing in obstinate stupidity, really no different than a sanctimonious religious fundamentalist asshole.

And no, there is nothing special about me. I just have taken the time and have gone through the trouble of removing from my mind all that causes people to stumble in their perceptions. Then I became a rare species of creature capable of seeing what is right in front of my eyes.

Amazing, isn't it?