Understanding the Mentality and World View of the Christian Fundamentalist

[sealybobo]

It seems to me all our problems will be solved without religion. Poverty global warming cures for diseases eventually getting off this rock alternative energy crime racism pollution equality and every other issue we have will be solved without religion.

Perhaps. But I am not sure what crime has to do with religion, for example. I would be pretty confident arguing that our prisons are not filled with people who were very faithful adherents to religion at the time they were arrested. I think what the community of faith can do in regard to the things you list is offer support and love. Eliminating famine or poverty comes from a motivation of love for one's fellow man. Theists do a great deal in that regard. Developing alternate energy, perhaps not so much, but according to scripture we are to be good stewards of the planet, thus we should support environmental causes.

Unless you think praying matters?

Well people generally pray for thanks or to ask for something they want. In a sense they are making a choice. So if, for example, a person prays for racism to be eradicated from society, they are, in a sense, choosing that. If enough people pray for it, it means by extension, more and more people are choosing it, and therefore it has a greater likelihood of becoming reality, not so much through the power of God but through collective choice.

I will say this...it certainly doesn't hurt. I have yet to run into an atheist who was in a desperate position and told me not to bother when I said I would pray for them to have a positive outcome.

When someone says they will pray for me or for something I secretely make fun but I appreciate the kind thought and would never say anything. Lol. I just think "oh brother"

You seem like a great person BTW. With more theists were like you. My brothers the same. Great man. I wouldnt want to hurt him or disrespect his beliefs no matter how dumb I think they are.

I'm only a militant athiest on usmb.

 

[BluePhantom]

When someone says they will pray for me or for something I secretely make fun but I appreciate the kind thought and would never say anything. Lol. I just think "oh brother"

You seem like a great person BTW. With more theists were like you. My brothers the same. Great man. I wouldnt want to hurt him or disrespect his beliefs no matter how dumb I think they are.

I'm only a militant athiest on usmb.

Well I appreciate that and the sentiment is mutual. To me a prayer for someone is just a nice gesture. It's like when someone wishes me a Happy Hanukkah. Well I am not Jewish so i don't celebrate that holiday, but neither do I screech "I AM NOT JEWISH! WHY WOULD YOU WISH THAT ON ME?!?!?" Stuff like that is just stupid. I simply can't understand that type of mentality. I have even had pagans wish me a Happy Solstice before and I wasn't bothered by it. The person is offering a sincere positive wish. I accept it as such and return it in kind.

To me, offering a prayer for an atheist is very similar. It may not help. It may not be what they subscribe to, but it's a positive wish and releases positive energy. As DT and I discussed, action is better than prayers, but if a prayer is all one has to offer, what's the harm in trying?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Or perhaps God is of the opinion that no harm can be done to the spirit, so death and human suffering is really not anything that has long term consequences in the grand scheme of it all.

Now that is a completely different topic. The existence of a spirit is not purely theoretical. It can, and has been, measured scientifically.

Asking those who can achieve spiritual trance states to do so and then measuring brain activity it is possible to show that this is a different "state of mind" to that of someone not in that state. If I recall correctly these same states can be detected in animals too.

As someone who does experience my own spirituality, mostly when closer to large bodies of water, there is the legitimate question of how do I reconcile that as an atheist?

The answer is quite simple. As mammals we are capable of self inducing a trance like state of mind under given circumstances. The more we practice the better we become at it.

However I don't conflate being in a "spiritual state" with the existence of any deity. Religion has nefariously co-opted our natural ability to reach a trance like state as "evidence" for the existence of their deity since they have nothing else to use. Simply because we can achieve a measurable state of mind is not evidence for anything "supernatural". We can do it therefore it is perfectly natural.

You will note that religions denied that animals have "souls" and yet animals can also go into the same trance like states. Religions made that pronouncement because they had no "evidence" that animals could achieve those states. Now that science has established they can religions are going to have to adapt.

So to be precise I am a self described spiritual atheist and yes, there are others just like me out there too.

Very interesting, indeed. So help me understand your belief. You mention a spirituality but not one connected to a divine deity. I am understanding you to mean a spiritual force that is within us that links us to nature and the universe around us but is not an eternal soul as theists see it. Is that it? If that's the case what happens to the spirit upon death? Does it die with the body? This is quite interesting.

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

 

[BluePhantom]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

 

[BluePhantom]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

BTW, this is really off topic but it's probably my favorite page of Biblical manuscripts. If I was able to take one single page of ancient manuscripts for myself, this would be the page. I love it because it demonstrates the history of the Bible so clearly and really makes those who adhere to the inerrant nature of the Bible squirm.

The page is from Codex Vaticanus, one of the earliest extant copies of the Bible we have. On the page with Hebrews 1 there is a great section. Hebrews 1:3 is written, in part "3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...." (Heb 1:3, NIV) Well in Vaticanus it's slightly different and there is a great exchange between scribes. The first scribe writes "...maintaining all things by his powerful word...". Well another scribe came along, scratched that out and wrote "...bearing all things by his powerful word...". Then the first scribe changed it back and added a note in the margin. If you look closely at the pic below between the first and second columns you can see the margin note.

Well what the note says is "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which translates as "Fool and knave. Leave the old reading and stop changing it." I want that on my tombstone!

Anyhow, it's pretty clear that even in the early 4th Century CE, people were messing with scripture and pissing other people off.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

BTW, this is really off topic but it's probably my favorite page of Biblical manuscripts. If I was able to take one single page of ancient manuscripts for myself, this would be the page. I love it because it demonstrates the history of the Bible so clearly and really makes those who adhere to the inerrant nature of the Bible squirm.

The page is from Codex Vaticanus, one of the earliest extant copies of the Bible we have. On the page with Hebrews 1 there is a great section. Hebrews 1:3 is written, in part "3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...." (Heb 1:3, NIV) Well in Vaticanus it's slightly different and there is a great exchange between scribes. The first scribe writes "...maintaining all things by his powerful word...". Well another scribe came along, scratched that out and wrote "...bearing all things by his powerful word...". Then the first scribe changed it back and added a note in the margin. If you look closely at the pic below between the first and second columns you can see the margin note.

Well what the note says is "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which translates as "Fool and knave. Leave the old reading and stop changing it." I want that on my tombstone!

Anyhow, it's pretty clear that even in the early 4th Century CE, people were messing with scripture and pissing other people off.

Reminds me of my favorite Vespasian quotation as he lay on his deathbed. "Woe is me, I think that I am becoming a God"!

Anyone who retains his sense of humor right up to the end is essentially laughing in the face of death. That is how I want to be remembered too although I seriously doubt that anyone will care what I have to say.

 

[BluePhantom]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

BTW, this is really off topic but it's probably my favorite page of Biblical manuscripts. If I was able to take one single page of ancient manuscripts for myself, this would be the page. I love it because it demonstrates the history of the Bible so clearly and really makes those who adhere to the inerrant nature of the Bible squirm.

The page is from Codex Vaticanus, one of the earliest extant copies of the Bible we have. On the page with Hebrews 1 there is a great section. Hebrews 1:3 is written, in part "3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...." (Heb 1:3, NIV) Well in Vaticanus it's slightly different and there is a great exchange between scribes. The first scribe writes "...maintaining all things by his powerful word...". Well another scribe came along, scratched that out and wrote "...bearing all things by his powerful word...". Then the first scribe changed it back and added a note in the margin. If you look closely at the pic below between the first and second columns you can see the margin note.

Well what the note says is "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which translates as "Fool and knave. Leave the old reading and stop changing it." I want that on my tombstone!

Anyhow, it's pretty clear that even in the early 4th Century CE, people were messing with scripture and pissing other people off.

Reminds me of my favorite Vespasian quotation as he lay on his deathbed. "Woe is me, I think that I am becoming a God"!

Anyone who retains his sense of humor right up to the end is essentially laughing in the face of death. That is how I want to be remembered too although I seriously doubt that anyone will care what I have to say.

That's great! Anyhow, the next time you get in a debate with someone who says the Bible has never been changed, show them that page and explain it to them. In my experience it will either end the debate or identify your opponent as completely irrational and not worthy of further effort.

 

[Dot Com]

This thread is more relevant than ever after the Duggart family revelation

 

[Derideo_Te]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

BTW, this is really off topic but it's probably my favorite page of Biblical manuscripts. If I was able to take one single page of ancient manuscripts for myself, this would be the page. I love it because it demonstrates the history of the Bible so clearly and really makes those who adhere to the inerrant nature of the Bible squirm.

The page is from Codex Vaticanus, one of the earliest extant copies of the Bible we have. On the page with Hebrews 1 there is a great section. Hebrews 1:3 is written, in part "3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...." (Heb 1:3, NIV) Well in Vaticanus it's slightly different and there is a great exchange between scribes. The first scribe writes "...maintaining all things by his powerful word...". Well another scribe came along, scratched that out and wrote "...bearing all things by his powerful word...". Then the first scribe changed it back and added a note in the margin. If you look closely at the pic below between the first and second columns you can see the margin note.

Well what the note says is "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which translates as "Fool and knave. Leave the old reading and stop changing it." I want that on my tombstone!

Anyhow, it's pretty clear that even in the early 4th Century CE, people were messing with scripture and pissing other people off.

Reminds me of my favorite Vespasian quotation as he lay on his deathbed. "Woe is me, I think that I am becoming a God"!

Anyone who retains his sense of humor right up to the end is essentially laughing in the face of death. That is how I want to be remembered too although I seriously doubt that anyone will care what I have to say.

That's great! Anyhow, the next time you get in a debate with someone who says the Bible has never been changed, show them that page and explain it to them. In my experience it will either end the debate or identify your opponent as completely irrational and not worthy of further effort.

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

 

[BluePhantom]

This thread is more relevant than ever after the Duggart family revelation

Meh....they are crackpots and have always been crackpots. Not very loving and Christian of me to say that, I realize, but I never claimed perfection.

 

[BluePhantom]

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

Well there are definitely contradictions but there are also those that seem to be contradictions but really are not. This is because the Bible was written over a couple thousand years and as society developed, things that had application before, no longer did and were replaced by something else. Also, things that did not exist earlier in Hebrew society came around later and since there was no scripture to address it, they had to create some.

Also, there are things that create apparent contradictions but only if you miss the context or target audience. For example, Leviticus was a legal contract between God and the Jews. When you compare the wording of Leviticus to legal documents of a similar age, scholars note that it is written in what was legal language. So Leviticus is actually a contract. God gives his conditions of the contract to the Jews. This was the Law. In exchange for following the Law, Jews were given and allowed to live in the Holy Land. But what this means is that the contract is limited to those terms, and actually Torah spells this out. So the Law only applies if you are Jewish and living in the Holy Land. If you do not meet those two qualifications, you are not part of the contract and thus you do not have to follow the Law. This is why Jews under Roman occupation who lived outside of Judea were not bound to things like Kosher Law. They were free to practice it if they chose but they were not required to as they were not in the Holy Land.

So later scripture sometimes says something that seems to contradict Leviticus, but in reality it doesn't because the later scripture is targeted at a different group...Gentiles, for example, who are not bound by the Law. However, there are indeed a LOT of contradictions that are absolutely valid...meaning they are truly contradictions.

To make it even worse, out of the 5,400 or so ancient manuscripts of the Bible we have available to us, scholars have not found any two that are completely identical. Most of the variances are totally irrelevant: spelling mistakes, using "also" in place of "as well as", etc. Some of them though are absolutely critical and have a major impact on the theology of Christianity. What a mess, huh?

I generally am of the opinion that the very first time these books were written down they may have been the inspired word of God. But if they were, God didn't seem terribly interested in preserving them, because it's been fucked up ever since. It makes it very difficult, as a theist, to figure out what came from Jesus and what was just bullshit that someone tossed in.

 

[Derideo_Te]

This thread is more relevant than ever after the Duggart family revelation

Meh....they are crackpots and have always been crackpots. Not very loving and Christian of me to say that, I realize, but I never claimed perfection.

No, that is the Christian thing to do, to call out those that bring shame on your religion.

Would you excuse a pedophile simply because he shared your faith or would you hold him accountable?

Essentially that is what is happening in the other thread. The extremist rightwingers are making excuses for a pedophile and yet they blame "liberals" for a "loss of morality" in this nation.

When they put partisanship above the safety of small children that is the height of immorality IMO.

 

[sealybobo]

When someone says they will pray for me or for something I secretely make fun but I appreciate the kind thought and would never say anything. Lol. I just think "oh brother"

You seem like a great person BTW. With more theists were like you. My brothers the same. Great man. I wouldnt want to hurt him or disrespect his beliefs no matter how dumb I think they are.

I'm only a militant athiest on usmb.

Well I appreciate that and the sentiment is mutual. To me a prayer for someone is just a nice gesture. It's like when someone wishes me a Happy Hanukkah. Well I am not Jewish so i don't celebrate that holiday, but neither do I screech "I AM NOT JEWISH! WHY WOULD YOU WISH THAT ON ME?!?!?" Stuff like that is just stupid. I simply can't understand that type of mentality. I have even had pagans wish me a Happy Solstice before and I wasn't bothered by it. The person is offering a sincere positive wish. I accept it as such and return it in kind.

To me, offering a prayer for an atheist is very similar. It may not help. It may not be what they subscribe to, but it's a positive wish and releases positive energy. As DT and I discussed, action is better than prayers, but if a prayer is all one has to offer, what's the harm in trying?

Perhaps theists and religion is evoking. The you'll burn in hell approach just isnt convincing anymore. Certainly modern educated people aren't taking the talking snake stories although I have theist friends who have admitted they take all those stories as matter of fact.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

Well there are definitely contradictions but there are also those that seem to be contradictions but really are not. This is because the Bible was written over a couple thousand years and as society developed, things that had application before, no longer did and were replaced by something else. Also, things that did not exist earlier in Hebrew society came around later and since there was no scripture to address it, they had to create some.

Also, there are things that create apparent contradictions but only if you miss the context or target audience. For example, Leviticus was a legal contract between God and the Jews. When you compare the wording of Leviticus to legal documents of a similar age, scholars note that it is written in what was legal language. So Leviticus is actually a contract. God gives his conditions of the contract to the Jews. This was the Law. In exchange for following the Law, Jews were given and allowed to live in the Holy Land. But what this means is that the contract is limited to those terms, and actually Torah spells this out. So the Law only applies if you are Jewish and living in the Holy Land. If you do not meet those two qualifications, you are not part of the contract and thus you do not have to follow the Law. This is why Jews under Roman occupation who lived outside of Judea were not bound to things like Kosher Law. They were free to practice it if they chose but they were not required to as they were not in the Holy Land.

So later scripture sometimes says something that seems to contradict Leviticus, but in reality it doesn't because the later scripture is targeted at a different group...Gentiles, for example, who are not bound by the Law. However, there are indeed a LOT of contradictions that are absolutely valid...meaning they are truly contradictions.

To make it even worse, out of the 5,400 or so ancient manuscripts of the Bible we have available to us, scholars have not found any two that are completely identical. Most of the variances are totally irrelevant: spelling mistakes, using "also" in place of "as well as", etc. Some of them though are absolutely critical and have a major impact on the theology of Christianity. What a mess, huh?

I generally am of the opinion that the very first time these books were written down they may have been the inspired word of God. But if they were, God didn't seem terribly interested in preserving them, because it's been fucked up ever since. It makes it very difficult, as a theist, to figure out what came from Jesus and what was just bullshit that someone tossed in.

Jefferson felt the same way which is why he created his own version of the bible editing out everything that he believed to be irrelevant.

Yes, as a theist it is a difficult task and it raises another question.

If it is difficult for a devout theist like yourself to figure out what is right given all of the contradictions why is that supposedly better than an atheist just deciding for themselves that following the golden rule and always being true and faithful to themselves and their family and friends is all they need?

Personally it is a great deal less time consuming to just stick to those basic principles. They haven't failed me yet.

 

[sealybobo]

The physical manifestation of spirituality is not the same thing as the religious concept of an "eternal soul" so, yes, it dies when I do.

If you want to discuss something that continues to exist after someone dies then that is love. Love can be passed down from generation to generation. The love you experienced from your parents might have come from their marriage or their parents but that is irrelevant. You pass it on to your spouse and your own children. In that respect it is eternal IMO.

Hallelujah! Amen, my brother! See, we are not so far apart after all.

BTW, this is really off topic but it's probably my favorite page of Biblical manuscripts. If I was able to take one single page of ancient manuscripts for myself, this would be the page. I love it because it demonstrates the history of the Bible so clearly and really makes those who adhere to the inerrant nature of the Bible squirm.

The page is from Codex Vaticanus, one of the earliest extant copies of the Bible we have. On the page with Hebrews 1 there is a great section. Hebrews 1:3 is written, in part "3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word...." (Heb 1:3, NIV) Well in Vaticanus it's slightly different and there is a great exchange between scribes. The first scribe writes "...maintaining all things by his powerful word...". Well another scribe came along, scratched that out and wrote "...bearing all things by his powerful word...". Then the first scribe changed it back and added a note in the margin. If you look closely at the pic below between the first and second columns you can see the margin note.

Well what the note says is "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which translates as "Fool and knave. Leave the old reading and stop changing it." I want that on my tombstone!

Anyhow, it's pretty clear that even in the early 4th Century CE, people were messing with scripture and pissing other people off.

Reminds me of my favorite Vespasian quotation as he lay on his deathbed. "Woe is me, I think that I am becoming a God"!

Anyone who retains his sense of humor right up to the end is essentially laughing in the face of death. That is how I want to be remembered too although I seriously doubt that anyone will care what I have to say.

Usually you arent able to say anything. That's at least been my experience. Unless you count my grandfather constantly asking for pago. That's greek for ice. I dont sleek very good greek so we joke that while he is begging me for ice I'm asking him who is this Paco person he keeps talking about.

 

[sealybobo]

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

Well there are definitely contradictions but there are also those that seem to be contradictions but really are not. This is because the Bible was written over a couple thousand years and as society developed, things that had application before, no longer did and were replaced by something else. Also, things that did not exist earlier in Hebrew society came around later and since there was no scripture to address it, they had to create some.

Also, there are things that create apparent contradictions but only if you miss the context or target audience. For example, Leviticus was a legal contract between God and the Jews. When you compare the wording of Leviticus to legal documents of a similar age, scholars note that it is written in what was legal language. So Leviticus is actually a contract. God gives his conditions of the contract to the Jews. This was the Law. In exchange for following the Law, Jews were given and allowed to live in the Holy Land. But what this means is that the contract is limited to those terms, and actually Torah spells this out. So the Law only applies if you are Jewish and living in the Holy Land. If you do not meet those two qualifications, you are not part of the contract and thus you do not have to follow the Law. This is why Jews under Roman occupation who lived outside of Judea were not bound to things like Kosher Law. They were free to practice it if they chose but they were not required to as they were not in the Holy Land.

So later scripture sometimes says something that seems to contradict Leviticus, but in reality it doesn't because the later scripture is targeted at a different group...Gentiles, for example, who are not bound by the Law. However, there are indeed a LOT of contradictions that are absolutely valid...meaning they are truly contradictions.

To make it even worse, out of the 5,400 or so ancient manuscripts of the Bible we have available to us, scholars have not found any two that are completely identical. Most of the variances are totally irrelevant: spelling mistakes, using "also" in place of "as well as", etc. Some of them though are absolutely critical and have a major impact on the theology of Christianity. What a mess, huh?

I generally am of the opinion that the very first time these books were written down they may have been the inspired word of God. But if they were, God didn't seem terribly interested in preserving them, because it's been fucked up ever since. It makes it very difficult, as a theist, to figure out what came from Jesus and what was just bullshit that someone tossed in.

Jefferson felt the same way which is why he created his own version of the bible editing out everything that he believed to be irrelevant.

Yes, as a theist it is a difficult task and it raises another question.

If it is difficult for a devout theist like yourself to figure out what is right given all of the contradictions why is that supposedly better than an atheist just deciding for themselves that following the golden rule and always being true and faithful to themselves and their family and friends is all they need?

Personally it is a great deal less time consuming to just stick to those basic principles. They haven't failed me yet.

Do you really need a bible to know fucking your neighbors wife is wrong?

 

[BluePhantom]

Perhaps theists and religion is evoking. The you'll burn in hell approach just isnt convincing anymore. Certainly modern educated people aren't taking the talking snake stories although I have theist friends who have admitted they take all those stories as matter of fact.

Well a lot of modern translations are not using the word "hell" anymore, but are using the original words. That's a great thing. I cannot understate just how great of a thing that is because it's a major step toward getting rid of later traditions that are based upon fear and manipulation and getting back to what scripture actually says.

There will always be those who believe in the talking snakes...but what can you do? Confucius said 'To speak to man who cannot understand is to let one's words go to waste. To speak not to a man who can understand is to let a man go to waste. The gentleman (self-actualized individual) let's neither words nor men go to waste'. Confucius was an asshole, for the most part, but he does have a point on that one.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

Well there are definitely contradictions but there are also those that seem to be contradictions but really are not. This is because the Bible was written over a couple thousand years and as society developed, things that had application before, no longer did and were replaced by something else. Also, things that did not exist earlier in Hebrew society came around later and since there was no scripture to address it, they had to create some.

Also, there are things that create apparent contradictions but only if you miss the context or target audience. For example, Leviticus was a legal contract between God and the Jews. When you compare the wording of Leviticus to legal documents of a similar age, scholars note that it is written in what was legal language. So Leviticus is actually a contract. God gives his conditions of the contract to the Jews. This was the Law. In exchange for following the Law, Jews were given and allowed to live in the Holy Land. But what this means is that the contract is limited to those terms, and actually Torah spells this out. So the Law only applies if you are Jewish and living in the Holy Land. If you do not meet those two qualifications, you are not part of the contract and thus you do not have to follow the Law. This is why Jews under Roman occupation who lived outside of Judea were not bound to things like Kosher Law. They were free to practice it if they chose but they were not required to as they were not in the Holy Land.

So later scripture sometimes says something that seems to contradict Leviticus, but in reality it doesn't because the later scripture is targeted at a different group...Gentiles, for example, who are not bound by the Law. However, there are indeed a LOT of contradictions that are absolutely valid...meaning they are truly contradictions.

To make it even worse, out of the 5,400 or so ancient manuscripts of the Bible we have available to us, scholars have not found any two that are completely identical. Most of the variances are totally irrelevant: spelling mistakes, using "also" in place of "as well as", etc. Some of them though are absolutely critical and have a major impact on the theology of Christianity. What a mess, huh?

I generally am of the opinion that the very first time these books were written down they may have been the inspired word of God. But if they were, God didn't seem terribly interested in preserving them, because it's been fucked up ever since. It makes it very difficult, as a theist, to figure out what came from Jesus and what was just bullshit that someone tossed in.

Jefferson felt the same way which is why he created his own version of the bible editing out everything that he believed to be irrelevant.

Yes, as a theist it is a difficult task and it raises another question.

If it is difficult for a devout theist like yourself to figure out what is right given all of the contradictions why is that supposedly better than an atheist just deciding for themselves that following the golden rule and always being true and faithful to themselves and their family and friends is all they need?

Personally it is a great deal less time consuming to just stick to those basic principles. They haven't failed me yet.

Do you really need a bible to know fucking your neighbors wife is wrong?

I don't!

 

[BluePhantom]

If it is difficult for a devout theist like yourself to figure out what is right given all of the contradictions why is that supposedly better than an atheist just deciding for themselves that following the golden rule and always being true and faithful to themselves and their family and friends is all they need?

Honestly, it isn't. It's just a different path we are choosing to walk, but both are largely based upon the same ethical principles of love, tolerance, charity, and the golden rule. Now some, well...many, Christians will present themselves as superior and that's really a shame, because I know many atheists who act much more "Christian" than a lot of Christians. That "Christian self-righteousness" is a real significant problem, IMO. I am sure you remember me posting a thread about that some time ago.

 

[BluePhantom]

Thank you, I will. The bible has been edited to suit the powers that be IMO. Which means that "Inerrant Word of God" is anything but. There is a website that graphically illustrate over 400 contradictions. Even when they weren't editing it they were still getting it wrong!

Well there are definitely contradictions but there are also those that seem to be contradictions but really are not. This is because the Bible was written over a couple thousand years and as society developed, things that had application before, no longer did and were replaced by something else. Also, things that did not exist earlier in Hebrew society came around later and since there was no scripture to address it, they had to create some.

Also, there are things that create apparent contradictions but only if you miss the context or target audience. For example, Leviticus was a legal contract between God and the Jews. When you compare the wording of Leviticus to legal documents of a similar age, scholars note that it is written in what was legal language. So Leviticus is actually a contract. God gives his conditions of the contract to the Jews. This was the Law. In exchange for following the Law, Jews were given and allowed to live in the Holy Land. But what this means is that the contract is limited to those terms, and actually Torah spells this out. So the Law only applies if you are Jewish and living in the Holy Land. If you do not meet those two qualifications, you are not part of the contract and thus you do not have to follow the Law. This is why Jews under Roman occupation who lived outside of Judea were not bound to things like Kosher Law. They were free to practice it if they chose but they were not required to as they were not in the Holy Land.

So later scripture sometimes says something that seems to contradict Leviticus, but in reality it doesn't because the later scripture is targeted at a different group...Gentiles, for example, who are not bound by the Law. However, there are indeed a LOT of contradictions that are absolutely valid...meaning they are truly contradictions.

To make it even worse, out of the 5,400 or so ancient manuscripts of the Bible we have available to us, scholars have not found any two that are completely identical. Most of the variances are totally irrelevant: spelling mistakes, using "also" in place of "as well as", etc. Some of them though are absolutely critical and have a major impact on the theology of Christianity. What a mess, huh?

I generally am of the opinion that the very first time these books were written down they may have been the inspired word of God. But if they were, God didn't seem terribly interested in preserving them, because it's been fucked up ever since. It makes it very difficult, as a theist, to figure out what came from Jesus and what was just bullshit that someone tossed in.

Jefferson felt the same way which is why he created his own version of the bible editing out everything that he believed to be irrelevant.

Yes, as a theist it is a difficult task and it raises another question.

If it is difficult for a devout theist like yourself to figure out what is right given all of the contradictions why is that supposedly better than an atheist just deciding for themselves that following the golden rule and always being true and faithful to themselves and their family and friends is all they need?

Personally it is a great deal less time consuming to just stick to those basic principles. They haven't failed me yet.

Do you really need a bible to know fucking your neighbors wife is wrong?

You might be surprised. I know several people who think the part in the Lord's Prayer about "...forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us..." is talking about people who come onto your property without permission. I am not kidding either. I never ceased to be amazed at how stupid people can be.