Zone1 A christian-atheist compromise?

[john54]

I'm a Catholic. There's nothing blasphemous about what I wrote. It's your perception of God, religion and the Bible that is in error. My beliefs are 100% consistent with all three and are based upon all three. Only a young child would equate God to Santa Clause like you do. God is a little more complex than that

I guess I'm surprised you think a personification of infinite love and kindness would be the sporadic jealous, angry, wrathful, hateful God in the Bible who says stuff like,

"And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I shall lay my vengeance upon them.”
—God, Ezekiel 25:17, King James Version

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
—God, Leviticus 20:13, King James Version

It just sounds like people coming up with words to put in their gods mouth. Not some spirit representative of some great truth of the universe. This God sounds like a human. Because humans invented and came up with these things and attributed them to the character prior humans had invented...

 

[ding]

I guess I'm surprised you think a personification of infinite love and kindness would be the sporadic jealous, angry, wrathful, hateful God in the Bible who says stuff like,

"And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I shall lay my vengeance upon them.”
—God, Ezekiel 25:17, King James Version

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
—God, Leviticus 20:13, King James Version

It just sounds like people coming up with words to put in their gods mouth. Not some spirit representative of some great truth of the universe. This God sounds like a human. Because humans invented and came up with these things and attributed them to the character prior humans had invented...

Again... it's your interpretation that is in error. You aren't the first person who had difficulty reconciling the "God of the OT" with the "God of the NT." The Gnostic Christian answer was to believe there were two different Gods; the "God of the OT" who was the God of the material world and was evil and the "God of the NT" who was the God of the spiritual world and was good. Their mistake was just as bad as yours. You need to understand how the ancient Hebrews saw God because your perception doesn't match their perception. Plus you don't have the proper context, can't distinguish Jewish embellishment and in other cases can't distinguish allegory.

 

[john54]

Again... it's your interpretation that is in error. You aren't the first person who had difficulty reconciling the "God of the OT" with the "God of the NT." The Gnostic Christian answer was to believe there were two different Gods; the "God of the OT" who was the God of the material world and was evil and the "God of the NT" who was the God of the spiritual world and was good. Their mistake was just as bad as yours. You need to understand how the ancient Hebrews saw God because your perception doesn't match their perception. Plus you don't have the proper context, can't distinguish Jewish embellishment and in other cases can't distinguish allegory.

You're just describing interpreting it however you will, and deciding it's embellished however you will...if a teaching has real deep wisdom it should be able to stand out of context, it shouldn't sow confusion and chaos due to its contradictions, it should share a consistent message.

I think you've come up with some stuff that's good, that you didn't really need christistianity for, and Christianity is just the stone in the stone soup you've been making. Unfortunately that stone has poisonous heavy metals in it.

 

[ding]

You're just describing interpreting it however you will, and deciding it's embellished however you will...if a teaching has real deep wisdom it should be able to stand out of context, it shouldn't sow confusion and chaos due to its contradictions, it should share a consistent message.

I think you've come up with some stuff that's good, that you didn't really need christistianity for, and Christianity is just the stone in the stone soup you've been making. Unfortunately that stone has poisonous heavy metals in it.

No. I'm not describing interpreting it however I will. I am saying to interpret it as it is.

Take Leviticus for example... Leviticus 18:1-30 is teaching to not behave as their neighbors did.

Laws Concerning Sexual Behavior.

1The LORD said to Moses:
2Speak to the Israelites and tell them: I, the LORD, am your God.*
3You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you once lived, nor shall you do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you; do not conform to their customs.a
4My decrees you shall carry out, and my statutes you shall take care to follow. I, the LORD, am your God.
5Keep, then, my statutes and decrees, for the person who carries them out will find life* through them. I am the LORD.b
6* None of you shall approach a close relative* to have sexual intercourse. I am the LORD.
7* You shall not disgrace your father by having intercourse with your mother.c She is your own mother; you shall not have intercourse with her.
8You shall not have intercourse with your father’s wife, for that would be a disgrace to your father.
9You shall not have intercourse with your sister,* d your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in your own household or born elsewhere.
10You shall not have intercourse with your son’s daughter or with your daughter’s daughter,* for that would be a disgrace to you.
11You shall not have intercourse with the daughter whom your father’s wife bore to him in his household,e since she, too, is your sister.
12You shall not have intercourse with your father’s sister,f since she is your father’s relative.
13You shall not have intercourse with your mother’s sister, since she is your mother’s relative.
14You shall not disgrace your father’s brother by having sexual relations with his wife,g since she, too, is your aunt.
15You shall not have intercourse with your daughter-in-law;* h she is your son’s wife; you shall not have intercourse with her.
16You shall not have intercourse with your brother’s wife;* i that would be a disgrace to your brother.
17You shall not have intercourse with a woman and also with her daughter, nor shall you marry and have intercourse with her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter;j they are related to her. This would be shameful.
18While your wife is still living you shall not marry her sister as her rival and have intercourse with her.k
19You shall not approach a woman to have intercourse with her while she is in her menstrual uncleanness.l
20You shall not have sexual relations with your neighbor’s wife,* m defiling yourself with her.
21n You shall not offer any of your offspring for immolation to Molech,* thus profaning the name of your God. I am the LORD.
22You shall not lie with a male as with a woman;o such a thing is an abomination.
23You shall not have sexual relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; that is perverse.p
24Do not defile yourselves by any of these things, because by them the nations whom I am driving out of your way have defiled themselves.
25And so the land has become defiled, and I have punished it for its wickedness, and the land has vomited out its inhabitants.q
26You, however, must keep my statutes and decrees, avoiding all these abominations, both the natives and the aliens resident among you—
27because the previous inhabitants did all these abominations and the land became defiled;
28otherwise the land will vomit you out also for having defiled it, just as it vomited out the nations before you.
29For whoever does any of these abominations shall be cut off from the people.
30Heed my charge, then, not to observe the abominable customs that have been observed before your time, and thus become impure by them.r I, the LORD, am your God.

 

[john54]

No. I'm not describing interpreting it however I will. I am saying to interpret it as it is.

Take Leviticus for example... Leviticus 18:1-30 is teaching to not behave as their neighbors did.

Laws Concerning Sexual Behavior.

1The LORD said to Moses:
2Speak to the Israelites and tell them: I, the LORD, am your God.*
3You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you once lived, nor shall you do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you; do not conform to their customs.a
4My decrees you shall carry out, and my statutes you shall take care to follow. I, the LORD, am your God.
5Keep, then, my statutes and decrees, for the person who carries them out will find life* through them. I am the LORD.b
6* None of you shall approach a close relative* to have sexual intercourse. I am the LORD.
7* You shall not disgrace your father by having intercourse with your mother.c She is your own mother; you shall not have intercourse with her.
8You shall not have intercourse with your father’s wife, for that would be a disgrace to your father.
9You shall not have intercourse with your sister,* d your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in your own household or born elsewhere.
10You shall not have intercourse with your son’s daughter or with your daughter’s daughter,* for that would be a disgrace to you.
11You shall not have intercourse with the daughter whom your father’s wife bore to him in his household,e since she, too, is your sister.
12You shall not have intercourse with your father’s sister,f since she is your father’s relative.
13You shall not have intercourse with your mother’s sister, since she is your mother’s relative.
14You shall not disgrace your father’s brother by having sexual relations with his wife,g since she, too, is your aunt.
15You shall not have intercourse with your daughter-in-law;* h she is your son’s wife; you shall not have intercourse with her.
16You shall not have intercourse with your brother’s wife;* i that would be a disgrace to your brother.
17You shall not have intercourse with a woman and also with her daughter, nor shall you marry and have intercourse with her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter;j they are related to her. This would be shameful.
18While your wife is still living you shall not marry her sister as her rival and have intercourse with her.k
19You shall not approach a woman to have intercourse with her while she is in her menstrual uncleanness.l
20You shall not have sexual relations with your neighbor’s wife,* m defiling yourself with her.
21n You shall not offer any of your offspring for immolation to Molech,* thus profaning the name of your God. I am the LORD.
22You shall not lie with a male as with a woman;o such a thing is an abomination.
23You shall not have sexual relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; that is perverse.p
24Do not defile yourselves by any of these things, because by them the nations whom I am driving out of your way have defiled themselves.
25And so the land has become defiled, and I have punished it for its wickedness, and the land has vomited out its inhabitants.q
26You, however, must keep my statutes and decrees, avoiding all these abominations, both the natives and the aliens resident among you—
27because the previous inhabitants did all these abominations and the land became defiled;
28otherwise the land will vomit you out also for having defiled it, just as it vomited out the nations before you.
29For whoever does any of these abominations shall be cut off from the people.
30Heed my charge, then, not to observe the abominable customs that have been observed before your time, and thus become impure by them.r I, the LORD, am your God.

Sounds like the appropriate development of taboos against incest that develop as cultures take notice of the societal problems said incest causes, and the deformities it causes in offspring.

Atheistic cultures like China and Japan also have these taboos, and they're old taboos.

Again, stone soup for you.

 

[ding]

Sounds like the appropriate development of taboos against incest that develop as cultures take notice of the societal problems said incest causes, and the deformities it causes in offspring.

Atheistic cultures like China and Japan also have these taboos, and they're old taboos.

Again, stone soup for you.

Actually, according to Huston Smith, it was the establishment of standards which were heads and shoulder above their contemporaries of the day. Which is why the correct context is to compare these passages to the practices of their contemporaries instead of today's standards.

 

[john54]

Actually, according to Huston Smith, it was the establishment of standards which were heads and shoulder above their contemporaries of the day. Which is why the correct context is to compare these passages to the practices of their contemporaries instead of today's standards.

Ok, so the Jewish religion at the time had accumulated some moral standards that were more civilized in some regards compared to their contemporaries. So did buddhism and Taoism. But it also left out extremely important things - no taboo against pedophilia, no ban on gambling, no ban on animal cruelty and animal sacrifice - hindhuism and buddhism were miles ahead in terms of animal's rights and the importance of non-violence in general.

 

[ding]

Ok, so the Jewish religion at the time had accumulated some moral standards that were more civilized in some regards compared to their contemporaries. So did buddhism and Taoism. But it also left out extremely important things - no taboo against pedophilia, no ban on gambling, no ban on animal cruelty and animal sacrifice - hindhuism and buddhism were miles ahead in terms of animal's rights and the importance of non-violence in general.

Your understanding of China and India is as limited as your understanding of Judaism and Christianity.

 

[john54]

Your understanding of China and India is as limited as your understanding of Judaism and Christianity.

Well that settles that.

 

[ding]

Well that settles that.

Confucius was appalled by the violence and cruelty of China and sought to return to the harmony of the earliest Chinese dynasties.

The Indian caste system is the antithesis of equality.

With that said I can respect their religions. You can't say the same about Christianity.

 

[john54]

Confucius was appalled by the violence and cruelty of China and sought to return to the harmony of the earliest Chinese dynasties.

The Indian caste system is the antithesis of equality.

With that said I can respect their religions. You can't say the same about Christianity.

I can respect that it did good and bad through its history like all religions, since there's no religion that doesn't include at least some valid moral standards. I also think it's time people begin to let go of it for its failings as an outdated relativistic moral structure and disagreements with scientific facts - fortunately this has already begun to happen as many are leaving Christianity throughout the globe.

Did Christianity profess equality? Yes - in principle it was ahead of hindhuism for instance in that regard. And yet it was used as the religion of hierarchical feudal systems for 95% of its history.

Claiming Christianity is non-violent is silly. We have the crusades, the Spanish inquisition, and numerous other religious wars and atrocities done in Jesus's name. The commandment against killing is violated by God purportedly killing tons of people himself- he's breaking his own rules so who is going to listen to him. Also you can see many more Christians own guns than atheists or other religions:

 

[ding]

I can respect that it did good and bad through its history like all religions, since there's no religion that doesn't include at least some valid moral standards. I also think it's time people begin to let go of it for its failings as an outdated relativistic moral structure and disagreements with scientific facts.

Did Christianity profess equality? Yes - in principle it was ahead of hindhuism for instance in that regard. And yet it was used as the religion of hierarchical feudal systems for 95% of its history.

Claiming Christianity is non-violent is silly. We have the crusades, the Spanish inquisition, and numerous other religious wars and atrocities done in Jesus's name. The commandment against killing is violated by God purportedly killing tons of people himself- he's breaking his own rules so who is going to listen to him. Also you can see many more Christians own guns than atheists or other religions:

View attachment 752503

Is there some underlying reason you are so quick to criticize Christianity and Christians?

Because I don't see you trying to subordinate other religions. Is there something you would like to tell me about yourself that would explain your ax grinding?

 

[john54]

Is there some underlying reason you are so quick to criticize Christianity and Christians?

Because I don't see you trying to subordinate other religions. Is there something you would like to tell me about yourself that would explain your ax grinding?

I would have a bone to grind if those other religions were the religions in power in this country at the moment. Frankly I'm concerned about Muslims gaining any more seats in the house and Islam getting its foot in the door to begin spreading and bringing us even more backwards in civilized thinking...I think all religion needs to come to an end at some point. It just isn't necessary. But moral teachings and mind-body artforms that religions have passed on are necessary, and there ought to be some sort of transition from archaic moral relativism based on mythology to a more modernized form of morality making use of the ancient arts without need for the myth.

That's already begun to happen - despite being cited no where in the Bible as wrong, pedophilia has been recognized as evil and it's entirely an almost-universally, globally recognized taboo. Despite gambling being nowhere in the Bible, it's recognized as a vice.

The same needs to happen for non-violence - how are we still having wars fought in this day and age? Non-violence should be at the absolute top of the list.

And maybe worst or near worst is all the problems with lying and it's no surprise people don't know how to properly fact-check when they believe in a God supported only by the most generously inductively reasoned out evidence. We can all do better than Christianity, Islam, hindhuism, etc. They were the training wheels, now it's time to ride.

 

[buttercup]

Read the bible..........the biggest work of fiction there has ever been.
Its full of lies.

I can definitely understand why a homosexual would want to believe that about the Bible.

Unfortunately for you, you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[john54]

Is there some underlying reason you are so quick to criticize Christianity and Christians?

Because I don't see you trying to subordinate other religions. Is there something you would like to tell me about yourself that would explain your ax grinding?

On violence also, cinema and video games are just insanely violent and you don't hear a squeak from any Christian organizations about it - they're only concerned with sexuality.

The only major voice in the media to speak out against movie violence was atheist Bill Maher.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

I can definitely understand why a homosexual would want to believe that about the Bible.

Unfortunately for you, you couldn't be more wrong.

Nobody has yet to prove me wrong.

Including "religious scholars".

And if you want to bring sexuality into this.........it will get VERY, VERY, VERRRY NASTY AND MESSY!
But.......it's what I expect from lowlifes that value fantasy over reality, and live opposite of everything the preach!

 

[john54]

I can definitely understand why a homosexual would want to believe that about the Bible.

Unfortunately for you, you couldn't be more wrong.

Finally, a proper homophobic christian speaking out for what's right. Why don't you just scrap the 10 commandments you don't care about or follow anyway and replace them with a nice succinct,
1 Hate
2 Hate
2 Hate
4 Hate
5 Hate
6 Hate
7 Hate
8 HATE
9 HATE
10 HATE

 

[buttercup]

Finally, a proper homophobic christian speaking out for what's right. Why don't you just scrap the 10 commandments you don't care about or follow and replace them with a nice succinct,
1 Hate
2 Hate
2 Hate
4 Hate
5 Hate
6 Hate
7 Hate
8 HATE
9 HATE
10 HATE

Please point out anything I said that was homophobic.

What I said was based on common sense and logic.

A) The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin.
B) Homosexuals don't want to believe that it is a sin.
C) So some (or many) homosexuals choose to disbelieve the Bible.

Are you claiming that's untrue?

The poster I was replying to has stated he is homosexual. I don't hate him at all, and I don't hate anyone for being different. I mean that would go against what I believe, so for you to try to paint my post that way says far more about you than it does about me.

 

[john54]

Please point out anything I said that was homophobic.

What I said was based on common sense and logic.

A) The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin.
B) Homosexuals don't want to believe that is a sin.
C) So some (or many) homosexuals choose to disbelieve the Bible.

Are you claiming that's untrue?

The poster I was replying to has stated he is homosexual. I don't hate him at all, and I don't hate anyone for being different. I mean that would go against what I believe, so for you to try to paint my post that way says far more about you than it does about me.

No no no, don't misunderstand. I think you're being a right and proper Christian, an emblem of true Christianity, a bastion of adherent religious homophobic zeal for other Christians to emulate and admire.

Please, go join your Christian brethren from Russia in their glorious crusade to rid Ukraine of its hateful gays and nazi jews.

 

[buttercup]

No no no, don't misunderstand. I think you're being a right and proper Christian, an emblem of true Christianity, a bastion of adherent religious homophobic zeal for other Christians to emulate and admire.

Please, go join your Christian brethren from Russia in their glorious crusade to rid Ukraine of its hateful gays and nazi jews.

You said that I was hating. I don't hate him… In fact, I actually like him. I like a lot of his posts.

And now you're saying that I was being a proper Christian, which - correct me if I'm wrong - seems to imply that hating is part of Christianity.

If that's what you believe then you're just showing yet again, as you have throughout this whole thread, that you know nothing about Christianity.

PS: You still didn't answer my question, what did I say that was homophobic?