A lot of Atheist and agnostics just don't get it

[Meriweather]

Why vent your hate at atheists?

Sorry, that is so funny! You see, there have always been atheists in my family and I am married to an atheist from an atheist family. Presenting how they view the Bible is not hate...it is information. From there people can compare and contrast how people of faith view the Bible. (Also without hate!)

 

[Meriweather]

Finally, lest anyone think I am focusing on the Bibles alone, the above also holds true for the koran, The Bhagavad-Gita, The Book of Mormon, and so on. A book is simply that, a book. Until there is a way to connect a supernatural being with the authorship of a book, it's safe to assume that the book is, in fact, merely written by men. What I see are adherents of various faiths who tend to peel back the veneer of the faith as they interpret and re-interpret.

Although, the moment you break from the literal descriptions within any of the various holy texts, you fall into the circular loop of interpretation and what, if any, is the real interpretation. Which means, we’ve looped back to the issue of interpretation and translation but then we’d get in the problems with shoddy translation and why the gods would allow that, etc.

Of course, the Bible was written by men. There is no question about that at all. The Bible details accounts of human relationships with God; God's relationship with humans. In story form. That's how they told stories and wrote in those days. Not enough time and materials or computers to write Encyclopedia or textbook like accounts. Or, even like a newspaper type of account. A story is formed around the lesson.

The best thing to do is to go back to the original author and delve into his original intent and interpretation. In order to do this, it is vital to connect with history and culture of the time--and the original language as well. Takes a lot of study. Like decades worth. And understandably, the average person may have more important (or more interesting) ways of spending decades of time.

 

[Hollie]

The only external example of the gods that we have are the tales and fables describing the actions of those gods. The fable of the gods drowning the world because they were disappointed with humanity is the responsibility of religionists to resolve. Suggesting some ulterior motive based upon a subjective interpretation is fine but why shoukd anyone dismiss what is actually written in the bibles in favor of what they woukd prefer be written?

I can’t explain what a "true god" is or is not. There are so many definitions of god(s) that I certainly can’t catalog them all. Merely attempting to define a true god(s) would necessarily be dismissive of each and every one of the other assertions of god(s).

Tragedy striking us has a way of opening our eyes to how we could have done better. One of the lessons of the flood was to open the eyes of humans to how we could have been better. If you do not believe God sends floods today to punish people, then how can you believe God sent a flood in ancient times? This is what I mean about humans opening their eyes to who we are as compared to who God made us to be. The lessons start there.

I have no reason to accept that any of the gods made us to be anything.

One of the unfortunate circumstances of proclaiming victimhood of the gods or that "it's the will of the gods", is that it tends to make your choices for you and relieves believers of the burdensome task of taking responsibility for their actions.

 

[Meriweather]

Why would I not question the validity of the bibles?

As a materialist, I can dissect the stories because I believe them to be wholly fabricated. Believers have a lot less latitude if you wish to assert a perfect god is the author of all of this, directly or otherwise.

First of all, not many believe God is the author of the Bible. Nor, do the majority of us believe all of it should be taken literally. Naturally, some parts are literal. It is truth, told in story form. I am a big fan of figuring out which are the bare facts; which is story form; what is the original lesson being presented. There are a lot of scholars around to help with all of this. The Bible is an amazing book. I like it as much as I like Greek and Roman mythology--not to mention The Lord of the Rings.

 

[Meriweather]

I have no reason to accept that any of the gods made us to be anything.

One of the unfortunate circumstances of proclaiming victimhood of the gods or that "it's the will of the gods", is that it tends to make your choices for you and relieves believers of the burdensome task of taking responsibility for their actions.

Whatever your beliefs, God did not make us victims or to be victims. I am not even sure what you mean by that.

 

[Hollie]

Why would I not question the validity of the bibles?

As a materialist, I can dissect the stories because I believe them to be wholly fabricated. Believers have a lot less latitude if you wish to assert a perfect god is the author of all of this, directly or otherwise.

First of all, not many believe God is the author of the Bible. Nor, do the majority of us believe all of it should be taken literally. Naturally, some parts are literal. It is truth, told in story form. I am a big fan of figuring out which are the bare facts; which is story form; what is the original lesson being presented. There are a lot of scholars around to help with all of this. The Bible is an amazing book. I like it as much as I like Greek and Roman mythology--not to mention The Lord of the Rings.

I'm not sure who the "us" is when you suggest not many of us take it literally. Although, that puts "us" in that strange dynamic of what parts of the bibles are true, accurate, to be taken literally and which are not.

I think thats called "cafeteria religion"

Countless culture after culture has done this same thing. Would you say the gods of Greece and Rome and Babylon and the Norsemen are all “real” or were they made up to explain things that couldn’t readily be explained? Assuming you admit these other cultures did do precisely that, why do the gods of the desert you believe in not adhere to your own admission that men create gods for any number of reasons? Why do yours exist and theirs do not?

 

[Meriweather]

I'm not sure who the "us" is when you suggest not many of us take it literally. Although, that puts "us" in that strange dynamic of what parts of the bibles are true, accurate, to be taken literally and which are not.

I think thats called "cafeteria religion"

Not at all. My great-grandmother was Catholic, and not even in that day was everything taken literally. I think it was back in the 1970s that one of the Protestant denominations went gung-ho on everything in the Bible should be taken literally, but the rest continued on with teaching it as it had always been taught.

Of course, Catholics have a history of being accepting of many ideas. Saint A disagrees with Saint B, etc. My mom and grandma are two more examples! There is a lot people can vary on--and a few things they cannot and remain Catholic.

Catholics can believe God created the world in six days (my mom did) or that He created the world through evolutionary means (my grandmother did). Belief in God is the main criteria.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, yes. I would call such a tome historical. As would any historian.

Right, so we are in agreement.

 

[BreezeWood]

Why vent your hate at atheists?

Sorry, that is so funny! You see, there have always been atheists in my family and I am married to an atheist from an atheist family. Presenting how they view the Bible is not hate...it is information. From there people can compare and contrast how people of faith view the Bible. (Also without hate!)

.
your defense of a historically evil religion is the source for the accusation made against you. .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In fact, according to Darwin if there were no advantage in believing in a higher power, it would have been discarded long ago.

So what? Darwin's "opinion" means jack shit. In light of modern science, there is no reason to think that.

Furthermore, that's not support for the truth of magical horseshit anyway.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not sure who the "us" is when you suggest not many of us take it literally. Although, that puts "us" in that strange dynamic of what parts of the bibles are true, accurate, to be taken literally and which are not.

I think thats called "cafeteria religion"

Not at all. My great-grandmother was Catholic, and not even in that day was everything taken literally. I think it was back in the 1970s that one of the Protestant denominations went gung-ho on everything in the Bible should be taken literally, but the rest continued on with teaching it as it had always been taught.

Of course, Catholics have a history of being accepting of many ideas. Saint A disagrees with Saint B, etc. My mom and grandma are two more examples! There is a lot people can vary on--and a few things they cannot and remain Catholic.

Catholics can believe God created the world in six days (my mom did) or that He created the world through evolutionary means (my grandmother did). Belief in God is the main criteria.

The above is my impression with religionists, overall. They believe what they find to be convenient and what placates an emotional requirement to place blame elsewhere for circumstances they may or may not have created themselves. Secondly I have to acknowledge that much of our daily existence is a function of the choices we make. However, if you believe the gods are the creators of all, that ultimately makes them responsible for all. Things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature, or shall we call it “mercy”, which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could just as easily made it otherwise, they just didn't.

 

[Meriweather]

The above is my impression with religionists, overall. They believe what they find to be convenient and what placates an emotional requirement to place blame elsewhere for circumstances they may or may not have created themselves. Secondly I have to acknowledge that much of our daily existence is a function of the choices we make. However, if you believe the gods are the creators of all, that ultimately makes them responsible for all. Things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature, or shall we call it “mercy”, which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could just as easily made it otherwise, they just didn't.

No one needs an excuse to not believe in God or needs to find a Religion Forum to submit these excuses. I accept your expertise on what people of faith are "really like", and also that any average genii would make the ideal God. I just don't happen to agree as my experiences and education have been vastly different.

 

[ding]

In fact, according to Darwin if there were no advantage in believing in a higher power, it would have been discarded long ago.

So what? Darwin's "opinion" means jack shit. In light of modern science, there is no reason to think that.

Furthermore, that's not support for the truth of magical horseshit anyway.

Again the only person who is expecting magic is you.

The reality is that religion and faith are overwhelmingly positive. That's why they have existed throughout human history. If that were not the case they would have died out long ago.

 

[ding]

Why vent your hate at atheists?

Sorry, that is so funny! You see, there have always been atheists in my family and I am married to an atheist from an atheist family. Presenting how they view the Bible is not hate...it is information. From there people can compare and contrast how people of faith view the Bible. (Also without hate!)

.
your defense of a historically evil religion is the source for the accusation made against you. .

History says otherwise.

 

[BreezeWood]

Why vent your hate at atheists?

Sorry, that is so funny! You see, there have always been atheists in my family and I am married to an atheist from an atheist family. Presenting how they view the Bible is not hate...it is information. From there people can compare and contrast how people of faith view the Bible. (Also without hate!)

.
your defense of a historically evil religion is the source for the accusation made against you. .

History says otherwise.

.

History says otherwise.

name one century ...

the 4th century bible has not been responsible for the persecution and victimization of the innocent ...

howabout today's immigrant children, the "southern" boarder - they aren't yours afterall.

 

[ding]

Why vent your hate at atheists?

Sorry, that is so funny! You see, there have always been atheists in my family and I am married to an atheist from an atheist family. Presenting how they view the Bible is not hate...it is information. From there people can compare and contrast how people of faith view the Bible. (Also without hate!)

.
your defense of a historically evil religion is the source for the accusation made against you. .

History says otherwise.

.

History says otherwise.

name one century ...

View attachment 268636

the 4th century bible has not been responsible for the persecution and victimization of the innocent ...

howabout today's immigrant children, the "southern" boarder - they aren't yours afterall.

By any objective measure Christianity has been a force for good.

 

[Hollie]

The above is my impression with religionists, overall. They believe what they find to be convenient and what placates an emotional requirement to place blame elsewhere for circumstances they may or may not have created themselves. Secondly I have to acknowledge that much of our daily existence is a function of the choices we make. However, if you believe the gods are the creators of all, that ultimately makes them responsible for all. Things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature, or shall we call it “mercy”, which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could just as easily made it otherwise, they just didn't.

No one needs an excuse to not believe in God or needs to find a Religion Forum to submit these excuses. I accept your expertise on what people of faith are "really like", and also that any average genii would make the ideal God. I just don't happen to agree as my experiences and education have been vastly different.

I’m not aware of anyone needing excuses or religious forums to “not believe” in partisan gods. I see not believing in supernatural entities as a rational conclusion.

What I read in these threads are a lot of bad analogies, false representations and huge stretches of bent and mangled "reasoning" in a hoped-for attempt to reach a predefined conclusion. That's intellectually dishonest.

First, let me make the frighteningly obvious point that the evidences” presented as proofs of the gods are not about evidence, (as it should be), but rather one of Theistic interpretation (Christianity), that derives from one’s happenstance of place of birth and societal preference for one set of gods vs. a different set. Let’s be honest and admit that if those in this thread were posting from a middle eastern country, you religious affiliation would be different.

 

[Meriweather]

I’m not aware of anyone needing excuses or religious forums to “not believe” in partisan gods. I see not believing in supernatural entities as a rational conclusion.

What I read in these threads are a lot of bad analogies, false representations and huge stretches of bent and mangled "reasoning" in a hoped-for attempt to reach a predefined conclusion. That's intellectually dishonest.

What are "partisan gods"? Who are those who believe in them? Why do you participate in discussions you believe to be intellectually dishonest?

It appears to me that you have dreamt up a god in whom you do not believe--yet are absolutely positive that everyone else does. Intellectually, that is called projecting.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Again the only person who is expecting magic is you

Shameless, embarrassing lie. Magic is precisely what you expect from your iron aged fairy tale. Magical souls, magical miracles, magical afterlife, magical sky daddies, zombie kings, etc etc. Ding, you seem to be under the hilariously wrong impression that saying something isn't true makes it not true, even when you and everyone else knows it is true. And that is what religion does to a brain. Or, being 3 years old.

 

[Meriweather]

First, let me make the frighteningly obvious point that the evidences” presented as proofs of the gods are not about evidence, (as it should be), but rather one of Theistic interpretation (Christianity), that derives from one’s happenstance of place of birth and societal preference for one set of gods vs. a different set. Let’s be honest and admit that if those in this thread were posting from a middle eastern country, you religious affiliation would be different.

And so? If you are going to state the obvious and well known, you must have a point?

Religion is not a science, and as such, does not deal with physical evidence. Religion falls more into philosophy, where we reach above the merely physical.

The culture, the age, the place in which we are born has a lot to do with our perceptions and approaches. Why should it trouble me if I were born elsewhere (or else-when) that I might be of a different faith (or no faith at all? (Hmmm, sounds like the family I was born into--several different faiths and no faith at all.) God reaches out to those who reach towards Him. Or, suppose I had been born into a Buddhist family? Those who truly seek enlightenment most likely find it, or some form of it. Why should I fear being born a Buddhist? Or a Muslim? Or Hindu? I know people of all three religions and there is certainly nothing to fear when imagining myself in any of their families. I am sure I would have made a good any one of them, because it was my decision (and hope) to reach out to God. God has this way of reaching back.

As it is, I was raised Catholic, which is rooted in Judaism, and have been quite enlightened by my experiences of God. There is enough history, culture, language in these to keep me occupied with that study for some time to come. Besides, I make a good Catholic, too--or try, anyway.