Religion One of the all-time great bakes

[The rabbi]

All of it? Or can I skip bits I don't like?

You can do what you like. It is no skin off my nose.

 

[Monniehawk]

Well you did ask.
Just reading about the arguments for and against inerrancy of the bible I am reminded of the famous Homerism "It's not a lie if you believe it!"
A contradiction is a contradiction is a contradiction.
You can discuss why, how or when but it is still there and still is what it is.

Reminds me of the old line..
"everything I tell you is a lie!"

 

[Monniehawk]

All of it? Or can I skip bits I don't like?

Most people do. At least they embrace what they can accept.
Why the preoccupation with absolutism?

 

[CharacterFirst]

Well you did ask.

Just reading about the arguments for and against inerrancy of the bible I am reminded of the famous Homerism "It's not a lie if you believe it!"


A contradiction is a contradiction is a contradiction.
You can discuss why, how or when but it is still there and still is what it is.

Hey PE. What would it take for you to believe that Jesus was God? What would be your standard of proof for the things we are discussing?

 

[Max zero]

Most people do. At least they embrace what they can accept.
Why the preoccupation with absolutism?

So you can just follow the bits you want and God is all cool with that?

Is the Bible divinely inspired?

 

[Pie eyed]

Hey PE. What would it take for you to believe that Jesus was God? What would be your standard of proof for the things we are discussing?

Interesting question.

 

[Monniehawk]

So you can just follow the bits you want and God is all cool with that?
Is the Bible divinely inspired?

1. To paraphrase the Rabbi. You can do what you want. No skin off my nose.
2. Dunno if God is cool with it! Currently, I don't believe in one.
3. Dunno if it's divinely inspired. Mine is divinely bound in leather. Refer point 2.

Christians, like any other group, don't have to follow one individual path prescribed by narrow classifications. Not all earth scientists share the same idea about ecology or physicists about the origin of the universe. Not all atheists hate Christians. Why then try to impose artificial strictures on the diversity of Christians?

I answered your questions, why did you avoid mine?
Repeat: why the preoccupation with absolutes?

 

[Pie eyed]

1. To paraphrase the Rabbi. You can do what you want. No skin off my nose.
2. Dunno if God is cool with it! Currently, I don't believe in one.
3. Dunno if it's divinely inspired. Mine is divinely bound in leather. Refer point 2.

Christians, like any other group, don't have to follow one individual path prescribed by narrow classifications. Not all earth scientists share the same idea about ecology or physicists about the origin of the universe. Not all atheists hate Christians. Why then try to impose artificial strictures on the diversity of Christians?

I answered your questions, why did you avoid mine?
Repeat: why the preoccupation with absolutes?

I can't speak for Max, but my comments were in regard to the risk of not believing come judgement day from a non-believer, believer stand point. The point being if you accept the basic tenet that the bible is Gods word then not believing all of it leaves you in the non-believer camp. Simply believing in God is not enough to get you over the line according to the Bible. Taken out of context the discussion appears different than what it was.

 

[Max zero]

1. To paraphrase the Rabbi. You can do what you want. No skin off my nose.
2. Dunno if God is cool with it! Currently, I don't believe in one.
3. Dunno if it's divinely inspired. Mine is divinely bound in leather. Refer point 2.

Christians, like any other group, don't have to follow one individual path prescribed by narrow classifications. Not all earth scientists share the same idea about ecology or physicists about the origin of the universe. Not all atheists hate Christians. Why then try to impose artificial strictures on the diversity of Christians?

I answered your questions, why did you avoid mine?
Repeat: why the preoccupation with absolutes?

Well for believers you would assume there was some sort of divinity. How would you decide what was divine and what was not? That is why religion does tend to follow absolutes.

When you get cop outs like: "Love God." Yet no explanation as to what that means. It's like when you ask "What is God?" and you get meaningless drivel like "He is beyond our comprehension." I'm sure suicide bombers love God too.

Yet apparently our immortal souls are in mortal danger yet no one can tell me precisely how to get my soul out of mortal danger. Some say I can eat shellfish, some say I can't. I mean seriously?

Does this sound like something divinely inspired or a bunch of contrived man made bullshit? If you can do whatever you want and still count as a believer then being a believer is kinda pointless isn't it? There has to be some limit right? Some ground rules?

 

[Sloth]

Well if you're going to do a cut-and-paste from a website then you will permit me to do the same...

[SNIP SNIP SNIP]


Why the gymnastics? If the bible was the word of god, or divinely inspired, then surely it should be unambigous and error free? If the purpose of the bible is for god to communicate with humanity then surely he would make it as easy as possible to follow, without the need of jumping through hoops to try and make it work?

 

[CharacterFirst]

Interesting question.

Do you have an answer?

 

[CharacterFirst]

Well for believers you would assume there was some sort of divinity. How would you decide what was divine and what was not? That is why religion does tend to follow absolutes.

When you get cop outs like: "Love God." Yet no explanation as to what that means. It's like when you ask "What is God?" and you get meaningless drivel like "He is beyond our comprehension." I'm sure suicide bombers love God too.

Yet apparently our immortal souls are in mortal danger yet no one can tell me precisely how to get my soul out of mortal danger. Some say I can eat shellfish, some say I can't. I mean seriously?

Does this sound like something divinely inspired or a bunch of contrived man made bullshit? If you can do whatever you want and still count as a believer then being a believer is kinda pointless isn't it? There has to be some limit right? Some ground rules?

I thought Rabbi did give you an answer. He said if you were really interested to read the NT. You can't expect him or others to do all the work for you. Give it try and see what it says about loving God, who Jesus is etc.

 

[Max zero]

I thought Rabbi did give you an answer. He said if you were really interested to read the NT. You can't expect him or others to do all the work for you. Give it try and see what it says about loving God, who Jesus is etc.

Or the Koran? Or the Torah?

I mean you guys even agree on the New Testament fully yet you expect me to gain some divine enlightenment?

 

[CharacterFirst]

[SNIP SNIP SNIP]


Why the gymnastics? If the bible was the word of god, or divinely inspired, then surely it should be unambigous and error free? If the purpose of the bible is for god to communicate with humanity then surely he would make it as easy as possible to follow, without the need of jumping through hoops to try and make it work?

If we are, for arguments sake, accepting that God has inspired the bible, he would surely be free to have it written however he thought was best. The idea that we should be dictating to God how he should reveal himself to us, is pretty arrogant.

 

[CharacterFirst]

Or the Koran? Or the Torah?

I mean you guys even agree on the New Testament fully yet you expect me to gain some divine enlightenment?

I not a Muslim. I am encouraging you to have a look at the NT and see what it says about the things we are discussing. You can say no if you want.

 

[Pie eyed]

Do you have an answer?

LOL.
I'm not avoiding the question. I'm giving it the due consideration it deserves.
As I said good question.
20 years ago I would have given you a one word answer.

ps I turned on the tele to watch One Week at a Time and realised the NRL now have a copycat version running here in Canberra.
I feel slightly unclean.

 

[CharacterFirst]

LOL.
I'm not avoiding the question. I'm giving it the due consideration it deserves.
As I said good question.
20 years ago I would have given you a one word answer.

ps I turned on the tele to watch One Week at a Time and realised the NRL now have a copycat version running here in Canberra.
I feel slightly unclean.

Fair enough.

I know re OWAAT on ONE. What is going on there! Where is the real AFL one? I was looking forward to 2 hrs of footy drivel (it really is mostly drivel, but i watch just in case. Terrible isn't it) with FC starting tonight as well.

 

[Monniehawk]

Well for believers you would assume there was some sort of divinity. How would you decide what was divine and what was not? That is why religion does tend to follow absolutes.

When you get cop outs like: "Love God." Yet no explanation as to what that means. It's like when you ask "What is God?" and you get meaningless drivel like "He is beyond our comprehension." I'm sure suicide bombers love God too.

Yet apparently our immortal souls are in mortal danger yet no one can tell me precisely how to get my soul out of mortal danger. Some say I can eat shellfish, some say I can't. I mean seriously?

Does this sound like something divinely inspired or a bunch of contrived man made bullshit? If you can do whatever you want and still count as a believer then being a believer is kinda pointless isn't it? There has to be some limit right? Some ground rules?

This is getting a little polemical, but I share some of your frustrations with the vague answers - and will probably now add to the accumulation of them.
Christians often have vague answers. That doesn't mean that all is bullshit,
or that Christians have no cogent answers at all.
Many of them think in a different way, on a different plane if you like, and not everything has to be explainable in the way that concrete thinkers demand. I don't know that physicists become apoplectic worrying why light sometimes acts like a wave and sometimes like a particle or why the colour red has symbolic applications in art. People can be curious, yet just accept that something is, because it is! Like you, I don't have to believe it or understand it.
Your divination example of a xtian 'absolute' has not convinced me. Sorry.
As for doing what they like, it is more that some don't necessarily conform to an external, rigid imposition. If you happen to believe in a concept, do you have to accept someone else's perception of that concept? You can accept that ground rules exist, but still ignore or challenge them. Does breaking rules suddenly deny your faith? No, it simply means you have broken/challenged a rule.
Christians do NOT have to accept everything the Bible - or their parson says - in order to see themselves as a Christian. Most Christians of my acquaintance are able to query their faith and will argue interpretations.
I just happen to disagree with some key points of their belief.

 

[Mordecai]

Religious people often get stuck when confronted with reason and logic. If humanity had only developed those concepts a little earlier there wouldn't be religion.

Moron.

 

[Pie eyed]

Fair enough.

I know re OWAAT on ONE. What is going on there! Where is the real AFL one? I was looking forward to 2 hrs of footy drivel (it really is mostly drivel, but i watch just in case. Terrible isn't it) with FC starting tonight as well.

I never had a lot of time for the AFL version eiher but it's been a long off-season and I was looking forward to some classic Quarterbrainisms.

Hopes dashed but I've always got the 2010 GF Replay on HDD.

 

[CharacterFirst]

This is getting a little polemical, but I share some of your frustrations with the vague answers - and will probably now add to the accumulation of them.
Christians often have vague answers. That doesn't mean that all is bullshit,
or that Christians have no cogent answers at all.
Many of them think in a different way, on a different plane if you like, and not everything has to be explainable in the way that concrete thinkers demand. I don't know that physicists become apoplectic worrying why light sometimes acts like a wave and sometimes like a particle or why the colour red has symbolic applications in art. People can be curious, yet just accept that something is, because it is! Like you, I don't have to believe it or understand it.
Your divination example of a xtian 'absolute' has not convinced me. Sorry.
As for doing what they like, it is more that some don't necessarily conform to an external, rigid imposition. If you happen to believe in a concept, do you have to accept someone else's perception of that concept? You can accept that ground rules exist, but still ignore or challenge them. Does breaking rules suddenly deny your faith? No, it simply means you have broken/challenged a rule.
Christians do NOT have to accept everything the Bible - or their parson says - in order to see themselves as a Christian. Most Christians of my acquaintance are able to query their faith and will argue interpretations.
I just happen to disagree with some key points of their belief.

Thats a pretty good explanation.

 

[Max zero]

This is getting a little polemical, but I share some of your frustrations with the vague answers - and will probably now add to the accumulation of them.
Christians often have vague answers. That doesn't mean that all is bullshit,
or that Christians have no cogent answers at all.
Many of them think in a different way, on a different plane if you like, and not everything has to be explainable in the way that concrete thinkers demand. I don't know that physicists become apoplectic worrying why light sometimes acts like a wave and sometimes like a particle or why the colour red has symbolic applications in art. People can be curious, yet just accept that something is, because it is! Like you, I don't have to believe it or understand it.
Your divination example of a xtian 'absolute' has not convinced me. Sorry.
As for doing what they like, it is more that some don't necessarily conform to an external, rigid imposition. If you happen to believe in a concept, do you have to accept someone else's perception of that concept? You can accept that ground rules exist, but still ignore or challenge them. Does breaking rules suddenly deny your faith? No, it simply means you have broken/challenged a rule.
Christians do NOT have to accept everything the Bible - or their parson says - in order to see themselves as a Christian. Most Christians of my acquaintance are able to query their faith and will argue interpretations.
I just happen to disagree with some key points of their belief.

So what makes a Christian a Christian? Where do you actually stand?

Some beliefs are absolute. Does Hell exist? Are their talking snakes? Did Jesus raise from the dead? Did Noah's Arc exist?

My eternal damnation (quite a long time) is at stake here.

 

[melbournemartin]

I wonder if we have anyone dumb enough to be a new Earth creationist here?

 

[Monniehawk]

So what makes a Christian a Christian? Where do you actually stand?
Some beliefs are absolute. Does Hell exist? Are their talking snakes? Did Jesus raise from the dead? Did Noah's Arc exist?
My eternal damnation (quite a long time) is at stake here.

• To answer a question with a question: what makes an atheist an atheist? Opinion!
• SOME beliefs are absolute. (OK, making progress.) Some are conjecture and some are myths. A belief is simply a belief. It stands apart from empirical or concrete proof. You seem to have difficulty with that and yet I suspect it is a big part of your own cognition.
• Absolutism. Einstein has been proved wrong about a number of key issues, but he is not totally wrong just because he is not totally right! My point about the bible and xtians. Curate's egg!
• You stand eternally condemned ONLY if you believe in the whole purgatory thing. We don't, so this dialogue must be for your edification; it isn't for mine.
• As atheists/agnostics, that is always our lot. We don't believe in an afterlife so it is oblivion for us. I've lived with that... I can die with it!

I don't mind arguing/discussing points of difference, unless the other is proselytising. That can rankle. Some atheists are as bad as some evangelicals with their fervent desire to convert the unbelievers to their side.

 

[Partridge]

The problem with 'picking and choosing' which bits of the Bible you follow is how do you know which are the right bits?
What are the agreed core teachings (is there even a consensus?) that make you a Christian and what happens to the 'non core' teachings?

Why would I bet my soul (whatever that is) when people can't even give me a 100% list on the teachings I am supposed to follow?

You have to listen to senior religious figures. And never ever question them. At all.