the blasphemy challenge, comments from a theist
Posted on: April 26, 2010 - 1:40pm
Offline
the blasphemy challenge, comments from a theist
hi all, I'm a Christian; I'm not here to rant or anything, but I just have 2 quick comments regarding the blasphemy challenge:
1. I really don't see why anyone would bother asking someone to give up something which they don't believe has any value and/or even exists. If there is no God, no soul, no salvation or damnation, then there's no point. Selling one's soul by blaspheming the holy spirit is, in that case, an excersize in futility. Better, I would think, simply to give the DVD's away-- especially since those who have some reluctance to take up the challenge are the very ones who, in your view, most need to have it! 2. The whole premise is based on a faulty understanding of what constitutes "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit". In the context of the passage, blaspheming the Holy Spirit does not mean denying the Holy Spirit; it means giving credit to the power of evil for something that was done by the power of Good (Jesus spoke of this unforgivable sin in response to the accusation of the pharisees that he was performing miracles and casting out demons "by Beelzebub", that is, by the devil. This was a serious slur against the holy spirit through whom these works had actually been done; but not one that an Atheist can commit, not believing in either a Holy Spirit or a being known as Satan).
- Login to post comments
1. Besides being a good marketing device it showed:
a. We don't fear the being who you love and are scared of simultaneously.
b. It tied in to the last line of the movie.
c. It Got christians to wet themselves worrying about the (nonexistent) dangers of atheism.
2. Assuming it happened An assumption I don't make)
a. It depends on which form of Christianity you espouse - I've heard your definition of the unforgivable sin and two others.
b. That was a nice little re-write, wasn't it? From Baal-zebul (the Lord on high) to Beelzebub (the lord of the flies).
From the Wikipedia entry on Ba'al - "Some scholars have suggested that Ba'al Zebul which means 'lord prince' was deliberately changed by the worshippers of Yahweh to Ba'al Zebub ('lord of the flies') in order to ridicule and protest the worship of Ba'al Zebul. (NIV Study Bible published by Zondervan)."
Good old intolerant Yahwists - "You can't worship any other pagan god but ours". Calling them Christians hasn't changed them a bit.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
As an atheist, I still believe that the character of Satan demonstrates moral superiority to God. I believe that people who believe in God and the Devil and worship God are cowards. If I were a theist, and believed in the Bible, I would still have no choice but to burn in Hell because I would be incapable of loving a sadistic freak like Yahweh. Don't you think that saying this constitutes blasphemy, even though I am an atheist?
The fact that Satan, faced with God's tyrannical ways, made himself an enemy of God and an enemy of God's worshippers, means that Satan demonstrates a great sense of personal responsibility and commitment to the good, one far superior to those who grovel at God's feet and beg his forgiveness for acting in accordance with the nature he gave them.
There must be some way I can blaspheme the Holy Spirit as an atheist.
Jesus was a demon who was trying to get people to worship his superiors. Does that work for blasphemy? We are not afraid of empty threats of hell, nor the imaginary hands of your god.
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
This is entirely un-Biblical. Satan is the servant of YHWH in Jewish theology. And he not a servant in the loyal opposition sense. He is just a regular servant faithfully executing YHWH's will by acting as a tempter and as what we would think of as being a state prosecutor. Christians dreamed up everything you just wrote without regard for what the Bible or Jews say on this matter.
What you are writing about is the story from Paradise Lost. It makes for a good story, but has little to no grounding in the Bible.
I suppose that it is a bit odd that as an atheist who was raised Protestant, it still ticks me off that our common cultural views on Christian theology often flat out wrong when compared to the actual text of the Bible.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
Hi, welcome to the forum.
Sure you are.
Should we be asking people give up something that DOES exist instead?
Atheists don't believe in the Holy Ghost, so their goal is not actually to commit an unforgivable sin. The point is to symbolize their rejection of the religion.
Of course, every nonbeliever knows that Christians would never allow an unforgivable sin to actually be committed. The unforgivable sin will simply be ad hoc'd as much as necessary to make it absolutely impossible for anyone to commit. Even if there was someone insane enough to believe all the Christian stuff, but worship the devil instead, the definition would simply be changed to accommodate this. It almost has to be. An inclusive, fear/punishment based religion like Christianity thrives on mass reproduction and proselytization. If unbelievers could easily become "unsaveable," then the religious would lose their only decent excuse for trying to convert them all the time, and Christianity would be severely weakened.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
1. It has symbolic value. Doing the Blasphemy Challenge is a way of showing the world that you are sure of your (dis)belief.
2. Then again, in denying good, you are accepting evil. Jesus did, after all, say "Either you are with us or against us". Lovely little dichotomy.
"The Chaplain had mastered, in a moment of divine intuition, the handy technique of protective rationalization and he was exhilarated by his discovery. It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. Just no Character."
"He...had gone down in flames...on the seventh day, while God was resting"
"You have no respect for excessive authority or obsolete traditions. You should be taken outside and shot!"
@jcgadfly
1a. But we aren't scared of God, not in the sense you mean. Or at least, I'm not.
It isn't that the big meany god-in-the-sky is going to clobber me if I step out of line. What we Christians call the fear of God is more akin to reverence, awe and profound respect-- with a bit of the thrill one might get from riding a roller-coaster, or daring the rapids, mixed in.
2a. That's another thing about the Challenge; it not only depends on the form of Christianity we're talking about, it also doesn't take other, non-Christian theists (Buddhism, Judaism, Islam) into account at all.
Have to run, more later...
I bet you like tell yourself that. It masks the fear of hell you had indoctrinated into you.
Duh. Imagine that, a marketing trick in the USA that plays on christian superstition! Who would have thought?!
If you agree with us, Story Ming, you will burn in Hell for all eternity. Bwahahahaha!
The blasphemy challenge isn't about us trying to piss off your god. There's far more behind it than you realize. The point of the entire blasphemy challenge/day is this: You are a blasphemer. Yes, YOU, StoryMing, are a blasphemer. You may not be a blasphemer in the context of your own religion, but to a muslim, you are committing a sin worthy of hell by believing and telling others that god has a son. The muslim in this case is also a blasphemer in your context for precisely the opposite reason, he is denying Christ as the savior. So what does that matter? After all, you don't live in the same country this muslim does. He can think you're a blasphemer all you want and it won't matter one bit, so what's the big deal? It's a big deal because muslim clerics are attempting to work through the UN to make "defamation of religion"--or blasphemy--illegal. Ireland and The Netherlands have already passed anti-blasphemy laws and people have already been arrested simply for criticizing a particular religion. Blasphemy day is a protest against the idea that religious ideas should be taboo to criticize, and its about protecting YOUR rights as much as it is ours and everyone else's. Because once you buy in to this notion, a lot of really bad ideas will be left to grow and cause real, measurable harm to society as a whole. Maybe that's not the mindset everybody has about Blasphemy Day or the Blasphemy Challenge, but that's what it means to me. Because once you allow religion to dictate what is and is not intellectually taboo, freedom of thought, conscience, and even religion become impossible to maintain.
I guess it depends on the God you serve.
Which one do you serve?
a) The kill-crazy freak in the OT
b) The God who loves you but will send you to hell for the slightest offense as found in the Gospels?
c) The one who doesn't really care one way or the other and delegated his responsibilities to Jesus (he had to get something for his dad's beating him and murdering him, right?)?
2. It was Christianity because the RRS is based in America and Christianity is the dominant religious structure. I think Allah is a much of a bastard as Yahweh is. I took out all three in one shot - happy now? I don't include Buddhism because it is not a God-based religion. They venerate Buddha but he is not their god.
I'll leave you Christians to delve into why you want the people who wrote your holy book dead and roasting. Let me know how that comes out.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Is it kind of the same feeling as if an authority figure was watching you all the time with a gun pointed at you cocked and ready to shoot if you disobey or act up? Hmmm. Something like that??? Yyyyya, that's called fear.
Yes, well I guess you would miss the point entirely wouldn't you. I guess you see the blasphemy challenge leaning towards christianity but that's not the point at all as others have pointed out, only a christian would see it that way. I don't believe in allah either, and I don't fear that imaginary prick anymore than I fear yahweh. Ahhh! Isn't that empowering!!! WE DON"T FEAR YOUR GOD/S. I don't care if it's allah or yahweh or any other bat shit crazy diety who likes the smell of burnt flesh and orders the rape of virgins, they're all sick, people who don't see that are sick, I blashpeme against all of them equally.
jcgadfly: None of the above, of course!
In a nutshell, I guess you could say that the God I serve is the one who is essentially the diametric opposite of everything Atheists seem to mean when they speak of the god they *DON'T* believe in.
so, no, nomorecrazypeople, it is nothing like that
I don't see it as blaspheming against a god, because these gods don't exist. I see it as blaspheming against religion in general. God, is not real and has no bearing on anything, it is religion and belief that is the real force behind a mythical being.
Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin
Ok, well you started off by saying you are a Christian. I was raised strickly Christian, I am extremely familiar with the personality of the god of abraham. So what god are you talking about exactly, and could you explain how he's not the type to like the smell of burnt flesh and order the rape of virgins? What unique take on the christian god are you worshipping exactly? Have you read your bible from cover to cover? How many times? And if so how exactly are you representing a good god that you don't fear his vengence?
Oh, so you mean that when the Bible says,
""Should you not fear me?" declares the Lord. "Should you not tremble in my presence?"" Jeremiah 5:22
"But be sure to fear the Lord..." 1 Samuel 12:24
It isn't actually telling you to fear God? It actually means something completely different. You just have to interpret it the right way, right? And, since you're not actually "fearing" God, I suppose you're "trembling" out of "profound respect."
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
You can't just cut and paste your way through a theology course. You have to actually study it. It's not just a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of reading the entire biblical canon and then understanding the passages as they appear in the context of 66 books.
Luckily, many people have already done these studies. Many of the questions you have can be answered by doing a simple google search. Given the way you framed your question to the other poster, I would guess that you are not really interested in learning about Christianity, but rather, you are more interested in cherry picking passages and attempting to stump the religious people.
But just in case there is a tiny chance that you really want to know, I'll be generous and help you out:
"For the believer, the fear of God is something much different. The believer's fear is reverence of God. Hebrews 12:28-29 is a good description of this: “Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our ’God is a consuming fire.’” This reverence and awe is exactly what the fear of God means for Christians. This is the motivating factor for us to surrender to the Creator of the Universe."
http://www.gotquestions.org/fear-God.html
So you worship a god other than the gods of the Bible?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
and swallowing it whole - a difference you sidestep. Oh, and you are so generous with your loving help, FS. Praise be to god.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
To add to that:
And the typical person will read and study religion to truly understand it? From what I have seen they don't even need to read this bible or anything else, just follow programming from birth. baaaaaaaah
Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin
I don't see how that changes the fact that it's a matter of interpretation. Language is inherently ambiguous.
Plus, with Christians, having 66 books makes the Bible much easier to "interpret." Instead of accepting the literal meanings of passages that they don't like, even when they're obviously not metaphors, they'll refer to some obscure verse in a completely different book in a painfully obvious attempt to reconcile something or to stick their personal beliefs onto the Bible.
Doesn't help. Sorry. Btw, this looks exactly like what I'm talking about.
They're certainly not pulling "the fear of God is something much different" out of that verse. Looks more like out of their a**.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
And so your first shown:
""Should you not fear me?" declares the Lord. "Should you not tremble in my presence?"" Jeremiah 5:22
"But be sure to fear the Lord..." 1 Samuel 12:24
as examples from the bible by butterbattle in reference to the "fear" seemingly demanded by your god, and you reply with:
That's it? So your bible says one thing one place and another somewhere else, AGAIN!!! How tiring are these interpretive gymnastics you have to preform to make your god look at all reasonable in any way? And I could re-quote your bible back to you, and you could requote it back to me constantly contradicting eachother, ggggreat, sounds like alote of fun. Fortunate son I have a direct question I would like you to awnser.
What method do you use to determine which bible verses are to be taken literal and which arn't? Which are an accurate representation of the god of Abraham's character, and which are not? Can you give me a sound method one would use to make these distinguishments from one verse to the next?
I'm always intrigued when Christians counter the words of their God with the words of Paul.
Makes one wonder who's really getting the worship.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Umm, no. Language is ambiguous as we want to make it. If we decide that "apple" should refer to something other than the fruit, then the word automatically becomes ambiguous. Spoken languages are man made.
No, it is not a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of reading the bible and understanding it over the course of the entire biblical canon and not just a few cherry picked passages.
Care to cite me some examples of this (other than what you've mentioned about the source I just cited)? If you are willing to broad brush "Christians" in such a way, I'm going to assume that you have some examples of this that can be cited by some URL.
Of course it doesn't help because you are not seeking help. And any passage which contradicts your interpretation is inevitably going to be categorized by you as a case of "reconciling something or to stick their personal beliefs onto the Bible." Evidently, you are the only one with the correct understanding of it?
I'm interested to know what expertise you have in biblical theology and why we should trust your understanding of the scripture over theirs. Feel free to e-mail them or any other apologetics website that you can google search.
Again, you asked a question. You obviously were not looking for an answer. It was just your vain attempt to stump a Christian and you've failed miserably. In truth, the only ones who truly interpret the passages are atheists, which is clearly what you are doing at the moment.
It was not my quote. It was from a Christian website. I have no formal background in theology, so when I want to learn about what scripture says, I consult those who do. Finding a few cherry picked passages on some atheist website (which I'm guessing is what Butterbattle did) is not conducive to actually learning about what the other side believes.
It's not interpretative gymnastics. God asks us to fear him. In Hebrew, it is translated from the word "yirah", which means "awe". In Hebrew, there are different words used which translate in English as "loathing" or "dread". On Dictionary.com, the 4th definition of "fear" is "reverential awe".
http://judaism.about.com/od/beliefsandlaw1/f/feargod.htm
In Greek, "phobos" and "deilas" refer to dread or terror.. "eulabeia" refers to reverence. All of them are translated as "fear" in the New Testament, but only "eulabeia" is used in reference to God.
The method I use is consulting experts in the field who have done thorough exegesis and can assist me in my reading of scripture. Give it a try.
Yes ofcourse you must be right, I have never sat down and discussed the bible with self proclaimed bible experts, weak assumtion mate! Infact until I was 15 I did this 3 times a week since I was born. Ontop of that I had 8 different personal bible "tutors" you could call them. Some for a few months some that lasted years, wherever we moved I'd get hooked up with another "expert." So what exactly should I "try" that doesn't fit your criteria of listening to and learning from self-proclaimed bible experts. So who's a bible expert anyway? Someone who reads it alote? Someone who has read it their hole life? Someone who believes in it? Someone who has studied theology? Funny thing, over the years, the bible experts contradicted eachother, hmmmm... You can make your argument using old definitions of the word fear, great. The god of abraham is still one quick to anger, quick to violence, and quick to punish. If he did exist he should be "feared" by popular definition (but only in a get away from this drunken nut drivin the semi kinda way) as he is a bat shit crazy deity with fundementally contradictory personality traits and characteristics that either doesn't exist or is truly messed up.
So your method of distinguishing the "message" from the "contradictory message" you find in the bible is to take the position of self proclaimed bible experts? I'm glad that you think for yourself on the matter.
Okay, I'll accept that. But, in practice, language is almost always has some level of ambiguity and a thousands of year old translated religious compilation like the Bible is horrendously ambiguous.
Of course it's best to study as much of the material as possible, but that certainly doesn't mean that you can always reach a conclusive answer as to the meaning of a verse. In the end, there's always subjective interpretation.
Eh, if I may backpedal, I'm not saying all Christians do this, but in my personal experience, a lot of Christians do. I suppose I could go do a google search for examples, but I'm too lazy right now.
Not any passage. But, that was a good example of it.
Right now, I think I'm right. But, I can be wrong.
Virtually none. Sorry.
I analyzed the meaning of that English sentence and concluded that it didn't say anything about how the Christian's "fear" of God is different from the regular definition of fear.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Sure you did.
And what expertise did they have?
I don't think you are being honest with me.
Typically, someone with a degree in theology. It is possible that someone not formally educated in theology can understand scripture really well (i.e. Ray Comfort), but people like that are difficult to find.
Do you have any examples of this?
Uhhh, they are not "old definitions". People who speak Greek or Hebrew still use most of those words today. There is rarely a one-to-one correspondance between words in different languages.
What do you mean "popular definition"? I just gave you the translations. Seriously, if you make an error, why continue to defend it? Just admit you were wrong and move on.
Yes, they should just get rid of schools. Too many people out there learning from experts and not enough people out there "thinking for themselves". Damn those teachers.
No it isn't. "Fear" is one word that is used in English for multiple translations from Greek and Hebrew, all of which have their own unique meaning.
That's just deconstructionism, or the belief that any written text is not inherently meaningful because it is necessarily filtered through the unique lenses of a particular reader. By this metric, nobody can objectively learn anything from reading. Therefore, we cannot even have meaningful discourse right now because my text is being interpreted by you and may not reflect what is actually being conveyed.
My personal experience tells me that God exists.
You've admitted that you have no expertise in the field of theology. So what exactly is your basis?
And that's your problem. The Bible was not written in English. It was written in Hebrew and Greek. You cannot simply apply a colloquial understanding of words today in your own language to an ancient text written in a completely different language. Moreover, cherry picking passages is useless if they are written in the context of 66 books.
Folks, can we maybe not have this degenerate into some sort of free-for-all brawl, or endless quibble about what the meaning of the word "is" is? Can we stay on track here? Maybe?
NoMoreCrazy: To be raised 'strictly Christian' does not necessarily mean knowing anything about the character of the God of Abraham. Many people-- most, probably-- who call themselves Christian do not know Jesus Christ. OR his father (as robj101 correctly points out). Actually it was the religious people of his day that Jesus had the hardest time with, and the harshest words for: I expect it would be no different today. If you really do want to know what God it is I am talking about exactly (somehow I doubt it, but if), you might try reading 'The Jesus I Never Knew', by Philip Yancy. Actually yes, I have read the Bible, cover to cover, every year for the past ten years or more-- if that even matters. And no, I don't worship some other god; the God I worship IS the God of the Bible. The same that inspired such works as Handel's Messiah, the poem 'Footprints in the Sand', and the song Amazing Grace-- none of which depict the vengeful, tyrannical, dictatorial, abusive god described and denied here. Mine is no new or unique take on the Christian God, it is the take that all sincere Christian believers, the ones whose lives reflect heartfelt devotion to God and genuine unconditional love for their neighbor (and yes they do exist!) have held for the last 2000 years.So we've narrowed your God down to the the amalgamation of the Jesus of the Gospels and the "Jesus Christ" of Paul (I put it in quotes because Paul is not describing a person - the names are titles ->Messiah the Deliverer)
What do you think of the actions of the OT God then? Did they all go away once the Jesus of the Gospels died and rose again?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
I think you'll find that atheists not only deny the "vengeful, tyrannical, dictatorial, abusive god" that you don't believe in, but every sort of god whatsoever.
Ah, the all-powerful loving god/jesus/spirit who allows mothers to sell their 5-year-old daughters to men who then rape and murder the child. And who doesn't lift a finger to stop the torture of said baby. That loving god. The one with the "plan" that includes thousands of innocent children being murdered every day, many thousands more dying of preventable illnesses and lack of water and food.
Is it because of the original sin? And what would you say if I put someone in prison and tortured him then tortured his children and grandchildren and ...... I'd say anyone who did that was bat shit insane.
Is it because we have free will? Let's see...that five year old baby had how much free will?
We can't know god's plan.....but we can sure see the effects of said plan. Hunger, disease, murder, wars, all <rainbows> <lambs> <smiling faces> <flowers> <cute bunnies>
Oh, but it gives you a chance to go out and minister to those people. How kind of god to give you the opportunity to pat yourself on the back for being such a caring person.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Story Ming doesn't believe those parts of the Bible.
Indoctrinated, nothing. I was raised no-religion, and came to Christianity freely as an adult (largely no doubt because I didn't have to UNlearn all the baggage that passes for Christianity in many places).
Think what you like; I did not become a christan for the "fire insurance". If I am wrong, if God is not Who I believe Him to be and my faith is a blasphemous offense to some divine Power that Be, and I burn in hell for it, I accept that (would this be the flip side of Pascal's wager?). Hey, if I for one moment thought God was anything like the unspeakable so-and-so that you believe Him (not) to be, I wouldn't worship Him either.
That's impressive - you became a Christian without actually reading the Bible.
How did you pull that off?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
I'd say we agree here. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everyone, not just those who happen to agree with me-- theists, atheists, and idolators alike. However, many of us theists feel that our beliefs are in fact being systematically excluded from the public discourse: one's faith is not something one is supposed to talk about in public, it might offend someone, oh no! Freedom to me means, eg, the freedom to put up a nativity in town center so long as there is nothing to prevent anyone else from putting up a menorah, a statue of Vishnu, or an altar to Nothing, as well.
A what now ?
Of course you were. Though, if I had a dollar for each time a christian came on here and said they weren't raised with christianity... I'd be rich by now. Usually it turns out that "raised without religion" means they didn't like going to church and were busy doing mischief during the services/sunday school they were forced to go to as children.
Is that meant to refer to a celebration of Reason?
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
Likely an altar "To an Unknown God" a la Acts 17
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
It will always amaze me that the Christian doesn't see his own cherry picking to make his case for a "good" god, and then will call someone out on counter cherry picking from their bible. Cherry picking your bible to make a case for a "good" god of abraham is well just bloody silly. You might say doing the same to make a case for his "bad" character is equally as silly but let me pre-emptively show you how it isn't:
If I am a "good" person and do only "good" things and am of "good" character, then a "good person would consider me "good." If I am a "bad" person and do "bad" things and am of "bad" character then a "good" person would consider be "bad." If I was a "good" person and did very "good" things half the time however was a very "bad" person and did very "bad" things the other half a "good" person would consider me "bad." Infact even if I'm very "good" most of the time and yet very "bad" sometimes a "good" person would sill consider me "bad."
Just as an example... Let's say I was a good guy, I loved my wife, my kids, I helped people when I could and so on... Yet every 5 years or so I have an itch to rape and murder a little girl. Let's say I get busted red handed, video tape, etc.... 100% conclusive evidence. Do these examples of my good character hold ANY WEIGHT, AT ALL, IN ANY WAY in my defence? NNNNOPE! As if some magic number of good deeds listed would be able to sway the jury's opigion of my character after watching the video. Cherry picking through YOUR bible to make a case for the "good" character of the god of abraham is like the defense lawyer in this case saying:
"Your honor, in 1997 Joe Blow gave a dollar to a homeless man, in 1998 he acted as a loving father, in 1999 he helped his neighboor out of a jam, in 2000 he made a large selfless sacrifice, surely we can overlook the rape and murder of little Jen in 2001 in light of these examples of Joe's good charachter, If only you better understood Joe."
Wtf? OVERRULED!!!
I did, why is that hard to imagine I was dragged kicking and screaming for most of it. Not only did I go to church and study the bible 3 times a week, my parents were always making me study it with them aswell. Ontop of that I was forced to do "talks." I had to do these every 2 months or so, this is where I read about 2 chapters from the bible infront of the church and then I had to give an insightful 5-6 min interpretation of the words explaining how amazing god is to the creepy audience of a hundred or so. This started when I was about 7 and went unitll I was about 14 and refused. Luckily with every year I forget more and more about this and the bible.
Just the church kind I guess, years and years of creepy church expertise. Before they started pairing me up with younger "hipper" bible thumpers to tutor me I had a couple old farts, they were the type that had the book memorized from cover to cover, could draw verses out like billy the kids revolver and put a clever spin on any awnser to your question. Are these experts??? They were the most horrible of them all, really truly creepy.
By now you should be sure I am.
Haha, BANANAMAN! I'm sorry I can't help myself, when someone mentions that guys name I instantly laugh and this deep jovial voice in my head blurts "BBBBAAANNNNAAAANNNNAAAAMMMMAAAANNNN!!!!!!!"
So what exactly do you have to say about people who have seriously studied theology and think the bible stinks and is complete myth? Are they bible experts? Could anyone who disagrees with the bible be a bible expert in your opigion?
Lot's of stuff, just off the top of my head one would tell me we should not drink enough alchohol to get to intoxicated, this is viewed as harming yourself and is wrong, and went on to spin his position from versus in the bible. Later I was studying with one of these old guys for a few months and he was a heavy scotch drinker. One of those "don't be a pussy" old guys with a handshake that could brake your knuckles. I asked him what the bible said about drinking and he spun his case based on verses in the bible aswell that his frequent glasses of scotch were just fine. Well Which one is it?
Great, I was just trying to make a distinction between the 2 definitions, now I know. Hey I got one for you:
Why the heck would your god leave his word in the hands of man to be misinterpreted? Why the heck would he wright the bible in "this" language and not re-translate it oppropriately in "that" language for others? It is apparent translating the true meaning of something substancial from one language to the next is very difficult, sometimes it just doesn't work properly. So why would he leave it in the hands of our imperfect translations. Your god just looks more and more lame and incompetant the more you try explaining him.
I just did like 2 lines ago, let me respond before you double post the same correction.
*sigh*
Alright, I definitely agree that we can have meaningful, text-based discussions. So, the case where language is subjective is the exception, not the rule. Is that better?
Lol. Okay.
I just read those verses; that's all.
Okay. Fair enough. I don't know what might have been the meaning of the word in the original language, before it was translated into fear. I'm only looking at the way it's used in English and making my conclusion based on that.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Does he?
I know he completely sucks at philosophy and science.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Watch the debate with Thunderf00t and notice at the very end how well Ray does in addressing issues with scripture.
Fluff!
Well Ray did use Scripture but I'm not sure it addressed any issues.
He admits that the best way to use scripture is to attempt to bypass reason and play on the emotions using scripture. If only those emotions weren't hate and fear...
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Right, true, Atheism by definition means dis-belief in a god oer gods of any kind, whether malicious or beneficent. But is it not plain from the responses here that when "God" is mentioned, an entity of a *particular* nature and character-- of the most unpleasant kind-- is being presupposed? So much so that even the idea that one might worship from any other motive than fear and forced obligation is apparently almost beyond comprehension.
I've been in retail for over 10 years. No one transacts business using a piece of bubble-gum wrapper or Monopoly money for tender.
I must be an exception then. When I say I was raised no-religion, I mean NO RELIGION. Never brought to church, never knew anyone in my family to pray, God was not generally a topic of discussion in conversation.