Support NeoGAF

[Shanadeus]

Love does not condone evil. Love protects people from those who want to do evil. That is what our justice system is for. It is there to protect people from those who want to do evil.

The entire human race was evil during Noah's time. Jesus said that in the last days the same thing will happen. People will be self centered and God will pour out his wrath again. But this time not with water but with fire. God wants people to repent, stop being evil, and love others unconditionally. This can only be done with the help of God. But people would rather be evil and live for themselves then love how God wants them to.

I disagree.
The justice system (in the US) is not all about protecting people from those who want to do evil.

First of all, it doesn't care about "evil" unless it's a crime and secondly - it's more about punishing people and fuelling the blood thirst of people than it is about protecting innocents.

If the justice system, or the government itself really, was there to protect people from those who want to do evil then it would prevent those who want to do evil from being created in the first place.

Criminals aren't just nature's freaky little accidents popping up and waiting to be smitten into jail or a grave. Criminals are in the overwhelming majority of cases a by-product of one or more conditions, with varying preventability, in society.

I meant, tell me more about how you met god, the circumstances, and what did he/she tell you
YOU WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT ME WERE YOU >:O

It happened last week when it suddenly wrote out a message in thin air.

It something along the lines:

"Hello, I am what many of your kind call 'God'"

To which I responded:

"Prove it"

Which it proved by making a cupcake appear out of thin air and immediately vanish.

...

Yeah, it didn't really go down like that.

 

[GhaleonQ]

If I was Satan, the first thing I'd do is get men to rewrite the bible so that it is no longer the word of god, so that it shackles its followers instead of freeing them.

Having a pit of fire to threaten people to stay in line with is a pretty good controlling mechanism, and it has worked pretty well so far. It's entirely possible 'hell' means a different thing and I don't think it is a pit of fire in the afterlife.

And when a being demands worship, that's more controlling language, and I'd need some more substance before accepting it as the words of a divine entity. If it is, then more care has to be taken to ensure that entity has our best intentions at heart.

1. Past: arbitrary pagan gods and merit-based afterlife versus principled single god and merit-based afterlife = push

2. Present: you HAVE to know how many people have left Christianity because of hell theology.

3. http://pewforum.org/Age/Religion-Among-the-Millennials.aspx A whole 3/5 of Christians in a country supposedly heavily influenced by zealots believe in its existence!

4. I like that your idea of heaven is chillin' with God playing video games because he (lowercase "h") is just a bro like you and I, but, again, you're entering a theology with your own anachronistic biases. That's not Christianity's fault. Republicanism seems pretty hierarchal compared to anarchy, but I'm pretty sure the former's not an excuse for autocracy.

 

[Liquid Helium]

Correlation =/= Causation

I agree, but if he is arguing god had to kill people who don't obey him to keep the world good, its a pretty damning evidence to the contrary.

We have the lowest crime rates ever because of all of the abortions that have been committed.

http://movies.netflix.com/WiSearch?v1=Freakonomics&oq=frea&ac_posn=1

Freakonomics
(2010) PG-13

Several documentary directors each film a segment representing one chapter of Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner's best-seller Freakonomics, which explains different elements of popular culture through economic theory and statistics. Issues include everything from cheating sumo wrestlers to whether Roe v. Wade produced a drop in crime. Filmmakers include Morgan Spurlock, Alex Gibney, Seth Gordon, Eugene Jarecki, Rachel Grady and Heidi Ewing.

This movie brings up the very issue of low crime and through statistics found that it is because of all the abortions in the past 30 years.

Well I think that's a good reason to be pro-choice, no?

 

[Chaplain]

what way out did he give egypt's first born?

Warning after warning. Go reread the story and you will see Pharaoh rejected every way out God offered through Moses. More than 9 times Moses gave a way out before God took the first born sons.

 

[Dever]

I do not have the answer to that but I do know what people with bad morals spread those morals to others. Hollywood does a great job at this. A good example of this is what is on tv right now. Shows that would be considered pornographic 50 years ago are considered normal tv now.

And shows that were considered normal TV 50 years ago would nowadays be considered racist or demeaning to women.

 

[Shanadeus]

Warning after warning. Go reread the story and you will see Pharaoh rejected every way out God offered through Moses. More than 9 times Moses gave a way out before God took the first born sons.

He said first born, not their fathers.

How did the toddlers have a way out?
They had no choice but to remain in the care of their parents and couldn't in any way influence the choice Pharaoh had.

 

[Chaplain]

then it would prevent those who want to do evil from being created in the first place.

Hitler tried the same thing and it didn't work.

Criminals aren't just nature's freaky little accidents popping up and waiting to be smitten into jail or a grave. Criminals are in the overwhelming majority of cases a by-product of one or more conditions, with varying preventability, in society.

People become criminals one step at a time. People make choices and those choices become habits and later become who we are.

 

[Chaplain]

He said first born, not their fathers.

How did the toddlers have a way out?
They had no choice but to remain in the care of their parents and couldn't in any way influence the choice Pharaoh had.

Sin has consequences. This happens today. A woman gets pregnant, and instead of taking responsibility for her actions, decides to have an abortion. The unborn child suffers because of the choices the woman made. No difference.

 

[GhaleonQ]

I don't think I'm being patronizing; in fact it seems like you're patronizing all of Santa's believers. And I think you know that the bolded is incredibly false. Have you not seen statistics about religious belief among natural scientists? They pretty much NEVER convert to Christianity because they're too well educated.

So once again, my questions: Do you see the similarities between what is generally required for conversion to Christianity and what it takes for someone to believe in Santa Clause? Do you see any difference between the respectability of these 2 beliefs? And why do you think many more people continue believing in Christianity beyond the age of 10 than Santa?

1. You're committing a ton of fallacies. Here's 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi

2. You're making a ton of silly propositions. Here's 1: intelligence is a single continuum.

3. I already answered your question. "That some people treat the Christian God like Santa Claus doesn't mean that's an informed, correct, or orthodox understanding of Christianity. Thus, the fault lies with people and not Christianity. Furthermore, far from condemning it, attracting the weak is Christianity's purpose just as much as it is attracting the strong."

4. Some people continue for the bad reasons that I mentioned, of course. Belief I would describe as genuine and sophisticated recognizes that the theology is objectively phenomenal and, to my subjective preference, awe-inspiring. To compare, for instance, Luther's exegesis "Concerning Bound Choice" to supersonic reindeer is silly.

5. Uh, "Saint Nikolaos" might have some connection to Christianity, yes. Can anyone help me figure out how SAINT NICK and Christianity might be related?

 

[Shanadeus]

Hitler tried the same thing and it didn't work.

It didn't work because Hitler was wrong.

People become criminals one step at a time. People make choices and those choices become habits and later become who we are.

People are products of the environment and genetics. You have as much of a choice of becoming Christian as a rock has to fall down when dropped from a cliff.

Sin has consequences. This happens today. A woman gets pregnant, and instead of taking responsibility for her actions, decides to have an abortion. The unborn child suffers because of the choices the woman made. No difference.

Then God is a practitioner of infanticide, because he was the one who killed the babies.
He didn't use a proxy, he didn't subtle manoeuvre the parents into killing them - he himself made the killing blow for each individual baby.

If I kill someone then I'm still the murderer regardless of how much I say that I only killed because X person didn't do what I wanted them to do.

 

[matmanx1]

If you are going to make a topic about something I think you should at least have a good grasp of the subject matter. OT's topic attempt comes off as something of an inflammatory troll which I thought was frowned on around here.

Trust really comes down to Faith. Faith comes from God upon hearing his Word. God's Word was made flesh and dwelt among man in the form of Jesus.

That's the very most basic answer to your (biased) question.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

Sin has consequences. This happens today. A woman gets pregnant, and instead of taking responsibility for her actions, decides to have an abortion. The unborn child suffers because of the choices the woman made. No difference.

A woman takes a shower, which causes the death of countless "microscopic animals." These "animals" suffer because of the choice the woman made.

 

[Chaplain]

It didn't work because Hitler was wrong.

That is the point I was making.

People are products of the environment and genetics. You have as much of a choice of becoming Christian as a rock has to fall down when dropped from a cliff.

People have freewill to choose what they want to do. There are countless drug addicts who say they didn't have a choice going to a dealer and taking the drugs. But this is a lie because the person decided to get in the car, get money, pay the dealer and do the drugs. Each step was a choice that hurt the person.

Then God is a practitioner of infanticide, because he was the one who killed the babies.
He didn't use a proxy, he didn't subtle manoeuvre the parents into killing them - he himself made the killing blow for each individual baby.

God did not force anyone to reject his way out. Pharaoh made a choice and that choice affected all of his people.

Another thing is if this life is all there is, then God did do wrong. But God says that there is another life when we die. It does not end and those children, even though they suffered because of someone else's sins, go to be with him in heaven. They are not complaining now for what happened. Do you think they are?

 

[Chaplain]

A woman takes a shower, which causes the death of countless "microscopic animals." These "animals" suffer because of the choice the woman made.

God says we are created in his image and are more important to him then the animals. As Jesus said:

Look at the birds. They don’t plant or harvest or store food in barns, for your heavenly Father feeds them. And aren’t you far more valuable to him than they are?

 

[Shanadeus]

People have freewill to choose what they want to do. There are countless drug addicts who say they didn't have a choice going to a dealer and taking the drugs. But this is a lie because the person decided to get in the car, get money, pay the dealer and do the drugs. Each step was a choice that hurt the person.

My point is that you can affect the environment, you can change biology and thus change the choice they make - because the choice they make never exist in a vacuum.

It can be as free as you want it to be but it will still be the consequence of a particular combination of nature and environment.

AGod did not force anyone to reject his way out. Pharaoh made a choice and that choice affected all of his people.

So if I let someone make a choice I'm not morally culpable for a murder I commit due to them choosing something I did not want?

The only argument I could see working here is the one below and about God being above the moral laws he put forth.

Another thing is if this life is all there is, then God did do wrong. But God says that there is another life when we die. It does not end and those children, even though they suffered because of someone else's sins, go to be with him in heaven. They are not complaining now for what happened. Do you think they are?

That's a point I may concede, but as there are many who claim that innocents back then weren't covered by the later laws (that you would rise to heaven) it would still paint God as someone who killed and condemned babies to non-heaven.

 

[NotWii]

1. Past: arbitrary pagan gods and merit-based afterlife versus principled single god and merit-based afterlife = push

2. Present: you HAVE to know how many people have left Christianity because of hell theology.

3. http://pewforum.org/Age/Religion-Among-the-Millennials.aspx A whole 3/5 of Christians in a country supposedly heavily influenced by zealots believe in its existence!

4. I like that your idea of heaven is chillin' with God playing video games because he (lowercase "h") is just a bro like you and I, but, again, you're entering a theology with your own anachronistic biases. That's not Christianity's fault. Republicanism seems pretty hierarchal compared to anarchy, but I'm pretty sure the former's not an excuse for autocracy.

1. But the old testament god is a combination of several gods from the old world, it's the same thing, different perspective

2. Could be there to scare the bejeesus out of people, could be there due to miscommunication of samsara, could be both?

3. I'm not sure what you're getting at? That hell is an unpopular concept amongst christians?

4. Could you rephrase?

And shows that were considered normal TV 50 years ago would nowadays be considered racist or demeaning to women.

Heh, good point

 

[Black-Wind]

Well, in one of my classes we came to the conclusion that if you believe in an all powerful god then you are likely to believe that god to be benevolent so that you have hope for the future.

Thats why people don't "blame" god for the shitty things that happen or call it "his plan" but when good stuff happen it's because of "him".

But seeing as I'm not a believer I guess I shouldn't be here.

 

[JGS]

He said first born, not their fathers.

How did the toddlers have a way out?
They had no choice but to remain in the care of their parents and couldn't in any way influence the choice Pharaoh had.

Not here to argue (Sorry), but I've always liked this account in the Bible so I can't help replying.

Firstborn didn't denote just toddlers. Jesus is and always will be a firstborn after all. All firstborn were affected (Except possibly the Pharoah who also was usually the firstborn).

The punishment wasn't a result of sins of the father. The two aren't really related except techinically in the deicsion of the father. It was more in line with it simply being a plague- a punishment from God for not agreeing to do his will. In fact, the fathers of the firstborn (Many of them in the military at least) didn't last long after that 10th plague.

God allowing the killing of enemies and their children is nothing new and Scripturally speaking, hasn't even ended. Children often suffer the fate of the parents who raise them. God's enemies being mad that he would have the nerve to do this is unlikely to raise even a little sympathy, so it's just a matter of dealing with it...or shrugging it off as a phony threat anyway since no harm will be done assuming Christians are wrong.

The account of the 10 plagues is pretty complex, but I can't get to some of the research regarding the significance of all ten. This is probably a case, though, of there being no way that Egypt was not going to get out of experiencing all 10 plagues. Their primary shot at survival was in the initial action of refusing to let the Jews leave. It was all downhill from there since not only did they refuse that, but they continued to rely on their Gods to protect them. It was on like Donkey Kong then.

 

[WillyFive]

A woman takes a shower, which causes the death of countless "microscopic animals." These "animals" suffer because of the choice the woman made.

Good job hero, you just compared human beings to germs.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

3. I already answered your question. "That some people treat the Christian God like Santa Claus doesn't mean that's an informed, correct, or orthodox understanding of Christianity. Thus, the fault lies with people and not Christianity.

To compare, for instance, Luther's exegesis "Concerning Bound Choice" to supersonic reindeer is silly.

How is it possible to have a sophisticated belief in the supernatural?
How is it possible to have a correct belief in the supernatural?
Is it possible to have a sophisticated, correct belief in Santa?
Why is the bolded a silly comparison? They seem to be of about equal merit to me.
Do you understand why I said your were patronizing Santa's believers?

 

[GhaleonQ]

1. But the old testament god is a combination of several gods from the old world, it's the same thing, different perspective

2. Could be there to scare the bejeesus out of people, could be there due to miscommunication of samsara, could be both?

3. I'm not sure what you're getting at? That hell is an unpopular concept amongst christians?

4. Could you rephrase?

1. Right. I'm saying that hell isn't a powerful argument to believe or not believe, unlike what you wrote.

2. I'm just saying that even if hell does scare people into staying with the Church they don't like, it likely pushes out just as many.

3. Right. They aren't even scared by it as a rule, but some of them don't even think it's a thing. You can go to Pew even more and find that most of the people who DO believe in hell in this country think that it's basically for child molesters and mass murderers, anyway. I bet fewer than 20 percent of Americans believe in an orthodox version of hell.

4. That something is more authoritarian than another thing is true, but who cares? Having 1 bus driver is more authoritarian than not having a set bus driver, but it doesn't mean that the bus driver is a power mad psycho who will drive people wherever he wants.

Also, the only way you can decide that Christianity is purposefully to make sheep follow a leader is to enter with your own biases. I'm not saying Christianity CAN'T be autocratic, just that there's nothing in it that makes it necessary.

How is it possible to have a sophisticated belief in the supernatural?
How is it possible to have a correct belief in the supernatural?
Is it possible to have a sophisticated, correct belief in Santa?
Why is the bolded a silly comparison? They seem to be of about equal merit to me.
Do you understand why I said your were patronizing Santa's believers?

Hey, guys, Goodnight, Moon is just as sophisticated as The Brothers Karamazov. I mean, THEY'RE BOTH MADE UP. Edit: And don't forget that Kierkegaard and your grandmother are intellectual equals. PHILOSOPHY'S JUST MADE UP.

 

[Shanadeus]

Not here to argue (Sorry), but I've always liked this account in the Bible so I can't help replying.

Firstborn didn't denote just toddlers. Jesus is and always will be a firstborn after all. All firstborn were affected (Except possibly the Pharoah who also was usually the firstborn).

The punishment wasn't a result of sins of the father. The two aren't really related except techinically in the deicsion of the father. It was more in line with it simply being a plague- a punishment from God for not agreeing to do his will. In fact, the fathers of the firstborn (Many of them in the military at least) didn't last long after that 10th plague.

God allowing the killing of enemies and their children is nothing new and Scripturally speaking, hasn't even ended. Children often suffer the fate of the parents who raise them. God's enemies being mad that he would have the nerve to do this is unlikely to raise even a little sympathy, so it's just a matter of dealing with it...or shrugging it off as a phony threat anyway since no harm will be done assuming Christians are wrong.

The account of the 10 plagues is pretty complex, but I can't get to some of the research regarding the significance of all ten. This is probably a case, though, of there being no way that Egypt was not going to get out of experiencing all 10 plagues. Their primary shot at survival was in the initial action of refusing to let the Jews leave. It was all downhill from there since not only did they refuse that, but they continued to rely on their Gods to protect them. It was on like Donkey Kong then.

My point with that was:

So if I let someone make a choice I'm not morally culpable for a murder I commit due to them choosing something I did not want?

The only argument I could see working here is the one below God didn't let the innocent ones he killed suffer, he rewarded them with heaven instead and about God being above the moral laws he put forth.

You can't really say that God didn't kill the firstborns (let's focus on the toddlers as they have no say in the matter) by pointing at the Pharaoh's actions just as you couldn't say that I didn't kill X person by pointing at Y's actions.

Especially if X person is innocent and have no ability to influence Y's actions.

 

[Raist]

Good job hero, you just compared human beings to germs.

Well tehcnically you're 90% germs and 10% human

God says we are created in his image and are more important to him then the animals. As Jesus said:

Look at the birds. They don’t plant or harvest or store food in barns, for your heavenly Father feeds them. And aren’t you far more valuable to him than they are?

Well I guess Jesus sucked at observing nature. Countless animals do at least one of these.

 

[Zaptruder]

If you are going to make a topic about something I think you should at least have a good grasp of the subject matter. OT's topic attempt comes off as something of an inflammatory troll which I thought was frowned on around here.

Trust really comes down to Faith. Faith comes from God upon hearing his Word. God's Word was made flesh and dwelt among man in the form of Jesus.

That's the very most basic answer to your (biased) question.

You know there's little point in arguing with a person that can't argue or comprehend reality outside of scripture or gods word.

It's ok. I've got friends and family like this... I just don't bother engaging them on the subject matter.

I mean, I tell them why I'm an atheist, and in particular, what the nature of my beliefs are (secular humanist), but I don't argue with them...

Because the effort of converting one person is such that you might as well write this shit in a book and convert a few hundred, thousands or how ever many while you're at it.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

Moon is just as sophisticated as The Brothers Karamazov. I mean, THEY'RE BOTH MADE UP.

Translation: The supernatural things I believe in are SOPHISTICATED. The supernatural things I don't believe in are juvenile and silly.

 

[GhaleonQ]

Translation: The supernatural things I believe in are SOPHISTICATED. The supernatural things I don't believe in are juvenile and silly.

Fine.

Hey, guys, Matilda is just as sophisticated as The Brothers Karamazov. I MEAN, THEY'RE BOTH FICTION.

I literally do not understand how you can believe this unless you're just being obstinate. I'm certain that you don't act on this belief in real life. Since political, economic, philosophical, and religious beliefs are all invented and unprovable, you think they're all equally worthless? They're all equally good, well-constructed, and supported by equally dumb people?

Edit: Just so you know, you get 1 response. This is a stupid argument that's wasting time.

 

[Twilight Princess]

Because putting into practice what God's Word says shows its true (for me at least). God says to forgive your enemies. I do this and the hate I have for my enemies is removed by God. God says not to look at other woman with lust in my heart. I do this and the love for my wife that I have increases. God says die to myself daily (hourly sometimes). I do this and I experience love for others that I normally do not have.

Stuff like that is why I know God's Word is 100% true. God gives me basic instructions on how to live. I do what he says and my character begins to change.

if all As are B, and if all As are true, then all Bs are true? i do not deny that the bible has some wisdom but what book doesn't?
i practice all those things you mentioned, and i did it without believing in the christian god.
i'm happy for you though, you seem to have found a purpose in life and are content with it, which is all that matters anyway.

 

[jorma]

Well tehcnically you're 90% germs and 10% human

And we are all 100% stardust!

 

[Escape Goat]

Game Analyst, how do you reconcile the fact that most of the rituals and stories can be traced in other religions as well as religions that predate Christianity?

 

[Shanadeus]

Fine.

Hey, guys, Matilda is just as sophisticated as The Brothers Karamazov. I MEAN, THEY'RE BOTH FICTION.

I literally do not understand how you can believe this unless you're just being obstinate. I'm certain that you don't act on this belief in real life. Since political, economic, philosophical, and religious beliefs are all invented and unprovable, you think they're all equally worthless? They're all equally good, well-constructed, and supported by equally dumb people?

Edit: Just so you know, you get 1 response. This is a stupid argument that's wasting time.

Do you think the the concept of God as described in the bible would be considered more sophisticated than other fictional works if it was presented today?

The sophistication and all the philosophical thoughts of Christianity are probably due to it being based on a really old text that became really, really popular.

Elevate any other religious text at the same level that the bible has enjoyed and you'll probably come up with just as "deep" arguments and complex philosophizing on it as you have with the Bible.

Trust me, if the Bible had a small cult following then it would never have gotten as many arguments and counter-arguments that over several centuries would come up with more and more sophisticated explanations and arguments and rather would have viewed as a text of an ancient people that thought about taking the concept of God one step further by merging together the pantheons og God into one super-manly super-God.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

I literally do not understand how you can believe this unless you're just being obstinate. I'm certain that you don't act on this belief in real life. Since political, economic, philosophical, and religious beliefs are all invented and unprovable, you think they're all equally worthless? They're all equally good, well-constructed, and supported by equally dumb people?

One of these things is not like the others....

 

[Escape Goat]

One of these things is not like the other....

one of these things does not belong...

 

[Arrowgigantic]

Trust God, or FEAR God?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLwtqwnI6ko

 

[Escape Goat]

If any of our Christian posters would care to respond to my question above I'd really like to hear an answer. I really am curious how people believe their God is the true God when so much of what happens in the bible comes from Pagan myths.

 

[GhaleonQ]

If any of our Christian posters would care to respond to my question above I'd really like to hear an answer. I really am curious how people believe their God is the true God when so much of what happens in the bible comes from Pagan myths.

1. My experience is that some people who make this argument spout nonsense about the Mithra cult based on some stupid webpage. I'd advice against being that person.

2. The actual answer requires way too much comparative religion debate for a message board. I doubt anyone will start this argument, unfortunately.

Do you think the the concept of God as described in the bible would be considered more sophisticated than other fictional works if it was presented today?

The sophistication and all the philosophical thoughts of Christianity are probably due to it being based on a really old text that became really, really popular.

Elevate any other religious text at the same level that the bible has enjoyed and you'll probably come up with just as "deep" arguments and complex philosophizing on it as you have with the Bible.

Trust me, if the Bible had a small cult following then it would never have gotten as many arguments and counter-arguments that over several centuries would come up with more and more sophisticated explanations and arguments and rather would have viewed as a text of an ancient people that thought about taking the concept of God one step further by merging together the pantheons og God into one super-manly super-God.

1. I think you're making it sound easier than it is. If you know anything about the early Church (assuming we're counting from 33 A.D. and not the beginning of the Old Testament) and the late Roman and early Byzantine empires, you'll know that they could have thrown it out at any time. It's funny that the opposite happened; it WAS an irrelevant cult that got randomly picked from history.

2. If you think Shinto or Buddhism are as theologically sophisticated as Christianity or Judaism, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying sophistication proves something is right (I think Judaism might be more sophisticated in philosophy, but definitely not in art, and I don't think it's true), just that something can be given equal attention without equal results.

3. I was addressing the absurd form of your argument ("Everyone! A myth based on a Christian priest and perpetuated in the Christian world is a lot like Christianity!), to be fair.

4. I totally acknowledge your argument. The Bible is pretty sophisticated as it is, but the gulf is not as wide without theological development. If I believed, like Bob, that development proved something was correct, I'd be in trouble.

However, because we aren't able to solve the God problem a posteriori (see below), we can only argue about its a priori form (that is, its arguments). As such, current and potential sophistication are important ways to decide the relative worth of an idea.

"Capitalism works because of competition, markets, human nature, contracts, et cetera," is a worthy idea. "Capitalism works because God is on our money," is a worthless one. They both support something imaginary (the idea of capitalism), but only 1 is good.

One of these things is not like the others....

Oh, cool, if you can prove that, you can get a chair at any university in the world. Good luck.

Part of Christianity's awesomeness is the way it encourages intellectual humility, which, interestingly, relates to your original (facetious) argument about smart people not being religious. It makes you acutely aware of what you do and do not know. I'll just say that it's a universal virtue that you ought to acquire. See you later.

 

[Dude Abides]

2. If you think Shinto or Buddhism are as theologically sophisticated as Christianity or Judaism, I don't know what to tell you.

I would say you don't know very much about Buddhism. This whole argument from subsequent philosophical development is pretty silly. Marxist thought is just as sophisticated as Christian theology, but I doubt you think that's a very good argument that Marx had it right.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

If any of our Christian posters would care to respond to my question above I'd really like to hear an answer. I really am curious how people believe their God is the true God when so much of what happens in the bible comes from Pagan myths.

A funnier way to ask is how do they know that the Bible wasn't written by Loki as part of a plan to discredit Odin. Because it worked, didn't it?

 

[GhaleonQ]

I would say you don't know very much about Buddhism.

I am talking about its manifestation in all forms. Philosophically, it's quite sophisticated. Theologically? Well, we could debate that. Artistically? Dude. No. I say this as someone who thinks that Mishima's Sea Of Fertility tetralogy might be that century's best fiction work.

This whole argument from subsequent philosophical development is pretty silly. Marxist thought is just as sophisticated as Christian theology, but I doubt you think that's a very good argument that Marx had it right.

I say that!

 

[Bungalow Bob]

Do you think the the concept of God as described in the bible would be considered more sophisticated than other fictional works if it was presented today?

The sophistication and all the philosophical thoughts of Christianity are probably due to it being based on a really old text that became really, really popular.

Elevate any other religious text at the same level that the bible has enjoyed and you'll probably come up with just as "deep" arguments and complex philosophizing on it as you have with the Bible.

Trust me, if the Bible had a small cult following then it would never have gotten as many arguments and counter-arguments that over several centuries would come up with more and more sophisticated explanations and arguments and rather would have viewed as a text of an ancient people that thought about taking the concept of God one step further by merging together the pantheons og God into one super-manly super-God.

Good post.

I'll add that people nowadays would require far more evidence than someone's written word to believe a new supernatural claim. And it's truly uncanny how the magnitude of miracles seems to be indirectly proportional to technological advancement and scientific understanding. It's gone from the parting of the seas to Jesus on a burnt piece of toast.

 

[Dude Abides]

I am talking about its manifestation in all forms. Philosophically, it's quite sophisticated. Theologically? Well, we could debate that. Artistically? Dude. No. I say this as someone who thinks that Mishima's Sea Of Fertility tetralogy might be that century's best fiction work.

Well, the post I quoted mentioned theology only. Even accepting arguendo the notion that you can meaningfully compare the entire universe of Christian-inspired art to the entire universe of Buddhist art, I don't see how you can flatly state that one is objectively more sophisticated than the other.

I say that!

You're a Marxist?

 

[Bungalow Bob]

Part of Christianity's awesomeness is the way it encourages intellectual humility which, interestingly, relates to your original (facetious) argument about smart people not being religious. It makes you acutely aware of what you do and do not know. I'll just say that it's a universal virtue that you ought to acquire. See you later.

Part of the awesomeness of believing in the Easter Bunny is the way it encourages intellectual humility. It's such a great thing to whole-heartedly believe extraordinary things for no good reason. YAY FAITH!

 

[Escape Goat]

1. My experience is that some people who make this argument spout nonsense about the Mithra cult based on some stupid webpage. I'd advice against being that person.

2. The actual answer requires way too much comparative religion debate for a message board. I doubt anyone will start this argument, unfortunately.

.

Uhh what? You see the same themes in Babylonian mythology. The great flood for example. The idea of heaven, hell and purgatory. You can trace the acts of Jesus to pretty much any hero. Jesus or Odysseus parallel each other often. Hell, so does Luke Skywalker. Joseph Campbell outlined it as the Path of the Hero. The Eucharist, the consuming of the flesh and blood of the gods, pops up in ancient myth well before Christianity was conceived.

 

[ghst]

Warning after warning. Go reread the story and you will see Pharaoh rejected every way out God offered through Moses. More than 9 times Moses gave a way out before God took the first born sons.

so it's a christian teaching to hold infants directly accountable, to the point of murder, for the actions of their ruling monarch?

and another question for christians, do you believe that you are failing your god in the inadequacy of your abilities to bring the light of the lord to others? you have the light of divinity on your side but can't even prop up a off-topic message board without resorted to victimized claims of "being trolled". your arguments are so pock-holed, transparent and fallible that it often seems your reasoning is contorted in such a way to aid your own personal convictions, at the expense of those you are supposed to be reaching out to, who only become more alienated by your political mind gymnastics.

why do you believe it is that the more you attempt to bring us into the flock, the more repelled we are by what you have to say? whose failing is this?

(bonus points for not dropping the great deceiver card).

 

[Monocle]

Because putting into practice what God's Word says shows its true (for me at least). God says to forgive your enemies. I do this and the hate I have for my enemies is removed by God. God says not to look at other woman with lust in my heart. I do this and the love for my wife that I have increases. God says die to myself daily (hourly sometimes). I do this and I experience love for others that I normally do not have.

Stuff like that is why I know God's Word is 100% true. God gives me basic instructions on how to live. I do what he says and my character begins to change.

Members of every major religion on Earth, including those that directly contradict your own, report the same kinds of experiences. Thoughts alone can trigger profound physical changes, including, of course, intense feelings and sensations. None of these reactions constitute proof of anything external to yourself. Belief is sufficient to cause what you describe.

 

[GhaleonQ]

You're a Marxist?

I'm not saying sophistication proves something is right (I think Judaism might be more sophisticated in philosophy, but definitely not in art, and I don't think it's true), just that something can be given equal attention without equal results.

4. I totally acknowledge your argument. The Bible is pretty sophisticated as it is, but the gulf is not as wide without theological development. If I believed, like Bob, that development proved something was correct, I'd be in trouble.

However, because we aren't able to solve the God problem a posteriori (see below), we can only argue about its a priori form (that is, its arguments). As such, current and potential sophistication are important ways to decide the relative worth of an idea.

"Capitalism works because of competition, markets, human nature, contracts, et cetera," is a worthy idea. "Capitalism works because God is on our money," is a worthless one. They both support something imaginary (the idea of capitalism), but only 1 is good.

Part of the awesomeness of believing in the Easter Bunny is the way it encourages intellectual humility. It's such a great thing to whole-heartedly believe extraordinary things for no good reason. YAY FAITH!

This literally makes no sense either taken alone or as a response. The Easter Bunny encourages a sense of intellectual boundaries? What?

Uhh what? You see the same themes in Babylonian mythology. The great flood for example. The idea of heaven, hell and purgatory. You can trace the acts of Jesus to pretty much any hero. Jesus or Odysseus parallel each other often. Hell, so does Luke Skywalker. Joseph Campbell outlined it as the Path of the Hero. The Eucharist, the consuming of the flesh and blood of the gods, pops up in ancient myth well before Christianity was conceived.

........................................................................................*sigh* I'm not even saying you're wrong and that I have the upper hand, just that you don't know what you don't know (I assume, based on your arguments). Since this is a REALLY hard subject, it won't be productive.

 

[Monocle]

This literally makes no sense either taken alone or as a response. The Easter Bunny encourages a sense of intellectual boundaries? What?

His point is that attributing a beneficial effect to a false belief doesn't rationally justify a person to hold it.

 

[JGS]

You can't really say that God didn't kill the firstborns (let's focus on the toddlers as they have no say in the matter) by pointing at the Pharaoh's actions just as you couldn't say that I didn't kill X person by pointing at Y's actions.

Especially if X person is innocent and have no ability to influence Y's actions.

I agree with that (I think).

However, no one could influence his actions- grown or toddler.

I guess I like to focus on the fact that God kills enemies and oftentimes, where the ruler goes, so goes his nation. Ditto for kids- where the parent goes, so goes the kid.

 

[GhaleonQ]

His point is that attributing a beneficial effect to a false belief doesn't rationally justify a person to hold it.

Of course. It also doesn't mean 2 false beliefs are of equal worth to the world or intellectual equivalents, which is (I think) still his point. There's a gradient.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

This literally makes no sense either taken alone or as a response. The Easter Bunny encourages a sense of intellectual boundaries? What?

My post meant: I understand the fact that believing in Christianity, Santa, the superiority of a certain race, or any other illogical thing encourages intellectual humility. But why is this a good thing?

 

[Monocle]

I agree with that (I think).

However, no one could influence his actions- grown or toddler.

I guess I like to focus on the fact that God kills enemies and oftentimes, where the ruler goes, so goes his nation. Ditto for kids- where the parent goes, so goes the kid.

This doesn't strike you as an outrageous injustice?