God?

[Osprey 199]

quote:

Originally posted by echo4papa:

quote:

Originally posted by Osprey23:

...and handling snakes for holy purposes.

 

I thought masturbation was a sin?

 

ZING

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

The biggest problem I have with any conversation along these lines is that there is a certain breed of people who are either incapable or unwilling to accept that just because some people who are atheists have dogmatic opposition towards organized religion doesn't mean that all atheists have dogmatic opposition towards organized religion, or that atheism is in itself dogmatic.

 

There is a group of phenomena in the universe that cannot be explained at present. A creator of some type is a lot of people's answer to those questions. They come to that conclusion, I'd assume, by looking at that phenomena, and deciding that that answer, that of a creator, makes the most sense to them. I've looked at the same evidence and come to the conclusion that the notion of a God doesn't make much sense. That's it. That's the entire dogma of my atheism.

 

I get no satisfaction out of bashing the faith of anyone. I get GREAT satisfaction out of bashing individuals who don't understand their own faiths, or who use their faiths as a means by wish to persecute others. Nearly every major religion was founded on principles of peace and acceptance, a fact completely lost on a heck of a lot of people. I find that amazing.

 

Freex, I take huge issue with your assertion that a lack of belief in an afterlife would make mine or anyone else's life meaningless. That's ridiculous. The fact that I believe that when my heart stops beating, that's it, doesn't mean I'm suddenly destined for a life of misery and despair because my life is meaningless. On the contrary, by not believing that my life is a psychological/religious test towards an even better afterlife, I'm free to set my own standards for what makes a life worth living, and to match my personal goals better with what that standard is.

 

The truth is that 99% of the people on this planet, religious or otherwise, will never be the person they want to be because they'll never commit to it. I find personal meaning by trying hard to be part of the 1%. I wanted to improve my physique, so I started going to a gym and hired a trainer. I look better and I feel better, and I take pride in that, and more importantly to this discussion, I find deep meaning in my desire for self-improvement. I don't need a supreme being to tell me to better myself. I want to do that on my own.

[TheRevTy 6]

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

My problem with the Bible is, if it is to be the word of God, what do you say about the, umm, 'creative exceptions' that will undoubtedly come from hundreds of years of translations to different languages, hand written copies, methodical changes (Kind James version), and other omissions and additions.

 

The Bible is like playing that game, telephone. There is no way our current versions are true to the 'original'. Anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible is, well, wrong.

 

Hello everyone! Thought I'd pop in here and see what is happening. Everyone seems to be civil, and that is always nice.

 

As for this question, I cannot account for potential manuscript changes in terms of copying, although from all that I've learned, the scribes that copied the original texts went through ridiculous means to check the validity, things like counting every letter to match up the 234th letter and junk like that.

 

However, in terms of translations, having studied the original languages extensively, I can affirm that some meaning is lost when translated between languages. Just as with any translation, inflections and ideas are lost. That being said, I would struggle to believe that anyone feels every single word is infallible, but rather the general ideas. And even then there is distinction between poetry, historical narratives, prophesies, etc.

[TheREALBrooksThompson 157]

quote:

Originally posted by Freex:

 

Believing in the afterlife does not make life meaningless. In Christianity for example, the believer lives to do the things God wants him to do, which include living a life of compassion and love and preaching so that others believe in Christ. They don't work for themselves and quit. It makes the believers know they can enjoy life but at the same time work for things because there are eternal consequences. As in your belief, there are no second chances. You have one life to believe, one life to live in Christ. Salvation is secure in Christ, but it's not the only thing we live for.

 

The above is not an opinion, but my way to summarize the teachings of Jesus and the Bible. I didn't come up with it. In any case, you may read the Bible and find it for yourself, draw you own conclusions. I know other religions have other views.

 

Whatever you believe about the meaning of your life, I suggest you don't think believing in the afterlife makes the believer's life meaningless. That argument's logic is essentially flawed for what I wrote above.

 

Live today because there's nothing tomorrow. If there was, why living today? - this sounds like a summary of what you said.

 

 

Out of curiosity, do you believe in the history of Jesus written in the gospels? Have you read it? Do you believe what they wrote is true?

 

I feel I should make something clear here: I'm not saying that believing in what you believe can't provide meaning for your life. I'm just saying it doesn't for me. The point I've been trying to make (and I'll admit that I'm not always very good at putting my ideas into words) is that I think religion is up to the individual. It's a personal issue. I don't think there is one set of beliefs that will work for everyone. What gives you comfort and provides you with a purpose in life is not necessarily going to provide me with the same. And that's ok.

 

As for your questions, yes I have read most of the bible. I don't believe everything in it. I believe Jesus existed, I like a lot of what his message was as far as teaching people how to coexist. I don't believe he was the son of god or anything like that. I don't believe he died on the cross. I think he survived the crucifixion. But that's a topic that's probably far too controversial for civil conversation here.

 

The main point is that in my opinion, there is no wrong belief system. It's the individual that puts his or her faith into those beliefs that determines whether they are effective or not. I don't believe in trying to convert people to anything. As I said earlier, to each his own.

[Ned Ryerson 94]

quote:

Originally posted by TheRevTy:

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

My problem with the Bible is, if it is to be the word of God, what do you say about the, umm, 'creative exceptions' that will undoubtedly come from hundreds of years of translations to different languages, hand written copies, methodical changes (Kind James version), and other omissions and additions.

 

The Bible is like playing that game, telephone. There is no way our current versions are true to the 'original'. Anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible is, well, wrong.

 

Hello everyone! Thought I'd pop in here and see what is happening. Everyone seems to be civil, and that is always nice.

 

As for this question, I cannot account for potential manuscript changes in terms of copying, although from all that I've learned, the scribes that copied the original texts went through ridiculous means to check the validity, things like counting every letter to match up the 234th letter and junk like that.

 

However, in terms of translations, having studied the original languages extensively, I can affirm that some meaning is lost when translated between languages. Just as with any translation, inflections and ideas are lost. That being said, I would struggle to believe that anyone feels every single word is infallible, but rather the general ideas. And even then there is distinction between poetry, historical narratives, prophesies, etc.

 

I guess what I am trying to get at here is a philosophy that the Bible is the justification for many things. For example, "homosexuality is a sin." Yet the Bible is a creation of man, that is for some reason by design of our creator, imperfect.

 

I am not accusing anyone here of receiving the literal interpretation of the Bible, but our country is full millions of people, some of those in very powerful positions, who literally believe every word in the Bible as so.

[iddelen 7]

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

quote:

Originally posted by TheRevTy:

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

My problem with the Bible is, if it is to be the word of God, what do you say about the, umm, 'creative exceptions' that will undoubtedly come from hundreds of years of translations to different languages, hand written copies, methodical changes (Kind James version), and other omissions and additions.

 

The Bible is like playing that game, telephone. There is no way our current versions are true to the 'original'. Anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible is, well, wrong.

 

Hello everyone! Thought I'd pop in here and see what is happening. Everyone seems to be civil, and that is always nice.

 

As for this question, I cannot account for potential manuscript changes in terms of copying, although from all that I've learned, the scribes that copied the original texts went through ridiculous means to check the validity, things like counting every letter to match up the 234th letter and junk like that.

 

However, in terms of translations, having studied the original languages extensively, I can affirm that some meaning is lost when translated between languages. Just as with any translation, inflections and ideas are lost. That being said, I would struggle to believe that anyone feels every single word is infallible, but rather the general ideas. And even then there is distinction between poetry, historical narratives, prophesies, etc.

 

I guess what I am trying to get at here is a philosophy that the Bible is the justification for many things. For example, "homosexuality is a sin." Yet the Bible is a creation of man, that is for some reason by design of our creator, imperfect.

 

I am not accusing anyone here of receiving the literal interpretation of the Bible, but our country is full millions of people, some of those in very powerful positions, who literally believe every word in the Bible as so.

 

Actually the Bible as we call it today - and I am referring to the New Testament part - was not available for a long period of time after Jesus was gone. There were indeed historical sources mentioning

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

quote:

Originally posted by iddelen:

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

quote:

Originally posted by TheRevTy:

quote:

Originally posted by WPMagic:

My problem with the Bible is, if it is to be the word of God, what do you say about the, umm, 'creative exceptions' that will undoubtedly come from hundreds of years of translations to different languages, hand written copies, methodical changes (Kind James version), and other omissions and additions.

 

The Bible is like playing that game, telephone. There is no way our current versions are true to the 'original'. Anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible is, well, wrong.

 

Hello everyone! Thought I'd pop in here and see what is happening. Everyone seems to be civil, and that is always nice.

 

As for this question, I cannot account for potential manuscript changes in terms of copying, although from all that I've learned, the scribes that copied the original texts went through ridiculous means to check the validity, things like counting every letter to match up the 234th letter and junk like that.

 

However, in terms of translations, having studied the original languages extensively, I can affirm that some meaning is lost when translated between languages. Just as with any translation, inflections and ideas are lost. That being said, I would struggle to believe that anyone feels every single word is infallible, but rather the general ideas. And even then there is distinction between poetry, historical narratives, prophesies, etc.

 

I guess what I am trying to get at here is a philosophy that the Bible is the justification for many things. For example, "homosexuality is a sin." Yet the Bible is a creation of man, that is for some reason by design of our creator, imperfect.

 

I am not accusing anyone here of receiving the literal interpretation of the Bible, but our country is full millions of people, some of those in very powerful positions, who literally believe every word in the Bible as so.

 

Actually the Bible as we call it today - and I am referring to the New Testament part - was not available for a long period of time after Jesus was gone. There were indeed historical sources mentioning