|
On April 18 2007 09:55 MoltkeWarding wrote:
I don't see Xelnaga as acting smug at all. On the other hand, maybe some of us would benefit from a re-evaluation of what the bible says rather than what we imagine it to say.
It is possible for an atheist to take a texual criticism/interpretation of the bible without hostility.
I've taken a bible as lit class, and at the end of it I felt largely as I felt at the beginning, that any text as dense and historically important as the Bible can and probably should be studied. But this doesn't really seem to be relevant to the theological debate happening at the moment.
About the smug comment, I could be mis-internet-inflecting on his behalf, but here's a quickly plucked example of something I read as a bit on the smug side:
Oh really? You see, 2 Timothy 3:16 teaches that if you're going to go around saying "Hey!! I'm a Christian!!" then you should expect to live you life according to scripture. And when you aren't, then other Christians have that authority to pull you aside, and in light of what scripture teaches question your behavior, which is all I did. You might not like it and you might not understand it and you might think it's unfair, and I feel sorry for you, but that's just how it is.
What I and I think others are and were reacting to is the way in which the bible is cited, as totally irrefutable and literal fact, something most Christian scholars don't even try to do any more, and as a striking blow to someone else's argument. The impression I got was that Xel felt like everyone else's position was held just out of a simple lack of knowledge about the bible, which in my evaluation hasn't been the case for much of this thread. People were telling him that not all Christians follow every word of the Bible, and he responded with quotes from it.
|
On April 18 2007 12:13 TheOvermind77 wrote:
So sum it up...I respect the Bible and take it as a guideline for how to live my life, but only loosely. I am not a Biblical literalist.
If you can pick and choose at your own will, then what's the point of the thing?
You can make your own morals and guidelines. Sure maybe you can take inspiration from the Bible, but to choose what you take as literal truth and what to ignore sounds absurd - why not ignore the whole thing?
|
On April 18 2007 11:59 XelNaga wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 11:56 ZaplinG wrote:
dinosaur bones and the ancestry of humans is far from not being true.
where did the bones come from? i suppose someone planted billions of them all over the world in an effort to disrupt christianity? They existed at the same time is what I was getting at.
Radio carbon dating  Tool of the devil
|
On April 18 2007 12:43 Never Post wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 12:13 TheOvermind77 wrote:
So sum it up...I respect the Bible and take it as a guideline for how to live my life, but only loosely. I am not a Biblical literalist.
If you can pick and choose at your own will, then what's the point of the thing? You can make your own morals and guidelines. Sure maybe you can take inspiration from the Bible, but to choose what you take as literal truth and what to ignore sounds absurd - why not ignore the whole thing?
I choose not to ignore it because I do believe there was Divine inspiration in the writing of the Bible. When referring to "loose guideline", I should have specified: Things like the Ten Commandments, believing in Jesus, Heaven and Hell, etc are all things that I do not doubt. But I do not take other things...the odd Old Testament rituals, some of the slightly overzealous statements of Paul, the story of creation, Revelations, etc...as literal. I don't make up my own guidelines.
I am a person who is kind to others. I believe in one God. I believe in Jesus. I don't commit crimes. I help out people in need. I do many of the things that the Bible says.
Just not every single word. I don't know if I explained that correctly...is that a better explanation? I was kind of vauge earlier. Sorry ><
|
On April 18 2007 12:03 Purind wrote:Evolution is clearly a lie created by scientists to take over the world. Here is proof: + Show Spoiler +Creationism wins again
Crap, how can I continue to argue against that? I concede my stance and retract all previous statements.
|
On April 18 2007 12:50 TheOvermind77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 12:43 Never Post wrote:On April 18 2007 12:13 TheOvermind77 wrote:
So sum it up...I respect the Bible and take it as a guideline for how to live my life, but only loosely. I am not a Biblical literalist.
If you can pick and choose at your own will, then what's the point of the thing? You can make your own morals and guidelines. Sure maybe you can take inspiration from the Bible, but to choose what you take as literal truth and what to ignore sounds absurd - why not ignore the whole thing? I choose not to ignore it because I do believe there was Divine inspiration in the writing of the Bible. When referring to "loose guideline", I should have specified: Things like the Ten Commandments, believing in Jesus, Heaven and Hell, etc are all things that I do not doubt. But I do not take other things...the odd Old Testament rituals, some of the slightly overzealous statements of Paul, the story of creation, Revelations, etc...as literal. I don't make up my own guidelines. I am a person who is kind to others. I believe in one God. I believe in Jesus. I don't commit crimes. I help out people in need. I do many of the things that the Bible says. Just not every single word. I don't know if I explained that correctly...is that a better explanation? I was kind of vauge earlier. Sorry ><
So you remove anything which to you seems illogical/nonsensical. So I can read the Bible, pick the passages I like, subtract the "God thing", and still be a Christian?
|
On April 18 2007 12:43 Never Post wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 12:13 TheOvermind77 wrote:
So sum it up...I respect the Bible and take it as a guideline for how to live my life, but only loosely. I am not a Biblical literalist.
If you can pick and choose at your own will, then what's the point of the thing? You can make your own morals and guidelines. Sure maybe you can take inspiration from the Bible, but to choose what you take as literal truth and what to ignore sounds absurd - why not ignore the whole thing?
"The reasons behind human actions are usually immeasurably more complex and varied than our subsequent explanations of them." (if someone can identify this quote, congrats  )
One can't take an entirely rational approach. Humans aren't entirely rational creatures. Humans can read a text and relate to it in non-rational ways, some of which are irrational. Nobody can live entirely rationally and so nobody can give an entirely rational account of their lives. So, to say that the exercise is absurd is exactly right. Reason can only take someone far enough to know that reason isn't enough. There's some other quote that I don't have memorized by some ~4th century churchman along the lines of "Christianity is absurd. That's why I like it."
|
whatever
the more i read from nutjobs like these the more i think organized religion is a bunch of bullshit
what we really need to learn to do is to be kind to other people and stop judging each other
wow lol.
so kind, and non-judgmental.
gj.
|
United States37500 Posts
|
TheOvermind77
"Awaken my child, and embrace the glory that is your birthright. Know that I am the Overmind; the eternal will of the Swarm, and that you have been created to serve me."
from that line that i know that you are in God's business for the power he could bestow upon you .
all of your arguments are a means to an end, your end, the end that has you standing next to God
basking in his glory/power.
|
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that?
|
On April 18 2007 13:11 TheOvermind77 wrote:
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that?
Idk, are you a girl?
|
On April 18 2007 13:09 xM(Z wrote:TheOvermind77 "Awaken my child, and embrace the glory that is your birthright. Know that I am the Overmind; the eternal will of the Swarm, and that you have been created to serve me." from that line that i know that you are in God's business for the power he could bestow upon you . all of your arguments are a means to an end, your end, the end that has you standing next to God basking in his glory/power.
Yes, I want to be a Cerebrate...or just the Overmind. I want to be the Overmind and control all of the Swarms! BWAHAHAHAH!
In seriousness, though, that is not what I desire ><
|
On April 18 2007 13:12 Annor[BbG] wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 13:11 TheOvermind77 wrote:
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that? Idk, are you a girl?
In the words of Peter Griffin: Touché, Salesman.
|
On April 18 2007 13:11 TheOvermind77 wrote:
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that?
That's also what you would be calling taking out of context. That was hygiene law for the Hebrews when they were in the desert. There was a lot of sickness and disease concern at the time, and so there you go, this is a solution for it.
When you say you're taking the bible literally, there is also the assumption that you know the context of the bible and do we need to apply Hebrew religious laws to our society today? No, because 1) We aren't Hebrew and 2) It's out of context.
On April 18 2007 12:45 bine wrote:Radio carbon dating Tool of the devil
No, just inaccurate.
|
On April 18 2007 13:11 TheOvermind77 wrote:
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that?
Nowadays we understand the science behind 'discharges' and aren't so afraid of their 'dirtying' that we must murder animals irrationally.
I also think we have the science to realize that this and similar verses are just as irrational:
Genesis, 1. 1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
|
Braavos36402 Posts
since when is the solution to sickness and disease to sacrifice doves and pigeons
|
On April 18 2007 13:24 Hot_Bid wrote:
since when is the solution to sickness and disease to sacrifice doves and pigeons
Don't ask me, that's their society. The solution was being separated.
|
On April 18 2007 13:22 XelNaga wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 13:11 TheOvermind77 wrote:
Here is an example of what I mean by not taking the Bible literally...or 'ignoring' some parts.
Leviticus 15: 28-30
"'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. 29 On the eighth day she must take two doves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the Lord for the uncleanness of her discharge."
Do you practice that? Should we practice that? That's also what you would be calling taking out of context. That was hygiene law for the Hebrews when they were in the desert. There was a lot of sickness and disease concern at the time, and so there you go, this is a solution for it. When you say you're taking the bible literally, there is also the assumption that you know the context of the bible and do we need to apply Hebrew religious laws to our society today? No, because 1) We aren't Hebrew and 2) It's out of context. No, just inaccurate.
So you're saying that Hebrews in poor living conditions should kills birds or they'll be unclean? Frankly, that sounds absolutely stupid.
|
On April 18 2007 13:25 XelNaga wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2007 13:24 Hot_Bid wrote:
since when is the solution to sickness and disease to sacrifice doves and pigeons Don't ask me, that's their society. The solution was being separated.
If the Bible simply records the ideals of a society, where's it's credibility as divine scripture?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
