Not Smart Enough

[JoabAnias]

Take all the superstition and myth out of Christianity and you basically have humanism! They're very compatible, hence why a lot of ex-Christians such as myself hold humanism as a world-view.

I reject superstition outright. What form of humanism are you referring to?

The type that seeks to avoid causing ones self harm?

The issue I have with church morals and ethics is that they claim unchanging absolutes... and even throughout history this is demonstrably false. Some morals of the catholic church I find to be abhorrent, and many more found in the bible, but I believe when a lens of humanism is applied to religious teachings and dogma (as I believe almost all but the most fundamentalists do) one can come out with a very reasonable world-view.

I had that issue once too and spent over ten years trying to prove a discrepancy in dogma and concluded that with a correct understanding of dogma, its simply not possible. I've never found humanism to be a guarantee of a methodical hermeneutic. I have found humanism to be a good starting place as an imperfect means of ascension to Gods will for my own sake.

 

[rjc34]

Atheism is becoming anti-theism. That is what the new atheism is all about.

They're two separate qualifiers. Neither is 'becoming the other'.

You could call me an agnostic atheist anti-theist humanist, because all three qualifiers address separate issues.

 

[rjc34]

I reject superstition outright. What form of humanism are you referring to?

The type that seeks to avoid causing ones self harm?

No, the one that follows a golden rule of 'Do No [avoidable] Harm'. I put the 'avoidable' in there because there are many situations where one must choose between the lesser of two evils, where the lesser is always preferable.

Also, I disagree with your statement of rejecting superstition. Just as you might qualify other religions seeking other gods as superstitions, they would classify yours the same, and I would classify all under that title.

I had that issue once too and spent over ten years trying to prove a discrepancy in dogma and concluded that with a correct understanding of dogma, its simply not possible. I've never found humanism to be a guarantee of a methodical hermeneutic. I have found humanism to be a good starting place as an imperfect means of ascension to Gods will for my own sake.

So when god condones slavery and gives very specific instructions about the the practice in the bible... what do you conclude of those morals?

 

[JoabAnias]

No, the one that follows a golden rule of 'Do No [avoidable] Harm'. I put the 'avoidable' in there because there are many situations where one must choose between the lesser of two evils, where the lesser is always preferable.

Also, I disagree with your statement of rejecting superstition. Just as you might qualify other religions seeking other gods as superstitions, they would classify yours the same, and I would classify all under that title.

That humanism you mention, is it in regard to only yourself?

As far as superstition you probably regard faith or belief as a superstion because its something you do not understand. I would have to differ with your opinion of what superstition is because I understand everything I choose to believe.

So when god condones slavery and gives very specific instructions about the the practice in the bible... what do you conclude of those morals?

Its a matter of understanding and perspective. Allowing is not necessarily the same thing as condoning. Any more than you choosing the lessor of two evils would be condoning the lessor evil. Its simply your available choice. God allows men free will. Yes, even to enslave each other or permit other evils if they so choose. God sanctions only the good.

 

[rjc34]

That humanism you mention, is it in regard to only yourself?

It's in regard to humanity in general... hence humanism. Do the least amount of harm possible to all people.

As far as superstition you probably regard faith or belief as a superstion because its something you do not understand. I would have to differ with your opinion of what superstition is because I understand everything I choose to believe.

I beg to differ. I was born and raised a Christian. Superstition is a belief that is unsupported by evidence or reason; and while you may make claims that your belief has good philosophical reasons, nobody has ever been able to put forward an unflawed argument for god that didn't have at least a couple fallacies included.

Its a matter of understanding and perspective. Allowing is not necessarily the same thing as condoning. Any more than you choosing the lessor of two evils would be condoning the lessor evil. Its simply your available choice. God allows men free will. Yes, even to enslave each other or permit other evils if they so choose. God sanctions only the good.

I beg to disagree. It's not a question of free will, it's a question of specifically condoning the action. He commanded his people to go slaughter opposing tribes all while taking all of the virgin girls as slaves.

"The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "These are the regulations for the Passover: No foreigner is to eat of it. Any slave you have bought may eat of it after you have circumcised him, but a temporary resident and a hired worker may not eat of it." (Exodus 12:43)

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way." (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment." (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ." (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them." (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

Jesus condones the beating of slaves in this parable:
"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." "(Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

RJC, your comments concerning the Christian Religion and it's comparison to superstitions is a highly ignorant one. Knocking on wood or avoiding walking underneath a ladder is a superstition, belief in a creator is faith and the Christian faith is based on reason.

Let me ask you, where is the substance in your belief system? Are you certain that all that exists is due to random natural processes? I am not talking about evolution here, go beyond that, tell me why we exist and prove it to me, provide me with factual evidence concerning your belief system and that, it to, is not another unsubstantiated set of ideals.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

I will also deal with your ignorant statements (as I know my Catholic brethren will also do) regarding the scripture you quoted later on God willing, am on the train coming home from work.

 

[rjc34]

RJC, your comments concerning the Christian Religion and it's comparison to superstitions is a highly ignorant one. Knocking on wood or avoiding walking underneath a ladder is a superstition, belief in a creator is faith and the Christian faith is based on reason.

The sentence 'faith is based on reason' is an oxymoron. The entire concept of faith is based around believing despite having no evidence or reason. If there was a flawless philosophical argument to support the existence of god everyone would believe. Therefore, as I previously defined superstition as 'a belief held without evidence or reason', the Christian faith also falls under this definition.

Let me ask you, where is the substance in your belief system? Are you certain that all that exists is due to random natural processes?

I am agnostic to the issue. I have however seen no evidence or any flawless philosophical arguments to support the idea that something outside the natural world exists. It is your job to prove that we didn't come through natural processes, not mine.

I am not talking about evolution here, go beyond that, tell me why we exist and prove it to me, provide me with factual evidence concerning your belief system and that, it to, is not another unsubstantiated set of ideals.

You're trying to shift the burden of proof here. You're implying there must be a reason as to our existence. I ask you why? You're trying to get me to prove a negative, which logically cannot be done. I make no claim as to whether there exists a god or not, and I think anyone who does is foolish. All I know is that not evidence or logical argument has ever been shown to prove the existence of god.


I think however, as I can feel you jumping very swiftly to the defensive, that our discussion is over. I don't feel like racking up a warning for debating on a christian subsection.

 

[rjc34]

I will also deal with your ignorant statements (as I know my Catholic brethren will also do) regarding the scripture you quoted later on God willing, am on the train coming home from work.

You call me ignorant like you think you have access to my knowledge of scripture. This in itself is bearing false witness. You have no idea as to my theological background or my study in the matter. I expect you will be retracting this insult and politely discoursing with me on the matter.

 

[Andrew Ryan]

Aside from my fiancee and people I associate with at Church, most of my friends are Atheists, one even is quite militant. I am highly irritated when discussing religion with them because they always seem to work from the position that, due to their lack of belief they are some how "smarter," than me because they don't believe in some "flying spaghetti monster," when really, they sound about as idiotic as some fundamentalist Protestants whom they claim to hate, use the same sort of argumentation and make me laugh both on the inside and outside at their ironic ignorance at what is really being discussed.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

Jesus condones the beating of slaves in this parable:
"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." "(Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

The fact that you have willfully taken a portion of a parable out of scripture and deliberately stripped it from it's context to make a false claim, proves that you are dishonest and typical of the atheist mind set.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

It also proves that without the Holy Spirit, you have absolutely no understanding of scripture. Better ask your teacher for a refund.

 

[rjc34]

The fact that you have willfully taken a portion of a parable out of scripture and deliberately stripped it from it's context to make a false claim, proves that you are dishonest and typical of the atheist mind set.

Alright, give me the context and explanation of how this does not mention beating a slave.

And what is this 'atheist mind set' you speak of?

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

Alright, give me the context and explanation of how this does not mention beating a slave.

And what is this 'atheist mind set' you speak of?

The parable refers specifically to those believers who are lazy, cultural Christians or Christians who stray away from the faith either willfully or naively. It expresses the fact that we are to be vigilant, always doing the good work that Jesus commanded us to do, so when Christ returns (the master in the parable) we will not be sent to hell for our luke warm state. That is why Christ states that this lazy servant will be portioned with the unbelievers and receive many stripes. The many stripes being condemnation.

It does not in any way, shape or form, condone slavery.

Such a simple parable, yet your worldly knowledge has been found wanting.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

The atheist mind set is trying to discern scripture using human reasoning, as I just demonstrated, it does not work. Ciao ciao.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

Furthermore, the faithful and wise stewards who are made rulers of the master's household, are the teachers of the Church (Bishops, priests etc). These will receive greater condemnation as they have been left with a massive task to shepherd the sheep.

 

[Blackwater Babe]

Hi Michie,

I posted something similar on TAW, I'm astounded at the hate these people have for us, it is quite extraordinary. I also find it difficult to comprehend that many atheists label themselves as humanist, but have great disdain for over 2 billion HUMANS.

If you stroll into an atheist blog, you will be quite shocked at the absolute hate and bitterness that flows from the minds of these people.

Meh, you could replace "athiest" with "Christian" and this would be just as true. Beam in thy own eye and all that.

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

Um, are you speaking for yourself? I do not see any wide spread evidence of committed Christians using obscene and hateful language against atheists. Cultural Christians, yes, but we all know that an unrepented Christian will be worst off than an Atheist.

 

[Blackwater Babe]

Um, are you speaking for yourself? I do not see any wide spread evidence of committed Christians using obscene and hateful language against atheists. Cultural Christians, yes, but we all know that an unrepented Christian will be worst off than an Atheist.

Ah... this is one of those "no true Scotsman" things, isn't it?

Where I could cite a million examples of Christians saying, doing or being hateful about or to athiests, and you'll say "well obviously thats not a REAL Christian, so that doesn't count" right?

 

[Christ's_Warrior]

Would you call them repented, or committed Christians my friend? Are they behaving in a manner worthy of being labelled a follower of Jesus Christ? If the answer is no, then no, they are not real Christians. Do they turn the other cheek? If the answer is no, then no, they are not real Christians. Do they take up their Cross daily? If the answer is no, then no, they are not real Christians.