The good book?

[Sectio Aurea]

Yes, I have read three translations in their entirety: NCV, NRSV, and NJKV.

Do you not recognise anything evil or bad about it?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Good for you, but not relevant to what I said. The dominant secular culture that I was raised in teaches selfishness. When I watched TV commercials, I saw a lot promoting selfishness, few promoting anything else.

And you are aware the odds are the TV commercials you are referring to were written and acted out by people who consider themselves Christian, right?

"Advice" is stuff that little old ladies in pearl necklaces write in newspaper columns, telling people what type of shoes to wear at the country club and suchlike. The Word of Jesus Christ is life-changing principles. Or to put it another way, advice tells us how to conform to the surrounding society, but Jesus tells us that we don't have to, because we can conform to God instead. Hebrews 4 says: "The word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." I don't think anyone ever described a Dear Abby column that way.

I'm just going to write off the word game you're playing with the term "advice". You know what I'm talking about, and you're trying to dodge my point.

The point is Jesus didn't offer up anything philosophically that was original to him. He had some good messages, but again nothing ground breaking or unheard of.

Also, if he was indeed divine I'd assume his message would be perfect and flawless. Instead we have sermons that one would expect to hear from an iron age preacher. Some good, some bad, some wise and some not so wise. I just don't see how you can read what was attributed to him and come off with the idea it was divinely inspired.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Yeah, I've heard a lot of people say that Jesus was just an ordinary, run-of-the-mill preacher or philosopher, and Christianity is no different from any other set of teachings. By observation, though, it seems to me that nobody believes it. Even atheists who claim to believe that still pour vastly more effort into spreading hatred of Christianity than anything else.

Oh please... Criticizing the religion isn't "spreading hatred" of it. I don't hate Christians, I was one myself growing up and I still have family members who consider themselves Christian.

The reason why Christianity is mostly targeted is because we live in a largely Christian society, and it's Christians that are usually the ones trying to legislate their beliefs on everyone else. If Sikhs, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc were trying to put monuments up on public ground or inject their religion into government I'd be fighting them as hard as I do the Christians.

I've seen scores of websites devoted to expressing a person's wrath against Jesus and His followers, which must have required quite a lot of time to construct. By contrast, I've never seen any website devoted to attacking the Pythagoreans.

That might have something to do with the fact that the Pythagoreans (if there are any pythagoreans left) aren't driving a major political movement like the religious right and trying to assert their religion or religious views over everyone else.

Kinda gives people a little more reason to fight the Christians...

A few weeks ago someone on this website--I can't recall his name at the moment--was claiming that many churches teach that sex is dirty and evil and that the Catholic Church's teachings lead to people getting AIDS. I doubt the guy who was saying that pours out similar lies against the Neoplatonists.

Actually, the guy you were referring to is me, and it's not lies. Many Christian Churches do teach that sex is evil and dirty. Also, it's common sense that an organization that promotes misinformation to get people to refrain from using condoms in AIDS infested areas contributes to the spread of the disease.

I'm not aware of any Neoplatonists who are teaching people that condom manufacturers are purposefully infecting condoms to spread the disease, or that latex condoms have pores which make them useless in preventing the spread of the disease.... so in both cases you should stay away from condoms. I do however know of Catholic bishops who have said these exact things, and they deserve to be thrown in jail.

When people encounter the living God in Christ, some devote their lives to following him and others devote their lives to hating him, but no one reacts by thinking of him as just another ancient talking head, similar to Parmenides of Elea or Anaxagoras.

I'm not aware of anyone who's met Jesus in person, so nobody has encountered the living God in Christ. All you've done is hear stories about him. Perhaps you've had a euphoric feeling as well that you attribute to Jesus, or the holy spirit or whatever, however I'd say odds are incredibly strong that it's just a emotional response to a preachers sermon or other religious event.

As for Jesus himself, if he did actually exist I do view him as a simple first century preacher. In fact I think he'd be very surprised at the religion that grew out of his teachings.

I don't have anything against Jesus as a person at all. What I have a problem with is people who claim to follow him and want to try removing or limiting civil rights or liberties of non-christians.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Reading is fine, but is not enough.

The Bible is not only a book, but is also a reference, a life-time reference. You do not have to read through an encyclopedia, but you need to read it when you have question. .

I could equally find an appropiate answer to a question in the Upanishads, Quran or even the daily horoscopes in my local newspaper. These "answers" (more often than not) are not genuine, but rather what we would desire to be our answers. I find the google search engine far superior in finding answers to my questions.

I would say that read the Bible twice all the way through is not bad. But it would be better if you try to read a particular Book in the Bible a few more times. And read other Books in the Bible as you like to. For example, I read Ecclesiastics at least 20 times. And what it says in there surprised me every time when I revisited it.


A more beneficial way to read the Bible is trying to find verses in the Bible to answer your question. Now-a-day, it is quite easy to do so. Just search: "what does the Bible say about ????" on Internet, then you will hit many messages that quote the Bible.

That is still only picking and choosing parts that one may be interested in. I find the bible gateway site valuable for searching the bible for things like that, but I find little if any value in the bible at all. Its seems clearly obvious (to me anyway) that the authors of the bible didn't have very much knowledge of earths history, of other more advanced human cultures, the earth or even the universe. A modern day child probably has more knowledge and understanding.

 

[juvenissun]

I could equally find an appropiate answer to a question in the Upanishads, Quran or even the daily horoscopes in my local newspaper. These "answers" (more often than not) are not genuine, but rather what we would desire to be our answers. I find the google search engine far superior in finding answers to my questions.

That is still only picking and choosing parts that one may be interested in. I find the bible gateway site valuable for searching the bible for things like that, but I find little if any value in the bible at all. Its seems clearly obvious (to me anyway) that the authors of the bible didn't have very much knowledge of earths history, of other more advanced human cultures, the earth or even the universe. A modern day child probably has more knowledge and understanding.

I have never read any other book as I read the Bible. However, I really don't believe there is another book like it. This is my experience, and is also the experience of many many scholars. I don't believe such an experience could be wrong. Scriptures from other major religions may be used to compare with the Bible. However, one book is more than enough for me, and I don't have time for other choices.

My experience is that the message in the Bible continuously opens my eyes during the past two decades. No other book can even get remotely close to it. What's said in the Bible virtually answers ALL of my life-time questions.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

I have never read any other book as I read the Bible. However, I really don't believe there is another book like it. This is my experience, and is also the experience of many many scholars. I don't believe such an experience could be wrong. Scriptures from other major religions may be used to compare with the Bible. However, one book is more than enough for me, and I don't have time for other choices.


My experience is that the message in the Bible continuously opens my eyes during the past two decades. No other book can even get remotely close to it. What's said in the Bible virtually answers ALL of my life-time questions.

I fully understand what you are saying, for well over two decades I shared your exact same belief and viewpoint word for word. But as an atheist, if I have enough time to read scripture from the bible, then I have enough time to read sacred text from any other religion also, you will be amazed where you will find time when you have the will, this open minded approach I feel has given me a much broader viewpoint of the spiritual world and human behavior as a whole. I associate now much more with people of other faiths, and they are all just as convinced as you are, that their God and religion is the only true one.

Most of you must be wrong.

 

[juvenissun]

I fully understand what you are saying, for well over two decades I shared your exact same belief and viewpoint word for word. But now as an atheist, I now know that if I have enough time to read scripture from the bible, then I have enough time to read sacred text from any other religion also, this I feel has given me a much broader viewpoint of the spiritual world as a whole. I associate much more now with people of other faiths, and they are just as convinced as you, that their religion is the only true one.

Most of you must be wrong.

In this case, I would encourage you to take ONE issue and compare the view of a few religions. In your case, I believe you will get no detail from any of the religion.

There is not enough time in one's life to study well on any one of the religious doctrine. Needless to say more than one. If you divert your focus, you will not get anything. It is certainly an unfortunate situation. I have seen people converted from one religion to another. But I seldom see anyone who are very good in more than one religious doctrine.

 

[AlexBP]

The difference is that Christians try to legislate their beliefs, and have the resources to do so.

I'm unaware of what you're talking about. Is anyone currently trying to pass legislation that regulates Baptism, or the Eucharist?

Do you not recognise anything evil or bad about it?

No.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

I'm unaware of what you're talking about.

The attempts to have creation mythology taught as science in public schools is one example. The anti-gay movement is also overtly Christian.

I don't consider the public scrutiny of ideas to be 'hatred'. Actually, I consider it to be a civic duty.

 

[AlexBP]

You didn't answer my question. Has there been any attempt to pass legislation that regulates Baptism or the Eucharist? Those things are explicitly part of Christian belief, so if we Christians are trying to legislate our beliefs, surely there must be some legislation regarding those things.

As for the two other things you've mentioned, you'll have to offer details. In mainline seminaries I see gay couples snorging in the hallways while professors are teaching classes such as "The Queer Experience". Half of all PFLAG meetings are held in church basements. Plainly any 'movement' in society's general outlook towards gays in the past 50 years has been in their favor; I don't see any anti-gay movement Christian or otherwise. As for "creation mythology taught as science in public schools", I'd have to know which public schools you're talking about.

 

[AlexBP]

And you are aware the odds are the TV commercials you are referring to were written and acted out by people who consider themselves Christian, right?

Perhaps some were. So what?

The point is Jesus didn't offer up anything philosophically that was original to him.

I'm aware os some instances in which things Jesus said bore a passing similarity to things that other ancient Rabbis and philosophers said. Nonetheless Christ's teaching as a whole constitutes a teaching for life that is unlike any other I've ever encountered. Certainly when I observe the behavior of atheists on this board and elsewhere, I virtually always get a sharp reminder of the sharp contrast between their beliefs and Christ's teachings, and it's generally to Christ's advantage.

Then of course there's the advice that Jesus gives to sell all your possessions.... I don't see too many Christians, (and especially churches) following that one.

The Franciscans, the Hutterites, the Cistercians,...

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

You didn't answer my question. Has there been any attempt to pass legislation that regulates Baptism or the Eucharist? Those things are explicitly part of Christian belief, so if we Christians are trying to legislate our beliefs, surely there must be some legislation regarding those things.

The fact that you don't try to legislate all your beliefs is immaterial to the point.

Having said that, there are Christan 'dominionists' who have made it their explicit intent to install a fascist theocracy in the US, but I'm only addressing the parties that have enough numbers and capital to present a legitimate threat.

I don't see any anti-gay movement Christian or otherwise.

I find that remarkable, considering it takes about four seconds worth of google research to find information on a plethora of Christian organizations devoted to 'fighting the gay agenda' or 'praying the gay away' or 'protecting traditional marriage [READ: legislating Bible verses]'.

You could also prove it to yourself by attending your local gay pride parade. I've been to many, all over the country. Who do you suppose it is that shows up to protest them? The local secular student alliance? The bricklayers union? Can you guess?

[HINT: It's Christians, 100% of the time.]

As for "creation mythology taught as science in public schools", I'd have to know which public schools you're talking about.

You can look at the continuing debacle in Texas for an egregious example. Google 'texas state board creationism'.

 

[AlexBP]

The fact that you don't try to legislate all your beliefs is immaterial to the point.

It seems quite material to me, since you originally said "Christians try to legislate their beliefs". That would only be true if all Christians tried to legislate all their beliefs. If you actually mean that some Christians try to legislate some of their beliefs, or that a few Christians try to legislate a few of their beliefs, that would be different.

I find that remarkable, considering it takes about four seconds worth of google research to find information on a plethora of Christian organizations devoted to 'fighting the gay agenda' or 'praying the gay away' or 'protecting traditional marriage [READ: legislating Bible verses]'.

Well, there are certainly many mainline churches that seem functionally impossible to distinguish from gay rights groups, as I already mentioned. But besides that, there's certainly no reason to focus on Christians in this debate. The USA is a democracy with a Christian majority. Compare the USA to countries government by atheists in which religious believers are violently persecuted. (China, Vietnam, and Cuba would be examples of such countries.) Which government is more pro-gay, the USA or those atheist regimes? If you agree that China, Vietnam, and Cuba are less gay-friendly, why isn't your gay-rights-driven wrath aimed at them?

If you insist on bringing up the issue of same-sex marriage, just remember that 50 years ago virtually everybody in western civilization agreed that marriage could only be between a man and a woman, including atheists. Were atheists at the time overflowing with righteous outrage against themselves for their own position?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

It seems quite material to me, since you originally said "Christians try to legislate their beliefs". That would only be true if all Christians tried to legislate all their beliefs.

Uh. No. It wouldn't. I never used the word 'all'.

I don't really feel obligated to elaborate on this. It's a simple matter of reading comprehension.

Well, there are certainly many mainline churches that seem functionally impossible to distinguish from gay rights groups, as I already mentioned.

That doesn't make the other stuff go away.

But besides that, there's certainly no reason to focus on Christians in this debate. The USA is a democracy with a Christian majority.

Which is precisely why Christianity draws more attention from atheists in this country.

Compare the USA to countries government by atheists in which religious believers are violently persecuted. (China, Vietnam, and Cuba would be examples of such countries.) Which government is more pro-gay, the USA or those atheist regimes? If you agree that China, Vietnam, and Cuba are less gay-friendly, why isn't your gay-rights-driven wrath aimed at them?

I don't answer loaded questions.

If you insist on bringing up the issue of same-sex marriage,

I don't insist on it. I'd rather it not be an issue at all, actually.

just remember that 50 years ago virtually everybody in western civilization agreed that marriage could only be between a man and a woman, including atheists. Were atheists at the time overflowing with righteous outrage against themselves for their own position?

I am aware that public opinions change.

 

[AlexBP]

The reason why Christianity is mostly targeted is because we live in a largely Christian society, and it's Christians that are usually the ones trying to legislate their beliefs on everyone else.

I see. All the targeting of Christians is because Christians try to pass laws. The Democratic and Republican Parties try to pass laws. Do you target them? Special interest groups ranging from AIPAC to NOW to the Sierra Club try to pass laws. Do you target them? Public sector unions try to pass laws. Do you target them? Corporate conglomerates try to pass laws. Do you target them?

If Sikhs, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc were trying to put monuments up on public ground or inject their religion into government I'd be fighting them as hard as I do the Christians.

Are you seriously claiming that Muslims don't try to inject their religion into government? I'm pretty sure the political program of the guys who blew children to smithereens at the Boston Marathon last month did not arise from Christianity.

 

[AlexBP]

I don't answer loaded questions.
...
I am aware that public opinions change.

So to summarize what you've said: when atheists spend much of their lives devoted to hating Christians, it's because Christians support legislation such as traditional marriage law, which is exactly what atheist supported until very recently in this country and exactly what atheists in many countries still support. And when you're asked about the obvious absurdity of this position, you don't answer.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

So to summarize what you've said:

This oughta be good.

when atheists spend much of their lives devoted to hating Christians,

Never used the word 'hate', and never implied it takes up 'much of my life'. That was you. You're not off to a good start here.

it's because Christians support legislation such as traditional marriage law,

More to the point, it's (partly) because they try to legislate their beliefs that they are subject to scrutiny, which is a practice of skepticism, not atheism.

which is exactly what atheist supported until very recently in this country and exactly what atheists in many countries still support.

And if those atheists were here today trying to legislate and had the capital to make a difference, I'd be against them. Harmful, stupid and evidence-bereft beliefs are to be scrutinized and ridiculed, no matter who has them.

And when you're asked about the obvious absurdity of this position, you don't answer.

As anyone with a functioning brain and the ability to scroll can plainly see, what I actually said was I don't answer loaded questions.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Getting back to why I initially engaged with you, do you or do you not now understand why Christians and their beliefs are routinely subjected to scrutiny in our society while Pythagoreans aren't?

 

[AlexBP]

Never used the word 'hate', and never implied it takes up 'much of my life'. That was you. You're not off to a good start here.

In post #18 I wrote about the fact that many atheists make a massive effort to make their hatred of Christians known. You quoted that paragraph and offered an explanation for it. How much of your personal life it takes up is utterly irrelevant; you entered a conversation about the general tendency of many atheists. If you didn't intend to respond to what I wrote in post #18, why did you quote it?

And if those atheists were here today trying to legislate and had the capital to make a difference, I'd be against them

So those who live under atheist regimes in China and Cuba simply don't matter to you or your fellow atheists?

You've listed some examples where you feel that Christians are trying to "legislate our beliefs", but by any measure those constitute a microscopic fraction of what the government does. Even if you feel those things are "harmful, stupid, and evidence-bereft", the government surely does many things that are far more harmful, stupid, and evidence-bereft. (Examples aren't hard to come by.) Why don't atheists rail against every stupid piece of legislation with the same vigor that they rail against Christianity?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Why don't atheists rail against every stupid piece of legislation with the same vigor that they rail against Christianity?

What makes you think that they don't?


eudaimonia,

Mark