So, having learned (or at been exposed to) things like history, science, psychology, sociology, critical thinking and so on causes people to question and not blindly accept what they’re told? Who could have imagined that! Does this also mean that if we’re smarter and more educated we’re less likely to fall for a politician’s crap? I guess that means the dumbing down of our education system helps explain how our current White House occupant got there. That, and the whole vote fraud thing, of course.
GALLUP: Nearly 1 in 3 Believe Bible is Literal Word of God
About one-third of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word, a new Gallup poll reveals. This percentage is only slightly lower than several decades ago.
Gallup reports that the majority of those “who don’t believe that the Bible is literally true believe that it is the inspired word of God but that not everything it in should be taken literally.” Finally, about one in five Americans believe the Bible is merely an ancient book of “fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man.”
There is also a strong relationship between education and belief in a literal Bible, Gallup explains, with such belief becoming much less prevalent as schooling continues.
Those who believe in the literal Bible amount to 31% of adult Americans. This is a decline of about 7% compared with Gallup polls taken in the 1970s and 1980s. It is strongest in the South.
Believe in the literal word of the Bible is strongest among those whose schooling stopped with high school and declines steadily with educational level, with only 20% of college graduates holding that view and 11% of those with an advanced degree.
On a related note, eBay has a bible (autographed by Jesus himself!!) for sale that’s written in English and supposedly authenticated by carbon dating to around 60AD. Current bid is $1 mil. It not clear from the description how the chapters written after 60AD got into the book. A miracle!
Of topic but tautology has been mentioned a couple of times. My all time favourite is the classic Mark Twain contribution:
“Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.”
#35
For “Of topic” read “Off topic”, of course.
The Bible is somewhat similar the Iliad/Odyssey. It’s a piece of FICTION meant to ENTERTAIN using the story of a man and all his great accomplishments.
#37, Steve,
Interesting comment. I remember when I was a kid, that if it was an old Aesop Fable, or other story, there was a moral to it, good triumphs over evil. When it came from from the bible though, it was a lesson to be learned, god loves us … .
Speaking of rare birds, I must be that 1% that has an advanced degree, professional certifications, have read and studied the bible all the way through and believe it. Who’da thunk?
Not to be a devil’s advocate, but it’s easy to see how many would not believe in the bible, especially when you see what’s been done in the name of christianity for centuries. Matthew 7 tells christians to expect that there will be people claiming to have done works in the name of the christ, but were in fact unknown and rejected by him.
It’s also easy to not believe, especially when you consider that most seminarians, don’t believe the bible. They go to school to be taught to run a business called a church. Beginning with higher criticism in the 1800’s, clergy belief in the bible began to drop off. It’s just a job, man… (If you don’t believe me, Here’s a tip, consider Jimmy Swaggart.. Ugghhhhh – Vomit. He’s an actor not a bible student. )
It’s very easy not to believe when you look at the example of the Catholic church, which built a bureaucracy and an institution to hi-jack the doctrines and believers of the first century christians. They infused christianity with the beliefs of the pagans in order to make it popular. Tertullian, who invented trinity, left the catholic church calling it a church of bishops rather than a church of god. Kind’a says it all.
So, is there anyone calling themselves a christian, I haven’t offended? I hope not as most calling themselves Christians are not.
Anyway, the point is, we all in the end get to make our own choice regarding where to put our hope for the future, asuming there is hope.
Do we put our hope in a world of men, where large segments seem bent on destruction of each other, where children are trained to kill for the cause, and where those with the economic power to help the needy ones are instead focused on their next double cappuccino latte? (Over time this is all coming to a neighborhood near you). Check out 2 Timothy 3:1-5 sometimes and compare it to a daily newspaper.
Or are we forced to look for a higher power that has a purpose and the capacity to some day clean up the mess man has made of his home?
My vote is not on men, being able to solve the problems we are confronting. In the absense of pressing reset on the planet, I see no hope for ever fixing the problems.
For the bubba’s, content to watch their HDTV and drink their beer – charge on. If Marie Antoinette lived today, no doubt she’d say, let them watch cable. Someday, you too can watch your world destroyed.
For the weak-minded, peer pressured among you awnser me this – How can you explain the prophecies recorded in the bible that were fulfilled? What about Cyrus the great, prophesied about by Isaiah 200 years in advance? I have no doubt after a quick internet search you will claim that Isaiah was written after the fact.
Hummm, that’s a tough one…. – How do you explain that the Jews were expecting a savior in advance and it turned out to be Cyrus?
For me, this kind of research boils down to, do I trust the people who recorded the both the prophecies and events as they happened, or do I trust the flatulence spouting re-writers of history centuries after the fact.
The Bible is complete farce. 31% of Adults are ignorant. This should not come as a shock to anyone. Anyone can write a bible and state that it is the word of God. And that is what happened. Religion has brought nothing but bigotry, racism, sexism, death, destruction, and hyprocrisy throughout the ages. But this is old news. Think of it this way, it better that the 31% are usually somewhere studying the bible, perhaps dedicated most of their lives to this book. And they are out of your way. On Sunday and the days of Bible Study, they are tranquil. What is ironic that in parts of Southern California which are very Christian, the drivers are the most aggressive. Do you know why? They are filled with the Sprit which also means screw you if you don’t get it. The sad thing is these Christian folks who believe in the literal translation of the bible are the first to watch you get lynched or tarred and feathered. They adore it.
Mentor John – As long as you realize your’e talking about “christian religion” and not the bible, I agree 100%. Although I suspect your percentage is low, especially for knowledge of the bible but also for knowledge in general
But, It’s clear you are a serious student and extremely knowledgeable – Well done!!! No doubt with an extremely open mind.
On another note, did you realize that before and during the second world war, there were christians tarred and feathered by other christians here in the US. . Makes your point about christianity. If you refused to participate in WW2, like the first century christians refused to join romes armies, you were tarred and feathered or strung up by Christians. What a country the US is.
On the same point, the same thing was happening in Germany under Hitler at the same time. Hmmmmmm…. With the knowledge of the Catholic church
Don’t confuse the wannabe “Christians” who couldn’t find Hosea of Jonah with a magnifying glass with true Christianity. The wannabe’s are no different from the Pharisees or Saducees that Jesus pointed to as Hypocrites.
By the way, you of course know the bible wasn’t writen by one person, but instead written by dozens over centuries, yet it still is harmonious. So, it’s really kinda doubtful that anobody could write a bible. But anybody could write a book of Mormon, or Mohammed’s part of the Koran, or Buddha, or Confucious sayings as these were written by 1 guy.
Back to your studies, genius…
41–Its been awhile but wasn’t the bible put together by a committee in 400 AD or so? At that time, many “books” existed about god and this committee went thru and selected what would be included and what would be left out?
So, they still missed those dozens of well known inconsistencies and contradictions. So, for this reason, and in this sense, yep–it still is harmonious.
It is often hard for me to believe so much misery and death can be caused by a couple of lousy books. If you think about it, other than these nonsense books, there is no basis whatsoever for our precious religions. None.
I believe in the Bible. I’ve seen Bibles with my own eyes so I know they exist.
# 43 – Here’s the frustrating thing. The bible “book” didn’t cause anything.
The death and destruction done in the name of Christianity has not been done by Christians. It’s been done by groups of power hungry individuals and organizations bent on imposing their will on people.
Some examples, William Tyndale was put to death by the catholic church for producing a bible in english. How is that Christian? By the way, it’s commonly thought his translation was the source for later producing the Bishops and later the King James bibles. (The one most American’s think Jesus carried – What Morons…)
Michael Servetus was put to death by Calvinists, for pointing out the non-biblical beliefs of the Calvinists and the Catholics. The only reason the catholics didn’t kill him was Calvin got to him first. He was one of the only people who was tried and convicted by both the protestants and catholics. At the same time he was a brilliant doctor. On the order of Michaelangelo in his field. How is that Christian?
Imprisoning Galileo (because they could) – Christian?
The Inquisition – Christian?
Support of the Nazi’s – Christian?
You get the point.
In a curious twist, the Muslims are right on target when it comes to most “Christians”. They believe most of the beliefs of Christianity today were inserted by men into the message of Jesus long after his departure. Jesus himself never had anything whatsoever to do with them.
Ghandi noted about Christianity “Oh, I don’t reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
The most disgusting thing of all is, if you attend a seminary and really understand what you’re taught, you know all of the above, and still choose to mis-represent the bible. It’s just a job man…
Ugghhh.
#45 – Brock,
“Here’s the frustrating thing. The bible “book” didn’t cause anything.”
I can understand and appreciate your logic but I beg to differ. The “book”, whether it be Bible or Qu’aran or various other texts, is used to propagate patently ridiculous fictions from one generation to another.
The fictions, once absorbed and believed, lead to the most awful consequences, not the least of which is violent intolerance, like stoning women to death for ‘allowing themselves to be raped’.
It was my point that if these books weren’t revered and passed on from generation to generation as the ultimate truth (all vastly different ultimate truths, of course), there would be absolutely no basis for any of these religions to continue to exist!
I love books, I don’t believe in censorship or book burning and there is good and bad in religious texts but teaching them as ‘the ultimate truth’ to every generation is a stupid thing for humans to do. The evidence of that stupidity is so clear, there’s not even any point in rehashing it over and over again.
Speaking of “Christians”
Al Sharpton – Drug Dealer – Christian?
Jesse Jackson – Adulterer – Christian?
Jimmy Swaggart – Adulterer – Christian?
The Pope – Christian?
Henry the 8th – Christian?
George Bush – Christian?
It’s kinda like wrapping yourself in a flag – The morons will believe anything they are told by their priest because they are fat, dumb and intellectually lazy. The priest will say whatever is needed to feather his bed.
In the imortal words of Jack Nicholson “You want the truth, you can’t handle the truth”
The truth is most “Christians” today aren’t. They are members of a social club that meets weekly to pat each others back and feel good. The shame is they choose the bible to be their touchstone…
If nothing else give me credit for not being peer pressured by the skeptics into blindly rejecting the bible as irrelevant. That’s the path of least resistance in the US today. People don’t care. And that’s too bad. The effect on society shows.
At the same time, give me credit for knowing and calling most “christians” for what they are – At best they are fakes, at worst they are little more than grifters, using the bible to defraud people.
Most people do what’s easy. I’ve made a pretty good living in the stock market by looking for the false beliefs of people. What I’ve found is most people are wrong most of the time. Crowd psychology.
Regarding the “selection” of the books in the bible, it’s not so difficult to understand. The Hebrew Scriptures were already agreed in by the 2nd century, BC. The Christian Scriptures were generally agreed to by the 2nd century CE. (The Catholic church tries to take credit for the list, but if you pick up the Douay bible, you will see it has “extra” books.) Selection was agreed to based on the author as well as the acceptance by the early churches. In general, the ones accepted were written by the individuals who were prominent in the first century congregation. There were others who wrote letters about the first century congregation, but that in and of itself doesn’t give them standing to be included. Kinda like if I wrote a book on quantum physics and expect to be included in a summary of important physics scholars of the 21st century. Including me, wouldn’t make sense.
Funny how many people have some serious personal issues against christianity. Oh yeah and I believe in bible.
Once again. The bible isn’t the issue. It’s the false teachers.
At least that’s the issue I have. And I think I’ve pointed to just a few of the falsehoods.
To wit, while in the US, great issue is taken with the violence of Islam. Why isn’t there similiar issue with “Christianity”. Hypocrisy abounds.
“Christianity” is the most violent movement in the history of man. The western nations are the most violent. How do you think we ended up with all the material wealth? To the victors go the spoils. At least the greeks and romans were honest about it. In the west, we like to feel like we are somehow kinder and gentler. How ridiculous.
Regarding your comments:
“The “book”, whether it be Bible or Qu’aran or various other texts, is used to propagate patently ridiculous fictions from one generation to another.
The fictions, once absorbed and believed, lead to the most awful consequences, not the least of which is violent intolerance, like stoning women to death for ‘allowing themselves to be raped’.”
Do you really think that if there was no “book”, the horrors of the history of humanity wouldn’t have happened? The horrors were created by people who wanted power and used anything at their disposal to get it. And it continues on.
The “books” were the sideshow. The distraction used by magicians to get you to look one way while the real action took place in the other hand.
If you can’t see that, you’re not a student of history. Or your biases are showing.
You see this is my point, people choose sides around topics like this without any, any basis for making a decision. You heard an idiot priest and made a decision about the bible. That’s stupid.
And yes, the retards opening a creationism museum don’t make things any easier. They are part of the grifter movement, only in it for the money.
And by the way, check out 1 Peter 3:7 regarding caring for women. Or
Ephesians 5:25. You assume the bible was used to promote stoning women. Nothing could be further from the truth. At least for real Christians of which there are very few.
#39
Or are we forced to look for a higher power that has a purpose and the capacity to some day clean up the mess man has made of his home?
My vote is not on men, being able to solve the problems we are confronting. In the absense of pressing reset on the planet, I see no hope for ever fixing the problems.
I have to say I’m also skeptical whether humankind will ever get their act together, but that doesn’t mean I automatically think one or more gods will save us. It means that I think there’s a very real possibility that we’ll destroy ourselves. Bleak, sure. Who ever said the fate of this planet has to be rosy?
Hummm, that’s a tough one…. – How do you explain that the Jews were expecting a savior in advance and it turned out to be Cyrus?
Simple. The Jews expected a savior, and somebody stepped up to the role because the Jews needed freeing. It’s called a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the Jews hadn’t been freed, nobody would have written about it since it wouldn’t have been declared a divinely directed event.
This reminds me of all those Christians who were claiming that the world was going to end in 2000. Well it didn’t (just like when the same scare happened in 1000), so then these same people start looking for another target date not far in the future (I’ve heard 2012). And if humans live long enough to witness the day of our destruction, I’m sure the Christians will feel vindicated as they die that the rapture prophecy was true.
hey #50==thanks for posting about #39!. Must have read that too fast.
Brock!!!!!! It has always nettled me how people more intelligent and educated than myself were nonetheless “religious.” I suppose I should just take comfort in the fact of the posting above, that superstition does decline with education?
So, you “think” the validity of the bible is made by the accuracies of the prophecies?????? Taking that at face value, would you agree that accurate predicting (ie–future looking) would have no bearing on reporting of past actions Iie–past looking) nor on the nature of God or mans relationship to him (ie–superstition?).
Now you cant think that being accurate in predictions provides “general” authority for everything else because you recite there were many authors of the bible–no?
Some experts have opined that “religion” has a hold on the human species because we fear death, or the unknown, or we have an overreaching need for meaning in the universe. Maybe so. Do YOU have any concrete reason for your belief?
I think that we are missing the essential agreement here; anyone with a brain realizes that so many who come crying “Christ, Christ” bear no resemblance to him, in that they apply no effort to being all tolerant and all forgiving. Of course, he told us this would be so. Any belief can be twisted to serve power; the ‘holy’ emperors and the church twisted ancient books to their ends, and murdered millions. Stalin and Mao twisted atheist and economic treatises, and themselves murdered millions. Words do not kill, and oppress, and destroy; people do that. And people manage enough excuses to do those things in a state of utter ignorance, if only on a smaller scale.
The most revolutionary thing that Christ said, and the one that is most rarely observed, is the one that most of the atheists in attendance would find a lot of agreement with. In his time, his people were oppressed from afar, and the people cried out for freedom. Many came, preaching terror and violence, and raised small insurrections, always crushed, always ending worse for the populace. Jesus came, and said “The truth will set you free.” And think of how true this is; if the Jewish people had set themselves to understand reality, in their brilliance, how could they fail? They might have simply walked away from key posts, and made the territory ungovernable. Perhaps they could have made any of the innovations we have made by observing the truths of the natural world, and overcame the Romans with technology. Who knows, they chose the revolutionary, Berabbus. However, we do know this principle works, as Ghandi and King so thoroughly demonstrated. And, by the modern example, we see how much better the Israeli nation has faired with it’s sharp scientific curiosity as an ally, though some may argue about how much they have really learned from their history. If so, they are hardly in small company, in that regard.
If you want my faith, there you have it. “The truth will set you free.” And if you like practicality and reproducibility, it doesn’t get much better than that.
52–Is there any truth to the notion that “the truth will set you free?” Set you free from the burdens of the untrue I suppose but you take it way too far. Ghandi and King showed that when contesting against a society that is violating its own basic values, passive resistence can work. BTW–did the truth actually set Ghandi and King “free” or simply get them killed??
The same tactic by Ghandi did not work years earlier in South Aftica. The same tactic in Stalins Russia or in Rome’s Egypt would get you shipped to the gulag or sliced open on the spot. It got 8 people shot by the Police at Kent State in the GOUSA!! The truth is the meaning and utility of truth is VERY debateable, hardly practical, and too random to be reproduceable==and is mostly a poetical longing.
Actually, I just wanted to add before I leave for awhile that the truth or falsity of the bible isn’t to my mind the ultimate point. That point would be that even if god did exist in any manner shape or form–so what? The truth is, I don’t want to worship any god—and if he exists, many think that he will punish me forever? Where is the freedom in that?
#51 – I’ve read and re-read your note several times and for the life of me, can’t quite understand your point. Sorry.
As far as superstition, I have none.
I really liked your final question. Reminds me of when the Sadducees asking Jesus about reseurection and who would be a woman’s husband if she remarried after her first husbands death. He knew they didn’t believe, and only asked to make him look foolish. You should check out the account.
Nonetheless, let me take one final shot across the bow and see if I can make a point you’ll appreciate.
The history of man is one where each generation, based on their achievements, thinks they have all the awnsers. And then, someone comes along and shows them the error of their ways.
For example, in the 1800’s and prior, Doctors (AKA barbers at one point) would bleed people as their analysis was they “had too much blood”. Sometimes just cuts, sometimes with leeches.
In the 1960’s, it was discovered that the idea of too much blood, and using leeches didn’t accomplish anything, and was unsanitary, disgusting, etc.
In 2005 I read an article that noted that using leeches to clean out wounds and for removing excess blood is now a cutting edge treatment. Who’da thunk!!!
Semiconductors are another example. For at least 10 years, it has been expected that Moore’s law was running out of steam, due to the dimensions involved, now down to 45 microns. But they keep coming up with ways to keep on track.
My point is, I’m very comfortable admitting my ignorance, and admitting for the possibility of higher powers, specifically the god Jesus proclaimed. I’ll let you do your own research to understand how this god is unique. Suffice it to say, the itinerant philosophers who travelled around and attracted adherents, that today are Islam, Buddha, Confucious, Mormon, etc religions to me are not genuine.
Here’s a wild hair for you, Why would a young man, evidently from a well to do family, studying from one of the greatest teachers of his day, essentially on track to be on the supreme court of his day, give it all up and become the greatest witness of christ in his day? He hunted down and persecuted first century christians, and then became one. And it took a while for the believers in Jerusalem to trust him, meaning he was essentially shunned for years by the very believers he hoped to join. So he left town and became a travelling preacher, living a life of poverty. He was as you no doubt know, the Apostle Paul. If you don’t believe in the miracles of Jesus, that’s ok, just realize that a really smart guy gave up everything to become his disciple, after Christ was dead. Why would a thinking guy do that?
Seems like a miricle to me.
Here’s another wild hair . We live in a time period where ignoring religion means you can’t understand the world around you. China is most likely going to adopt Confucious as the state religion in a few years (fits their political agenda, if you understand that religion, you know what I mean). Thailand is in the process of adopting Buddha as the state religion. Islam has spread throughout the middle east and asia and frankly was setting up to take over france in a few years. Japan is generally secular. Each person worships 2 or 3 religions and like the US, England and Australia, religion doesn’t matter. Russia is run by the Russian Orthodox church. South America is nominally Christian, specifically Catholic.
And everyone is generally PO’d at everybody else.
The US is impotent to taking action to establish any reasonable order as in prior years. And the UN is a zoo.
How do you really think this is going to play out?
What does the french revolution teach us?
What do you put your hope in? Why?
Brock,
Specifically, what is not “genuine” about Buddhism? It is easily one of the best thought-through theologies available. Let’s just touch on a few Christian issues/problems.
1. Do no harm and love one another. That is one of the key tenants as articulated by the HH Dalia Lama. And he has a very pithy definition of love, the wish for all sentient beings to be happy and have the causes of happiness, and to avoid suffering and its causes. Happiness here specifically excludes actions that may produce temporary happiness, such as binge drinking, because they inevitably produce suffering later. How would a Christian have a problem with that?
2. Buddhism (all the traditions I know of) clearly avoids the problem of how can there be suffering (i.e., WW2, Iraq, a car accident which kills an innocent child) when there is an all-powerful, loving God. Buddha(s) are not all powerful, they cannot prevent the suffering of others.
3. Buddhists are not required to believe in Buddhist creation myths and things mentioned in hagiographies, which don’t make sense today. In the Tibetan tradition, HH Dalia Lama has clearly directed followers to follow the science. And of course, Buddhists believe that there was no beginning to “confusion” (basically the condition we find ourselves in today). So, there isn’t the problem of being caught in your underwear about time and who created what when.
4. Buddhists don’t believe that just by believing in Buddha you go to a heaven (which clearly Brock outlines as a problem for some in Christianity) You must transform yourself, eliminate confusion and mis-perceptions of reality (the equivalent to Brock’s “truth”) to get anywhere.
5. While Buddhists believe that it is critical to believe in Dharma to shed yourself of confusion and know “truth”, it doesn’t believe that some guy raised as a Christian can’t shed his confusion. Christians, to some extent, say some poor slob in Communist China and not lucky enough to be introduced to Christianity is condemned to an eternity of suffering at the hands of the merciful God. Why is the Christian position here a good one?
6. It’s perfectly okay to regard the Christ as a Buddha of love, even though clearly Buddhist doctrine doesn’t recognize him. If contemplating the love of Christ helps you gain realizations, go for it.
Finally, Here’s the hair back at you Brock, the Buddha was a prince. He gave it all up, once he saw human suffering. He left town, had his version of the Damascus Road Experience and became a traveling preacher, living a life of poverty. Why would a thinking guy do that? Seems like a miracle to me. No disrespect to Paul, but he did nothing more than what the Buddha did 1500 years earlier. Both were driven by the need to help alleviate suffering, and like many others, they are wonderful.
Bobbo,
I take it that your biography of Ghandi and King would be: “Railed against inequity, engaged in passive resistance, and was murdered.” What an utterly selfish view, to not realize that a true leader will sacrifice himself to free his people, as both of those men largely managed to do. They did this by speaking the simple truth that they were men, of the same caliber as any other, and their understanding of the truth of how vital each of their respective groups was to their societies. Passive resistance only works if you are not deceived, my friend.
Rob,
As far as you follow your Budda, and I follow mine, we will find ourselves in a life without conflict. Did not mine say “Judge not lest yet be judged?” By the standard they proclaim, those unfortunates who have judged you and a crude farmer in the mountains alike will hear of it again, if only to answer for the suffering and conflict they engendered with you, their brother. Call it karma, I guess. As far as being required to believe everything that one might theorize from the Bible (and so much of the “Christians” drama and drivel is theory rather than the word of their prophet) that is not a universal trait. Praise the heavens for it, because if every Christian in this nation were a “Christian,” our doom would be swift, with every sword at every throat.
#55 – Addressing the Christian Issues/Problems:
>>>1. Do no harm and love one another. That is one of the key tenants as articulated by the HH Dalia Lama.
Jesus himself when asked what the greatest commandments were, replied “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” and the second is like it: “You are to love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:33-40) Both were quotes from the Torah.
>>>2. Buddhism (all the traditions I know of) clearly avoids the problem of how can there be suffering (i.e., WW2, Iraq, a car accident which kills an innocent child) when there is an all-powerful, loving God.
We live in a fallen world. Suffering is a result of man’s depravity and overall sinful nature. Christians and Jews alike are called upon to go forth and alleviate suffering and seek to change the world and restore it.
>>>3. Buddhists are not required to believe in Buddhist creation myths and things mentioned in hagiographies, which don’t make sense today.
Christians aren’t “required” to believe in the account of creation, though most do since there is no rub with science and the creation account (despite what you might read elsewhere on this site)
>>>4. Buddhists don’t believe that just by believing in Buddha you go to a heaven (which clearly Brock outlines as a problem for some in Christianity)
To believe in Christ is not enough; there must be a change of heart as well.
>>>5. While Buddhists believe that it is critical to believe in Dharma to shed yourself of confusion and know “truth”, it doesn’t believe that some guy raised as a Christian can’t shed his confusion. Christians, to some extent, say some poor slob in Communist China and not lucky enough to be introduced to Christianity is condemned to an eternity of suffering at the hands of the merciful God. Why is the Christian position here a good one?
Paul addresses this in Romans 2:14-16 “For whenever Gentiles, who have no Torah [law], do naturally what the Torah requires, then these, even though they don’t have Torah, themselves are Torah! For their lives show that the conduct the Torah dictates is written in their hearts. Their consciences also bear witness to this, for their conflicting thoughs sometimes accuse them and sometimes defend them on a day when God passes judgment on people’s innermost secrets”
In a nutshell, people’s own consciences are witness to their own actions. God is infinite in His justice and judgement, but He is also infinite in his mercy and grace. He is infinitely fair and will take everything into consideration!
Woke up all refreshed and encouraged to see all the conscientious posting going on. I’m in about my third cycle of finding issues in the blogs, posting, finding no pleasure and retiring for another cooling off period. The recognition is the same…language has its limits.
Maybe it is the medium and not the message?
To futher contest/resolve the points engaged above, I think the only thing to do would be to go back to basics and start defining the words used, because I see the ideas being expressed supposedly in a dialetic are infact missing the opposing positions completely. Thats not a process these blogs accommodate.
Just to honor the time you took to post, I’ll respond to the points advanced, and then go research some more on the Paraguay/Brazil war a century ago that was briefly mentioned on a show about Iguacu Falls that I had the pleasure of visiting last year.
54–“As far as superstition, I have none.” /// Definitional isn’t it? One definition of superstition is to believe in things that can’t be proven–like the existence of god. Now that will immediately devolve into the statement that the bible/god can be proved, but my point is that when people use the same words/concepts with opposite meaning, communication becomes “difficult.”
54–How do you really think this is going to play out?/// Most likely, limited nuclear exchange with world culture collapse followed by a 60 foot rise in sea level. Metaphorically, another cleansing flood.
What does the french revolution teach us?/// Revolutions often betray themselves?
What do you put your hope in? Why? /// Science, self interest, and luck. Cant think of anything else that could even hypothetically work.
56–“What an utterly selfish view, to not realize that a true leader will sacrifice himself to free his people, as both of those men largely managed to do.” I don’t know what is “selfish” about being accurate but I agree leaders often (get) sacrificed for their efforts. However==the subject was not the attributes of leadership but rather the nature of truth. Switching subjects doesn’t address the orginal subject no matter how interesting the collateral issue is.
57–Only because it is SO glaring: “In a nutshell, people’s own consciences are witness to their own actions. God is infinite in His justice and judgement, but He is also infinite in his mercy and grace. He is infinitely fair and will take everything into consideration!” /// Again definitionally, as described, god is also a tyrant that is worthy of rejection for being just what he is.
49. – Brock
“You see this is my point, people choose sides around topics like this without any, any basis for making a decision. You heard an idiot priest and made a decision about the bible. That’s stupid.”
…and that is an ad hominem bit of empty rhetoric. What basis did you have for making that particular decision? Still, as flatly wrong as you are, somehow you got some of the ‘priest part’ right.
Although I was never a Catholic, I made my informed decisions about the Bible long before I was educated by Jesuits, who certainly weren’t idiots and who did hone my thinking, all the way through university.
“The “books” were the sideshow. The distraction used by magicians to get you to look one way while the real action took place in the other hand.”
That may be so but when people believe these books are the absolute truth, they use the books as absolute justification for a lot of very nasty crap. That’s why I think we’d be better off if the books were viewed as fiction rather than fact.
#57 Stiffler writes “God is infinite in His justice and judgment, but He is also infinite in his mercy and grace. He is infinitely fair and will take everything into consideration!”
This claim of “infinitely fair” is a common and wonderfully reassuring assertion, drawn from many similar claims made in the Bible, but there is absolutely no evidence of its veracity. It is merely something believers take on faith for what will happen in the afterlife. First, let me stipulate that my definition of fairness necessarily includes equal application of punishment for equal severity of the infraction. The key word is “equal.”
According to the Bible, God enforced judgments here on earth that were so wildly erratic that they border on schizophrenic. Unfortunately, God had no therapist to help him work through his issues with these humans he had created. Suffering from a dark mood, he sometimes commanded the harshest of punishments for the tiniest infractions (working on the Sabbath is the perfect example of sin that harms no one). In one of God’s more “merciful” moods, he watched idly from his heavenly perch as the mass murderers Levi and Simeon performed their premeditated acts of vengeance against an entire city because their sister had been “defiled” by the leader of that city. Levi and Simeon went on to live long and blessed lives, perhaps because they were from the right family (both were sons of Jacob, and Levi was an ancestor of Moses). Stiffler, this is a deity/demon who sometimes lets mass murderers go scot-free, while infractions akin to overtime parking might be punished by painful death. And you use the phrase, “infinitely fair”? Torturous punishment is a common theme, and now you’ve begun torturing the language as well.
The Bible is filled with examples that absolutely contradict any notion of fairness and justice applied here on earth, and so you’re left with nothing but completely unsubstantiated claims that fairness will be any component of the afterlife. Once again, it’s all a matter of faith. Good luck with that.
[ And for the benefit of casual readers not following this closely, this is my response to Stiffler’s mention of the Apostle Paul’s philosophy concerning judgment of Gentiles who live without benefit and knowledge of the written Torah or (presumably) the plan of Salvation. So rebuttals raising the issue of Salvation are hereby pre-empted 😉 ]
60–Right you are. Words have “no meaning” when talking with bible based believers. But its worse than what you fairly post.
Christers have made a god that is too heavy to lift. God made us and a million years before time began he knew how and why each one of us would sin but he will still blame us for our lack of faith, or working on Sunday as you say, or killing millions of our fellow man?
If god made us, then HE is responsible as the author of all things. In this sense, to be infinitely fair, seems to me that all the evil a man can do in his lifetime (as a tool of god?) is not a jot compare to the infinite of time god might levy any punishment? Its really all claptrap making no sense at all.
Sorry to post again, but “gosh darn it” words and the ideas they convey really should be given respect for the “meaning” they convey outside the concatenation of faith. Too much regarding bible based belief is just gobbledegook.
Bobbo,
Words apparently have no meaning for you either, since you can read a post entirely about the power of recognizing the truth of ones situation and endeavoring to impress this upon others, and somehow managed to think that is changing the subject away from “the truth will set you free.” Deceived people can not be free for long, and I doubt you can show one contrary example. Further, reducing the lives of great leaders to their end, as you did, suggests that they would have been better off if they had never fought for what is right. That might be true in a strict “my flesh is all that I am” sense, but I doubt a world in which great leaders thought only of themselves would be a very positive one, for it would be a world without great leaders. A true leader (which we unfortunately lack at the moment) would sacrifice themselves gladly for those they defend, and your cynical focus upon the messy end guarantees you will never be one.
Brock, the bible said many great things and much of it is good advice that is valid today. However its not new, much of it is just recycled from older totally non christian or theological texts. As good as the advice is it doesnt change the fact that god does not exist.
62–thanks Li, let me parse it one more time.
You say Martin Luther King is an example of “The truth will set you free.” and I respond the truth will get you killed. Then you say that I fail to see that a true leader will sacrifice himself for the simplicity of his recognition of truth. (paraphrased for flow).
Well, it looks to me you are still equating the issue MLK stood for with MLK himself? And the “truth” is we both have anthropomorphized truth giving it redeming and threatening powers that are not inherently in its defintion? So, its the consequences of speaking the truth that can get you killed and for freeing your people–or is it just the consequences of speaking that which is unpopular regardless of the truth involved?
Nah, I think most issues are too multi-faceted for any X=Y statement to be valid, other than to rally the troops or get money donated. But then, maybe Certainty=Manipulation (when it works?)