2008-02-18, 17:13 | Link #361 | ||
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Quote:
It sounds disrespectful to think of the Bible as a collection of made-up stories, but I think that questioning it as such only occurs because people hold it up so highly. I admit, it bothers me as well to see people read over parts of the Bible and treat it as if they came directly from God. They go to service and listen to their preacher's interpretation, and just accept it. They don't realize that the Bible has gone through multiple translations, and that each part can be interpreted differently. When you put that together with the fact that people interpret it so literally, you do somewhat have to wonder about it. I guess it's sort of like wondering about the Catholics. Part of the church services call for eating a bit of bread (a cracker, in my experiences) and drinking wine - the cracker represents the body of Christ and the wine represents His blood. Catholics supposedly believe that the wine becomes Christ's real blood once it hits your mouth, and that the bread becomes His flesh. I don't know that all Catholics believe that, but I think most of us here would agree that it sounds a little... out there. Such literal interpretations and beliefs are a little unnerving to those of us non-believers, I suppose.
__________________
|
||
2008-02-18, 17:14 | Link #362 | |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
I would if I knew them. I like consistency.
You see, I just don't see the logic of saying "this is the truth, as revealed to us by God" and then going "except for those parts which we don't like, and which have to be "interpreted" out of all recognition". I don't see the point of a Holy Book which is no better than a book of Fables de La Fontaine. I'd love for an explanation to make sense. Rather than "this is what we've arrived to thanks to modern thinking, and this is how we can twist the Bible to conform to it". Quote:
Note: all I've said about what I think of the Bible is that I don't believe in God. Which says it all, really, but isn't derogatory. What interests me is the status of the Bible for a Christian. While I don't approve of the literalism as moral or intellectual guide, at least it makes a certain amount of sense to me. But if you see the Bible as - to use Vexx's phrasing rather than mine - "a collection of apocryphal tales scattered across the years", and if it's neither free of errors nor literal - does it still make sense to call it a Holy Book? If all you're doing is interpreting it till it agrees with what you want it say, can't you skip the middle... book... and just take responsibility for your beliefs? In fact... Forget it. It's not even that important. If that's how you see Holy Book, who am I to contradict? But I would like a clear statement on whether you (whoever claims to be Christian) believe that stuff like the Flood and the Red Sea parting actually happened, or are just stories. Last edited by Anh_Minh; 2008-02-18 at 17:29. |
|
2008-02-18, 17:23 | Link #363 |
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa, hold yer horses for a second there.
I thought that, other than those Creationist wackos (and dangerous ones at that), more or less everyone (important) in the Christian community agreed on the point of the Bible being a huge metaphor, or at the very least, the Old Testament. Or am I missing something here?
__________________
|
2008-02-18, 17:34 | Link #365 | ||
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
@Ledgem: in fact, much "earth level" daily practicing Buddhism *does* depend on those Buddha fairy tales and moral teachings via "stories of his life". If you look how Buddhism is implemented in Tibet -- you'll see a lot of the pre-buddhist color and variety blended into pure buddhist thought. In Japan, the Shinto and Buddhists doctrine and practice are almost indistinguishable at times - each taking from the other. Pure Buddhism (Zen, etc) that doesn't depend on supernatural input is kind of an intellectual class of Buddhism.
Christianity maps out in a similar fashion, ranging from people who fervently believe their Bible School Stories (not necessarily mapping to biblical text), literalists, metaphorists, modern academic theology... @WK: well... in America, there are quite a large population of "literalists" which tends to swamp out sounds made by the rest of the Christian communities. The creationists, literalists, and their followers are a significant portion of the population (unlike in AU or UK). @Anh Quote:
You're trying to map logic onto something fundamentally based in "emotional anti-rationalism" ... ain't gonna work and you'll just get a headache. They're not saying "those parts we don't like" ... the Bible has never been an integrated, proofed, set of interlocking instructions to begin with. You're insisting something that can only be the case by throwing logic and reason out the window. Recognizing the *roots* of biblical fragments and the intended audience of the scrapbook that is the Bible is in no way "cherrypicking". Myself, the whole tendency of evangelicals constantly reaching for the Old Testament is assert their views is kind of anti-Christian anyway. The OT is for the Judaic faith --- and *they* are more likely to assert the writings in it are mythological to some level. Quote:
For something you've ruled out so easily, you don't seem to have actually studied it much. I recommend at least reading the works of Joseph Cambell to start with. I've spent about 35 out of the last 50 years studying and questioning the religions and philosophies of the world. I figure if I'm going to discard a belief structure - I'd better understand what I'm discarding. I'm probably pretty scary to Christian or Islamic literalists because I can rip their assertions to shreds using their own source data. But I'm usually amazed at what people don't know about their own religion or one they are actively against.
__________________
Last edited by Vexx; 2008-02-18 at 17:58. |
||
2008-02-18, 17:59 | Link #366 | |||||||||
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
As I said, that's fine... But if they believe everything, possibly including the very existence of God, is a man-made metaphor, they should have the courage to say so.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If there was a proof of the existence of God that's not rooted in some Sacred Text or other, I think we'd hear about it even if we didn't want to. And if there isn't, I just can't make myself really care about the issue. |
|||||||||
2008-02-18, 18:13 | Link #367 | ||
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2008-02-18, 18:21 | Link #368 | ||
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
- Couldn't He do a better job? - Why did He stop? Quote:
Also, I'd argue that faith is a prerequisite of religion, not its point. More of a tool, really. That the point of religion is to get at a truth that is not otherwise reachable. But what do I know? |
||
2008-02-18, 18:25 | Link #369 | ||
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Um... Anh -- *I'm* an atheist who practices Buddhism with sprinkles of Shinto.
I'm not nor have I ever been a "believing Christian". I'm not trying to make you *be* anything. I'm suggesting you understand what you're shooting at. Quote:
Sorry about some of my typing bloopers. Quote:
I'm not a Christian so asking whether I believe Jesus Christ existed is pointless. I'll just say there's essentially zero evidence for his historicity. Joseph Campbell was a mythology researcher and professor recognized throughout academia. He's also well known for his PBS television series with Bill Moyer (an investigative journalist who's also a Methodist minister) on his books. He was an atheist that understood the *value* of storytelling in communicating the cultural values of a society whether they were factual or not. He specificially influenced and was consulted by George Lucas in creating the original Star Wars script. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell I first encountered his writings in my initial university class on comparative religion. My professor (she was Catholic) used his books (the 4 volume series The Masks of God) as the basis of her course. As to *why* you should read it? Well , you're asking questions and you sound like you need a lot more data (so many "why?" questions) -- I'm providing directions to where you can find answers.
__________________
Last edited by Vexx; 2008-02-18 at 18:43. |
||
2008-02-18, 18:37 | Link #370 | |
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Quote:
Of course, I myself have problems with that concept, but that doesn't mean I go trampling all over every Christian that comes my way. Two of my best friends are devout Christians and none of them question the supremacy of science and logical thinking... as long as it doesn't conflict with the existence of God. But that doesn't mean they believe the Bible is a 100% factual account of what really happened.
__________________
|
|
2008-02-18, 18:38 | Link #371 | |||
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Or rather, why did you bring him up when you did? |
|||
2008-02-18, 18:51 | Link #372 | ||||
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Okay, you're look like you're being purposely obsfucating to be annoying but I'll keep trying.
Quote:
Quote:
To use exactly your tactic: "wife" == "personal whore"+"houseservant". (She's my wife. Oh, so she's your personal whore! WTF? What? I just repackaged what you said to see if you'd stand by it.) That's exactly what you admit you just tried. It is a trolling tactic. Quote:
:P Quote:
Is this getting too hard? What do you know? Its beginning to sound like you don't even have a basic framework to discuss religion. You oversimplify every explanation to a simple-minded soundbite that fails to convey the original explanation (e.g. "it is filet mignon with vegetables" == "it food") I'd really like to think you aren't just trolling for combat.
__________________
Last edited by Vexx; 2008-02-18 at 20:26. |
||||
2008-02-18, 20:08 | Link #373 | |
eyewitness
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
Quote:
I you can't understand this gap, you shouldn't invest money in the stock markets. Nice dansen on this page anyway.
__________________
|
|
2008-02-18, 20:25 | Link #374 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Yes... though we're thumping each other on the head strenuously... we're all dansen.
I guess that counts for something..... The Mystery of the Dansen?
__________________
|
2008-02-19, 00:33 | Link #376 | ||||
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Seriously, don't you think it'd be interesting to note if what you call a "modern Christian" doesn't believe in Jesus Christ? Quote:
|
||||
2008-02-19, 10:34 | Link #378 |
Nani ?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Emerald Forest ( yes its a real place. )
|
Meh, Ive read the Scientology documents...really sad what people will believe once they have been conditioned. Its things like that that let you realize that while people dont deserve to be bashed for their relgion, it doesn't mean all religions shouldn't be bashed.
|
Tags |
not a debate, philosophy, religion |
|
|