"I asked God to help me"

I’ve heard, usually Christians in the US to be fair, respond to “why do you think this” with “because it says so in the Bible.”

Well that’s because they are stupid, as others have said. The bible was never intended to be taken literally, it was written to provide guidance, and was never meant to be an instruction manual with 10 steps to find inner happiness. Sorta like the analogy of give someone a fish and they eat for a day, teach them to fish and they will eat everyday.

Christianity seems to be suffering from the recent (last 50 years or so) instant gratification culture. Where if I can’t see it, or be given explicit instructions on how to do something then it can’t be worth doing, especially it would involve any effort other than googling it.

haterz

On a point of note, I don’t hate anyone (and if I did, I wouldn’t spell it like a teenage boy on facebook). Can we lose the passive-aggressive insults please? It doesn’t do you any favours and we’ve got too many people being obnoxious already.

it doesn’t matter wether others don’t see it as important if we let lack of logic rule then we end up with life prior to the enlightenment where religous leaders can abuse power in the name of god and do whatever they jolly well like

No, I don’t think we do. It’s not black and white, logic or anarchy, after all.

Hilldodger – where’s the logic in ill-informed banging on and on about fairies and unicorns on a religion thread? Oh sweet irony 🙂

I’m sure (well hope I guess) that many of the haterz have room in their lives for things that aren’t in accord with a rigidly deterministic logical system – art, poetry, human emotion, where’s the logic in those……

I love all of these things and make space for them in my life, but that isn’t the issue here. You seem to be saying if ypou don’t believe in god then you can’t have art poetry emotion etc?

toys – I read your posts – just nowt to respond to apart from to say I agree with you basically but maybe ease off on the pejorative language?

I got a metaphorical kicking from (IIRC) Barnsleymitch for intemperate language and accepted it as its not right to insult moderate non proselytising folk like him as well

So don’t you think it’s pointless to debate the bible when its just a part of whats underneath the whole umbrella of “faith”?

it doesn’t matter wether others don’t see it as important if we let lack of logic rule then we end up with life prior to the enlightenment where religous leaders can abuse power in the name of god and do whatever they jolly well like

I think people were still pretty religious during the Enlightenmnet, were’t they?

Presumably, if “god” is all powerful, “he” could change it so that two plus two would equal three (logic being just a “construct”, and all…).

Cougar – Member

haterz

On a point of note, I don’t hate anyone (and if I did, I wouldn’t spell it like a teenage boy on facebook). Can we lose the passive-aggressive insults please? It doesn’t do you any favours and we’ve got too many people being obnoxious already.

Fair enough, I’m all for politeness and respect, shame it’s not always reciprocated 😕

In future I shall refer to the people opposed to the free and open public discussion of religious views as “people of unfaith” unless you have a better suggestion….

. RichC

The bible was never intended to be taken literally, it was written to provide guidance, and was never meant to be an instruction manual

In whcih case how do yo anser this as put by Cougar?

if you accept that then the Bible loses its potency. It’s no longer a holy book, it’s a book of best guesses made by men, based on stories they’d heard hundreds of years ago, passed down by word of mouth between generations before anything got written down. Embellished with each telling.

Its either the word of god or its a made up story by fallible humans. If its the former it should be obeyed literally, if its the latter then what is the imperative to obey any of it?

As opposed to a life where political leaders can abuse power in the name of progress, economics and security needs and do whatever they jolly well like.

Well that is a differnet problem but at least if we criticize cameron et al we don’t get burned at the stake.

Molgrips

I think people were still pretty religious during the Enlightenmnet, were’t they?

So what? Your point is?

From wikipedia: The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals in 18th century Europe and America, whose purpose was to reform society and advance knowledge. It promoted science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and abuses in church and state.

How nice that it happened and I celebrate those who perpetuted it, and what we are seeing in this thread is a decline of those ideals, which is very sad.

toys19 – Member

I love all of these things and make space for them in my life, but that isn’t the issue here. You seem to be saying if ypou don’t believe in god then you can’t have art poetry emotion etc?

No, I’m replying to your point that Logic is the over riding principle for life and suggesting a few things that don’t follow a logical system….

if its the latter then what is the imperative to obey any of it?

Because you think it’s sound advice?

There is a lot of it in there.

If you want to argue about this, it would really make sense to get a better idea of what Christianity is about. This concept of all the bible being of equal weight is facile. There is a whole academic subject of Theology which involves the study of such matters and Christians rely on priests and others to help them determine what they should give greatest weight to. As with other subjects, not all practitioners agree with each other and there are divergent views. Hence, much of the portrayal of what is important to Christians in these threads is ill educated and emphasises extremes that many of the faith do not agree with.

I think people were still pretty religious during the Enlightenmnet, were’t they?

I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave earlier…

The sloughing off of the “bad” bits of the chosen “Holy Book” always follows the advances of secular morality.

This happens slowly though, as religion is highly resistant to change from outside it’s boundaries in the society or wider secular landscape in which it squats.

Theology, Unicornology, Leprechaunology…

(Just testing the theory that the best way to educate is by repetition of the lesson).

TandemJeremy – Member
the word of god

TJ, seriously, I suggest you do some reading on the theological interpretation of the phrase “word of God”, it is most certainly not a literal unquestioning adherence to ancient scriptures….

The bible was never intended to be taken literally

Never? I don’t believe you.

I don’t know for certain, but I’m pretty sure that that’s a massive backpedal by Christianity. And even if it isn’t, the Bible would have been taken literally by most of its largely uneducated audience back in the day, so if it’s true that it was never meant to be taken literally then it’s essentially fraud on a huge scale.

AFAIK, the only reason we’re now going, “ah, well, you see, it’s allegorical” is because in these relatively enlightened time anyone with an ounce of critical thinking can see that it’s complete bobbins.

As we discover more about the world and its history, the church is having a harder and harder time reconciling this with the ‘facts’ presented in the Bible. Something’s got to give, and they’ve finally worked out that going “no, no, science is wrong, erm, dinosaur fossils were buried by satan to trick us!” isn’t going to work except on the really hard of thinking, so now it’s ‘not literal’.

What Christianity really needs is Bible 2.0.

One version of events goes like this:

Molgrips – nice summary, wish I could be that concise

TJ, seriously, I suggest you do some reading on the theological interpretation of the phrase “word of God”, it is most certainly not a literal unquestioning adherence to ancient scriptures….

You’re probably right. It’s more an attempt to stifle skeptical enquiry by claiming divine infallibility. Much like the current output from the Vatican.

molgrips – Member

if its the latter then what is the imperative to obey any of it?

Because you think it’s sound advice?

There is a lot of it in there.

So its back to choosing which bits suit you then – what is convenient for you to beleive in. It actually has no moral authority – its simply a menu of things one can choose to believe in or not.

What Christianity really needs is Bible 2.0.

They already have it, its called the New Testament.

Hilldodger – thats not the point – its this simple one

If you can pick an chose which bits of the bible to believe in/ to follow and this choice is made on the interpretations laid down by fallible humans then actually the bible has no more validity or weight than any other code laid down by people.

Because you think it’s sound advice?

There is a lot of it in there.

So why can’t we have sound advice without all this pesky ‘god’ business? (Because people won’t follow it unless it’s accompanied either by a threat or a promise of a reward, perhaps?)

As the late great DNA said, is it not enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there’s fairies at the bottom of it?

They already have it, its called the New Testament.

Zing! Good point. (-:

“The Bible” is generally taken to be both the “Old” and the “New” testament.

Neither of them is a history book.

Fair enough, I’m all for politeness and respect, shame it’s not always reciprocated

Yeah, if I’ve stepped over a line at any point then I’m sorry; I do try to be civil. (-:

In future I shall refer to the people opposed to the free and open public discussion of religious views as “people of unfaith” unless you have a better suggestion….

Well, no, that’s saying that all atheists are opposed to public discussion, isn’t it? I think it’s pretty obvious from here that that’s not the case, everyone here welcomes discussion.

Its either the word of god or its a made up story by fallible humans. If its the former it should be obeyed literally, if its the latter then what is the imperative to obey any of it?

Personally I believer its the latter, as it was never meant to be taken literally and pretty much all of the sane religious leaders agree on this, just as they all agree that evolution is as close to a fact as a theory can get.

As for why should you obey the bible? Well its a book of guidelines to help you find happiness and contentment from the indescribable (hence its not written down) joy of realising that there is something more in the universe than what you can just see and touch. However to find this, you do have to accept that you are not the most important thing in the universe(ie: overcome your Ego). The bible isn’t the only book to do this the Koran, Buddist Dao’s, The Veda etc all echo the same theme

Also ‘obey’ is the wrong word, the bible was IMHO never meant to be obeyed, it was mean to be followed willingly. So if you are happy to live in ignorance of this bliss, then you have no need to pay any attention to it.

BTW; I don’t go to church, and I don’t believe in a man with a beard watching over us. However I am fairly open minded to any ideas, and like to find out more about things before I decide for or against them.

You keep using the word “never.” I do not think it means what you think it means.

Modern Christianity is relatively enlightened these days. It wasn’t always the case. People have been executed for daring to disagree.

Has there been any new points made for awhile? I think its probably time for CFHs gif again. nO one is being persuaded by anything are they?

Sorry, were we supposed to be? I didn’t get the memo.

TandemJeremy – Member
Hilldodger – thats not the point – its this simple one

If you can pick an chose which bits of the bible to believe in/ to follow and this choice is made on the interpretations laid down by fallible humans then actually the bible has no more validity or weight than any other code laid down by people.

It’s obvious you either “don’t get it” or are being deliberately argumentative…

..as I see it (and leffeboy explained rather more eloquently earlier)
The Bible is an amalgamation of religious texts, sermons, accounts & parables put together by many authors and subject to numerous translations and edits.
It has become one of the more important texts for teaching in the Christian religion, not the sole basis for it’s existence.

It is semingly only some people of unfaith who want to stick to a literal word-for-word interpretation of the Bible rather than those who use it as a focus for spiritual development and religious inspiration…

…anyway as several have noted, it’s all getting a bit petty and niggly now, we all seem to know where the other is coming from so it’s no longer a discussion but a slanging match – enjoy…….

Steel hammer, rubber nail.

I’ve got to go and do some work. Talk amongst yourselves.

Cougar – Member
The bible was never intended to be taken literally
Never? I don’t believe you.

Doesn’t matter if you believe me or not, its still true.

I don’t know for certain, but I’m pretty sure that that’s a massive backpedal by Christianity. And even if it isn’t, the Bible would have been taken literally by most of its largely uneducated audience back in the day, so if it’s true that it was never meant to be taken literally then it’s essentially fraud on a huge scale.

Why’s it a fraud? The bible was meant to provide guidelines, not instructions. Just because people turn something into what they want to hear doesn’t make something a fraud.

The real fraud was the bible being written in a language which only the church could read, and hence twist the message. As you didn’t/don’t have to believe in god to be in the church, especially as it was/is a way to make a lot of money (ie: selling Absolution to the rich)

Hence the protestant movement and Luther, who believed the bible was being twisted away from its intention of enlightened for the masses into a money making scheme

Throwing away belief in god, because you don’t like the church seems to be a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water tbh.

I don’t agree, TJ. I think that the increase in civility I have seen on this thread between many participants is precisely what discussion is about.

There is a whole academic subject of Theology which involves the study of such matters and Christians rely on priests and others to help them determine what they should give greatest weight to

Exactly. Christianity is (as I understand it) embodied by the faithful, not by a book or a small group of people. At least Anglicanism seems to be, I suppose that’s less so in the case of Catholicism. Although that has evolved a lot over the years hasn’t it? In response to human progress.

TJ, the thread has moved from bashing Christians to a rather interesting discussion about theology, I think. Got some good posts recently.

Hilldodger – I don’t know how to explain it any better but you seem not to see the simple point. I am not claiming the bible is anything that it should be accepted literally. what I am saying is that if you don’t accept it as the word of god then where does it legitimacy come from?

If the bible is this

.as I see it (and leffeboy explained rather more eloquently earlier)
The Bible is an amalgamation of religious texts, sermons, accounts & parables put together by many authors and subject to numerous translations and edits.
It has become one of the more important texts for teaching in the Christian religion, not the sole basis for it’s existence.

Then its the creation of men thus it has no inherent value or legitimacy surely. Aesops fables are morality stories, Kants works are more rigorous and intellectually valid, The brother Grimm wrote a more entertaining tale

If all the bible is is

an amalgamation of religious texts, sermons, accounts & parables put together by many authors and subject to numerous translations and edits.

then what value does it have?

MOlgrips
TJ, the thread has moved from bashing Christians to a rather interesting discussion about theology, I think. Got some good posts recently.

I am not bashing Christians – I am outlining a crucial theological point that you refuse to answer and that no one has made any answer to.

richc
Well its a book of guidelines to help you find happiness and contentment from the indescribable (hence its not written down) joy of realising that there is something more in the universe than what you can just see and touch. However to find this, you do have to accept that you are not the most important thing in the universe(ie: overcome your Ego).

So it’s unfair to call all theists stupid but okay to call all atheists egotists?

600 🙂