It is hard to explain and impossible to verify in any scientific sense. It is something that most people feel although we don’t all agree on what it means. I believe in our spirit and in the Holy Spirit as our link to God and each other and our access to all the answers as we strip away the misconceptions and illusiions we have embraced.
It would be a major highjack to get into the authorship of the Bible here. There have been numerous threads on the subject and I will try and provide some links. Perhaps we could start a new thread and those Dopers who are so knowledgeable about that would be kind enough to participate.
I will say that after studying in various areas my conclusion is that it was never God’s plan that we have one final authoratative collection of writings to go by. The source is the Holy Spirit and it is available to anyone who seeks truth and love. It can speak to us through any medium which would include the Bible and other so called holy books, nature, each, other, anything at all. I think it holds people back to hold onto the need for some external authority rather than look within themselves as Christ taught.
The final straw for me was a passage in Leviticus 12:
I just can’t understand how rational intelligent people can read that passage and those like it and say, “Yeah God said that.” No disrespect intended. I revere Jesus and his teachings and after studying the New Testament quite a bit my conclusion is that he taught us to seek God, love and truth, by learning to listening to the voice of the Holy Spirit within ourselves. We can share our ideas and feelings with each other, but we should never let any person or group make a decision for us on “God’s will”
Agreeing with it in principle is one thing. Really thinking about it and how it relates to our day to day, is much harder. It requires seperating accepting social tradition from our spiritual beliefs. One example. The general Christian attitude about the gay community. Two people loving each other cannot be sin. A physical act in and of itself cannot be a sin. It is the condition of the spirit behind the act that determines sin
How much of that qualifies as “good” ? Religion does not promote true charity or compassion; the point is to act nice in order to convert people. To use your examples : The Allies fought Hitler in self defense; they didn’t fight because they were Christian. Anti semitism exists due to millenia of religious propaganda; you don’t get to wash your hands of it and pretend the Nazi’s hatred came from nowhere. I can’t comment much on the history of education, but I do know the Catholic school system was created because the early school system wasn’t much more than a tool for promoting Protestantism and harassing/converting everybody else. Not much to admire there.
Only if the primary motivation was religion. If he just happens to be religious, that’s like giving his hair color credit.
Was the motivation for the idea religious ( no idea ) ? Was religion necessary for it to be created ( no ) ? Does it make up for the evils of religion ? ( not even close ) ?
Some; I don’t think it makes up for the damage we have caused, much less the damage we will cause in the future.
They are outnumbered by the ones who oppose such rights. Why do you think we lag behind Europe in such things ? We are religious, therefore we are backward and morally corrupt. Why do you think Bush and the Republicans are in charge ? Religion.
Part of the point of religion is the elimination of choice and thought. That’s why it centers on faith; faith is a form of mindlessness. You are supposed to believe and obey and never, ever think. Besides which, religious people base their actions on a set of delusions; any choices they do make will likely be wrong.
I agree that a source is the Holy Spirit. However,I I feel that the Bible is “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in rigtheousness”. I seem to put much more emphasis on the Bible and believe that it is the authorative writing.
Can you explain the reason for your quote of Leviticus. I dont know which direction you are trying to take it.
Sure a physical act can be a sin (but yes it is the condition of our spirit that causes our drive to sin). We are given our bodies from God. We are to treat it as such. I find the way certain christians react to the gay community as uphauling. Christ says "“Do not judge lest you be judged yourselves. Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite!” Yes, being gay is a sin. So is having sex before you are married. I know I am guilty of having sex before I am married although I am not proud of it. I am no better than anyone else so I do not act as if I am.
Christ tells us to test everything. One would think that that would even apply to the Bible itself. Where do you come up with these extreme ideas? I am honestly curious as to these extreme religious people you base your judgements on.
I don’t think so. There are two possible worlds: the natural and the supranatural. The natural is subject to the law of causality, meaning if something happens—anything—we know that it was caused by something else. So any particle had to be the result of something else. Even a virtual particle needs some type of agent for it to cease being virtual and begin becoming real.
The only thing that would not be subject to this constant look backward would be something operating outside the laws of the natural: something supranatural. Ascribing eternal existence to something of the natural world—even virtual particles is not the same as ascribing it to a Creator.
Der Trihs, I have rarely encountered someone so hostile to Theism. I mean, it’s one thing to not believe, but you are downright evangelical about it. I venture that one quality that you (and I) probably despise in many people who profess to be religious and where it on their sleeve is their hubris. I respectfully submit to you, as I have done with them, that isn’t it possible, just possible, that you may be wrong? I mean if it is NOT possible that you are wrong about something for which you have no first-hand knowledge, then wouldn’t that make you perfect? You know, like a god?
I do not understand the need to go into every thread that touches on the issue and spew venom about religion. I share much of your observations concerning organized religion, but I know I’m not going to change people’s minds on the issue of faith. You claim that belief in God is a-rational (which I don’t fully agree with), but then you attempt to use reason to subvert someone’s decision of faith.
And by the way, although I am no fan of organized religion, to claim that there was no good done by it is, as I think you relaized with your backstep, ridiculous. Aside from the overt good done through countless charities, think about all the people over all the centuries that have found solace in their times of pain and loss. Yes, wars have been fought because of religion, but religion has also acrted as a controlliing force and prevented warfare and bloodshed. I’m just saying that if you’re going to focus on the bad, you need to take a long, hard look at the good, as well.
If there is one thing I don’t know much about it is quantum field theory. However, what little bit I’ve read about it tells me that virtual particles don’t need no stinkin’ agent. The equations, or maybe it’s their solutions, tell those who understand them (and I only read about them) that both particle production and particle anihilation are necessary if the equations are valid.
Which of course leads to the question where did the quantum field that is described by the equations come from? As Dr Trihs said, at this point there isn’t enough data. And that is not a justification for jumping way ahead and postulating that it must have come from a supernatural agent.
As to God creating the heavens and the earth out of nothing:
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Like David Simmons implied, effects without causes occur on the quantum level. That’s a basic implication of true randomess.
First, I’m hardly “evangelical” about it. I only talk about it when it comes up as a debate subject. I don’t burst into a thread on, say, a fantasy novel and rant about how it’s a bad book because it contains gods. When someone like Siege talks about how her faith comforts her, I don’t try to argue with her ( that’s a purely subjective claim anyway, and beyond arguement ). When people start claiming religion is good for the world, when they start talking like it’s objective fact; that’s when I feel the need to speak up.
No, I do not believe there is any possibility I’m wrong; not about this. Religion is so absurd and so destructive that it being right and good is simply too implausible for me to take seriously. The only reason most think otherwise is because they are propagandized from infancy; otherwise I’m sure most people would find religion as silly as most now find belief in unicorns and fairies.
Perhaps I give people too much credit then; you seem to be saying that theists are beyond reason.
I never said that no good came from religion; that would be hard to accomplish even if you tried. I also said the good done by religion could be accomplished by other, better means.
How much of what? Stopping Hitler? Quite a bit of it I think.
Really? So no religious person ever did anything genuinely charitable or compassionate? Well that’s handy info, thanks.
I see. So if if a religous person does something out of greed or a lust for power, it’s the fault of their religious beliefs. However if they do something positive, it’s probably for some other reason than them being religious so religion gets no positive points. Also handy info. I think I see where you’re coming from.
Silly me. I thought it was because power mad leaders use the “it’s their fault” tactic repeatedly through history. Hey wait! Since Judism is a religion, wouldn’t anti semitism be against religion? Isn’t that agood thing?
I see. But primary motive doesn’t seem to be a consideration when looking for things to blame on religion.
Yeah, Saving Europe from Nazi domination was no big deal. I think Merle Haggard has a song he wants you to hear.
Again, I thought that was a greed and power hungry thing. What was I thinking?
Dam it!! I thought we had this all figured out. It’s choice that is to blame. You say science is good because it allows choice, yet people choose to use science for evil purposes. But religion is evil because it doesn’t allow choice. Now I am totally confuse. Even though science shows us people can’t choose correctly still it’s evil to not let them choose.
We are so screwed.
The bulk of the German army was destroyed on the eastern front. Various numbers are given for German casualties. For examplethis site lists total German killed and prisoners of war on the eastern front as about 3.5 million.
Most of the sources I have read estimate that 2/3 of German military combat deaths occurred on the eastern front.
And it must be remembered that the Germans were largely Christians and they not only didn’t stop Hitler but avidly supported his government up to and including operating the extermination camps.
So it does seem a bit of a stretch to say that mainly Christians stopped Hitler.
The Bible is an awesome and very useful tool for us to use with the guidence of the Holy Spirit. I think it’s crucial that we recognize the Holy Spirit as the ultimate authority not any person or book. I think thats what preachers or any spiritual leaders should teach. That’s what Jesus taught.
My objection is that people treat the Bible as if it was God’s intention that we have these particular writings and *only *these, as the final authorative guide to God’s will for mankind. I find no evidence that this is true other than within Christian tradition. There is nothing within the Bible to indicate that this was God’s plan. We know that there were other writings that we don’t have. We know there were other writings that were rejected by those who compiled the Bible. We have discovered other writings such as the gnostic gospels that speak of Christ and his teachings. Why shouldn’t we expect the Holy Spirit to move people today to write their experience and have it be just as meaningful as books of the Bible? Other cultures have sought God and spiritual meaning. Why wouldn’t we expect a loving God to respond to them. As I mentioned, Buddha taught many of the things Christ taught 600 years before Christ. It’s all Christian tradition and in my view is often contrary to what Jesus actually taught.
The Bible is heavily influenced by the culture of that day and the opinions of the authors. The quote in Lev 12 shows that better than any other scripture although there are others. In the NT woman are told to cover there heads and not speak in church. The quote in Lev. 12 plainly says “The Lord spoke to Moses” and said a woman child makes a woman more unclean than a man child. Honestly, Thinking of God as a God of love who is no respector of persons, can you look at that passage and say, “Sure God really said that”? To me it makes a very clear statement about nature of the Bible and inspiration and why popular Christian tradition about the Bible is just plain ole wrong. as in, not it line with the truth that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would lead us to.
Honestly I’m still figureing this out, but it seems to me that it is the intent of our hearts that parcipitates sin, according to the definition we agreed on.
The Bible says, God is a spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and truth. Jesus taught about intent rather than just the physical action. If you pray but your intent is to get attention from others then that’s all you get. If you hate your brother it’s the same as murder. If you know you should do good but you don’t it’s a sin. All intent that seperates us from God because we don’t live in the spirit.
Why is being gay a sin? Because a 2000 year old book has a couple of lines in it that people pull out of context to claim they know what God thinks? If you believe that those passages are true then why are woman allowed to speak in church and have their heads uncovered. We won’t get into that any deeper. Suffice it to say that I don’t agree. Love and the physical expression of love is not a sin if we live honestly.
I put it as a question because I sincerely didn’t know. My point was that if religion got blamed for the Holocaust then believers who fought against Nazis deserved credit. Concerning the russian front. Any guesses as to how many russians might have been believers?
Written back when? Take a look at your Bible, and tell me the first place it talks about the reading of the Law, the Torah. That’s a clue as to when it was actually written.
Is your proof your feelings, or something more solid. Matter does come out of nowhere, as you’ve already read. Do you know the evidence for the Big Bang? The predictions of the theory that have been verified? The continuing discoveries that are verifying it further? Are you aware that we are seeing stars being born?
I’ve read the Bible cover to cover, and I’ve studied science - and there is far more wonder in the science books. The real universe is far more splendid than the world the ancients thought there was.
I’m well aware of the “explanations.” A bit far fetched, if you look at them with an open mind. The Sherlockians do something similar in explaining away the contradictions in their holy canon, and demonstrating (for fun) that Holmes really lived. Explaining away contradictions is a nice intellectual exercise, but sad when done for real.
The scientific inaccuracies are far more damning, though. Even more so is the obvious evolution of the concept of god through time. You should really read the Torah and Joshua with a truly open mind. There are hundreds of interesting questions. Forget about Cain’s wife - who the heck was around to populate the city that Cain built? I have seen Chinese artifacts from both before and after the supposed flood. They were clearly done by the same culture. Did the descendants of Noah dig out porcelain from the muck and copy the style instead of bringing their own?
Think about Jesus. God had evolved into a formless figure in the sky, much like we have today. All of a sudden, he has a son with a human woman. Was that god the Hebrew god - or the Greek gods, who did this all the time?
Believe in god and/or Jesus if you wish - but if you say the Bible is totally true, you are stating an absurdity.
I’ve got to disagree with you a bit here. The ancient polytheistic religions didn’t seem particularly destructive. Alexander the Great, who was convinced he was descended from the gods, had no problem leaving the religions of the places he conquered alone, and even married a Persian princess in her “church”. Alexander is a common Jewish name (or so I learned in Hebrew School) because he was such a guy.
As for religions, or sects of religions, who believe that they are the only true answer, that those who don’t believe are going to hell, and you might as well torture the nonbeliever into converting because it will be in his own best interest - there I agree.
Do you really mean being gay is a sin, as opposed to gay sex. (Not a sin either, as far as I’m concerned - or more not immoral, evil or unethical.) But being gay? Do you think gay people have a choice? If so, do you think you could choose to be gay if someone with the Bible Rev 2 said heterosexuality was sinful? I couldn’t.
And why is premarital sex a sin, besides an old book says it is. I am proud of having sex before we were married (not that it was so hard ) and seeing our 27th anniversary shows it didn’t hurt. We’ve told our daughters that if they don’t sleep with their intendeds before marriage they’re being stupid. Why wouldn’t you see if you were compatible - not doing so might end you up in Dear Abbey, a horrid fate.
Well in a later post you did bring up “stopping Hitler” as one of the good things that people did on account of their religion. At least that’s the way it sounded.
I have no idea how many Russians were believers or not. Of course, not all of the Soviet troops were Russians. A great many were from the Asian regions of the Soviet Union. I suspect that many were only conventionally atheistic in order to get along in their society as many of those in my outfit on our side were only conventionally religious for the same reason. It just makes things easier not to make waves.
I don’t necessarily mean destructive in a deliberate fashion; I agree the old polytheisms tended to be far more tolerant in many ways. I was also referring to the tendency of people who rely of faith to either stagnate ( because they investigate nothing; they already “know” ), or to simply make bad decisions. People who die because a ruler relied on omens and prophecies are just as dead as if he ordered his soldiers to chop off their heads.
I must admit, I think we’d all be better off if monotheism had never been invented.
I appreciate the info.It’s always good to learn something new. I wasn’t making a serious arguement. I was jousting with Der Trihs to show that his assertion that the evil done by religion far outweighs the good is something he will never prove, and that his standards of measureing that assertion are grossly unfair.
It seems that anything even superficially associated with religion goes into the “evil done by religion” column but only things with a primary motive being religious belief goes into the “benifits of religion” side.
The conventionally atheistic and conventionally religious thing is interesting. I was sirprised in another thread to learn how high a percentage seem to want “Under God” left in the pledge. A bunch of them must be only conventionally religious at best. I know people with serious spiritual beliefs who support taking it out.
Aside from my sarcasm, someone refered to your attitude as evangelical. I was just thinking that same thing. Your zeal to assert what you believe is true and the way you distort logic to establish it is exactly what many Christians do to cling to their own beliefs. There is no doubt that many horrible things have been done in the name of religion. Many horrible things have been done for money. I wish money had just never been invented. Governments have done horrible things. We’d be better off without governents. My point is that these things are such an integral part of human history there is no way to realistically seperate them. Is religion used by governments to hide their own evil acts. That’s easy to see. So isreligion to blame or corrupt governments that manipulte them. Are religions and governments corrupted by the desire for money? We can see that over and over. Are religious beliefs to blame or the lust for money. Someone said, the love of money is the root of all evil. So which is the worse evil? It comes back to choice. What is the foundation of who we are as people and what moves us to make the choices we make. David Simmons made an interesting comment about WWII and the eastern front so I looked up religion in Russia. I thought this from Wikipedia was interesting.
Atheists slaughtering those with religious beliefs? Then this was interesting.
During a crisis when those with beliefs were needed for defense the atheist state became more tolerant. When the crisis was over, it’s back to religious persecution. Interesting ain’t it?
Is the Soviet Union an example that even an official atheist state doesn’t escape corruption and the evil that humanity sometimes commits against it’s fellow man?
I remember hearing something about a period of history in Spain in a predominantly Muslim society which became a sort of golden age. All religions and philosophies were tolerated. Open discussions and and exchanges of ideas were encouraged. Art and literature flourished.
That’s the kind of attitude I would encourage. Respect and tolerance for people to choose their own path and judge them according to their actions. I emphatically support sepration of church and state. I would encourage an education about the worlds major religions including an accurate potrayal of their history. I would encourage people to think for themselves which isn’t easy when there’s so much pressure to conform.
He is making assertions without backing them up. However, that doesn’t mean he is basing his statements on faith, simply that he is not explaining his reasoning to you. Also, I have yet to see distortion of logic from him.
Repeat after me. A gov. declaring that all citizens must be atheist does not make a culture atheistic.
Yes. However, while you may or may not have gotten support for such a attitude from the bible, you may just as easily gained the opposite attitude. Read the thing again. It contains quite a lot of abhorrent teachings, along with the good.
) and seeing our 27th anniversary shows it didn’t hurt. We’ve told our daughters that if they don’t sleep with their intendeds before marriage they’re being stupid. Why wouldn’t you see if you were compatible - not doing so might end you up in Dear Abbey, a horrid fate.