The Gospel

[Atlas]

I guess all I can say is I believe, I just wish you could.

Jesus said that unless you change and become like a child you will never enter His kingdom. I believe every word that came out of his mouth. Simple childlike faith!

I believe you. I think we all do. I also have a Mother, brother and sister who bring your argument to my ears every chance they get. I once felt as you do, as they do.

I need more. Belief seems to be a feeling to me. It's not an intellectual thing. It's something at the core of your being that feels unshakeably true. There is no additional logic, evidence or proof required. Feelings are their own proof.

So every religion, psuedoscience, occult belief is "true" in exactly this way. That's why we doubt you. We doubt them all. They cannot all be true, really true. How can we distinguish what is really true from what is not?

Your short time guardian angel Joseph, he seemed real to you. That was a felt experience, right? Then you felt that he was from the great Deceiver, God communicated this to you, to your heart?

What made Joseph real and true? What then made him false? How were you able to distinguish "real truth" from "false truth"?

This is what we are interested in. Why do we believe what we believe. Scientific truth is demonstrable, repeatedly so. Sure it has theories, but they lead to new hypotheses and new avenues of inquiry. The method is something to believe in just for it's productivity. Science, it's methods, it's inventions and it's intellectual "truths" generate feelings of happiness in us just as your feeling belief in Jesus do in you.

We wish you could know how intellectual honesty feels. It feels good. Very liberating. It's not the childlike happiness you now have. I wish you well with that. I thought my own time with Jesus was the most happy time in my life until I realized that I was looking through the glass darkly.

Jesus is the mask of God. You hold him so close you don't see it. If you peel off the mask you see what we see. It's you Kathy. It's all you. It always has been, drugs, astrology, the occult - it's been you finding your way. Bask in the goodness and light you feel but don't try to tell others they don't feel happy. That's what you're saying when you tell us, "I wish you could believe too."

Search for those who are unhappy like you were. Maybe they are looking for a new reality. Those of us here are not wishing to trade our reality for yours.

 

[Kimpatsu]

What is "bleeding obvious" to me is that you cannot tell the difference between a statement that is meant to be approximate and a statement that is actually in error.

And how do you know the statement was meant to be approximate? Divine revelation?

 

[Atlas]

In Genesis, God gives man dominion over the earth (verses 1.26-28). God certainly has no problems with the Israelites building the tabernacle and its furnishings, which certainly involves technology such as metalworking, cloth making, dyeing of cloth, and even mining for the jewels that decorate the ephods of the priests. Just to get these done involves having teased some secrets from nature. It seems strange that the same God who had no trouble with technology here would suddenly turn around and consider "the electric light an abomination."

There is another thread in which it is pointed out that the combination of Latin (a.k.a. Roman Catholic) Christianity and Aristotle led to science. What Latin Christianity contributed was the idea that God runs the universe according to consistent laws, so trying to investigate and find out what these laws were was not a fools' errand. Of course, Latin Christianity in itself is a mix of biblical and Greek philosophical ideas, so I'm not sure how relevant it is.

I haven't followed that thread. It sounds interesting. Aristotelian Scholasticism ruled intellectual inquiry for centuries. The problem was that it dealt in analysis and deductive reasoning. Our priests could deduce God's plans for us by reasoning what is true down from the true God.

I can't remember how inductive reasoning came in. That seems to be the breakthrough idea that really launches science. Observe, hypothesize and test - repeat. The synthetic reasoning was different in pwerful ways. Is that discussed in the other thread? I probably won't delve into the more than 400 posts there.

If we are talking about other non-Biblical religions, then it is obviously against this. Certain philosophies may be said to "count" as essentially other religions, and Paul has a few words to say against these. If we are talking about following an investigation of nature that may lead away from God, well, the Bible never anticipates this.

Right. We don't know if Galileo's telescope is evil or just his findings. The Amish have their views of technology but I think they eschew it more because it brings them into contact with outsiders. Technology may not be evil in and of itself but it brings evil close. Best to go very slow adopting the worldy ways of the outsiders. Backbreaking toil is good for the soul. Strangely, I don't disbelieve that sentiment - though I don't believe in any sort of immortal soul - but I'd never choose to be shackled looking backwards when the future is offering so much promise.

 

[jjramsey]

And how do you know the statement was meant to be approximate?

First, because round numbers were used in the first place. Second, because the point of mentioning the dimensions of the bowl was to give an impression of its size. Exactness is simply not required. Third, because the iffiness in the length of a cubit makes any statements on length approximate.

If the statement about the dimensions of the bowl were in a chronicle outside the Bible, I would have understood it as being approximate. I see no reason to apply a different standard simply because it is in the Bible.

 

[jjramsey]

If we are talking about following an investigation of nature that may lead away from God, well, the Bible never anticipates this.

Right. We don't know if Galileo's telescope is evil or just his findings.

No, no. My point was the whole idea that investigating nature could lead away from God is an idea that is foreign to the Bible. Worshipping nature was a problem. Studying it? The issue never came up. Astrology may be considered a problem, because of its pagan religious implications, but the question of astronomy wasn't even considered. The biblical authors show no concern that studying reality could even conflict with what they supposed to be revelation.

 

[Tricky]

I guess all I can say is I believe, I just wish you could.

Jesus said that unless you change and become like a child you will never enter His kingdom. I believe every word that came out of his mouth. Simple childlike faith!

Children are, by default, agnostic. They only have faith if some other human trains them to. They are so very easy to manipulate. I do not think you do any credit to Christians by calling their faith "childlike", even though it is in many ways true.

I wish you could abandon "faith" and rely more on evidence, but we cannot change others just by wishing so.

 

[kurious_kathy]

Like it was said before, it's not the gospel we're offended by, it's how you are acting in its name.

Are you actually saying you are open minded? You're going to tell me an open minded person thinks all other religions but yours are going to hell?

I am open about having a relationship with God. Jesus connects us to God. If you can not confess Jesus is Lord then I am sad that I won't see you on the other side of eternity. I hate to think of anyone not going to heaven. No matter what our past is, religion, scholor, scientist, phsycologist, ect... God meets us where we are at. Jesus turns us from darkness to light. A Relationship!

 

[Kimpatsu]

Kathy, why would an uppity rabbi whose life story is a blatant plagiarism of the Egyptian god Osiris be able to lead you to god?

 

[Ryokan]

If you can not confess Jesus is Lord then I am sad that I won't see you on the other side of eternity.

I'm not.

 

[Dubium]

As an ex-charismatic I still sometimes feel the scars that horrible experience left behind. At the church I belonged to there was a huge emphasis placed on satan. The pastor always made a big deal out of banning satan from the building, casting out demons - blaming everything evil - physical complaints, psychological problems, lifestyle choices on 'Satan' and I used to walk around in terror that satan would steal my soul because I was taught there was this huge battle going on between Jesus and Satan, and having been 'won' by Jesus I was immediately fair game for satan.

No one talks about it much, but those kind of teachings are EVIL and damaging. It's enough to make anyone psychotic - believing that there is this constant battle going on for their soul and with the tiniest lowering of the guard that satan will regain control.

Christianity (especially of the fundie kind) does not equal freedom and peace. It equals fear and paranoia and guilt and shame. It's a crock. But the scars remain and sometimes itch.

 

[Atlas]

No, no. My point was the whole idea that investigating nature could lead away from God is an idea that is foreign to the Bible. Worshipping nature was a problem. Studying it? The issue never came up. Astrology may be considered a problem, because of its pagan religious implications, but the question of astronomy wasn't even considered. The biblical authors show no concern that studying reality could even conflict with what they supposed to be revelation.

I'm of the opinion that we have to be taught the the Bible is the word of God. We would not come to that conclusion ourselves if there were several other books to choose from.

That is, there is an authoritarian structure that is assumed when it comes to religion. A Jim Jones or David Koresh naturally appears. Using the same Bible as everyone else, there own charisma, and their own interpretation believers are made dupes, or the other way around.

Galileo's work was subjected to the authoritarian review. It was interpreted by holy men after prayer consideration to be heresy.

The meaning of the Christian Bible morphs from Johnathan Edwards to God is Love to Sylvia Brown's Christian woo. It all things to all people. The mafia hit men still go to confession.

Like Tricky said. Kids only have faith if someones else trains them to it. There is no concensus as to what is true, you learn who God is from the one who tells you about Him.

The inspired word of God would not be so malleable. At every stage God is saying you will never know the truth. Any God who demanded worship would make things a little more clear. Just another reason to conclude all the gods who have their own books are false.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

I guess all I can say is I believe, I just wish you could.

Jesus said that unless you change and become like a child you will never enter His kingdom. I believe every word that came out of his mouth. Simple childlike faith!

My old friend, the Pied Piper of Hameln, too, had a thing for child-like faith...

Also, you never explained how you dealt with Matthew 16:27 and Ephesians 1:4,5 and their apparent contradiction to your belief in salvation by grace and free will.

 

[alfaniner]

BTW, kathy, you have hit 50 posts. You can choose an avatar now.

 

[Palimpsest]

I guess all I can say is I believe, I just wish you could.

Jesus said that unless you change and become like a child you will never enter His kingdom. I believe every word that came out of his mouth. Simple childlike faith!

I'm guessing that's probably what you said before, when you were into self-help. "I believe. I've got my life metaphor, do you?" And before that, when you studied the occult. "I believe." Probably with the same child-like faith, too. The instruments may have changed, but it's still the same old song.

I hope someday you find what you're looking for, Kathy.

 

[Kimpatsu]

You realise that what Kathy is really arguing is the logical fallacy of Argument from Adverse Consequences? And logical fallacies are, as we all know, attempts to rescue arguments that are in deep rhetorical trouble. So everything she writes here is pointless.
*Yawn...*

 

[jan]

Pretty much. Not so sure how fundamental mercy is in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, but it certainly played a strong enough role in it that accusations of not caring or even preying on widows and orphans became stock rhetoric.

This is rather off-topic, but do you know Euripides' Ion? The hero of this drama/opera is an orphan and a slave; he starts the play singing while doing some low manual work, while piously referring to Apollo as a kind of father (since he had no real father). I guess this must have been quite a shock for his audience (so one could say that Euripides was "arguing against the Greek intuition"), since the heroes of plays were supposed to be grand noblemen, not orphan slaves, and having a slave singing about the god's grace* must have bordered on sacrilege.

But that's just the start: since we learn that Apollo is not only a metaphorical father of Ion, but his real father, and the god has to face a lot of guilt, and behaves extremely immoral.

What's the moral of this? I don't know if there is any, but it could be this: first of all, an orphan slave is as good as the subject of a play as a nobleman. And second, don't expect much from the gods; there is no moral to be expected outside humankind.

I think you can understand why I admire this; and why it is unlikely to expect something comparably in the Bible.







Edited to Add: *of course slaves had been allowed to believe in gods, and to pray. But the context here is a public drama, which was not at all a mundane thing, but deeply rooted in religious traditions.

 

[Hawk one]

Working under the assumption that KK and CD are in fact serious, I would like them to consider the following reading material:

First off, let's start with the whole Original sin and salvation business. Other people have touched upon this subject, but I usually keep this article in handy for a more complete take on the whole business.

Next, let's take a look at the issue of morality.

I noticed KK claimed to have done some studies on the End Times. In that case, this website is obviously a must to read. Here, you will find a compilation of the more well-known end time prophecies throughout more than 2 millenia (which is a pretty large amount). Heck, end time prophecies started more than 26 centuries ago. With all those end times over us, one should expect the actual end coming soon, n'est pas?

I also noticed CD has a beef with evolution. And also that he doesn't represent anything new to the debate. In fact, just about everything I see can be found in this extremely handy list of refuted creationist claims. And in CD's first post, we can for example notice how he brings up claim CA001, and possibly implying CA602 as well. Just to mention a couple. For the future, if CD continues to throw out well-known and refuted claims, I will merely respond by referring to whichever point of the list he's invoking, and I recommend other people - at least those fairly familiar with the list - to do this as well.

Oh, and here is a nice little FAQ on God and evolution as well, just in case there's still someone out there believing evolutionary science is any more atheistic then say the scientists who work/worked with the theory of gravity.

That's your homework for now, KK and CD. Make me proud and read as much as you're feeling capable of, OK?

 

[jjramsey]

I'm of the opinion that we have to be taught the the Bible is the word of God.

No argument from me here, although I'm not too sure what it has to with the Biblical writers not foreseeing that their words may be contradicted.

That is, there is an authoritarian structure that is assumed when it comes to religion.

Not necessarily. The usual means by which one generation passes on its conventional wisdom to the next generation is a sufficient means of continuing on religion. In most of human history, that has been what has happened. There is authority involved, of course, but a full-fledged authoritarianism is not necessary.

Galileo's work was subjected to the authoritarian review. It was interpreted by holy men after prayer consideration to be heresy.

You really ought to read through the thread Is religion slowing us down? if you have time. Galileo gets discussed, and the real situation with him is a bit more complicated than the popular conception. For one, the Church's own attitude toward geocentrism and heliocentrism was mixed, even ambiguous.

The inspired word of God would not be so malleable. At every stage God is saying you will never know the truth. Any God who demanded worship would make things a little more clear. Just another reason to conclude all the gods who have their own books are false.

Not so sure I disagree, although I'd settle for an "inspired word of God" that didn't blow it on the creation and age of the universe, or in a supposed global flood for which the evidence is lacking.

This is rather off-topic, but do you know Euripides' Ion? The hero of this drama/opera is an orphan and a slave; he starts the play singing while doing some low manual work, while piously referring to Apollo as a kind of father . . . we learn that Apollo is not only a metaphorical father of Ion, but his real father, and the god has to face a lot of guilt, and behaves extremely immoral.

What's the moral of this? I don't know if there is any, but it could be this: first of all, an orphan slave is as good as the subject of a play as a nobleman. And second, don't expect much from the gods; there is no moral to be expected outside humankind.

Interesting. I'm sorry to say that I have not read Euripides' Ion. Actually, when you wrote "don't expect much from the gods," the book of Ecclesiastes came to mind. To a perhaps shocking extent, it would agree with the idea of not expecting too much from God.

 

[Terry]

Have you heard of biochemist Michael Behe, Professor of Biochemistry, Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University?

I have four words for you:

Type Three Secretory Apparatus


--Terry.

 

[billydkid]

Relationship

Like it was said before, it's not the gospel we're offended by, it's how you are acting in its name.

Are you actually saying you are open minded? You're going to tell me an open minded person thinks all other religions but yours are going to hell?

I am open about having a relationship with God. Jesus connects us to God. If you can not confess Jesus is Lord then I am sad that I won't see you on the other side of eternity. I hate to think of anyone not going to heaven. No matter what our past is, religion, scholor, scientist, phsycologist, ect... God meets us where we are at. Jesus turns us from darkness to light. A Relationship!

Generally, for there to be relationship there has to at least two entities involved. You can not have a relationship between you and some notion you have about who Jesus was. There is no Jesus. That person has been deceased for 2000 years. I have no idea how you can have a relationship with someone who does not exist.