This one actually IS for the Christians.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Saya

Unless they believe Jesus wrote the book himself there's not much reason to believe that the Bible is divine truth and must not ever be questioned.

How about because it's the only thing close to providing a reason for believing that Jesus is divine?

[Sinjob]

Originally Posted by Despanan

Dude, what's up with you today Sin? Did Vind piss in your cheerios?

It's the crack...heads.

From the movie I saw yesterday, really got me down (the one I was talking about in the Antichrist thread).

[Despanan]

I typed a huge resonse, but then my computer ate it when I tried to post, so I'm going to quickly summarize my veiws here:

1) Excluding the apocrypha The Holy Bible Bible is pretty much the only source of information on Jesus's life. If early christians fucked up on the details, what makes you think they got any of it right? If Jesus was the Son of God, why would an omniscient, loving diety who allready sent his only begotten son to die for us allow the only record we have of it to become so corrupted?

2) It's an intellectual cop-out to claim that you only follow Jesus. It's healthier than following the whole bible, but you really aren't following Jesus, you're following (at least) four different guys ideas about him and those guys can't even keep their story straight. When you say stuff like that, it honestly it sounds more like you're clinging to the last thread of an illogical religion simply because it was drilled into your brain as a child and you can't bear to let it go. I understand and I sympathize, but that doesn't make it true, and that won't stop me from confronting you about it.

I would expect no less from anyone I considered a friend were the tables turned.

3) Saya keeps making straw men of my arguments. I do not want to outlaw religion, ban the bible, or hold moderates "spiritually responsible" for the actions of Radicals. I want people to keep their religion out of politics. Since such a vast amount of Christians (especially Americans) refuse to do this, and these people cannot be reasoned with, the only option is to stand up and expose the bible for what it is.

4) The Bible is a rambling mass of contradictions and patently ridicoulous supernatural stories which derives it's authority from the commands of an invisible man in the sky. There's some nice stuff that Jesus said, but the stories about him are internally inconsistant, and only account for about 1/3-1/4 of the actual text, the rest centering around blind submission and obedience to an invisible man in the sky who loves you but will torment you for all eternity if you fail to follow his commands/worship Jesus. All of this is published together, under the same cover, which in and of itself discourages Cherry-picking.

6) All of Jesus's teachings that Saya and HP have pointed to as their reasoning behind believing in them, can be found elsewhere. Why not just follow the teachings and ignore the supernatural mumbo jumbo and throw the book out the window? It will be healthier for future generations to be divorced from the idea of Jesus's divinity, and his moral and ethical teachings will remain in-tact without encouraging those pesky extremists.

7) We are currently living in what is really the first age when one can freely make the arguments I have without fear of Death/Suppression. Therefore these arguments need to be made and Atheists need to make their voices heard. Especially since, with the exception of Scientologists, we are the most widely dispised group in the United States. This is because too few of us speak up out of politeness, and many Christians don't realize just how insane their holy books really are.

[Despanan]

Shit. Can't edit. #7 should say "this is partially because too few of us speak up"

[Despanan]

Shit...resonse...Holy Bible Bible.

I apologize for the typos. I was going quickly because the previous post was eaten and didn't proofread at all.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Despanan

I want people to keep their religion out of politics.

That's not it, though. Or if it is, let me ask you something, do you disagree with Kontan's complaints of the contradictions in the Bible?
If so, what does the fact that the Bible contradicts itself have to do with Christianity's political power?
Clearly there must be more to it than just depoliticizing Christianity, an endeavor which is impossible anyway.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by Despanan

"...the rest centering around blind submission and obedience to an invisible man in the sky who loves you but will torment you for all eternity if you fail to follow his commands/worship Jesus...."

"6) All of Jesus's teachings that Saya and HP have pointed to as their reasoning behind believing in them, can be found elsewhere. Why not just follow the teachings and ignore the supernatural mumbo jumbo and throw the book out the window? It will be healthier for future generations to be divorced from the idea of Jesus's divinity, and his moral and ethical teachings will remain in-tact without encouraging those pesky extremists."

I mentioned this in my earlier post but I failed to expand upon it, so allow me to rephrase in greater example without taking it as my being condescending.

There are those who do not have the mental faculty to see the path of light for what it is, and yet still need help.

An alcoholic or drug addict really, really needs help, but may not have the money for expensive, non-religious rehabilitation. As mentioned before, because of their natural endowment or because of damage caused by their affliction, the easiest, quickest, most powerful counter agent to their addiction is to believe in a higher, divine power, since their own human frailty could not break the bonds of addiction.

Now, if they realized that they are going to try and break their own addiction through sheer will power, they are back where they started from, because their ego is battered into believing they have failed again and again to wield self control. A divine, universally powerful strength from outside however can help them break their bonds.

What I am saying is there are many for whom divinity makes the whole thing work. It is awesome that Jesus died for an addict thousands of years ago to demonstrate His love for even future generations He would never see, but to be able to come inside that addict (divinely speaking) and kick out and "crucify the old man with Jesus" and replace it with a new (resurrected) man who could become a "saint" is a lifesaving miracle.

See how it works? I am not saying its for everyone, and certainly not you Des, but isn't it worth keeping for the sake of the lives it can turn around?

[Despanan]

While I'm here, this bit got eaten:

1) On Jesus and separation of Church and State:

Actually, that's a pretty modern way to interpret the "render onto Ceaser" bit. It's far more likely that Jesus was slyly escaping from a Catch 22 the Pharasies were trying to trap him with. The question was: "should Jews pay taxes to Rome?" if he said yes, they were going to paint him as a sort of proto Uncle Tom, if he said no, they could report him and have him arrested and killed as a revolutionary.

So what did he do? He said: "Give God's stuff to God and Rome's stuff to Rome, duh."

So basically he didn't answer the question.

He also told Pontius Pilate that his kingdom was in the next life, but once again, that statement is suspect, as Jesus had a vested interest in living, and the Gospel's writers had a vested interest in making the Romans look bad.

Regardless, I resent the implication that I'm trying to "twist the scripture" I'm simply stating what's there. Jesus did alot of wierd things. He killed a whole herd of pigs when healing a guy suffering from demon-posession. He inexplicably allowed a sick friend to die, only to ressurect him later. He cursed foliage.

I think overall the Jesus of the scripture was a pretty awesome and happening dude, but I don't think he was Divine, and I don't think he's a good enough reason to keep around the Abrahamic religions.

Also: you're avoiding the question.

Take Buddah and Jesus out of the equation. Hippy Prophet shows up in your town and tells you to sell/give away all of your posessions and follow him around the country preaching.

Yes or no: Is that guy a fanatic or not?

[HumanePain]

That's easy: yes He was a fanatic. Wouldn't you call someone willing to die for their cause a fanatic?

[Alan]

Oh snap. Seriously, no one is going to win because you guys are arguing different end results and I'm willing to bet you know it.

[vindicatedxjin]

Damn, does that jesus dude get attention or what?

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

I mentioned this in my earlier post but I failed to expand upon it, so allow me to rephrase in greater example without taking it as my being condescending.

There are those who do not have the mental faculty to see the path of light for what it is, and yet still need help.

An alcoholic or drug addict really, really needs help, but may not have the money for expensive, non-religious rehabilitation. As mentioned before, because of their natural endowment or because of damage caused by their affliction, the easiest, quickest, most powerful counter agent to their addiction is to believe in a higher, divine power, since their own human frailty could not break the bonds of addiction.

Now, if they realized that they are going to try and break their own addiction through sheer will power, they are back where they started from, because their ego is battered into believing they have failed again and again to wield self control. A divine, universally powerful strength from outside however can help them break their bonds.

What I am saying is there are many for whom divinity makes the whole thing work. It is awesome that Jesus died for an addict thousands of years ago to demonstrate His love for even future generations He would never see, but to be able to come inside that addict (divinely speaking) and kick out and "crucify the old man with Jesus" and replace it with a new (resurrected) man who could become a "saint" is a lifesaving miracle.

See how it works? I am not saying its for everyone, and certainly not you Des, but isn't it worth keeping for the sake of the lives it can turn around?

You know, I actually have a friend who is a former Heroine addict and a staunch outspoken Atheist, and I will divert to his opinion:

"Any port in a storm"

while I DO have issues with 12-step programs, like the fact that AA has roughly the same Long-term sobriety rate as people who go cold-turkey, claims that it is the one and only way for someone to go sober, and is against the use of actual medicine to deal with the problem. But hey, I understand that sometimes people do need to belive in something.

Overall, I want to apologise if I seemed smug or rude, our belief systems ARE in conflict, but that doesn't mean I don't respect you, or hold you as anything other than a friend.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Alan

That's not it, though. Or if it is, let me ask you something, do you disagree with Kontan's complaints of the contradictions in the Bible?
If so, what does the fact that the Bible contradicts itself have to do with Christianity's political power?
Clearly there must be more to it than just depoliticizing Christianity, an endeavor which is impossible anyway.

I wouldn't say it's impossible. It won't happen in my lifetime, but religions do go the way of Hellenism and the Norse Gods.

And no, I do not disagree with Kontan's complaints. If Christianity had only one homeless follower, that guy would still be wrong (obviously). I just wouldn't waste my time arguing with him.

Christainity's political power is directly tied to the belief that Jesus was the son of God and the bible is the word of God. If this is the truth, then Christians have to divine mandate to rule this world by biblical law, and the divine duty to convert all others to their way of thinking.

This is why many Christians fight so hard against things like evolution. It is impossible to ever disprove God, as he is defined as being completely supernatural. The closest we can come is by pointing out the inconsistancies between their text and reality, and the inconsistencies within their holy words themselves. Will this ever completely destroy faith in Jehova? No, but if my view ever becomes the normative human view it will completely break their political power.

No more will politicians be taken as anything other than bigots when they say: I'm not against gays, the Bible is. No more will people be able to use the Bible to argue that certain books should be removed from schools, or certain scientific and medical advances should be blocked. People will no longer have a legitimate rational against allowing gays to serve openly in the military, or marry. When people like Sarah Palin claim that they have "prayer warriors" protecting them from psycho/spiritual attacks, they will not remain legitimate contenders for the highest office in the country.

Will people still try to do these things? Of course, but we will at least, be able to remove one of their greatest weapons and rallying tools. I think that's worth fighting for.

[Alan]

Well, but that doesn't take away from the political nature of Christianity. Norse mythology would still be political if it were still relevance, but lack of relevance does not take away from its political nature as any religion, just as any ideology, will have the political bent of perpetuating itself. All religions, all philosophies, all art forms, are political in the very act of expression to a larger audience.

But that's not the point. The point is that imagine if only one sole person believed in the Bible including its blatant contradictions. If it were true that you're only bothered about the role religion has in politics, then you wouldn't mind the Bible in this scenario. But I don't think it's true that you wouldn't mind. Even taking away its political power you probably and rightfully would still be bothered by the fact that such contradictions still exist in a book which claims to be truth, am I right?
So there has to be something more than just the separation of church and state.

[Alan]

Hang on, if it were just one individual then he would just be a cook like the thousands others we have.
Change that scenario a little. Imagine that millions still believe in Christianity, but somehow it really doesn't impact politics at all.
Imagine the world is Saya's Canada and religion really has no push in politics. None. At. All.
Does that mean we can feel better about the blatant contradictions of a book that claims to be absolute truth? There's got to be something more than just the political influence of Christianity at play here.

[Despanan]

I agree with what you've just said. I do have a deeper problem with religion, I'm mainly focused on the political aspect because that's the most pressing concern.

So yes, you're correct I suppose, but I don't think I understand where this is going.

What are you getting at?

[Alan]

It's just that the initial problem is already big enough, and people have only responded at it by saying the whole following Jesus and not the Bible shtick. My opinion is that it's a big enough discussion to stay on that path and ask why bother in the first place instead of falling into, shall we say, a defensive position of "why does it bother you in the first place" for the atheist camp
You stay in it half of the time but when you talk about politics you're paying more respect to the red herrings than you need to. Including politics just adds to why your worry is important but there's no need for you to prove your worry; it's already a legitimate worry by its own.

[Despanan]

So you're saying if I approached this from a purely intellectual standpoint we'd be able to avoid the political implications?

How then would you have responded to Saya's "Have faith in Jesus, but not the scripture" and HP's "Have faith in just the teachings of Jesus"?

I guess I could have kept the discussion a bit more focused if I'd done that, and avoided the "alienating people" argument, but wouldn't it have been a little disingenuous?

[KontanKarite]

Alright, let me try to get this on track because honestly, the wrong people have been giving this thread attention. Saya, fuck off. Read the title again, everyone.

Now. This was the discussion that I was going with so that everyone knows what I'm trying to say:

Me: The bible is the word of God. Yes or No?

Christian: Yes they are his words be they written himself or divinely inspired. This is the word of God.

Me: Okay. Here's a huge list of contradictions. What do you have to say about it?

Christian: I only follow Christ, blah blah blah.

Me: But you said the bible is the word of God. So you must be subservient to the one most high. All of creation answers to God.

Christian: Yes.

Me: Okay, remember the contradictions...

Christians: Okay...

Me: If the word of what is perceived to be the most powerful authority in all of creation is broken and inconsistent, then why would you want to base your votes or any policies in our system of government on what a broken book says?

Christian: Um....

[Despanan]

So just thought of this.

Saya claims that details like where Jesus first appeared to the 11 disciples is inconsequential in context of the greater message of the Gospels.

Do you realize what an inconsistency in where Jesus first appeared to the disciples means?

It means at least 1 of the authors of the Gospels wasn't there.

Think back to 9-11. How many of us remember exactly where we were and what we were doing? Do you think we'll still remember that in 31 years? you bet your ass if we saw a good friend who we knew was dead suddenly alive again we'd remember every goddamn detail, even 40 years later. Same as if we turned a corner and saw a dragon torch a car. We'd remember the day, the street, what we had for breakfast, and the color of the car when that goddamn dragon torched it.

So basically, if these people had the sense to write it down, you can bet they either had the sense to remember the single most important event in human history...or they're lying and they weren't there.

[Corpsey]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

Alright, let me try to get this on track because honestly, the wrong people have been giving this thread attention. Saya, fuck off. Read the title again, everyone.

Now. This was the discussion that I was going with so that everyone knows what I'm trying to say:

Me: The bible is the word of God. Yes or No?

Christian: Yes they are his words be they written himself or divinely inspired. This is the word of God.

Me: Okay. Here's a huge list of contradictions. What do you have to say about it?

Christian: I only follow Christ, blah blah blah.

Me: But you said the bible is the word of God. So you must be subservient to the one most high. All of creation answers to God.

Christian: Yes.

Me: Okay, remember the contradictions...

Christians: Okay...

Me: If the word of what is perceived to be the most powerful authority in all of creation is broken and inconsistent, then why would you want to base your votes or any policies in our system of government on what a broken book says?

Christian: Um....

That's an argument between you and Tam. Your argument is baseless if you remove the contradictions. You have ignored the facts that members (Saya/Solumina/Humane) have raised prior to your post about how contradictions can occur and potential remedies. If it was possible to prove that the contradictions you showed earlier were incorrect via mistranslation or w/e, would it make change your attitude on how you view Bible at all? Or would such an attempt be in vain? Also, do you realize that trying to analyze and discuss every supposed contradiction is one mammoth task?

I would like to point out that Christians in the first century also never supported any political movement or took arms or supported any nation whatsoever. Hell, even Jesus refused to do so. People tried to make him King, but he refused to partake in the Politics of his time.

[KontanKarite]

If those contradictions weren't there, I wouldn't have this argument. But guess what? They exist. The book isn't perfect. Many agree it's the word of God. So God's word is imperfect, flying in the face of doing something because of a divine command instead of your reason.

Or are you agreeing that the bible isn't divine? And if you do agree, then why is it a good excuse to use this broken book for policy making?


The only thing you guys are really doing is being combative because Desp and I are speaking up and it's really not polite. I agree, this presentation isn't polite at all. But I didn't intend for this to be a nice little chat. But all it seems to have done was bait the polite, passive, and reasonable members. Again, this conversation was NOT intended for you or Saya and not EVEN H_P. You guys are just talking because this is a more incendiary approach to condemning divine mandate controlling policy.

We can all agree that murder is wrong. But making a law about murder being wrong based on our collective reason is better than the same exact law based on divine mandate.

[Despanan]

Corpsey: I don't think you know what you're talking about.

[KontanKarite]

Basically, they're saying that because they can use reason to amend an imperfect "holy" text, that it's totally viable to use that book to make a country's policies. Problem with this, is that it's like polishing shit so that it can continue to stay relevant.

I mean, who cares, right? Just so long as all the laws are agreed upon, who cares where they come from? Saying that stealing is wrong because God said so is JUST as relevant and even more ACCEPTABLE than saying that stealing is wrong because we understand what kind of damage it causes from observation and reason.

[Corpsey]

Originally Posted by Kontan

And if you do agree, then why is it a good excuse to use this broken book for policy making?

I don't. I thoroughly disagree with people making up their own policies and then using the bible as a reference to justify their policies, not God's.

Originally Posted by Kontan

The only thing you guys are really doing is being combative because Desp and I are speaking up and it's really not polite.

I'm going to be polite about this, then.

Originally Posted by Kontan

Again, this conversation was NOT intended for you or Saya and not EVEN H_P.

This is for myself and HP and potentially Saya, as this is a thread which is titled "This one is actually for the Christians". I believe I am a Christian and therefore feel entitled to respond to it. If you didn't want it like that, then remake this and title it "This one is actually for those who don't believe the Bible is a divine book and wish to talk about how foolish it is to follow it". Don't bait us otherwise.

Originally Posted by Kontan

If those contradictions weren't there, I wouldn't have this argument. But guess what? They exist.

They exist because of misuse of the bible, poor translation and taking the scripture out of context. I could disprove most of these if necessary, but I don't think putting in the effort to do so would be worth it if you couldn't care less.

Originally Posted by Despanan

Corpsey: I don't think you know what you're talking about.

As someone who believes their faith in a God is based off a book which is the true word of God and is based off reason, logic and honest-hearted research, I do think I could have the slightest of ideas about what I'm talking about. I read the Bible regularly and read the whole book, not just on a portion of the books in the Bible.