eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...so how does skepticism, or atheism, offer more sense in terms of making laws? How would law be structured?
The bible says how much of an inconsiderate dick that god is. READ THIS
- Thread starter SilasZaneB
- Start date
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Remember that atheism is not an ideology. It is utterly without content, and therefore can not be expected to provide any sort of moral foundation or guidance.
Skepticism is simply the systematic and consistent application of doubt. Is there anyone who would argue that laws should be passed without first applying proper doubt to their need, nature and effectiveness?
Skepticism is simply the systematic and consistent application of doubt. Is there anyone who would argue that laws should be passed without first applying proper doubt to their need, nature and effectiveness?
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...100%
So, how does it get accomplished? What is missing in the 'God as dckhead' debate is to mention that if we were to look to quantum physics for a framework - we'd end up back to religion.
Oy.
So, how does it get accomplished? What is missing in the 'God as dckhead' debate is to mention that if we were to look to quantum physics for a framework - we'd end up back to religion.
Oy.
tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
We should probably be making laws based on rational ethics, reason, and morality in the best interest of humanity. None of which have to do with religion (certainly not christianity)......100%
So, how does it get accomplished? What is missing in the 'God as dckhead' debate is to mention that if we were to look to quantum physics for a framework - we'd end up back to religion.
Oy.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...I hope I don't go too far and make this unintelligible. Okay, here goes. Religions follow things like the law of three. (Triamazikamno) Further, 4 in religion(s) is a huge number, usually denoting wholeness. These numbers, imo, are plain in the constitution of man - its why there are 4 gospels, etc. People are meant to find the center of 'their' being this way. If we alter these 'laws', we still need the spiritual element. It has to be natural (balanced) this is what I am saying.
If the idea is to benefit the all, we can't Razor parts of it off to find wholeness. To me that looks like "Judge, Jury and Executioner", without the robes or mass.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
My point of view is that much could be accomplished by teaching people to develop their BS detectors. This would have to involve teaching the principals behind valuing truth as well as the methods of it's divination.
But as I think you are about to point out, It would take more than an instilled passion for science to fix government and law. Although the ultimate pursuit of science is objective truth, it's values do not necessarily keep a person subjectively honest. Politics are contorted by greed, lust for power, ect, which are not remedied by science. Critical awareness may help the population avoid being exploited by fear and ignorance, but would do little to prevent political exploitation of selfishness, materialism and such.
I think the main point being made here is that, although science may not offer an end all solution, we should all agree that ignorance and pretense offer nothing at all.
But as I think you are about to point out, It would take more than an instilled passion for science to fix government and law. Although the ultimate pursuit of science is objective truth, it's values do not necessarily keep a person subjectively honest. Politics are contorted by greed, lust for power, ect, which are not remedied by science. Critical awareness may help the population avoid being exploited by fear and ignorance, but would do little to prevent political exploitation of selfishness, materialism and such.
I think the main point being made here is that, although science may not offer an end all solution, we should all agree that ignorance and pretense offer nothing at all.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
^ 
.................
.................
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Apparently you have difficulty comprehending the term, "allegory".
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
defining it as an "allegory" doesn't address the heinousness of the passage.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
quantum mechanics while not fully understanded is good for tech you might even have some of it in your pocket...100%
So, how does it get accomplished? What is missing in the 'God as dckhead' debate is to mention that if we were to look to quantum physics for a framework - we'd end up back to religion.
Oy.
[youtube]qI5q6OqSo4s[/youtube]
it definitely isnt worth starting a religion over or making laws over it.
numerology is bunk and has no place in anything deciding anything at all in our future
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
My point of view is that much could be accomplished by teaching people to develop their BS detectors. This would have to involve teaching the principals behind valuing truth as well as the methods of it's divination.
posted to FB, thank you very much... a hint of humor in this, love it
posted to FB, thank you very much... a hint of humor in this, love it
CinnamonGirl
Active Member
Maybe if you viewed it less literally--you might enjoy it more? i dunno-- I personally don't ascribe to the mysticism behind the bible but as a historical literary text it has some really fantastic reading-- especially the old testament--the epistles, the psalms, song of Solomon-- poetry imo--and don't forget--the old testament is pre-christian--by 1000 years or so. Pre-christian thought did not include Free Will-- it was believed that your whole life was pre planned and directed at every moment by God and the the story of Job illustrates this--Job had no choice he was--as you pointed out-- at god's mercy. Compare this to the New testament idea of God after the idea of free will was introduced is very different-- he is a much kinder and gentler god --more removed --less smiting-- anyway-- I could care less about whether or not someone believes in god but to throw out the bible as bullshit is really missing some great stuff. . . .jus sayin
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
i will let my sig reply to that.
tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
I've read the bible several times through, and one thing it was not is enjoyable: Poor (if any) character development, no real cohesion, extremely repetitive, etc. I can't remember anything in it really that was well written. Much better written stories can be found from J.R. Tolkien and J.K. Rowling, and much better morals and lessons in those, as well...Maybe if you viewed it less literally--you might enjoy it more? i dunno-- I personally don't ascribe to the mysticism behind the bible but as a historical literary text it has some really fantastic reading-- especially the old testament--the epistles, the psalms, song of Solomon-- poetry imo--and don't forget--the old testament is pre-christian--by 1000 years or so. Pre-christian thought did not include Free Will-- it was believed that your whole life was pre planned and directed at every moment by God and the the story of Job illustrates this--Job had no choice he was--as you pointed out-- at god's mercy. Compare this to the New testament idea of God after the idea of free will was introduced is very different-- he is a much kinder and gentler god --more removed --less smiting-- anyway-- I could care less about whether or not someone believes in god but to throw out the bible as bullshit is really missing some great stuff. . . .jus sayin
CinnamonGirl
Active Member
I agree, it certainly isn't a novel--however, Tolkien, Rowling, CS Lewis-- even Star Wars are all derivative of Bible stories--Christ figures in every one--( which in turn were derivative of Greek mythology the Iliad and the Odyssey)--much of the greatest art in the western world is inspired by stories in the bible. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be an either/ or proposition-- discarding the bible is like throwing out the Mona Lisa because it is an ugly painting . . . .
. . . .side note. . .I honestly don't understand the whole "christ died for your sins" thing-- I can't seem to come up with a logical reason "why" in the christian cosmology mankind needed a martyr/savior-- why did he have to be born? and why did he have to die? . . .I don't get it. . .
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...what I wrote had zero to do with numerology.it definitely isnt worth starting a religion over or making laws over it.
numerology is bunk and has no place in anything deciding anything at all in our future
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...maybe think in terms of 'blood'. The book is about wellness, after all. Blood and consciousness are analogous in that mystical stuff. Oh, and the heart plays a role, obviously. Also, being based upon the sun, it has to follow that same cycle of night / day (or, martyr/savior). The christian study of the 'son' is about the sun <---the model. So, the principle 'idea' behind the sun is what we're 'after'. The physics of it are another matter. Heh
mudminer
Active Member
Its a righteousness issue. Old Testament=Old Covenant/s. New Testament=New Covenant. Now replace the word covenant with deal. In the OT there were (I believe) no less than 11 deals that were made between God and man, for man to be "right" with God. Man is cited for having broken every one of these deals. So under the "New deal" God changes things up a bit. He decides He wont make the deal with men but with Himself. That deal being that if only one man can lead a righteous life, all men for all time would be reconciled to Him because of that one mans righteousness. *Edit* Now to address why the "one mans" birth and death and the conditions of them were necessary and significant. His birth and life needed to be witout sin. One of the prophecies of the Christos (the annointed one) was that He would be "born of a virgin". It was also necessary that he be born without sin (the sin of Adam) so God had to do the impregnating. This one man then had to be born, raised and after the age of accountability, live a sinless life. As to his death and for it to be accounted as payment for our (or any for that matter) sins, there must be blood. This according to Jewish law. Jesus was the sacrificial lamb that God offered for the worlds sins. Hence his freedom of blemish (sin). So. Man needed a martyr because he had been shown, according to law, to be unworthy to have fellowship with God. The martyr needed to be born so that He could die. He needed to die so that man could live under an enduring covenant wth God, and not have to be concerned about screwin it up.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
i.e. God was pissed that these men he created kept failing him (whether he knew ahead of time that this would happen is also a fun discussion), so he essentially stacked the deck to make a deal with someone he knew wouldn't break it, himself. So why do we need Jesus again? Why did god go through all of these machinations rather than just make a declaration?
BTW, there is no messianic prophecy that says he will be born of a virgin. That's a combination of a mistranslation and misapplication of another prophecy by the writer of Mathew. The Jews believed (and still do) that the final King of Israel, the messiah, will be a mortal man, just like all of the previous kings.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Mmmmkay.
God to Adam: Told you not to touch that.
God to Noah: I guess I could have done that better.
God to Abraham: Changed my mind ... just wanted to see if you would. Sucker.
God to Job: Oh whine whine whine.
God to Mary: You're so screwed.
God to Jesus: It's for your own good, boy.
cn