Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

@spendius,

I liked it!

But it is easier to point out the flaws with the whole perspective, from your view point of Hitler, than your post of the NKJV, Bible post...

1 Reply

@FOUND SOUL,

Quote:

But, his evil stemmed in my opinion, from the past.................

Yes--the idea that the Panzer Divisions were marching through Beethoven's brain when he wrote some of his stuff. And the mystical side of Wagner. With Darwin as an add on.

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

Someone will have to be in control to set the rules...

No?

Yes. The Pope. As you disagree Spade "No" is the answer.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Well--bless my soul-

And, so Soul shall bless you back by reposting it to be recognised for it's effort and worth and consequently replies..

It might be worthwhile to say that the Authorised Version, aka the King James Version, was published in 1611 after King James ordered 47 scholars of the Church of England to take 0n the task in 1604 shortly after he became King. These scholars were no doubt advised and assisted by many others. Separate committees were formed with responsibility for various sections.

The New Testament was translated from the Greek and the Old Testament from Hebrew. There were in existence at the time numerous other translations, as there has been since, which points to the obvious fact that these scholars are the ones who wrote the KJV. Sometimes a different translation of one Greek or Hebrew word altered the meaning of a passage. And double negatives were also ambiguous.

The key point though, and one I imagine you will have some difficulty with, is that the authors of the KJV were Elizabethans.

A scholarly reading of Hamlet suggests that the educated Elizabethan scholar was aware that things are very often what they say they are in relation to the foundation of literary works but that it was permissible, expected even, that a fantasy of symbolism was constructed upon the factuality of the foundation which might be so elaborate that it obscures it to all but close readers.

And though Queen Elizabeth the 1st had died a year before these men were employed with the operation, all of them were"Elizabethans" and such an approach would be second nature to them.

Such a factual foundation being that there was a "before and after" makeover with the mission of Jesus which was seen as the only alternative to man being his own worst enemy. A saving mission.

So if you want to know something about the men who wrote the Bible you need to know about the educated and uneducated Elizabethan mind both of which Shakespeare wrote for. Some readings of Star Trek proceed in the same way. So do readings of fairy tales, fables and myths.

The Narcissus myth, for example, is a warning about self-love and not about a chap who drowned after falling in the river attempting to kiss his reflection in the surface of the water.

Shakespeare will clue you in to the Elizabethan mind. Then you will know something at least about the men who wrote the KJV of the Bible. I cannot comment on any others because I have never read any. Nor ever felt the need to. Beware of cargo cults.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

But it is easier to point out the flaws with the whole perspective, from your view point of Hitler, than your post of the NKJV, Bible post...

Try going over the exchange again Spade.

0 Replies

@spendius,

You know that now I am going to have to read up more on both Hitler and Shakespear..

I hate wisdom, it makes me want to know more.....

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

What about a religion, or a belief system is not a good, or correct thing then?

It is the part about not being truthful and the part about not being intellectually honest. If you are caught up in a religion and you claim it to be the word of a God and you can not prove that it is true but yet you teach that it is empirically Gods word, "That is weaving a web of deception and that also holds back society from moral advancements.

Quote:

I am being serious...If ten men "think" it is moral to gang rape someone, if there is no ultimate judge, who decides that that is moral or not, unless it is some sort of passed down religious thing?

It is not moral to us, but it appears it is to them...

Ok lets just pretend that you are not weaving a web of deception but rather, "you honestly do not no whether my illustration was moral or not. Rolling Eyes

Rape is an act that is done against someone who is not wanting it to happen, if the act is done to you and you did not ask for it or want it then your emotions have been violated. If this crime was done to any of the ten men and they did not want it done to them it would still be immoral. It really does not require a God to understand morality if you try.

Lets say you are smarter than your own mother and you happen to find a better way to do all of the work, that the 2 of you do each week in just 2 days. Would it be moral for you to let your mother do all the work being that your discovery enabled the two of you to have more rest time? Twisted Evil

Quote:

But, what if your better understanding of morality, is not necessarily a better understanding at all? That is my point?

It is to you, but maybe not another...

Your 5 year old brother johnny is visiting a friends house with you, your friend happens to have a 5 year old brother as well to play with Johnny but a problem arises and johnny does not want to share the other boys toys with him instead he wants to be greedy. and this is the question you asked me and I am asking you to think about it as you give your explanation to johnny.

I will share this very simple video with you. Idea

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

It is the part about not being truthful and the part about not being intellectually honest. If you are caught up in a religion and you claim it to be the word of a God and you can not prove that it is true but yet you teach that it is empirically Gods word, "That is weaving a web of deception and that also holds back society from moral advancements.

That shows that my Bible authors post was cast upon stony ground.

0 Replies

I thought that you all might like this one about 2 young girls who are very close.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Yes. The Pope. As you disagree Spade "No" is the answer.

Again, I never said I am against the Church, I do not believe they are 100% correct...

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

It is the part about not being truthful and the part about not being intellectually honest. If you are caught up in a religion and you claim it to be the word of a God and you can not prove that it is true but yet you teach that it is empirically Gods word, "That is weaving a web of deception and that also holds back society from moral advancements.

What would you suggest? To each his own, is not a solution either...

Quote:

Lets say you are smarter than your own mother and you happen to find a better way to do all of the work, that the 2 of you do each week in just 2 days. Would it be moral for you to let your mother do all the work being that your discovery enabled the two of you to have more rest time? Twisted Evil

Not possible, by your example...either, I would have to continue to do it all with her in a week, or I would get it done in 2 days and she would know...

What is up with all the sarcastic emoticons??

Quote:

Ok lets just pretend that you are not weaving a web of deception but rather, "you honestly do not no whether my illustration was moral or not. Rolling Eyes

Rape is an act that is done against someone who is not wanting it to happen, if the act is done to you and you did not ask for it or want it then your emotions have been violated. If this crime was done to any of the ten men and they did not want it done to them it would still be immoral. It really does not require a God to understand morality if you try.

Why don't you try telling this to all those Middle-Eastern nations??

Quote:

Your 5 year old brother johnny is visiting a friends house with you, your friend happens to have a 5 year old brother as well to play with Johnny but a problem arises and johnny does not want to share the other boys toys with him instead he wants to be greedy. and this is the question you asked me and I am asking you to think about it as you give your explanation to johnny.

And why Don't I flip it around, and you tell me your answer...

What if all people believe that making money is the way to be morally right?

But in the end, it serves more problems than it solves, and is not...And it is actually better to be poor? And have nothing? As you give nothing, you expect nothing...You do not squander it, you do not hoard it, You are not greedy, your are not wasting it, Your not worried about it, You will never take advantage of someone because of it, nor will they do it to you, And chances are, if people know you are poor, they have no reason to pry on you either....

Who would change that thinking, if not a God one day, or religious...explaining exactly what it should be??

Do you believe that by each his own, this moral dilemma, would ever change from right to wrong, or wrong to right?

If not, who would ultimately be right? The people who gain their money? Or the people, who were doing the right thing by giving everything away and being poor, because they knew it was the more moral thing to do in the long run?

If by my scenario, The poor are right...

Do you believe, people will ever be willing to give up everything to be poor?

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

What would you suggest? To each his own, is not a solution either...

I guess it may be OK as long as you are not causing harm to others.

Quote:

Why don't you try telling this to all those Middle-Eastern nations??

Do you think that they may swallow it easier than what you have? Just because someone thinks it is moral to rape your own mother does not make it so.

Quote:

What if all people believe that making money is the way to be morally right?

Who said that making money or being rich is wrong? I say that it could be wrong depending on how it is acquired.

Quote:

Do you believe, people will ever be willing to give up everything to be poor?

Maybe they will not be giving everything up to be poor but rather humbling themselves so that everyone can be rich.
I think that there may always be rankism but it will be looked down on in the future as slavery is looked down on by today's society.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

I guess it may be OK as long as you are not causing harm to others.

And who decides or tells others that causing harm is not moral? To them, they are being moral...

Quote:

Do you think that they may swallow it easier than what you have?

Nope, no one will, that is why to each his own, is a failing solution...Every time, and everywhere...

Quote:

Just because someone thinks it is moral to rape your own mother does not make it so.

I agree! From our understanding of morality, but I thank God for that...And think you should too! Because I bet, your views of morality were derived from the Bible, and what you actually agree and disagree with or about it, and have formed your own conclusions, were you think the Bible is not ethically correct...

If it is each his own, who is going to implant to the ones, who rape peoples mothers, it is immoral to do it??

Quote:

Who said that making money or being rich is wrong?

That is exactly my point! It is all in the eyes of the one who is looking thru the glass...

Who is actually right or wrong? Without religion, the answer is neither or both...With a religion, there would probably be some clear answer about it...And Jesus says, it is better to be poor, a few times, about in Spirit, and if people take from you, give it all away...And about the rich man entering Heaven, and a camel going thru a needles eye...

What does your, to each his own, say about this? And why do you derive at this/these conclusions?

Quote:

I say that it could be wrong depending on how it is acquired.

But now, you are breaking down morality into sub groups...Which makes it even more confusing to try to breakdown...

And even more in the eye of the beholder, as to what is morally right or wrong...

So lets say, you think being rich is a good thing, And so does another, But you got it from years of hard work, and he got lucky on a slot machine, or was a hit-man for the mob, and killed 3 people as has the same money as you do...

Who would be ultimately right about the moral thing....

When everyone "thinks" the way they earned it is moral?? Biblical, we can read in some sort of way, who actually was...As the Bible will probably explain in a certain way...What one should do...

What would be your answer as to what one should do, if the world is, to each his own?

And would anyone ever change?

Quote:

Maybe they will not be giving everything up to be poor but rather humbling themselves so that everyone can be rich.

That is a great way of looking at it! But you get my point, they have little to nothing, for a purpose of others to succeed, as they are not interested in possessions, But being humble...

Does this make the Humble or Rich man right? Or wrong? And why?

Quote:

I think that there may always be rankism but it will be looked down on in the future as slavery is looked down on by today's society.

You do not believe "rankism" is already looked down upon??

What does rankism, have to do with, morality, from the perspective, it is seen from?

How do these people who do acts of "rankism" be shown they are in fact being immoral, without the Bible, or some religious scripture, to compare morality, immorality, to??

Other than that, it is all just an opinion, based upon one other person...

So when you break it down, "A" judging "B"...

And "C" judging "A" at some point...

So who would ultimately be right? And why?

How do we implement, these correct views of morality?

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

Again, I never said I am against the Church, I do not believe they are 100% correct...

Never saying anything against the Church is not exactly what you do with that reply. That you do not believe it is 100% correct is the fertile soil of all heresy. And as heresy leads to the proliferation of as many fanciful, no doubt subjective, heresies as there are rhetoricians to embrace them confusion follows with the certainty of entropy and thus to the dissolution of the Church. Total disbelief in the Church, even contempt for it, are less dangerous to its survival.

As the Church is the flagship of Christianity, settling in the water though it is, the danger applies to Christianity itself. Hiding behind Jesus is no use.

As I said at the beginning, you are a danger to Christianity just as loose cannons are on a gun deck.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Your real task Spade, which you are avoiding facing up to with all these pointless sophistries about right and wrong or good and evil, is to get into a rhetorical battle with all the others who have an open line to God. And to win it and be the Messiah.

As you can't do, as you demonstrate here most days, the heresies will spawn as they adjust to the vagaries of the market place and religion will become like Morris dancing in kit Made in China, or pancake tossing races with Teflon frying-pans or dancing around the Maypole well deflowered or any one of thousands of recreations aimed at the bored motorist in which extinct customs are laughably recreated and re-enacted.

And Atheism will walk into the open door and over the Welcome mat and smirk indulgently at these quaint atavistic ceremonies which are too diverse, disjointed and dispersed to constitute even the slightest risk and, indeed, patronise them as they each, separately, provide photo-ops for the high rankers who, in their turn, will take some mighty heavings to shift.

I need to thank you really. You have clarified my mind from the dross I was embracing concerning the Discovery Institute. It is in the same boat. I must have suspected it too because in all the years in the evolution debate I rarely allowed it much praise despite it being on the same side as me. I had sniffed it out in the Dover trial but wasn't sure what it was. Now I know exactly.

As far as I remember the Church had no witness in that trial.

You need funds. And we're all skint.

3 Replies

@spendius,

In a re-enactment I saw on TV of the Battle of Marston Moor nobody ran away.

That's as ridiculous as the well deflowered dancing around the Maypole.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Never saying anything against the Church is not exactly what you do with that reply. That you do not believe it is 100% correct is the fertile soil of all heresy. And as heresy leads to the proliferation of as many fanciful, no doubt subjective, heresies as there are rhetoricians to embrace them confusion follows with the certainty of entropy and thus to the dissolution of the Church. Total disbelief in the Church, even contempt for it, are less dangerous to its survival.

As the Church is the flagship of Christianity, settling in the water though it is, the danger applies to Christianity itself. Hiding behind Jesus is no use.

As I said at the beginning, you are a danger to Christianity just as loose cannons are on a gun deck.

I can not disagree with you anymore...And I think it is a pure insult for you to say it, when you are not even one yourself, when you get down to the bottom of the barrel...

Perhaps, you should read what the Church and Bible says about this matter??

I will clue you in once more....Romans 10:9

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+10%3A9-10&version=NIV

Romans 10:9-10 (New International Version)

Show resources
Romans 10:9-10

New International Version (NIV)

9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

You, as an ultimate atheist, who supports Christianity, for whatever social reason(s) you do...

Are the MOST damaging kind of person that exists, if you are going to break it down that ways....

And you simply, can not say, by what the Church, and Bible say, (above)
That you have the authority to say what you say...And are not wrong about it!!

It is one thing to give pointers, and it is one thing to think you may have a direct line to God, and be willing to share it, and write a letter to the Pope to address it...

It shows that someone genuinely cares about the Church, not that they are in fact against the Church...

It shows that EVEN IF THEY ARE WRONG, they are doing what they think is right, and know they may be wrong about it, but are going to do it, because they want the Church to be the best it can, and are "trying to help" (again, even if wrong!!!) This shows they take responsibility etc....

And the bottom line, is what you say is great, that is, if you were actually a Christian yourself....

Otherwise, it is absolutely meaningless...

There is no way, I can trust what you are saying, and take it as words of encouragement...

Because, at the end of the day, you are not one of us, as the Bible says...

If you want me to listen to the Church, and Bible here...And not my own instincts....

Which you never have addressed...BTW...

So, I have no Idea, if you are in fact doing this, just to get me fired up etc...

And likewise, it would be just as wicked for me to pose as an intellect about atheism, and tell you what you would/should be doing...

You "think" I am being genuine, And not insulting, or arrogant....

You should listen to anything I say about atheism....

Nor, are you able to trust anything, I say to you, about it....

Now, SHOW ME< Where exactly it says in the Church, or Bible, ONE MUST OBEY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH< TO BE ONE OF THEM< OR SAVED?????

That is all I want to know, and hear an answer to....

1 Reply

@spendius,

I do not understand any of the second post....

If you post what you want to say, without getting all metaphorically, simile, Alliterative, And speaking poetically, and explain exactly what you think my problems are...I will respond to you...

Even though, you give me no reason to do so...And You really have no reason to listen to me, as you said...

But I will answer your potential problems you pose, and be courteous to you...

Even though, you have not done the same to me...But rather, have tried to look down upon me, ever since I posted the video about my birthday....

0 Replies

@spendius,

Because, at the end of the day, you are not one of us, as the Bible says...

If you want me to listen to the Church, and Bible here...And not my own instincts....

Which you never have addressed...BTW...

So, do you want me to go around, and start telling people, as well as you, they are going to burn in Hell for denying Christ?? Like some Catholics do??

Or do you not want me to do that? As that is something you are bathing in the luxury of, right now, as we speak....Which you conveniently, do not address, Nor bring my attention to, Nor others, about the Catholic Church....???

By extorting the Church the way you do, and Christianity...Yet, not one Christian has called you out upon, nor any Catholic...

And you feel you have the right, to tell other Christians, and Catholics, how loose of a cannon they actually are???

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

Are the MOST damaging kind of person that exists, if you are going to break it down that ways....

Not at all. I turn no heads. I direct people to Rome that's all. The Church's first question on hearing of someone claiming to be in touch with God is to ask if anybody is listening to him or her.

Quote:

Now, SHOW ME< Where exactly it says in the Church, or Bible, ONE MUST OBEY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH< TO BE ONE OF THEM< OR SAVED?????

I already have done. The Church is the rock (Saint Peter) on which Jesus said it would be built and any messages coming down go through the Vatican switchboard. Splitting hairs dissenters notwithstanding.

What are your points of disagreement with the Church?

The situation is exactly the same with the Communist Party. It believes mankind can pull itself up by its own bootstraps.

1 Reply

Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know