Are we pushing too hard and fast?

[sharon45]

They have many different ways of understanding the Bible, which is already a very stupid mistake.

Well... the Bible is a collection of books written by a variety of authors, writing for different reasons, pushing different agendas. They are also leaving out loads of information that their contemporary readers would have taken for granted. Context which we need to have today, to make sense of it.

I think there's many different ways to interpret the Bible because I think that the Christianity in the Bible is several distinct religions. I recommend Bart Ehrman's book, "Lost Christianities". It's really good. There probably never was any single original Christianity, or any single true interpretation. And just like any movement it can take a long time before they've figured out what they want to be. I think the Bible contains the evolution of a religion.

It has much to do with the editing and corrupting made by various powers taking the religion virtually for their own. Many did not believe that Jesus was a god, but they have been almost entirely silenced. One of these very stupid mistakes refers to what I said above about practically every Christian harboring a personal view. Hence the over 30,000 different sects, and the violence leveled against each other over the centuries. A religion ought to have its followers close to the same wavelength of thought, yet not even Jesus' acts and words are nearly compatible enough with his own presumed message.

 

[Lion IRC]

The Nicene Creed is a 'wavelength' shared by BILLIONS of Christians.
..but carry on with your gainsaying and straw argument (as usual)

 

[sharon45]

The Nicene Creed is a 'wavelength' shared by BILLIONS of Christians

No, unfaithfully claimed.

...but carry on with your gainsaying and straw argument (as usual)

Ha, that is thickly rich when the NT is basically a grotesque series of pathetic fallacies shamefully shoehorned into book form.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Well... the Bible is a collection of books written by a variety of authors, writing for different reasons, pushing different agendas. They are also leaving out loads of information that their contemporary readers would have taken for granted. Context which we need to have today, to make sense of it.

I think there's many different ways to interpret the Bible because I think that the Christianity in the Bible is several distinct religions. I recommend Bart Ehrman's book, "Lost Christianities". It's really good. There probably never was any single original Christianity, or any single true interpretation. And just like any movement it can take a long time before they've figured out what they want to be. I think the Bible contains the evolution of a religion.

It has much to do with the editing and corrupting made by various powers taking the religion virtually for their own. Many did not believe that Jesus was a god, but they have been almost entirely silenced. One of these very stupid mistakes refers to what I said above about practically every Christian harboring a personal view. Hence the over 30,000 different sects, and the violence leveled against each other over the centuries. A religion ought to have its followers close to the same wavelength of thought, yet not even Jesus' acts and words are nearly compatible enough with his own presumed message.

Just by using the term "corruption" you've already sidled into treacherous waters. "Corruption" infers that there was a kind of pristine or pure form of Christianity at some point. I highly doubt that ever existed. I think that originally Christianity was little more than a couple of loose ideas. Over time it grew into something. But many different somethings, simultaneously. This is backed up by evidence. Enough of the earliest Bibles have survived to piece together this picture.

I think you are completely wrong about the cause about the reason for the number of Christian sects and violence between them. I think the culprit is just this idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Or more precisely. That the inerrant word of God exists at all. An external rule book, that if we just understand it correctly we'll have the correct answer for how to behave.

The error is the fundamental basis for the religion. That will lead to two things.

1) There's no need to justify actions ethically. If it's in the bible it's morally right. It will lead to a colder and more brutal world.
2) It'll be self serving because people typically hear and see what they want to hear and see. So it'll lead to a more greedy and selfish world.

Compare it to Hinduism. They're fine with different sects. They don't think that their holy texts are the inerrant word of the gods. They also think that the texts and leaders are subject to corruption. They're taught to think for themselves. Their holy texts aren't intended to be rule books for life. Their holy texts are intended to be a kind of self help books. There's supposed to be a payoff for the reader, to read them.

Christianity is just a fundamentally flawed type of religion. Islam has the same problem. Oddly enough, Judaism doesn't share this problem.

 

[sharon45]

It has much to do with the editing and corrupting made by various powers taking the religion virtually for their own. Many did not believe that Jesus was a god, but they have been almost entirely silenced. One of these very stupid mistakes refers to what I said above about practically every Christian harboring a personal view. Hence the over 30,000 different sects, and the violence leveled against each other over the centuries. A religion ought to have its followers close to the same wavelength of thought, yet not even Jesus' acts and words are nearly compatible enough with his own presumed message.

Just by using the term "corruption" you've already sidled into treacherous waters. "Corruption" infers that there was a kind of pristine or pure form of Christianity at some point. I highly doubt that ever existed.

It doesn't matter about Christianity itself, the real corruption is of OT as the NT constantly refers back in error to that much older source for some sort of forced justification. The book of Hebrews is one egregious example.

I think you are completely wrong about the cause about the reason for the number of Christian sects and violence between them. I think the culprit is just this idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Or more precisely. That the inerrant word of God exists at all. An external rule book, that if we just understand it correctly we'll have the correct answer for how to behave.

I gave some of this expected division in another thread quoting Jesus from Matthew 7 when he is detailing a little of what supposedly makes up a true disciple. He also warns of coming false prophets, which Jesus already was, based on the OT, and that book had cautioned long ago about such worthless men sent to test the people's faith.

Oddly enough, Judaism doesn't share this problem.

I would not quite say that, but it does fare a lot better than Christianity and Islam.

 

[Underseer]

Give them an inch and they take a mile.

If we don't fight back, they will take and take and take until we're back in the dark ages.

Appeasement never works, especially with Abrahamic theists.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just by using the term "corruption" you've already sidled into treacherous waters. "Corruption" infers that there was a kind of pristine or pure form of Christianity at some point. I highly doubt that ever existed.

It doesn't matter about Christianity itself, the real corruption is of OT as the NT constantly refers back in error to that much older source for some sort of forced justification. The book of Hebrews is one egregious example.

I don't understand what you mean?

I think you are completely wrong about the cause about the reason for the number of Christian sects and violence between them. I think the culprit is just this idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Or more precisely. That the inerrant word of God exists at all. An external rule book, that if we just understand it correctly we'll have the correct answer for how to behave.

I gave some of this expected division in another thread quoting Jesus from Matthew 7 when he is detailing a little of what supposedly makes up a true disciple. He also warns of coming false prophets, which Jesus already was, based on the OT, and that book had cautioned long ago about such worthless men sent to test the people's faith.

Oddly enough, Judaism doesn't share this problem.

I would not quite say that, but it does fare a lot better than Christianity and Islam.

I think the only reason for that is because Judaism is a smaller religion. I think it's just a question of scale of the mayhem.

The only reason you need to reject any Abrahamic faith is the first commandment. That command, pretty much guarantees, sectarianism and endless religious strife. It will also breeds stupidity. Because it emphasizes faith over skepticism, and emphasizes obedience over figuring it out for yourself.

Religions traditional role is to make people better people. Abrahamic faiths don't give a shit about that. They just want you to obey. As long as you obey there's nothing you need to work on. Great message!

 

[Methinx]

The only reason you need to reject any Abrahamic faith is the first commandment. That command, pretty much guarantees, sectarianism and endless religious strife. It will also breeds stupidity. Because it emphasizes faith over skepticism, and emphasizes obedience over figuring it out for yourself.

Religions traditional role is to make people better people. Abrahamic faiths don't give a shit about that. They just want you to obey. As long as you obey there's nothing you need to work on. Great message!

Lots of people like to 'obey', they feel safer and more fulfilled if they follow a rule.

 

[sharon45]

It doesn't matter about Christianity itself, the real corruption is of OT as the NT constantly refers back in error to that much older source for some sort of forced justification. The book of Hebrews is one egregious example.

I don't understand what you mean?

If you read a version of the Bible with good foot notes, you should see that the book of Hebrews has about the largest amount of references which cite passages from the Old Testament.

I think you are completely wrong about the cause about the reason for the number of Christian sects and violence between them. I think the culprit is just this idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Or more precisely. That the inerrant word of God exists at all. An external rule book, that if we just understand it correctly we'll have the correct answer for how to behave.

I gave some of this expected division in another thread quoting Jesus from Matthew 7 when he is detailing a little of what supposedly makes up a true disciple. He also warns of coming false prophets, which Jesus already was, based on the OT, and that book had cautioned long ago about such worthless men sent to test the people's faith.

Oddly enough, Judaism doesn't share this problem.

I would not quite say that, but it does fare a lot better than Christianity and Islam.

I think the only reason for that is because Judaism is a smaller religion. I think it's just a question of scale of the mayhem.

Judaism is much smaller, because it just superficially seems like it was replaced. One can actually question the god in Judaism, so this eventually leads to many very unsatisfied members. Judaism is also not a fun religion with its 613 commandments and no promise of Heaven.

The only reason you need to reject any Abrahamic faith is the first commandment. That command, pretty much guarantees, sectarianism and endless religious strife. It will also breeds stupidity. Because it emphasizes faith over skepticism, and emphasizes obedience over figuring it out for yourself.

Religions traditional role is to make people better people. Abrahamic faiths don't give a shit about that. They just want you to obey. As long as you obey there's nothing you need to work on. Great message!

Yes, to those who sorely manipulate the faith, yet the Bible still supports questioning its god, but that information is mostly lost in the emotional noise.

 

[Elixir]

If you read a version of the Bible with good foot notes...

... you'll burn in Hell, according to most of Christianity's sub-cults.
FOOTNOTES??
That's "adding to scripture" and a mortal sin! The Bible is supposed to be perfect, inerrant and complete. It don't need no steenkin' footnotes!
(Of course that doesn't obviate the need for some shyster to tell you what it means, for only 10% of your income...)

 

[sharon45]

If you read a version of the Bible with good foot notes...

... you'll burn in Hell, according to most of Christianity's sub-cults.
FOOTNOTES??
That's "adding to scripture" and a mortal sin! The Bible is supposed to be perfect, inerrant and complete. It don't need no steenkin' footnotes!
(Of course that doesn't obviate the need for some shyster to tell you what it means, for only 10% of your income...)

Well, in the book of Hebrews' case, the footnotes are supposedly listed to its advantage, er, until one actually reads the cited passages.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I am down here in Texas where Christian pushiness is par for the course and has been for decades. The Christians here have been bothersome pests for years and no matter what happens, they squawk. Latest polls from Gallup et al show about 10% of Americans no longer believe in God, so atheism is a growing presence in America, and I think that keep pushing is the way to continue. The Christians are going to shriek anyway, but that isn't really going to do much for them. Keep on pushing back at them. does that make me militant? So be it.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I am down here in Texas where Christian pushiness is par for the course and has been for decades. The Christians here have been bothersome pests for years and no matter what happens, they squawk. Latest polls from Gallup et al show about 10% of Americans no longer believe in God, so atheism is a growing presence in America, and I think that keep pushing is the way to continue. The Christians are going to shriek anyway, but that isn't really going to do much for them. Keep on pushing back at them. does that make me militant? So be it.

The god cult members in my acquaintance have learned to leave me alone. I'm guessing they just don't like plain speak when it comes to religious silliness. A recent response to a religious claim was along the lines of, "Invisible spacemen watching what I do with my penis, and who know when I'm a good boy or bad boy? Sounds very five-year-old to me. Why not just grow up?"

I enjoy the exchanges when they come.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't understand what you mean?

If you read a version of the Bible with good foot notes, you should see that the book of Hebrews has about the largest amount of references which cite passages from the Old Testament.

I'd argue that if you don't read it with the footnotes, you will have no idea what you are reading. It's better to read books about the Bible than the Bible itself IMHO. There's just so much it's assumed the reader already agrees with. I've read quite a few serious academic books about the Bible. There's tonnes of them.

And none of the one's I've read are books on the Bible affiliated with any church, or just some dude. Like most of them are.

The only reason you need to reject any Abrahamic faith is the first commandment. That command, pretty much guarantees, sectarianism and endless religious strife. It will also breeds stupidity. Because it emphasizes faith over skepticism, and emphasizes obedience over figuring it out for yourself.

Religions traditional role is to make people better people. Abrahamic faiths don't give a shit about that. They just want you to obey. As long as you obey there's nothing you need to work on. Great message!

Yes, to those who sorely manipulate the faith, yet the Bible still supports questioning its god, but that information is mostly lost in the emotional noise.

That's a statement that needs backing up. I can't recall any reference in the Bible to encouragement to question it. Quite the contrary.

I also find that idea that there's some sort of good pristine form of Christianity, and if we only could take it seriously and follow it, it would all be fine. No, it wouldn't. The problem with Christianity isn't people who've misinterpreted it. The problem with Christianity is Christianity itself. There's just no way that a Christian world will be a pleasant place to live.

 

[sharon45]

If you read a version of the Bible with good foot notes, you should see that the book of Hebrews has about the largest amount of references which cite passages from the Old Testament.

I'd argue that if you don't read it with the footnotes, you will have no idea what you are reading. It's better to read books about the Bible than the Bible itself IMHO. There's just so much it's assumed the reader already agrees with.

Well, I am hardly going to agree with just anything the writers of the Bible say. I read books like the Bible for some education, not for a mere reflection of my own thinking.

The only reason you need to reject any Abrahamic faith is the first commandment. That command, pretty much guarantees, sectarianism and endless religious strife. It will also breeds stupidity. Because it emphasizes faith over skepticism, and emphasizes obedience over figuring it out for yourself.

Religions traditional role is to make people better people. Abrahamic faiths don't give a shit about that. They just want you to obey. As long as you obey there's nothing you need to work on. Great message!

Yes, to those who sorely manipulate the faith, yet the Bible still supports questioning its god, but that information is mostly lost in the emotional noise.

That's a statement that needs backing up. I can't recall any reference in the Bible to encouragement to question it. Quite the contrary.

I said supports questioning, not necessarily encourages it. In Genesis 18 as Abraham bargains with the OT's god for Sodom's sake, and also in the book of Job. Those pitiful folks were practically unarmed in stark contrast to myself, and why a real version of the Bible god would never intellectually challenge me.

I also find that idea that there's some sort of good pristine form of Christianity, and if we only could take it seriously and follow it, it would all be fine. No, it wouldn't. The problem with Christianity isn't people who've misinterpreted it. The problem with Christianity is Christianity itself. There's just no way that a Christian world will be a pleasant place to live.

I can't quite make that exact judgment until after I have read through this so-called absolute final draft of the NT, but most likely you are correct.

 

[Malintent]

Maybe it's the sources I'm reading (FB, religious blogs)...

I stopped reading there since your source is unreliable and notably political, as opposed to factual. My assumption is that you are deeply misinformed and therefore the rest that follows what I quoted is highly suspect.

 

[Kosh]

Maybe it's the sources I'm reading (FB, religious blogs)...

I stopped reading there since your source is unreliable and notably political, as opposed to factual. My assumption is that you are deeply misinformed and therefore the rest that follows what I quoted is highly suspect.

Well, had you actually read it, you'd understand why those sources are relevant to my question, but thanks for the snide condescending remark.

Move along.

 

[Shake]

Since the birth of the internet and the publications of the "new atheists" (Dawkins, Harris, et al) religion in general has seen a huge pushback from the nonreligious which they'd perhaps been aware of before at a lower level, but the internet has helped consolidate the atheist voice. It has emboldened many atheists who quickly found out that not only weren't they the only ones who thought this way, but there were more of us than anyone realized. It started with online forums, bulletin boards and the like and has now expanded onto YouTube and social media. The secular community has grown rapidly, and formed a political voice as well. Religion had been coasting along and while they likely realized that there were indeed nonbelievers out there, they wrote us off as being a nuisance and too small to be concerned with. There may well be some pushback from the religious now that they realize that not only are we a threat, but that we're growing so rapidly, often at their expense. They're also aging: the largest numbers of secular folks are among the young. The pushback is coming out of fear: they know they're losing the battle on many fronts and worse (for them), they're dying off and being replaced by increasingly less religious generations.

 

[bilby]

Since the birth of the internet and the publications of the "new atheists" (Dawkins, Harris, et al) religion in general has seen a huge pushback from the nonreligious which they'd perhaps been aware of before at a lower level, but the internet has helped consolidate the atheist voice. It has emboldened many atheists who quickly found out that not only weren't they the only ones who thought this way, but there were more of us than anyone realized. It started with online forums, bulletin boards and the like and has now expanded onto YouTube and social media. The secular community has grown rapidly, and formed a political voice as well. Religion had been coasting along and while they likely realized that there were indeed nonbelievers out there, they wrote us off as being a nuisance and too small to be concerned with. There may well be some pushback from the religious now that they realize that not only are we a threat, but that we're growing so rapidly, often at their expense. They're also aging: the largest numbers of secular folks are among the young. The pushback is coming out of fear: they know they're losing the battle on many fronts and worse (for them), they're dying off and being replaced by increasingly less religious generations.

The Internet is a mixed blessing; Essentially it has taken some of the limelight away from the powerful, and handed it to the previously powerless, allowing them to be heard more loudly than before.

For Atheists, particularly in highly religious cultures, this has been a boon.

Sadly, it has also been a boon for other, previously unheard or ignored groups, some of whom were being ignored for good reason, including (but not limited to):

Idiots
Racists
People who haven't thought it through, but have a fantastic idea (in all senses of the word 'fantastic', but particularly the archaic sense 'belonging to a fantasy world')
Flat Earthers
Anti Vaccination activists
Anti <insert any technology here> activists
Average voters
Below average voters
Waaay below average voters
People whose IQ is lower than their shoe size
Fascists
Donald Trump

So it's not all beer and skittles. Of course, it never was, and it remains to be seen whether giving the ordinary people more of a voice is a net positive or a net negative - Trump, Brexit and the rise of anti-intellectualism suggest that it has at least some very large negative effects, but I suspect that overall the long-term outcome will be positive, perhaps after a tumultuous period while we all adjust to the new way of life in which opinions that require more than 140 characters to express are given less weight than those that can be stated briefly (no matter how dumb they might be).

 

[DrZoidberg]

Since the birth of the internet and the publications of the "new atheists" (Dawkins, Harris, et al) religion in general has seen a huge pushback from the nonreligious which they'd perhaps been aware of before at a lower level, but the internet has helped consolidate the atheist voice. It has emboldened many atheists who quickly found out that not only weren't they the only ones who thought this way, but there were more of us than anyone realized. It started with online forums, bulletin boards and the like and has now expanded onto YouTube and social media. The secular community has grown rapidly, and formed a political voice as well. Religion had been coasting along and while they likely realized that there were indeed nonbelievers out there, they wrote us off as being a nuisance and too small to be concerned with. There may well be some pushback from the religious now that they realize that not only are we a threat, but that we're growing so rapidly, often at their expense. They're also aging: the largest numbers of secular folks are among the young. The pushback is coming out of fear: they know they're losing the battle on many fronts and worse (for them), they're dying off and being replaced by increasingly less religious generations.

I remember what caused the New Atheist movement. It had to do with the culture wars. From 1700 onwards liberal secularists have been secure in the knowledge that slowly and steadily religion was dying. Toward the end of the 90'ies this trend seemed to be changing. The numbers of atheists was dropping and the number of religious was growing. This is what set them all off.

But it just turned out to be magic with numbers. Or magic with labels. When more in depth surveys of religiousity was carried out they found that what was happening was that people didn't like labelling themselves as atheists or agnostics. But when asked what they actually believed the slow and steady march towards atheism just went on as before. The biggest shift in the last 30 years is that religious people are getting weirder and weirder beliefs. To an increasing degree they refuse to blindly accept what they're told by religious authorities.

Something on the rise is atheistic religion. Pantheism for instance. Or Wicca. Or Hindu atheistic forms. Or atheistic Buddhism. These often use the term God, rarely identify as atheists, even though they in practice are. There's also pure atheistic religion. Newly started religions who are openly atheistic. Members of these also rarely identify as atheist, even though they obviously are.

So a person saying that they're religious today really tells us very little of what they actually believe.