Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting Heavenese because that's exactly the ultimate conclusion an atheist would come to.
For you I guess its a case of all or nothing right? For you its all, for an atheist its nothing - I can see your point and why you are sticking to your guns (even though I'm sorry I do think you are misdirected, but I do mean no disrespect, it's just a very different view from mine). I think you have sort of indirectly answered my question.
And I can see The Venerable Bede's point too.
He takes a middle ground and takes what is meaningful for him from the bible. Not trying to sound patronising in any way, I think I'm understanding the variety of mindsets going on here. Please correct me if you think I'm a million miles away in my conclusions here?
Thanks guys for the contibutions so far. I do feel as thought I'm getting an education here. It's good to understand others points of view.
Yeah, you could say that about me. I also understand the different views among christians, and I don't want to shoot them down for their views.
The Bible is NEITHER a history NOR a science book. It is a spiritual set of books that reflect the evolution of human society and their attempts to understand God. It is syncretistic and the Christ legend reflects a more sophisticated narrative than any of its less evolved predecessors. We see in the Bible the evolution of our species spiritual consciousness about God and its cognitive understanding of life. The events recorded reflect the generic learning necessary to develop our species spiritual maturity.
The problem our species faces was two-fold. We had to evolve our brain power and cognitive abilities as a species from very primitive capabilities. These placed limits on our capability to understand anything at each stage of our evolution. But also WITHIN each generation (regardless of where we have evolved to cognitively) each individual has to mature, learn and develop their abilities from scratch to whatever level the species is capable of. This learning and spiritual maturation is constrained by the culture, traditions and knowledge they are born into at the time. This has presented and still presents many obstacles to human understanding of our purpose.
Your goal of understanding our reality as much as possible from science is attractive intellectually . . . but hardly seems appropriate or all that important as the purpose of humanity. Given the wide diversity in intellect . . . such a goal as the ultimate purpose of humanity would be extremely unfair. But agape love of life is a goal for humanity that bridges all gaps and spans all intellectual abilities. It is easy to see how it could be the ultimate goal of human existence. The Christ legend and message of such love resonates with me for that very reason, Cruithne.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne
I agree with you Mystic. The Bible is neither a history nor a science book and if that's what people kept to I think I would understand it. The trouble is people do seem try interpret it as though it was.
I see no problem in cherry picking useful parables and using them to illustrate certain moral codes. Absolutely fine with me. It's taking it all absolutely literally, that I'm sorry I think is misdirected especially in light of so much being in direct conflict with what is right in front of your eyes.
They are operating on the mistaken notion that if the Bible cannot be taken to be true and historical . . . then belief in God is undermined. They refuse to realize that all such recordings in the "spiritual fossil record" simply reflect our species attempts to understand our purpose and our God. When viewed in that light it is easy to see the spiritual evolution in our cognition as we evolved our capabilities as a species. Finding moral codes within the Bible is useful but limited. It is a rich source of information (positive and negative) about humanity that enables discernment of a proper goal for our species. I think your focus on understanding our reality through science as the goal of humanity is intellectually attractive but misdirected . . . as I pointed out above. The far more inclusive and beneficial goal is agape love for life, IMO. That is why the Christ legend and message of Love is so appealing.
I agree with you Mystic. The Bible is neither a history nor a science book and if that's what people kept to I think I would understand it. The trouble is people do seem try interpret it as though it was.
I see no problem in cherry picking useful parables and using them to illustrate certain moral codes. Absolutely fine with me. It's taking it all absolutely literally, that I'm sorry I think is misdirected especially in light of so much being in direct conflict with what is right in front of your eyes.
Interesting Heavenese because that's exactly the ultimate conclusion an atheist would come to.
For you I guess its a case of all or nothing right? For you its all, for an atheist its nothing - I can see your point and why you are sticking to your guns (even though I'm sorry I do think you are misdirected, but I do mean no disrespect, it's just a very different view from mine). I think you have sort of indirectly answered my question.
And I can see The Venerable Bede's point too.
He takes a middle ground and takes what is meaningful for him from the bible. Not trying to sound patronising in any way, I think I'm understanding the variety of mindsets going on here. Please correct me if you think I'm a million miles away in my conclusions here?
Thanks guys for the contibutions so far. I do feel as thought I'm getting an education here. It's good to understand others points of view.
Once you realize that God delights to make & keep His Promises; It is impossible for Him to lie.
Once you take that promise and claim it and act upon it; You will receive the results promised.
What could be simpler than that? Test me & Prove me wrong God says - It doesn't take a rocket scientist to find one of God's many promises and simply "do what it says" and the results are guaranteed!
It hasn't failed me in over 6 decades - That is how I know what the "truth" of the matter is.
Thanks absolutely everyone for your honest contributions here. It's been quite enlightening.
I'm sure what I'm about to say is obvious to everyone apart from myself but its been good to get inside peoples heads to see things from their point of view.
I have never been able to understand what it is about things like evolution and the age of the earth that people could possibly reject. To me there is so much evidence for these things and I just didn't understand the mindset.
However what I do understand is an 'all or nothing' mindset because I'm very much like that myself. So now I'm starting to understand that once you start to question parts of the bible you have to question all of it, and for some that must be impossible. I actually very much get that and can see that if you have been brought up to believe in the bible, it must be very difficult to question it, otherwise you have to question your whole belief system. I can see how that would be very hard for some, especially if you feel the bible is part and parcel if your very being.
I don't say I agree with it because I think it means you are missing out on so much, but there is a saying that goes 'what you never had, you never miss'. So I guess if believing in the bible makes you happy, who am I to question it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
They are operating on the mistaken notion that if the Bible cannot be taken to be true and historical . . . then belief in God is undermined. They refuse to realize that all such recordings in the "spiritual fossil record" simply reflect our species attempts to understand our purpose and our God. When viewed in that light it is easy to see the spiritual evolution in our cognition as we evolved our capabilities as a species. Finding moral codes within the Bible is useful but limited. It is a rich source of information (positive and negative) about humanity that enables discernment of a proper goal for our species. I think your focus on understanding our reality through science as the goal of humanity is intellectually attractive but misdirected . . . as I pointed out above. The far more inclusive and beneficial goal is agape love for life, IMO. That is why the Christ legend and message of Love is so appealing.
I know what you are getting at Mystic. Science on its own tells us nothing about love or life or morals or any of that sort of thing and I know I have the tendency to focus just on the science. But that doesn't mean I need the bible to give me direction with any of that. You know I have had discussions on this very subject (and we have agreed on much of it) that many parts of the bible are actually very amoral in my eyes (remember the Sam Harris thread), so as long as you cherry pick out the good stuff, that's fine by me. I'm sure Jesus if he existed was a very extraordinary and lovely person for his time.
But I'm 45 years old and have managed to live all these years, ticking along nicely with my own framework about love and life with no guidance whatsoever from the bible. Probably never even picked one up since I was about 7 or 8. And I appreciate love and kindness as much as the next person and have managed to bring up three amazing kids who probably never give god a second thought. They are the embodiment of love and kindness.
The reason I focus on the science so much is for me it has so much enriched my life that I feel bad that other people are missing out by rejecting much of it so out of hand. But as indicated above, I guess what you never had you never miss and I guess what it comes down to is people aren't all that interested. Happy with their lot as they say and that's probably not for me to argue.
They are operating on the mistaken notion that if the Bible cannot be taken to be true and historical . . . then belief in God is undermined. They refuse to realize that all such recordings in the "spiritual fossil record" simply reflect our species attempts to understand our purpose and our God. When viewed in that light it is easy to see the spiritual evolution in our cognition as we evolved our capabilities as a species. Finding moral codes within the Bible is useful but limited. It is a rich source of information (positive and negative) about humanity that enables discernment of a proper goal for our species. I think your focus on understanding our reality through science as the goal of humanity is intellectually attractive but misdirected . . . as I pointed out above. The far more inclusive and beneficial goal is agape love for life, IMO. That is why the Christ legend and message of Love is so appealing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne
I know what you are getting at Mystic. Science on its own tells us nothing about love or life or morals or any of that sort of thing and I know I have the tendency to focus just on the science. But that doesn't mean I need the bible to give me direction with any of that. You know I have had discussions on this very subject (and we have agreed on much of it) that many parts of the bible are actually very amoral in my eyes (remember the Sam Harris thread), so as long as you cherry pick out the good stuff, that's fine by me. I'm sure Jesus if he existed was a very extraordinary and lovely person for his time.
But I'm 45 years old and have managed to live all these years, ticking along nicely with my own framework about love and life with no guidance whatsoever from the bible. Probably never even picked one up since I was about 7 or 8. And I appreciate love and kindness as much as the next person and have managed to bring up three amazing kids who probably never give god a second thought. They are the embodiment of love and kindness.
I understand . . . but I would argue that they DO know God because they embody love and kindness. You see, I don't think belief in God is an intellectual requirement. It is a inner attitudinal and behavioral stance to life itself. There are many atheists (like your children and yourself) who I consider to be better Christians than many who profess to be. It is the degree to which our lives embody "love of one another" (and all life, actually) that we embody love of God . . . because that is what God IS, IMV.
Quote:
The reason I focus on the science so much is for me it has so much enriched my life that I feel bad that other people are missing out by rejecting much of it so out of hand.
You are preaching to the choir here, Cruithne . . . science is my anchor to sanity. If I could not have explained my encounters through science (at least by plausible hypotheses) . . . I would have been left with no choice but to consider that I am insane. I enjoy your posts and appreciate your intellectual rigor.
I understand . . . but I would argue that they DO know God because they embody love and kindness. You see, I don't think belief in God is an intellectual requirement. It is a inner attitudinal and behavioral stance to life itself.
I guess that's where we differ .
But I understand your stance on that.
Quote:
There are many atheists (like your children and yourself) who I consider to be better Christians than many who profess to be.
Quote:
You are preaching to the choir here, Cruithne . . . science is my anchor to sanity. If I could not have explained my encounters through science (at least by plausible hypotheses) . . . I would have been left with no choice but to consider that I am insane. I enjoy your posts and appreciate your intellectual rigor.
Well we agree on much Mystic. I think we meet in the middle on many issues which is refreshing. Always a pleasure chatting with you.
Ok I think I see what you are getting at.
Alex I'm just saying that if people embraced science, they might find it enriched their lives because it might help them understand the universe better. It might even even open their eyes and help them appreciate their god more fully. This certainly seems to be the way it has worked for Mystic.
Now as you know I'm an atheist, so this isn't the way my mind works, but I'm trying to put myself in a theists shoes.
I'm not paranoid about anything. I find the human psyche fascinating. I like to understand how people think. I think it makes you a better person. I don't wish to take anything away from people's belief in god, but I am opening up to the possibility that there are alternatives to a literal belief in the bible, that could actually enhance your life. There is a whole breathtakingly, mindblowing universe out there to explore get to grips with and I'm thankful to have been able to have lived at at time when we can really begin to appreciate it and begin to understand it, and there is so much more to learn. I feel sorry that some people will never have these experiences.
Now I'm sure (certain!) they will say the same about me with my not having any experience with religion. So of course people are free to ignore the lot of this (and probably will ) and go on their merry way.
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter
Moderator cut: Orphaned
Moderator cut: Orphaned response
Last edited by june 7th; 02-28-2014 at 06:37 PM..
Reason: Orphaned. Member has since chosen to delete his post.
I would say that many people, both Christians and non-Christians, make the assumption that the Bible is a book of science. It is not, and makes not claims to be. There is not one example in the Bible of a piece of science being put there that was not known at the time. Even the Bible says that it was written by man. It does say that scripture is inspired by God, but there is no consensus on what this means, even among evangelical protestants. One thing is clear (whether you are a Christian or not), and that is the Bible should be interpreted in the context in which it was written. It is a a collection of books written by primitive men, but let's not kid ourselves, these men were just as intelligent as we are today. They just didn't possess the same level of math and science that we have today.
My dad has written a half dozen biographies, including on people who could not read or write. For the most part, the stories are true in the sense that the important details are accurate, but some of the finer details might not be quite right because history is dealing with a person's fallible memory. He would often interview several different people on the same event. Their stories would all be different, though not necessarily inaccurate. Just a different perspective of the same event. In the Bible we see this as well with different books covering the same stories. Like my dad and his editor, the writers in the Bible likely eliminated stories that they though didn't match up (or like you and I would do when relaying a story on this web forum). Of course, the odd suspect account did make it into the final draft. I supposed this is what they mean by "god inspired" that it is believed that those suspect versions didn't make it into the original manuscripts. God inspired or not, the Bible should be taken in the context in which it was written. They were concerned with history and spirituality, not science.
Don't you ever worry that you are believing in a fairy tale that will be proven wrong in 20 years? Or that in 1000 years people will look back on you and laugh for believing in a 13.8 billion or whatever old universe?
I sure don't.
Just to take one obvious example, it isn't that long ago that people believed that ulcers were caused by stress and bad diet, but within the last twenty years it was discovered that they are caused by a bacterial infection. Do I feel bad or stupid that I thought something else twenty years ago? No.
The nature of scientific inquiry is to test ideas and reject the ones that are wrong. We can be grateful for the people who are responsible for advances in our knowledge, and we can be confident that there will be people in the future who correct or expand on what we now consider to be true based on the best available evidence.
I would say that many people, both Christians and non-Christians, make the assumption that the Bible is a book of science. It is not, and makes not claims to be. There is not one example in the Bible of a piece of science being put there that was not known at the time. Even the Bible says that it was written by man. It does say that scripture is inspired by God, but there is no consensus on what this means, even among evangelical protestants. One thing is clear (whether you are a Christian or not), and that is the Bible should be interpreted in the context in which it was written. It is a a collection of books written by primitive men, but let's not kid ourselves, these men were just as intelligent as we are today. They just didn't possess the same level of math and science that we have today. <snip>
God inspired or not, the Bible should be taken in the context in which it was written. They were concerned with history and spirituality, not science.
There is often misunderstanding when I say they were ignorant primitive barbarians. That does not mean they were not intelligent. Ignorance is just a lack of knowledge, period. But they were savages and barbarians which has nothing to do with their level of intelligence . . . just their self-control and cultural civility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 
