Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-19-2017, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,357,968 times
Reputation: 601

Advertisements

oops I should have made it clear I am talking about extreme fundamentalism. Not all fundamentalist go to the extremes of the two examples I gave.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-19-2017, 12:38 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
We agree, amazing isn't it.



A mythos is used to explain a spiritual application. Many people ( to many, Christians and atheist alike) read the bible with nothing other then as it being literal. The example I gave earlier about killing ones enemies should suffice to show the difference. The barbaric ignorance everyone is found of throwing around come in when people take what is spiritual as literal, thus they think God actually commanded the killing of ones enemy. In other words people who hold to a literal understanding ( be they Christians or atheist) still retain barbaric ignorance.

Paul states

But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which*vail*is done away in Christ.

In that scripture you should be able to see the barbaric ignorance that is still present today when reading the OT and that vail is only taken away in Christ.

That is why we are told to take every thought captive to Christ; and if it does not line up with the view Christ has of the Father (the view of Love) then it is not to be understood literally, but spiritually.

We are given a standard by which we are to test these things out, *1 Cor 13 and Galatians 5:13-26 as Mystic has so often pointed out and people refuse to use or understand. They would rather retain their the barbaric literal understanding then to even contemplate the thought that much of the scripture is written in Mythos or has a spiritual application if the word mythos is to hard for people to grasp.





Your understanding of mythos differs from mine, try spiritual application instead, might be less confusing.




Again try spiritual instead as you are using your own definition of mythos instead of mine. Word definitely can be confusing.



That is exactly why I have said in the past atheist have a fundamental mind set, it is all you have ever heard so I can't blame you for having one. It is also the reason I and a few others here are having such a hard time speaking on the things we believe, because not only do we have to deal with the points you guys bring out we have to keep correcting you as to what we believe. It is like fighting to battles at once.



And that is because you have the fundamental mind set.




No I do not mean just that, however the best thinking and impulse humans have comes from God.




Ok so what evidence do you have that there is no God? All I have seen so far is people saying there cannot be a God because of this or because of that.
While we agree on a lot I must protest about the suggestion of a "fundamental" mindset. I respond only to the claims I hear. As you observe, a more of less Christian -dogma god and Jeses is what is being presented. That's what i respond to. When a more general or deist creator is presented I argue on that basis, though it really isn't something we atheists need to be concerned about.

As a god not existing, it always carries the caveat "So far as I can tell". I look at the various claims; I assess the arguments for them. If the fail to convince, I disbelieve. God does not exist, so far as i am concerned until I am give good reason to think it does. That for me (in response to your question about what I want it to do) is all I require of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2017, 11:08 PM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7821
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Aj in my post to trans I covered it in part, here

A mythos is used to explain a spiritual application. Many people ( to many, Christians and atheist alike) read the bible with nothing other then as it being literal. The example I gave earlier about killing ones enemies should suffice to show the difference. The barbaric ignorance everyone is found of throwing around come in when people take what is spiritual as literal, thus they think God actually commanded the killing of ones enemy. In other words people who hold to a literal understanding ( be they Christians or atheist) still retain barbaric ignorance.

Paul states

But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which*vail*is done away in Christ.

In that scripture you should be able to see the barbaric ignorance that is still present today when reading the OT and that vail is only taken away in Christ.

That is why we are told to take every thought captive to Christ; and if it does not line up with the view Christ has of the Father (the view of Love) then it is not to be understood literally, but spiritually.

We are given a standard by which we are to test these things out, *1 Cor 13 and Galatians 5:13-26 as Mystic has so often pointed out and people refuse to use or understand. They would rather retain their the barbaric literal understanding then to even contemplate the thought that much of the scripture is written in Mythos or has a spiritual application if the word mythos is to hard for people to grasp.

However I also believe that the sciences can help with understanding what is literal and what is mythos.

One of the problems (the biggest one imo) we face today is fundamentalism. Fundamentalist of any kind whether religious or atheist state things that I can easily see as coming right out of the mouth of Hitler.
The Christian fundamentalist say things like you are going to be eternally tormented in fire if you don't believe exactly like we do. The atheist fundamental state things like religion is that cause of all the evils in the world and we must destroy region at all costs.

Do you really see any difference in statements like the above?

Now from what I gather most atheist will also state they are humanists. But do statements like the above sound like something good for all of mankind?

Dawkens open the God delusion with the song by Lenin, basically stating imagine there was no God.

Ok go ahead and imagine that scenario and the impact that would have on much of humanity.

It would take away there hope of the hereafter, take away all the comfort they get from the belief they will see their lost loved ones again etc. Can you also imagine the depression that would set in? can you also imagine the suicide rate that could easily follow the depression?

How is any of that a humanistic view?

Is not a humanistic view suppose to be for all humankind?

Fundamentalism at it core is nothing more then demanding everyone believe like they do or by hell and high water watch out.

For myself the more humanistic view is that which S.J Gould brings out concerning Non-Overlapping Magisteria. If you have read Gould you will know what I am talking about.

For myself I see no reason the sciences and religions cannot co exist in a peaceful fashion.
Well said, pneuma. Extreme fundamentalism and extreme atheism are equally dangerous, IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
oops I should have made it clear I am talking about extreme fundamentalism. Not all fundamentalist go to the extremes of the two examples I gave.
I knew what you meant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2017, 11:27 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,822,485 times
Reputation: 2879
So BaptistFundie claims there are no contradictions in his Bible and then ignores them when they are presented. Predictable I suppose.

1 John 4:8 - "God is love."
1 Corinthians 13:4 - "Love is not jealous."
Exodus 20:5 - "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God.

How say you BF??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 03:20 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Well said, pneuma. Extreme fundamentalism and extreme atheism are equally dangerous, IMO.

I knew what you meant.
The biggest problem that bedevils all discussion is 'I am the only one who is reasonable".Everyone else seems to be wilfully deluded and stubbornly refusing to listen. I know how it looks. I know that atheist apologists are equally open to confirmation bias. I do it myself on occasions, like posting a video bashing Hamm's Ark.

But mostly I keep it at a distance and am aware of it when it pops up. The faithful embrace it as a virtue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
So BaptistFundie claims there are no contradictions in his Bible and then ignores them when they are presented. Predictable I suppose.

1 John 4:8 - "God is love."
1 Corinthians 13:4 - "Love is not jealous."
Exodus 20:5 - "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God.

How say you BF??
It really is astonishing how the one thing we are not getting is any proofs of Jesus. We got the 'historical Jesus = Gospel Jesus" ploy, which they probably think is valid - but it is as invalid as First -cause creator = Biblegod.

It's an understandable mindset but false in both cases.

However, once a heap of evidence is presented that a historical Jesus is likely (we may not entirely agree, but I think an historical Jewish messiah is pretty certain) but the Gospel representation of him is demonstrably questionable (1) we are justified in expecting either sound refutation or acceptance of the point.

Instead we get almost everything but that. We don't get contradiction denial so much these days, and not the 'witnesses don't always agree' excuse, mainly because the shrugging of of these as minor matters that don't really harm the story can be quashed by showing them to be Glaring Discrepancies That Blow Gospel Credibility Sky -High, the only response really is - silence.

And let's try something else to shut these atheists up.

(1) and we have done with the 'well, don't you question the Historical accounts of Alexander, , Caesar, George Washington?". The answer being Yes. The Gordian knot episode is considered dubious, Caesar's version of his invasion of Britain is questions, and representations of Washington as a drooling, Bible kissing Churchgo. And it is ing Christian are certainly to be questioned. And it is hardly news these days that Ramesses II'ds account of the battle of Qadesh is seen a spin -doctored as the Biblical account of the Assyrian seige of Jerusalem - and indeed most of the gospel version of Jesus.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-20-2017 at 04:00 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 03:21 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,357,968 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
While we agree on a lot I must protest about the suggestion of a "fundamental" mindset. I respond only to the claims I hear. As you observe, a more of less Christian -dogma god and Jeses is what is being presented. That's what i respond to. When a more general or deist creator is presented I argue on that basis, though it really isn't something we atheists need to be concerned about.

.
So then are you saying that atheist have really no problem with religion except that which is of the extreme fundamental mind set?


Quote:
As a god not existing, it always carries the caveat "So far as I can tell". I look at the various claims; I assess the arguments for them. If the fail to convince, I disbelieve. God does not exist, so far as i am concerned until I am give good reason to think it does. That for me (in response to your question about what I want it to do) is all I require of it
Well then I would think most people who call themselves atheist are actually really agnostic in it true sense of the word meaning I don't know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 03:27 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,357,968 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Well said, pneuma. Extreme fundamentalism and extreme atheism are equally dangerous, IMO.

I knew what you meant.
Yup, for myself I don't have a problem with fundamentalism in religion or atheism per say, It just when they take their beliefs to the extreme it is based more on hate for humanity then love for humanity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 03:37 AM
 
35,095 posts, read 51,109,197 times
Reputation: 62664
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
There it is. Show us exactly what you have that convinces you Jesus was a real person. It cannot be from the Bible because those writings are not considered historical evidence by non-biased Biblical scholars.

Go on. Show us something extra-Biblical that proves Jesus existed--ANYTHING, artifacts, a grave, a monument, an ossuary containing his bones, a relief, just anything-- and then let us examine it and if it is convincing I know that I will change my belief and say that he truly was the Son of God.

Go ahead!
Why? Jesus could be standing in front of you and you would call him a fraud.
There is no point in attempting to tell you anything because all you want to do is argue.

I am curious though why you talk so much about someone you do not believe ever lived.
Oh, by the way, thank you, every time you talk about Jesus, you glorify him...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 04:19 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
So then are you saying that atheist have really no problem with religion except that which is of the extreme fundamental mind set?
In effect, yes, though it would be more true to say that the tasrget is religious influence on society, whether it is fundamentalist or not. In fact Creationists are the most alarmingly dangerous because they target science in education. The Others simply want people obedient to the church.

I have come to see the value of religion, When points are made about the uses it has and how it might be socially necessary, I accept it. I also accept various possibilities about Cosmic minds or NDE's, but reserve Belief until some decent evidence is produced.

That's me, but this is the general view of atheism, including 'Militant' atheism, which is simply Old style atheism but doing something about the harmful effects of organized religion (fundy or not) and advocating a humanist based society and removing religion from society (separation of Church and state being one aspect,).

There is a place for Theists in rolling back religious influence too, because they can see the harm and also a humanist society protects their own freedom to believe something other than the orthodoxy. Irreligious god -believers are often more allies of Militant atheists than so called atheists who fight Change tooth and nail.

Quote:
Well then I would think most people who call themselves atheist are actually really agnostic in it true sense of the word meaning I don't know.
And so are those who say they Know what they believe is true. Of course they don't and are agnostic, as inded we all are, because nobody really knows. Theism and atheism is not about what we know, but about what we believe. Theists believe what they do not know, and they may feel they have good reasons for it. It's what the debate is about.

Atheists do not believe because, while we do not know for sure, we see a total lack of good reason to believe any god -claim.

Of course we do say 'there is no God', but there are caveats with that, as theists are with 'I know God exists'. caveats and qualifications. It's just that only in the detailed nit -picking of debate and trying to get any kind of Edge do these nuances on terminology become so terribly important.

I must say I am happy the way our discussion is going. A discussion rather than debate, now, and mutual understanding rather than one beating the other to a frizzled frazzle looks to be the possible (and preferrable) result.

Atheists don't so much want to Win - we just want to be Understood

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-20-2017 at 04:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2017, 04:20 AM
 
5,912 posts, read 2,591,198 times
Reputation: 1049
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
oops I should have made it clear I am talking about extreme fundamentalism. Not all fundamentalist go to the extremes of the two examples I gave.
Is there a web site that can explains the difference between funi-christian and extreme-fundi-christian?

What is the dividing line between the two? You guys are all in agreement until one does something that's extreme.

What is that line? What is that act that elevates a christian to extreme?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:11 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top