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.
First bolded: No. The fact that the stories are still told may -- at most -- prove that they had some wisdom. But that doesn't at all prove that they are "true".
Perhaps Ozzy meant that there are underlying truths/wisdom to be discovered within the stories -- just like with many good stories, past and present -- not that they are historically true.
Perhaps Ozzy meant that there are underlying truths/wisdom to be discovered within the stories -- just like with many good stories, past and present -- not that they are historically true.
If that's what meant, that's what he should have written.
If that's what meant, that's what he should have written.
I've occasionally written things that didn't mean what I intended them to mean.
At any rate, I've taken from his posts that he does see truth/value in the stories in a metaphorical way, even if he does believe they are literally true. Would you disagree with that concept?
Sounds like you're mad at God, since you choose to belittle others. Classic.
Anger is just disappointed love.
You might consider that disappointment doesn't come from nowhere. It isn't illegitimate just because you don't find it convenient.
In any case, yes, some believers start their journey out of faith because they are bitterly disappointed in god, but then you have to explain Romans 5:5. It says hope / religious faith does NOT disappoint because we are keenly aware of god's expressed love toward us.
So yes for some of us the proximate first cause for our unbelief is violated expectations that the church was foolish enough to set in the first place. We don't feel god's love and protection and comfort, and that's -- what -- all our fault somehow? Or could it just maybe possibly have something to do with the absence of the things we are told we're supposed to experience?
But I think if you actually attempted to know the OP you'd find that anger has long since given way to something you probably find even less palatable: indifference.
I was hurt and confused at first, not so much angry, but today I just don't give a fig. My childhood god is irrelevant to me because he's a non-falsifiable proposition, therefore I can stake no knowledge claim for or against his existence, therefore it's bloody hard to develop a supportable belief one way or the other, too.
Also, in practical terms, my god-beliefs resulted in unrealistic expectations that rendered me nearly incapable of making informed decisions based on accurate explanations and predictions of experienced and lived reality. Today, my epistemological approach to life does an infinitely better job of explaining lived reality and predicting outcomes.
God is an idea -- your idea -- and it's up to you to support and substantiate that idea. Not me. If you ever actually did so, I might in principle be persuaded to re-evaluate my life. But you don't, and can't, and won't, and thus never the twain shall meet.
I've occasionally written things that didn't mean what I intended them to mean.
At any rate, I've taken from his posts that he does see truth/value in the stories in a metaphorical way, even if he does believe they are literally true. Would you disagree with that concept?
I would agree, but that's also where I've complained that christians ought to make up their minds. Are the stories metaphorical or literally true. Decide. But they can't...or won't...because to decide either way weakens their position.
that depends on how you ask me. "literal" jesus, there is no point in arguing that a man named "something" lived and did some of those things. I have no problem with jesusas as existing.
jesus didn't come to die for our sins, he is celebrating the awakening of an animal. the lesson of the cross was to show that "keep learning, the body will become irrelevant".
do you believe he literally rose from the dead and his body literally was taken to heaven?
If you’re going to come here and discuss Christianity, don’t be surprised if Jesus and scriptures are discussed.
Oh, I'm not surprised. I'm just telling you that throwing scriptures at atheists is ineffective.
But in the same vein as your admonition, if you're going to come here and discuss christianity, don't be surprised -- and stop whining -- when others argue against your beliefs.
I would agree, but that's also where I've complained that christians ought to make up their minds. Are the stories metaphorical or literally true. Decide. But they can't...or won't...because to decide either way weakens their position.
It depends on the Christian, perhaps, as to what there mind is made up to (and isn't a good thing when a person's mind isn't so made up as to be completely closed off to a different possibility?). Speaking very broadly, I think there are quite a few Christians who look at the OT stories mostly metaphorically, and the NT less so. But, to try to get everyone to agree about everything in any group isn't realistic.
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.
I've occasionally written things that didn't mean what I intended them to mean. 
