The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Adios
Auf Wiedersehen

:-)

Darn, I go away for a few days and the thread gets interesting again...


The idea that God either "made a [stupid] mistake" or "deliberately put Adam in a trap for His own amusement" is a very narrow interpretation of what is a pretty sketchy account.

I've come across a few other interpretations in my time, and my favourite - in fact, the only one that makes sense to my tiny mind - is that the "trap" was indeed deliberate, and that Eve & Adam were intended to take the "forbidden" fruit so that they could know, from experience, what it's like to break a commandment. The "commandment" itself was simple, easy to follow, and apparently pointless; the only consequence for disobedience was the artificial consequence that had been specified. Namely, they'd have to end the unlimited holiday in the well-stocked sandbox and go and earn a living, for a limited period, in a more challenging environment.

Having to earn a living in a challenging environment was thus part of the plan from the start. Another part was that, while struggling with an indifferent universe, they'd have to choose what kind of people they'd become. Hence the need for experience in disobeying - you can't choose to be "good" if you don't have a choice, and you can't have an informed choice if you don't understand the consequences of both alternatives.

By eating the forbidden fruit, Eve and Adam showed they were capable of choosing for themselves, and at the same time learned a valuable lesson in consequences. God therefore judged that they were ready to move out of the sandbox, and sent them off for an undergraduate course at Hard Knocks University.

Of course, the above interpretation might raise a few questions about the old idea of a quick judgement leading to either a return to the sandbox or eternal punishment (like, what would be the point of the HKU bit?), but that's another subject entirely.

Originally Posted by Fixit7 ... All suffering is brought upon by humans.

Tell that to a rabbit while it's getting its guts torn out by a family of cougars, fairy tale there?

Add: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/an-advice-for-a-good-movie-to-watch-697994/page31.html#post5520076

It also pays to remember a creation myth when you encounter one!

Genesis Chapter 1, for example, is a well-known example of ancient Hebrew poetry, which repeated certain phrases after each "verse," e.g. "... and the evening and the morning were the Xth day."

Various "improbabilities and inconsistencies" have to be overlooked, too. For instance: how can there be "the deep" (water ...) when there is no sun? Howcum "planet Earth" exists when the stars do not? And so on.

It is obviously impossible for this to be "literal truth." So, what is it? It is: allegory. It is: a tale.

The same can be extended to the rest of the first section of Genesis, to the "Fall of Man" and so on. Although it wasn't poetry, it certainly was allegorical. If you try to take-on the thing as "literal TRVTH" (to borrow the image of the podium from The Wizard of Id), and if you try to do so seriously, you're simply gonna get bolluxed-up. Therefore, I cordially suggest: "Relax. Take these documents for what they are, not whatever your preacher or priest once told you they are." It's okay. Really.

The entire provenance of "the Christian Bible" is dripping, more than anything else, with the very-recent influence of the Roman Empire. The Emperor at that time conceived of a "state religion." Little did he suspect that he would create one which out-lasted his Empire ... and yet, which created another Empire to which heads-of-state to this very day pay obeisance!

This is "what happened," so I suggest that you simply interpret the text accordingly. You can still "have faith." Just mix a double-helping of understanding in, with that faith. It's quite meaningless (and setting yourself up for a very rude fall, one day ...) if you say that you "have faith" in something, but do not know what it is (and isn't). Or, if you deny it.

If "God," as they say, "had a message for Man and wrote it in a Book," then He had to know that there would be humans involved in every step thereafter. But, being a Deity, He would nevertheless cause His essential message to shine clearly through all the muck.

http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/amgg/listofdeities/an/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anu

People here and there still 'prey' to oldest of gods and all the way up, if it was taught* they will go; please.

[BUT]. If you try to teach not to sin to "your children" or surroundings but with sin,,, that sounds kinds stupid doesn't it?! .

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs Always remember that "religions" are h-u-m-a-n inventions. Holy-books, such as The Bible, did not "come down from God Himself, exactly as you now read them."

Some may be inventions (Mormonism, Wicca) but many are created by human experiences. Some are based on the experiences of one person (Islam) or a small number of people over a couple of centuries (Judaism), but others (Paganism) have evolved from the experience of innumerable people over millennia, with many silly ideas getting discarded. Not all silly ideas, of course; we are not infallible.

Nor do all religions have "holy books"; with the exception of Hinduism, Paganism doesn't: Chinese, Japanese, African, Native American, and European Pagans don't believe that the Gods are in the business of micro-managing our lives or telling us what to think.

How about this: it you teach a dog not to bite a cats head off they could be frends..!

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann Some may be inventions (Mormonism, Wicca) but many are created by human experiences. Some are based on the experiences of one person (Islam) or a small number of people over a couple of centuries (Judaism), but others (Paganism) have evolved from the experience of innumerable people over millennia, with many silly ideas getting discarded. Not all silly ideas, of course; we are not infallible. Nor do all religions have "holy books"; with the exception of Hinduism, Paganism doesn't: Chinese, Japanese, African, Native American, and European Pagans don't believe that the Gods are in the business of micro-managing our lives or telling us what to think.

When I was a young pot head I went with out weed for the first time. Months passed no biggie, then I had a dream and I got high as uck even woke up high; how do you explain that?

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann Nor do all religions have "holy books"; with the exception of Hinduism, Paganism doesn't: Chinese, Japanese, African, Native American, and European Pagans don't believe that the Gods are in the business of micro-managing our lives or telling us what to think.

Indeed, one of the "uniquely Roman" characteristics of the (Western ...) Christian religion, as it is commonly preached (here), is that infernal preoccupation with control. (Specifically, one might say, state control.) One of the reasons why "The Quest for the Historical Jesus" is such an interesting topic to me, is that we do distinctly see the appearance of "state meddling and probable redacting" throughout much of the text. (And we have even, in a few cases, find scraps of "other versions" of these texts where this redacting doesn't appear is different.) Really, when you start to dig into the question, "how did this 'Bible' in my hand, get to be precisely as it is?," it's a fascinating adventure.

We don't "know." We don't have any "absolute truth." But, if we are no longer content to be afraid of that possibility, many exciting thoughts open up ... without fear or guilt or "any of that other garbage."

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

Ask any professed christian who posted in this thread on how they stand with gay marriage and womens rights to their own bodies.

Like so many other comments, I find this one confuses political beliefs/organized religion and faith. Well, a lot of people, of faith and not, do that, so it's ok. Fixit7 already addressed most of whatever else I was going to say better than I anyway. +2

Btw, "They will know that you are My disciples by your love" or words to that effect: that's how you identify the Christians.

One of the traditional methods that Christians used to express that love during the spanish inquisition was burning at the stake.
The court would take a heretics property, the victim would be tortured until confession and repentance and then (presumably with a saved soul and a clear conscience) dispatched to the mercies of a just god.
You can wiggle all you want to but christian holy books and history tell the truth of the matter.

You can probably say this for most religions, but abrahamic theism seems especially guilty, every time the true believers get control of the political and legal machinery, the truth comes out and the blood flows like water.

Like so many other comments, I find this one confuses political beliefs/organized religion and faith. Well, a lot of people, of faith and not, do that, so it's ok.

Like Shiria Law.

I am only replying because I was quoted. When organized religion and politics mix. Both volatile
belief systems. You are just putting out the fire with gasoline.

One of the traditional methods that Christians used to express that love during the spanish inquisition was burning at the stake.

Here I was trying to show how to define the word Christians by behavior, and you decided to define behavior by the word Christian. Interesting.

So many people can't even figure out awk, grep and dd, yet feel like they've got a handle on Everything.

@rokytnji I don't believe we disagree here.

Originally Posted by fogpipe every time the true believers get control of the political and legal machinery, the truth comes out and the blood flows like water.

Every time human beings get control of the political and legal machinery ... "blood flows like water."

I am quite sure that the Deity in question "was less than impressed" at the zeal with which these people ... do not call them "Christians" ... committed atrocities "in His name."

"Get away from Me, you evildoers! I never knew you!"