Halloween from the perspective of a non-theist
-
@thanksaj said:
@Huw3481 said:
Ok, I'll bite.
It's an established fact that ''The Church" took existing pagan festivals and subverted them to persuade people to convert to Christianity.
What sucks in your picture is that you are taking your view on Christianity and calling others out about it. That's verging on extremeism.
You can believe in whatever Sky Fairy you like. I don't gve a rat's ass. The wars between Catholics/Muslims/Other Christians are all down to your own interpretations of your holy books.
Don't JW believe Jesus was nailed to/hung from a tree rather than a cross?
If people who don't belive the same as you are defying Jesus himself, then I'm on the Highway to Hell.
This is one of those "keep your bloody opinions to yourself, AJ" discussions.
There are many religions as well as variations on single religions.
You can't all be right.
You keep your faith if it helps you, but it doesn't help me. Not one bloody iota.
Me, I'll make my own path.
He was hung on a stake and not a cross. The cross is another one of those pagan merges that so many people buy into. Romans used stakes as a rule, as wood as scarce in that region. So using two pieces of wood instead of just one made no practical sense. In addition to that, the original words use in Greek that so many translate as cross actually translates as stake or tree. Most of what most people believe about Christianity is pretty bastardized.
Isn't that "He was hung on a stake according to one version of some writings that nobody can really prove"?
And wouldn't the original words be in Aramaic?
-
@nadnerB I'm not trying to say anything negative about religion itself, and your argument of "atheists gets all old testament" is in itself misguided towards the implied goal.
I was born, raised, and baptized catholic, so I'm familiar with the works, up until now a majority of my life I was a Christian.
My implied goal wasn't to state how Christianity was wrong, or how any religion is wrong for that matter, just to point out those who make facebook statuses professing insulting texts with misinformed information. If you're going to entertain some text that is out dated from one book and profess it as your belief, wouldn't all text from the same book apply?
I endorse all religions as a side note, and will defend your right to believe what you want, I'm not one of "those atheists". Just to clarify.
-
@Huw3481 said:
@thanksaj said:
@Huw3481 said:
Ok, I'll bite.
It's an established fact that ''The Church" took existing pagan festivals and subverted them to persuade people to convert to Christianity.
What sucks in your picture is that you are taking your view on Christianity and calling others out about it. That's verging on extremeism.
You can believe in whatever Sky Fairy you like. I don't gve a rat's ass. The wars between Catholics/Muslims/Other Christians are all down to your own interpretations of your holy books.
Don't JW believe Jesus was nailed to/hung from a tree rather than a cross?
If people who don't belive the same as you are defying Jesus himself, then I'm on the Highway to Hell.
This is one of those "keep your bloody opinions to yourself, AJ" discussions.
There are many religions as well as variations on single religions.
You can't all be right.
You keep your faith if it helps you, but it doesn't help me. Not one bloody iota.
Me, I'll make my own path.
He was hung on a stake and not a cross. The cross is another one of those pagan merges that so many people buy into. Romans used stakes as a rule, as wood as scarce in that region. So using two pieces of wood instead of just one made no practical sense. In addition to that, the original words use in Greek that so many translate as cross actually translates as stake or tree. Most of what most people believe about Christianity is pretty bastardized.
Isn't that "He was hung on a stake according to one version of some writings that nobody can really prove"?
And wouldn't the original words be in Aramaic?
The Old Testament is traditionally written in Hebrew, with the New Testament being composed in a combination of Greek and Aramaic. However, there are scholars who have translated manuscripts found in places like the Dead Sea. Cross is never an accurate translation.
-
@RAM. said:
@nadnerB I'm not trying to say anything negative about religion itself, and your argument of "atheists gets all old testament" is in itself misguided towards the implied goal.
I was born, raised, and baptized catholic, so I'm familiar with the works, up until now a majority of my life I was a Christian.
My implied goal wasn't to state how Christianity was wrong, or how any religion is wrong for that matter, just to point out those who make facebook statuses professing insulting texts with misinformed information. If you're going to entertain some text that is out dated from one book and profess it as your belief, wouldn't all text from the same book apply?
I endorse all religions as a side note, and will defend your right to believe what you want, I'm not one of "those atheists". Just to clarify.
@RAM. , you talk about not rejecting portions of a book, like Leviticus, and accepting the whole book. The fact is, that is STILL the wrong approach. You read the Bible as a whole, because the Bible has a theme, carried from Genesis to Revelation. The fact is that there are plenty of parts of the original five books of the Bible that no longer apply to Christians.
-
While this thread has remained semi-civil so far. Please make sure it remains so. Anything that results in a flame war will cause the thread to be deleted.
We don't want to discourage debates but will not allow flame wars.
-
-
@thanksaj said:
@RAM. said:
@nadnerB I'm not trying to say anything negative about religion itself, and your argument of "atheists gets all old testament" is in itself misguided towards the implied goal.
I was born, raised, and baptized catholic, so I'm familiar with the works, up until now a majority of my life I was a Christian.
My implied goal wasn't to state how Christianity was wrong, or how any religion is wrong for that matter, just to point out those who make facebook statuses professing insulting texts with misinformed information. If you're going to entertain some text that is out dated from one book and profess it as your belief, wouldn't all text from the same book apply?
I endorse all religions as a side note, and will defend your right to believe what you want, I'm not one of "those atheists". Just to clarify.
@RAM. , you talk about not rejecting portions of a book, like Leviticus, and accepting the whole book. The fact is, that is STILL the wrong approach. You read the Bible as a whole, because the Bible has a theme, carried from Genesis to Revelation. The fact is that there are plenty of parts of the original five books of the Bible that no longer apply to Christians.
Agreed completely. Can you explain which parts don't apply to Christians while other parts from the same books do? According to most Christian Dogma (although not all, which is telling in and of itself) the bible is the physical manifestation of the word of G/god. Wouldn't it be sacrilege to dismiss certain parts of any of these books?
@nadnerB said:
Leviticus is a book of rules for the a tribe of Israel, specifically Levi, regarding how they are to live their lives and act in order to be fit to carry out their priesty duties in the Tent of Meeting (later to become Solomon's Temple). The rules for the rest of the tribes of Israel are listed in Deuteronomy. They are, IMO, less intense and strict.
I have no problem with this. That's fine Deuteronomy/Leviticus is a set of rules for a bronze age semi-nomadic tribe of middle easterners...
But why are those, admittedly outdated, rules being thrown around by Christians, who have supposedly found the new testament, to oppress a group of people?I have no problem with Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Scientologists, basically any of the tens of thousands of religions. I am engaged to a devout Catholic, I really don't care what people believe in, but when they use texts from 2-3000 years ago to oppress or condemn people for something that has no bearing on their [the Christian's] everyday life... that's when I take issue.
-
@RAM. said:
@nadnerB I'm not trying to say anything negative about religion itself, and your argument of "atheists gets all old testament" is in itself misguided towards the implied goal.
I was born, raised, and baptized catholic, so I'm familiar with the works, up until now a majority of my life I was a Christian.
My implied goal wasn't to state how Christianity was wrong, or how any religion is wrong for that matter, just to point out those who make facebook statuses professing insulting texts with misinformed information. If you're going to entertain some text that is out dated from one book and profess it as your belief, wouldn't all text from the same book apply?
I endorse all religions as a side note, and will defend your right to believe what you want, I'm not one of "those atheists". Just to clarify.
I see where you are coming from and it looks like we have both misread parts of each others points of view, going by what I read in your text.
Thanks for the clarification of your views, much appreciated
I think it's time to bail on this topic before we end up like slashdot.
nadnerB out -
@coliver said:
@thanksaj said:
@RAM. said:
@nadnerB I'm not trying to say anything negative about religion itself, and your argument of "atheists gets all old testament" is in itself misguided towards the implied goal.
I was born, raised, and baptized catholic, so I'm familiar with the works, up until now a majority of my life I was a Christian.
My implied goal wasn't to state how Christianity was wrong, or how any religion is wrong for that matter, just to point out those who make facebook statuses professing insulting texts with misinformed information. If you're going to entertain some text that is out dated from one book and profess it as your belief, wouldn't all text from the same book apply?
I endorse all religions as a side note, and will defend your right to believe what you want, I'm not one of "those atheists". Just to clarify.
@RAM. , you talk about not rejecting portions of a book, like Leviticus, and accepting the whole book. The fact is, that is STILL the wrong approach. You read the Bible as a whole, because the Bible has a theme, carried from Genesis to Revelation. The fact is that there are plenty of parts of the original five books of the Bible that no longer apply to Christians.
Agreed completely. Can you explain which parts don't apply to Christians while other parts from the same books do? According to most Christian Dogma (although not all, which is telling in and of itself) the bible is the physical manifestation of the word of G/god. Wouldn't it be sacrilege to dismiss certain parts of any of these books?
The specific aspects of the Mosaic Law in regards to things like the Sabbath, diet, animal sacrifices, etc. However, the principles, or guiding ideas, behind the laws still hold true. While the observance of the Sabbath is no longer required, the principle of setting aside time for spiritual matters holds true. Jesus said he came not to tear down the Law (the Mosaic Law), but to fulfill it. The Mosaic Law served a purpose: lead the Jews to the Messiah. When the Jews rejected the Messiah, and he'd come, the purpose of the Law had been fulfilled.
The Bible is the Word of God. There are plenty of things that support that, from prophesies that have been fulfilled in the past 100 years (actually, almost 100 years ago to the day...it was October 1914 when the last date-defined prophesy was fulfilled), to the fact the Israelites had laws under the Mosaic Law that were thousands of years ahead of their time, and so on. It's not sacrilege to "dismiss parts of the Bible" because not following the laws doesn't mean you dismiss the principles that made up the Mosaic Law. Every principle still applies, but not every law.
, -
@Addie this wasn't targeted towards anyone I promise, I don't even have facebook, hence no way of viewing posts
I just know my grandma posts stuff like this all the time. She forwards me emails all the time about being a good christian... I don't have it in me to say "hey grandma I'm an atheist, you can stop sending me this stuff."That said, my family and future wife are friends with my grandma and yell at her all the time for it. Being rude and bigoted towards people because of a misrepresentation of your beliefs, I'm not a fan of that ignorant mentality.
@thanksaj how can your belief be pick and choose from a single section? I can't make an apple pie by going "I like steps 3-5 but not steps 1 and 2, therefore they don't apply to my belief." Its either all or nothing... There is no multiple choice pick and choose religion from anything I've understood, there are different denominations and variations, but not "pick and choose"
Side note, on the topic of religion, Sufism is a very interesting concept of Islam if anyone is curious about some interesting religious beliefs to look up.
-
Just letting everyone know I'm backing out of this thread. It's not worth it to me to debate with a troll.
@RAM. to answer that final question, I didn't choose that I would follow this and won't follow this. Goes back to taking the Bible as a whole and not in pieces.
With that, I'm out.
