Wasn't trying to say they do, I was responding to a charge that all "Christians take the Bible as infallible". By pointing out that Catholics don't teach this, I was just pointing out how ignorant the original charge was.

uth. are you saying the bible isn't infallaable it isn't the word of 'god' then, jsut made up as we have been saying???



Mickle a christian church uses a bible, as a baptist as a mormon, as does a catholic, the catholic bible has more books than the christitian and some christians won't touch the King james version because king james was gay... and the other little dramas that come up..........One goes to church to worship man, jesus, god whatever but its for those that beleive in the bible to come together in fellowship and for bible study etc to advacate the teachings of the bible.....My point is a bible is the reason the church is there.......i see no differnce, they may look differnt or do different customs but in essence its the same thing...i too was once relgious as are many of the athiests and NB's now.....I have been to many types of churches for various reasons and other than the customs its the same ...Now One church has a great investment in leading you to think you are different what would they sell you on, one has to be 'better or less than, what would be the point.... really its all the same thing sorry friend...

The english language is used by people in Britain and America, we use a book to look at the meanings of words called the dictionary, does that mean then that really we are all English?

I agree. These people might be suffering the symptoms of a Don Quixote Syndrome.

I'm new to these forums! Hope no one minds if I add my two cents into this most interesting conversation.



I don't know that it's necessarily "fair" (NEVER assuming that a debate amongst Theists and Non alike will be considered "fair") to say that attributing information to a high power is dangerous. But having said that, the last part of your quote, pointing out that you are indeed a non-believer playing your role as such...having a view as such...will inevitably sustain the fact that, it is only inappropriate if not necessarily and inherently "wrong" to believe otherwise.

Is Atheism viable. Well let's look at it this way. With our very limited and very human source of definition via language and the human thought process (i.e. logic, invention, understanding, etc.) apparently a board of very well-to-do and educated scholars (within researched reasoning amongst like-minded students and scholars of language throughout yesteryears) decided that this is the definition of "viable."

1. capable of living.
2. Physiology. a. physically fitted to live.
b. (of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.

3. Botany. able to live and grow.
4. vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses: a period of history that few teachers can make viable for students.
5. practicable; workable: a viable alternative.
6. having the ability to grow, expand, develop, etc.: a new and viable country.

*courtesy of dictionary.com*

If that's the case, then yes, of course Atheism is viable.

But then, that is always the battle isn't it? The point of view, the perspective, in itself, is the only thing that will not see us see each other. All I would say is to keep in mind the individual. Understanding, acceptance, awareness, all of these things will never be realized through religion. It will only be realized through the person. Just as Christianity may block those precious receptors in the minds of humanity to accept truths otherwise, so does Atheism...ONLY if you let it.
I would like to point out here, that stereotyping is a dangerous tool. I've been extremely pleased to see many people in this forum easily accept anothers view on the opposite side of the spiritual spectrum. Not every Christian is a bible beating freakazoid, not every Atheist is an ill-mannered sodomizer. etc.

The power of humans to expand and grow should not even be held in the religion of their hearts, but the logic and reasoning of their minds. But then that is the other battle isn't it. Keeping religion to your heart, your logic to your mind...and either proficiently being able to keep the two harmoniously, or not. It is when there is only logic in the heart or only religion in the mind the people become closed off to all experiences and "truths" possible. If there is no room for beliefs, freedoms, and things of like nature in the heart, you may never learn to accept those who are not you or your "right" perceived. As is it, if there is no room for ideas, understanding, or possibility in the mind. The struggle is learning that it's just down right okay for someone to be Atheist. And likewise, it is down right okay to be Christian. Or a Wiccan. Or Baha'i. Or any religion that you wish. It is a circle. The freedom of choice is power...the power, is acceptance. Acceptance is allowing you to have this power, and allow others to have it as well...If people were able to easily achieve that, then parity and peace would not be a problem.

Doing my best to keep myself from stereotyping, the fact of the matter is because of the way most Christians are raised, there are many (NOT ALL) denominations of Christianity that believe it is their duty...nay their quest, to spread the word of Christ and help people either accept or deny him as their savior. Pentacostals actually believe this is the only way we will finally make it to Heaven...when every last person on the planet that is of the proper age to take upon their own religious responsibility, has the chance to either accept or deny Jesus.

Let's go ahead and use this example to prove my point (then I'll hush my face) If (ON A WIDE AND VARIED SPECTRUM) a Pentacostal were to run into an Atheist on the street and try to give them propaganda for their church or faith... If more Atheists were to simply say, "I'm sorry, I'm an Atheist. But good luck to you and have a nice day." And simply walk away...that would solve a lot of problems on their end. The problem is, socially speaking, there are so many that feel "violated" by the intrusion of publicly expressing a belief in a God they so fervently disbelieve. Many times this causes discomfort or (if someone was ONCE a believer and became a disbeliever for personal reasons) even anger. On the flip side, If more Christians, say a Pentacostal, were to be passing out propaganda and he tried to give a piece of literature to a passerby of the Atheist persuasion, if the Atheist were to simply walk away or even IF IN the event the Atheist were to say something mean or unnecessarily rude, it would be in the best interest of the "Christian" personally and spiritually to just say, "Okay thank you anyway," NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY, and go on about their afternoon knowing they will reach out to other people who actually want to listen anyway. Instead of the possible, "Just wait until Judgement Day!" or "The ignorant do not reign in Heaven!" or other things I've heard some really bad Christians say.

Again, this all just comes down to both sides realizing, it just plain okay to be whatever you want to be, and believe what you want to believe. Although the day that happens unconditionally between both parties...well, let's just say I'm not completely confident I'll live to see that day. I do hope for it, but I doubt I'll see it.

No that's not what I'm saying.

The Bible is a work of man, a collection of stories, songs, laws, history, letters, and works of prophets. Every culture has it's traditions, laws, creation stories, etc. The Old Testament is the written form of these for the Hebrews. The New Testament is the written accounts of Jesus, plus the works of his apostles, plus the many writings of St. Paul. It was all written by humans, and the decision on what to include or not include was also done by humans. It's believed to be divinely inspired. However, while some sects have taken the view that the Bible was practically written by God himself and nothing in it could be false, others have never taken this view.

So the Bible is probably not infallible, but that is not the same thing as saying "it's just made up". Much of it may be true. Some can be historically verified, some cannot. Some of it is clearly creation mythology that every culture had some form to explain the origins of life. (incidently many cultures have a 'great flood' story that share an amazing number of details with Noah's Ark). Many stories there is no way to verify true or false. I've been taught that one should focus more on the 'spiritual' truth rather than historical 'accuracy'. In the Catholic Church, the most important part is the Gospels, with the teachings of Jesus. Even then, while we're confident in the existance and Divinity of Jesus, Three of the Four Gospels come from a single original source that contained the teachings of Jesus, but not much in the way of narrative. So the historical accuracy of the story of what Jesus did day to day may not be as historically accurate as his teachings. Anyway, that's the short version. It's not really a black & white thing that it's completely true or completely false. In that sense, no religion, spiritual movement, or science can claim 100% true either. But for some reason, it's held as a black mark against Christianity

Uth, thats what many of has been saying , it isnt a book one would put a whole lot of stock into as a guide to any kind of ethical behavior IMO ,,,certainly its entertaining and the 'god' is certainly quite the monster and can stand toe to toe with any of the most heinous serial killers but other than that is has little merit, little practicality, i am open to any counter that shows otherwise, saddly so far not much comes up.......The jesus ( and i actaully like the character myself) wisdoms are not particuarly original and actually if one is serious as to living a philosphy of no harm and to be a benefit to all the eastern philosophys provide a sound and practical guide...Not the only way, not a better way, but a sound way...the western dogmas create to many dysfunctional harmful behaviors, at some ploint as a collective we are responsible for that which we support with our beleifs and have to be proactive in responsibiliy and quit hiding behind a umbrella of faith becasue we are too afraid to challenge the system...., we can see that by observing the world we live in most of the serious issues can be traced right to christianity.... thats the hard cold reality IMO .... Alot depends on what you are trying to do as a human, thats the question one needs to ask...Sceince never claims 100 percent anything, and as lofty and dreamy as faith is its really not practical, nor is it meant ito be... .......

The mythologies of any given religion holds no importance their just stories used to teach the philosophy of a religion.

Even if the Bible is one day discovered to be a fake that doesn't make the teachings void.

After reading the bible all you should have to ask yourself is this...What was the moral of the story?

Ambriel


Ambriel your post was worth alot more than "two cents", thank you very much.

I especially like this statement. :
"The point of view, the perspective, in itself, is the only thing that will not see us see each other. All I would say is to keep in mind the individual. Understanding, acceptance, awareness, all of these things will never be realized through religion. It will only be realized through the person. Just as Christianity may block those precious receptors in the minds of humanity to accept truths otherwise, so does Atheism...ONLY if you let it. "

Well the OT is really the religious book of another faith and written many hundred years before the NT. I admit that the Loving, forgiving God talked about by Jesus bears little resemblance to the jealous, vengeful God in many of the OT stories. There are many theories on why (see Gnosticism, for instance). In my church, the OT is downplayed greatly.

On whether Jesus' teaching are original or not, I think misses the point. Remember, way back then there was no easy forms of mass communication, no internet etc. Now speaking on my own views, not church teachings. It would seem that whatever higher spiritual power there is at work, it wouldn't just impart its truths in one little corner of the world and leave the rest of the world in the dark. It seems more likely to impart revelations to various cultures in various ways. So there may well be truth in Eastern Religions, in Native American and African religions, etc. So if Jesus's sayings aren't original, it doesn't make them any less true. They may have been original to the people who heard them in the Mediteranean region and spread it.

Also the world has many types of people. And people respond to different things. Some may respond well to a very mystical, spiritual religion, while others need to believe in more concrete things and tend to take things literally. For instance, I think Christianity contains much symbolism that is interpretted literally by many. I see no reason why a God would need to be a man or have a Son (in the blood-relation sense). I believe these teachings are symbolic, an attempt to make complex spiritual truths easier to explain to a primative mindset. Everybody understands a Father-Son relationship, not everyone understands a "oneness with everything" concept. But I can see many parallels between what Christianity teaches in symbolic terms and what more mystical religions teach. The problem is not everybody sees these things as symbols.

Jesus did not create most of the western dogmas personally. Christianity has been a very popular religion over the past 2000 years, and people have twisted it to achieve their own ends. If the "better ways", as you put it, had been as popular as Christianity had been in the west, I'm sure they could have been exploited just as much. I mean if you can take the teachings of Jesus (love your enemies, turn the other cheek, blessed are the peacmakers, let he who is without sin cast the first stone) and use them to justify wars, burning of heretics and whatever, then I would suggest that nothing would be safe from similar distortions. I've said before Christianity is not the root cause of these evils, human nature is.



It's true that science itself doesn't. But many seem hold science in such esteem that they feel they can dismiss anything that is not in the material realm as non-existant.

Uth other than the Jesus Myth the OT and the NT arent' much different....The bible is across the board a poor value system, thats what I'm interested in, I'm interested in peace and love and getting along and that things are safe for myself and kids, and all beings I'm interested in embracing diversity and not hatiing because one is different in beleifs or sex or sexual preference, i'm not interested in a system that pushes a hate adgenda and harm to others by making up a Imagiinary dieyt and saying this is his message to mankind....It doesn't work...Religion has had 2000 years to get humanity to a peaceful loving place it has failed miserably, it has created alot of dydsfunctions on top of the hatred it generates.....truthfully the best hope for mankind is getting away from relgion move towards systems that are peaceful philosophys for living, there are many and many are independently , quietly doing things themselves to change things, our religon may of had good intentions at some point although I am doubtful...if i may ask why do you support a system that speaks for itself the effects are observable,the harm awesome, i understand that growing up religious immunes one to the harmful effects much like watching killing over and over desensitizes and can affect ones capacity to be emphathetic...so it can be real hard to see the danger because to many its natural and many call this 'love''' .....the issue isn't that relgion isn't followed the issue is it is followed to the letter.....

Well stated! I also took a religion course in a Catholic College and this is what we were led to believe. The teacher was a priest and a Ph. D. in Philosophy and Psychology. Through this course (World Religions), I found that evolution can comfortably coincide with the Creationist Theory (maybe God's six days were our six billion years--who knows?) and the Darwinian Theory is acceptable (maybe God made man out of monkeys--why not use the materials at hand?). I learned that although the Bible is an inspirational book and a tool to live by, the Bible also includes a biased history of the Hebrews, imagery, symbolism, allegories, and personal opinions. (For example, in First Corinthians, Chapter 7, which discusses married life versus remaining single, St. Paul admits freely that his advice is his own opinion, not a commandment of God or the Holy Spirit.) I have had a hard time convincing many of my Protestant friends that the Bible is not the mouthpiece of our religion (the community--the Body of Christ--is its mouthpiece). The Bible is simply a tool, inspired by God but still written by humans (who we all know to be fallible), to teach us how to live a Godly life. That is why the Body of Christ (Christian Community) must discern the Bible through the grace of the Holy Spirit, so that we can know which things are written of man and which things are inspired by God. When I realized this, it was as if a light went off in my head, and it also gave me a great amount of comfort and actually strengthened my beliefs as a Christian.

This is why I firmly believe in education. Some of my Christian friends can recite the Bible verse by verse, but they cannot tell you the history behind the message. To dumbly accept something without knowing why is a waste of God’s grace. I believe there is a difference between faith and dumb faith. God wants us to know why we have chosen to follow him. He doesn’t want a bunch of dumb sheep—that is why he gave us free will and an intellect.

I’m sure there have been Christians on UM that have been less than Christ-like in their responses, but I have found on UM that most (not all) atheists treat me, as a Christian, with contempt and hostility. I don’t have the desire to look up all the postings to prove my point—it would take too much energy--I’m simply stating my personal experience in this forum. Those encouraging religious intolerance is just as bad as some of the garbage being spouted by religious fundamentalists.

I’m sure there have been Christians on UM that have been less than Christ-like in their responses, but I have found on UM that most (not all) atheists treat me, as a Christian, with contempt and hostility. I don’t have the desire to look up all the postings to prove my point—it would take too much energy--I’m simply stating my personal experience in this forum. Those encouraging religious intolerance is just as bad as some of the garbage being spouted by religious fundamentalists.

howdy i would ask if you feel that you are treated with contempt becasue your beliefs are disagreed with and challenged...i have found that the christians on here see hatred in disagreement and challenges,... i have seen christians threaten to kill others and I was one of them because I disagreed..yet i realize that this is the teachings of christianity beleive as you or told or 'die', be shunned, maimed, first born killed etc......

its healthy to disagree it's a earmark of a free thinking individual...Honestly i've been coming for a year and a half and I rarely have seen a athiest or NB get hostile, or condemn.....I would like to see proof of this, this is quite a claim one that should have posts to back it up...

Nonsense.

Perhaps because you are not objective in your observations?

And you have to prove that this quote is accurate;

"... i have seen christians threaten to kill others and I was one of them because I disagreed.."

You should have proof to back up such a strong claim unless you are setting up a double standard.

will this do as an example for you, paper?

I wanted one directed at Sheri but that's fine. In defense to Mr. President he was illustrating the point that people like you would convince others to commit murder.

Now I am not defending him just analyzing his post in respect to the situation; I am not saying you would do such a thing. I can see why you would see it as dangerous but it does not constitute as the “attacks” Sheri was describing.

Supra, I think you can see from my postings that I do not respond with anger and do not take adversity or a challenge as a threat.

I encourage open dialogue and appreciate the opportunity to share my opinions. I do not wish to force anyone to accept my way of thinking--but I do like to share my opinion and encourage people to consider other ways of thinking.

However, the response I have received from some atheists on UM have been more than "challenging." I think as a moderately intelligent person, I can discern the difference between an intellectual debate and a verbal (or written) attack.

Unfortunately, I also seen Christians respond in a less than Christ-like manner--I'm sure there have been some instances when I could have been more Christ-like--but I never deliberately try to be rude. I apologize for those of us who have done so, for that has given you a distorted view of Christianity.

QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 8 2007, 04:24 PM) *
"I'm not going to address the rest of the post" Thank you, for a person of your intellect i shall consider that an attempted "I'm sorry I was wrong, the evidince is staggering, yet dont want to admit it, so ill hide behind this curtain while repeating the 'I know you are but what am I' peewee herman motto"

At the same time, If I'm wrong and you still yet did not see the evident proof of your own foolishness and lack of understanding, then I have nothing more to offer this conversation.

Let your own evils consume you, Let your life become more miserable then it has ever in your entire life. Let those false loves you cling to attack you from all sides, let them devastate you just as the fire and brimstone that fell upon sodom and gomorrah. Then only through your intense suffering and misery I pray your eyes and ears become able and perceptive. Not just seeing and hearing but understanding.

Good day.
Paper,
Heres another example of Hatred from a christain....This was To KBA...( see above)

Paper the one i received was similar, and i have noticed that it isn't unususal after a few disagreements that a relgious person becomes freaked out ..It spart of the dogma too...

Howdy you don't have to apologize for 'christains' its part of the beleif , if one is different they are against 'god' and therefore not important or worthy of lfe...Depending on the topic ( homosexual being the big no no against 'god' ) will depend on the severity of the attack...I am just saying relgioun teaches hatred and divisison, not all christians agree, I know many who would never for a second consider hating anyone for any reason...

I Still would like to see where a NB or athiest has insulted someone...

You mean like the people here who pledge that they believe in tolerance, but are only tolerant of what they already agree? They say they believe in diversity, but then argue that the world would be better off without some POVs. They smear all of Christianity with strawman arguments- they tell us what 'all christians' believe, and prove it's nonsense by debunking their own strawman view of Christianity.

BTW, What is the difference between these three statements?

1. "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world"
2. "The world is a wicked place. Everybody needs to protest witchcraft of EVERY FORM and shun its presence in our homes."
3. "the most dysfunctional ideas are in christianity, its observable, we can see the effects of the beleifs and values, humanity is a mess....."

All three are examples of bigotry IMO.
I'm sure that some here will say that the difference is that the 3rd one is true, and all Christians believe the first two (because they said so). All three are actual quotes and one was taken from this very forum.

I wonder if there's a psycological explaination as to how people can be exactly like what they claim to be against, and not even realize it. Projection?

Uth their would be some views that we woudl all be better off not ascribing too, and we have to ask why are some things a choice at all??? such as discrimination, hatred, division...Too often christianity fights to keep beleifs that are harmful, rarely do you see one refusiing to see a woman as inequal what we do see is jsutifications as to why a beleif that obviously supports inequality be debated to keep the right to discriminate......why would it be a choice to harm self and others or not to harm self, this is only possible in a extremely immature society , As one evolves one knows what is best and that is the only choice no matter what, there is never a justification otherwise.... ... ....Juvenile diabetes is on the rise if a child gets diabetes at a young age the child may not live past his late 30's as a parent do i offer this as a choice?????Or do i set the standard as the parent guiding using the very best knowledge and wisdoms I have to give my child the best advantages??? What would I be saying if i offerred a choice do you value your life or don't you as if its a choice..see what I'm saying?????

Yeah about my two cents...heh, sorry about that. I guess I got carried away