God's dad.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-11-2013, 04:14 PM (This post was last modified: 16-11-2013 04:20 PM by Mr Woof.)
God's dad.
Christians hold the very challenging idea that Yahweh father of Jesus is identical with the son, so that, collectively God Senior had himself crucified, in order to save the world from a death that (being God) was not a conventional death at all.
It seems that in His omniscience God would have seen sin, and on that account was perpetrator of the earthly misery that followed. How on earth could having his Son (Himself) killed alter the fate of all those pre Christian sinners who were not so oddly atoned?

This the core of Christianity sounds very ad hoc. It could of course reflect a power play, and an experimental cosmic God engaged in some slovenly creative experimentation.
Christians, in general, look to life here, death, then the resurrection (Isiah writes of the dead jumping out of their graves and dancing) so all, it would seem are to be tested on the basis of one earthy life, not a series of soul experiences via reincarnation as posited by Hinduism. Christians,on this one life basis, have a difficult job in explaining the total goodness of God. How, for the Heavenly test, is an infant, tested opposed to an octogenarian. Just doen't make sense. Any theists like to explain this?

Getting back to God the Father, of whom Jesus said we should be similarly perfect.
Was He referring to Yahweh? The old testament God was fearsome, jealous, insecure, demanding, and eclectic in his works. He chose to pick a specific group, while committing genocide against the other tribes. Was this the 'perfection we were to follow? As part of the Trinity why did Jesus alter the original laws, regarding Sabbath keeping, opting to turn the other cheek, rather than an eye for an eye, to love enemies rather that rage war against them etc? Not clear at all!

It is interesting that one of the early Church fathers, Marcion, believed that Yahweh was a bumbling fool of a god, and that Jesus had been sent by the true God to patch up Jehovah's botched up work. Marcion would have destroyed all of the Old Testament and most of the Gospels. One wonders how Christianity would have evolved in this scenario.

This is just one snippet relating to strange and contradictory elements inherent in Christianity that encourage irrational thought, certainly at the fundamentalist level.
Is it possible to adopt a spiritual pragmatism, minus all the tripe, based on subjective writings, poetry, art, literature and Universal awe........a spirituality that thinks creatively, kindly, openly, while still remaining objective?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:52 PM
RE: God's dad.
You have to remember, when the bullshit story was first created, it was probably passed round by word of mouth, the resources to look closely at the story were probably not there, people probably didn't have the Bible at hand, but got taught by preachers and scholars and so had to take someone else's view on the topic and not their own.

Secondly, thiests aren't exactly analytical people, and can be fairly ignorant. After all, the best way to become atheist is to read the book, and I am sure if all the Christians on the planet read the Bible in detail, then there would not be as many Christians as there are today. So even though the story is full of contradiction and bullshit, most people either a) don't know because they are uneducated on the Bible, b) like to ignore the contradictions as they wish to continue believing as it gives them hope, makes them feel special or like the idea of eternal life, or some other crap reason.

It also makes me think, when thiests say to athiests "So you think the universe just happened out of nothing?", you could argue "So you think your God just appeared out of nothing?" If God is real, where did he come from?

"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." - Henry David Thoreau
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 06:07 PM
RE: God's dad.
They knew it made no sense.
They argued over the trinity for centuries, (literally).
Aquinas said if anyone said they understood it, they were lying.

(I though this thread was about Yahweh's father. Originally he had one too).
(Gramps I guess). Dodgy

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
16-11-2013, 06:17 PM
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 04:14 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Christians hold the very challenging idea that Yahweh father of Jesus is identical with the son, so that, collectively God Senior had himself crucified, in order to save the world from a death that (being God) was not a conventional death at all.
It seems that in His omniscience God would have seen sin, and on that account was perpetrator of the earthly misery that followed. How on earth could having his Son (Himself) killed alter the fate of all those pre Christian sinners who were not so oddly atoned?

This the core of Christianity sounds very ad hoc. It could of course reflect a power play, and an experimental cosmic God engaged in some slovenly creative experimentation.
Christians, in general, look to life here, death, then the resurrection (Isiah writes of the dead jumping out of their graves and dancing) so all, it would seem are to be tested on the basis of one earthy life, not a series of soul experiences via reincarnation as posited by Hinduism. Christians,on this one life basis, have a difficult job in explaining the total goodness of God. How, for the Heavenly test, is an infant, tested opposed to an octogenarian. Just doen't make sense. Any theists like to explain this?

Getting back to God the Father, of whom Jesus said we should be similarly perfect.
Was He referring to Yahweh? The old testament God was fearsome, jealous, insecure, demanding, and eclectic in his works. He chose to pick a specific group, while committing genocide against the other tribes. Was this the 'perfection we were to follow? As part of the Trinity why did Jesus alter the original laws, regarding Sabbath keeping, opting to turn the other cheek, rather than an eye for an eye, to love enemies rather that rage war against them etc? Not clear at all!

It is interesting that one of the early Church fathers, Marcion, believed that Yahweh was a bumbling fool of a god, and that Jesus had been sent by the true God to patch up Jehovah's botched up work. Marcion would have destroyed all of the Old Testament and most of the Gospels. One wonders how Christianity would have evolved in this scenario.

This is just one snippet relating to strange and contradictory elements inherent in Christianity that encourage irrational thought, certainly at the fundamentalist level.
Is it possible to adopt a spiritual pragmatism, minus all the tripe, based on subjective writings, poetry, art, literature and Universal awe........a spirituality that thinks creatively, kindly, openly, while still remaining objective?

Gott ist tott, and we have killed him.

Literally and mythicaly looking back on it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 08:32 PM
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 04:14 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  It seems that in His omniscience God would have seen sin, and on that account was perpetrator of the earthly misery that followed. How on earth could having his Son (Himself) killed alter the fate of all those pre Christian sinners who were not so oddly atoned?

Most priests and ministers teach the idea that the new testament and Jesus's sacrifice "overrides" the old testament and animal sacrifices.

But that doesn't really address the fact that a great deal of the old testament gave the impression that humanity was supposed to do this or that *forever* to please God. You'd think when god was talking with Moses and Noah and everyone else, he would have said something along the lines of "...but this is just going to be for a few hundred years, then I'm changing the rules. Don't worry, you'll already be dead and junk."

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Cephalotus's post
16-11-2013, 10:09 PM
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 06:07 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  They knew it made no sense.
They argued over the trinity for centuries, (literally).
Aquinas said if anyone said they understood it, they were lying.

(I though this thread was about Yahweh's father. Originally he had one too).
(Gramps I guess). Dodgy

Correct, from what I have found the trinity theory was decided by the Nicene Council 321-325 and 390 ad...interesting note, the scholars and priests who disagreed were banned and kicked out of the region by Emperor Constantine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
17-11-2013, 12:44 AM
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 10:09 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Correct, from what I have found the trinity theory was decided by the Nicene Council 321-325 and 390 ad...interesting note, the scholars and priests who disagreed were banned and kicked out of the region by Emperor Constantine.

The First Council of Nicaea was in 325. The Second Council of Nicaea was in 787.

The controversy continued pretty much unabated even after First Council of Nicaea. It wasn't until the First Council of Constantinople in 381 that the matter was more-or-less settled. I say more-or-less because various non-Trinitarian--and hence "heretical"--denominations emerged in the 19th century: Jehovah's Witnesses (1870s), Christadelphians (1840s), LDS (1830s), Christiam Science (1860s (?)) as part of the Protestant Second Great Awakening.

The doctrine of the Trinity is pretty much the first target of attack that Islamic and Jewish apologists make against Christianity. It is a strange doctrine but it is needed to make the whole strange narrative work--as much as it can be said to work--and that is why it has become one of the definitive elements of mainline Christianity.

The position of the Eastern Orthodox Church (and the Roman Catholic Church too I believe) is that the doctrine of the Trinity is a μυστήριον, i.e. something ineffable that human reason is incapable of fully comprehending.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chippy's post
17-11-2013, 01:39 AM (This post was last modified: 17-11-2013 02:28 AM by Chippy.)
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 04:14 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  It is interesting that one of the early Church fathers, Marcion, believed that Yahweh was a bumbling fool of a god, and that Jesus had been sent by the true God to patch up Jehovah's botched up work. Marcion would have destroyed all of the Old Testament and most of the Gospels. One wonders how Christianity would have evolved in this scenario.

Most of what is known of Marcionism comes from Tertullian's Adversus Marcionem because none of Marcion's texts have survived.

If Tertullian is correct in his reading of Marcion then according to Marcion Yahweh is a demiurge, i.e. a World-creator god--not a "bumbling fool of a god". Under Marcionism the role of Jesus is also salvation. To Marcion, Yahweh was the tribal god of the Jews, he didn't "botch up" anything. To Marcion the OT was nothing more than a description of the actvities and demands of this Demiurge. The only part of the OT that was relevant to Christians was the Fall.

For all that, we were aware that Marcion sets up unequal gods, the one a judge, fierce and warlike, the other mild and peaceable, solely kind and supremely good. [1]

There is no known Marcionite account of the exact relationship between the Demiurge and God but since there is only one Supreme God the implication is that the Demiurge was created by God. That is to say, God delegated the task of creation to Yahweh--the Demiurge. Thus Genesis is an account of Yawhweh's demiurgical activity.

Adding a demiurge into the Christian story only makes a complicated and convoluted narrative more difficult. That seems to be one of Tertullian's arguments against Marcionism. Marcion's required rewrite of the NT would seem to corroborate this.

PS:- I know you have an aversion to substantiation and prefer to just make things up--as if that represents some virtue--so just treat my quotation of Tertullian as something I made up.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 02:09 AM
RE: God's dad.
(16-11-2013 04:14 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  ...
Is it possible to adopt a spiritual pragmatism, minus all the tripe, based on subjective writings, poetry, art, literature and Universal awe........a spirituality that thinks creatively, kindly, openly, while still remaining objective?

Yes.
I have.
At least, I like to think so but perhaps that's just me being subjective

(17-11-2013 01:39 AM)Chippy Wrote:  ...so just treat my quotation of Tertullian as something I made up.

All good up until the personal insult.

Was that really necessary? Huh? huh? Was it?

No

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 08:44 AM
RE: God's dad.
(17-11-2013 02:09 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 04:14 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  ...
Is it possible to adopt a spiritual pragmatism, minus all the tripe, based on subjective writings, poetry, art, literature and Universal awe........a spirituality that thinks creatively, kindly, openly, while still remaining objective?

Yes.
I have.
At least, I like to think so but perhaps that's just me being subjective

(17-11-2013 01:39 AM)Chippy Wrote:  ...so just treat my quotation of Tertullian as something I made up.

All good up until the personal insult.

Was that really necessary? Huh? huh? Was it?

No

Come on, It's Chippy, of course it was necessary. Tongue

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: