Logic vs. Theism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-03-2017, 10:45 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(23-03-2017 08:13 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(23-03-2017 06:40 AM)OakTree500 Wrote:  All I would suggest is, if you think the START of the book doesn't make any sense and it's illogical ,[which it is], why would the rest of it be any better?

I do think that there is some stuff to take out of the bible, to use in a positive manner,as there is from all religions but it's not meant to be taken literally. It's very provable that a lot of the "big" stories just didn't happen at all.

Nobody can guide you but yourself. I'm not saying you shouldn't believe, just use your noggin a bit and work things out for yourself, and you might see things a bit differently. Believe in whatever you like, but be honest and real with yourself and you'll grow as a person.
Good post and advice. I would never advise any to take any sacred religious texts literally. They just aren't meant to be interpreted that way in my honest humble opinion.

peace friend

faith in selfless unity for good

So does this mean the Jesus parts aren't meant to be taken literally as well? Including the sacrifice? What about the whole concept of a god existing at all? What that not literal?

If the entire book isn't taken literal then I fail to see the point of it. Sounds like a book of fairy tales and badly wrote poems to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Dark Wanderer's post
28-03-2017, 11:15 PM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(28-03-2017 08:10 PM)socialistview Wrote:  See god god brings judgement to give oppressed people for the better. Since we can reason there has to be a judgement for our sins.

> Sin is nothing more than a priestly invention designed to control people through fear and guilt. Before you can make claims about God's judgment, you must first prove that he exists. Secondly, you must prove that the Bible is divinely inspired. Good luck with both of those! Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Gwaithmir's post
29-03-2017, 03:29 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
Then you must explain why I should care.

Except for threats on his behalf, they appear to have nothing. You'd think Mr. All Powerful wouldn't be so easily upset by the actions of mere humans.

I don't care about such threats either, especially as they involve things happening to me after I am dead. Fill your boots.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Robvalue's post
29-03-2017, 05:32 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(28-03-2017 08:10 PM)socialistview Wrote:  See god god brings judgement to give oppressed people for the better.

Except there is no evidence for that happening except by chance. It also totally ignores when bad things strike decent people. Pull your head out of your ass, son.

Quote:Since we can reason there has to be a judgement for our sins.

No, we can't "reason" that at all. There's no "has to" and, from all the available evidence, there isn't any kind of cosmic justice no matter how much you may want there to be.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
29-03-2017, 05:35 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(29-03-2017 03:29 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Fill your boots.

Pardon? Is that something for the "British colloquialisms" thread?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
29-03-2017, 05:44 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(28-03-2017 10:45 PM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  
(23-03-2017 08:13 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Good post and advice. I would never advise any to take any sacred religious texts literally. They just aren't meant to be interpreted that way in my honest humble opinion.

peace friend

faith in selfless unity for good

So does this mean the Jesus parts aren't meant to be taken literally as well? Including the sacrifice? What about the whole concept of a god existing at all? What that not literal?

If the entire book isn't taken literal then I fail to see the point of it. Sounds like a book of fairy tales and badly wrote poems to me.
Sacrifice is to be of wants/ desires of self and can lead to literal self sacrifice or martyrdom in cases.

As far as GOD being your literal physical earthly father? Not exactly; but being the cause of all existence, then still, in a way, could be seen figuratively as a father of sorts.

The bible, nor other profound writings should be attempted to be read or understood if someone can't even think of things in a non literal or material form.

You can find the same truths searching yourself with honesty.

But if you can't be honest about comprehending the bible then your level of self honesty may be miniscule as well.



faith in selfless unity for good
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2017, 05:52 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(29-03-2017 05:44 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Sacrifice is to be of wants/ desires of self and can lead to literal self sacrifice or martyrdom in cases.

self-sacrifice is not necessarily a good thing.
martyrdom is rarely a good thing although I gather that's your goal. You need help, Pops. Get some.

Quote:As far as GOD being your literal physical earthly father? Not exactly; but being the cause of all existence, then still, in a way, could be seen figuratively as a father of sorts.

Prove it exists. Then prove it created anything. We'll wait.

Quote:The bible, nor other profound writings should be attempted to be read or understood if someone can't even think of things in a non literal or material form.

Few people here have trouble with non-literal text; the difference is that we recognize it as metaphorical and are able to apply it to reality. You seem to see it as supernatural and create a separate reality for it. You need help, Pops. Get some.

Quote:You can find the same truths searching yourself with honesty.

But if you can't be honest about comprehending the bible then your level of self honesty may be miniscule as well.

It has nothing to do with being honest with yourself It has to do with separating fact from fiction. You need help, Pops. Get some.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like unfogged's post
29-03-2017, 06:00 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(29-03-2017 05:44 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Sacrifice is to be of wants/ desires of self and can lead to literal self sacrifice or martyrdom in cases.

As far as GOD being your literal physical earthly father? Not exactly; but being the cause of all existence, then still, in a way, could be seen figuratively as a father of sorts.

The bible, nor other profound writings should be attempted to be read or understood if someone can't even think of things in a non literal or material form.

You can find the same truths searching yourself with honesty.

But if you can't be honest about comprehending the bible then your level of self honesty may be miniscule as well.
There are deep divisions among Christians about how literally to take what parts of the Bible. Whether for example to take a six day creation as six literal days, or whether there was a literal talking snake in a literal garden of eden with a literal tree of knowledge of good and evil. Or how literally to take verses that decry homosexuality as an abomination.

When it suits some Christians, such as to try to harmonize an obviously ancient earth with the much younger earth of the Bible, even literalists will reach for questionable forced interpretations, e.g., the "gap theory" between Gen 1:1 and 1:2.

And that is just Christians arguing about just their holy book.

Each believer's conceit is that there is a single "correct" interpretation that they and their sub-sub sect have managed to land upon. The more enlightened ones will admit that they aren't sure about a few things even so, but that those things are not foundational or important.

This is the problem you have with religious faith, which is not tethered to empirical reality, evidence, or substantiation. It's a fundamentally failed epistemology that does not tend to lead towards truth. It is just people shouting in a vacuum at each other. It's a real problem when you assume what's true in advance and then try to force-fit facts to it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like mordant's post
29-03-2017, 07:16 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(29-03-2017 05:35 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(29-03-2017 03:29 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Fill your boots.

Pardon? Is that something for the "British colloquialisms" thread?

Haha, yeah Big Grin

Not sure of the origin of it. It means "Go for it, do as much as you like".

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
29-03-2017, 10:21 AM
RE: Logic vs. Theism
(29-03-2017 07:16 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(29-03-2017 05:35 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Pardon? Is that something for the "British colloquialisms" thread?

Haha, yeah Big Grin

Not sure of the origin of it. It means "Go for it, do as much as you like".

Love it! (was gonna ask the same thing as unfogged. Great minds and all that Rolleyes )

A bit of googling led me to this:

So far, the best origin story I've heard is that of "when plundering, using every available container - i.e., even your boots". It feels as though there may be more to it than this, but I've not discovered it yet. What say?

And

At the HMS Victory museum in Portsmouth UK, you can buy a thick leather cup lined with pitch. This is a replica of the sailor's mug used on board in Nelson's time, and it was used (among other things) for the rum ration when issued. This cup is called a "boot", and when things were good and you got an extra rum ration, sailors were told "Fill Yer Boots"!

And

In quick time they were at the wine-pipe; for a moment the new hands seemed at a loss for the means of getting the wine to their mouths; but the "wide-a-awake" boy sliped (sic) off one of his shoes in a twinkling, dipped it into the cask and drank.

"Drink, you devils, drink!" he said; "its all one how much you drink, only don't get drunk!" And again he filled his shoe, and again he drank. The previous debauch in connexion with the new, soon tumbled him on the ground; and he lay there gradually sinking into stupidity; but, as he took his leave of consciousness, he admonished the others to take care of themselves; to take as much as they could rightly carry; but not to get drunk, saying, as he sunk lower and lower himself, "Fill your boots, boys—fill your boots! Give me one small drop in a shoe to make me well again, for I'm— I'm—."

Alas, poor humanity! There lay in the deepest degradation, as good a fighting soldier, and, when he could not get drink, as cleanly and active a fellow as ever the English army possessed


All in all, what we can conclude from this, is I want a drink. Either rum or cahcaça will do Yes

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vera's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: