Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-10-2015, 06:02 PM (This post was last modified: 18-10-2015 07:10 PM by Reltzik.)
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 05:11 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  I am sorry but I did not get to the second question. When does following the bible do more harm than good? I do not know how to best answer that question. Now, this is just my personal opinion but it seems to be logical. Jesus Christ said when asked what the greatest commandment was. He said first to love God with all your heart, all your spirit, and all your soul then to love your neighbors because love covers a multitude of sins. If a christian was to do anything that would violate these two commandments then they are wrong. Beating kids to death is not loving your neighbor. It is not what a christian should be doing.

The point of the question wasn't about asking what Christians SHOULD be doing. It was noting the high failure rate of Christians attempting to follow the Bible, screwing up, and making things worse as a consequence. Wouldn't, for example, it be better if this family who beat their child to death because of their (mis)interpretation of the Bible never encountered the book in the first place?

To draw a metaphor, let's say that there's a miracle drug with a complicated dosing regimen to cure cancer. You have to do four pills spread throughout the first day, three pills the second, then four, then three, then two, and then restart the pattern, and every three times through the pattern you take four pills on the fourth day instead of three. If this regimen is followed precisely, then the cancer is cured after ten cycles (fifty days), with 100% observed success rate. Not just remission, total cure, no chance of it coming back. But if the regimen is not followed precisely, things go really, really bad. The tumors are made worse, the cancer metastasizes, and it even becomes communicable. The drug gets released onto the market and, lo and behold, more people who take it screw up the regimen than get it right. For every person who pulls it off, five people get it wrong and harm themselves and those around them. The drug ends up doing more harm than good because people don't follow the instructions, and arguably should never have been released at all. This is what I meant by a cure worse than the disease.

To make the analogy clearer, let's say the Biblical instructions are the cure. (Again, for the sake of argument.) The core commands, you say, are very simple, but they come packaged with a lot of weird instructions (stoning gays, not suffering witches to live, etc) that confuse a lot of people even if they're supposed to be overridden by the core commands. These confused people then harm themselves and those around them. When the results of the religion -- factoring in the frequency and consequences of it being practiced incorrectly -- prove so detrimental in the world, at what point does it become a cure worse than the disease? It's not what they SHOULD be doing, but it's what their failed attempt to understand the Bible got them doing. Nor can we really say that the Bible had no part in the process.

For the record, most of us here are humanists, and we're just fine with the idea of loving our neighbors (and even the people on the other side of town or the other side of the planet). We just don't need the Christianity to tell us to do that.

(18-10-2015 05:14 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(18-10-2015 05:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  But the biggest thing they fail to understand is "YOU CAN NOT CONVERT AN ATHEIST BY USING THE BIBLE AS YOUR ONLY SOURCE!" as you know atheist don't care. I might as well be quoting nursery rhymes to prove that cows can jump over the moon.

Quote:I try very hard not to use my own personal opinion but rather use the scripture found in the bible.

You seem to not be taking your own advice. Your personal opinions and, more importantly, WHY you hold the beliefs you do would be much more interesting.

The difference seemed clear to me. He's criticizing people for attempting to CONVERT ATHEISTS using Biblical verses, while he says (in the part you didn't quote) that he's attempting to CLARIFY WHAT CHRISTIANITY IS using Biblical verses. Seems a bit like the right tool for the right job, though I have some semantic doubts about whether it's the book or the practice that defines the religion. I'll agree that the personal opinions and reasons for the beliefs would be interesting.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Reltzik's post
18-10-2015, 06:31 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 06:02 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(18-10-2015 05:14 PM)unfogged Wrote:  You seem to not be taking your own advice. Your personal opinions and, more importantly, WHY you hold the beliefs you do would be much more interesting.

The difference seemed clear to me. He's criticizing people for attempting to CONVERT ATHEISTS using Biblical verses, while he says (in the part you didn't quote) that he's attempting to CLARIFY WHAT CHRISTIANITY IS using Biblical verses. Seems a bit like the right tool for the right job, though I have some semantic doubts about whether it's the book or the practice that defines the religion. I'll agree that the personal opinions and reasons for the beliefs would be interesting.

I understood the distinction he's making but may have quoted hastily. He correctly touched the idea that scripture doesn't prove anything to atheists because we don't take it as authoritative. Why he would then think there was value in clarifying how he reads scripture is what I question.

As you noted in your response to him, if the ideas are good then it is those ideas that count, not that you can interpret some parts of scripture to support them. I don't think it makes sense to worry about how xians should be reading the bible until there is a reason to take it as anything more than a collection of myths and legends.

I also don't see how he can clarify what xianity is using any tool without diving headfirst into a No True Scotsman argument.

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
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
18-10-2015, 07:25 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 05:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  On the other hand, within minutes of joining this forum I have come to realize that there are a lot of atheist who know very little about Christians or the bible.

While that may be true in regards to the big picture (because a lot of the developed world has evolved past worrying about the same fairy tales you do) , with that statement you make it painfully clear that you are a noob here, and that your head is further up your ass than I would have guessed.

Welcome to the forum, please try not to piss on the rug, it really ties the room together.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
18-10-2015, 09:05 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 05:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  On the other hand, within minutes of joining this forum I have come to realize that there are a lot of atheist who know very little about Christians or the bible.

Interesting. In mere minutes, you looked at a total of 871,856 posts in 30,646 threads, made by 16,142 members, and were able to understand not only their knowledge of christianity and the bible, but to judge their motivations and intentions.

(18-10-2015 05:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Who's to blame them? Why would they care? Why would they waste their time researching a fairy tail? So I decided to join this forum simply to answer questions, clear up confusion and try my best to explain why christians believe the things they do.

You could, perhaps, ASK the people if they care. ASK them if they've read the bible. ASK them what research they've done. ASK them why they believe what they do.

OR you start off with a narrow mindset and misjudge the knowledge and experiences of a large group of people, continue on by making assumptions about their reasons, experiences and motivations, and finish by offering to help, without offering up any evidences of any qualifications.

Did I miss anything?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
18-10-2015, 10:13 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 09:05 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(18-10-2015 05:03 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Who's to blame them? Why would they care? Why would they waste their time researching a fairy tail? So I decided to join this forum simply to answer questions, clear up confusion and try my best to explain why christians believe the things they do.
Did I miss anything?
What I'd like to see is Jason go to a Christian site and try to clear up confusion and try to explain to them why Christians believe the things they do.

It is my experience that you can't assume much of any particular Christian. Their scriptures are often interpreted differently from church to church and from person to person. Jason would get lambasted in his attempt to tell other Christians the stuff that he tells us represents them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Stevil's post
19-10-2015, 12:03 AM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 10:13 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(18-10-2015 09:05 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Did I miss anything?
What I'd like to see is Jason go to a Christian site and try to clear up confusion and try to explain to them why Christians believe the things they do.

It is my experience that you can't assume much of any particular Christian. Their scriptures are often interpreted differently from church to church and from person to person. Jason would get lambasted in his attempt to tell other Christians the stuff that he tells us represents them.

Cue KC giving the kid a solid beat-down backed up by Bible verses Big Grin

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
19-10-2015, 03:26 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(18-10-2015 06:02 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(18-10-2015 05:11 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  I am sorry but I did not get to the second question. When does following the bible do more harm than good? I do not know how to best answer that question. Now, this is just my personal opinion but it seems to be logical. Jesus Christ said when asked what the greatest commandment was. He said first to love God with all your heart, all your spirit, and all your soul then to love your neighbors because love covers a multitude of sins. If a christian was to do anything that would violate these two commandments then they are wrong. Beating kids to death is not loving your neighbor. It is not what a christian should be doing.

The point of the question wasn't about asking what Christians SHOULD be doing. It was noting the high failure rate of Christians attempting to follow the Bible, screwing up, and making things worse as a consequence. Wouldn't, for example, it be better if this family who beat their child to death because of their (mis)interpretation of the Bible never encountered the book in the first place?

To draw a metaphor, let's say that there's a miracle drug with a complicated dosing regimen to cure cancer. You have to do four pills spread throughout the first day, three pills the second, then four, then three, then two, and then restart the pattern, and every three times through the pattern you take four pills on the fourth day instead of three. If this regimen is followed precisely, then the cancer is cured after ten cycles (fifty days), with 100% observed success rate. Not just remission, total cure, no chance of it coming back. But if the regimen is not followed precisely, things go really, really bad. The tumors are made worse, the cancer metastasizes, and it even becomes communicable. The drug gets released onto the market and, lo and behold, more people who take it screw up the regimen than get it right. For every person who pulls it off, five people get it wrong and harm themselves and those around them. The drug ends up doing more harm than good because people don't follow the instructions, and arguably should never have been released at all. This is what I meant by a cure worse than the disease.

To make the analogy clearer, let's say the Biblical instructions are the cure. (Again, for the sake of argument.) The core commands, you say, are very simple, but they come packaged with a lot of weird instructions (stoning gays, not suffering witches to live, etc) that confuse a lot of people even if they're supposed to be overridden by the core commands. These confused people then harm themselves and those around them. When the results of the religion -- factoring in the frequency and consequences of it being practiced incorrectly -- prove so detrimental in the world, at what point does it become a cure worse than the disease? It's not what they SHOULD be doing, but it's what their failed attempt to understand the Bible got them doing. Nor can we really say that the Bible had no part in the process.

For the record, most of us here are humanists, and we're just fine with the idea of loving our neighbors (and even the people on the other side of town or the other side of the planet). We just don't need the Christianity to tell us to do that.

(18-10-2015 05:14 PM)unfogged Wrote:  You seem to not be taking your own advice. Your personal opinions and, more importantly, WHY you hold the beliefs you do would be much more interesting.

The difference seemed clear to me. He's criticizing people for attempting to CONVERT ATHEISTS using Biblical verses, while he says (in the part you didn't quote) that he's attempting to CLARIFY WHAT CHRISTIANITY IS using Biblical verses. Seems a bit like the right tool for the right job, though I have some semantic doubts about whether it's the book or the practice that defines the religion. I'll agree that the personal opinions and reasons for the beliefs would be interesting.
Ok. I think I understand the question now. Basically, does the benefits of religion outweigh the cost? I think your analogy really hits the nail on the head. I believe that most religions were built on a foundation of love and peace in order to make the world a better place. However human nature is flawed and corrupt. Religion in general, doesn't matter if it be Christianity or Muslim, has in fact been a tool by corrupt individuals in order to control the masses for a more sinister motives. So my answer is simply no. If all religions are false, the world would be better without it. The question is how to prove religion is false? How can science prove that God does not exist? Many argue that atheism itself is a religion because it does require faith that God does not exist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2015, 03:56 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(19-10-2015 03:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  The question is how to prove religion is false? How can science prove that God does not exist? Many argue that atheism itself is a religion because it does require faith that God does not exist.

There is no need to prove religion false. If you claim to follow the One True Religion, and claim that I should too, then it's simply a case of that if you don't satisfy me that your religion is true, then I have no reason to believe it.

It is *religion* - any religion claiming to be true - that must be proven true. To commit to following such a religion without such a proof or at least a reasonable certainty is silly - it means that you could be living a lie.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
19-10-2015, 04:15 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(19-10-2015 03:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  I believe that most religions were built on a foundation of love and peace in order to make the world a better place.

That's a pretty broad statement that I suspect does not hold up. Many religions involved a lot of animal and/or human sacrifice, lots of ritual offerings and grovelling, and very little apparent concern for love or peace.

Quote:However human nature is flawed and corrupt.

Human nature is also selfless and loving. Religions often seem to focus on the negative in order to convince people they have a problem that they need the religion to cure.

Quote:The question is how to prove religion is false? How can science prove that God does not exist?

The question is how to prove religion is true. It does not make sense to accept the claim and then look for ways to disprove it, at least not before there is sufficient evidence in support of the claim. What demonstrable, verifiable test can be performed to support the claim that a god exists?

Quote:Many argue that atheism itself is a religion because it does require faith that God does not exist.

Many would be wrong. All it requires is critical thinking and a refusal to accept claims that have not been demonstrated to be true. Atheists are not under any compulsion to accept the claim "no god exists" and they can reject that right along with "a god exists" and simply remain unconvinced.

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
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
19-10-2015, 04:20 PM
RE: Teen Beaten to Death in New York Church
(19-10-2015 03:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  The question is how to prove religion is false?

If by proving that religion is false you mean showing that object of worship does not exist then there is no need to prove religion false. It's believers who should prove it true not other way around.

(19-10-2015 03:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  How can science prove that God does not exist?

Why should science deal with infantile tales about space wizards? It's believers job to prove their god.

(19-10-2015 03:26 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Many argue that atheism itself is a religion because it does require faith that God does not exist.

It only show that many are deluded. Atheism is lack of belief but I imagine theist preffer to think that atehists do believe, just in other thing; if atheist believe theist aren't forced to confront their delusion. But if atheists do not believe in nonexistence it may mean that "irrefutable" proofs for god aren't so irrefutable and doubts could appear. So better to think that atheist believe and/or they're just angry at some guys invisible friend.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: