Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by Nam on Today at 10:31:04 AM »
Dude, are you tipsy? "Anytime" for "anyone" and "petiole"[1] for "people" -- unless on purpose?
 1. a stalk that joins a leaf
I use swipe typing on my phone, which means that it likes to pick words based on what it thinks I mean.  I'm sure you've run into something similar in the past, having used a phone for posting for several years now.

So, you've been taken over by your phone...

Hi Jaimehlers' phone. Um, my phone says hi, too. Um, don't let it take over me like you took over him.

[logs off quickly! ]

;)

-Nam
2
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by jaimehlers on Today at 10:27:19 AM »
Dude, are you tipsy? "Anytime" for "anyone" and "petiole"[1] for "people" -- unless on purpose?
 1. a stalk that joins a leaf
I use swipe typing on my phone, which means that it likes to pick words based on what it thinks I mean.  I'm sure you've run into something similar in the past, having used a phone for posting for several years now.
3
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by OldChurchGuy on Today at 10:17:41 AM »
I think that Nogodsforme is correct in that the Bible, in itself, is a stumbling block for many, if not most Christians, and that the argument could definitely be made that this is a good thing.

The way I see it, these Christians, including Old Church Guy, are more Theists with Christian trappings. They are those genetically "wired" for faith; they need a higher power to believe in, and naturally the religion they were brought up with and is most prevalent in their surroundings "feels" right. So that's how they identify, whether they strictly embrace every last bit of dogma or not. Delving deeper into it raises uncomfortable questions, which creates a market for books and philosophies which manage to find the warm and fuzzy interpretations, focusing on the lessons in love and forgiveness and sugar-coating, downplaying, or downright rejecting the notion of eternal torment for the unbeliever. Yet they still identify as Christian because for the most part it's a comfortable niche where they can practice their faith with more or less like-minded people.

While the argument could be made that they are not "Christians" because of this, they are also, often, the people more "Christ-like" in their attitude toward others. They find the lessons of love and forgiveness more compelling in a god-figure than they do jealousy and vengeance. They follow the philosophies attributed to Jesus according to their hearts and cannot comprehend or reconcile the idea of a loving god with that of hell.

Others seem to find more security in a much narrower definition, where they do not believe that those who waffle about details merit salvation. As long as they, themselves, think their path leads to heaven, their god seems perfectly justified in his criteria.

Perhaps it is genetic.  I don't think so in my case, but I am not the most objective source.  :)

You make very good points and I for one thank you for sharing them.

Appreciatively,

OldChurchGuy
4
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by wheels5894 on Today at 10:16:52 AM »
Paul was inspired by God when he wrote. Simply saying, "But Paul was just a man!" is a moot point. He was a man, yes, but he was under the influence of God.
Seeing as you have no way to actually show that this was the case, you will have to excuse me for saying that your claim is entirely moot.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, of course, but you have no chance of convincing anytime else that you are correct when you rely on an argument like this.  The only people who could be swayed by it are those who already believe that it's true, which helps your case not at all.

The problem with Paul, like the other heroes of the NT, is that they only exist in the texts of the NT and no where else. This is where the historicity is a problem. For some odd reason, no one ever noticed this Roman Citizen or ever made a single note about him despite his journey to Rome. Now that is not to suggest that Paul, the person, never lived after all someone wrote the letters that bear his name, but he might as well be anonymous, like the evangelists as well as bear the name Paul.

Finally, If one listens or read Richard Carrier, there is the take on the story that Paul 'borrowed' the bits of facts he preaches from other cults and one can almost go along with that considering Paul's Jesus is never really on earth at all. He is not an historical figure for Paul. Rather he is an eternal figure doing his stuff in heaven. This is a significant problem for history as Paul is the nearest of the NT writers and yet doesn't attest to an historical Jesus.
5
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by jynnan tonnix on Today at 10:13:05 AM »
I think that Nogodsforme is correct in that the Bible, in itself, is a stumbling block for many, if not most Christians, and that the argument could definitely be made that this is a good thing.

The way I see it, these Christians, including Old Church Guy, are more Theists with Christian trappings. They are those genetically "wired" for faith; they need a higher power to believe in, and naturally the religion they were brought up with and is most prevalent in their surroundings "feels" right. So that's how they identify, whether they strictly embrace every last bit of dogma or not. Delving deeper into it raises uncomfortable questions, which creates a market for books and philosophies which manage to find the warm and fuzzy interpretations, focusing on the lessons in love and forgiveness and sugar-coating, downplaying, or downright rejecting the notion of eternal torment for the unbeliever. Yet they still identify as Christian because for the most part it's a comfortable niche where they can practice their faith with more or less like-minded people.

While the argument could be made that they are not "Christians" because of this, they are also, often, the people more "Christ-like" in their attitude toward others. They find the lessons of love and forgiveness more compelling in a god-figure than they do jealousy and vengeance. They follow the philosophies attributed to Jesus according to their hearts and cannot comprehend or reconcile the idea of a loving god with that of hell.

Others seem to find more security in a much narrower definition, where they do not believe that those who waffle about details merit salvation. As long as they, themselves, think their path leads to heaven, their god seems perfectly justified in his criteria.
6
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by OldChurchGuy on Today at 10:12:01 AM »

<snip>

Outside of Christianity, I cannot prove that all other faiths are doomed to eternal damnation.  Again, I have trouble believing a loving caring God would be willing to let so much of humanity be doomed.  But, that is me. 

As always,

OldChurchGuy

I am reminded of the last of C S Lewis's Naria series where the world ends and the heroes go into heaven. One character whose name escapes me, was following a faith that seemed to be Islam and he was let in, not because of trusting in Aslan but because if his true adherence to his own faith, albeit the wrong one as it turned out. Maybe that is how you god, OGC, will deal with the non-Christians.

Of course, us atheists, arguing the case of there being no go will be 'cast into outer darkness where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth' because we actively tried to persuade people to give up their faith. It's either that or, if we have been as good as the Christians in moral behaviour etc. maybe we get let in. Who knows?

Who indeed knows?  It is all a matter of faith / belief for theists.  That is why I am always surprised when a theist of any stripe presents their faith / belief as irrefutable fact. 

As always,

OldChurchGuy
7
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by wheels5894 on Today at 10:07:00 AM »

<snip>

Outside of Christianity, I cannot prove that all other faiths are doomed to eternal damnation.  Again, I have trouble believing a loving caring God would be willing to let so much of humanity be doomed.  But, that is me. 

As always,

OldChurchGuy

I am reminded of the last of C S Lewis's Naria series where the world ends and the heroes go into heaven. One character whose name escapes me, was following a faith that seemed to be Islam and he was let in, not because of trusting in Aslan but because if his true adherence to his own faith, albeit the wrong one as it turned out. Maybe that is how you god, OGC, will deal with the non-Christians.

Of course, us atheists, arguing the case of there being no go will be 'cast into outer darkness where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth' because we actively tried to persuade people to give up their faith. It's either that or, if we have been as good as the Christians in moral behaviour etc. maybe we get let in. Who knows?
8
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by One Above All on Today at 10:02:43 AM »
Dude, are you tipsy? "Anytime" for "anyone" and "petiole"[1] for "people" -- unless on purpose?
 1. a stalk that joins a leaf

Ducking auto-correct, probably.

-Nam

-One
9
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by Nam on Today at 09:59:07 AM »
Dude, are you tipsy? "Anytime" for "anyone" and "petiole"[1] for "people" -- unless on purpose?

-Nam
 1. a stalk that joins a leaf
10
General Religious Discussion / Re: Questions For Old Church Guy
« Last post by jaimehlers on Today at 09:56:45 AM »
Paul was inspired by God when he wrote. Simply saying, "But Paul was just a man!" is a moot point. He was a man, yes, but he was under the influence of God.
Seeing as you have no way to actually show that this was the case, you will have to excuse me for saying that your claim is entirely moot.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, of course, but you have no chance of convincing anyone else that you are correct when you rely on an argument like this.  The only people who could be swayed by it are those who already believe that it's true, which helps your case not at all.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10