I think as Jung said "its wiser to acknowledge the idea of God consciously, for, if we do not, something else is made God, usually something quite inappropriate and stupid such as only an "enlightened" intellect could hatch forth. "
Which I think is to say we should take things as they come rather than use our conscious imaginations to imagine some idea of God or even an absence of God.
Well you may be right.
I was thinking this morning that having decided that God is a non physical reality, would it be possible to believe and benefit from a theist centred religion just the same as someone who believed in a more traditional supernatural God? And what is the appropriate resolution for a Buddhist who believes both that a bodhissttva exists and yet is a mind projection?
Having realised our own 'self deceptions' do we have a choice beyond which self deceptions to pursue? Directed imagination is encouraged as a start in many disciplines - arguably it is the main technique in some (whether overtly recognised or not).
I will think on, you may well be right - if you are I guess it's difficult not to fall silent.
That was me you were responding to. And perhaps I should have used a prefix of one of the fastest ways to atheism, instead of the fastest. Just a bit of semantics there. But I hope I've corrected it now with this post.
Edited to add a bit more.
My own personal opinion is that lack of belief does have a route of sorts. In my case anyway. I came to atheism via investigation and applying skepticism instead of taking things at face value. So in that respect it did take a route.
That's fine. I've stuck my oar in - and had it taken off me to be poked back - as usual:D
BIB: How exactly?
It's not even an argument; it's a definition.
To be an atheist, you must lack a belief in a god. That's it. Any further beliefs or convictions linked to a person's atheism are irrelevant.
There are many varieties of atheist just as there are many varieties of theist. Two atheists may disagree on absolutely everything other than their absence of belief in a God; but they're still atheists.
Sorry Fez. Not ignoring you - but I don't think I've got anymore to add beyond the posts I've made. Thanks for replying.
Well I'm sure you're not alone in wanting to call all atheists something other than that word, but what will you call those who simply are not theists if you redefine the word to your satisfaction? Will you devise a new word for them?
It was an aside. I do think some atheists cling to the 'absence of belief' definition for secondary reasons.
I don't understand what you think I am discarding in the paragraph you quote.
You said "...... but that will take us into the long discussion about physicalism. " which gave me the impression it was another aside, or something not up for discussion at this time. But no matter.
I am only asking you to appreciate my perspective - where did I say I was defining how people should label themselves?
You said "I think, in this matter, dictionary, or even encyclopaedic, definitions can only take us so far. I've thought for some time that we need to move this particular debate on a bit." which again 'gave me the impression' that you aren't satisfied with just having your perspective, but you want to show it as being superior to the common understanding. I doubt you'll get very far and it's been done to death.
And now it's you who is being prescriptive about whether I am allowed to consider myself an atheist or not.
Well suit yourself, of course, but I'll sometimes try to help you not make silly mistakes.
Exactly so. An absence of belief requires no reason for it. But in the quote I originally responded to, the poster said that reading scripture was the fastest route to atheism they knew. It's surely not the fastest route to absence of belief. It doesn't need a route.
Depends where you're coming from, of course, but I imagine (if I may) that listening to an audio book of any sacred text would put even the strongest believer off it. Would be like trying to understand and appreciate a fine painting from a blind person's written description of it.
Even I can appreciate the power of it when spoken by a great orator.
"Documentary offering an in-depth portrait of one of the most famous names in the history of mankind - Jesus Christ. Gospel writers left out crucial details about pivotal events in Christ's life, historical moments that have been adapted, embellished and rewritten over the course of hundreds of years. This programme takes a fresh look at the unexplained, unexpected or hidden details of Jesus's life, challenging some basic modern assumptions along the way to reveal some surprising details."
"Documentary offering an in-depth portrait of one of the most famous names in the history of mankind - Jesus Christ. Gospel writers left out crucial details about pivotal events in Christ's life, historical moments that have been adapted, embellished and rewritten over the course of hundreds of years. This programme takes a fresh look at the unexplained, unexpected or hidden details of Jesus's life, challenging some basic modern assumptions along the way to reveal some surprising details."
Thanks for the heads up archy; unfortunately the irritating background music has driven me away. >:(
"Documentary offering an in-depth portrait of one of the most famous names in the history of mankind - Jesus Christ. Gospel writers left out crucial details about pivotal events in Christ's life, historical moments that have been adapted, embellished and rewritten over the course of hundreds of years. This programme takes a fresh look at the unexplained, unexpected or hidden details of Jesus's life, challenging some basic modern assumptions along the way to reveal some surprising details."
I have recorded it for later but my expectations are not very high to say the least.
True.
My perspective is that if I had been asked if I wanted someone to die in a horrific way to save my sins, I would have certainly declined the offer. I would hope that most Christians feel the same way.
True.
My perspective is that if I had been asked if I wanted someone to die in a horrific way to save my sins, I would have certainly declined the offer. I would hope that most Christians feel the same way.
Especially as his dramatic and gruesome death (assuming it even happened) seems to have been as effective as a chocolate teapot. As the kids say, epic fail.
True.
My perspective is that if I had been asked if I wanted someone to die in a horrific way to save my sins, I would have certainly declined the offer. I would hope that most Christians feel the same way.
Whatever wisdom the NT contains or does not contain; and even I own it tells some enduring truths; there is no explanation for the crucifixion that makes sense even as an allegory or parable.
Whatever wisdom the NT contains or does not contain; and even I own it tells some enduring truths; there is no explanation for the crucifixion that makes sense even as an allegory or parable.
Well at least that moron Mel Gibson got to make a religious porn film out of the story.
Thankfully however I refused to watch such sadistic drivel (or any other religious film for that matter).
Whatever wisdom the NT contains or does not contain; and even I own it tells some enduring truths; there is no explanation for the crucifixion that makes sense even as an allegory or parable.
The idea that Jesus set out with the full knowledge of his demise and indeed encouraged it, glorifies religious martyrdom and has had terrible consequences.
How much better it would have been had he decided that sitting in a field of flowers for eternity was the way to save us. That certainly would have been a more salubrious symbol to wear around the neck.
I would like to hear why a Christian person thinks violent death was the choice for our salvation.
I would like to hear why a Christian person thinks violent death was the choice for our salvation.
It's because all the gods and religions that man has ever invented are merely a reflection of the culture and era of the inventors. The middle and near east was a fairly brutal place 2000 years ago, and the superstitions that it spawned reflect that. Man makes gods in his own image.
It's because all the gods and religions that man has ever invented are merely a reflection of the culture and era of the inventors. The middle and near east was a fairly brutal place 2000 years ago, and the superstitions that it spawned reflect that. Man makes gods in his own image.
Yes, blood sacrifice of animals was common so human sacrifice/god sacrifice must have been thought to have a stronger dramatic impact. It definitely is of its time.
It's because all the gods and religions that man has ever invented are merely a reflection of the culture and era of the inventors. The middle and near east was a fairly brutal place 2000 years ago, and the superstitions that it spawned reflect that. Man makes gods in his own image.
It's difficult to reconcile afternoon tea with the vicar with all of that horror and torture and yet it is central to the faith.
Unfortunately, as you say, it is an image of times past and Christians can't change that .
I've wondered what an alien would think if they visited and saw people drinking 'blood' in a church with the image of a man in agony being worshiped.
It's difficult to reconcile afternoon tea with the vicar with all of that horror and torture and yet it is central to the faith.
Unfortunately, as you say, it is an image of times past and Christians can't change that .
I've wondered what an alien would think if they visited and saw people drinking 'blood' in a church with the image of a man in agony being worshiped.
They would probably think something like this. ;-)
"Documentary offering an in-depth portrait of one of the most famous names in the history of mankind - Jesus Christ. Gospel writers left out crucial details about pivotal events in Christ's life, historical moments that have been adapted, embellished and rewritten over the course of hundreds of years. This programme takes a fresh look at the unexplained, unexpected or hidden details of Jesus's life, challenging some basic modern assumptions along the way to reveal some surprising details."
True.
My perspective is that if I had been asked if I wanted someone to die in a horrific way to save my sins, I would have certainly declined the offer. I would hope that most Christians feel the same way.
God spared you the choice of having to ask for the sacrifice. However, he does expect you to acknowledge it.
Yes, blood sacrifice of animals was common so human sacrifice/god sacrifice must have been thought to have a stronger dramatic impact. It definitely is of its time.
Even in ancient times they realised the importance of blood even though they were not aware of how it was important.
Comments
Well you may be right.
I was thinking this morning that having decided that God is a non physical reality, would it be possible to believe and benefit from a theist centred religion just the same as someone who believed in a more traditional supernatural God? And what is the appropriate resolution for a Buddhist who believes both that a bodhissttva exists and yet is a mind projection?
Having realised our own 'self deceptions' do we have a choice beyond which self deceptions to pursue? Directed imagination is encouraged as a start in many disciplines - arguably it is the main technique in some (whether overtly recognised or not).
I will think on, you may well be right - if you are I guess it's difficult not to fall silent.
That's fine. I've stuck my oar in - and had it taken off me to be poked back - as usual:D
I shall shut up about it now.
Sorry Fez. Not ignoring you - but I don't think I've got anymore to add beyond the posts I've made. Thanks for replying.
You said "...... but that will take us into the long discussion about physicalism. " which gave me the impression it was another aside, or something not up for discussion at this time. But no matter.
You said "I think, in this matter, dictionary, or even encyclopaedic, definitions can only take us so far. I've thought for some time that we need to move this particular debate on a bit." which again 'gave me the impression' that you aren't satisfied with just having your perspective, but you want to show it as being superior to the common understanding. I doubt you'll get very far and it's been done to death.
Well suit yourself, of course, but I'll sometimes try to help you not make silly mistakes.
Pft. I'm sure you could have worked that out for yourself, without any help from "super power" lol.
Even I can appreciate the power of it when spoken by a great orator.
What about Mu, Ultima Thule and Cimmeria?
On Ch. 5 in about ten minutes.
"Documentary offering an in-depth portrait of one of the most famous names in the history of mankind - Jesus Christ. Gospel writers left out crucial details about pivotal events in Christ's life, historical moments that have been adapted, embellished and rewritten over the course of hundreds of years. This programme takes a fresh look at the unexplained, unexpected or hidden details of Jesus's life, challenging some basic modern assumptions along the way to reveal some surprising details."
Thanks for the heads up archy; unfortunately the irritating background music has driven me away. >:(
I have recorded it for later but my expectations are not very high to say the least.
Don't want to ruin it for you, but it doesn't end well......
I had a funny feeling it didn't - I had the very same premonition about Titanic as well.
Depends on your perspective...
True.
My perspective is that if I had been asked if I wanted someone to die in a horrific way to save my sins, I would have certainly declined the offer. I would hope that most Christians feel the same way.
Especially as his dramatic and gruesome death (assuming it even happened) seems to have been as effective as a chocolate teapot. As the kids say, epic fail.
Whatever wisdom the NT contains or does not contain; and even I own it tells some enduring truths; there is no explanation for the crucifixion that makes sense even as an allegory or parable.
Well at least that moron Mel Gibson got to make a religious porn film out of the story.
Thankfully however I refused to watch such sadistic drivel (or any other religious film for that matter).
The idea that Jesus set out with the full knowledge of his demise and indeed encouraged it, glorifies religious martyrdom and has had terrible consequences.
How much better it would have been had he decided that sitting in a field of flowers for eternity was the way to save us. That certainly would have been a more salubrious symbol to wear around the neck.
I would like to hear why a Christian person thinks violent death was the choice for our salvation.
It's because all the gods and religions that man has ever invented are merely a reflection of the culture and era of the inventors. The middle and near east was a fairly brutal place 2000 years ago, and the superstitions that it spawned reflect that. Man makes gods in his own image.
It's difficult to reconcile afternoon tea with the vicar with all of that horror and torture and yet it is central to the faith.
Unfortunately, as you say, it is an image of times past and Christians can't change that .
I've wondered what an alien would think if they visited and saw people drinking 'blood' in a church with the image of a man in agony being worshiped.
They would probably think something like this. ;-)
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj178/MissConstrue_2008/Dark%20Humor/christianity-demotivator1.jpg
I wonder if the Christians could tell us how this religion isn't correct and theirs is?
It was worth a watch.
God spared you the choice of having to ask for the sacrifice. However, he does expect you to acknowledge it.
Even in ancient times they realised the importance of blood even though they were not aware of how it was important.
Cuckoo cuckoo cuckoo.
http://i.imgur.com/vHmaDcc.jpg