But how could I have begged the question when it was you who created the 'truth' from which such a question was bound to arise with your absurd assertion "that Christianity is what Christians make of it". When you provide us with cryptically worded but intellectually empty tautologies and nonsense written in the language of a philosophy freshman such questions are bound to arise. Talk about begging the question.
But how could I have begged the question when it was you who created the 'truth' from which such a question was bound to arise with your absurd assertion "that Christianity is what Christians make of it". When you provide us with cryptically worded but intellectually empty tautologies and nonsense written in the language of a philosophy freshman such questions are bound to arise. Talk about begging the question.
I don't identify as Christian. I have no use for John 3:16 (what is this "only begotten" blithering, all people are children of god!)...Even though I appreciate his teachings I don't believe he died and was raised from the dead to atone for our sins - as well as several other traditional beliefs.
If instead we started with the Sermon on the Plain and the Sermon on the Mount and asked "would you get behind that as a party platform?" I'd say absolutely, count me in.
But for centuries (millennia at this point) "being a Christian" has revolved around practices and spiritual beliefs that seem to be to have been tacked on. I don't "get" these things from a casual read of what Jesus of N himself said - that Jesus is to be worshiped, that he rose from the dead and that that matters somehow for some reason, that it is Very Important to get everyone else to acknowledge the truth of these things ("believeth in him").
If those were matters mostly only discussed in the dusty corridors of graduate departments of theology and in seminaries, and the everyday mainstream emphasis was on sharing, forgiving, refraining from judging & punishing people, and so forth, I could ignore the former and identify as "Christian with some differences of opinion with some of its scholars" or some such, but it is very much a religion in which if you do not believe Jesus is God in a sense that no other person is, believe him to be currently alive, pray to him and worship him, and get behind the effort to get everyone else on board with that, you do not belong on their bus.
Besides, as has been pointed out in myriad debates with atheists, even claims to be theistic are subject to quite a bit of dubiety. And a belief not only in God but in God as widely construed (a sort of Action Comics figure) is also a pretty big part of the new "Christian" picture.
It only has meaning in context. As a statement, "I am a Christian" really doesn't tell you a thing about the speaker other than that they have the ability to speak. But there's no consensus of beliefs among people who might make that statement, there's no agreement of behaviors. There are people who say that who do not believe in any deities at all, but think Christmas trees are pretty. There are some people who are Trinitarians. There are some who think Jesus is credited with some good ideas. There was an Episcopal priest who described herself as a Christian and a Muslim. There's no universally understood objective test.
If I wanted to find out if someone has beliefs similar to mine, I would not ask "are you a Christian?" because the answer would be meaningless. I'd ask about their beliefs.
If instead we started with the Sermon on the Plain and the Sermon on the Mount and asked "would you get behind that as a party platform?" I'd say absolutely, count me in.
But for centuries (millennia at this point) "being a Christian" has revolved around practices and spiritual beliefs that seem to be to have been tacked on. I don't "get" these things from a casual read of what Jesus of N himself said - that Jesus is to be worshiped, that he rose from the dead and that that matters somehow for some reason, that it is Very Important to get everyone else to acknowledge the truth of these things ("believeth in him").
If those were matters mostly only discussed in the dusty corridors of graduate departments of theology and in seminaries, and the everyday mainstream emphasis was on sharing, forgiving, refraining from judging & punishing people, and so forth, I could ignore the former and identify as "Christian with some differences of opinion with some of its scholars" or some such, but it is very much a religion in which if you do not believe Jesus is God in a sense that no other person is, believe him to be currently alive, pray to him and worship him, and get behind the effort to get everyone else on board with that, you do not belong on their bus.
Besides, as has been pointed out in myriad debates with atheists, even claims to be theistic are subject to quite a bit of dubiety. And a belief not only in God but in God as widely construed (a sort of Action Comics figure) is also a pretty big part of the new "Christian" picture.
It only has meaning in context. As a statement, "I am a Christian" really doesn't tell you a thing about the speaker other than that they have the ability to speak. But there's no consensus of beliefs among people who might make that statement, there's no agreement of behaviors. There are people who say that who do not believe in any deities at all, but think Christmas trees are pretty. There are some people who are Trinitarians. There are some who think Jesus is credited with some good ideas. There was an Episcopal priest who described herself as a Christian and a Muslim. There's no universally understood objective test.
If I wanted to find out if someone has beliefs similar to mine, I would not ask "are you a Christian?" because the answer would be meaningless. I'd ask about their beliefs.
The original statement was this:
To what end? In atheism there is no purpose for anything, only desire and feeling and emotion. No meaning. Modernism failed our parents' generation. So now we have chosen postmodernism-- "whatever you want to believe, as long as you believe it truly, it is true".
As sandorski succinctly put it, "incorrect".
How does a believer presume to know what an atheist thinks? Who is he to say whether somebody has or has not found any meaning outside of the meaning the believer believes in? The problem with the religious believer is that they believe based on faith. I remember very well what I went through when I lost my faith. It was the blackness of hell but only because I believed there had to be some meaning to life for life to be livable. When that idea died with everything else I believed I found a meaning that transcended time and space. I am and in that there is infinite meaning. Everything I was looking for out there in God and the universe was always right here in me. I am the image of God and he is the image of me. It's not something you then know or believe. It's a fact you discover by being. To have the truth is not something you can think or talk about. It is not a thing or an idea. It is a state of being, THE state of being.
What people fail to realize is that all states of being are not open to them. The knowledge of states is based on a science most people do not know exists. Knowledge can't be had without experience, the experience of states.
The question to what end is meaningless to being. Be and you will understand. We are the waves on the surface of life. Being is the water of the sea.
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
I counter that the only possible way in which you'd have anything close to absolute conformity of belief is in a fascist theocracy. Religion and belief have always been subjective in how they're practiced.
The most important aspect of Christianity is this: The incarnation means that God himself was actually among us. Every other religion's central figure simply stated that he was the true servant of God, but not God himself. It's unlike any comparative religion. The Incarnation puts a direct link between humans and Divinity, and that is what makes us precious, and what gives meaning to our lives.
I think for any Christian, making that observation is a great step in understanding their belief.
Aren't you an atheist?
Yes and, or, no, depending.
I don't believe in the God most people seem to, some being out there who controls the world with a plan he's had since the beginning, and stuff like that, some sort of entity or I don't believe in that in those kinds of words.
So in that respect I'm an atheist, I guess.
But I do believe that religion is a corruption of a deeper truth that people misunderstand like the three blind men feeling the elephant and reporting different things.
There is one truth and it covers us all. Religions are about that truth seen through a glass darkly, images of shadows of the real cast on a dark cave wall.
So I guess I believe that religions worship the bathwater and Atheists throw out the baby with the bath. Neither have a clue as to what is going on.
Edited for edit: Yes, I think I must be a mystic though what little I know I managed to find by being hit in the head by Zen, some story about this poor asshole hanging over a cliff with tigers above and below and a strawberry he plucked which tasted so good.
Have one!
Hey, and don't forget you want to name things so you can file them away. Mystics go in the mystic drawer and that's the end of that.
Yes and, or, no, depending.
I don't believe in the God most people seem to, some being out there who controls the world with a plan he's had since the beginning, and stuff like that, some sort of entity or I don't believe in that in those kinds of words.
So in that respect I'm an atheist, I guess.
But I do believe that religion is a corruption of a deeper truth that people misunderstand like the three blind men feeling the elephant and reporting different things.
There is one truth and it covers us all. Religions are about that truth seen through a glass darkly, images of shadows of the real cast on a dark cave wall.
So I guess I believe that religions worship the bathwater and Atheists throw out the baby with the bath. Neither have a clue as to what is going on.
Edited for edit: Yes, I think I must be a mystic though what little I know I managed to find by being hit in the head by Zen, some story about this poor asshole hanging over a cliff with tigers above and below and a strawberry he plucked which tasted so good.
Have one!
Hey, and don't forget you want to name things so you can file them away. Mystics go in the mystic drawer and that's the end of that.
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,947
- 126
Well. Are you actually answering the question? Or are you just creating an answer to make yourselves feel better. Look believe in whatever you want but realize that humankind has been using religion to answer unknown questions for tens of thousands of years, it's just become more refined in the last couple thousand. It's almost as if our mind's ego and self awareness couldn't function as a race without this kind of purpose.
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,947
- 126
Well to touch back on moonbeams post I think your world view is one of the most basic but I don't know your reality so who's to really say. Just like you think that my world view is basic but you don't really know, the only difference here is because of your religion you THINK you know.
This basically sums it up from moonbeams post:
"What people fail to realize is that all states of being are not open to them. The knowledge of states is based on a science most people do not know exists. Knowledge can't be had without experience, the experience of states.
The question to what end is meaningless to being. Be and you will understand. We are the waves on the surface of life. Being is the water of the sea."
Whats wrong with this line of thinking?
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
I think perhaps you misunderstood me. I simply mean that "atheist" "theist" "mystic" and "agnostic" are some basic classifications into which the vast majority of the world falls, to which I am no exception. I didn't claim mine was better. I didn't mean the word Basic as demeaning.
I'd like to know, before I give an objection to that line of thinking, what is really meant by Moonbeam's paragraph. I suppose my foremost objection is that it's intentionally vague. What is meant by the experience of states? Experience of states of being? Also, I disagree with the assertion that knowledge can't be had without experience. Wisdom, perhaps, but not knowledge.
Moony, Moony, Moony, you have confused the concepts of "I am a Christian" with "I am christian." Kind'a like "I am a Sports Fan" and "I play sports."
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,947
- 126
What he is saying is you are asking a question that can not be answered. When i said atheist and religious people can both sit under a tree and marvel at existence it is in the now like what mooney is saying "Be and you will understand"
As for the top paragraph, without my life experience you can not judge my life because you don't know or understand where I am coming from and the same is true for you. It also comes down to accepting the fact that full understanding will never be known and knowing this will give one all the understanding they need to sit under the tree
see this is good...
How would you get knowledge without experience? The only way would be for someone to teach you and right there is all you need to understand about it. That process right there could lead itself to corruption, fault and control because there is no scientific methodology to test the teaching. But you have faith in the teaching and nothing I type will or should change that.
Let me finish by saying that i respect everyone's choice to find spirituality or not. I think it is a part of being human and I would never try to take that. Spirituality has helped countless people get through very hard situations.
I'd like to know, before I give an objection to that line of thinking, what is really meant by Moonbeam's paragraph. I suppose my foremost objection is that it's intentionally vague. What is meant by the experience of states? Experience of states of being? Also, I disagree with the assertion that knowledge can't be had without experience. Wisdom, perhaps, but not knowledge.
I like to use the example of a father talking to his son about his hostility toward girls, when he tells him that one day he will likely have a very different reaction. There is no way such a father can really tell his son about the joys women can bring, but in the fullness of time the child will grow into a man. A child has not experienced the state of sexual attraction and the infatuation of love. The child thinks his father is daft and talking mumbo jumbo.
Well there are many stated the mind can be in, states of meditation unknown to most of humanity, etc. I remember telling somebody one time about what happens when you leave your body and fly, about the sound you hear, and they said, yeah, the rushing sound of the wind and the panic of terror. They wanted no more part of that discussion, a poor soul with the capacity to fly who was terrified of the very thought of having that experience because it was open to her. I should be so lucky. Or maybe you have had the experience of time dilation in a moment of intense experience like in an accident were everything happens in slow motion. Well there is also a state some refer to as the state of cosmic consciousness where suddenly there is this intense illumination and the sureness of deep understanding. There is also what the Sufis refer to I think, as Fana and Baqa. Got to go now.
I like to use the example of a father talking to his son about his hostility toward girls, when he tells him that one day he will likely have a very different reaction. There is no way such a father can really tell his son about the joys women can bring, but in the fullness of time the child will grow into a man. A child has not experienced the state of sexual attraction and the infatuation of love. The child thinks his father is daft and talking mumbo jumbo.
Well there are many stated the mind can be in, states of meditation unknown to most of humanity, etc. I remember telling somebody one time about what happens when you leave your body and fly, about the sound you hear, and they said, yeah, the rushing sound of the wind and the panic of terror. They wanted no more part of that discussion, a poor soul with the capacity to fly who was terrified of the very thought of having that experience because it was open to her. I should be so lucky. Or maybe you have had the experience of time dilation in a moment of intense experience like in an accident were everything happens in slow motion. Well there is also a state some refer to as the state of cosmic consciousness where suddenly there is this intense illumination and the sureness of deep understanding. There is also what the Sufis refer to I think, as Fana and Baqa. Got to go now.
Even greater would be the understanding that that claim is wrong; that other religions have similar elements, and share more with Christianity than they or Christians might like to admit, because it might actually make us brothers under one God instead of members of an exclusive club with a red carpet to heaven, as the subject of the OP likely see themselves.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter