 |
|
|
|
 The Bible presents us with an evolving story, writes John Shelby Spong.
December 29th, 2011
09:10 AM ET
My Take: The 3 biggest biblical misconceptions
By John Shelby Spong, Special to CNN The Bible is both a reservoir of spiritual insight and a cultural icon to which lip service is still paid in the Western world. Yet when the Bible is talked about in public by both believers and critics, it becomes clear that misconceptions abound. To me, three misconceptions stand out and serve to make the Bible hard to comprehend. First, people assume the Bible accurately reflects history. That is absolutely not so, and every biblical scholar recognizes it. The facts are that Abraham, the biblically acknowledged founding father of the Jewish people, whose story forms the earliest content of the Bible, died about 900 years before the first story of Abraham was written in the Old Testament. Actually, that's not in the Bible Can a defining tribal narrative that is passed on orally for 45 generations ever be regarded as history, at least as history is understood today? Moses, the religious genius who put his stamp on the religion of the Old Testament more powerfully than any other figure, died about 300 years before the first story of Moses entered the written form we call Holy Scripture. This means that everything we know about Moses in the Bible had to have passed orally through about 15 generations before achieving written form. Do stories of heroic figures not grow, experience magnifying tendencies and become surrounded by interpretive mythology as the years roll by? My Take: Bible condemns a lot, so why focus on homosexuality? Jesus of Nazareth, according to our best research, lived between the years 4 B.C. and A.D. 30. Yet all of the gospels were written between the years 70 to 100 A.D., or 40 to 70 years after his crucifixion, and they were written in Greek, a language that neither Jesus nor any of his disciples spoke or were able to write. Are the gospels then capable of being effective guides to history? If we line up the gospels in the time sequence in which they were written - that is, with Mark first, followed by Matthew, then by Luke and ending with John - we can see exactly how the story expanded between the years 70 and 100. For example, miracles do not get attached to the memory of Jesus story until the eighth decade. The miraculous birth of Jesus is a ninth-decade addition; the story of Jesus ascending into heaven is a 10th-decade narrative. In the first gospel, Mark, the risen Christ appears physically to no one, but by the time we come to the last gospel, John, Thomas is invited to feel the nail prints in Christ’s hands and feet and the spear wound in his side. Perhaps the most telling witness against the claim of accurate history for the Bible comes when we read the earliest narrative of the crucifixion found in Mark’s gospel and discover that it is not based on eyewitness testimony at all. My Take: Yes, the Bible really condemns homosexuality Instead, it’s an interpretive account designed to conform the story of Jesus’ death to the messianic yearnings of the Hebrew Scriptures, including Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53. The Bible interprets life from its particular perspective; it does not record in a factual way the human journey through history. The second major misconception comes from the distorting claim that the Bible is in any literal sense “the word of God.” Only someone who has never read the Bible could make such a claim. The Bible portrays God as hating the Egyptians, stopping the sun in the sky to allow more daylight to enable Joshua to kill more Amorites and ordering King Saul to commit genocide against the Amalekites. Can these acts of immorality ever be called “the word of God”? The book of Psalms promises happiness to the defeated and exiled Jews only when they can dash the heads of Babylonian children against the rocks! Is this “the word of God? What kind of God would that be? The Bible, when read literally, calls for the execution of children who are willfully disobedient to their parents, for those who worship false gods, for those who commit adultery, for homosexual persons and for any man who has sex with his mother-in-law, just to name a few. The Bible exhorts slaves to be obedient to their masters and wives to be obedient to their husbands. Over the centuries, texts like these, taken from the Bible and interpreted literally, have been used as powerful and evil weapons to support killing prejudices and to justify the cruelest kind of inhumanity. The third major misconception is that biblical truth is somehow static and thus unchanging. Instead, the Bible presents us with an evolutionary story, and in those evolving patterns, the permanent value of the Bible is ultimately revealed. It was a long road for human beings and human values to travel between the tribal deity found in the book of Exodus, who orders the death of the firstborn male in every Egyptian household on the night of the Passover, until we reach an understanding of God who commands us to love our enemies. The transition moments on this journey can be studied easily. It was the prophet named Hosea, writing in the eighth century B.C., who changed God’s name to love. It was the prophet named Amos who changed God’s name to justice. It was the prophet we call Jonah who taught us that the love of God is not bounded by the limits of our own ability to love. It was the prophet Micah who understood that beautiful religious rituals and even lavish sacrifices were not the things that worship requires, but rather “to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with your God.” It was the prophet we call Malachi, writing in the fifth century B.C., who finally saw God as a universal experience, transcending all national and tribal boundaries. One has only to look at Christian history to see why these misconceptions are dangerous. They have fed religious persecution and religious wars. They have fueled racism, anti-female biases, anti-Semitism and homophobia.They have fought against science and the explosion of knowledge. The ultimate meaning of the Bible escapes human limits and calls us to a recognition that every life is holy, every life is loved, and every life is called to be all that that life is capable of being. The Bible is, thus, not about religion at all but about becoming deeply and fully human. It issues the invitation to live fully, to love wastefully and to have the courage to be our most complete selves. That is why I treasure this book and why I struggle to reclaim its essential message for our increasingly non-religious world. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of John Shelby Spong. soundoff (6,068 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 Next »
« Previous entryBelief Blog's Morning Speed Read for Thursday, December 29
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Editor’s note: John Shelby Spong, a former Episcopal bishop of Newark, New Jersey, is author of "
The Roman Empire has records to this day as well as archeological finds to prove that Jesus of Nazareth existed. So u cannot wish him away. How do u know Napoleon existed or Shakespeare or William Wallace. Their influence more than anything. So why discount Jesus' influence on his contemporaries.
As to the 34000 groups under Christianity those are not the only Bible based groups. There are those of the Jews and Moslems or have u forgotten. Intuition when developed is called the fruit of the Spirit. To use it is to control urself perfectly. Intellect has never controlled us.
The principle that we are intellectual animals is a fallacy that lead us to divide the brain into the mammalian, reptilian and amphibian. However the so-called reptilian controls us through intuition and the hormones. It is where our sub-conscious is. Jesus termed it the heart.
The 'Because I emote I am' principle is an admission of this control by the sub-conscious rather than the conscious. It is not wrong for a Christian or a spiritual man to develop his EQ then. The Bible was written in a way that reflects the theology of the time and later enlightenment in mind.
Picking and choosing is function of intuition. We do not do things without emoting (having motives). As u noted urself there might be myriad Bible believing sects because of differing motives. The cerebrum is excited to absorb or process information by motive.
LinCA these set of posts were meant as a response to ur posts. I hope the path of Agape love helps ur understanding of the Bible. I wud that a message of atheism, agnosticism and religiousity will die in ur heart and spirituality will arise in u and devour all before u. Amen
@Nii Croffie
You said, "As to the 34000 groups under Christianity those are not the only Bible based groups. There are those of the Jews and Moslems or have u forgotten."
Nope, that number doesn't include any Jewish or Muslim organizations. But even if there were only a few, the point would still stand.
You said, "Intuition when developed is called the fruit of the Spirit. To use it is to control urself perfectly. Intellect has never controlled us."
There you go again with intuition. Intuition will never settle an argument. It is entirely personal and individual. It has no bearing on reality.
You said, "The principle that we are intellectual animals is a fallacy that lead us to divide the brain into the mammalian, reptilian and amphibian. However the so-called reptilian controls us through intuition and the hormones. It is where our sub-conscious is. Jesus termed it the heart."
More blah, blah, blah. See my response above.
You said, "The Bible was written in a way that reflects the theology of the time and later enlightenment in mind."
Baloney. The bible was written and later edited in a way that reflects the time and place it was written or edited in. It has no predictive value or capacity.
You said, "I hope the path of Agape love helps ur understanding of the Bible."
I understand the bible just fine. It's nothing special. It's value is entirely caloric.
You said, "I wud that a message of atheism, agnosticism and religiousity will die in ur heart and spirituality will arise in u and devour all before u."
Not likely. Suspension of disbelief in this regard is neither easy nor desirable.
You said, "Amen"
Promise?
"Intellect has never controlled us."
Well I surely do need a COHERENT explanation of this one.
It is very easy not to understand the Bible and make noise. Actually in the Bible that is a fruit of the flesh. The myriad of religions based on the Bible includes Islam by the way. Does this mean it is wrong. Certainly not. Every Army has its units and heirarchy for more effective warfare.
I did not think for once that any pure atheist will be able to defend his position without reverting to insults, inuendos, half truths and hearsay today. The fact remains that the God of the Hebrews is recorded to have lived on Earth as a human. I would find it strange if Atheists believed.
Every religion is based on disbelief u see. Atheism is the weakest however because too few of its members discover the path of spirituality i.e. to love their fellow human being as much as they love themselves. Our God said this is the central theme of the Bible when He was on Earth.
You have obviously not spent as much time on this forum as I have.
I have seen insults, ignorance, condescension, and even some hate and bigotry thrown around.....ALL BY THEISTS.....who by the way are the major contributors to this forum. They vilify Mr. Spong, have hysterical theological arguments as to why he is right or wrong (mostly wrong from what I've read here) and choose to ignore the somewhat gentle message that Mr. Spong has presented. Do you know Why? I'll tell you why...and yes this is MY opinion (born of some experience I might add):
Christianity has become a haven for the bigoted, the intolerant, and the down-right unintelligent. There are hate groups spawning all over the Country...inspired by their own interpretation of the bible. The Westboro Baptist Church is a recent and most vocal example. Are they the only one? No. Search the internet, look around even in your own town....they are there.
And they seek to become politically active. Now you have real danger. Yes, Mr. Theist, your beliefs are dangerous. Maybe not yours personally, but of course I would not know that. I DO what I see and hear...and I DO NOT like it.
"too few of its members discover the path of spirituality i.e. to love their fellow human being as much as they love themselves."
You amaze me. Are you giving me the "no moral compass" argument? You will loose that argument. Do you seriously think that unless one accepts a religious philosophy that they are immoral, hateful, selfish, etc.? SERIOUSLY? You are truly delusional.
And by the way atheists require no "membership." It is NOT a religion or belief or a cult or a club...it is simply NON-BELIEF. Why is it so hard to get that through your theist brain? You and most others? Do you think this is the first time I've dealt with this worn-out simplistic nonsense? [sigh]
Lemmings will believe anything. That's why the bible still exists.
“The greatest disease in the West today is not TB or leprosy; it is being unwanted, unloved, and uncared for. We can cure physical diseases with medicine, but the only cure for loneliness, despair, and hopelessness is love. There are many in the world who are dying for a piece of bread but there are many more dying for a little love. The poverty in the West is a different kind of poverty - it is not only a poverty of loneliness but also of spirituality. There's a hunger for love, as there is a hunger for God.”
― Mother Teresa, A Simple Path: Mother Teresa
"Mother Teresa, A Simple Path: Mother Teresa"
You do know she wrote in her bible she doubted God existed right.
Doubt is part of all religion. All the religious thinkers were doubters.”
Isaac Bashevis Singer
Yeah, love will get some food in the stomachs of those starving kids, or it'll get a guy to stop doing coke and beatiing his wife and children. Thanks mother theresa for your ingenius words of wisdom.
Mother Theresa is a sadomasochist and a crook.
Confused in Cleveland, the reason all are lonely is the same reason that your Father YHWH is lonely for us, He begs us to return to Him in Malachi 3v7 and Isaiah 44v22 where He tells us that He has already forgiven our sins and has redeemed us. Read Isaiah 60v16 and Isaiah 49v26 and in Isaiah 43v13, He tells us that no man can be delivered from out of His hands. This was all prophesied in Duet.32v17 that the peoples future generations would leave YHWH for idols in the latter days. The NT(not true) are idols it takes the people away from their Creator YHWH who is Spiritual and gives to us righteousness and peace so here is why many are lonely they are the lost sheep as YHWH says in Ezekiel 34 that He will in His day bring us all back home. And in Malachi 2 and Jeremiah 23v1-3 He expresses His anger to the priest and pastors that mislead the flocks in the NT(not true). In Isaiah 40v18 He says to many "Who will you try to equal or liken Him to? Take heed, there is no other savior Isaiah 43v3,11. The Truth is in His book of remembrance of Malachi 3v16 the books true name, from Genesis – Malachi. The so called OT. He wants us to do His commandments the law in Exodus 20 the sabbath Levitucus 23, and the passover in Exodus 12 and to eat right in Deut 14 and Leviticus 11 not GMOs, and unclean meats, this is to prolong our lives and keep us from diseases and come back for He never changed none of this as said in Malachi 3v6 YHWH changes NOT never His Word nor His Truth.
"If there be some who, though ignorant of all mathematics... dare to reprove this work, because of some passage of Scripture, which they have miserably warped to their purpose, I regaurd them not, and even despise their rash judgement."
Father Nicholaus Copernicus
"Religion. Opium of the people? A true opium of the people is a belief in nothingness after death – the huge solace of thinking that for our betrayals, greed, cowardice, murders we are not going to be judged."
— Czesław Miłosz
There are two answers to the question: “Why does anything exist rather than nothing at all?” The atheist answers, “There is no explanation.” The theist replies, God. An intelligent case can be made for either answer. But to say that the laws of physics alone answer it is the purest nonsense.
Stephen M. Barr
Professor of Particle Physics in the
Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Delaware
Questions can be answered with "I don't know," and many should be. God believers are just filling in the blank just to have something written in the space.
Wrong! An atheist would say: We don't know yet.
It happens every time. Theists always use the lack of general knowledge as proof of existence of their deity. For example, where does those lighting bolts come from? By Odin! It is the doing of Thor. Whereas a atheist rightly says that we don't yet.
Believers are so gullible and stupid.
No, the atheist says: "I don't know", and the believer says: "god".
One is being truthful, and the other is guessing....
It's OK not to know!
Faith is hooking up with a girl after a long night. You sir are just deluional.
@ Lemaitre
So rather than apologize for lying and your disgusting behavior, you continue that same disgusting behavior and add even more lies? You're the best kind of christian because you turn people off with your lies and presumption. Don't ever change; you represent your god well just like you are.
Momoya, y r u so angry with lemaitre. I think u r angry with God more than disbelieving Him. Anger is justified by wisdom and in ur case Holy Mary said it best. The God of a spiritual man is essentially different from that of a religious man. U can debate the religious because they r just like u.
The Pharisees and Sadducees claimed Jesus was lying but was He? They were so angry that they sought His blood. It is not doctrines that we have. A doctrine can be debated. What we have is an active intuition combined with intellect and instinct. Try the fruit of the Spirit on for size.
@NiiCroffie
I'm not angry with anyone, but I think when somebody lies and acts like a jerk that person should not expect to be taken seriously. Do you think Lemaitre should be lying and bullying? Do you think it helps or hurts the position he advocates?
And, really, Lemaitre is probably an atheist who thinks its funny to play the christian strawman. It's his choice.
But Momoya can't u see beyond his teasing manner to the message. Sometimes these religious arguments are too serious hmm? I don't think a light-hearted joke can't help u along. I laughed @ being called a bulldog, didn't I? Do u know the Roman Emp fell just cos people cudn't laugh while arguing! lol
I have been following this blog since the article was published and find the comments to be intriguing. We humans try to explain or describe God using our languages in a way that our minds understand what we have experienced. In doing this we limit God by our very own limitations. I would suggest that God is beyond our primitive understandings and descriptions and we do a grave disservice trying to debate who or what this Being or Great I Am is.
Life is a learning and evolving act that we all are participating in and we haven't yet made it to nursery school in the whole of our history and understanding. Why are we so angry with different views about God? I know that the God I believe exists has created an amazingly complex universe that I am a part of and welcome every second of my experience. I also believe the God I envision expects me to love all creations as unique and wonderful.
This BLOG is a LIE from beginning to end!
Prayer changes things
Enjoy prayer in the morning
Science changed more things than every prayer combined. The prayers I witnessed are shelfish of nature more so than a wishlist to Santa Claus.
God is reality, and the evolving understanding of man is the word of god being revealed. The problem rests in having ever written the mythology down and canonized it as holy when it was bully. God it seems exists as something we are perfecting. who would have thought it was anything more than a projection of mankind bartering with his own understanding?
Lemaitre, this was your last post to me on the big bang argument:
>>I'm not asking if the Big Bang Theory is found in some
>>Holy text – I know that it's not. I'm asking you if despite it's obvious omission from sacred texts, do you think a supplies a >>plausible explanation for the origins of all that is?
No, Lemaitre, you didn't ask that. You did NOT ask if the big bang supplied an sort of explanation for anything, you asked if the big bang was proof against god. Here's the quotation: "Do you think the Big Bang Theory is a good argument against the existence of God?" So you see, you didn't ask anything about any explanation. You asked if the BB was anti-proof for god.
You've lied and misrepresented facts several times now. As an atheist, I wish more god believers were like you.
Look, I've told you once, don't come back here until you have studied (and let me add for your fundie mindset, UNDERSTOOD) some philosophy, some scripture, and some science. I saw your post on the previous page to someone else: "I've ready the bible many, many, many times and worked hard at understanding it," or words to that effect. Sorry to say it, but you failed.
So let's just call this area a "grown ups" site. To be worthy to post something, it has to be based on big ideas, genuine inquiry, serious analysis. This, "I can prove to you that there's no way Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt" is such a bore. Why don't you use that on some teeny-bopper website for Bible camp.
No go to your room until you've finished your homework!
"To be worthy to post something, it has to be based on big ideas, genuine inquiry, serious analysis."
You have read the posts here before right?
And even if it was not the most childish and/or demeaning, your post certainly leaves worthy, genuine and serious at the door. Oh, and it avoids his point which is valid. There is a big difference between being a good argument against God versus being a good argument for evolution. You may not see it but thats only due to the blinders Christians are required to wear. You can have God and the big bang or God and the big snap or just the big bang and no God.
The presumed existance of a God is a catch 22, even for that God itself. If you claim omnipotence, that would not only mean the power to do everything, but actually doing everything. That would take forever, so since there are no new god like activities going on, and we invented the dvd player , hammer, bridges, cars, ping pong and everything else first, when a god come to creating those stuff it is already proven that he,she is not omnipotent, but a mere copycat (because he is all seeing too, so he cannot claim it created those independently). In any case, the hyperbolic nature of a gods power proves he doesn't exist but in some people's mind
Lemaitre, you should be ashamed of your behavior here. You have proved yourself an arrogant liar. You presume to know how people have lived their lives and what books they have and haven't read. You rudely assert your opinions as fact, and you refuse to answer polite questions put to you while you continue to ask your own.
After you refuse to answer questions, and after you incorrectly assume a whole list of things about me, I maintain my decorum and tell you that I will debate on YOUR terms and not on mine. Then, instead of acknowledging my willingness to debate whatever you purport, you act like I said the opposite of what I did say. Does your god really get a kick out of his followers being rude, evasive, presumptuous liars? At least fundamentalists are sweet in their ignorance, you're just a bully.
Well kids, this has been a huge waste of time. I go back to my original post.....and that is 90% of the so-called atheists who prowl this site can ONLY deconstruct the God of the fundamentalist Christian ESPECIALLY Momoya! That's all they know! My guess about Momoya is: a former Fundi who realized that world view does not hold together, nor stack up against modern science. Like the kid in elementary school who was the last one to figure out that Santa Clause ain't real, he/she/it was embarrassed and humiliated – and ANGRY that he/she/it was lied to. Now on a quest to prove the same about God.... He's the kid who, the following Christmas, us running around the school telling all the kids that there is no Santa Clause. His peers look at him like a weirdo, but he doesn't get why – he just loves making the younger kids cry!
Anyway, as all you enlightened folks know, my screen name is the REAL name of the father of the Big Bang Theory. And that would be FATHER George Lemaitre, Catholic priest, and scientist. I would love to see one of you "Discovery Channel scientists" try to go toe to toe with him in either the fields of either science, or theology (same for you fundies).
To Hail Mary and Momoya – I order you not to come back here until you have read ANY book called "How to understand the Bible," not written by a fundamentalist. Furthermore, don't come back until you have read some Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Copernicus, George Lemaitre, Stanley Jaki, Jean-Luc Marion, Henri Bouillard, and others (I'll let you choose).
In the meantime, I'm going to bed.
Why are you LYING?
I told you that I would debate with you the existence of any god you preferred to put up before me. I have asked you polite questions, and you have rudely ignored them while asking me more questions. The god belief fails on all counts, not just fundamentalist ones.
I have told you that I would debate any god doctrine you put before me, why are you so afraid to do that?
"90% of the so-called atheists who prowl this site can ONLY deconstruct the God of the fundamentalist Christian" Since the majority of Christians who comes to this site worship that God, it makes sense that most atheists focus their fire on the easy targets. It does not make their points any less valid. You yell & scream that it takes reading "some Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Copernicus, George Lemaitre, Stanley Jaki, Jean-Luc Marion, Henri Bouillard, and others" and I agree with you that everyone should expand their base of knowledge, but what has that got to do with the existence of the God of the Hebrews?
I don't care whether I find out your God is real or fiction, I just know I'm happy with my choice to discard organized religion, prayer and ritual so I can live the truth I know which is to show love in all things. If you do that, it doesn't matter if there is a God or not, you'll live a happy life and if some invisible deity is going to punish me for that then so be it. Maybe the real sin is not using the life you have now to care for and connect to as many other humans as possible.
"so-called atheists who prowl this site can ONLY deconstruct the God of the fundamentalist Christian..."
Oh...THAT god...that's the one we're talking about? Hmmmm....seems to be lots of different versions, right?
Atheists do not try to deconstruct anything generally. This would only happen when they are confronted with theists spouting nonsensical fantasies as being necessary to live a proper life.
Now understand this: An atheist is quite simply a non-believer...not a member of a church, a club, a cult, a movement, a religion, an organization, ad infinitum. We simply choose not to believe. How hard is that to understand?
We simply, through intellect, logical thought, common sense and rationality CHOOSE NOT TO BELIEVE.
@ momoya
alas, dealing with the 'BrotherHood' compares to being in a room with a bunch of mangy, rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth, high testosterone pitbulls. Yet something 'tells' me you already knew that. I praise your common sense and perspective. Be Brave
Hail Mary, the BrotherHood salutes u! lol.
Hail Mary, yeah, atheists rarely get the chance to debate anything with god believers. They either try to weasel out of their own definitions and beliefs or they just stomp off in a prideful huff while ignoring what they can't reason with.
So u found ur voice while we were asleep, huh? All that Lemaitre was telling u was that almost all the worlds greatest scientists have been God-believing including Darwin n Einstein in one form or the other. This is because to believe in God affords science the breadth of curiosity it needs.
Science has never been a quest for evidence that there is no God. Atheists always struggle with this concept but Natural Philosphy is not atheism's Bible. I don't know what u want to debate so much that u cannot find the words to speak up! Science is about possibility, atheism is absolute denial..
of this possibility. It is not arrogance to admit the possibility of God. We are searching for evidence of the possibility or impossibility of Him and the evidence is still being gathered. Don't rush to court too soon. DANIEL 12:4. I did not come to Christ through Bible study. I obeyed His words...
to be as a little child. Never considering myself as an expert, ready to debate every fine detail but rather following the evidence with a questioning mind. I was ready to be persuaded or not without getting dissappointed. You've not finished ur search. There r endless possibilities. Ask Seek Knock.
Believers have been gathering evidence for 2000+ years. So far, there is not a shred of independent, verifiable or factual evidence for any god. Religion is on the same path as astrology, its predecessor on the tribal mythology evolutionary tree.
if you're searching for evidence of an impossibility of something without a null hypothesis, I think that you'll find yourself searching for a very long time. As of now, the score would be 0 – 0. I don't anticipate that changing anytime soon.
I'm glad that u can see that it is 0-0. That is to debate spiritual experience without it is futile on ur part at best. Why do u want to verify my experience. Scientists tested the brains of believers praying and it was as if they were talking to a tangible person unlike when talking about Santa.
No god is tangible so they must not have been talking to god.
The beauty of it all is that there are two types of people who claim belief in God- spiritual n religious. Religious includes atheists by the way. Spiritual people are beyond intellectual comprehension like their God. A god who is not tangible is a doctrine. Doctrines are useless to the spiritual.
@Nii Croffie
You said, "I'm glad that u can see that it is 0-0."
But just because it is 0-0, doesn't mean that each side of the argument has equal merit. Without scientific evidence, the position that there is no god is the default one. For the other position to have non-zero merit, evidence is required. Without verifiable evidence, it is no more rational or reasonable to assume there are any gods as it is to assume there are Pink Unicorns.
You said, "That is to debate spiritual experience without it is futile on ur part at best. Why do u want to verify my experience. Scientists tested the brains of believers praying and it was as if they were talking to a tangible person unlike when talking about Santa"
Because religious experiences are indistinguishable from schizophrenia. Without tangible, verifiable evidence for the existence of "the other party" in this dialog, you're just talking to yourself.
And just because the belief in a god is stronger than that in Santa, doesn't make it any more valid or true. Actually, belief in Santa is more reasonable than belief in gods, as the man behind the Santa myth actually existed. He would be 1742 years old this year, but that is far more believable than any god.
Without scientific evidence atheism is best. Hmm. Schizophrenics are incapacitated by their belief are they not? It is a disability. However spiritual people are enhanced by their belief so it cannot be the same. It is strange that u call St Nicholas' name. He claimed his inspiration from God.
@Nii Croffie
You said, "Without scientific evidence atheism is best. Hmm."
Without valid evidence, there is no reason to believe any gods exist. Atheists argue from the default position.
You said, "Schizophrenics are incapacitated by their belief are they not? It is a disability. However spiritual people are enhanced by their belief so it cannot be the same. "
Not every schizophrenic is disabled by the disease. Symptoms vary.
You said, "It is strange that u call St Nicholas' name. He claimed his inspiration from God."
I never said that I agreed with what St. Nicholas believed in. He was probably equally deluded as most of the believers of is time.
My claim is about the myth surrounding him. Believing that he is still alive is far more reasonable than believing in the existence of gods. While there is no reason to believe that St. Nick is still alive, let alone that he moved to the North Pole and has tamed flying reindeer, there is very little disagreement about whether he actually existed.
Deluded u say! Schizophrenics are not all disabled u say! My friend I know Psychaitrists and Neurologists who will give u drugs for that statement. A spiritual believer essentially does not percieve by the 5 rational senses only but the 6th intuitive sense as well.
Psychaitrists have revised the 'Because I think I am' philosophy scientifically and it reads 'Because I emote I am'. Intellect is not the only form of knowledge there is intuition and instinct. The Emotional Quotient is based on intuition and superior to IQ based on intellect. The Bible agrees.
BUT U forget if it is sensible to believe in St Nicholas then it is even more sensible to believe in our God 'cos He also walked the Earth as a human being and is a historical figure. Yes my God, the Self Existent One who saves and is King (meaning of Jesus Christ). He is not intangible.
Nii Croffieis an idiot.
I've known some people with multiple personality disorders, amongst other medical conditions. Not all of them cause disability. Some people are able to cope, some are not.
As for the stupid, absurd justification of god by scientific studies performed on idiots praying to an imaginary being, the reason why the results were what they were is simple. The brain functioned as though the individual was speaking to someone because those people actually believed they were speaking to someone. It's no different than a child speaking to an imaginary friend.
FYI, you have absolutely no ground, whatsoever in attempting to justify the existence of god in any form, any way, ever. Until you have real evidence, you have nothing more to say on the subject.
@Nii Croffie
You said, "A spiritual believer essentially does not percieve by the 5 rational senses only but the 6th intuitive sense as well."
The problem is that they rely, sometimes exclusively, on the 6th one. No rational argument can be made, based on it.
You said, "Intellect is not the only form of knowledge there is intuition and instinct. The Emotional Quotient is based on intuition and superior to IQ based on intellect. The Bible agrees."
Even if that were true, and even if that were relevant (and I'm not saying that it is), it wouldn't mean that the bible is correct on anything else. Correlation (if there is any) doesn't establish causation.
You can get the "bible to agree" on any position. All you need to do is find some suitable passages and interpret them to support your case. That's what is done by all christians, and hence produced some 34,000 different christian cults, sects and denominations. Once all christians agree on one interpretation of one version of your precious bible, you may have a case. Until then you are all just picking and choosing the parts that you like while dismissing the rest.
You said, "BUT U forget if it is sensible to believe in St Nicholas then it is even more sensible to believe in our God 'cos He also walked the Earth as a human being and is a historical figure."
I never said it was sensible. It is patently ridiculous for an adult to believe that St. Nick is still alive, but even so, it is far more reasonable than believing there are any gods.
You said, "Yes my God, the Self Existent One who saves and is King (meaning of Jesus Christ). He is not intangible."
Whether Jesus actually existed is not a matter of fact. It is even less established whether any of the acts attributed to him were his.
LinCA repeating my words to lengthen ur submissions, huh! I think u r now running into the region of the absurd. Jesus of Nazareth called the Christ did exist on Earth as a human. In Jewish theology if u care the Christ is God. It is intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise.
It's intellectually dishonest to believe jesus was god, or in the bible myth at all.
Jesus is my God because He taught me to understand the Bible in a way that changed my life. I believe if u will avail urself to test His words u might see what I did. Are u ready to try? Myths are stories that have historical backgrounds but may have been embellished with fiction. Do u know this?
@Nii Croffie
You said, "LinCA repeating my words to lengthen ur submissions, huh!"
No, not to lengthen my post, just to link my response to yours.
You said, "I think u r now running into the region of the absurd. Jesus of Nazareth called the Christ did exist on Earth as a human. In Jewish theology if u care the Christ is God. It is intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise."
I agree that religion is pretty absurd, but I don't think that's what you mean. I accept that you believe that Jesus was an actual person. Just because you believe that, doesn't make it so. There is very little, if any, independent evidence to support your belief. Believing the he was a god, is utterly ridiculous.
You said, "Jesus is my God because He taught me to understand the Bible in a way that changed my life. I believe if u will avail urself to test His words u might see what I did. Are u ready to try?
That's how I became an atheist.
You said, "Myths are stories that have historical backgrounds but may have been embellished with fiction."
Some myths are. Some are just fiction.
LinCA comments 1 and 2 r my actual responses to UR comments. The one u commented on was for Phist. Linking my post to urs by repeating mine will confuse u. As I can see whenever u read mine u do not know whether u wrote mine or urs. If u became an atheist by being a religious Christian thats sad.
A spiritual Christian grows in knowledge as He investigates. Maybe u were linking other sources to ur investigation. In my experience I am Anglican so we have no doctrinal positions per se and have to search on our own. Some will take doctrines and fail. Others will discover spirituality.
@Nii Croffie
You said, "LinCA comments 1 and 2 r my actual responses to UR comments. The one u commented on was for Phist. Linking my post to urs by repeating mine will confuse u."
My mistake. I missed that Phist had commented instead of you. Please disregard my response to him/her.
You said, "As I can see whenever u read mine u do not know whether u wrote mine or urs."
I sometimes combine my responses to multiple posts into a single one. I do all my editing in a separate text editor (the comment box is simply too small). Once I copy the posts that I intend to respond to, I remove the header that includes the original author on subsequent posts.
You said, "If u became an atheist by being a religious Christian thats sad."
I don't think so. It's great. I've never felt more at ease with my beliefs since I shed the christian nonsense.
You said, "A spiritual Christian grows in knowledge as He investigates. Maybe u were linking other sources to ur investigation. In my experience I am Anglican so we have no doctrinal positions per se and have to search on our own. Some will take doctrines and fail. Others will discover spirituality."
Some will actually open their eyes and minds and realize that it's all baloney. Now, that I would call a success.
See, here I did it again. I copied your second post and combined my responses into a single one.
@Phist
See my reply to your comment in my reply to Nii Croffie, above.
Men get real I have not attacked u personally have I. I'm just stating my views on life. What is making u angry about that? To me loving my enemy as much as I love myself is the greatest good. The Bible taught me that. God is Love and if I love then I am his and he lives in me. I love u as myself
Nii Croffie, Many Christians believe that Jesus is God right?, then who is the Almighty Creator and Father? I remember that Christians said Jesus was the son of God, so now what happened to that? Is Jesus being God the new wave of the times, or am I missing something here? And is maybe the Father and Creator of son of man has gone on a break or does He still have the job of being our Creator on that fine day that the generations of Adam was formed?, in Genesis 5. One more question are Christians saying that Jesus is the Father and the son? Which is it? It's so confusing religions today. This is why I do not do them I think they change everything too often, and the last time I checked when the Almighty was working on the job, He said that He changes not in Malachi 3v6. That means nothing is suppose to change up like this is it?
My guess is that u r a Jew or have read the Jewish Bible, am I right? In the Christian Bible this is known as the Old Testament to describe the Mosaic Covenant and the theology that flowed from it. Christians have a second set of Scripture known as the New Testament in their Bible.
Oh now I get it u r a cult refugee! I'm sooo sorry for the problems u have faced. I am Anglican and we r as free as a lark so we barely understand what that means. I have had to read on spiritual abuse and frankly it does not look good.
Oh so u r a cult refugee! I'm so sorry. I'm Anglican and we re as free as a lark so we do not understand what it means to b in ur position. I've has to read up on spiritual abuse in the past week n it has been quite revealing. I thought u were a Jew. I think u might be better off with a support gp
It is Moses who prophesied about a God who can manifest in human form. Isaiah prophesied about the Eternal Father being born as a human by a virgin. Isaiah also prophesied about the crucifixion and so did King David in Psalm 22. The Church used the OT almost exclusively until the 3rd century.
The OT was used almost exclusively by the Church until the late 3rd century. I think the need for textual criticism is funny. I have had prophetic experiences and it has made me disbelieve people who say there is no God. I am a baby spiritual person so how much more Isaiah.
The Bible makes it plain that the Man WAS granted permission to eat the fruit of the Tree of Life. It is not a question of being restricted not to eat the Tree of Judgement but freedom to choose to love or reject God. God loves us and always wants us to choose Him but He will not restrict us.
A religious world-view is basically judging between God and the Devil. A spiritual worldview is obeying God's judgements. I love God with all my life n I love my neighbour as much as I love myself. This has freed me to learn as much as I like n understand as much and grown my emotional quotient.
THINK AND GROW RICH by Napoleon Hill is basically the Bible rewritten for the modern mind. There are ways to understand the essence of the Bible without Aristotelian reasoning. Logic is a very broad field not limited to scepticism alone. IQ alone cannot grasp knowledge it takes EQ as well.
No I am not jewish more like a Hebrew descendant though, and no not an abused refugee, I'm here in the US its as close to abuse as any of the chosen can get its enough captivity as prophesied in Deut.28v15-67, for 68 has been fulfilled on slave ships. This is why you feel as free as a lark. But you are doing what most christians do you are double talking, for none of those scriptures that you provided say jesus and you know it these are talking about David and his seeds and the descendants that will be on the throne to govern over the flocks as prophesied in Isaiah 40 and Jeremiah 23v1-8. None of what you are saying is truth and that is what YHWH is the TRUTH and of His Spirituality for which your kind strays the flocks from this is why the Father is angry and He says in Malachi 2 and in Jeremiah 23v1-3 of the priest and pastors and their lies. Also in Jeremiah 23v4-8, YHWH speaks of the Branch of David and the true high priest to come also the New Covenant is not in the NT it is in Jeremiah 31v31-40 prophesied for the future of the new kingdom to come. No wonder you drink so much you are not living the truth. When you use the word God who are u referring to? For God is not the Creator's true name that is profane as said by Him in Ezekiel 36v22,23. Again you did not answer my question of is jesus the Father or the Son? For YHWH says do not liken anyone to Him in Isaiah 40. Another thing of truth the only son and FIRSTBORN that the Creator YHWH mentions is in Exodus 4v22,23 'ISRAEL' HIS CHOSEN SON AND FIRSTBORN, THERE CANNOT BE TWO FIRSTBORNS. SO TELL THE TRUTH.
If u practise Agape u will bear fruit of the Spirit. Salvation is offered by Grace to those who have faith working by Agape love. The judgement of men is limited by knowledge and therefore we cannot judge righteously. To judge God is therefore death since we must admit the evidence of the Devil too.
what you say has no actual truth to it. there are no demons or gods or goblins or unicorns. go away.
I hope u forgive me if I sound proud or boastful. I do not intend to push my ideas down ur throat. It is another field called Apologetics. It is about me defending what I believe. I hope u read the Bible to find out whether goblins and unicorns are in it. Science does not support atheism.
Atheism doesn't need support because it isn't a thing, or belief system. Religion on the other hand supports nothing, and science sure doesn't back it.
Nii Croffie, According to the book of Job, the so called devil,satan, did have to ask permission to approach Job from the Almighty Creator first so why think of the devil as anything to worry about? I have no idea why son of man make satan a big thing when you better watch that man with free will for he has the play. For it looks like the Almighty Father has satan in check at all times. I read that in Isaiah 45v7 the Almighty tells us that He created it all the evil, the peace, the light and the dark so why worry about old measly devil he has no rank in any matter. Oh by the way many people don't get the story of Job, you see Job had a problem and it was his 'PRIDE' that the Almighty had to check not any devil, it was Job who needed guidance here otherwise Job would not have had to apologize or be guilty of anything. See, I know its not the devil its any man who is being an evil or wicked or whatever the fault is for in Jeremiah 17v9,10 the Almighty pulls the heart strings of a man's heart according to his ways. Its kind of a trick on the free will our gift if you use it for wrong then this is what it will be and vica versa, you do right then this is what it will be and then sometimes we get no good deed goes unpunished, its like a variety of flavors,oh life, don't cha just love it?