(July 6, 2014 at 5:06 am)Purplundy Wrote:

(July 6, 2014 at 2:08 am)Jenny A Wrote: If you define god as some variant of a supernatural being who created the universe that's plenty for me to go on. I don't believe it.

If you have some other definition, and you have some evidence for it's existence as you've defined it, I'll be happy to consider it.

Personally, when talking about God, I don't tend to lean on the "How else did we get here?" part because it really has no effect on anybody.
I'd say that God is like a resource. That when you hear the phrase "God is good," it means that good is God. That when people are good, when life is good, God is there. Religion (and non-religion) are a collection of theories on how to tap that resource.

Sounds vaguely pragmatist. Have you read William James?

Personally, if I were to sort what from the bible was of any use as fodder for wisdom stories, I'd toss everything about creation. It really doesn't matter. It doesn't inform the question of how shall we live.

Religions usually come with an origins story but cutting that out hardly affects the rest. I still think (as if anyone needed to hear it again) that gods arise the same way as does a sense of 'me'. I think there is a good amount of flexibility about how the stuff of consciousness gets apportioned. You get what you expect to get. I no longer 'get' god, leastwise, I no longer think of 'Him' as other.

The house of consciousness is great, a vast mansion, and in it there are many rooms. We know some of the those rooms but we didn't build it. The way we are brought up can influence what we expect to find there. What we expect can directly influence what we experience.

(July 6, 2014 at 12:06 pm)whateverist Wrote: Personally, if I were to sort what from the bible was of any use as fodder for wisdom stories, I'd toss everything about creation. It really doesn't matter. It doesn't inform the question of how shall we live.

Oh, IDK Whatevs, how are we going to get our heads around to the normative edicts (that follow from this) if we remove the snakes and the sin and the curses bit? That's a fairly important part of genesis, intrisic to "how it all ended up this way" - from the narrators point of view and from the point of view of establishing theology. How could a person not have the question of "how to live" informed, in some way, by this story - and the relative status of their belief or acceptance of it?

I just don't see how subtracting the "how it got to be this way" takes away the option of opting in to a good life. It might play a pivotal role for some believers, but to me it seems like a side show.

(July 4, 2014 at 12:06 am)Purplundy Wrote:

(July 3, 2014 at 8:49 pm)Cinjin Wrote: Everybody is just supposedly the same and looks back on their life with pure satisfaction before enjoying perfect love and happy happy joy joy????

The following question is unrelated to your views on the afterlife,
but,
not to discount the suffering of anyone,
what if we simply assume that some people are less happy because our lives are better by comparison?
With the exception of regular people who suffer extreme tragedy, like the family members of the passengers of the doomed Malaysia Airlines flight,
people who are born into poor conditions do not necessarily wake up crying in the mornings.
You mentioned kids starving in Africa. I would like to disclose that I happen to have strong African roots. My parents are immigrants. I've also spent a few years in Nigeria, the country with the Islamic radical terrorists in half of the country.
If I had to spend the rest of my life in Africa, I'd shoot myself.
But then there are the people who permanently reside in this developing terrorist-infested nation with a middle-class that gets electricity half the day.
With my personal experience, I would fiercely argue that they do not feel that their lives are as bad as you might think.

IF I had made some sort of sweeping generalization about everyone living in Africa rather than the statement I actually made, then you might have a point, but as it stands now, you omitted a couple key words: starving children

Additionally, you yourself wrote "I'd shoot myself" if you had to live in Africa for the rest of your life ... something that seems far more insulting to Africans than anything that you CLAIMED that I said.

These two points I've made tend to hold moot the butthurt you seem to have over my remarks about the general depressing plight of starving children. I was merely pointing out that there are those whose lives are not as beautiful and wonderful even in hindsight. Exhibit A:




Your unwarranted indignation is noted and ignored. My original point stands.

If I had to pick a moral for the Genesis story, it would be that the more powerful we become, the more evil we become capable of.
Of course, others choose to interpret it as sufficient reason to be anti-scientific blockheads and hindrances to the human race.

---

(July 6, 2014 at 3:38 pm)Cinjin Wrote: You omitted a couple key words: starving children

Because, you know, I obviously wasn't referring to starving children when I said that people living in Africa were as happy as us.

Quote:Additionally, you yourself wrote "I'd shoot myself" if you had to live in Africa for the rest of your life ... something that seems far more insulting to Africans than anything that you CLAIMED that I said.

Am I obliged to want to spend the rest of my life in any place I go to? You yourself assumed that the lives of those in Africa might not be as great as yours because Africa isn't a place you've been born in and have become accustomed to. That still stands with everyone else north of the equator, except I don't go as far to say that my life is objectively better than theirs.

Quote:These two points I've made tend to hold moot the butthurt you seem to have over my remarks.

Yeah. If you read the first post, I was clearly crying into the keyboard.

(July 6, 2014 at 3:41 pm)Purplundy Wrote: If I had to pick a moral for the Genesis story, it would be that the more powerful we become, the more evil we become capable of.
Of course, others choose to interpret it as sufficient reason to be anti-scientific blockheads and hindrances to the human race.

Oh my gawd. I just googled the book of Genesis. There are 50 chapters! I thought Genesis just covered the first 7 days of 'creation'. Would it be possible to explain why you think the moral for the Genesis story revolves around power and evil without my having slogged through all that begetting?

(July 6, 2014 at 3:41 pm)Purplundy Wrote: If I had to pick a moral for the Genesis story, it would be that the more powerful we become, the more evil we become capable of.
Of course, others choose to interpret it as sufficient reason to be anti-scientific blockheads and hindrances to the human race.

Well, there are at least a few parts in genesis that you have to take literally, as a catholic (non lapsed, non-heretical, I assume)...aren't there?

Also, I'd love to see which parts of the narrative led you to decide what the moral of the story was - if you could summarize them. Hell, might even be a good thread.

(July 9, 2014 at 12:55 pm)whateverist Wrote:

(July 6, 2014 at 3:41 pm)Purplundy Wrote: If I had to pick a moral for the Genesis story, it would be that the more powerful we become, the more evil we become capable of.
Of course, others choose to interpret it as sufficient reason to be anti-scientific blockheads and hindrances to the human race.

Oh my gawd. I just googled the book of Genesis. There are 50 chapters! I thought Genesis just covered the first 7 days of 'creation'. Would it be possible to explain why you think the moral for the Genesis story revolves around power and evil without my having slogged through all that begetting?

I think Purplundy is only referring to the creation story.

Beyond that Genesis includes Cain and Able, Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel. Then we switch to Abraham and get his life story including: god's promise to Abraham about his descendants, the almost sacrifice of Isaac, Sodom and Gomorrah, various just so stories explaining who those other none Hebrews were descended from (hint its lesser sons of Hebrews). Isaac marries Rebecca and his son Jacob tricks his son Esua out of his birth right (another none-Jewish race formed). Jacob is tricked into marrying Leah when he wants Rachael and works another seven years for his father-in-law to get Rachael too. He has twelve sons. Joseph and Coat of many colors story is about the youngest and best of the twelve.

There's much about strife between brothers, promises of the greater glory of the offspring of Abraham, problems between relatives, unhappiness among multiple wives and so on, not to mention god's special relationship with his people.

It's the most readable myth in the Bible.

(July 9, 2014 at 1:11 pm)Jenny A Wrote: It's the most readable myth in the Bible.

That's what I was afraid of. My gag reflex is just too strong.