What value do you see in studying theology in concerns to Christianity?

[brewer]

[edit]
Once we can get people to stop saying that God is always the Kim Jung Il of the skies, we can work on the differences between Augustine and Spinoza. 
[edit]

Yep, all the christians I know IRL discuss these differences on a daily basis,...........NOT!

You're so out of touch with how mainstream christianity exists (at least in America) it's not even funny.

Maybe you need to be off preaching in christian forums.

[Belacqua]

You're so out of touch with how mainstream christianity exists (at least in America) it's not even funny.

I've explained many times: I don't care at all about mainstream American Christianity.

[brewer]

You're so out of touch with how mainstream christianity exists (at least in America) it's not even funny.

I've explained many times: I don't care at all about mainstream American Christianity.

Then you're out of touch with reality and your opinions mean little except to you.

[Belacqua]

I've explained many times: I don't care at all about mainstream American Christianity.

Then you're out of touch with reality and your opinions mean little except to you.

Is mainstream American Christianity the whole of reality?

[brewer]

Then you're out of touch with reality and your opinions mean little except to you.

Is mainstream American Christianity the whole of reality?

It's a much much bigger slice than yours is.

[EgoDeath]

Is mainstream American Christianity the whole of reality?

It's a much much bigger slice than yours is.

As elitist as Bel is in his view of Christianity, and in dealing with other people in general, I have to wonder how much money the fucker makes.

[Belacqua]

It's a much much bigger slice than yours is.

As elitist as Bel is in his view of Christianity, and in dealing with other people in general, I have to wonder how much money the fucker makes.

Ah, now that's hilarious!

[Acrobat]

Once again, stop. How do you know that you share the same point of view as people who existed thousands of years ago?

Because thought, views, perspectives have histories, leave a trail of fossils, and you can see the fragments of the bones of your thoughts in others, trace them to their source. It’s because I can see my views in the views of people thousands of years ago. It’s probably why I like to read and discuss their writings, while you might find them boring and uninteresting.

We all have writers and thinkers we probably identify with more than others, who share your particular ways of thinking. Atheists might identify with thinking of folks like Dawkins, or Hitchens, or Harris, Hume, Russell in a way that I don’t.

I mean don’t you ever wonder why you value the things you do? Why you see the world a certain way, why you hold the beliefs you do, what the historical influences and factors are in their development?

And of course there are works that trace the history of thoughts as well, like Charles Taylor A Secular Age.

Most atheists I come across tend to sell some naturalistic story of how religions developed, often as some sort of proto-science, making their own histories of how thoughts developed, religion as a sort of early form of science, etc.... But they’re not very good, and offer very little explanatory power,

I do the same of course, but I offer one with greater explanatory scope. One capable of putting all the pieces together, answers more questions that it raises, and takes into a wide variety of writings, thoughts, and histories.

What exactly is the difference between encapsulating story-telling and recognizing it as a distinct genre?

The difference between categorizing writings, like this is fiction, this is non-fiction, this is philosophy, this is history, these are stories, and a sort of work that lumps all these styles together. Why even ancient historical writings can contain non historical elements, invented speeches, and no one bats an eye.

What precisely is "teleogical thinking?"

Believing things have end purposes, like rocks existing so porcupines can scratch their back. As opposed to non-teleological views, were purpose is something humans give to things. Its the difference between a reality that wants to tell us how we ought to live and be, and a reality that has nothing to say, only us.

When the term Truth is used in religious writing and scripture, its almost always in context of some purpose, goal, like being the way, a source of liberation, the opposite of evil, etc...

Once again, how do you know this?

Uhm, because thats what the context in which the term Truth is used indicates:

“The truth shall set you free”
“I am the way the truth and the life”
“If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.”

[no one]

I prefer to study The Princess Bride.

[Fake Messiah]

Studying theology would prevent silly errors like "all Christians believe in an angry man in the sky."

And yet theologians describe christianity as a belief in an angry man in the sky.