Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 9:12 pm

Poll: The problem with Christianity lies in...
This poll is closed.
Christ Himself
2.70%
1 2.70%
Christians
40.54%
15 40.54%
Both of them
56.76%
21 56.76%
Total 37 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Unconventional Religion
#31
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 30, 2013 at 6:34 am)genkaus Wrote:
(July 30, 2013 at 5:25 am)Consilius Wrote: In some cases? I didn't realize that human morality changed value with the situation.
To think that the right thing should ever be equated, let alone replaced, with cash or comfort sounds wrong.
That sentiment is to be expected of someone who values dogma over rationality.
Give a fair example and justify my irrationality. I didn't realize Jesus was such a softy.
Reply
#32
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 31, 2013 at 5:33 am)Consilius Wrote: Give a fair example and justify my irrationality. I didn't realize Jesus was such a softy.

This statement:

"I didn't realize that human morality changed value with the situation."

Human morality is required to guide our actions within the context of our circumstances. It is irrational to adhere to fixed-value morality with no regard to its actual application.
Reply
#33
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 30, 2013 at 8:34 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: Where you seem to me to be tripping up in your attempt to understand Christianity's origins is you seem to be under the impression that the only alternative to Christianity having a divine origin is a bunch of people meeting in a back room in some secret conspiracy to carefully craft and devise this religion as a means to a planned end. Now it is true that some religions are born this way but this is not the only alternative.

It reminds me of the "Liar, Lunatic or Lord" trilemma so famous in apologetics. You start with your desired conclusion, insist that there's only one or two possible alternatives and then straw-man the alternatives by way of reducto ad absurdum. In this case, it seems to me, correct me if I'm wrong, that you insist that Christianity either has a divine origin or it was a carefully crafted backroom conspiracy.

I thought you were trying to assert something like that in your essays.

Its true that many not-Jesus things have been written about Jesus (the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Thomas). At many times in Christian history, the Church was just outright about it. If you're Gospel or your church didn't follow mainstream teaching, it was labelled heresy. Documents were evaluated by their theology rather than their historicity. I can admit to that.

Would you say that Christ was adapted to the Gospels or the Gospels were adapted to Christ?

(July 31, 2013 at 5:52 am)genkaus Wrote: It is irrational to adhere to fixed-value morality with no regard to its actual application.
It does seem like moral relativism has a place in that statement.
But give me a real world-example where the fair thing to do would be to choose personal benefit over that of someone else.
Reply
#34
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 31, 2013 at 5:55 am)Consilius Wrote: It does seem like moral relativism has a place in that statement.

If you think that you either don't understand the statement or you don't understand moral relativism.

(July 31, 2013 at 5:55 am)Consilius Wrote: But give me a real world-example where the fair thing to do would be to choose personal benefit over that of someone else.

Killing your would-be murderer.
Stealing from a thief.
Saving yourself from a burning building and strangers behind.
Spending money on a new house rather than feeding starving kids in Africa.

I could go on.
Reply
#35
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 30, 2013 at 11:26 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: Neither had Mark or Luke. Both were companions of Paul and Luke introduces his Gospel with a flat denial that he was a witness but rather compiled the account. And all this is assuming that they were the authors of the books in question.
Paul was addressing issues that rose up in his churches. He didn't have a reason to dig up accounts of Christ's life. Mark felt it was necessary to do so for his church's specific needs, along with Luke. Their Gospels are assumed to have multiple authors who probably weren't them.
Quote:As for Paul, he was the chief prosecutor for the Jews and had his conversion experience only a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus. I would think he would have witnessed such a grand execution that involved the rabbis meeting on Passover Eve in order to get rid of this troublemaker.
Paul was indeed a Pharisee, but I don't believe he was in Jerusalem at the time of Christ's death. His hometown was Tarsus in Cilicia, and he volunteered to exterminate the Christian sect, not Christ himself. If he had in fact met Christ face to face, he would have claimed so in one of his life stories. It seems like an evangelical goldmine.
Quote:The tale got better with the telling.
Or details of it were slightly altered or cut out as time went on and motives changed.
Quote:Jesus was alone when praying at the Garden of Gethsemane, so no need for posing there.
36 Then Jesus came with them to a place called Gethsemane, and said to His disciples, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” 37 And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and distressed. 38 Then He *said to them, “My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me.” Matthew 26:36-38
Even John has Jesus pray at the end of his discourse to the disciples in John 17, ending the speech that he began at John 14, right after predicting Peter's denial during the Last Supper.
Quote:Jesus is God and not God at the same time, depending on the needs of the story at that moment. When Jesus is praying at Gethsemane, that's when he's not God. When he's forgiving sins, that's when he is God. Flip, flop, flip, flop.
Jesus' life was written through the eyes of his disciples. His messianic secret wasn't given plainly, so he would hint it by his actions. Many Gospels progress as this secret is revealed in the "Who do you say that I am?" scene.
Quote:But the madness of the Trinity is really exposed when we have to ask why a god would need to be his own intercessor with himself. If Jesus is God, there is no intercessor because he is the god you are trying to contact. If Jesus is not God, Christianity violates the 1st Commandment (in addition to Commandment #4, since the Sabbath is Saturday).
Fully God, fully man. He is where both meet. Divine goodness reveals itself to fallen humanity for the purpose of bringing fallen humanity to divine goodness. He became what we are to make us what he is. He is the path to salvation. And so on.
Quote:The OT god was not out of reach for the faithful and an intercessor, according to Yahweh, was neither necessary nor desired.
In the OT, God was only with the Jews and among them, only the priests. Christ was God's revelation to the world.
"No other gods" does not mean no intercessor. An intercessor is both God and man.
"because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors."
Isaiah 53:12
Quote:Jesus didn't advertise a new God.
A new way to serve the same God. Jesus was openly Jewish, and sought to reform the religion rather than establish his own.
Quote:You can assume the existence of all kinds of supernatural things that "just so happen" to resemble the natural source of their inspiration.

Symbols are very important to the Bible. A fiery Hell with maggots, God having a throne and a rod and a right hand side, winged messengers, are all part of Judeo-Christian mythology, I guess you can call it. All have been evolved from traditional notions to suit the culture.
God is a spirit, angels are spirits, and Hell is a spiritual "location" (more like a state of being). If our physical bodies burned in fire after we died, Hell would have geographical coordinates. Just because the Jews used cultural influences to describe their God on a throne does not mean he has one. God does not need an independent physical description to be original, because any description of him would be wrong, simply because he cannot be described.

(July 31, 2013 at 6:12 am)genkaus Wrote: Killing your would-be murderer.
Stealing from a thief.
Saving yourself from a burning building and strangers behind.
Spending money on a new house rather than feeding starving kids in Africa.

I could go on.
Self-defense.
The possessions you take would be yours. If they aren't, the person doing so is a child who thinks it's OK because "He did it too."
Dying for them would be noble, but you only need to do as much as you are able. Or do we speak bad of those who sacrifice themselves for others? What about the atheists in foxholes?
Finally:
"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required." Luke 12:48
"For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: but by an equality." Corinthians 8:13-14
Reply
#36
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 31, 2013 at 7:11 am)Consilius Wrote: Self-defense.
The possessions you take would be yours. If they aren't, the person doing so is a child who thinks it's OK because "He did it too."
Dying for them would be noble, but you only need to do as much as you are able. Or do we speak bad of those who sacrifice themselves for others? What about the atheists in foxholes?
Finally:
"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required." Luke 12:48
"For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: but by an equality." Corinthians 8:13-14

I'm not interested in your capacity to twist morality or your shoddy rationalizations. The examples show that morals are not absolute or universal, but contextual. Your specific question was about "real world examples where it is fair to choose personal benefit over someone else's". All the given examples fit the criteria.

Now, can you give an example where the rational thing to do is to sacrifice my personal benefit for someone else's?
Reply
#37
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 26, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: They lived and died poor.
Was that before or after Jesus named himself the son of God and King of all Jews? I think he had bigger plans which just merely turned out kind of wrong and unfortunately got him killed by the tender age of 30 or so...

Quote:Their were relatively inclusive with low standards.
They'd have to be considering the bullshit they're selling.
"Men see clearly enough the barbarity of all ages — except their own!" — Ernest Crosby.
Reply
#38
RE: Unconventional Religion
@genekaus
If I was twisting morality, would that make everything I suggested immoral?
We're not debating the universality of morals. And "contextual" is not the opposite of "universal".
And yes, you did exactly what I asked. Like my Bible quotes, I'm not preaching we should give away everything we have. "Live simply so that others can simply live."
Is self-sacrifice irrational?

(July 31, 2013 at 8:17 am)littleendian Wrote: Was that before or after Jesus named himself the son of God and King of all Jews? I think he had bigger plans which just merely turned out kind of wrong and unfortunately got him killed by the tender age of 30 or so...
He was a travelling preacher born into a poor family.
Jesus only called himself the Son of God to his disciples. Nobody else knew who he was. (Matthew 16:13-16)
Jesus called himself king at his final trial and when he was asked if he was. (Matthew 27:11)
"Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, 'This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.' So Jesus, perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone." John 6:14-15
Reply
#39
RE: Unconventional Religion
(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: If I was twisting morality, would that make everything I suggested immoral?

Not necessarily. Some of the untwisted parts of your morality are immoral and some twisted parts are immoral. Basically, a lot of your Christian morality is immoral and how you twist it does little to change that.

(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: We're not debating the universality of morals.

Yes we are. If you don't believe that the value of morality changes with situation, then you believe in universal morals.

(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: And "contextual" is not the opposite of "universal".

Not universally, but in this context, it is.

(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: And yes, you did exactly what I asked.

Good. So you agree with me.

(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: Like my Bible quotes, I'm not preaching we should give away everything we have. "Live simply so that others can simply live."

And I'm saying "Ignore the biblical bullshit. You don't have to give away anything that you have if you don't want to. Live richly."

(July 31, 2013 at 8:24 am)Consilius Wrote: Is self-sacrifice irrational?

In most cases - yes.
Reply
#40
RE: Unconventional Religion
Hey, we've arrived at direct contradiction!
Which of these cases of self-sacrifice is irrational? (We are using 'irrational' to mean 'bad', 'stupid', 'should never be done'.) Self-sacrifice is largely irrational in another sense. And I don't mind.
Soldiers dying for their country.
Parents struggling for their children.
Blocking a bullet.
If they're OK, we'll need a case of self-sacrifice being 'irrational in a bad way'.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)