Even if theism is a failure, it's still superior to atheism

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You’re describing church, not God.

Boru

The majority of believers attend church, at least once a year.

Dawn

People who believe in God tend to believe every day. God and church-going are not the same thing.

Boru

[Mister Agenda]

Jehanne:reading the author's book would let me know his definition, but not that of any of the users here.

Grand Nudger: first, thank you for taking the time to explain this; i may read over this again.  i hope you bear with me as i try to make sure i understand where you're coming from.  is your perspective the result of the knowledge of the history of religions, and the process of how theyve all changed over time?

Boru: what is it that makes you believe God is cancerous?  to answer a question youve asked in the past, if God is in us and God damns someone, i believe it means we've damned ourselves.

Atheism and theism are mental states; one where there's no belief any gods are real (or in some cases, really gods) and one where there's belief that at least one god is really real.

By 'god', most atheists (I think) mean the dictionary meaning, a superhuman being or spriit worshiped as having power over human fortunes or nature. A pantheist may define God as the universe, but it's not a being or spirit so I don't accept 'God is the universe' any more than most Christians would accept 'God is my dog that I have named God'. Some religions may say a particular natural feature is a god, or a particular person is a god; but to me they're just natural features and people, and calling them something different doesn't change that.

All that said, I would like more Christians better if they seemed to be trying to live up the teachings of what I call the 'hippie version' of Jesus. Not the one that curses fig trees for not being in season or advises people to hate their families; but the one who is supposed to have said to help the poor, visit the imprisoned, and care for the sick.

[rlp21858]

Boru: i believe it's true that many that call themselves Christians do malignant things but i believe their actions are the result of fear and doubt. fear and doubt are cancerous; the Bible speaks against these things and malignity.

i think that much of the belief that what is called "God" is evil has to do with the belief that it involves giving man no freedom or choice in deciding his own outcome. the tone of Christianity is that God created all things but did so for them to be used for a certain purpose, and damnation comes from a perversion of that intended use. but we've probably all heard of the "free will" that God has given man, and i believe we can see the working of it in that man, who God created, has the ability to choose good or evil.

as for the Bible, i believe your perspective is an interpretation of the verses involving damnation, which i understand. i think many who follow Christianity have a fear involving this: predestination is a banned topic of discussion on many Christian sites, for example. but i dont believe this interpretation is of God. remember the Bible says that God is above all, through all, and in us all: with so many possible workings, we have to be careful how we interpret. are there any particular verses that made you conclude that God made man to damn him?

[rlp21858]

Mister Agenda: i understand. Christ didnt say to hate our families, though: he said to love him more than our families. if we put our family above all things, we fall into sin quickly because that's rooted in bias and favoritism, which isnt the truth: everyone should be treated equally. by loving Christ first, we will deal with our families the same way we would all others.

[arewethereyet]

Isn't loving god above our families a form of bias and favoritism?

Seems god is a bit insecure.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Boru: i believe it's true that many that call themselves Christians do malignant things but i believe their actions are the result of fear and doubt.  fear and doubt are cancerous; the Bible speaks against these things and malignity.

i think that much of the belief that what is called "God" is evil has to do with the belief that it involves giving man no freedom or choice in deciding his own outcome.  the tone of Christianity is that God created all things but did so for them to be used for a certain purpose, and damnation comes from a perversion of that intended use. but we've probably all heard of the "free will" that God has given man, and i believe we can see the working of it in that man, who God created, has the ability to choose good or evil.

as for the Bible, i believe your perspective is an interpretation of the verses involving damnation, which i understand.  i think many who follow Christianity have a fear involving this: predestination is a banned topic of discussion on many Christian sites, for example.  but i dont believe this interpretation is of God.  remember the Bible says that God is above all, through all, and in us all: with so many possible workings, we have to be careful how we interpret.  are there any particular verses that made you conclude that God made man to damn him?

The Bible also speaks approvingly of woman as property and the spoils of war. The Bible speaks approvingly of the happiness caused by murdering the children of your enemies. The Bible speaks approvingly of rape, incest, genocide, etc. These are not interpretations, they are what the Bible says. How does this not qualify as malignancy?

As for the Bible creating man in order to damn him, Genesis chapter 3 is pretty clear. God knew that the serpent was going to tempt Eve, knew that Eve was going to eat the fruit, and knew that Adam would follow suit.

As for God deceiving people in order to damn them, 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12. God deliberately deluded people to prevent them from being saved.

Some God you’ve got there, mate.

Boru

[Jehanne]

Mister Agenda: i understand. Christ didnt say to hate our families, though: he said to love him more than our families. if we put our family above all things, we fall into sin quickly because that's rooted in bias and favoritism, which isnt the truth: everyone should be treated equally. by loving Christ first, we will deal with our families the same way we would all others.

Why do you believe that the words of Jesus exist in any extant document? Jesus never wrote anything, as he, like his immediate followers, was illiterate.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Mister Agenda: i understand.  Christ didnt say to hate our families, though: he said to love him more than our families.  if we put our family above all things,  we fall into sin quickly because that's rooted in bias and favoritism, which isnt the truth: everyone should be treated equally.  by loving Christ first, we will deal with our families the same way we would all others.

Why do you believe that the words of Jesus exist in any extant document?  Jesus never wrote anything, as he, like his immediate followers, was illiterate.

What do you base that on? Simply because Jesus didn’t write doesn’t necessarily mean that he couldn’t write. 

While the overall literacy rate in Roman Judea/Palestine was probably around 3%, that of adult males Jews in cities and towns has been estimated to be as high as 20-25%.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

We could assume that jesus was a real boy and that he did write things down, but then we'd have to explain why his followers trashed what he wrote , and wrote their own shit, and their own different versions of shit, instead. It's not beyond the pale for people to do that, mind you, but it does paint a different picture of the regard they held for whomever this jesus fella was.

[The Grand Nudger]

i think that much of the belief that what is called "God" is evil has to do with the belief that it involves giving man no freedom or choice in deciding his own outcome. 

Just one thing among many, but you'll have a great many more things to shitcan before you finally realize that you'd have to toss christ himself in order to rehabilitate the christian god. By and large, people just don't believe in vicarious redemption or blood sacrifice anymore, let alone the decency of either thing. We don't let people serve other peoples prison sentences, we don't accept the execution of a third party to satisfy a debt between another two. They were normal enough ideas for the time they were written, but that was quite awhile ago, and they're so far outside of contemporary moral intuitions that it's unlikely to see them make a comeback. All a part of christianity's modern identity crisis. Generally speaking, as narrative devices, when a culture leaves the moral space occupied or carved out by a particular god, that god has breathed it's last unless it can be successfully exported to some other group that still inhabits that space, or successfully revised to more closely align with the changing mores of the host culture.