Christians, when will you move a mountain?

reply to post by Akragon

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

You mean like insulting people who didn't agree with him?

Passage please...

Matthew
12:34
16:3-4
17:17
23:13-37

Mark
8:38
9:19

Luke
9:41
11:40
12:56

John
8:44
10:8

Didn't want to toss out a huge block of text there, so I'll let you look them up yourself.

You mean condemning those who didn't want to follow his teachings?

He knew the correct path, which is the path of the spirit not the flesh... this is refected in his teachings. IF he was actually sent from God to show man the path... why wouldn't he condem those who wouldnt' listen?

So the path of unsubstantiated nonsense?

If you were a professional at whatever job you do, and you told your people to do something which you knew was correct and they didn't listen wouldn't you disipline them? Or even threaten to fire them?

False comparison, I could actually demonstrate why someone's doing it wrong and I'd explain it well before I'd resort to disciplinary action or termination.

You mean emphasizing devotion to him?

Yes...

Ah, so I should live my life emphasizing devotion to myself from others.

You mean making people leave their families destitute and fatherless?

I've explained this to your friend Awakeandaware... You simply do not understand this passage. It doesn't mean leave your family, nor does it mean hate your mother and father. It means don't follow the needs of the flesh, seek the way of the spirit.

It means abandon your families and come follow me through the desert. The apostles left families destitute.

Sure, the guy said a few good things, but he also did some horribly silly things.

Please show me these silly things he said... Im sure you just don't understand the meaning behind the passage...

Um..nearly everything? The whole 'believe in a deity based on a lack of evidence' thing is up there. Not condemning slavery.

This passage
"And that servant [slave], which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." (Luke 12:47)

Claiming that marrying a divorced woman is adultery, don't bother to plan for the future, demonization of sexual urges, endorsement of old testament law...crap, how about pretty much everything he said?

Most of the things Jesus says are either outright wrong, unsupported, or partially true but taken to ridiculous extremes.

And again, the things he said aren't new. I've many examples of people who lived much better lives than he, who did more good for the work.

Ya thats great but this isn't about Norman Borlaug. Your post was about an alligorical statement in the bible, which i clarified for you... and im more then happy to do the same for your other questions as well.

It's not an allegorical statement in the Bible, it's a series of statements of what Christians can do. I quoted a lot more than one passage, yet you seem hung up on my title.

And I just pointed out Norman Borlaug because you said that Jesus was someone to live by the example of...I'd rather not spend my time wandering around the Middle East insulting people who don't want to listen to my nonsensical ramblings before getting crucified in my early 30s.

reply to post by Akragon

Originally posted by Akragon
Actually Genesis lines up pretty accurately according to what science states... I think you'd be supprized... And again inspired or not, it was written by the hand of man.

Pretty accurate? World created in 6 days, plants proceeding the sun, plants proceeding animals, birds proceeding land animals but coming after fish. That's just right there off the top of my head. The Sun and moon are placed in a physical dome above the Earth in the Genesis account and they move through it as the Earth remains still.

Genesis 2 just outright contradicts Genesis 1..it also places the creation of humanity before the creation of all the other animals, which again goes against everything discovered through science.

So yeah, I've actually studied both the Bible and science, it's sort of easy to see how Genesis in no way lines up with science.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


*sigh*
this is going to take a while so bare with me...

Mat 12:34

33Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

34O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

35A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

36But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

This isn't insulting at all... Calling someone a snake? Have you ever owned a snake? They can't be trusted not to bite you even if you're loving to it. Perhaps you're a little too sensitive my friend

Mat 16:3-4

3And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?

4A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

This isn't insulting... Hes calling people hypocrites, which isn't an insult if its true. If it were not true then perhaps yes. Hes speaking to "The Pharisees and Sadducees" whom are shown in many situations through out the bible to be exactly that.... No insult there.

Mat 17

15Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.

16And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.

17Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.

Again, no insult there.... Faithless and perverse generation? People in this passage are asking him for a cure when his disciples could not cure this mans son who he considers to be a Lunitick. So again hes calling people exactly what they are.... Faithless... and pererse meaning those who are not true... liars, thieves and the like

As here....
Proverbs 8:8
All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.

I've looked at all of your examples, none of them are insults. Perhaps to a 10 year old they might be... but im sure you're not 10, you'd probably be crying just from reading such filth if you were.

So the path of unsubstantiated nonsense?

Nope, truth and love for all of creation. Sadly enough very few people understand that as you clearly can see by your own words.

False comparison, I could actually demonstrate why someone's doing it wrong and I'd explain it well before I'd resort to disciplinary action or termination.

Not a false comparison. He preached the narrow path all though out his ministry... So imagine this person you're demonstrating and explaining to.... heard exactly what you explained over and over for at least three years straight....and he still didn't get it. You're losing money in your business for the whole time you employed him which will continue because he just doesn't get it.

Now tell me you wouldn't fire him.... If you still won't fire him after over three years, you're either a fool....or you're lying about the fact that you wouldn't fire him.

Ah, so I should live my life emphasizing devotion to myself from others.

Im not telling you how to live your life or what to believe, im simply correcting your OP. And just so you know.....that isn't even close to the correct message.

It means abandon your families and come follow me through the desert. The apostles left families destitute.

No it doesn't... You don't understand the passage, even though i explained it quite clearly. Perhaps that is my fault.

This passage
"And that servant [slave], which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." (Luke 12:47)

Slavery was a big thing back then.... we've evolved beyond such things in modern society. I honestly thought one who fights so hard for Atheism would understand that. This passage has no meaning in this day and age. Written millenia ago, and appled when such things were the normal.

Most of the things Jesus says are either outright wrong, unsupported, or partially true but taken to ridiculous extremes.

Clearly you haven't read what he said, or you do not understand the passages you speak of.

It's not an allegorical statement in the Bible, it's a series of statements of what Christians can do. I quoted a lot more than one passage, yet you seem hung up on my title.

Im not going to argue back and forth like a child. I've see tons of your arguements go on for pages, and though you make a lot of valid points in your arguements, your ideas about what the words of Jesus meant are miles off, even for an atheiest

Moving mountians is alligorical, if you don't want to accept it as such and believe that he spoke of litterally moving mountians, i'll have to leave you to your beliefs. You argue about these supernatural powers that are given to christians, when even christians don't believe what you're talking about.

Perhaps you might want to think about that for a minute.

This thread is clearly about arguement for the sake of arguement. Not really my thing...

But hey, whatever does it for ya man...

reply to post by Akragon

Originally posted by Akragon
This isn't insulting at all... Calling someone a snake? Have you ever owned a snake? They can't be trusted not to bite you even if you're loving to it. Perhaps you're a little too sensitive my friend

...so calling someone dangerous and able to bite you without provocation isn't insulting? I'm sorry.

This isn't insulting... Hes calling people hypocrites, which isn't an insult if its true. If it were not true then perhaps yes. Hes speaking to "The Pharisees and Sadducees" whom are shown in many situations through out the bible to be exactly that.... No insult there.

Well...in the Bible they were shown, sure. But there's no evidence that the Bible represents an accurate account of how these people were in real life. And again, it's name calling. It's insulting. To call someone a hypocrite rather than address their positions? I'm sorry, but Jesus engaged in Ad Hominem arguments out the butt.

Again, no insult there.... Faithless and perverse generation?

Yeah, calling people perverse isn't an insult at all.

People in this passage are asking him for a cure when his disciples could not cure this mans son who he considers to be a Lunitick. So again hes calling people exactly what they are.... Faithless... and pererse meaning those who are not true... liars, thieves and the like

Yeah, because we all know that lunacy is cured by faith. I'm sorry, but 'perverse' doesn't mean that in that context.

As here....
Proverbs 8:8
All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.

Proverbs is in Hebrew, the gospels are in Greek.

I've looked at all of your examples, none of them are insults. Perhaps to a 10 year old they might be... but im sure you're not 10, you'd probably be crying just from reading such filth if you were.

You're right, it's empty, meaningless filth. It's been a pox upon humanity for centuries. And again, they are all insults. Just because you claim they aren't doesn't mean they aren't. They are all instances of outright name calling or ad hominem arguments.

You'd think an omniscient dude would know better than to use informal logical fallacies.

So the path of unsubstantiated nonsense?

Nope, truth and love for all of creation. Sadly enough very few people understand that as you clearly can see by your own words.

Creation? No such thing. Truth and love? Sure. Love for everything? I don't love polio, I don't love cancer, I don't love earthquakes, and I sure as hell don't love religion.

Truth. Sure. Not much of that found in religion though.

False comparison, I could actually demonstrate why someone's doing it wrong and I'd explain it well before I'd resort to disciplinary action or termination.

Not a false comparison. He preached the narrow path all though out his ministry... So imagine this person you're demonstrating and explaining to.... heard exactly what you explained over and over for at least three years straight....and he still didn't get it. You're losing money in your business for the whole time you employed him which will continue because he just doesn't get it.

Now tell me you wouldn't fire him.... If you still won't fire him after over three years, you're either a fool....or you're lying about the fact that you wouldn't fire him.

Except that in this instance Jesus isn't preaching to the same people. Sure, some of them are the same, but clearly Jesus is travelling around as is described in the book.

And the narrow path is simply a wrong idea. His ideas are wrong.

Ah, so I should live my life emphasizing devotion to myself from others.

Im not telling you how to live your life or what to believe, im simply correcting your OP. And just so you know.....that isn't even close to the correct message.

Of course it isn't. But it was the right thing for Jesus to do, wasn't it? And again, I'd like to point out that when Jesus is claiming magic powers for his followers there is not a hint of metaphor in the passages. You're just reading it into those passages because you're a modern person who realizes that anything else would be silly.

Actually, snake handlers and faith healers don't think it's silly. Neither do exorcists.

It means abandon your families and come follow me through the desert. The apostles left families destitute.

No it doesn't... You don't understand the passage, even though i explained it quite clearly. Perhaps that is my fault.

No, you clearly don't understand the passage. You're reading into it a modern interpretation. Jesus routinely says "sell your possessions, give the money to the poor, and abandon your families". This isn't a metaphor, it's cult-like behavior.

This passage
"And that servant [slave], which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." (Luke 12:47)

Slavery was a big thing back then.... we've evolved beyond such things in modern society. I honestly thought one who fights so hard for Atheism would understand that. This passage has no meaning in this day and age. Written millenia ago, and appled when such things were the normal.

Ah, so they get a pass. Even though their leader was supposedly omniscient. Instead of saying "No! Do not enslave!" he decided to endorse slavery. Hell of a narrow path if bits of it are changing constantly.

Most of the things Jesus says are either outright wrong, unsupported, or partially true but taken to ridiculous extremes.

Clearly you haven't read what he said, or you do not understand the passages you speak of.

No, I've read what he said repeatedly. I've heard other people read it aloud. I've heard people explain it regularly. Hell, I'm more familiar with what he said than most people who believe in the stuff. I understand it quite well. It's wrong.

It's not an allegorical statement in the Bible, it's a series of statements of what Christians can do. I quoted a lot more than one passage, yet you seem hung up on my title.

Im not going to argue back and forth like a child. I've see tons of your arguements go on for pages, and though you make a lot of valid points in your arguements, your ideas about what the words of Jesus meant are miles off, even for an atheiest

Wow, I'm wrong. Why?

Moving mountians is alligorical, if you don't want to accept it as such and believe that he spoke of litterally moving mountians, i'll have to leave you to your beliefs. You argue about these supernatural powers that are given to christians, when even christians don't believe what you're talking about.

Except for the snake handlers, the faith healers, the exorcists, and all those others who actually are responsible for so many deaths.

What's even crazier is that these beliefs used to be highly prevalent, the only reason they aren't so common now is because secularism dragged Christianity out of the dark ages.

Perhaps you might want to think about that for a minute.

I've thought about it. Clearly you haven't. Clearly you don't understand the history of the Christian religion. You don't even understand that there are children who are dying today because their parents think that prayer cures diabetes.

This thread is clearly about arguement for the sake of arguement. Not really my thing...

No, this thread is highlighting stupidity. This thread is highlighting how blind people are to what's actually in the Bible and how they, like you, have to explain things away as allegories that were not thought of as such until the dawn of secularism and science.

Madness wrote:

["No, this thread is highlighting stupidity. This thread is highlighting how blind people are to what's actually in the Bible and how they, like you, have to explain things away as allegories that were not thought of as such until the dawn of secularism and science."]

True. Allegories are illustrations for easing communication, but not with intrinsic values to base anything on. And use of symbolic interpretation is as a methodology just as subjective as any faith or doctrinal interpretation is.

Ultimately (at least in the sphere of human understanding), subjective and objective are different positions/perspectives with different applications.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

...so calling someone dangerous and able to bite you without provocation isn't insulting? I'm sorry.

Sorry for what...lol You have the right to disagree. I'll see if i can explain.

FIrst thing you have to know is that Jesus knew what was in all mens hearts(according to the story of course)

He was talking to the Sadducees and the Pharisees who were two different "sects" of Jews... These groups were basically the "aristocrates" and priests(Sadducees)... and the middle class people(pharisees) He'd had many dealings with both groups, they conspired to kill him in many situations as well. Though they rarely agreed with each other they did manage to come together at Jesus' trial...

So he had plenty of provocation to call them snakes my friend. Again, when its true its not an insult, so don't be sorry

Well...in the Bible they were shown, sure. But there's no evidence that the Bible represents an accurate account of how these people were in real life. And again, it's name calling. It's insulting. To call someone a hypocrite rather than address their positions? I'm sorry, but Jesus engaged in Ad Hominem arguments out the butt.

This is true, theres no evidence of the bible being an accurate account of history. I don't take it as historical fact, i take it as spiritual knowledge using alligorical stories. You take it as pure garbage, and of course you're welcome to do so. As i've said not everyone understands the message, and apparently some just arn't supposed to.... *shrug*

And hes dealing with the same people(sadducees & Pharasees) who were in fact hypocrites. No insult if its true.

Yeah, calling people perverse isn't an insult at all.

Depends on the context and if its true or not...

Perverse:
Showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable, often in spite of the consequences.

Yeah, because we all know that lunacy is cured by faith. I'm sorry, but 'perverse' doesn't mean that in that context.

See i can use the same arguement as you have though.... How do you know he didn't cure this man of whatever affliction he had... You have no proof... You weren't there. I don't know if its true, but i won't say that its not either.

Proverbs is in Hebrew, the gospels are in Greek.

whats your point, this is in english...

You're right, it's empty, meaningless filth. It's been a pox upon humanity for centuries. And again, they are all insults. Just because you claim they aren't doesn't mean they aren't. They are all instances of outright name calling or ad hominem arguments.

You'd think an omniscient dude would know better than to use informal logical fallacies.

I agree it has been horrible for humanity, but again thats because people don't understand it. There were no insults there as i've said. Its not an insult if its true. If you lie to me and i catch you and call you a liar is it an insult? Yes its insulting to you, but its also true so deal with it....ye know?

Still haven't found those fallacies you keep speaking about, but you don't accept my inturpretation anyways so what does it matter?

Creation? No such thing. Truth and love? Sure. Love for everything? I don't love polio, I don't love cancer, I don't love earthquakes, and I sure as hell don't love religion.

Truth. Sure. Not much of that found in religion though.

Alright, love for your fellow man hows that instead. Personally i prefer love for all of creation but to each his own. When i say creation i mean all of existance, spiritual and physical.

Actually i agree theres little truth in most religions, most have an agenda. Im not religious though...

Except that in this instance Jesus isn't preaching to the same people. Sure, some of them are the same, but clearly Jesus is travelling around as is described in the book.

And the narrow path is simply a wrong idea. His ideas are wrong.

Yet again you manage to know exactly who was there and following him. Yes he traveled around but realize this isn't an exact timeline recorded in the bible. Days or weeks might have passed between one passage to the next, this is an account of his life. Theres no way to know exactly who was following him unless it's said specifically, which in this case it isn't.

His ideas are not wrong they're absolutely right... but again if you disagree you're welcome to do so. Im happy to clarify your understanding but again, you don't accept what i say so it doesn't matter. At least i enjoy helping people understand these things though.

Of course it isn't. But it was the right thing for Jesus to do, wasn't it? And again, I'd like to point out that when Jesus is claiming magic powers for his followers there is not a hint of metaphor in the passages. You're just reading it into those passages because you're a modern person who realizes that anything else would be silly.

Actually you're right! Technically its an alliterative hyperbole, or an exaggeration made for emphasis that is comprised of words all beginning with the same sound.

Just because you call it wrong doesn't mean it is... its not meant to be taken litteral man. It means to do something that is usually hard or almost impossible.... To move mountians.

No, you clearly don't understand the passage. You're reading into it a modern interpretation. Jesus routinely says "sell your possessions, give the money to the poor, and abandon your families". This isn't a metaphor, it's cult-like behavior.

Again, pointless back and forth arguing. I told you what it meant, if you don't agree then don't. I really don't care honestly. It means material possessions do nothing for spiritual progression. Theres no modern inturpretation that IS the correct meaning of that passage. Im sorry i can't explain it any better.

Ah, so they get a pass. Even though their leader was supposedly omniscient. Instead of saying "No! Do not enslave!" he decided to endorse slavery. Hell of a narrow path if bits of it are changing constantly

Show me where he said, Slavery is right or anything even close?

He aknowledges slavery exists yes... he does not endorse it.

No, I've read what he said repeatedly. I've heard other people read it aloud. I've heard people explain it regularly. Hell, I'm more familiar with what he said than most people who believe in the stuff. I understand it quite well. It's wrong.

Im sure you have heard it preached, and you might even have read it,(doubt) but you don't understand it. Similar to many on these forums who post line after line of scripture, then condem everyone to hell for not believing what they believe. They don't understand it, nor do you... and it shows in what you write. But again thats fine, you don't have to understand it.... its only a book. And you'll still pass into the afterlife just like everyone else so it doesn't matter if you "get it" or not.

Oh, and no its not wrong....

Wow, I'm wrong. Why?

Why are you shocked? You don't understand the message in the bible its as simple as that, no big deal. No different then most people actually... You're on a mission to convince everyone that the bible is pure garbage... Have fun it matters not to me.

Except for the snake handlers, the faith healers, the exorcists, and all those others who actually are responsible for so many deaths.

What's even crazier is that these beliefs used to be highly prevalent, the only reason they aren't so common now is because secularism dragged Christianity out of the dark ages.

yup i agree actually..

I've thought about it. Clearly you haven't. Clearly you don't understand the history of the Christian religion. You don't even understand that there are children who are dying today because their parents think that prayer cures diabetes.

Uhm, no im afraid i've studied the bible and many other ancient texts. I couldn't care less about the Christian religion and its not my problem that people believe prayer cures anything. Yes its tragic, yes christianity spreads like a disease, but im not Christian, nor do i blame the bible for peoples lack of understanding. If anything its those who preach the bible who are responsible for the corruption and death associated with religion. Most Christians are decent people who are scared and just want to get to "heaven" one day. What they don't understand is that you don't need religion to pass into the afterlife, its automatic once you die.

No, this thread is highlighting stupidity. This thread is highlighting how blind people are to what's actually in the Bible and how they, like you, have to explain things away as allegories that were not thought of as such until the dawn of secularism and science.

Well i do agree this thread does show whos blind. Im not going to point fingers though... its quite obvious. This thread asks a question that even christians do not believe. For some reason you don't get that... *shrug*

Your first line in this thread... for example.

Within the Bible it is claimed that Christians are able to do all sorts of extraordinary things. They seem to be superhuman if these claims are right:

You open your arguement with an incorrect premise, i corrected you over and over but again you don't see what i do, so theres nothing else i can explain to you on this matter.

And unlike many others have no need to explain anything to anyone nor do i have any desire to "prove" anything to you... i chose to explain things to clarify people's understanding.

I only decided to take part in this thread because the post made me laugh.

Anyways, believe whatever you want man. Doesn't matter in the least to me

reply to post by Akragon


Well, since you refuse to see an insult as an insult, I don't know where we can go from here. Calling someone a viper is not an accurate description. Calling someone perverse for a religious disagreement is also not an accurate description. Both of those are outright insults.

Hell, comparing those who won't agree to swine is also insulting.

My point about the difference between Hebrew and Greek is that the meanings shift. You're translating two different languages and trying to find an equivalence through a third language...sort of messes with the meanings.

But again, you're straying from the topic. You're still hung up on the mountains thing. What about the ability to handle snakes and raise the dead? What about the ability to drink poison without dying? What about the claim that those who believe will be able to accomplish feats greater than those accomplished by Jesus?

As for the slavery thing...Jesus had an opportunity to speak out against slavery, he didn't. That makes him complicit in its continuation if he is supposed to be a moral teacher.

I don't understand how you can doubt that I've read the Bible. I'm one of the few posters on here that actually demonstrates having read the damn book (three times in fact, and that's just counting cover-to-cover readings). If anyone doesn't actually understand or hasn't read the Bible, it would be the individual who is calling the whole book allegorical when the majority of it isn't. What's allegorical about "Sell all of your stuff and follow me". What's allegorical about that?


You know what, I'm just done. You don't care about basic things like...reason. Or evidence for that matter. You simply state that I don't get the core message without demonstrating why. I've provided passages, you've merely claimed that they're allegory. Why are they allegory? Well, because they'd be ridiculous otherwise. Hell, they're ridiculous even as allegory. Faith doesn't move mountains, heavy machinery does.


To just quote one line from what you said:

You open your arguement with an incorrect premise, i corrected you over and over but again you don't see what i do, so theres nothing else i can explain to you on this matter.

Logical fallacy: Special pleading. I'm sorry, but you cannot claim special knowledge or insight. You have to actually be able to provide argument or evidence to back up your claims.


Oh, and one more thing. You keep tossing out a straw man about me thinking the Bible is pure garbage. I don't. I wouldn't have read it if I thought it was pure garbage. What I think is that it's a document of significance to understanding the history of the development of western civilization. It has the same value as any mythic text. I don't consider the Bhagavad Git, the Odyssey, or the Saga of the Nibelungs to be pure garbage, I just don't think that they're true and I heavily disagree with many of the messages contained within them.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

Well, since you refuse to see an insult as an insult, I don't know where we can go from here. Calling someone a viper is not an accurate description. Calling someone perverse for a religious disagreement is also not an accurate description. Both of those are outright insults.

I've already explained everything on this issue, if you don't get it i can't explain further. It doesn't matter if its an insult to the people hes talking to if what he is calling them is true....Truth hurts sometimes, people find truth insulting at times...again deal with it.

My point about the difference between Hebrew and Greek is that the meanings shift. You're translating two different languages and trying to find an equivalence through a third language...sort of messes with the meanings

And my point is its translated into english, for all to read. I don't care what it means in greek, im telling you what it means in my language. If you disagree with the context, you're free to do so. Im telling you the correct meaning of these passages... so again if you don't get it, i can't explain further....nor will i just for the sake of arguement.

But again, you're straying from the topic. You're still hung up on the mountains thing. What about the ability to handle snakes and raise the dead? What about the ability to drink poison without dying? What about the claim that those who believe will be able to accomplish feats greater than those accomplished by Jesus?

Raise the dead means dead in spirit... I find it amusing to no end when people talk about zombies in the bible, its just silly honestly, but again as i've said before many people don't understand the bible so lack of understanding leads to silly crap like zombies and such.

I can handle snakes, i've owned several...and i didn't get that ability from reading the bible. As i've said before, it doesn't matter what i tell you about these issues, you don't accept anything i tell you so its pointless to bother...

As for the slavery thing...Jesus had an opportunity to speak out against slavery, he didn't. That makes him complicit in its continuation if he is supposed to be a moral teacher.

Ever think that the term "slave" might not be the same now as it was back then? Besides slavery was only recently abolished, it was widely accepted for centuries. As i've said, he acknoledged slavery existed, but it was very normal... IF something is accepted in society its considered ok... For example...In muslim countries people think women should be covered completely... western society believes this is wrong. But go and try to tell someone over in those countries its wrong... They'll laugh at you.

There was no bill of rights back then, and its quite possible these slaves were mearly doing their jobs, everyone needs to work... and if serving others is your only means of employment you do what you must.

I don't understand how you can doubt that I've read the Bible. I'm one of the few posters on here that actually demonstrates having read the damn book (three times in fact, and that's just counting cover-to-cover readings). If anyone doesn't actually understand or hasn't read the Bible, it would be the individual who is calling the whole book allegorical when the majority of it isn't. What's allegorical about "Sell all of your stuff and follow me". What's allegorical about that?

I didn't say the whole book is alligorical, i said your OP claims are alligorical, im actually shocked that an intelligent person such as yourself doesn't understand that.

I've explained this part you're speaking of several times and in a few different ways in this thread alone man... Again if you don't understand it i can't explain it any better. Honestly im doing my best to clarify these passages for you...Im sorry i can't be any more clear.

You know what, I'm just done. You don't care about basic things like...reason. Or evidence for that matter. You simply state that I don't get the core message without demonstrating why. I've provided passages, you've merely claimed that they're allegory. Why are they allegory? Well, because they'd be ridiculous otherwise. Hell, they're ridiculous even as allegory. Faith doesn't move mountains, heavy machinery does.

Its probably better if you do quit honestly, you don't get it... Why don't you get it? Well thats simple, you're focusing on things that don't matter in the least. Things that are obviously illogical if they were anything but alligorical... At least that part you do get.... so we have progress. Thats why you don't get the message. Many of his followers didn't "get it" either, and in many cases Jesus himself is completely amazed that people just don't understand him. This is why he spoke in parables. To most it sounds like nonsence, but to those that understand him...his parables are beautiful and full of truth.

Yes faith doesn't move mountians litterally. But knowledge can change peoples ideals and beliefs including those who believe strongly in something that is incorrect. That my friend is the mountian and unfortunatly christians can change peoples beliefs... unfortunatly its not always for the better.

Logical fallacy: Special pleading. I'm sorry, but you cannot claim special knowledge or insight. You have to actually be able to provide argument or evidence to back up your claims.

Call it whatever you want man, i can back up anything i tell you, but again you don't accept what i tell you so its pointless argueing back and forth. Im telling you the sky is blue, and you disagree with me. I don't know what else to do im sorry. If you believe Jesus said you can litterally move mountians if you believe in him, unfortunatly you're wrong. Its as simple as that.

Oh, and one more thing. You keep tossing out a straw man about me thinking the Bible is pure garbage. I don't. I wouldn't have read it if I thought it was pure garbage. What I think is that it's a document of significance to understanding the history of the development of western civilization. It has the same value as any mythic text. I don't consider the Bhagavad Git, the Odyssey, or the Saga of the Nibelungs to be pure garbage, I just don't think that they're true and I heavily disagree with many of the messages contained within them.

Actually yes, i assumed this.... if im wrong i appoligise. As i've said before, many read it, few understand it.

I've read the Bhagavad Gita as well, i believe theres a lot of knowledge in that book as well, but theres a lot of allegorical stuff in there too, just like any other religious document.

Do you believe that there will be a dragon flying through the sky at some point in the future? Revelations says there will be.... So once again we come to the same situation. In reality there will be no dragon...ever. The dragons spoken about in revelations represents something. The four horsemen are supposed to be flying through the sky, and apparently Jesus will return on a cloud. All of these things have meanings and they're Obviously not litteral. Personally i think revelations is useless. It was written by an old man in a cave who claimed divine revelation, but again...i don't know. I don't see a point in trying to predict the future, i prefer to live in the now, and have no need to know what is to come. Yet people seem to think they can predict things from reading it... even though time and time again its proven they can't.

I can show you litterally hundreds of Metephor's and allegorical statements all though out the bible. Though again most times people seem to think its litteral. Genesis says the earth was created in Seven days. Logically anyone with half a brain understands this simply isn't true, yet many believe it is.

I can only help your understanding on these passages so much my friend. Im more then happy to answer your questions but i see it as pointless. You just return to the same arguement over and over. Not everything in the bible is meant to be taken litterally. If you can't see that simple fact, what else can i do...

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote:

["Not everything in the bible is meant to be taken litterally."]

Which only regresses the problem a step. Which verified method shall be used to sort the literal parts from the metaphorical/allegorical parts.

Is genesis 1 partly literal, partly allegorical/metaphorical? Without a valid method, which actually is far more complicated to create than just relating to literalism, ANY bible-interpretation method can (and does) claim superiority.

We have an increasing amount of resident bible-esoterists, bible-totality interpretators, symbolism/allegory interpretators, secret-code interpretators and not least the occasional very special methodology used by creationists.

Most of them agreeing on only two things. To disagree with each other and to disagree with objective procedure.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by Akragon

 

You wrote:

["Not everything in the bible is meant to be taken litterally."]

Which only regresses the problem a step. Which verified method shall be used to sort the literal parts from the metaphorical/allegorical parts.

Is genesis 1 partly literal, partly allegorical/metaphorical? Without a valid method, which actually is far more complicated to create than just relating to literalism, ANY bible-interpretation method can (and does) claim superiority.

We have an increasing amount of resident bible-esoterists, bible-totality interpretators, symbolism/allegory interpretators, secret-code interpretators and not least the occasional very special methodology used by creationists.

Most of them agreeing on only two things. To disagree with each other and to disagree with objective procedure.

True that my friend...

this is why i tend not to bother with what is allegorical and what is not...

But for this example specificallly MIMS is arguing for the sake of arguement itself. Theres no logical reason for anyone to believe that because you believe in Christ you will be able to litterally move mountians. Its a rediculous thing to even state honestly.

This was my whole arguement, which for some reason (which is beyond me) he can't understand.

Just some basic logic can usually tell you if a passage is a metephor, or an allegorical statement...

You can't move mountians litterally... Dragons don't exist litterally....

Now healing the sick, this is a different story.... theres been many claims of people healing others through "spiritual means" I've not bothered to reseach these claims because i really don't care... IF they're lying about it they're only hurting themselves, and most likely theres an agenda behind their claims (probably money)

This doesn't change what i understand, regardless of the truth behind the matter. I can't heal people, maybe some can, i don't know.

As you know im more then happy to admit when im wrong, and if i don't understand something. I don't speak on matters i don't understand, it would be pointless.

This thread is something i do understand which is why i posted a reply.

reply to post by Akragon


Why do you keep emphasizing the mountains thing? I provided a passage specifically:

Matthew 21:21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.

Jesus literally struck down a fig tree in this passage. He says "If you have faith, you can do that too. Hell, you'll be able to move a mountain and toss it into a sea!"

Now...how is that allegorical? He's just killed a damn fig tree and tells his followers that the doubtless amongst them will be able to do awesome stuff like killing fig trees.

And what about this bit?

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

I'm sorry, but how is this passage an allegory at all?

And then...he says that people will do things greater than what he himself did:

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

So...the magic man says that other people will be able to do the same magic and better.

I'm sorry, but you've yet to explain how this is an allegory nor have you pointed out how you discern allegory from a literal passage. Saying that it's basic logic really means..well...based on my understanding of the world through modern science it seems crazy. Well...dudes coming out of their graves and walking into Jerusalem sounds crazy. So does a guy coming back to life. Was the resurrection a metaphor?

You need to actually provide a standard, not something that is essentially ad hoc based upon the state of current knowledge.

As for this statement:

]Now healing the sick, this is a different story.... theres been many claims of people healing others through "spiritual means" I've not bothered to reseach these claims because i really don't care...

Except none have been verified.

IF they're lying about it they're only hurting themselves, and most likely theres an agenda behind their claims (probably money)

Yes, the parents whose children die every year because they refuse medical treatment for basic medical conditions like diabetes are only in it for the money.

You're not providing anything but a 'get out of jail free' card for when the Bible doesn't make sense. Turn it into an allegory or metaphor, regardless of whether or not that transformation renders the passage nonsensical. Why would Jesus be using a metaphor when he's saying "I killed a fig tree on command and you can too! Hell, you can move mountains if you've got enough faith!" Doesn't make any sense. Or does the metaphor begin at mountains but not apply to the fig tree thing?

reply to post by Akragon


With IAM as the possibly only exception, I prefer not to comment on/for other contributors on ATS, unless I have an active dialogue going with them. So in the case of this quote from you .........:

["But for this example specificallly MIMS is arguing for the sake of arguement itself. Theres no logical reason for anyone to believe that because you believe in Christ you will be able to litterally move mountians. Its a rediculous thing to even state honestly."]

.......I'd rather argue for my own position. I want to carry the 'objective' procedure as far as it carries; something which does not include gnostic atheism or reductionist materialism. But on the other hand the objective procedure ranges far and wide in the spectrum of agnostic atheism versus theism.

Personally I see a great deal of humour in the title, because infallibility and ineffability lurks just around the corner in much of the theist argumentation presented on ATS, and 'miracles', 'angels&demons' and weird coincidences (= using inductive reasoning in the worst possible way) abound.

It's a question of defining an alleged trans-cosmic situation, and one of the definitions can actually lead straight to 'miracles'; miracles being the counter-point to 'natural laws'.

Insofar I'm able to be 'fair' about your attitude, I backtracked the thread and found these three comments from you:

Quote 1: [".......Not by God of course, but if you consider God to be all things, those who invented those prosthetic's are also a part of God."]

You're making an assumption ("if you consider God to be all things"), which while it isn't categorical, still is so suggestive, that it's close to cornering opposition.

Quote 2: ["Raising the dead in this sence means helping those who do not understand we are more then just flesh. Realization of the spirit within is a step towards the correct path."]

Which is both doctrinal and patronizing.

And to me. Quote 3: ["Actually Genesis lines up pretty accurately according to what science states... I think you'd be supprized... And again inspired or not, it was written by the hand of man."]

Yes..resemblance to science would make me SURPRISED. And as I prefer to have this dialogue between you and me, it would be very interesting for me to know, how you arrive at this conclusion. While I'm not university educated in hard science, I'm not ignorant either, so this brushing off of the basis of the whole bible (including genesis 2) on the miraculous/not-miraculous perspective is central.

So the offer is repeated: Explain, while also giving me the allegorical and literal choices and why.

Quote: ["Just some basic logic can usually tell you if a passage is a metephor, or an allegorical statement..."]

'Basic logic' needs some clarification.

Quote: [" Now healing the sick, this is a different story.... theres been many claims of people healing others through "spiritual means" I've not bothered to reseach these claims because i really don't care... "]

I once healed a terminal cancer through reiki-healing. I don't take it as a proof of anything. I'm not sure, that I can repeat it to satisfy 'objective' phenomena criteria.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

Why do you keep emphasizing the mountains thing? I provided a passage specifically:

Because its a rediculous thing to even state, so i emphasize it to make you realize its silly. Theres no logic behind your question what so ever... Yet you can't seem to see that.

So...lets examine these passages so we might be able to put this to rest shall we...

First we need to look at a few parables so bare with me, i'll explain the best i can.

The Tree and its Fruits

15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

The last line is the main point in this passage. You can know people and what their about by their words and actions, Or.. "The fruit they bare"

Now continuing on "fig trees" and what they symbolize...

First in your passage this is said...

19And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.

Now i don't know about any supernatural abilities he may or may not have had... but regardless there is meaning to this passage.

The fig tree was useless, Barren and without purpose other then to exist. Basically saying without spiritual progression you have no purpose to exist. We're hear to learn and experience life as it is. How you live your life affects the outcome in your life. If you're a mean, ignorant, intolerant person, your life with reflect that. You'll end up lonely, with few friends. On the other hand if you're kind, loving, and giving...not to mention forgiving... again your life will reflect that. People will flock to you just to be around you, love spreads like wildfire my friend, this is a fact.

So...now we look at the Barren fig tree... this represents those who do not progress their own spirit because of their need for materialism. Those who show anger towards others, those who do not forgive, those who do not give freely etc etc...

The Barren Fig tree

6He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.

7Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?

8And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:

9And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

This is an example of how one should act towards those who continuiously (key word) do not progress their spirit through love... This man was forgiving towards this plant( i know its lame but hear me out) And even though Jesus said... Whats the point of it being there, it has no use...cut it down. The farmer or dresser wanted to give it another chance... even after three years of uselessness. An example of forgiveness and understanding.

I've explained this to you as well, but for the sake of this post i will again, just so you don't have to go searching.

This means "you can only do so much to aid people in their understanding about life". We are here to learn, and experience... then move on to the next step if you progress or return for more learning if you don't learn your lessons. Your lessons are your experiences in life, Good and Bad.

Now we look at the Budding fig tree...

The Budding Fig Tree

29And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;

30When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.

31So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.

32Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

33Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

So, just as you know and understand that when the trees bud summer is near... one should also know that the kingdom of God is also quite near... I'll even refine that idea for you... the kingdom is here, now. Existance in all its chaotic and amazing glory is the kingdom... Thomas or whoever wrote Thomas said it best...

His disciples questioned:
When will the kingdom come?
Jesus answered:
It will never come if you are
expecting it. Nobody will say look here
or look there. Yet the Kingdom of the Father
is spread throughout the earth and no man sees it.

And by the way just so i clear everything up.... His words will not pass away because Love is the only absolute. Love is the purest truth in all of creation.

Now i know you're argueing about these supernatural gifts that will be given to those who believe in him. This just isn't the case. Though it may seem that hes saying that, theres a deeper meaning in those words, and its not meant to be litteral.

Believers can not kill a fig tree with a thought, nor will they ever be able to... Though i admit i would love to see someone try... On the other hand they can see one who is withered inside, or lacking love. To those you should be patient and understanding of their situation, you don't know what they've been through in their life to make them disregard love, but one should show him love anyways.

Now again, you can only do so much for people who do not have love in their life. After a while its pointless to try because they chose to be blind. Which is what him killing the Fig tree means... Those who understand will see that some chose not to learn. Those who hate, those that are greedy, selfish, those that lie, cheat and steal... they have no point of existance other then to serve themselves. This materialistic ideal also spreads like wildfire. Many times they are also quite rich and have many possessions which many will envy. They got to where they are because of a cut throat attitude. They don't care who they affect in their actions, as long as they get what they want, These people should be cut from your life... Im not saying turn your back on them... im saying "leave them to their beliefs"... for as he said " they understand not what they do"


So...on to the next part you're talking about...

17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

This doesn't mean drink poison and you'll be fine... It means they will hear poisonous thoughts from others but will be unaffected by them.

James will explain...

James 3:8
But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison

As you can see, the poison is mens thoughts, and mens words. Those who think they know the truth yet do not.

This is similar to where Jesus said, You must drink my Blood... Not litterally of course... His blood is his words and actions... So in other words... understand what hes saying and accept the truth of his words, because they are love and truth.

So does a guy coming back to life. Was the resurrection a metaphor?

No it was to provide people proof of the existance of the afterlife to the world... Put it this way... Say one of your close friends died...You went to his funeral, saw him burried. Then three days later he shows up at your door with a smile on his face. Now im not saying something like this would happen....of course not. But if it did happen, would you have any doubts of the existance of life after death?

I think not...

Yes, the parents whose children die every year because they refuse medical treatment for basic medical conditions like diabetes are only in it for the money.

You're not providing anything but a 'get out of jail free' card for when the Bible doesn't make sense. Turn it into an allegory or metaphor, regardless of whether or not that transformation renders the passage nonsensical. Why would Jesus be using a metaphor when he's saying "I killed a fig tree on command and you can too! Hell, you can move mountains if you've got enough faith!" Doesn't make any sense. Or does the metaphor begin at mountains but not apply to the fig tree thing?

I can't understand why people believe prayer is all you need, nor do i have an explanation for it. In those cases it probably would have been better if they'd never heard of God. At least they would seek medical attention logically. I won't deny the bible has probably done more harm then Good, but again the fault lies on those who teach. They do not understand yet they believe they do... so again its the blind leading the blind.

I do not teach... i am no teacher... But i do have the ability to clairify people's understanding of scripture.

So... i hope i explained these passages to you... scripture can be complicated believe me, it took many years for me to "get it"...

Any other questions?



Oh, your "moving mountians" statement was also in Thomas...

If two
Make peace with one another in the same house,
they can order the mountain to move,
and it will move.

Again, hard things can be accomplished... Get it?

And one more thing i've already mentioned... Handling "snakes" does not mean litterally handling snakes. As i've told you in a previous post. Snakes are those who try to decieve people, liars, cheats... same as when he called people Vipers. Which again, isn't an insult if its true.

reply to post by bogomil

Quote 1: [".......Not by God of course, but if you consider God to be all things, those who invented those prosthetic's are also a part of God."]

You're making an assumption ("if you consider God to be all things"), which while it isn't categorical, still is so suggestive, that it's close to cornering opposition.

This isn't an assumption, as i've said before...If you consider God as being all things without exception (which i do) i wasn't saying prosthetic's are made by God, i leave the idea open to the possibility. Again If God is all things that must include all things would it not?

Quote 2: ["Raising the dead in this sence means helping those who do not understand we are more then just flesh. Realization of the spirit within is a step towards the correct path."]

Which is both doctrinal and patronizing.

Sorry, im not going to lie to you, there is a correct path for spiritual progression. Patronizing or not, its true.

And to me. Quote 3: ["Actually Genesis lines up pretty accurately according to what science states... I think you'd be supprized... And again inspired or not, it was written by the hand of man."]

Yes..resemblance to science would make me SURPRISED. And as I prefer to have this dialogue between you and me, it would be very interesting for me to know, how you arrive at this conclusion. While I'm not university educated in hard science, I'm not ignorant either, so this brushing off of the basis of the whole bible (including genesis 2) on the miraculous/not-miraculous perspective is central.

I'll send you a link, tell me what you think and keep in mind... Im not saying its true... Im saying its possible.

reply to post by Akragon


So...because some mentions of trees are parables, they all are? I'm sorry, but you have no rationale to do so. I also find it a bit telling that you didn't bother citing the passages beyond verse number, as your first passage comes from Matthew 9....I'm quoting 12 chapters later.

Then you quote Luke 13...which was written later than Matthew.

And then you quote it again...even though that one isn't a parable, it's more of a "Let me sort of explain how the world is going to end using a clever metaphor"...and that prediction of the end of the world doesn't come to pass.

Then for some reason you're using James to explain away the poison thing...hell, you're just providing nonsensical references from other books. Why are you citing other books and other parts of books to explain entirely unrelated passages? James is talking about words, Jesus is talking about drinking deadly things. Last I checked, that actually applies to a lot more than poison...and also you cannot drink words...so the metaphor collapses.

You have no reasoning behind your explanations, you're merely providing ad hoc rationalizations for things you cannot explain. You are taking passages that aren't metaphors and saying they are for no reason beyond the fact that they would be silly otherwise.

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote: ["Again If God is all things that must include all things would it not?"]

Even in the hypothetically case of an 'unknown' to cosmic existence (which for me is a trans-cosmic existence level and, ....I believe..., for you 'god'), there are some steps to take, before the whole thing can be promoted to theory-level.

And while you ofcourse have every right to form your own assumptions, these assumptions are only valid to you. Also building further assumptions on top of the first has no value except as speculations. This is part of relating to/including objective procedure, using material or methodologies, which is independent of individual interpretations.

(Sorry I now have to remind of my 'mantra' about relative realities and epistemological outer reaches, it's just watching my back 'in case'...).

You do arrive at positivist (absolute) conclusions:

Quotes: ["Sorry, im not going to lie to you, there is a correct path for spiritual progression. Patronizing or not, its true."]

and

["We are here to learn, and experience"]

and

["one should also know that the kingdom of God is also quite near... I'll even refine that idea for you... the kingdom is here, now. Existance in all its chaotic and amazing glory is the kingdom..."]

All dogmas/doctrines, and none with any objective criteria supporting them. And when people aren't in agreement on 'answers' a sensible step would be to ask HOW they arrived at their answers. Which method is used.

As I'm uncertain on how much reliance you put in the procedure(s) of objectivity, it's only fair that you get a chance to present your possible dissenting from objectivity and formulate your own method. You can either pull out 'answers' from your sleeve or a tophat, or you can regress, 'go back', in your chain of reasoning to a point which is communicable/meaningful to both of us. In this case on method.

That's why I can be so insistent on certain things, e.g. requesting specifics of how allegories/metaphors/parables are distinguished from literal information, the intrinsic nature of allegories etc and to what extent and how they can be used.

You have seen me in former contexts similar to this one (though you appear to be very decent in the social-context department, so I don't feel a need to use heavy artillery on you), and I'm regularly accused of complicating things un-necessarily. Using my insistence of regressing reasoning-chains and clear-cut definitions as an intimidating (even patronizing) tactical maneuver. That I on purpose try to confuse opposition with academism.

It's not my intention, and if such academism should occur, it's on points, where 'authority' arguments are brought in. The common, daily-life, chain of reasoning on HOW answers are concluded is inside the scope of everyone not stuck in spoonfed doctrinalism.

So please, a bird's eye on your version of 'allegories' and their use etc. (My own interest in asian semi-religions and philosophy has made me familiar with such, so the concept as such is not strange to me).

And please also. I would appreciate YOUR understanding of the scientific implications of genesis 1. Not exclusively a reference to 'authority'. The 'pro-theist authorities' on science/theism syncretism very often turn out to ignoramuses on a 'cottage-industry' level. Especially in their almost fanatic devotion to inductive reasoning out of proportion.

I apologize for the not very fluent linguistic coherence above. Some days a good syntax is beyond me.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Look, i could explain this in more detail but again we come to the same problem... It doesn't matter what i tell you, you don't accept my answers, so again its pointless to continue. Clearly as i've said before..." you don't get it"

All these books were "inspired" (supposedly of course) by the same teacher (Jesus). When he speaks about drinking deadly things, hes talking about mens words. Its the same as Jesus speaking about drinking his blood. Catholics use symbolistic ritual in their methods to associate them selves with Christ. They drink their grape juice and eat their crackers to symbolise Eating Christs Body, and drinking his Blood... But do you believe this is what he meant? You have to eat crackers, and drink grape juice to be my follower? The body of Christ is the life he led, and the blood is his words and actions. Thus to be his follower you must learn from his words and his actions, and use those in your daily life... and lead by example. This is what he meant at the last supper, but again...you don't accept what i tell you... so its pointless to continue to attempt to clairify these passages for you because as i've stated before, you choose to be blind to his teachings. And of course you're free to do so.

As i explained in my last post to you... theres only so much you can do when dealing with one who doesn't understand. And im sorry but you don't understand, even though i've explained these passages over and over.

So... believe whatever you like, i have no agenda nor do i care if you believe what i tell you. Im not trying to convert you to some rediculous religion, im only trying to clarify your understanding on these passages, and apparently i've failed in doing so.

Also try to keep in mind, im argueing these points and im not even Christian...

Either way im sure we'll chat again sometime soon.

reply to post by bogomil

Even in the hypothetically case of an 'unknown' to cosmic existence (which for me is a trans-cosmic existence level and, ....I believe..., for you 'god'), there are some steps to take, before the whole thing can be promoted to theory-level.

See thats the thing, these are my answers and no one elses. I don't care if my answers are promoted to "theory" or laughed at and shruged off.

You do arrive at positivist (absolute) conclusions:

Quotes: ["Sorry, im not going to lie to you, there is a correct path for spiritual progression. Patronizing or not, its true."]

and

["We are here to learn, and experience"]

and

["one should also know that the kingdom of God is also quite near... I'll even refine that idea for you... the kingdom is here, now. Existance in all its chaotic and amazing glory is the kingdom..."]

All dogmas/doctrines, and none with any objective criteria supporting them. And when people aren't in agreement on 'answers' a sensible step would be to ask HOW they arrived at their answers. Which method is used.

I arrived at my answers through study, and meditation on verse. What i tell you rings true in my heart, though i'll admit im a bit sketchy on the Genesis vs science thing. I haven't actually read what i sent you for many years, so i'd have to read it again to comment on it. And again i have no need for people to agree with me, im just telling you what i know.

That's why I can be so insistent on certain things, e.g. requesting specifics of how allegories/metaphors/parables are distinguished from literal information, the intrinsic nature of allegories etc and to what extent and how they can be used.

I can't very well go through the entire bible to point out which passages are meant to be taken which way...90% of the time its logical. For example... as i said to MIMS.... Drinking Jesus' blood and eating his body. Logically he didn't really mean you have to partake in Canibilism, though MIMS likely believes thats what he meant. Logically you can't move a mountian, logically you can't kill a tree with thought. Logically you can't walk on water... Logically you can't turn water to wine. Many seem to look for Christs supernatural powers to assert his divinity, i do not. I look at the life he led, and the way he treated everyone. As equals, with love. that is what makes him divine and unlike any other man of that time.

You have seen me in former contexts similar to this one (though you appear to be very decent in the social-context department, so I don't feel a need to use heavy artillery on you), and I'm regularly accused of complicating things un-necessarily. Using my insistence of regressing reasoning-chains and clear-cut definitions as an intimidating (even patronizing) tactical maneuver. That I on purpose try to confuse opposition with academism.

Yes i believe we've discussed this before. Big words don't intimidate me my friend. Use whatever "artillery" you believe you must use. But remember im not your opposer, nor am i your ememy. I try to explain things in clear english so as to not confuse people im speaking to, unfortunatly the bible isn't always in clear english which is why many people misunderstand.

It's not my intention, and if such academism should occur, it's on points, where 'authority' arguments are brought in. The common, daily-life, chain of reasoning on HOW answers are concluded is inside the scope of everyone not stuck in spoonfed doctrinalism.

Im my own authority on scripture, and have no interest in 99% of peoples inturpretations of it (that 1% actually being IAMIAM) And as you should know by now, im not "spoon fed" anything. As a matter of fact i can actually only claim two people in history have ever actually taught me anything about scripture, one being IAM and another being a "false prophet"... As for him, i could see what was in his heart which is why i was careful as to what he attempted to teach me. I found myself regularly correcting him on his own understanding of it, and this man has been studying the bible for over 55 years. He did not forgive me for correcting him, and actually got rather mad at times because of it. Anger is useless, and he wasn't open minded enough to see pasages from another point of view. And finally i realized i understood more then he did as well. He no longer had answers i could accept and so i returned to studying on my own.

So please, a bird's eye on your version of 'allegories' and their use etc. (My own interest in asian semi-religions and philosophy has made me familiar with such, so the concept as such is not strange to me).

And please also. I would appreciate YOUR understanding of the scientific implications of genesis 1. Not exclusively a reference to 'authority'. The 'pro-theist authorities' on science/theism syncretism very often turn out to ignoramuses on a 'cottage-industry' level. Especially in their almost fanatic devotion to inductive reasoning out of proportion.

As i've said , i can't very well go though the bible and point out every bit of allegory and metaphor there is. 90% of the time its very logical when you read. Keep in mind the time these books were written and their understanding of the physical world. Sometimes you really have to look deeper for a meaning in passages.

As for Genesis...

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

This is the big bang theory... In the beginning there was "one"...a singlularity... God. (all things as i've said).. He/she/it created the heaven(the spiritual realm not some place in the clouds)
And the earth (the physical universe, which makes up what we know as Matter anti-matter gravity etc etc)

2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

The birth of our planet through millions of years, Void of life... And the spirit of God (God being all things) moved upon the water... The beginning of life which of course as we all know, started in the lakes and oceans as bacteria and eventually evolved and moved on to land.

From there is gets a little sketchy, but you get the idea. Of course to believe all of this you'd also have to believe this text was inspired by God, which i don't. I believe this is mans best discription of what he didn't understand. But the question that bugs me is how did they get this knowledge.

reply to post by Akragon

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

Look, i could explain this in more detail but again we come to the same problem... It doesn't matter what i tell you, you don't accept my answers, so again its pointless to continue.

I don't accept your answers because they're unreasonable.

Clearly as i've said before..." you don't get it"

Clearly as I've said before, this is a special pleading fallacy.

All these books were "inspired" (supposedly of course) by the same teacher (Jesus).

And written at different times by multiple authors in multiple areas.

When he speaks about drinking deadly things, hes talking about mens words.

Except...why? You're just saying it because there's a passage about words having the potential to be poisonous, but there's nothing within the text linking poisonous words to drinking deadly things.

Its the same as Jesus speaking about drinking his blood. Catholics use symbolistic ritual in their methods to associate them selves with Christ. They drink their grape juice and eat their crackers to symbolise Eating Christs Body, and drinking his Blood...

...um...they drink actual wine.

But do you believe this is what he meant? You have to eat crackers, and drink grape juice to be my follower? The body of Christ is the life he led, and the blood is his words and actions. Thus to be his follower you must learn from his words and his actions, and use those in your daily life... and lead by example. This is what he meant at the last supper,

So why does say stuff about eating his body and drinking his blood? Why is the body the life he led when Judaic tradition holds blood as life? Why are you associating blood with words and actions?

You're just rationalizing things for yourself without justification.

but again...you don't accept what i tell you... so its pointless to continue to attempt to clairify these passages for you because as i've stated before, you choose to be blind to his teachings. And of course you're free to do so.

Um...I don't accept it because you're randomly rationalizing things to fit your worldview without reason. You don't have a justification for these 'clarifications'. I'm not blind to the teachings of Jesus, I'm just not accepting your random interpretations that have basis in nothing but your own comfort.

As i explained in my last post to you... theres only so much you can do when dealing with one who doesn't understand. And im sorry but you don't understand, even though i've explained these passages over and over.

I do understand what you're doing, which is why I reject it. Claiming special knowledge isn't going to get you out of this.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

I don't accept your answers because they're unreasonable.

thats fine with me.... call them whatever you want.

Except...why? You're just saying it because there's a passage about words having the potential to be poisonous, but there's nothing within the text linking poisonous words to drinking deadly things.

Alright lets try a different approach...

Lets assume Jesus was a good person for the sake or arguement. Why would he (being at least a half decent person) Tell his followers or anyone for that matter to drink poison? Knowing full well it would be suicide?

1. Do you believe Christ was insane, or a homicidal maniac. Perhaps a David Koresh type person?

If you say yes, this discussion is over, because clearly you are a fool...and i don't personally believe you are a fool...

or

2. There is a deeper meaning to what he was trying to say, because as you can read for your self, generally he looks out for peoples best interest when it comes to spiritual matters. Through out his ministry he didn't harm a fly,(except a tree apparently) so in this one circumstance(two actually in this case)do you really believe hes telling people "if you believe in me, you can drink poison and not have it affect you, litterally move mountians, kill trees with thought... etc etc"..

This is where it comes down to basic logic... was he out to decieve people? Or was there a deeper meaning to what he said?

...um...they drink actual wine.

uhm.... i know that, i've actually bought the wine they use, its sweet and disgusting. When i actually went to church as a child it was grape juice... we don't give wine to our children in Canada...

Whats your point btw?

So why does say stuff about eating his body and drinking his blood? Why is the body the life he led when Judaic tradition holds blood as life? Why are you associating blood with words and actions?

Lets see if you can put it together... Ask yourself what does he mean in this passage? IF his words stand for all time as he said... they are meant for anyone who reads and understands them. So... does he mean drink my blood litterally? Logically if he meant it litterally no one could ever drink his blood after he was dead. Even at the last super they used wine symbolically... not litterally his blood.

54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

57As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

58This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

So... do you get it at all? How is it possible to eat his flesh, and drink his blood? Do we need wine to accomplish this? and don't forget the little cracker!!

Or...again is there a deeper meaning?

How does bread come down from heaven? Have you ever seen a loaf of bread fall from the sky? Of course not!

So what is he saying then? Drink my blood and eat my body.... what does that mean?

Is it possible he might be refering to himself, his life as the bread that came from heaven? IF this is the case, what is the blood you must drink?

I'll even give you a hint...from the exact same book and chapter (just for you ) because clearly you have issues with me using more then one book...

60Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

61When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

..
...
....

Yes Judaic tradition says life is in the blood... but they mean litterally which is why they're forbidden to eat blood, as it says here...

3Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
(weed reference! )

4But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

You're just rationalizing things for yourself without justification.

No im telling you the correct inturpretation of these passages... im sorry you don't agree.

Um...I don't accept it because you're randomly rationalizing things to fit your worldview without reason. You don't have a justification for these 'clarifications'. I'm not blind to the teachings of Jesus, I'm just not accepting your random interpretations that have basis in nothing but your own comfort.

That doesn't even make sence dude... this has nothing to do with my world view... Im not even sure where you got that idea from. I don't even talk about my world views on these forums for the most part...

So...

Why don't you enlighten me on the teachings of Jesus then, i would love to hear an atheist's inturpretation honestly. You know them so well, so show me what you know...

I do understand what you're doing, which is why I reject it. Claiming special knowledge isn't going to get you out of this.

Unfortunatly you don't understand what im doing... IF you did you'd realize i have no malicious intentions in clairifying these passages for you... This sharpens my knowledge of the book so i actually enjoy these debates. Until they get hostile of course... but you haven't ever been hostile to me which is why i don't just give up. Unlike your friend AAW...

This isn't special knowledge, everything is right in front of you to read...

And exactly what am i trying to get out of? Do you think you've cornered me or something? I can answer your questions very easily, if you don't accept my answers thats up to you, i don't care what you want to call my answers either so i don't see what i should be trying to "get out of"