Sunday School

[.Spectator]

I agree with the scholar BTW. Did I not say in another thread that Genesis was allegory and not to take it literally?

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Ok. I took what you said to be a comment rather than an intellectual argument. I expressed his hypocrisy by relating how he was a member of the parish council and had “Jesus” bumper stickers.

I am not implying atheists are better. I am saying that Biblical morality is not good enough in the modern world. If Christians think it is then they are weakening their own position. I have higher standards and so do all the atheists that I know. I trust them implicitly. They have never let me down or acted unethically in my company.

I do not hold onto negative feelings. I dismiss “bad” or “poisonous” people, like my neighbor, from my life the minute I see such traits. I never look back. When my neighbor decided to take a swing at me (at my front door) I did do as Jesus said though and did unto him what he wanted to do to me. I then forgot about him. He is a waste of space. He is of no concern or interest to me, especially since his wife and kids have escaped his drunken clutches.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

If you take Genesis as allegorical then “original sin” is invalidated because there was no fall from grace. It means the Christian god did not create man and woman, only life forms that emerged from the sea about 3.5 billion years ago. We are mere primates, almost identical to other primates and we live on a 6 billion year old planet that exists in a Universe not created with us in mind. If there was no original sin then Jesus did not need to die for us. The Book of Exodus is also not true. The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt. Moses never went up that mountain. What parts of it are true or factual?

[physeterParticipant]

These are the “sort of men” that Jesus condemned? Like, a long time ago? Way back in the distant past? You know, I was told once that Jesus was still alive. If Jesus is alive, he could have condemned THIS man, here, and now, instead of hiring the man to work for his own frucking organization. You know, if he was alive and not just a myth.

And when did this become a site where proselytizing and preaching was not going to be met with mockery? I live in a Christian world. My apartment is literally surrounded by churches. When I go to work, when I go to the store, when I go to community events I am surrounded by people who believe in Jesus, who go to church, who think God created the universe and think you can’t do good without being a Christian. When I talk to my parents or my brother I have to bite my tongue unless I want to start an argument; they can talk all about how their god did this or their god did that but I’m not supposed to acknowledge what I think. In my country you have to believe in God to be elected to any position of authority. All the TV stations have to make sure they are sympathetic to believers; all the news stations have to respect religion. Atheist websites are one of the only places I can go where we can be honest and open about what we believe. How is this shocking?

[.Spectator]

Fine then I’ll go away. I’ve only been on this site for 5 years. I was a Christian when I joined out of curiosity. Then I became an atheist only to find that I actually wasn’t. So what now that IM being honest I’m no longer welcome here? Fuck that. So much for atheists having a superior morality. Pushing people away when we don’t agree instead of real honest debate is not what I thought this site was about. I guess I was wrong.

[.Spectator]

I get pushed away at church and here on this site where I thought I had friends. Now I see how shallow you all really are. I guess I have no one. Bye.

[.Spectator]

@Reg the allegory is all about the pride inside of us that makes us want to be our own Gods. Or Gods to someone else. I stopped believing in God only to believe a certain someone was God. You know what I mean. Now where has it left me?

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

@Reg the allegory is all about the pride inside of us that makes us want to be our own Gods.

It might make sense if every Christian said this. But they don’t. You have your own version. But you still miss the point if it is allegorical. I have had Christians argue with me for years who claimed it is all true. On whose authority are you claiming it is allegorical? Do you accept Exodus is not factual? We do not want to be our own gods. We are godless. We are mere thinking apes. We are atheists.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Hi Physeter. Good to see you here!

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Belle – No one has asked you to leave. Don’t get so precious about it. You have heard “worse” from us. We are challenging you statements and not your character. Have you not noticed we don’t respect religion? Has that really taken you 5 years to realise this? We respect your right to believe in whatever god you want to believe in but we do not respect faith. We do not consider faith as a method of discovering reality.

Then a couple of comments from 2 members that you have known for those 5 years leads you to calling us shallow? Many site members have been abused in some way or another by religion. It is not deserving of our respect. I see it as a chain that hold back the world, often actually trying to drag societies back into the dark ages. Have you ever ventured to some Christian or Muslim forum to hear what they say about atheists? The foul language and vitriol is too vulgar to repeat. I have had death threats from them for asking civilized questions and I get banned for asking if Jesus would approve of their words and intended actions towards me.

[.Spectator]

Nevermind Im just stressed about other things. sorry for my reaction and just forget I said anything. Delete my comments if you want to it doesn’t matter.

• This reply was modified 7 years ago by  ..

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

What Jesus said, and meant, and what his “followers” do, are two different things.  The second doesn’t invalidate the first.

His saying, “love your neighbour as yourself”, and my similar construction, “Perfect Compassion”, are supreme ethical guidelines, and we are better off with supreme ethical guidelines, even if we don’t technically fall over and die if we don’t have them.

@reg – “If you take Genesis as allegorical then “original sin” is invalidated because there was no fall from grace.”

– I could never figure out the Garden of Eden story for a long time.  Now, I think it has three separate components, which have become conflated together in a confused folk memory.  1) the move away from the happy, idyllic little world of small groups (~12,000 years ago), where everyone is more or less a friend and people are people you can rely on through thick and thin, into farming: a big, settled, cosmopolitan world of many small groups jarring up against each other and where most people are comparative strangers, with a corresponding loss of trust in their everyday companions;  2) “original sin”, which is simply a part of the human condition, a tendency to get what we want in the wrong ways, and is actually a very useful and valid concept; 3) blaming women for all this, as usual.  This third part is actually quite hard to figure out and unpack.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

“When the Rapture happens there will be no hiding place.”

“said one student, “but really, who cares if there are honeybees? This world is coming to an end anyway. We’ll all be raptured.” The late Christopher Hitchens called this attitude “a contempt for all things of this world” – an acceptable form of nihilism.”

– I was having a conversation with a Christian philosopher, about my philosophy.  He said he likes it, and it works, but he sees it as nihilistic, because there’s no promise of eternal bliss in Heaven after we die, and therefore, nothing to live for, and also he meant, possibly, no hope of final justice.  I said, this is precisely the reason why it’s the opposite of nihilistic – because atheists are concerned with this life only, and so we make the most of it.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

“Humans have no monopoly on moral behavior.”

– the morality in the animal kingdom really consists of two patterns of behaviour:  targeted helping, based on empathy (reading others and their needs; feelings of concern and wanting to help); and long-term reciprocity based on buddy relationships.  There is some “tit-for-tat” reciprocity observed in primates, where one monkey will groom another in return for favours such as being allowed to hold a baby.  We also see, within small groups, the weak and disabled being taken care of by the able-bodied.  More primitive forms of empathy are widespread such as vicarious alarm (one bird within a feeding flock will suddenly get alarmed and fly up in the air, and all the others follow automatically) or vicarious arousal (such as when a dog sees other dogs playing, and instantly feels playful and joins in).  Also – all sentient creatures are connected to all the others around them, in the sense that they will monitor what each other are doing, and act accordingly, especially between predators and prey.

What non-human animals lack are those hyper-social, hyper-cooperative aspects of humans: for example, fairness, reputation, and a sense of right and wrong.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

I don’t think it matters what the allegory means.  If it is not factually true then it is a recording of a myth. It is just another cultures ancient creation story. There are several of them from around the world. For centuries Christians believed it all to be factually true. They understood it to be an accurate account.

Since Science has illuminated and contradicted much of it and many other chapters too, some Christians – some, not all – have decided that certain parts are “allegorical”. I ask them on whose authority are they making such claim and get all sorts of ridiculous answers back.

If the creation story, as told in Genesis is not the accurate word of God as handed down to man (the God breathed Word) then the following deductions can be made:

The Christian God did not create humans. Therefore Christians that accept it as allegory have no choice but to also accept that Evolution is true.

Therefore Adam and Eve never existed. There was no tree of knowledge, no temptation by the devil, no apple eaten and therefore “no fall from grace”.

If there was no fall from grace there was no original sin and no need for the Creator of the Universe to impregnate a virgin with His son 6 billion years later to save us from the effects of an allegory. There is no need to be baptised or born again.

The same with Exodus. The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt. Therefore they never waited for anyone to come back down the mountain with the 10 commandments.

Do these same people still believe that another old man built a boat with 2 of every creature on board before God flooded the entire planet or is this just allegorical too?

When does the book stop being allegorical and become factual? Forget the book of Numbers or the Song of Solomon or Ester or any other book that does not even mention their God.

What about all the books left out, like the Gospel of Thomas? What do we know of Jesus? His birth details are suspect, especially the location and the time (the Roman census part). The next we hear about him he is 30 years’ old and wandering around the place “doing miracles” and narrating parables. Maybe they are allegorical too as they are all accounts written years after the event. Then we are expected to believe he rose from the dead when he has no reason to die. They don’t believe the Creation Story but they do the Resurrection?

Why did he have to die for us if we never fell from grace? It an apologist answers any of this can they please reveal on whose authority they are making their claims.

I don’t understand how people can believe in an undefined god whose story is allegorical. Please explain. I find it impossible to believe even if 1.2 billion evolved humans do. And don’t bother telling me that many of you always took it to be allegorical. That would be breaking one of the commandments that were never  handed down the mountain.This is only a recent ploy on behalf of Christians to reconcile their book to scientific discoveries. Explain yourselves if you can. I assume it is now ok for women to join in to explain the Bible? It is difficult to keep track of all the changes this unchanging Faith makes.

[Author]

Posts