You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
May 24, 2018, 11:02:24 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Why is religion taken literally?  (Read 7162 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Doomsday

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #75 on: November 22, 2008, 02:23:04 AM »
So were many of the writers of the Bible that so many people put their faith in and use as the focus for their worship.  Jesus was a flesh and blood person as were his followers. 

Just because something sounds logical on the surface doesn't make the statement true.  I can point to the Bell Curve book as evidence of that.  Hell that book even has evidence.

Ahh, but did I even so much as mention Jesus? I will not question his existence, only his divinity, and we're talking about "God" anyways.

As I stated before, I have no wish to argue or debate, so to say it bluntly, don't talk to me!  ;D

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #76 on: November 22, 2008, 02:25:53 AM »
Alright...then please refrain from posting in a board that is obviously meant for debate.

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #77 on: November 22, 2008, 06:53:03 AM »
Play nicely, folks.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • On Hiatus
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #78 on: November 22, 2008, 07:15:54 AM »
My, I've gotten a lot of replies on this. I'm not going to retort against anyone replying to me, I just want to break down the quote and explain what I believe.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent."

Well, this one is obvious. If god wants to get rid of evil but he can't, then he is not omnipotent, because God can supposedly do anything, be anywhere at once, etc.

"Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent."

Again, obvious. If he can prevent evil, but won't, then he's apathetic or malevolent, and not really deserving of our adoration.

"Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?"

If god is all-mighty and willing to do away with evil, then why does evil exist?

"Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

The clincher of the quote; If he does not want to prevent evil and indeed, cannot, then he is no God by human terms.
Having the power to do something and not doing it is not evil. It is not apathetic. Just because a parent can stop a child from rollerskating; he could get hurt. Why not stop that. Well any good parent knows sometimes the child's got to get hurt to learn anything. Tyranny from within is a sin. A human can bring the world to a some semblance of peace and sinlessness. However, he has to clinch the freedoms people enjoy. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #79 on: November 22, 2008, 07:35:15 AM »
I'm being very nice.   :o

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #80 on: November 22, 2008, 07:49:33 AM »
I felt that exchange had the potential to blow up in a hurry. I would prefer that it didn't, hence my asking to keep things polite.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #81 on: November 22, 2008, 02:56:57 PM »
Nope, all good on this end.  Just felt that if his ideas weren't open to have their flaws pointed out he shouldn't try to point out flaws in others.

Epicurus is based around several very broad assumptions regarding the nature of God.  Because the argument is based around the presence of evil.  So there is an assumption that what we view as evil is indeed evil in the eyes of a divine being.  I can't fathom that since he is an eternal being where as our lives are very much mortal and secular.  Philosophically none of us can truly comprehend the presence of "true evil" which is evil done only for the sake of itself.  People rarely believe themselves to be evil, making excuses that their actions are for the betterment of some thing or goal.  While these explanations may be insane to most, they are what the person uses to justify their actions.  True evil would not justify, would not care and would do evil only for the sake of evil.  Just as the concept of true good is unknown to us because someone would have to do good without any self-reward or benefit, not even the joy of doing a good job.  They would be a machine essentially and could take no joy in the good they do.


Also the logic is a trick as well.  Let us say that God decided to do something and show his omnipotent power.  He got rid of world starvation, something that most would say is evil.  So he creates food.  Wham right there everyone has food on their plate.  Well now what about the farmers that spent their lives understanding their crops and build their lives around that idea.  No jobs for them so now they are unhappy.  All those industries that grew up providing food and services to those food providers are now without jobs.  Then what happens when people want more food, as they always do.  Is God going to make a candy cane appear in your hand at whim?  If so, won't people just keep eating all sugary sweets.  Abundance now and we are all eating as much as we want when we want.  So we all get diabetes.  God could cure that by making our bodies perfect, but then we aren't really human then if we don't contend with the imperfections of our bodies. 

The Epicurus argument has a very child-like quality to its simplicity.  God is supposed to be the parent that makes all the bad things go away, yet bad things are here so there can be no God.  Things are far more complex than that so it does not stand up to any speculation.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2008, 03:17:49 PM by Asku »

Online mannikTopic starter

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #82 on: November 22, 2008, 06:13:00 PM »
Jesus was a flesh and blood person as were his followers. 

I'm so, so sorry to have to tell you this....but no...Jesus and his disciples were not actual people....Jesus is a metaphor for the sun, and his disciples the 12 zodiac...

These videos will help explain...



Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #83 on: November 22, 2008, 07:25:38 PM »
I was not making reference to the legend or myth of Jesus, but the actual figure.  Many anthropologists have stated the possibilty that Jesus was a revolutionary fighter in terms of political ideology for Judaism.  They point toward the last name of Juda for one as Iscarius(sp?), which at the time also was the name of a guerilla group that attacked Roman citizens.  Also by looking through the Bible there are many instances where Jesus's remarks can be viewed as trying to drive away the Roman influence in his Jewish homeland.  Whether he was the son of God..no clue.

Taking the Bible as a document of historical writing, a few researchers have proposed that the birth of Christianity may deal more with the birth of a political theorist than the son of God.  Supernatural elements being attached to his story would not be unusual.  Similiar to how King Arthur's tale became fable, even though his actual existance was supposed to be real.

As for followers, they are most certainly real because Christianity still exists today.  I did not say his disciples.  The writers of the Gospel did exist, unless someone is going to claim an inhuman entity wrote the stories.  As such, since the writers existed then their weight in the argument according to his standards is the same as Epicurus.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2008, 07:29:57 PM by Asku »

Online mannikTopic starter

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #84 on: November 22, 2008, 07:34:30 PM »
My mistake, I misuderstood you.


Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Why is religion taken literally?
« Reply #85 on: November 22, 2008, 09:59:35 PM »
Any closer to answering your question?