|
Michael Jackson posted:death is certain. 
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
Snark you loving suck at posting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
I wish people could state their beliefs/arguments in terms that could be understood. Like, "i am an agnostic" or "i am an atheist" or "i am an protestant" or "my argument is Christian conditionalism".
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:I wish people could state their beliefs/arguments in terms that could be understood. Like, "i am an agnostic" or "i am an atheist" or "i am an protestant" or "my argument is Christian conditionalism". I reject god because he doesn't have gnarly chops like Asimov.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:I wish people could state their beliefs/arguments in terms that could be understood. Like, "i am an agnostic" or "i am an atheist" or "i am an protestant" or "my argument is Christian conditionalism". Athiest. Thank Sagan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Bob James posted:I reject god because he doesn't have gnarly chops like Asimov. Asimov was also capable of writing more than one piece of fiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Bob James posted:Asimov was also capable of writing more than one piece of fiction. And it wasn't so.....self-serving and boring.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
There are many great characters in the Bible. They just need to be in the hands of more capable storytellers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
The Snark posted:He is entirely unqualified to comment on which of us is an idiot or even to see me as he is in fact dead. I think you should pull arm and hand from out of that corpse's rear end and stop making him say things. Direct quotation = putting words in a dead man's mouth, it seems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
J.A.B.C. posted:Direct quotation = putting words in a dead man's mouth, it seems. He actually said "I see you, fearful idiot?" Sorry, it was easy to assume that Sedan Chair made that up like most of their usual quotes. The Snark fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Bob James posted:There are many great characters in the Bible. They just need to be in the hands of more capable storytellers. Man, if the Bible was written like the Venture brothers, I'd be a worshiper.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:Do you actually want me to define "son of God" or will you, as soon as I do, quote another vague poetic-sounding non-answer in order to avoid the question? Muscle Tracer posted:So, "no, but if you take these words to mean something completely else, then yes"? More if we take those words to mean the things the people who started using them to talk about... Son of Man, "man from above", Son of David, Son of God, Messiah all of these are symbols that express different understandings of the relationship between God and humanity. Why did Christians go with "Son of God"? There were specific reasons for the choice of that metaphor as opposed to other metaphors. When we examine these ideas and concepts in this way, most of them are pretty drat reasonable. So on one hand we have accepting simplistic literalistic (often pretty crappy) understandings of terms and on the other hand we have knowing the actual origins of those terms, the many different ways people have used them in the past, and the criticisms of those ways they have been used shaping our understanding of them. Not a hard choice. OwlFancier posted:You can do that without God, I have a set of moral ideals that I look to in order to determine my actions, but I don't need to make them sentient and pretend that they can punish me if I don't follow them. I can follow them of my own volition. Which you would think I would want to given that I made them up in the first place. Don't pretend that the necessity of autonomous rational understanding is something absent from religion. It isn't. Further, that step , that autonomous rational understanding business, always comes after whatever we decide to give authority to. The question of what ones trusts in, is always a question, even if one answers it: "oneself and one's own reason" OwlFancier posted:To me, that sentence makes as much sense as 'black is a necessary part of white'. Again monotheist here. The dichotomies of Christian thought are all structured as a thing and an absence of a thing. They aren't dualistic, they are not light moon dark moon, Manichean type, assertions. One can definitely can apply both, because they aren't actual different things! It is entirely reasonable to talk about where faith is present and where it is absent. We can talk about where the light is and where the light is not! CommieGIR posted:Man, if the Bible was written like the Venture brothers, I'd be a worshiper. I don't remember if it came up in this thread or not but some of the late non-canonical stuff is interesting in this very way. Shark (seal?) tank self baptisms, Paul as a bumbling inspector Clouseau type, balding, fat, bowlegged, with bulging eyes, always disappearing when things get crazy. They are occasionally chortle inducing. Google "Acts of Paul and Thecla" , there are other examples, but that's the easiest one to get at. And I am definitely not Catholic btw. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
Do people believe that Jesus is Son of God just like Adam was and is something created by God, or that he is God-Son eternally a part of the trinity God-Head as perpetrated by different sects throughout time?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:Do people believe that Jesus is Son of God just like Adam was and is something created by God, or that he is God-Son eternally a part of the trinity God-Head as perpetrated by different sects throughout time? Yes some people (some church fathers!) believe(d) that. "Adam is fulfilled in Christ, which means that Christ is the essential man, the man Adam was essentially, and should become but did not become." We're talking Irenaeus' ideas there. And then when Tertullian does the whole Trinity with a high Christology thing it's in the context of Irenaeus arguing that! When I read Paul and Thecla I imagined Paul wandering from town to town looking like this:  "Hey everybody we're not gonna get laid" Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:When we examine these ideas and concepts in this way, most of them are pretty drat reasonable. You could not be more wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Yes some people (some church fathers!) believe(d) that. "Adam is fulfilled in Christ, which means that Christ is the essential man, the man Adam was essentially, and should become but did not become." We're talking Irenaeus ideas there. And then when Tertullian does the whole Trinity with a high Christology thing it's in the context of Irenaeus arguing that! yeah, already in the year 100-200 people started to incorporate and use greek philosophy so its no wonder that the idea of a soul and trinity became so widespread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Why did Christians go with "Son of God"? For the same reason that I could be called "Son of Jeff," you fatuous twat: because Jeff is literally my dad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Yeah, some sects must twist grammar and stuff to make "Son of God" mean "Eternal God Son of God Consciousness".
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
I want to remind everyone that Brandor once argued that if you believed that the Pythagorean Theorem was correct you therefore must also believe in God.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I want to remind everyone that Brandor once argued that if you believed that the Pythagorean Theorem was correct you therefore must also believe in God. I sincerely hope he means a "universal" unknown god and not YHWH because that would be less retarded. Just a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:Do people believe that Jesus is Son of God just like Adam was and is something created by God, or that he is God-Son eternally a part of the trinity God-Head as perpetrated by different sects throughout time? It's mistranslated. It's actually "Sooner of God" prophesying of an immigrant named Jesús settling in Oklahoma. Oklahoma is also the true Promised Land. The Israelis aren't going to like this and will probably try taking the state by force. Oklahoma is landlocked so Israel will have to go through another bit of territory first... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
That book looks like it would be fascinatingly insane.
The Snark fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Guys, what if God was one of us'?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I want to remind everyone that Brandor once argued that if you believed that the Pythagorean Theorem was correct you therefore must also believe in God. No I argued that the Pythagorean cult had a soter, Pythagoras. That remains a factual statement. It is also factual that the origin of the concept savior, is that soter business. By soter I mean the teacher that gave knowledge that saved one from not knowing. You know they (Pythagoreans) talked about transmigration, too. By transmigration I mean being re-incarnated, or more rather literally being born-again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:Guys, what if God was one of us'? Just a slob like one of us?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Just a slob like one of us? Or a stranger on a bus, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
"Mysterious man-like entity who creates the entire universe from nothing, but has really a fragile ego, and therefore requires unending adulation on penalty of eternal torment? Totally plausible. This same entity puts part of itself in the Soul slot of a baby and puts that baby in a lady? Now let's not get carried away here, that would be ridiculous!!!" —BKP
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:No I argued that the Pythagorean cult had a soter, Pythagoras. That remains a factual statement. It is also factual that the origin of the concept savior, is that soter business. By soter I mean the teacher that gave knowledge that saved one from not knowing. You know they (Pythagoreans) talked about transmigration, too. By transmigration I mean being re-incarnated, or more rather literally being born-again. This just in: Guy who creates an essential part of mathematics and sciences might be a loony. Isaac Newton at 11 with a video about his search for the date of the second coming and his progress with alchemy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:Or a stranger on a bus, whatever. If he had a name, what would it be, and would you call it to his face?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
I don't think this theory that the purpose of religion in the grand sense, is to provide some kind of a sop to the question of death, is actually true. It seems like this is definitely a major factor in Christianity, but I don't recall it being a major fear of Judaism, and it certainly seems less emphasized in Islam. Similarly, of the more prominent Eastern religions, Buddhism and Hindu practices say essentially "reincarnation, or possibly ultimate escape from rebirth," while I don't think various other folk religions seem to make a big hash out of it. Now if we generalize it to "addresses thorny questions about the world," rather than just "har har, fear of death," I think we have a stronger case. I can't think of a religion that doesn't present some kind of theory to the question "Why do bad things happen in the world?" As for atheists living in fear of death, I can say several of my atheist relatives were not particularly terrified by the prospect. Especially if you are very sick, the trade-off of "I go to sleep and never wake up" vs. "I stop hurting, forever" probably seems adequate to ease the terror. I can see how an afterlife would be desirable but it frankly seems like the anxiety is created by the concept of Hell; if you don't avoid Hell, you will experience infinite torture, which would be pretty scary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:"Mysterious man-like entity who creates the entire universe from nothing, but has really a fragile ego, and therefore requires unending adulation on penalty of eternal torment? Totally plausible. This same entity puts part of itself in the Soul slot of a baby and puts that baby in a lady? Now let's not get carried away here, that would be ridiculous!!!" —BKP Haha what? YHWH didn't put a "part" of himself in a baby. However in the bible it states that a son of his went down and became human. "soul slot" lol, did you play binding of isaac?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:This just in: Guy who creates an essential part of mathematics and sciences might be a loony. Isaac Newton at 11 with a video about his search for the date of the second coming and his progress with alchemy. Or, and this is pretty damned important, the question of knowing is fundamental to the idea of salvation. Fundamental in the sense of that it's literally where the idea of salvation, and re-birth, new-life, originates. Maybe, it might be important towards understanding what people who are talking about death in and then new life in, something or another (now what was that again?) are saying?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Or, and this is pretty damned important, the question of knowing is fundamental to the idea of salvation. Fundamental in the sense of that it's literally where the idea of salvation, and re-birth, new-life, originates. You are putting WAAYYY WAYYY too much into Pythagoras. He also created 'mystical shapes' and had a religious cult following.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:If he had a name, what would it be, and would you call it to his face? If I ever met Jesus I'd ask him "Who is your daddy and what does he do?!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Or, and this is pretty damned important, the question of knowing is fundamental to the idea of salvation. Fundamental in the sense of that it's literally where the idea of salvation, and re-birth, new-life, originates. He also forbid the eating of beans and considered irrational numbers a memetic threat, so...
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
As a point of curiosity, DID the cult of Pythagoras sincerely fear beans? Is there any prevailing theory as to why?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
The Snark posted:As a point of curiosity, DID the cult of Pythagoras sincerely fear beans? Is there any prevailing theory as to why? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoreanism#Vegetarianism quote:The Pythagorean code further restricted the diet of its followers, prohibiting the consumption or even touching of any sort of bean. It is probable that this is due to their belief in the soul, and the fact that beans obviously showed the potential for life. Some, for example Cicero,[10] say perhaps the flatulence caused by beans is an emergency response system, as protection from potential favism, perhaps because they resemble the kidneys and genitalia,[11] but most likely for magico-religious reasons,[12] such as the belief that beans and human beings were created from the same material.[13] It is thought that the fava bean was particularly sacred to the Pythagoreans; this is because fava beans have hollow stems, and it was believed that souls of the deceased would travel through the ground, up the hollow stems, into the beans where they would reside.[14] Most stories of Pythagoras' murder revolve around his aversion to beans. According to legend, enemies of the Pythagoreans set fire to Pythagoras' house, sending the elderly man running toward a bean field, where he halted, declaring that he would rather die than enter the field – whereupon his pursuers slit his throat.[15] Susceptible persons may develop a hemolytic anemia by eating the beans, or even by walking through a field where the plants are in flower.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Or, and this is pretty damned important, the question of knowing is fundamental to the idea of salvation. Fundamental in the sense of that it's literally where the idea of salvation, and re-birth, new-life, originates. It's called being insane.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Further proof that the belief in a "soul" is pffffffffttthhhh
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:11 |
|
|
BrandorKP posted:No I argued that the Pythagorean cult had a soter, Pythagoras. That remains a factual statement. It is also factual that the origin of the concept savior, is that soter business. By soter I mean the teacher that gave knowledge that saved one from not knowing. Nah you have it backwards, soter just means a person who saves you from something, the concept of a mystical "savior" isn't necessary. You find a lot of kings and generals named soter who did nothing besides win battles. BrandorKP posted:You know they (Pythagoreans) talked about transmigration, too. By transmigration I mean being re-incarnated, or more rather literally being born-again. The transmigration of souls doesn't necessarily imply any sort of spiritual change or spiritual rebirth that "born again" in the Christian sense does...it just means that your soul inhabits another body. This is some sloppy philology here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:28
|
|