Do you think the bible is a work of delusional people? - Page 2

No slurs intended; just pointing out that if incontrovertible evidence surfaced that pointed out historical (or other) innacuracies in the Bible, many 'biblical scholars and linguists' would automatically debate the results.

I'm not on either 'side', as it were, because I don't consider the Bible to be any kind of historical record of fact.

No, you're talking about "the meaning of life and all that crap". I'm talking about a book you can buy at any Wal-Mart. wink

I was really referring to DeLude with that. I wasn't trying to say you were trusting God, obviously.

Calling BS on that Gutt. My theology is shaped by my own study. The people that rasied me were nominally Christian at best. I am a 5 point Calvinist which is at odds with my family. That has come from study, discussion, and prayer, not from the people that raised me.

That was my bad, I scrolled too fast and thought CT had posted that. Didn't see who the quote was from 'till I posted.

Man, us atheists is stoopid...

Again, because you chose your route, doesn't mean that most Christians are from birth. You are AN EXCEPTION, just as I said in my last post there would be. Cry BS all you want, that doesn't change the fact that most people are Christians ONLY because that is what they are taught.

Most people on these boards are educated enough to make their own decisions, and don't really apply. I'm not talking to any one person, but it as a whole.

Two things:

What the heck is a 'five point Calvinist'?

And your family is still Christian, right? It's not like you switched teams, just divisions.

To Gutt - I know plenty of intelligent exceptions but your "rules" won't let me use them. If you want to view most Christians as mindless that's fine and you're welcome to your opinion. I don't entirely disagree. There are far to many cultural Christians that give us a bad name.

To Jacob - John Calvin and his students developed a theology in the 16th Century. There are 5 basic tenets;
that fallen man was totally unable to save himself (Total Depravity)
that God's electing purpose was not conditioned by anything in man (Unconditional Election)
that Christ's atoning death was sufficient to save all men, but efficient only for the elect (Limited Atonement)
that the gift of faith, sovereignly given by God's Holy Spirit, cannot be resisted by the elect (Irresistible Grace)
that those who are regenerated and justified will persevere in the faith (Perseverance of the saints)

I embrace all five points making me a five pointer. As to your second question, that depends entirely on who you ask.

Both Scott & billylove were raised with religion, that if not Christian (Calvinists) shared many beliefs. You went away for a bit, but don't tell me your childhood teachings didn't help form your opinions. That you didn't carry things over. That MOST christians take at face value what is told to them by someone in authority.

Of course a good christian will not think of themselves in this way.

For those scoring at home (and us non-Calvinists generally), capt.'s five points can be memorized via the mnemonic TULIP.

If the issue here is whether people become Christians largely because there are others around them who are Christian who attempt to persuade them to believe likewise, well, of course.

It's quite clear at the same time that lots of people end up being Christians while having no significant family or friends influencing their newfound faith, or even having those people be openly hostile to it. That also applies to other religions and belief systems. See, e.g., John Walker Lindh.

But there are lots of interesting Jewish-to-Christian conversion stories, most notably Saul of Tarsus and that other very highly intelligent guy.

OK. I won't tell you that even if its true. My childhood teachings were in no way substantive. Believe what you want though. You seem to know more than I do.

And for the record, as a Calvinistic Christian, I in no way believe that anyone becomes a Christian entirely by choice.

Personally, I was born and raised Jewish in a non-religious household. I knew absolutely nothing about Christianity (I mean zip, I mean I didn't know anything about anything save that Jesus died on a cross and was born to a virgin, had nver read one word of the New Testament, and was unfamilliar with the term "gospel") until I began my own studies of the various world religions. I considered myself to be an atheist, a position I laugh at today, and I grew to be an agnostic and then a Christian.

Of course, just because I converted to Christianity doesn't absolve me of the charge of "stupidity."

But see Burke, you are an "exception". wink

He's the "other very highly intelligent guy."

Of course they would. You are "assuming" that the people who study the Bible are uniformly Christians without honor. Give me a break.

Let me bring it closer to home: Nick Nunziata, Chud overlord, takes money from advertisers to post their ads on his site. He also reviews said advertisers movies on his site. Does the lucrative AOL/Time-Warner dollar bonanza influence Sir Nick's critiques? Do the films advertised on the site get promoted more in the editorial content? How can one really know that Nick hasn't lost his honor to the mindless hordes of the uber-corp?

I guess one would have to weigh the evidence and examine the individuals particular bias (if there are any). Apparently, Jacob, in the matter of Biblical archaeology, you won't even go that far. wink

Okay, I lose. My bad. Most Christans are so out of choice. MOST christians are not born into the religion. What was I thinking?

One always has the choice to reject the teachings (or lack thereof) of one's parents, no matter what they have been taught. By that logic, all (or almost all) racist parents raise racist children.

Guttenberg,
Are you a mirror image of your parents, or do you make your own decisions? If you believe certain things that your parents believe, are you then in essence, a follower, and not a free-thinker?

By that logic there is to reason slavery lasted as long as it did. Parents taught hate, & it stuck. They didn't grow into thinking for themselves and seeing error.

It is as I said earlier. People on the religion boards are not going to join because they don't know how to argue religion. I have always said there is exception.

When Biblical archaeology includes eyewitness accounts of people rising from the grave and walking on water, I take it just as seriously as Greco-Roman archaeology that includes gods of thunder and lightning. History may well be there, but it takes independant research, no matter how moral and honorable the practitioners may be.

Are you comparing religious upbringing and indoctrination to racial upbringing and indoctrination?

Do you think the South is pre-disposed to being bigoted because of our genes, or our upbringing and indoctrination? Do Southern children choose to be bigots?

Actually, racist parents are very likely to raise racist children. And if they send those children to racist schools, take them to Klan rallies every Sunday, and associate solely with other racist families, guess what?

As book, the Bible has many timeless and valuable lessons between it's pages. And I think its authors were far less delusional, as writers go, than one might imagine.

That said, Biblical literalists are both stupid and delusional.

And yeah, I know that disses a hearty chunk of the American popualtion(<a href="http://roperweb.ropercenter.uconn.edu/cgi-bin/hsrun.exe/roperweb/pom/pom.htx;start=HS_special_topics?Topic=religion" target="_blank">Citation</a>).

I'm talking about the historical nature of the documents, not their content. Different discussion on a different topic.

Racism was an example I used when discussing the idea of parental upbringing and the decision making capabilities of adults. I say that children, regardless of background, make their own decisions (Adam Warren disagreed).

At no time did I say anything about the South or southerners being bigoted or racist.

Mr. Singer, it may be time to think about cutting down on the Ganja. wink

The reason I mention the South is indeed pertinent to the argument. Racism and bigotry continue to somewhat thrive in the South because racists raise their kids in a racist environment. Christians do the same thing. Indoctrination from childhood, especially by family members, is a powerful thing.

Obviously, not all racist parents produce racist children.

Maybe you should try some ganja yourself, you might loosen up a bit.

Let's all pass it around & chill for a bit. The CHUD smoke-out.

Actually a funny thing is that (and at the moment I do not have the numbers, sorry) Islam is the fastest growing religion via birth.

Christianity is the fastest growing religion via conversion. In fact the numbers in Asia are astronomical with thousands coming to Christ daily. I would have to say, yes, most American Christians come to faith via living in a Christian household but you are never born Christian. That is always a choice so technically all Christians come to know Christ via conversion. Now how many stay in the faith and just don't simply call themselves Christians but actually live it is different.

And via Mr. Warren I am stupid and delusional.

But we, as a consensus, already knew this right?

*Edited due to lack os smiley appearing in original post (I coulda sworn I included it)

Stop it already. You're making no sense. Believe what you want but stop lying to yourself. Children are easily influenced. Children are sent to Bible school when they'd really rather be watching cartoons (yes, I know. You know this guy who gave up cartoons when he was a kid to study the Bible, whatever). Children don't choose religion, it is given to them. Christians don't teach their children Islam (yes, I know. You know this guy who was raised christian, but his parents taught him about the pros & cons of all religions). If one of the first things you are taught is christianity (taught before formal schooling, even), do you actually think an eight year old can decipher the bullshit & form their own opinion?

I'm not saying christians are idiots. My whole family is christian & I love & respect all of them. All I am doing is stating the OBVIOUS that the MAJORITY (scott: read as NOT ALL, again, I'll repeat NOT ALL) of people adopt the religion they are taught from their parents, not through a process of research & personal opinion.

Not lying to myself. Seems to me you are not taking into account everything I am talking about. What I meant by the last little bit is there are quite of few people in this world who call themselves Christians but are no where near fulfilling such a title. You wouldn't believe the number of kids who grew up in church that come the time of High School and owning their own car that were hardly ever in church or would stay for 30 minutes to show they were there then left. Being Christian is totally a choice of the believer. You can believe and know what the words of God are, or you can memorize them and have no personal connection to them, or you can simply know them, not care, and leave calling yourself a Christian in name only.

So yes you can grow up in a Christian home and say you know God but the most important question is...does He know you? Because there is one verse in the Bible that distinctly states that when you face God before the throne of Judgement and say "Look at me I was a good Christian" and God's turns and says "But I never knew you" and well, unfortunately, you got a one way ticket to flames whether you called yourself a Christian or not because God didn't know you.

So you either make sure you are following the Words of God and knowing the reasons for them or you can end up saying your Christian and before everyone in the world who has lived God saying..."Nah Uh". So grow up with it sure...doesn't mean you're getting into heaven nor that you are actually a Christian.

And unfortunately I cannot apologize for the parents who follow the word of the Lord and raise their children in the ways of the Lord. Course some do it right and some don't but there will be a point where that child either accepts all this or in the end ends up rejecting it.

I know, I have seen it in my own life and in many others.

Well, I think I have found the confusion here. The way I see it, people who believe in christianity, are Christians. God may send them to hell anyways (as he does everyone who doesn't do exactly as he says), but they are still Christian. If someone believes there is a God & Jesus was his son, they are CHRISTians. From what I can tell, you believe being Christian means not only believing & having faith, but believing in a certain interpretation of the Bible that says you have to go to church & do whatever to get God's attention.

Just a bit of difference in definition.

And perhaps this is for a new thread, but this thing about sending someone to hell because God didn't know them seems ultimatley cruel. The guards who strung up the son of God are forgiven, but anyone in our time who isn't going to church has to burn?

I'll throw a wrench into the works. The only people that are Christian are those God chooses. Raising has nothing I repeat absolutely zero to do with wether you are a follower of Christ. It can't because man due to his evil heart is completely incapable of choosing God. One can make the claim of being a Christian and many in this country do but that doesn't make it so. Mormons, Jehovah's witness, Seventh Day Adventists, Catholics, Baptists and lo even Presbyterians all claim to be Christians but on a case by case basis not all are. And in fact most aren't.

Oh and what is a Biblical literalist exactly? This is what I believe concerniong the Bible.

From the <a href="http://www.reformed.org/documents/icbi.html" target="_blank">The Chicago StatementOn Biblical Inerrancy</a>

A SHORT STATEMENT

1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God's witness to Himself.

2. Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms, obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises.

3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture's divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.

4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.

5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible's own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church.

Actually I think the literalists make a really good point. If you do believe in an all powerful God then why should you get to pick and choose what parts of the Bible are real? If you believe that God is the creator of all then why would getting a shit load of animals on a boat be so far fetched?

the subject is://
do you think the bible is a work of delusional people?.
-------------

I have several identities...
i am a logical variation of onoff and ha-4
and the net is vast and limitless.//

we had an interesting discussion about a similar subject. click <a href="http://pub18.ezboard.com/fhavetheologywillargueapologetics.showMessage?topi cID=658.topic" target="_blank">HERE</a> for more.

the bible, god, muslims, christians, jews..etc...there's no difference. no wonder god is a superstar, especially in every third world countries.

the "religion A-Z" forum is amusing.
good night!

references
<a href="http://godandscience.org/apologetics/nogod.html" target="_blank">atheists have proven god does not exist. right?</a>
......
<a href="http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/schick_21_1.html" target="_blank">can science prove that god does not exist?</a>

I must say there were some interesting arguments going on in that thread. A bit confusing at first, especially if you don't know many of the terms, but none the less fascinating.

</strong>

Strikes me as nothing more than "New Age" pablum. "Believe what you will. You've always existed. God simply is." Pheh.

God loves all His art? Prove it. Oh wait you just know. Well good on ya, mate. How do you know any of this stuff? Admit it, you're just guessing and believing what makes you feel good.

So are you.

So are you.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Speaking for myself... i think it's DUMB and simply idiotesque to beleive in something because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy on the inside when it comes to religion.

God knows there are things I believe in that don't make me feel all warm & gooey inside...

Not a guess Gutt, but then you believe that my parents brain washed me.

So you've personally spoken to God. You have proof beyond your own interpretation of a book you think was written by God (through others). How is what Yae Su says any less meaningful than what you say? Because of the Bible?

Holy christ, Scott. You have failed to actually read my posts becuase you are so irked by the fact that I made the crazy assumption that religion is taught by parents, and not learned through choice. I'm not going to repeat myself, if you want to go through & re-read, go ahead; if you'd rather continue to carry a grudge, fine with me as well.

Apologies for the brain-washing comment. Twas uncalled for. I can be an ass when riled.

Now the reason I am irked by folks like Yae Su is that they say stuff like "People who follow old books haven't evolved." or something similar. That's basically insulting every person who follows an established religion. People who have devoted their lives to studying something that has moved them deeply. And what does he have to offer? "Well I know that I existed before because I feel that I always have. And you'd go insane if you remembered your prior life." Sure explains Shirley MCClane.

Edited to remove unnecessary quote of Gutt.

I understand you getting pissed at the notion that religious people are cro-magnon. My only point is that there ARE new-age philosophy books. They are mostly inane ramblings, but there is nothing new from the God of the Bible. He isn't teaching anymore. That seems fishy to me. I'm sure Romans saw the new testament as new age bullshit as well. I don't think Yae Su is any more right than you are, but you can't discredit him because he uses 'faith' as his only reason for believing.