Languish's church attendence

[MadImmortalMan]

The problem with the "Bible offers many useful lessons" argument is really that it does not even attempt to show how that compares to tons of other books and stories that offer more useful lessons without the side dish of genocide and rape (or, conversely, a lot of available stories of genocide and rape are much cooler and more entertaining too).

Between the likes of Euripides, Homer, Shakespeare or Voltaire (or HBO, for that matter), why would anyone want to read the Bible instead?

Who cares? Why pick Homer over Milton? It doesn't matter.

[Sheilbh]

I used the phrase "as described in the bible" to segregate god from all the other gods, but srsly, how can you be a christian if you haven't read the bible as revalation?

And my point is there are multiple descriptions of God made in the Bible, which were written at different points by different authors and classes of authors.  So I don't yet have an opinion on the 'God as described in the Bible' because, frankly, the God of Exodus is different from the God of Isaiah and Jeremiah and very different from the God of John's Gospel.  Similarly even I can see the Bible's a text that revises itself as it goes.  So I struggle with the idea of 'God as described in the Bible'.  Based on my reading so far I'd immediately want to know, which God?

It's not that odd for Christians not to have read the Bible.  My parents have been going to Church for over 100 years between them and they don't even own a Bible.  I imagine most self-described Christians haven't read the Bible.  I read lots of theology, so I read Augustine and Aquinas and, especially, John Henry Newman.  The idea of reading the Bible before you know how to understand it always struck me as a bit odd.

Do you mind sharing with us your conversion story?

Well I'd always gone to Church occasionally so I never felt like I left.  I've never been a huge believer but I've also never rejected the Church.  But I could never find a regular Catholic Church I liked that I would find coherent.  My movement to the CofE, though, was down to finding a Church I liked, reading some poetry (John Donne), sermons and some of Rowan Williams's theology.

[Sheilbh]

Who cares? Why pick Homer over Milton? It doesn't matter.

Yeah.  That's absurd.  If those are your choices you're doing well.  We live in a world where people pick Twilight over any of them - that's more of a worry

[Iormlund]

There are very few "objective criteria" in attempting to analyze any ancient text, be it the Bible, the Illiad or Mayan stelae.  That certainly does not mean that attempts to analyze such works is futile.

Except no Homer scholar tries to prove Zeus was watching it all from Mt Ida. He's more interested in things like whether Bronze Age champions disembarked from chariots to fight, which might be proved by actual evidence.

[CountDeMoney]

My favorite book when I was little was my Children's Illustrated Bible.

Really? Mine was the Greek mythology. My grandma started to read it to me when I was like 6. I could name the Muses before I could name the Apostles.

Oh, those were a total blast.  I had several illustrated books on Greek mythology.  Unfortunately, some of the tales were a shitload more scarier than the Bible.

I read the Iliad and the Kalevala before I read the Bible. Jewish myths are even less interesting than the Finnish ones. Go figure.

Considering the Iliad appeared before the Bible, you should have.

It's all within the progression of the study of the evolution of literature and literary theory of western civilization.

Ancients > Bible > European Renaissance > Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment > modern literature

[Sheilbh]

You can't assert that so much did god love mankind that he sent his only begotten son to die so that those who belive in him shall be granted eternal life while at the same time claiming that his ways are mysterious. It is in effect asserting that your conclusions are true and refusing to answer any questions apart from repeating your own assertions.

Hold on.  I said that Christians are more able to comprehend God through Christ than through 'God' (the Father, or Holy Spirit).  We can understand Christ's role because he explains it.  We can approach comprehension of his nature - but barely, while comprehension of God's is wholly beyond us.

Again, when you can't explain something you claim incomprehensability, then you assert other things about god. You are basically saying that the description of god uses words that don't mean what they usually mean. Your religion falls apart at that point you are basically saying that there is no connection between the meaning of the words used and the content of the message. You cannot assert that some parts are incomprehensible and other parts are clear and obvious without some way of differentiating between the two.

Well words don't mean anything.  They point towards meanings that we all understand in different ways.  The limitations of language exist when you're not talking about theology.

Again I think you're missing the point I assert God and the nature of God are incomprehensible.  They are beyond human understanding.  You have the Bible which is mediated by man so it's imperfect but it's not incomprehensible and theology is an attempt to understand that and square it with our human experiences.

[Valmy]

Except no Homer scholar tries to prove Zeus was watching it all from Mt Ida. He's more interested in things like whether Bronze Age champions disembarked from chariots to fight, which might be proved by actual evidence.

Not really sure what has to do with the value of the material.

[crazy canuck]

Who cares? Why pick Homer over Milton? It doesn't matter.

Yeah.  That's absurd.  If those are your choices you're doing well.  We live in a world where people pick Twilight over any of them - that's more of a worry

[Razgovory]

There are very few "objective criteria" in attempting to analyze any ancient text, be it the Bible, the Illiad or Mayan stelae.  That certainly does not mean that attempts to analyze such works is futile.

Except no Homer scholar tries to prove Zeus was watching it all from Mt Ida. He's more interested in things like whether Bronze Age champions disembarked from chariots to fight, which might be proved by actual evidence.

I don't think Homer was ever regarded as a "religious" text.  It's more like a story where gods happen to be some of the characters.

[Scipio]

Leaving aside the Lincoln/Jefferson troll bait, if I were an atheist I'd probably have nothing to do with religious discussions, as they wouldn't interest me in the slightest.  I'm curious to know where certain atheists' hostility towards religion comes from.  Did religion cause harm to you in some significant manner, to where you think you have to fight back against it?

I care about religion for the same reason I care about politics; because it affects me too. I prefer truth to fantasy and I prefer to live in a society where others prefer truth to fantasy. Your religion does affect me when it flies planes into buildings, sabotages stemm cell research, takes my tax kroner and convinces people that morality can be found in a book.

Religion is an untruth that affects me. If it didn't affect me then I wouldn't care. I am militant on the issue for the simple reason that religious demand that I do not challenge their dogma when they advocate for it. The religion spat here started when AmScip called soviet communism a form of secular humanism. That's not me attacking religion, that the religious attacking dogma free government.

The idea that Soviet Communism is dogma free is like the idea that China's one-child policy is enlightened.  False in its terms.

[Admiral Yi]

The one child policy is very enlightened.

[Razgovory]

I thought about this thread a today I thought it strange that Viking hates religion in a way that he considers to be irrational.

I hate religion in the same way Jefferson and Lincoln did.

http://languish.org/forums/index.php/topic,7520.210.html

But a little earlier...

To be honest before 1859 you could not be an honest well informed rational atheist because of the design argument.

http://languish.org/forums/index.php/topic,7520.180.html


So presumably Viking means that he hates religion in a way that is not informed, rational, or honest.

[mongers]

I think God will have to explain the whole Holocaust gig, before I agree to be on speaking terms with him/it.

[Caliga]

He hates Jews because they won't accept killed Jeebus.  Duh.

[Razgovory]

I think God will have to explain the whole Holocaust gig, before I agree to be on speaking terms with him/it.

Why?  He didn't do it.  The Europeans did.  Though admittedly that does sound like something he would do.