Any religious people watch the Wonders of Life last night?

Christianity is good at gobbling up new ideas and traditions to avoid inconveniences.

Oxy said:
If God exists why does he allow famine and rape etc?

Is this the work of the Beast?

Jason2 do you believe satan exists? If so, who is winning?
Click to expand...

Life on Earth is some kind of game, like a global Big Brother. God picks the winners instead of phone votes, they go on to heaven while the rapists are sent to hell for all eternity with the atheists. Isn't this a bit sick on a morality level?

Quite frankly if heaven is full of Jason2 characters, send me down :cool:
 
Many religions have taken on different elements over time, the romans pantheon being a classic example of re-labeled Helenistic gods.

I may be misapplying but this process itself may be similar to evolution, as explain in the meme hypothesis.
 
Castiel said:
The position that Genesis is allegorical has a specific name, it is known as The Accommodation View. Simply put, it is the position that Genesis 1-2 was written in a simple allegorical fashion to make it easy for lay people of the time to understand complex ideas and concepts and also at the same to allow a more educated and interpretative state with the potential for complex theological discourse on the nature of existence and Man's relationship with God and the Universe around him.

Interestingly, one of the most influential theologians of Contemporary Conservative Evangelism and supporter of Biblical Inerrancy (upon which doctrine stands Creationism) was a man called Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield who said this;

“I do not think that there is any general statement in the Bible or any part of the account of creation, either as given in Genesis 1 and 2 or elsewhere alluded to, that need be opposed to evolution.”

Even one of the men most influential in US Conservative Christianity doesn't contend that Evolution is false, which significantly undermines the notion that Evolution is or even was in conflict with Christian belief.
Click to expand...

So which of the following would you agree with, or possibly you could comment on them further:-

1. If it's indeed allegorical, then it's possible to infer several different meanings from it and ascribe it as a loose interpretation for whatever happens in reality/your head/heart whatever, as any details can be fobbed off as being an enabler to understanding the general statements.

2. Is it therefore impossible to rewrite it in explicit terms understood today, such attempts would always fail because the whole point of it is to allude to meanings and to describe what is indescribable, and therefore you'd simple be replacing the allegory with a new one. Also the whole point may well have been for the individual to take a meaning from it that makes sense to them.

3. The other possibility like you say being that whoever wrote it did so in an allegorical form in order to communicate with the layperson as opposed to communication in a general sense between equals, would there not be a more complex version of it somewhere which is more precisely written? Surely someone would do this as a safeguard for the layperson reading inferring whatever they like from the allegory, unless they had no preconception that this would happen given that the metaphors of the day were well established enough to be understood en masse. I realise the more complex version may not have mass reproduced and therfore prone to going missing.

Bewildering.
 
estebanrey said:
estebanrey said:
So Jason2 are you bigger and more complex now than you were when you were a baby? Doesn't that mean you've broken the second law of thermodynamics under your logic?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Your text is getting bigger. Maybe that's making it too complex. You should go the other way and make the font size smaller for him!

(Jason2 this is an attempt at humour, I don't mean to demean you. If anything it's more of a reflection on me as a weak and fallible human being. I wish you happiness and all good things. I'm not them vs us, just all for discourse as a means of promoting greater understanding.)
 
Last edited:
d_brennen said:
Christianity is good at gobbling up new ideas and traditions to avoid inconveniences.



Life on Earth is some kind of game, like a global Big Brother. God picks the winners instead of phone votes, they go on to heaven while the rapists are sent to hell for all eternity with the atheists. Isn't this a bit sick on a morality level?

Quite frankly if heaven is full of Jason2 characters, send me down :cool:
Click to expand...

You don't know anything about me.
 
Castiel said:
You are confusing Literal Creationists with Christianity in a broad sense. The vast majority of Christianity believes in the allegorical nature of Genesis and accepts and incorporates modern Evolutionarily Knowledge within their belief structure, it is not in anyway contradictory or in conflict with their Faith.

Conservative Evangelicalism and other minority movements such as the Millennial and Restorationist movements of The Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses (Which I suspect Jason2 belongs to) largely maintain a Literalist approach to Genesis, but that is not the mainstream position and for the major Established Churches never was, as I explained earlier with references to Thomas Aquinas, Origen and Augustine.
Click to expand...

No, I do not belong to any denomination so please do not assume what I do or don't belong to.
 
It was explained earlier in the thread.

I've been reading through all 12 man sized pages today, and I now have to give out a few awards:

Kamwah, for being a good sport and doing a great job of backing up his points with good arguments: Silver star

Urgannagru for being a relatively unknown poster, yet accepting and learning new material at a fantastic rate and showing his capability to digest and understand this material: Gold Star

Jason2 for ignoring just about every single counter argument and acting like a stereotypical militant theist as well as coming across as a bit of a tool with his inflammatory posts which lead to him reporting others for doing no worse than him: The Richard Dawkins' "THEORY IS NOT FACT" Special Badge. Oh, and I would happily say all of this to your face, just tell me where to meet up as I am genuinely interested in your position and would love to have a face to face debate with you on why I think you are wrong. Please don't ignore this. If you do ignore this, it only proves that you are trolling and I will be presenting the mods with evidence as if you are trolling then you are most certainly not welcome here.

Nearly everyone else in this thread gets a worthy mention for keeping it as civil as possible and actually providing, for once in a religious thread, a good couple of hours of really good reading material for me to study the subject further.

I have nothing further to contribute that hasn't already been posted, and I have a few bits that I'm going to read up on before I feel that I'm on a decent enough level of understanding to contribute in a meaningful way.

Good job guys :)
 
I have ignored no posts, shayper. The only posts I have ignored are those who are on my ignore list. I have been respectful to all people I've spoken with so don't even dare to judge me pal.
 
Jason2 said:
No, I do not belong to any denomination so please do not assume what I do or don't belong to.
Click to expand...

I made no such assumption, only voiced a suspicion given your views and the similarity of them to other primitivist views as your denouncement a of denominational identity would infer.

You are reluctant to elucidate precisely which doctrine set you ascribe to or which Church to which you belong, so we are largely forced to make assumptions whether you like it or not, you can easily set aside such assumptions and inferences by stating your particular affliation as you have been asked (and you have ignored) more than a few times over te course of serious threads.

I find those that are reluctant to express their affiliations are usually either ashamed of them or they are in some way flawed in such a way as to warrant keeping them from being examined in any detail.
 
Castiel, I am ashamed of nothing. I was asked what denomination I belong to, and I replied. Jesus Christ is the saviour and redeemer of mankind - that is my view. Is that enough for you?

We aint ashamed, you can call us lame, but everybody gotta die and stand in front of the king.
 
Jason2 said:
I have ignored no posts, shayper. The only posts I have ignored are those who are on my ignore list. I have been respectful to all people I've spoken with so don't even dare to judge me pal.
Click to expand...

Right.

You have blatantly ignored several posts which have provided counter arguments that are well constructed, reasoned and backed up with evidence. I could go back through the thread and find at least 7 or 8 examples that I can remember, but it's not worth my time at the moment. If these are from people on your ignore list, then you only have yourself to blame for people calling you out on this stuff.

You have been FAR from respectful, going so far as to insult the whole of homosexuality. I showed a good friend of mine, who happens to be gay, some of your posts, and he was disgusted by your attitude and, I quote "This guy just shows the backwards attitude towards the gay community expunged by militant theists. It's disgusting, medieval and is continuing to cause problems for us because of who we are. I certainly don't persecute and insult religious people for their beliefs, so how dare he judge me in such a way for my sexuality"

I see you also neglected to respond to me inviting you to a face-to-face debate. After your rather hostile posts earlier asking people to say stuff to your face, I find this rather suspicious.
 
Jason2 said:
I have ignored no posts, shayper. The only posts I have ignored are those who are on my ignore list. I have been respectful to all people I've spoken with so don't even dare to judge me pal.
Click to expand...

So Jason2 are you bigger and more complex now than you were when you were a baby? Doesn't that mean you've broken the second law of thermodynamics under your logic?
 
Jason2 said:
I have ignored no posts, shayper. The only posts I have ignored are those who are on my ignore list. I have been respectful to all people I've spoken with so don't even dare to judge me pal.
Click to expand...

So to which form of Christian Doctrine and/or Tradition do you identify with or belong to, for example, are you a Charismatic Evengelical or a me,ver of a specific Church or Movement?
 
I think he has you on ignore Estebanrey.

"So Jason2 are you bigger and more complex now than when you were a baby? Doesn't that mean you've broken the second law of thermodynamics under your logic?"

Is one of the examples I mentioned earlier. Please respond to this point WITHOUT dodging the question Jason.
 
Jason2 said:
Show me where I have insulted homosexuals?
Click to expand...

Your ENTIRE stance on homosexuality is insulting. I just gave you a direct quote from my friend, which you have unsurprisingly failed to quote, describing how he felt after reading your posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom