I don't get Christianity because.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

He "stamped out" the viewpoints because they were wrong/made-up. As he puts it, they were forgetting the message they first received (the first gospels like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). Read Galatians 1:6-25 to see Paul's reasons for his actions. He didn't have an ulterior motive. Hear what he says.

 

But Matthew, Luke, John, ext. were written at the same time as the gnostic writings, so I don't see how the reasons stated in the bible can make any sense... :crazy:

Sure, that's when they were written, but the gospels were told audibly to the people before that though. Did you read Galatians 1:6-25? The gospel was preached before it was written down. Like, Matthew could've been walking around telling people what Jesus had said and what happened, then later, when he was going to die or whatever, he had it written down for people to not forget.

 

So were the gnostic texts, and oral renditions tend to get modified over many re-tellings...

[Ravenskya]

This has certainly taken an interesting turn from the conversation I left last night.

 

What exactly is the point of arguing the stamping out of the gnostic sects? Or are we all just tired and argumentative now? I was rather enjoying the debate earlier.

[Purgatorio]

Do modern Christians still believe God made the world for Humanity? By extension do they think people are above everything else of the natural world thus believing everything is for their benefit? Just wanting to know how far it has progressed, since it is the modern age with this evolution thing. Which doesn't kill God, for if God created the universe it's not wild fancy that evolution is a part of that creation.

 

:joy: the is back! I missed you so.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What?

[julianw]

Do modern Christians still believe God made the world for Humanity? By extension do they think people are above everything else of the natural world thus believing everything is for their benefit? Just wanting to know how far it has progressed, since it is the modern age with this evolution thing. Which doesn't kill God, for if God created the universe it's not wild fancy that evolution is a part of that creation.

Here is how it all started.

[metadigital]

*snip*

My father was raised Catholic and is now .... hmmm what's the word for it... someone who believes in God but doesn't believe that God pays any attention to the world. That he made it and left it to see what it would do... something like that.

*snip*

A deist, maybe?

Other than that...wow. Very deep and at the same time touching. Very true, too. Props to ya.

"i believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." -Einstein

He (the lapsed Roman Catholic father of Ravenskya) certainly wouldn't believe Ravenskya's story. :D

Deism seems most appropriate.

That I disagree with. It just seems unlikely to me that a deity would just create humanity and forget about it. But that's just my humble Christian opinion.

That's my Dad's take on the world, not mine. But apparently Ben Franklin and a few others thought the same way. It's got a name, I just don't know what it is. The thinking is that God created the world and now he sits back and watches like and experiment, and one day he will be done with it and the end will come.

 

I don't believe it, but my Dad had to suffer through Catholic school where he was beaten by nuns and such, so the fact that he believes in God at all makes me feel a little better.

that is deism in a nutshell... the old clockmaker hypothesis.

[metadigital]

It's people who preach hate not scripture that says turn the other cheek you arrogant sob.

 

Actually that is not a good example... because (although I hate to look like I'm switching sides) previously in the same book they state "Eye for an eye" which does sort of elude to vengeance...

Christianity is meant to be built on the New Testament; Old Testament is superseded (hence two commandments, not ten). And "An eye for an eye" was an improvement for the contemporary cultures; until this the standard response was "two eyes for an eye".

 

PS I think you meant "indicate", "evince", "imply", "indicate", or even "foretell".

elude

n verb

1 evade or escape from, typically in a skilful or cunning way.

2 fail to be attained or understood by; baffle.

 

DERIVATIVES

elusion noun

 

ORIGIN

C16: from Latin eludere, from e- 'out, away from' + ludere 'to play'.

 

PPS Your "Road to Damascus" conversion is very similar to another philosophy, one of the most famous (in the UK, anyway) proponents of which is Noel Edmonds, who wrote a book about it called Positive Happy; basically you ask the "Cosmos" (or whatever they call their version of godhead) for what you want and you get it ... no need for all the Roman Catholic overhead. "

I have a question for the Atheists...

 

My roommate was a self proclaimed Atheist, he was also quite dense so our debates were never all that fulfilling. But nevertheless in many discussions I have had with Atheists I always get the vibe that it isn't really that they don't believe in a higher power... it's that they hate the higher power so much that they prefer to state that it isn't real rather than say that it could be real and maybe it's just really mean.

 

So my question is... do you really believe that there is no higher power or do you just really hate a higher power?

Hate? I hate nothing, currently.

 

I refuse to believe in something without proof, that's all. There is no argument that convinces me that life needs a creator / godhead, so I use Occam's Razor and strip it away from the explanation.

 

The question is also pretty meaningless, so I guess I'm a bit ignostic, as well.

I for one am not an Atheist, but I do dislike God and the crap he has put mankind through with his various religions. Always making contradictory statements, placing one faction against another, and never giving a straight answer. God is a jerk, plain and simple. I would never worship a God like that, nor his kid, or even follow any of his so called prophets.

Dystheism

Then I'd say your friend is not an athiest. At one time I considered myself an athiest, and I just didn't believe that a higher power existed. I felt it was a human construct created simply to try to explain things such as the questions posted in Dark Moth's quote earlier in my post. In recent years, I moved to agnostic, which was really the culmination in my apathy. Sure there could be a higher power. There might not be. I'm no longer going to worry myself about it.

Apatheist.

[Pidesco]

PS I think you meant "indicate", "evince", "imply", "indicate", or even "foretell".

elude

n verb

1 evade or escape from, typically in a skilful or cunning way.

2 fail to be attained or understood by; baffle.

 

DERIVATIVES

elusion noun

 

ORIGIN

C16: from Latin eludere, from e- 'out, away from' + ludere 'to play'.

 

I think the word Ravenskya was looking for was "allude", which doesn't have exactly the same meaning as the words you suggested.

Edited February 3, 2007 by Pidesco

[metadigital]

allude

n verb (allude to) hint at. ⇒mention in passing.

 

ORIGIN

C15: from Latin allus-, alludere, from ad- 'towards' + ludere 'to play'.

Perhaps she mentioned it in passing :D ... certainly, however, it wasn't "elude".