Faith

Robert Tulip · Wed May 19, 2010 4:22 pm


	DWill wrote: liberal believers, who don't place stress on any of the doctrine but still want to be in the tradition. And to just believe in the God part of it, and maybe the Jesus part minus the miraculous, doesn't violate reason that I can see. These still consider themselves people of faith, but they've made something largely metaphorical of the religion. That seems to work for them.

At the surface, liberal belief is rational and virtuous, enabling an intelligent person to be part of a community, belonging to something bigger, participating in a sense of purpose and meaning, and providing a simple morality that teaches children how to be good people. If our faith sticks to aphorisms such as 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', and situates this teaching within a ritual church framework where we network with others who also do not really believe the magic, then it is often a good thing. Lack of such faith can be seen as a cause of delinquency and social alienation.

However, scratch the surface and such liberal faith has inconsistencies. We have had quite a bit of discussion here about whether the story of Jesus is itself a massive fraud. Remember, there is no reliable historical evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ was an actual person. It seems most likely that the character in the Bible was confected by the early church in order to create a unifying myth for the Christian community, that fictional stories were passed off as true and then very rapidly acquired the force of dogma.

It seems okay on the surface to be taken in by such a fraud, but it inevitably develops a twisted perversity. For every 'liberal believer' who likes the ritual and the good ethics but rejects the fantasy, there are many ignorant Christians who accept the fantasy as truth. This has numerous harmful social consequences. Over time, faith morphs into whatever suits the interests of preachers. In Christianity we can see that it suited the interests of the early church to ally with the Roman Empire because that increased the wealth and power of the clergy. People who could twist the fantasy for their selfish interests could rise within the institution. This Christendom alliance proved more powerful than the ethics written into the Gospels as a basis of faith. Over time, it enabled believers to elaborate completely fictional theories such as the stories of heaven and hell. The most dangerous contemporary manifestation of perverse faith is the false mythology of Christian fundamentalism, allied to a doctrine of military security that ignores the real natural threats to human life.

DWill · Wed May 19, 2010 7:35 pm


	Robert Tulip wrote: At the surface, liberal belief is rational and virtuous, enabling an intelligent person to be part of a community, belonging to something bigger, participating in a sense of purpose and meaning, and providing a simple morality that teaches children how to be good people. If our faith sticks to aphorisms such as 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', and situates this teaching within a ritual church framework where we network with others who also do not really believe the magic, then it is often a good thing. Lack of such faith can be seen as a cause of delinquency and social alienation.

That's true.


	Quote: However, scratch the surface and such liberal faith has inconsistencies. We have had quite a bit of discussion here about whether the story of Jesus is itself a massive fraud. Remember, there is no reliable historical evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ was an actual person. It seems most likely that the character in the Bible was confected by the early church in order to create a unifying myth for the Christian community, that fictional stories were passed off as true and then very rapidly acquired the force of dogma.

We'll never be able to prove that Jesus was an actual person, nor to disprove it. It's up to each of us to judge what seems most likely given the facts we have. For myself, it doesn't occur to me to doubt that the gospels talk about a person named Jesus who really did have a brief carreer as an end-times preacher in Israel. The very inconsistencies from gospel to gospel seem to me convincing evidence that they have to do with a historical figure. This kind of biography is not the made-up kind that we would see if it had been produced with the express intent of creating a myth from whole cloth. There are too many oddities. Nor is it that significant that we lack historical references to Jesus. His fame wasn't necessarily great during his life. If the Bible implies that it was, well, that is the effect of the posthumous growth of his reputation. So I don't think we are justified in calling the existence of Jesus a fraud. As for the supernatural/magical aspects attached to him, well of course these are the common currency of just about any religion you can name.

stahrwe · Thu May 20, 2010 10:01 am

DWill wrote:


	Robert Tulip wrote: At the surface, liberal belief is rational and virtuous, enabling an intelligent person to be part of a community, belonging to something bigger, participating in a sense of purpose and meaning, and providing a simple morality that teaches children how to be good people. If our faith sticks to aphorisms such as 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', and situates this teaching within a ritual church framework where we network with others who also do not really believe the magic, then it is often a good thing. Lack of such faith can be seen as a cause of delinquency and social alienation.

That's true.


	Quote: However, scratch the surface and such liberal faith has inconsistencies. We have had quite a bit of discussion here about whether the story of Jesus is itself a massive fraud. Remember, there is no reliable historical evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ was an actual person. It seems most likely that the character in the Bible was confected by the early church in order to create a unifying myth for the Christian community, that fictional stories were passed off as true and then very rapidly acquired the force of dogma.

We'll never be able to prove that Jesus was an actual person, nor to disprove it. It's up to each of us to judge what seems most likely given the facts we have. For myself, it doesn't occur to me to doubt that the gospels talk about a person named Jesus who really did have a brief carreer as an end-times preacher in Israel. The very inconsistencies from gospel to gospel seem to me convincing evidence that they have to do with a historical figure. This kind of biography is not the made-up kind that we would see if it had been produced with the express intent of creating a myth from whole cloth. There are too many oddities. Nor is it that significant that we lack historical references to Jesus. His fame wasn't necessarily great during his life. If the Bible implies that it was, well, that is the effect of the posthumous growth of his reputation. So I don't think we are justified in calling the existence of Jesus a fraud. As for the supernatural/magical aspects attached to him, well of course these are the common currency of just about any religion you can name.

This whole discussion is ridiculous. A great deal of what passes for discussion on these topics is no more than personal opinion reinforced by people with similar prejudices. Tulip talks about the abuses and dangers of faith unless Jesus is removed from it. What he fails to mention are all of the positive and virtuous activities carried out by the Church in the name of Jesus. You echo the sentiment and complain about inconsistencies in the Gospels. I would bet that if the Gospels agreed 100% you would cite that as proof they were forged too. Evidence is demanded but rejected. BT has a discussion forum set up to discuss each book of the Bible. If you guys are serious, you should participate in that discussion and let’s have a bare fisted, open discussion of the alledged inconsistencies in the Gospels. I’ll bet that doesn’t happen. Everyone is too scared of the Bible to engage in a real discussion of it. It’s much easier and safer to stand on the sidelines and throw rocks. You say the Gospels are contradictory, OK, show me.

Interbane · Thu May 20, 2010 11:47 am

Your warped perspective is comical Stahrwe. Without the ability to think for yourself, you think others' opinions are mere drivel? If other people don't copy/paste the opinions of someone with letters behind their names, their opinions are worthless? The opinions of members on this site are as level minded and intelligent as any I've seen from mainstream academia, and without most of the bias. There is no 'distinction' that qualifies some people to have a 'more valid' opinion than others.

This same tendency is found in a majority of your posts. Rather than attacking the thoughts and lines of reasoning, you attack the person. Rather than submitting reasoning yourself, you submit the opinion of famous people(the quote from Einstein). You're missing the point in all this. It is not the people that are important, but the thoughts they have. The fact that Einstein said what is in your quote is meaningless without the reasoning he uses to support it. You really ought to try and think for yourself.


	Quote: Everyone is too scared of the Bible to engage in a real discussion of it.

Actually, that's all anyone besides yourself would prefer, is a "real" discussion, and not a fantasy discussion. The reality is, the bible is a work of fiction mixed with some historical truth. It's not meant to be taken literally. Any real discussion would approach it from this perspective. You're off the deep end, and berating others for not following you! :lol:

DWill · Thu May 20, 2010 9:01 pm


	stahrwe wrote: Tulip talks about the abuses and dangers of faith unless Jesus is removed from it. What he fails to mention are all of the positive and virtuous activities carried out by the Church in the name of Jesus. You echo the sentiment and complain about inconsistencies in the Gospels. I would bet that if the Gospels agreed 100% you would cite that as proof they were forged too.

I think my language was fairly clear, so I have to question your reading here. I wasn't echoing the sentiments you ascribe to RT; I was disagreeing with him about Jesus not being real. I think your gun is so primed to go off at words such as "inconsistencies" that you don't--or at least didn't here--read for the meaning.


	Quote: Evidence is demanded but rejected. BT has a discussion forum set up to discuss each book of the Bible. If you guys are serious, you should participate in that discussion and let’s have a bare fisted, open discussion of the alledged inconsistencies in the Gospels. I’ll bet that doesn’t happen. Everyone is too scared of the Bible to engage in a real discussion of it. It’s much easier and safer to stand on the sidelines and throw rocks. You say the Gospels are contradictory, OK, show me.

I didn't have to go with contradictions to make my point. That wasn't and isn't my main interest. I'm not even talking about disagreements and differences of fact, narrative, or point of view between the Gospels. These are interesting to me, not at all the accusing statements that they are to you. I was just talking about the way that any of the stories are told, how that lends verisimilitude to them. Not in the sense that the events happened exactly as told or even at all, but simply in the sense that there must a been a real person about whom these different takes were written. They are not really smooth enough to be fiction; they contain lumps and oddities (again, anathema to you but not to me).

The Bible discussion didn't work for me because there wasn't much activity going on that I could plug into. I have absolutely no interest in arguing whether or not the Bible is so-called literal truth. Can't sink my teeth into that at all.

Robert Tulip · Fri May 21, 2010 3:05 am


	stahrwe wrote: This whole discussion is ridiculous. A great deal of what passes for discussion on these topics is no more than personal opinion reinforced by people with similar prejudices. Tulip talks about the abuses and dangers of faith unless Jesus is removed from it. What he fails to mention are all of the positive and virtuous activities carried out by the Church in the name of Jesus.

In case anyone else finds this discussion surreal, yes, here we have Stahrwe the Young Earth Creationist maintaining, valiantly and ridiculously, that the universe was made/created (his careful but absurd semantic distinction) by God in October of 4004 BC, an opinion that was proven false two centuries ago, while I, and it seems everyone else here, accepts the evidence of observation of the overwhelming consistency and truth of basic science regarding evolutionary biology.

Using ordinary scientific criteria there is no historical evidence for the life of Jesus Christ. The closest thing to “evidence” is the thuggery of the Church that tells people they will go to hell unless they toe the authoritarian line on the incarnation. This is no evidence at all.

In case Stahrwe did not notice, my comment that he just quoted mentions virtuous qualities of Christian faith. I am not suggesting that Jesus should be ‘removed from faith’, any more than the tortoise should be removed from Aesop’s fable. However, people should not claim that the mythical fables of the bible are historically factual. Their real meaning is as parables. It is quite possibly a very good thing to have faith in Jesus as the symbolic image of human perfection, but claiming that this fable is a matter of historical fact is the beginning of a slippery slope to fantasy, dogma and delusion. As Voltaire said, belief in absurdities gives permission for atrocities.

Departure from evidence in the formation of opinion is the destruction of ethics.

Can I request, and admit my own guilt here, that people stop calling Stahrwe an idiot? Apart from being rude, it is not true. In the conventional classification, idiots have an IQ below 20, imbeciles have an IQ up to 50 and morons have an IQ up to 70. Very religious adolescents have an average IQ of 97, so are simply dull, and are in no way idiots.

johnson1010 · Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:55 pm

http://www.wimp.com/positivethinking/

the power of faith, or how magical thinking bones us all.

Forum rules

Faith Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!