not saying I buy any of it as a sure thing by any means, just that I find the idea interesting and a somewhat plausible hypothesis to explain religion, But then again I could be just looking for logic to explain religion when there is actually none to speak of.
"Explain religion" as in define it?
__________________
__________________
A nobody telling everybody about Somebody.
Religion uses some pretty odd argument, but try debating someone who is learned, it's different than debating irrational followers. People who are wholly reliant on faith are often not the best debaters anyhow.
Curiously accurate statement on one level while inaccurate on another. Debating the "learned" is always more challenging than debating those who are not. Also, religious faith statements are not necessarily debatable. Religious faith is better supported by defending what one believes rather than by arguing/debating. The church has a long history of very effective apologists who's work is well documented.
Now days, effective religious apologists are as rare as aliens!.....but they do exist.
__________________
A nobody telling everybody about Somebody.
Absolutely!
I love this topic, just for general pondering. At one time I read some things about the "missing" books of the bible. Basically the books that were removed by the powers in the church that were contrary to what they wanted to teach.
I do believe in a God but I don't believe in religions. Men did write the bible and the collected works were edited by church father to include or omit each according to the father's beliefs, politics or whims.
Some insist the bible is the literal word of God yet men wrote, edited and published it. [what happened to golden tablets?]
Some religions insist we all (religious or not) toss out science and preach the most prominent Baptist & Evangelical creation myth. All other religions also have their creation myths but there is minimum agreement among these many.
God gave us commandments. These make a ton of sense for both religion and for civilizing the behavior of tribal groups. Some seem to feel our actual behavior in this regard isn't that important providing one has been baptized. Makes me wonder if those tablets fell from grace?
While raised Catholic and educated through a Jesuit University I caught onto "hide that priest" in 1964. I watch a number of "mortal sins" become "no big deal". The 3 priests that formed my religious beliefs in High School were all married by the time I'd finished college.
"Good works" seem out of religious favor. Almost every religion is an old boys club with 2nd class status for women.
What I call the "religious channel" is scary. A snake oil salesman would cringe to hear some of the tripe preached there.
I'm reminded of the line; "He cried like a guilty televangelist.
Those "Cargo Cultists" you mentioned were just folks like us. We 21st Century elitists would be bowing and scraping at the first sight of anything god like.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
I do believe in a God but I don't believe in religions. Everyone believes in "a" god. Not everyone believes in The God.
Men did write the bible and the collected works were edited by church father to include or omit each according to the father's beliefs, politics or whims. Yes, God did inspire men to write His Holy Scriptures. We agree there. It is my understanding that the Holy Bible, both Old ad New Testaments, were derived from the same divine inspiration, via man, but established somewhat differently. The Old Testament was never edited by "church fathers". Although many of it's books have appreciated some....controversy. The New Testament, or New Covenant, was NOT a collection of books, much less a bible until about 393 AD. It was at the Council of Hippo (393 AD) that an ecumenical effort was made to clarify what the church would put forward as inspired scripture. Many continue to confuse this "effort" with manipulation but in context that is proven a misunderstanding. At the time of Hippo there were many heretic and gnostic gospels and writings in existence. The church ( There were no "religions" at this time.) was sustained by the gospels and epistles written by (if not written surely authored by) one of the Apostles. These documents were written for the church as a whole, some addressed to specific local churches as in Galatians, Corinthians, Philippians, etc. These documents were considered useful (inspired) by all of the churches and eventually copied and circulated amongst them. Keep in mind the fist recorded texts were from around 50 AD. So the church accumulated some nefarious text in the 343 years before the Council of Hippo met to establish what was and what was not considered inspired for the use of the worldwide church. This where the naysayers and lesser informed took reign on....mis-statements. It is this council, a group of mere men, where the actual truth is commonly lost, if not purposely hidden. As mentioned earlier, in the church's 343 years, it had been corrupted by text that were heretic or gnostic in origin. Since the church was in the developing stages, and it was thirsty for more text from which to grow and better understand, it was also vulnerable to these false text that had infiltrated it's ranks. While the council was instrumental in the establishment of the cannon it did not "select" the cannon. The council, in it's wisdom, merely confirmed what the church already knew and thereby the cannon was the result. The criteria for New Testament canonization was simple and effective in eliminating texts that were viewed as inappropriate. The criteria were 1) the text had be Apostolic in nature (written or authored by an Apostle), 2) it did not contradict known scripture (Old Testament, Jesus' bible!)), 3) it had to be self-authenticating, and 4) did the church accept it (as in, had it already been in use). All four of these criteria were required to be considered "inspired". If all four criteria were not confirmed it fell away from church use. It was these books that are defined as "lost" or "forgotten" that so many refer to. They were not "lost" or they wouldn't exist today, nor were they, obviously, "forgotten". They contain heresy and because of that, and that only, not a part of the canonization.
Some insist the bible is the literal word of God yet men wrote, edited and published it. [what happened to golden tablets?] The "Golden Tablets" are from Mormon tradition not Judeo-Christian. The Mormons say the angel Maroni wrote the Golden Tablets and gave them to Joseph Smith who buried them under a tree where they were lost forever.
Some religions insist we all (religious or not) toss out science and preach the most prominent Baptist & Evangelical creation myth. All other religions also have their creation myths but there is minimum agreement among these many.
God gave us commandments. These make a ton of sense for both religion and for civilizing the behavior of tribal groups. Some seem to feel our actual behavior in this regard isn't that important providing one has been baptized. ?? It is my observation that the Ten Commandments are held in little regard whether one is baptized or not. Yes they make sense but the human condition directs us elsewhere.
Makes me wonder if those tablets fell from grace? "Those tablets" have fallen from grace, literally and in application. The first set, written by God and ignored by man, were destroyed by Moses. The second set were written, if not authored, by Moses were kept in the Ark of The Covenant along with the a jar of manna and Moses staff. It, like the Mormons Golden Tablets, was lost and has never been found.
While raised Catholic and educated through a Jesuit University I caught onto "hide that priest" in 1964. I watch a number of "mortal sins" become "no big deal". The 3 priests that formed my religious beliefs in High School were all married by the time I'd finished college. Catholic and Jesuit, hmmmmm, if you are into bashing Catholicism read "Doctrines that Divide" by Lutzer.
"Good works" seem out of religious favor. Almost every religion is an old boys club with 2nd class status for women. Agreed!
What I call the "religious channel" is scary. A snake oil salesman would cringe to hear some of the tripe preached there. Agreed to the clarification of "some"
We don't agree on some facts but we're close enough to discuss it. Interesting read!
Thanks.
__________________
A nobody telling everybody about Somebody.
That is interesting. If I may ask......is it that you consciously "don't" believe, or "won't" believe, or is it that you "can't" believe?
I find the concept intriguing. If you "don't" or "won't" believe, that clearly is a choice. If you "can't" believe, that clearly is a shame.
Your view points are not unique but certainly thought provoking. I'll admit that I haven't read the entire thread but I will now
Well I don't actually find it a real big deal to believe or not. Life is life, we live it the best we can & we all die in the end so what the heck difference does it make, absolutely none when no one really knows whats going to happen in the end.
Show me some proof one way or the other & I am happy to look at it
Catholic and Jesuit, hmmmmm, if you are into bashing Catholicism read "Doctrines that Divide" by Lutzer.
I'm not bashing Catholicism as much as just feeling done with it as I feel about all other religions. The Jesuits on the other hand question everything and are frequently out of favor with Rome.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
Linear Mode
