I invite you to pick apart Christianity

[Snow Turtle]

I'm a little confused by all this discussion about not knowing the self without external stimulus. You don't need others people to know that you exist yourself, as you will be naturally aware of your self surely?

If we're taking external stimulus to be any object than still I could just claim a blind, deaf and numb person will have awareness of themselves, a self since it's biological to know these sort of things.

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

The god of the old testament seems like a nasty piece of work, if that is god I'll take my chances with the devil.

God is the same in the new and old testaments. He is a God of love, mercy, and kindness, but He is also a God of wrath, judgement, and righteousness. You have to read all of scripture to understand, because some people read a chapter and think that God just killed people, but if they read the next chapter, they will see that He waited 500 years and sent prophets to them to warn them before He did so. There is no doubt, It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Heb 10:31

 

[Snow Turtle]

Regarding christianity. I'm not a christian because I can't wrap my head around these ideas.

a) Why is it eternal damnation?
b) Why would God set up a system where people punish themselves for not having faith?

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

Okay.

Now what?

(I happen to agree, btw, that usually in fights both sides have some meat to their perspective... and it's been my frustration when I engage in conversation with people who feel they are holding an exclusive truth.)

And Jews believe the Torah.
And Muslims believe the Koran.

...and note that there are countless shades of belief within those two groups... as there are among self-professed Christians -- note all the denominations -- so what exactly does it mean to "believe God's Word"? And why one particular view of God's word and not another? What makes one particular reading of one particular holy book the "approved" version of God's word and will on planet Earth?

Perhaps 70 years ago the majority of western society accepted one particular reading of the Bible as a "given"... but that is no longer the case, so there has to be some agreement up front about what two people accept as an authority before any meaningful conversation can happen. If you launch into expounding theology without first agreeing on the basics, any argument you make will have no traction with the listener.

That's why Protestants believe Catholics are wrong. Jesus was godman, and mary was a woman.

I bet you're looking for the woman in the red dress.

It is not a feeling, it is based on the fact that the Word is God's revelation to man. It is divinely inspired rhema 'spoken' by the Holy Spirit to man to write. The Word is also Jesus Christ: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." If you look up the original language used for "Word", you will find that it is λόγος 'Logos' and Logos means the living Christ. This is why He said For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Heb 4:12

An example of this is in Luke 24. The disciples had been personally taught by Jesus for three years. However, they still did not understand the Scriptures. They were distracted by the conflicting interpretations of 'contemporary scholars'. It was not until Jesus began with Moses and all the prophets and explained how they revealed Him that they understood the true meaning of Scripture. 'And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself' Luke 24:27. The disciples said, 'Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?' Luke 24:32.

Concerning the torah, it is the Law. The Law has not passed, any person that is not saved by Jesus Christ, which was/is the new covenant prophesied and fulfilled by Jesus Christ, messiah is held to it: 'Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. 1 Tim 1:9-11

Concerning denominations, you will not find the word in the Word of God because it is man made. If it isn't in the Word, I toss it.

 

[Owl]

Regarding christianity. I'm not a christian because I can't wrap my head around these ideas.

a) Why is it eternal damnation?
b) Why would God set up a system where people punish themselves for not having faith?

a) It's everlasting, and this because: 1) a person in the state of spiritual death has no ability to bring himself back to spiritual life; 2) God is under no compulsion to do this for him; and 3) leaving some persons in a state of spiritual death is necessary for a full revelation of the justice of God.

b) Que?

 

[Thalassa]

You're going to compare the number of people helped by Christian charitable work to the numbers killed by Christians throughout the centuries?

Please - it isn't Christianity itself that did that, it's people who did that. Christianity was sometimes their excuse, but the real motive was usually greed or lust for power.

People are rotten. They do rotten stuff all of the time, Christians or no. It just so happens that Christianity was the dominant religion in the Western World and was conveniently used as an excuse by some.

However, Christianity has also been used as a motive to do wonderful things in society, like give men and women equal rights, and end slavery in the United States.

 

[Qre:us]

However, Christianity has also been used as a motive to do wonderful things in society, like give men and women equal rights, and end slavery in the United States.

What? And, you can't really count Christianity as helping end slavery because it had its hands soiled just as much (if not more, but, I can't really say, as I don't know how one quantifies) in maintaining the institution of slavery.

I'm a little confused by all this discussion about not knowing the self without external stimulus. You don't need others people to know that you exist yourself, as you will be naturally aware of your self surely?

If we're taking external stimulus to be any object than still I could just claim a blind, deaf and numb person will have awareness of themselves, a self since it's biological to know these sort of things.

Well, I don't know what you surely know or believe, but, extensive study in child development when talking of self-concept (understanding, "I'm ME!"), a critical component is called referencing.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Ok, I will join the show.


If christian God exists that means that he/she/it created the universe and laws of physics in this universe. What mean that he/she/it is directly responsible for the fact that Nuclear warfare in this reality is possible.

So the question is why would God do such a thing?
Especially since this does not make much sense even if he/she/it is testing us.
Since this allows a very small minority to wipe out majority with one blow.

 

[ceecee]

However, Christianity has also been used as a motive to do wonderful things in society, like give men and women equal rights, and end slavery in the United States.

I'm sorry, what? I'm pretty sure people, Christian or otherwise, bought and sold salves even when they felt slavery was an abomination and/or tried converting the heathen slave race. Women's legal rights? I'd love to see proof of that.

 

[Thalassa]

What? And, you can't really count Christianity as helping end slavery because it had its hands soiled just as much (if not more, but, I can't really say, as I don't know how one quantifies) in maintaining the institution of slavery.

Feminism: Sarah Grimke was a Quaker. The Seneca Falls Convention (Elizabeth Cady Stanton) was held in a Methodist church. Christian doctrine was highly influential in first wave feminist movements.

Racism: William Apes wrote "An Indian's Looking Glass for the White Man" in Christian terms to illustrate how racism at that time was not, in fact, biblical. Christian doctrine was also shown as support that ALL MEN are equal in the eyes of God during the Civil War era. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a PREACHER.

Part of the reason why Christianity was able to be twisted as much as it was in earlier times was because of illiteracy. Many people could not actually read the Bible and instead just followed the guidance of their political leaders, trusting it to be the will of God. It was only after literacy began to increase in the general population that Christianity was more carefully studied and correctly interpreted as a religion of love and forgiveness.

Any philosophy, any religion, can be used to exert ill-will upon other people, and that includes atheists just as much as religious people. Christianity is not *the reason* for these horrible things in history. It is merely a cultural context which was sometimes misapplied as justification for horrific acts.

 

[Thalassa]

Women's legal rights? I'd love to see proof of that.

Do you know anything at all about the history of feminism?

 

[Snow Turtle]

Well, I don't know what you surely know or believe, but, extensive study in child development when talking of self-concept (understanding, "I'm ME!"), a critical component is called referencing.

That certainly makes sense. However I'm curious how a blind or deaf child could reference to other beings. Eitherway I'd imagine a being would have a sense of identity that they control themselves unless we're going on the assumption that these people locked up are completely void of the idea that they have thoughts etc.

a) It's everlasting, and this because: 1) a person in the state of spiritual death has no ability to bring himself back to spiritual life; 2) God is under no compulsion to do this for him; and 3) leaving some persons in a state of spiritual death is necessary for a full revelation of the justice of God.

b) Que?

1) Why?
2) Why?
3) Punishment is the only form of justice?

b) It's essentially the question: Why does God punish people for not believing? Which is commonly answered by: It's free will. To which I ask, it's clear that God has not provided enough evidence to convert these people, therefore why would he set up a system where these non-believers are condemning themselves?

 

[Qre:us]

Feminism: Sarah Grimke was a Quaker. The Seneca Falls Convention (Elizabeth Cady Stanton) was held in a Methodist church. Christian doctrine was highly influential in first wave feminist movements.

Racism: William Apes wrote "An Indian's Looking Glass for the White Man" in Christian terms to illustrate how racism at that time was not, in fact, biblical. Christian doctrine was also shown as support that ALL MEN are equal in the eyes of God during the Civil War era. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a PREACHER.

Part of the reason why Christianity was able to be twisted as much as it was in earlier times was because of illiteracy. Many people could not actually read the Bible and instead just followed the guidance of their political leaders, trusting it to be the will of God. It was only after literacy began to increase in the general population that Christianity was more carefully studied and correctly interpreted as a religion of love and forgiveness.

Any philosophy, any religion, can be used to exert ill-will upon other people, and that includes atheists just as much as religious people. Christianity is not *the reason* for these horrible things in history. It is merely a cultural context which was sometimes misapplied as justification for horrific acts.

So your argument is Christianity (not people who happen to be Christians) helped the Feminist movement and abolition of slavery when your argument for the flip side is, well, people who JUST happen to be Christians, abused and misinterpreted the religion? How do you justify such an obvious bias between the two sides of arguments?

Because I can just as soon come back with correlation and association where "Christianity" (or as you'd say, peeps who just *happen* to be christians) HINDERED both those causes....

For example, exerpts from the bible were being flung by BOTH sides (for and against) during the Suffragist debates on women's right to vote. So...? Where are you getting a final overall conclusion of Christianity HELPED?

 

[Qre:us]

That certainly makes sense. However I'm curious how a blind or deaf child could reference to other beings.

Blind, deaf and dumb does not negate the brain. I don't understand your confusion regarding this?

Eitherway I'd imagine a being would have a sense of identity that they control themselves unless we're going on the assumption that these people locked up are completely void of the idea that they have thoughts etc.

What do you mean? What's the argument there?

 

[Snow Turtle]

Ok, I will join the show.


If christian God exists that means that he/she/it created the universe and laws of physics in this universe. What mean that he/she/it is directly responsible for the fact that Nuclear warfare in this reality is possible.

So the question is why would God do such a thing?
Especially since this does not make much sense even if he/she/it is testing us.
Since this allows a very small minority to wipe out majority with one blow.

God gave us free will.
There's no problem with this line of reasoning, however there are those who hold the opinion that the price of freedom is not worth the harm that can be created.

 

[Snow Turtle]

Blind, deaf and dumb does not negate the brain. I don't understand your confusion regarding this?

The brain counts as a reference point? In that case I've got no problem.

What do you mean? What's the argument there?

Might just be a case of misunderstand your original position. Claiming that a person couldn't know what the self is without others to reference against, but if they can use their own mind as a reference point then there's no problem.

 

[Night]

God gave us free will.

Can you explain the idea of 'free will' further?

 

[Qre:us]

The brain counts as a reference point? In that case I've got no problem.

Might just be a case of misunderstand your original position. Claiming that a person couldn't know what the self is without others to reference against, but if they can use their own mind as a reference point then there's no problem.

No, I didn't mean brain as in isolation...humans/brain's capacity to interpret is not limited by being deaf, dumb and blind (this was my suprise with your comment). We can feel touch for example. When ANOTHER/or a leaf, anything touches us, we understand, are aware, of our body/the self....a baby often will eat its own foot, without understanding that it's its OWN foot its chewing on, as when you give a finger, it will happily munch on that, without any blip like, HEY. Pain allows us to feel our body as self. Pain being stimuli, an external. This awareness of body/physical self develops a bit later, as it learns how the body fits within its environment, where its body ends, and all else begins, etc.

You can't use your mind as your own reference point, because that's going around in circles. X can't validate X and be validated by X. That's impossible.

 

[Snow Turtle]

Can you explain the idea of 'free will' further?

Right I want to comment on the fact that I haven't fully taken on whether I believe in pure determinism or the randomness nature of quantam mechanics. Not to mention that this discussion will move into discussion about things that aren't empirically observable or can't be proven.

Otherwise...
I'll roll along with a basic definition of common day speech regarding free will -being allowed to make a decision after consideration and influence.

Meh. I can't give a decent argument, how about you provide me one?

 

[Snow Turtle]

No, I didn't mean brain as in isolation...humans/brain's capacity to interpret is not limited by being deaf, dumb and blind (this was my suprise with your comment). We can feel touch for example. When ANOTHER/or a leaf, anything touches us, we understand, are aware, of our body/the self....a baby often will eat its own foot, without understanding that it's its OWN foot its chewing on, as when you give a finger, it will happily munch on that, without any blip like, HEY. Pain allows us to feel our body as self. Pain being stimuli, an external. This awareness of body/physical self develops a bit later, as it learns how the body fits within its environment, where its body ends, and all else begins, etc.

Yes, I specifically used numb rather than dumb. It wasn't a typo.
I do remember reading in a book about a person who didn't have hands becacuse she never developed them in terms of exploring them, but I can't help but feel surely there is part of the self that definitely knows that it is itself from birth. Pain induced by the baby counts as an external stimuli?

You can't use your mind as your own reference point, because that's going around in circles. X can't validate X and be validated by X. That's impossible.

It does make me wonder what a baby thinks of it's own thoughts straight after birth, whether it even realises that it comes from itself. Right, so I take back my words that the baby knows it's own body. It seems that is indeed learnt.

What would happen to an individual locked up for an extensive period of time, apart from dying, would they eventually recgonise their own thoughts and when does it occur?