Why believe in Christianity???

[Forever_Jung]

Okay guys, I should clarify. The Mysterious Stranger gave that speech. And The mysterious Stranger was Satan. BUT WAIT! Before you dismiss the whole thing, he's not your usual Satan character. He seemed more like a mouthpiece for Twain's darkest thoughts.

Isnt the mysterious stranger the devil?

Edit: yes, I should have said that before.

 

[Qlip]

I haven't been thinking about God very long, as I was a self-proclaimed 'atheist' for 20+ years, but do you believe that God gives us free will?

I do, and if so, that would mean that God gives us the ability to allow the 'Devil' to work in us and to inflict pain and suffering on ourselves and others. Therefore, I don't think we can attribute any suffering to God, unless it is suffering of the kind that is going to make us stronger or benefit us in the long run, or is His will in some way. I think some suffering, perhaps most, is from elsewhere. The Devil, for lack of a better term.

And that if we all lived as close to God's will as we could, merging it with our will, not against it, we would likely actually 'suffer' very little.


I think we can only attribute Love to God. Not suffering.


EDIT: If you were interpreting Twain, etc., I'm sorry. Just ignore my post, if you like.

I was interpreting Twain. See my reply to Beefeater. I could write a lot on this subject ^^^, but this probably isn't the thread for it.

 

[Forever_Jung]

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBGGAjMg9vw"]Some creepy shit[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Lark]

You don't give that original Twain quote enough credit to read its subleties. If there is a God, then all suffering can be attributed to him. Therefore he (Twain, or a fictional character?? I haven't read that.) denies there is a God. But since there is no God, there is nothing.

Anyway, maybe it's a type of lament, but it's not a simple FU to God.

Perhaps, I read an interesting interpretation of old testament belief in God as a negation of belief in idols, so that belief in God is really a belief in "is not [insert the wicked alternative]".

 

[Beorn]

It's a quote, I don't understand the context. I don't know if I am projecting, but I feel that I understand the feeling behind it. Maybe I am wrong.

It feels like an expression of dissatsifaction. The same type of dissatisfaction that I had being raised believing in a deity, but having all my senses and reasoning tell me that if a diety exists then he should be rejected, and if a diety doesn't exist, then living is emptiness. I've reconciled with those feelings. I can't even begin to speak for Twain, except that I think I he understood this feeling at some point, and at some other point he wrote it in a book. I don't know what point in his life this was, people change their points of views all through their time.

I think it's a very expressive passage. I don't think it's childish whining.

I don't doubt that you suffered and relate to this in a different way than I do. If I recall correctly you were raised JW. I can imagine that type of experience would make one more understanding of Twain's sentiment.

I didn't have a perfect upbringing in the church, but it was far from manipulative or shame inducing.

 

[Lark]

Okay guys, I should clarify. The Mysterious Stranger gave that speech. And The mysterious Stranger was Satan. BUT WAIT! Before you dismiss the whole thing, he's not your usual Satan character. He seemed more like a mouthpiece for Twain's darkest thoughts.



Edit: yes, I should have said that before.

What do you mean by not your usual satan character? What is your usual satan character?

I've read two great anthologies of devil stories, one was by Hitchcock and it was entitled Devils, Devils, Devils, there was another one but which I dont recall the title of, it had an Asimov story to start I think with a devil attempting to trick someone but not thinking of the fourth dimension, travel in time.

God and the devil are complex and not thought of much anymore, the rise of secularism and humanism has actively deprived the world of archetypes and narratives, just another reason to be suspiscious of that particular trend.

 

[Qlip]

Perhaps, I read an interesting interpretation of old testament belief in God as a negation of belief in idols, so that belief in God is really a belief in "is not [insert the wicked alternative]".

That is really interesting, and has some verisimilitude from what I know of Jewish thought, being that a lot of what was in Law was specifically set out to separate the Israelites from those around them as a people.

 

[Qlip]

I don't doubt that you suffered and relate to this in a different way than I do. If I recall correctly you were raised JW. I can imagine that type of experience would make one more understanding of Twain's sentiment.

I didn't have a perfect upbringing in the church, but it was far from manipulative or shame inducing.

A lot of JWs end up perfectly well adjusted and happy and confused when their kids aren't. Some people are more suited to a type of experience than others. Sometimes it has less to do with the experience and more to do with the person. Of course some religions really test an average person's acceptance.

 

[Forever_Jung]

What do you mean by not your usual satan character? What is your usual satan character?

I've read two great anthologies of devil stories, one was by Hitchcock and it was entitled Devils, Devils, Devils, there was another one but which I dont recall the title of, it had an Asimov story to start I think with a devil attempting to trick someone but not thinking of the fourth dimension, travel in time.

God and the devil are complex and not thought of much anymore, the rise of secularism and humanism has actively deprived the world of archetypes and narratives, just another reason to be suspiscious of that particular trend.

Oh I just meant, it's not like Satan came out with a pitchfork and a red pajamas and everyone hated him in the story.

 

[Lark]

That is really interesting, and has some verisimilitude from what I know of Jewish thought, being that a lot of what was in Law was specifically set out to separate the Israelites from those around them as a people.

It leads to some interesting and odd but perfectly consistent possible beliefs when you think about it, like "I believe in God rather than capitalism/communism/materialism", what is really being asserted is disbelief in capitalism, communism, materialism (I only use those because they are modern examples of underpinning, unacknowledged belief systems), not really belief in God as a being exterior to human life and thought.

I read it in Erich Fromm and I suspected originally that he was trying to do for Judahism what Fuerbach did for Christianity, although he has cited other earlier Jewish sources who do appear to agree with him, like Maimonides http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides#Negative_theology

On the other hand I think it may be possible to assert negative theology like Maimonides without necessarily disbelieving in God as an exterior being, I think that Wittgenstein was suggesting something like this in the books he wrote which were mistakenly celebrated by atheists like Bertrand Russell.

 

[Lark]

Oh I just meant, it's not like Satan came out with a pitchfork and a red pajamas and everyone hated him in the story.

I love bugs bunny cartoons too.

 

[Night]

God and the devil are complex and not thought of much anymore, the rise of secularism and humanism has actively deprived the world of archetypes and narratives, just another reason to be suspiscious of that particular trend.

Lark, this assertion confuses me. Could you speak to your thinking here?

 

[Lark]

Lark, this assertion confuses me. Could you speak to your thinking here?

Why does it confuse you?

Secularism and humanism deny that mankind has or there is anything positive about a religious imagination its not complex or confusing.

 

[Forever_Jung]

I love bugs bunny cartoons too.

I was simply trying to clarify that Satan wasn't some sort of strawman in Twain's book, so the quote wasn't dismissed. I wasn't trying to fully explore the complexity of the devil archetype.

Why does it confuse you?

Secularism and humanism deny that mankind has or there is anything positive about a religious imagination its not complex or confusing.

Yes, I am VERY wary of secular humanism. I feel that we have already been stripped of too many our rituals and archetypes.

 

[Lark]

I was simply trying to clarify that Satan wasn't some sort of strawman in Twain's book, so the quote wasn't dismissed. I wasn't trying to fully explore the complexity of the devil archetype.



Yes, I am VERY wary of secular humanism. I feel that we have already been stripped of too many our rituals and archetypes.

I find that a lot of those sorts of trends are about not thinking, not thinking too hard for sure but mainly not thinking, whole lot of emoting stands in for the thinking.

 

[Night]

Why does it confuse you?

Secularism and humanism deny that mankind has or there is anything positive about a religious imagination its not complex or confusing.

Well, my primary reason behind requesting clarification was to gain a sense for how you defined your terms. Secularism and humanism are very old ideals, but have enjoyed contemporary re-purposing as catch-all cultural nets when people want to levy criticism against certain 'perils' of modernity. Same concept can be found when die-hard materialists seek to castigate 'fundamentalist agenda' as the essential plotline to lead Western ideals into decay and stagnation.

I appreciate your explanation.

 

[Qlip]

It leads to some interesting and odd but perfectly consistent possible beliefs when you think about it, like "I believe in God rather than capitalism/communism/materialism", what is really being asserted is disbelief in capitalism, communism, materialism (I only use those because they are modern examples of underpinning, unacknowledged belief systems), not really belief in God as a being exterior to human life and thought.

I read it in Erich Fromm and I suspected originally that he was trying to do for Judahism what Fuerbach did for Christianity, although he has cited other earlier Jewish sources who do appear to agree with him, like Maimonides http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides#Negative_theology

On the other hand I think it may be possible to assert negative theology like Maimonides without necessarily disbelieving in God as an exterior being, I think that Wittgenstein was suggesting something like this in the books he wrote which were mistakenly celebrated by atheists like Bertrand Russell.

Huh.. damn it I need to read more, this all sounds facinating. Basically, I just learned enough philosophy to get myself out of the woods and it's all highly suspect stuff that I'm not willing to provide refences for. There shouldn't be anything ironic about what I'm about to claim, but I'm a practical philosopher.

 

[Mole]

Cruelty In the Beginning

Really? I have recently done a series in my church examining the reasonable evidence for God and at no point did we hit upon a God of Cruelty....what did you mean in your statement?

God, the Father, ordered Abraham to murder his son, Isaac, by eviseration.

And then God, the Father, went on to torture his own son, Jesus, to death.

The first act of cruelty was the beginning of the Abrahamic faiths; and the second act of cruelty was the beginning of christianity.

So in the beginning was cruelty.

[MENTION=15744]CreativeCait[/MENTION]

 

[CreativeCait]

Many Christians and so-called Christian groups act in ways antithetical to the message of Jesus. Just today, the Southern Baptists reiterated their position against rights for gays. I have heard sermons that attempt to put women in their biblical "place", or pass judgment on groups of people in a way that I cannot imagine Jesus having done. Cases like this may not be an indictment of Christianity as a faith, but religions are practiced and perpetuated here on earth by people, people who also act in the political, social, and professional arenas when they leave church. If they and their leaders are preaching "true" Christianity, they often fail to practice it.

This makes me sad *sigh*

It annoys me when people (not you, thinking more of preachers + believers + other commentators) look at Christianity as if its outside of the influence of culture and society. In most of its expressions it has become highly entwined with the social and cultural discourses of the place it is being practiced in. This has good and bad effects. Also, the tradition itself is highly influenced by Greek philosophy and, especially in the case of the Catholic Church, the Roman then Byzantine Empire. As well as other things, expecially the origins of Christmas. But back to my point, many people confuse personal, political and social agendas with Christianity and don't challenge them enough through open-minded engagement with the bible, God and Jesus. Which is sad...The social and cultural context thingy is probably why I have not personally heard this stuff where I live.

lol yes. Pretty sure CreativeCait would agree with you here.

yes indeedy

Western civilization is based on four pillars - Ancient Greek philosophy, Judaism, Christianity and the Enlightenment.

Yes.

Ancient greek philosophy yes, ofcourse...but not ancient Greek Mythology, not in terms of praxis....in terms of research, teaching, literature, popular culture, yes, we still talk about Greek Mythology today.

I haven't been thinking about God very long, as I was a self-proclaimed 'atheist' for 20+ years, but do you believe that God gives us free will?

I do, and if so, that would mean that God gives us the ability to allow the 'Devil' to work in us and to inflict pain and suffering on ourselves and others. Therefore, I don't think we can attribute any suffering to God, unless it is suffering of the kind that is going to make us stronger or benefit us in the long run, or is His will in some way. I think some suffering, perhaps most, is from elsewhere. The Devil, for lack of a better term.

And that if we all lived as close to God's will as we could, merging it with our will, not against it, we would likely actually 'suffer' very little.

I think we can only attribute Love to God. Not suffering.

Yes, I believe God gave us free will. So I mostly agree with what you wrote above. I believe that suffering comes from the fact that we live in a 'fallen world' full of sin and yes, the Devil's hand in our lives, but also our own inherently sinful nature. I think if we live closer to God's will, the less self-destructive and sinful things we do and the less we suffer at the hands of our own making.

However, I think sometimes love and suffering from God can go hand in hand. This is the experience from my personal life. I believe you touched upon this when you said suffering that makes us stronger, benefits us, or is his will in some way. I would caution against heading toward the kind of thinking that Christianity is all about clouds and fairy floss and making ourselves feel better But it is definately about LOVE. It is hard to know where suffering comes from and what its purpose is. I think this is one of the greatest mysteries of life that are sometimes discovered years and decades later...sometimes not at all...but is all known to God who has a great purpose for our lives and this world. That's what I believe about it.

I was interpreting Twain. See my reply to Beefeater. I could write a lot on this subject ^^^, but this probably isn't the thread for it.

Wanna start another thread???

God, the Father, ordered Abraham to murder his son, Isaac, by eviseration.

And then God, the Father, went on to torture his own son, Jesus, to death.

The first act of cruelty was the beginning of the Abrahamic faiths; and the second act of cruelty was the beginning of christianity.

So in the beginning was cruelty.

[MENTION=15744]CreativeCait[/MENTION]

Hmmm....actually in most theology, it is more like, in the beginning was perfect love and the creation of life....then humans and the fallen angel (Satan) stuffed it up. What happened with Abraham came WAY down the track...And Jesus was tortured by humans, yes God allowed it, but it was at the hands of human cruelty. And God [Jesus] endured it out of the greatest love the world has ever seen.

 

[Coriolis]

But back to my point, many people confuse personal, political and social agendas with Christianity and don't challenge them enough through open-minded engagement with the bible, God and Jesus. Which is sad...The social and cultural context thingy is probably why I have not personally heard this stuff where I live.

It has been a long time since I considered myself Christian, but I still see merit in the question which was trendy for awhile: "What would Jesus do?"