Author Topic: Question for Theists  (Read 1749 times)

reddevil0126

  • Beginning to See the Wedge
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2012, 12:01:37 PM »
My opinion: The "god is wrathful" paradigm doesn't apply to Christians any longer.  That was an Old Testament concept of God, and Jesus began to move us away from that.  The trend in Christianity was supposed to be toward loving one another and conceiving of God as love.  But preachers and priests found that they could control their flock a little better by throwing in some wrath from the OT.  So the movement got corrupted. God appears to be willing to let the whole thing play out until it gets totally out of control, then Jesus returns to straighten it all out. That's my take on it, and it may be worth exactly what you paid for it. 

Amen.  I think Christianity would be more appealing if they completely toss away the god of the OT (whether they can do or not is beyond my knowledge).  Change in God's (?) mentality is so obvious: The same God who slaughtered the Its own creatures in sodom and gomorah, and by the Flood  saved the sinners by sacrificing Its own Son.  The God in the NT is NOT the God in the OT.  For Saul (Paul the apostle), probably he could not sever the Jewish tie completely.         

For me, transition to Christianity from Judaism is a natural one that comes along with the social changes.  But its net effect in individual level varies dramatically and we still see SOME (christian) individuals stuck with the concept of old God and thus displaying a bit questionable mentality.       

history_geek

  • A Frood Who Really Knows Where Their Towel Is
  • **
  • Posts: 490
  • Gender: Male
  • Nobody here but us
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2012, 03:50:54 PM »
Amen.  I think Christianity would be more appealing if they completely toss away the god of the OT (whether they can do or not is beyond my knowledge).  Change in God's (?) mentality is so obvious: The same God who slaughtered the Its own creatures in sodom and gomorah, and by the Flood  saved the sinners by sacrificing Its own Son.  The God in the NT is NOT the God in the OT.  For Saul (Paul the apostle), probably he could not sever the Jewish tie completely.         

For me, transition to Christianity from Judaism is a natural one that comes along with the social changes.  But its net effect in individual level varies dramatically and we still see SOME (christian) individuals stuck with the concept of old God and thus displaying a bit questionable mentality.       

I think we already had a bit of discussion why dropping the OT would not work ( http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=9286.30 "Bible study for atheists", page 3). Essentially the whole thing comes down to the fact that Jesse claims to be the Messiah, that was prophesied in the OT. Without the OT, there are no prophesies, without prophesies there is no Messiah. Case closed.

And getting rid of the "OT god" would not work either, as without that, there's no source for the prophesies nor would the "Father, Son and Holy Ghost"-marketing ploy work (doesn't matter if we're talking about the trinity, or any other combination of the supposed three or two parts of the Judeo-Christian "god"). Not to mention that the Ten commandments would go down the drain as well...
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C Clarke's Third Law
"Any sufficiently advanced alien is indistinguishable from a god."
 Pierre-Simon, marquis de Laplace:
Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypoth├ęse - I do not require that hypothesis[img]http://www.dakkadakka.com/s/i/a/4eef2cc3548cc9844a491b22ad384546.gif[/i

reddevil0126

  • Beginning to See the Wedge
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #17 on: March 29, 2012, 01:03:43 AM »
Thanks, Geek.

Very interesting discussion.  Atheist Bible Study Group!  Is this another mysterious way of God's Action and a proof for the existence of God? 

I understand your view and I agree. 

Since Paul was more influential than any other people in the NT, I think it may be interesting to understand his vision.  I am no expert in this and confess it's been a while since I read the NT.  But, my impression was that the idea of salvation by FAITH in the God Jesus alone is distant from Judaic view.  Also his role in Gentile Christians required the split from Jews, IMO.  I do not remember his mentioning of the image of the almighty warrior God described in early OTs written before the Babylonian Captivity.  I think this kind of Judaic God's image might have been more problematic to the Mediterraneans, especially when the God's temple was destroyed by the Romans.  The messiah in the OT turned out to be another failure as well.  The Judaic Messiah did not restore the Jerusalem even though he was killed by Jews.  Even though the early Christians hoped for the second coming of Messiah, like today's Christians, it could have been interpreted as a failure for many including gentiles if they heard about Jewish versions of the Messiah.  For this, he might have adopted salvation by FAITH in JESUS instead of restoration of Jehovah's Kingdom(?) and resurrection after death, different image of Messiah that is not depicted in the OT.  Totally individual level redemption.       

God of the OT might have been kept for authorization by the Apostles and other Judaic Christian authorities for political reasons.  This kind of attempt might have failed as discussed before.  But again, if his targets were gentiles did he need the OT's God other than political reasons?  Why did he need the failed God?  Another god, son of god, descendant of lesser god with better power,  isn't it the image of zeus on Mt Olympus?                   

                 

 

Too Few Lions

  • Living a Thoughtcrime
  • ****
  • Posts: 1005
  • utter poppycock
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #18 on: March 29, 2012, 03:15:12 AM »
Amen.  I think Christianity would be more appealing if they completely toss away the god of the OT (whether they can do or not is beyond my knowledge).  Change in God's (?) mentality is so obvious: The same God who slaughtered the Its own creatures in sodom and gomorah, and by the Flood  saved the sinners by sacrificing Its own Son.  The God in the NT is NOT the God in the OT.  For Saul (Paul the apostle), probably he could not sever the Jewish tie completely.              
Of course some early Christians did just that, both Marcion and the Gnostics believed that the god of the New Testament was an entirely different deity to Yahweh of the Jews. Unfortunately the church that was to become the orthodox / Catholic church outlawed their works and persecuted them out of existence.

Christianity would have been a far more pleasant and tolerant religion if they had have dropped the Old Testament, but it also probably never would have taken off. Antiquity and tradition were very important in the ancient world, and few people would have converted to following a totally new god. By keeping the Old Testament, early Christians gave their new faith a veneer of antiquity. They even went around claiming that their god and even Jesus (as it was claimed the OT was really all about him too) were far older than any of the Greek or Roman gods. Of course we now know that the Old Testament isn't anywhere near as old as those early Christians believed it to be.

I certainly imagine it might not have become the global religion it is today if early Christians had dropped the Old Testament, as it served as justification to outlaw and persecute out of existence all the other religions of the ancient world.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2012, 03:20:01 AM by Too Few Lions »

Amicale

  • Nerdy cat lady
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5484
  • Gender: Female
  • Nom nom nom
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2012, 09:14:44 PM »
Amen.  I think Christianity would be more appealing if they completely toss away the god of the OT (whether they can do or not is beyond my knowledge).  Change in God's (?) mentality is so obvious: The same God who slaughtered the Its own creatures in sodom and gomorah, and by the Flood  saved the sinners by sacrificing Its own Son.  The God in the NT is NOT the God in the OT.  For Saul (Paul the apostle), probably he could not sever the Jewish tie completely.              
Of course some early Christians did just that, both Marcion and the Gnostics believed that the god of the New Testament was an entirely different deity to Yahweh of the Jews. Unfortunately the church that was to become the orthodox / Catholic church outlawed their works and persecuted them out of existence.

Christianity would have been a far more pleasant and tolerant religion if they had have dropped the Old Testament, but it also probably never would have taken off. Antiquity and tradition were very important in the ancient world, and few people would have converted to following a totally new god. By keeping the Old Testament, early Christians gave their new faith a veneer of antiquity. They even went around claiming that their god and even Jesus (as it was claimed the OT was really all about him too) were far older than any of the Greek or Roman gods. Of course we now know that the Old Testament isn't anywhere near as old as those early Christians believed it to be.

I certainly imagine it might not have become the global religion it is today if early Christians had dropped the Old Testament, as it served as justification to outlaw and persecute out of existence all the other religions of the ancient world.

Ironically, if I'm honest with myself, chances are extraordinarily high I could have remained a Christian if historically, the Christian faith had always entirely divorced itself from the god of the old testament and had no affiliation with it. Reconciling how the heck I could in all good conscience follow the god of the OT was a HUGE stumbling block for me when I did believe -- and my conclusion was that if it was the same God, I couldn't follow it. Sadly, Christianity insists it IS the same god. So....


"Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb we are bound to others. By every crime and act of kindness we birth our future." - Cloud Atlas

"To live in the hearts of those we leave behind is to never die." -Carl Sagan

Asmodean

  • The Grumpy Lumpy
  • Administrator
  • Luxembourg Trembles!
  • *****
  • Posts: 14140
  • The GrayGod
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2012, 06:45:27 AM »
You know what would be nice as well? If they [The Christians, Muslims and Jews, primarilly] got rid of the need for constant groveling before their lord and masters, grew some fucking balls and told their imaginary friend and his petty little rules to fuck off every once in a while.
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

existentialcrisis

  • Beginning to See the Wedge
  • *
  • Posts: 33
  • Gender: Male
Re: Question for Theists
« Reply #21 on: December 08, 2016, 09:31:20 AM »

I have a question for theists.

It is a given that god is jealous,  violent in his wrath,  has decreed  that there shall be no other god(s) before Me,  has passed judgement that unbelievers should be killed, etc. etc.
 
Question:

Why doesn't the christian god kill Muhammad? He would like us to kill his followers. He will kill any number of non-believers, why not one pretender to the throne?
 
Increase your flock from 2.1 billion to 3.6 billion, 71 percent increase over night. What's wrong with this plan?

Theist perspective: Because it's the same reason God kills 5 million children a year before they reach the age of 6 through disease and war. Humanity is free to choose it's destiny due to free will. And who is to say Christians are right and Muslims are wrong? Muslims believe in Jesus and all prophets of the past anyway.

Atheist perspective: here is no God and all religions feed off unfalsifiable superstition. Adherents of religion also suffer from self-serving bias and use religion to remove those who think differently.

Pick one.

There are no facts, only interpretations. - Friedrich Nietzche

The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. - Benjamin Franklin.