[Aardwolf]

Ok, this is an argument that's been brought up so many places elsewhere, but has always been off-topic. So I'm gonna give it its own dedicated topic.



Basically, the argument usually goes something like this:

The events described in the Bible directly conflict with scientific evidence!

Only fundies interpret the Bible as literal truth!

...and from there it usually devolves into name-calling and accusations of hypocrisy.



So my question is this: if theists¹ don't agree on the Bible² as being literally true, what do they agree on? That the Bible² is good? That Jesus³ was a nice guy and a good role model? That even though the theists¹ can't agree what God⁴ wants of humanity, and can't agree on what God⁴ has done or is capable of doing, that God⁴ exists, and is (optionally) benevolent?

Pardon my cynicism, but that seems downright silly.




¹Christians or other theists, if there are other religions which do basically the same thing
²Bible or other applicable sacred texts
³Jesus or another applicable prophet or major religious figure
⁴God or other applicable deities

[Klaustrophobia]

do we HAVE to do this?

[Aardwolf]

do we HAVE to do this?

Yes. It would be off-topic anywhere else.

Edit: but if you want to not be a part of the discussion, I reckon that would be acceptable.

[Scotty]

If it keeps it to this thread and doesn't jack eight or ten more, then yes.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if every theist had a differing interpretation of some kind.  Because, let's face it, the Bible (or other sacred texts), true or not, are literature.  Literature cannot be exactly defined except by its authors, and even then people will disagree on what the author intended.

That said, I think that many (if not most) Christians would agree that the Bible is "The Good Book," that God exists in some form or another, and that he is arguably benevolent (at least, since Christ).

You'd be hard pressed to get any decently large group of Christians to agree on anything but that.

[el_magnifico]

Hmmm... basically, my point is, believe in whatever you want, and let others believe in whatever they want, as long as no rights are violated. You can think whatever you want, I'm not going to judge you, and maybe you're right. But that doesn't gives you the right to prejudge, discriminate or harass others based on their beliefs.

Seriously, are the concepts of tolerance and respect so hard to understand? And I'm asking that to everyone. Yes, even to people of my own religion.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if every theist had a differing interpretation of some kind.  Because, let's face it, the Bible (or other sacred texts), true or not, are literature.  Literature cannot be exactly defined except by its authors, and even then people will disagree on what the author intended.

That said, I think that many (if not most) Christians would agree that the Bible is "The Good Book," that God exists in some form or another, and that he is arguably benevolent (at least, since Christ).

You'd be hard pressed to get any decently large group of Christians to agree on anything but that.

Good one.

[iamzack]

Religions are more alike than different, but they vary so much there's no point in believing in any of them. Chances are, if there is one correct religion, NOBODY has it and we're all ****ed.

[redsniper]

I'm getting so damn tired of footnotes in forum posts.

[General Battuta]

Ok, this is an argument that's been brought up so many places elsewhere, but has always been off-topic. So I'm gonna give it its own dedicated topic.



Basically, the argument usually goes something like this:

The events described in the Bible directly conflict with scientific evidence!

Only fundies interpret the Bible as literal truth!

...and from there it usually devolves into name-calling and accusations of hypocrisy.



So my question is this: if theists¹ don't agree on the Bible² as being literally true, what do they agree on? That the Bible² is good? That Jesus³ was a nice guy and a good role model? That even though the theists¹ can't agree what God⁴ wants of humanity, and can't agree on what God⁴ has done or is capable of doing, that God⁴ exists, and is (optionally) benevolent?

Pardon my cynicism, but that seems downright silly.




¹Christians or other theists, if there are other religions which do basically the same thing
²Bible or other applicable sacred texts
³Jesus or another applicable prophet or major religious figure
⁴God or other applicable deities

Could we ditch the footnotes, please? They render the post less comprehensible by destroying reader's trance.

[el_magnifico]

Religions are more alike than different,

Yes, religions have a lot in common. Some people theorize they could even be the same truth revealed in different ways or in different parts. Some religions even share the same god, but interpret him in different ways.

but they vary so much there's no point in believing in any of them. Chances are, if there is one correct religion, NOBODY has it and we're all ****ed.

Bear in mind that, if I want to do something that you think is pointless, it's my decision. I believe smoking is pointless, but I don't go around insulting people who smoke and trying to outlaw it. What's more, the most important and beloved person in my life, a woman who I sincerely and profoundly admire, smokes. And, in an incredible coincidence, she's an atheist too.

[General Battuta]

I think we need to respect other people's decisions about their own personal beliefs.

It's only when those beliefs lead them to restrict the freedoms of others that they open themselves to criticism. And that's not a generalization anybody can make about all Christians.

[el_magnifico]

I think we need to respect other people's decisions about their own personal beliefs.

It's only when those beliefs lead them to restrict the freedoms of others that they open themselves for criticisms. And that's not a generalization anybody can make about all Christians.

Do we need to say anything else?

[iamzack]

but they vary so much there's no point in believing in any of them. Chances are, if there is one correct religion, NOBODY has it and we're all ****ed.

Bear in mind that, if I want to do something that you think is pointless, it's my decision. I believe smoking is pointless, but I don't go around insulting people who smoke and trying to outlaw it. What's more, the most important and beloved person in my life, a woman who I sincerely and profoundly admire, smokes. And, in an incredible coincidence, she's an atheist too.

I've already said I believe pointless **** that doesn't make any sense. What pisses me off is when people claim their beliefs make sense.

Also, smoking is a good analogy for most religious people. Being around them just might kill you.

[Aardwolf]

But how can you claim it's even the same God, without abstracting the concept of God so much that it becomes intangible and impotent?

@General Battuta: but I got the idea from you!

[mxlm]

That said, I think that many (if not most) Christians would agree that the Bible is "The Good Book," that God exists in some form or another, and that he is arguably benevolent (at least, since Christ).

I wonder how many atheists would call God an asshole.

I would, certainly.

[el_magnifico]

Don't feed him. He's just a troll felling frustrated that this post is evolving in a civilized way so far.

I'll answer your posts tomorrow. It's late in the night and I have to wake up early in the morning.

Have a nice day.

[karajorma]

Actually you only need to read the book of Job to be pretty certain he is. We are talking about the deity who allowed Satan to do all kinds of horrific things to Job just to win a bet and then makes up the death of his children by letting him have prettier ones.

Seriously? 

If a doctor killed your kid and then said "Don't worry, I let him die cause I knew I could genetically engineer a better one for you" wouldn't you consider him a arsehole?

[S-99]

Y yes, i believe we've all been in breeding non stop since day 6.

[el_magnifico]

Actually you only need to read the book of Job to be pretty certain he is. We are talking about the deity who allowed Satan to do all kinds of horrific things to Job just to win a bet and then makes up the death of his children by letting him have prettier ones.

Seriously? 

If a doctor killed your kid and then said "Don't worry, I let him die cause I knew I could genetically engineer a better one for you" wouldn't you consider him a arsehole?

Completely unrelated. iamzack has said worse things so far. But jumping inside a thread and insulting/provocating just for the sake of it is trolling, and you know it.
You have expressed the same opinion, but yours wasn't a deliberate provocation, but a respectable opinion. You can see the difference yourself, don't make me explain it.

Seriously though, I have to go to sleep.

[Aardwolf]

Seriously though, I have to go to sleep.

SO DO IT ALREADY.

[mxlm]

r. But jumping inside a thread and insulting/provocating just for the sake of it is trolling, and you know it.
You have expressed the same opinion, but yours wasn't a deliberate provocation, but a respectable opinion.

Ah, so calling god a bastard is cool, but asshole is total troll bait.

Well, good to know.

Also, insulting? Yeah, no, that's not the same as being provocative, and you know.