Posts by PSacramento

10

Interesting query and reply about THE CROSS on Bart Ehrman's blog

by Terry in

kleenmaint july 5, 2014. dear bart:.

i couldnt find a topic on josephus so i hope you see my question.

in your book did jesus exist on page 59 you quote (antiquities 18.3.3).. both this quotation and the more conservative version that seemed more plausible as his original writing have one very fundamental flaw that you didnt mention.

PSacramento

Would that be a sTAUros then?

Splash

Yes.

50

Question for the nonbelievers and atheists

by nykid in

what specifically made you stop believing in god and the bible?

was it a steady road of doubts or it was reading one book or one major event that made you realize the bible was not what it's claimed to be?.

.

PSacramento

I have watched a debate he had with a believer of the Bible, his arguments were weak IMO. Have you any specific examples that would give me a better perspective?

Kate xx

Sure, I mean a quick google finds a few, but here is a one in regard sto Bart's book, "How Jesus became God".

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2014/05/29/how-jesus-became-god-per-ehrman/

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

It is obvious I have hit a nerve. I was projecting the consequences of your statements (God's non-interference for instance) and if that doesn't match your personal beliefs, then there's come dissonance in there somewhere.

No, not really, no dissonance at all, I simply accept that there are things that happen that God does nothing about that I would LIKE him to do something about, even if I understand why He doesn't.

14

Numbers 5:11-31. How does the society make application of this ridiculous scripture?

by stuckinarut2 in

if you haven't read it yet, please do so.

numbers 5:11-31. this is a scripture that is as stupid as the "medieval witch trials"!.

it is also so degrading to women, and shows how the bible views them as mere property that can be treated as just possessions.. i would love to see how the wt tries to use this passage and make a modern day twist (as they try to do with so many other passages!).

PSacramento

First off, there is no rape here, it is clear that it is about infedeility.

This was an "intimidation" law, used in many "superstitious societies".

People were intimidated into telling the truth because they feared that some deity would punish them.

A priest would go through a ritual and the guilty party would be intimidated into confessing.

Now, it MAY be quite possible that God would intervene BUT it is more than likely (since there is no record of God every doing that) this was stricly intimidation to get the truth and here is the bets example of that:

23 ‘The priest shall then write these curses on a scroll, and he shall wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings a curse, so that the water which brings a curse will go into her and causebitterness. 25 The priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman’s hand, and he shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar; 26 and the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering as its memorial offering and offer it up in smoke on the altar, and afterward he shall make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her andcause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive children.

Note the ritual and the intimidation factor of what COULD happen to her if she was lying.

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

Psac,

More data which refutes your compassion theory (the study doesn't suggest religious people aren't generous, just that their motivations are more likely due to a sense of responsibility rather than human compassion)

My "compassion theory" as you put it, means that suffering is what develops compassion, it has ZERO to do with religion at all.

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

About "natural disasters are part of nature", which I agree. Your particular belief system demands however, that this is a God-created nature. A perfect God creating a flawed nature that sometimes comes crashing down on humanity with devastating effect. You absolve God from this flaw. Cofty doesn't.

You speak about my beliefs and even though I orginally said that the problem of suffering is THE biggets issue I have in Christianity, say that I absolve God from this problem, this flaw in nature, the flaw that nature is imperfect, that the world that God created is imperfect and could have been created far better.

I don't absolve God of his responsibility in creating this world, far from it (even though I am a evolutionary thiest), I may accept that the world is the way it is because it can be no other way AND have us here as were are right now, BUT I don't h ave to like it ( and I don't).

I do accept that God has His reason and no, they are not a mystery and YES we can judge God ( I know I do).

I accept that humans are not immortal and they die, that the universe, thei world IS the way its and that humans, coming later, have to adapt and survive and that this world is not suppose to change and that God makes it clear that it won't change ( we will eventually to the point that the way the world is won't matter as much).

I think it is horrifc that people have to die, the number is not relevant to me because even ONE death is one too many BUT we DO DIE, we do suffer and we have evolved that way, all life is MORTAL and God has made no promises for THIS life in THIS state untill the END comes.

I don't like it anymore than you do, perhaps hate it even more BUT I have hope in Christ and see in what He has done, His self-sacrfice for Us, as soemthing I deem worthy of worship. BUT that is MY view, you have to choose yours.

You don't think God worthy or even a very good God ( I know you don't think he exists) because the world He created is not a very good one, that it could have been made different and you MAY be right ( though you have no proof of that, that human life as it is could have come to be in a different world as this is), you may be right that there is no excuse for creating a world full of pain and suffering with no good reason that you cna accept.

I understand that completly and I am not asking to to agree with my POV.

As for not contributing to the topic, well, I did my best and I apologise for wasting anyones time.

That said, I thank the people that PM'd me for sharing my view and that agreed with me ( to whatever degree that they agreed).

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

The existence of God is not proven by the existence of compassion, is it? Also, suffering and death is a natural occurence you said earlier, Psac. (Although the bible says it is the punishment /consequence of sin--See Genesis and Romans.

How do you think that all this proves anything about God's love?

God's love is shown in His self-sacrfice for Us.

Compassion does NOT proove the existence of God and yes, death is natural ( to what degree suffering is natural is still debatable in regards to all animals).

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

Well, if you are trying to find purpose in a quarter million deaths, it has to be a pretty compelling one. Indeed I am trying to use a ruler, the ruler of logic. I have demonstrated that using suffering to increase compassion is unreliable and illogical. This makes the tsunami deaths purposeless.

Compelling to who?

I don't think that I mentioned or agreed that the 250K dead because of the Tsunami had a purpose. Just like the over 50 million killed by the Spanish influence has a purpose.

The view that God USES suffering to develop the triat of compassion does NOT equal that SPECIFIC deaths have a purpose ( though one can argue that death in of itself has purpose).

I am not trying to state that the people killed in the tsunami were killed to serve a higher purpose since from the start I mentioned that naturla disaters are a part of nature, of this world we live in and death from them will always happen.

The bible itself makes no mention that God CAN or DOES divert natural disaters to save lives, thoug it does mention that there will be a time that death will not be a factor.

This all goes back to what I mentioned earlier in regards to seeing what type of God is demonstrated in Jesus's life, death and resurrection and deciding IF that is a God you deem worthy of worship.

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

PSacramento, you have thoroughly and repeatedly clung to the notion that suffering is required for compassion, largely based on the definition of the word "compassion". I've recently read Pinker's book "The Better Angels of our Nature..." who convincingly demonstrates a different avenue for compassion to develop, which I won't go in to here.

I have not read that book, so I can't comment on that, but just from reading the wiki page it seems some have issues with his conclusions (Such as John Gray).

I think I can pretty well demonstrate that increased suffering does not result in a commensurate increase in compassion. You have also admitted that not every person responds to suffering by becoming more compassionate. So there is no purpose in allowing or increasing suffering in order to create more compassionate human beings.

That is a matter of opinion of course, since you are assuming some sort of "ruler" to measure suffering -to- comapssion ratio.

That people have the choice to due with ANY trait what they will doesn't seem to invalidate a trait or how that trait may be developed.

The tsunami deaths are therefore purposeless.

Having to repeat myself is a little too much like domestic life, when a partner knows when they have not been heard. It is mildly offensive to have to repeat ourselves. It is much more gratifying to know that what we care about, others do too, and that our opinion has some sort of weight.

To state that any death is purposeless is a matter of opinion.

I agree, it is midly offense to have to repeat ourselves, as it is offensive to be insulted and even called names when expressing a view or an opinion in a which I have not insulted anyone at all in this thread.

If I didn't car about your view I would not have been discussing this with you NOR would I have asked for clarification when I was not understanding your viewpoint.

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

PSacramento

You said the good was the development of compassion. Compassion, by your own definition DOESN'T require suffering. The suffering can ALSO create incompassion.

By my defintion, it does indeed require suffering, where did you get the idea it didn't?

The word itself means just that.

If your point is how this defintion is worded in particular:

compassion

/ kəmˈpæʃən / noun
1. a feeling of distress and pity for the suffering or misfortune of another, often including the desire to alleviate it .

I think you are missing the fact that the way this is worded still emphasies the FEELING to ALLEVIATE it ( suffering associated with misfortune).