Can anyone explain to me why christianity and the christian god make any sense?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

No one condemns indentured servant because that was entered into upon free-will of the servant.

No one is condemning the Butler occupation here. And indentured servility is quite different from the inhumanities of slavery.

Again, i ask: can you give me a reference, a source, a historian or scholar's analysis of Paul in order to determine his view on the above.?

Thanks.

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

No one condemns indentured servant because that was entered into upon free-will of the servant.

No one is condemning the Butler occupation here. And indentured servility is quite different from the inhumanities of slavery.

Again, i ask: can you give me a reference, a source, a historian or scholar's analysis of Paul in order to determine his view on the above.?

Thanks.

A "dulos" in the Greek is translated "slave", "bond-slave" in English. A "dulos" is an indentured servant, not someone who was captured and sold into slavery against their free-will. That's called a "manstealer" by Paul, and is condemned.

Originally posted by JesusisTruthh

I knew there was a big book that was sacred to people, so I gave it a shot and started to read it, called the bible. I honest to God never thought about hell even for a minute before that experience.

What about the other big books that are holy to people?

Originally posted by JesusisTruthh
what's the wager? I bet you're wrong. Although he's protestant and I'm Catholic so you might be correct.


peace.

$ .50

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Thanks for the etymology incite.

Could you provide a source, link, reference, or the context of which your quote was involved?

Sorry, i'm an inquizitive soul.

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Thanks for the etymology incite.

Could you provide a source, link, reference, or the context of which your quote was involved?

Sorry, i'm an inquizitive soul.

1 Timothy 1:10

"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;

KJB

for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

NIV

the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

ESV

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Thanks for the etymology incite.

Could you provide a source, link, reference, or the context of which your quote was involved?

Sorry, i'm an inquizitive soul.

1 Timothy 1:10

"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;

KJB

for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

NIV

the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

ESV

I wanted a link so i could follow it up; i did my own investigation of multiple translations:-

1 Timothy 1:10

New International Version (©1984)
for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers--and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

This translation from 1984 seems to translate the texts with "slave trader" in.

New Living Translation (©2007)
The law is for people who are sexually immoral, or who practice homosexuality, or are slave traders, liars, promise breakers, or who do anything else that contradicts the wholesome teaching

This also includes slave traders and adds a few more words to it; where are they getting all these "additives" from?

English Standard Version (©2001)
the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine

This translation doesn't mention anything about slave tradiing.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

Nor does this one.

International Standard Version (©2008)
for those involved in sexual immorality, for homosexuals, for kidnappers, for liars, for false witnesses, and for whatever else goes against the healthy teaching

Nor does this.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Laws are intended for people involved in sexual sins, for homosexuals, for kidnappers, for liars, for those who lie when they take an oath, and for whatever else is against accurate teachings.

It always seems to include "whatever else is against accurate teaching" but no other teaching explicitly condemns slavery, or the slave-trade.

King James Bible
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;

No mention in the King James Bible or (KJB)

American King James Version
For fornicators, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for enslavers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

American version does though....

bible.cc...

It seems translation differs from version to version, it seems the translation is a little "sketchy".

"Duolos" in the New Testament seems to be widely debated between biblical scholars, and historians alike. Most would agree, as the sources demonstrate; translation seems to differ depending on which scholar did the translation:-

www.puritanboard.com...
biblenotes.homestead.com...

Consider, then, the relationship between master and slave. The apostles had a good reason to use the word that means "slave" (doulos). They wanted us to understand that in our relationship with God we not only experience the joys of freedom as His children but also the serious requirement to obey as His slaves.

www.biblestudytools.com...

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Hydroman

 

Short answer: Upbringing and a willingness to believe coupled with the peculiarities of human psychology lend themselves to believing in incredibly fantastic tales, often to the point of accepting them as reality.

Really short answer: Neither makes sense.

Atheism makes no sense.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Atheism makes no sense?

Atheism is a lack of belief in in positive theory (there exists a deity); a first cause is still an assumption; and assumption that many skeptics are not willing to make; but are more than willing to entertain as a possibility - That's being open-minded - To say that "doesn't make sense" is to be extremely narrow minded:-

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Why are the skeptics who disbelief the positive claim not making sense? Can you expand your argument when you state "Atheism" does not make sense. Remember agnosticism isn't a belief.

Atheism isn't a positive claim, many atheists form their skeptic doubt based on agnosticism. We do not know; the only people who concede are those who say they do know. (whether a first cause is ultimately true or not)

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare

"Duolos" in the New Testament seems to be widely debated between biblical scholars, and historians alike. Most would agree, as the sources demonstrate; translation seems to differ depending on which scholar did the translation:-

Which bears the question if those people who translate the NT actually have knowledge of Greek. To be precise: "Doulos" means servant. "Sklavos" means slave.

Two different words with two different meanings.

Hope that helps

Peace

reply to post by Seed76

a slave, bondman, man of servile condition
a slave
metaph., one who gives himself up to another's will those whose service is used by Christ in extending and advancing his cause among men
devoted to another to the disregard of one's own interests
a servant, attendant

www.searchgodsword.org...

Greek word doulos, meaning bond slave, someone born into slavery

Consider, then, the relationship between master and slave. The apostles had a good reason to use the word that means "slave" (doulos). They wanted us to understand that in our relationship with God we not only experience the joys of freedom as His children but also the serious requirement to obey as His slaves.

www.bibletools.org...

en.wiktionary.org...
biblenotes.homestead.com...

Thanks for the extra definition. I think the implication from the Apostles is that you should be a slave to "GOD" first, the etymology or meaning being perfect to describe the relatioship between God and his creations; a "bondman" a "servant". Obviously, the contention being that people should willingly be a slave to of God, and without knowledge or any knowledge of reason; who wouldn't be scared into submission? It's a perfect vice really. It's quite easy to understand these are the words of man, not a God.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Atheism makes no sense.
If non-locality and evolutionary theory must be accepted as facts, then how are we, the human being, as the furthermost creative expression or leading shoot of evolution's pursuit of and persistent drive towards ever higher (more complex) impressions and levels of consciousness (yes even a single cell could be thought of as an evolutionary expression of a rise towards consciousness) - how are we to find our true nature, our center, our source, and most importantly, our destiny, if we must begin with the fundamental presupposition that any such discovery cannot include a co-creative relationship, in mutuality, with God or the Godhead or a Supreme Being?

Why does it have to include God?

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
In other words, how are we to find God in eternity, as reflected through the eternally unfolding (evolving) present moment of the story of Life as intended by design (rise of consciousness) from "before the very foundations of the world" (in eternity), if we must BEGIN with the presumption that since no God exists "union" or communion with said God is never possible?

Why do you suggest we have to find God in eternity? Surely if this being were real, he would find all of us, and we would know without a doubt it was him/her/it.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Why must we accept a purely materialist worldview and be left alone and set adrift in a senseless and meaningless absurdity, orphaned from our center and source and from a first/last cause, separated, not only from the phenomenal world at large, but also from our fellow man (and even from ourselves, from our true nature) - as a mere "thing" or at best an animal (intermediate phylos) who's sense of personality and of freedom is nothing but an illusion. Are we nothing but skin and bones, a machine, nothing more?

Sorry to hear you think your life is meaningless if gods do not exist. What about all other creatures on this planet? Do they get to know this god and live with him for all eternity? If not, are their lives meaningless?

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Why deny a heritage that includes the whole of all creation and an inheritance, in the fullness of time and history, perhaps of even greater value (transcendant)?

Why should we so belittle that which we truly are? I don't get it..

Again, sorry to hear you think we live meaningless lives without a god. Btw, what belief system do you belong to? Do Hindus, who believe in gods, get to enjoy this eternity with you? Do Muslims? Do christians? Do mormons? Jehovah Witnesses? I don't get why a god who wants us to live with him forever wouldn't reveal himself to each individual person, as he would know how to do it so that we could all believe and be on the same page.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Of course I can understand why some might wish to try to grind the "no God" axe for reasons of anti-religious sentiment, but maybe, in the final analysis and in the grand scheme of things, mankind is in truth not a mere "thing", but instead a process, intrinsic to the very process of evolution, not just on earth, but Cosmologically and therefore even Universally (right across the entire breadth and depth of all being and becoming) - hurtling at last headlong into God-conscious realization and awareness (rediscovering a fundamental relationship with the creative source of all). Perhaps in truth, man contains the universe, perched as he is at the apex of an eternal creative evolutionary process (fresh, most recent ie: the last shall be first and the first, last) and that in truth, the invisible or the interior of reality and existence, the inner being, exceeds by many many orders of magnitude, the first impressioned outer, materialist reality of our apparent subjective experience.

*stares blankly into space

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Perhaps there really is much MUCH more going on, right before our eyes, than ordinarily or traditionally meets the eye at first glance and that "God" isn't the "God of the gaps" but God of the entire domain of consciousness already always present awaiting man as the mirror image of God's reflection as the creative intent (beginning as always with the end in mind), in mutual discovery, and all manner of shared, intimate, co-creative, participatory fun and enjoyment at ALL levels - the kingdom of heaven if you will, shared in koinonia.

And maybe OUR "goal" if we are to have one, is to become more fully and authentically self expressed, as people, so that in being more fully human we might also radiate ever moreso our true nature as divine, sacred beings, "made" or created and included in eternity, to contain nothing less than the same spirit of the universe already intrinsic to all life and already fully informed through an eternal, non-local, cosmic evolutionary process (see Akashic Field).

Why believe any of that mumbo jumbo if there is no evidence for it? Why not just make up anything that sounds nice and exciting to you and believe it? I want to believe less false things as possible and most true things as possible, I don't know about you.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Why grind an axe which reduces the human being to a thing, and life itself to a meaningless absurdity without purpose or direction, and without an object of desire to drive our pursuit of continued advancement and evolutionary growth which, for the human being will occurs as much in the realm of the psyche ie: our spiritual nature, as if will in our physical morphology?

"God made our spirit with wings to fly in the spacious firmament of love and freedom. How pitiful it would be then, if we were to lop off our wings by our own hand, and suffer ourselves to crawl like vermine upon the earth!"

Again, sorry you feel that if there are no gods that life is meaningless. We don't all share that view.

Atheism makes perfect sense, imo. Do you believe that every god ever mentioned has existed or does exist? If not, why not? If so, are you crazy? Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods, mainly due to lack of evidence.

Originally posted by Hydroman
From my understanding of christianity, god existed before anything else. Before he spoke creation into existence, there was no life as we know it, no earth, no people, no reason for atonement.

From what I've understood as a former christian, the biblical god is all-knowing and all-powerful. He exists outside of space and time, somehow. Am I right about that so far?

So, before he created anything, he already knew what was going to happen. If he didn't, he wouldn't be all-knowing. This means that before he spoke he knew that 1/3 of the angels that he was about to create would rebel. He also knew that one of them, Satan, would tempt his first human creations, and they would fall also. Then, he knew he would have to devise a way to forgive them, and that would be through blood sacrifice (when at this time, blood didn't even exist). He also knew that he would be at one point happy with his creation, and then later saddened by it and wish he hadn't done it. He also knew that he was going to have to flood the entire earth, but save 8 people and a bunch of animals.

Ultimately, he knew that because he devised a way for man to be forgiven and reconciled to him that he was going to have to become one of us and die so that he could reconcile us to himself because of this rule he made up, but that there would be many, many, many more who wouldn't believe this or accept it and he was going to have to torture them forever in fire, along with the fallen angels because there is apparently no other way around it.

So here he is, wherever he was...doing whatever he did before he created anything, he then said, "Let there be light".

How does any of this make any sense?

Beloved Hydroman, none of it makes any sense when you look at it from an ignorant stand point, sinse the rulers of the world, religiosity, confounded truth: I am not pointing a finger at you specifically as ignorant, but the world as a whole is wallowing in ignorance. It is easy to feel the way you do about that which you refer to as God, but you are accusing the wrong being. To understand the true culprit, it is necessary to understand that which is undefilled: not the cannonical Bible, which Christianity has polluted to justify itself, but that which is being unveiled on the thread "Revelations: The secret of life as revealed to John by the Only-Begotten Light".

It will amaze you when you find out how the rebelious ones and evil came about, who created them, and why the world is what it is today; as it states, "Let him that is seeking truth keep seeking until he finds it; and when he finds it, he will be troubled, he will become amazed!" You will also become amazed at how religion came to be and the power that drives it up to this day; and why you should seperate yourself from religion.

Peace be with you Hydroman!!!

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare

Thanks for the extra definition. I think the implication from the Apostles is that you should be a slave to "GOD" first, the etymology or meaning being perfect to describe the relatioship between God and his creations; a "bondman" a "servant".

You are welcome. In my opinion it´s more in a line of "Servant to God" and not "Slave to God". A servant has rights, while a slave have none.

Obviously, the contention being that people should willingly be a slave to of God, and without knowledge or any knowledge of reason; who wouldn't be scared into submission? It's a perfect vice really. It's quite easy to understand these are the words of man, not a God.

Well, the Bible was written by man, but to answer your question the contention as you mentioned is not to be a "Slave" to God but a "Servant" to God. To make it plainly is more like the relationship of an "Employer" and "Employee"

Edit to Add:" Welcome to ATS. I hope you will enjoy your stay here"

Peace

reply to post by Seed76

A servant has rights, while a slave have none.

Your forgetting that you don't have the right object to being a slave (or servant) to God for fear of being judged to be sub-par, or evil, or unholy, or even for fear of social pressure from fellow believers.

Priests did preach hellfire to men, women and children; they did preach purgotory for unbaptised babies; these are the vices they used to gain their following.

Well, the Bible was written by man, but to answer your question the contention as you mentioned is not to be a "Slave" to God but a "Servant" to God. To make it plainly is more like the relationship of an "Employer" and "Employee"

I would never protest someones freedom to believe whatever they want. But this idea sounds like a celestial version of North Korea; with a master or dictator at the top of this absolute order; I'm certainly comforted by the fact we live in an enlightened age whereby freedom of speech is proving to be the cornerstone of liberty.

I'm not protesting freedom of belief, that must remain protected to ensure our freedoms.

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare

Your forgetting that you don't have the right object to being a slave (or servant) to God for fear of being judged to be sub-par, or evil, or unholy, or even for fear of social pressure from fellow believers.

It´s your opinion and i will respect it, but please keep prejudice out of it.

Priests did preach hellfire to men, women and children; they did preach purgotory for unbaptised babies; these are the vices they used to gain their following.

To be honest, there are more effective vices to gain followers than preaching.

But this idea sounds like a celestial version of North Korea; with a master or dictator at the top of this absolute order;

It´s your opinion and i respect that.

I'm certainly comforted by the fact we live in an enlightened age whereby freedom of speech is proving to be the cornerstone of liberty.

I would also add to freedom of speech also the usage of "Brain". It seems now days, people forget to use it.

I'm not protesting freedom of belief, that must remain protected to ensure our freedoms.

Yes, everyone should believe in what he/she wants to believe.

Anyway, i think we are of topic.


Peace

Originally posted by Olise
Beloved Hydroman, none of it makes any sense when you look at it from an ignorant stand point, sinse the rulers of the world, religiosity, confounded truth: I am not pointing a finger at you specifically as ignorant, but the world as a whole is wallowing in ignorance. It is easy to feel the way you do about that which you refer to as God, but you are accusing the wrong being. To understand the true culprit, it is necessary to understand that which is undefilled: not the cannonical Bible, which Christianity has polluted to justify itself, but that which is being unveiled on the thread "Revelations: The secret of life as revealed to John by the Only-Begotten Light".

I suppose you have obtained the truth? How did you come to obtain it?

Originally posted by Olise
It will amaze you when you find out how the rebelious ones and evil came about, who created them, and why the world is what it is today; as it states, "Let him that is seeking truth keep seeking until he finds it; and when he finds it, he will be troubled, he will become amazed!" You will also become amazed at how religion came to be and the power that drives it up to this day; and why you should seperate yourself from religion.
Peace be with you Hydroman!!!

Did it not come about by those who did not understand the natural world, so they made up stories and myths to help them explain what they thought was going on?

Originally posted by Seed76
Anyway, i think we are of topic.
Peace

It is my thread and I enjoy the conversation, so if the mods don't care I don't either.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by bdb818888
reply to post by madnessinmysoul Life would be pointless if there is no afterlife , but that's just my opinion.

 

Do insects have an afterlife? Do dogs? Sharks? Apes? Does Bacteria? If not, then their lives are pointless. Or maybe we exist here for a different reason and we are to give our lives meaning ourselves?

I believe every living thing has a life essence , an all-spark , a soul. Everything is connected , we are all one with God. Do I believe there is a Heaven and a Hell ? Yes , Hitler isn't going to the same place as mother Teresa . I personally think Hell is temporary, a place where you will experience all the pain an suffering you caused others in your lifetime, not the hellfire brimstone demon poking you in the butt with a pitchfork type Hell ,but a learning experience. Heaven is love ,peace, and forgivness .I think we all end up in God's kingdom in the end.

Originally posted by bdb818888
I believe every living thing has a life essence , an all-spark , a soul. Everything is connected , we are all one with God.

Why do you believe this?

Originally posted by bdb818888
Do I believe there is a Heaven and a Hell ? Yes , Hitler isn't going to the same place as mother Teresa . I personally think Hell is temporary, a place where you will experience all the pain an suffering you caused others in your lifetime, not the hellfire brimstone demon poking you in the butt with a pitchfork type Hell ,but a learning experience. Heaven is love ,peace, and forgivness .I think we all end up in God's kingdom in the end.

So Hitler will ultimately end up in God's kingdom with Mother Teresa? And where do you get this info?

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by bdb818888
I believe every living thing has a life essence , an all-spark , a soul. Everything is connected , we are all one with God.

Why do you believe this?

Originally posted by bdb818888
Do I believe there is a Heaven and a Hell ? Yes , Hitler isn't going to the same place as mother Teresa . I personally think Hell is temporary, a place where you will experience all the pain an suffering you caused others in your lifetime, not the hellfire brimstone demon poking you in the butt with a pitchfork type Hell ,but a learning experience. Heaven is love ,peace, and forgivness .I think we all end up in God's kingdom in the end.

So Hitler will ultimately end up in God's kingdom with Mother Teresa? And where do you get this info?

It's just my personal belief. I also believe that good and evil cannot exist without the other , how would you know love without hate , happiness without sadness , joy without fear , evil is necessary, and life is a learning process we all must go through.