The Gospel according to Judas

[troutman]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Science believed the earth was the centre of the universe then changed it's mind, do you stop believing in Science when they modify long held beliefs?

The difference between science and religion:

In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time someting like that happened in politics or religion.
-- Carl Sagan

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by troutman

The difference between science and religion:

In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time someting like that happened in politics or religion.
-- Carl Sagan

It may not be the same kind of change to which Sagan was referring, but the history of the Jewish and Christian religions demonstrate a number of changes in theology.
• In the sixth century B.C.E., the book of Deuteronomy was written as a theological explanation for Israel's history, and it formed the foundation for the future of Jewish religious expression. It could be argued that the appearance of the book of Deuteronomy marked the single biggest religious "policy shift" in history.
• The emergence of the doctrine of the trinity and of the incarnation were almost certainly developments which were not officially part of the original teachings of the apostles and the early church.
• The endorsement of Scriptural authority by Martin Luther, "sola scriptura" was a significant change, which made possible the Protestant Reformation (and by extension, the Enlightenment and the birth of Science!).
• The develoment in the mid nineteenth century of the documentary hypothesis changed modern christian perceptions of the Bible, and led to the emergence of neo-orthodoxy, biblical theology, and even fundamentalism and creationism.

Changes do occur (scholarly opinion about the location and function of divine authority and scripture are currently undergoing signigicant alteration); but such changes are never universally accepted, nor tangibly applied.

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by Cheese

LOL..if only there was a proof of a proof..you know..the proof!

The same could be said about your religion, Cheese....

[RougeUnderoos]

Uh oh.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12152740/

[Looger]

NEWS FLASH

the entire non-christian world believes in a totally different historical record than the christian world, evidence is turned up in the mid-east - mostly in israel - that flies in the face of what the catholic church claims to be true, like all of the time.

i'm not talking earth-born-in-seven-days stuff but the life and times of jesus, the essenes / qumranians (sp?), etc.

emperor constantine pulled at least two books from the bible, that haven't made it back (for us), any historical investigation into this stuff without rose-coloured-dogmatic glasses reveals a whole wealth of information.

say what you want aboot the people of the mideast but while constant religious strife might be rampant from 1897 - today, the history previous to that is quite different, and little bits of this or that religion or sect survive to today, including in iraq what can be described as people carrying the torch from original christianity.

or in ireland, the celtic christian church, before st. patrick, before catholicism wiped everything else out, or adapted 'pagan' rituals to its own brand of christianity to better spread (ie. christmas from winter solstice-eat-people-under-the-tree-every-year)

gnostic christianity, kind of a catchall term, stems from pre-catholic christianity, just never had the backing of the roman empire, yet survives in little pockets all over the mideast where religious tolerance (with occasional exploitation) has been the general rule over the last 1500 years, unlike western europe, where until relatively recently (historically) it was "wit' us or agan' us"

these little nuggets come up all the time and are big news in say, jerusalem, but rarely heard of here.

millions of books, jeez, the bible the president swears in on has some of the missing books, none of this stuff is 'hidden' or 'secret', it is all out there for anyone interested. pull back the saran wrap on history!

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Uh oh.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12152740/

Please elaborate by what you mean... "uh oh".... doesn't say a whole lot...

If you read the title of the article, you might think that, "uh oh"... read the rest of the article, the scientists have said essentially nothing....

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by HockeyPuck

Please elaborate by what you mean... "uh oh".... doesn't say a whole lot...

If you read the title of the article, you might think that, "uh oh"... read the rest of the article, the scientists have said essentially nothing....

Geez you take this stuff pretty seriously. Relax, it's just a joke.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by HockeyPuck

The same could be said about your religion, Cheese....

I dont have a religion HP.

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Geez you take this stuff pretty seriously. Relax, it's just a joke.

Oops sorry man... Didn't think you were being sarcastic...

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by Cheese

I dont have a religion HP.

Sure you do... Atheism is just as much a religion as Islam, Buddism, and Christianity...

These religions believe there is a God or gods, etc., and those that live by these religions live their lives being accountable to their deity....

Atheists do the same thing, except they believe that there is no God and therefore live their lives not being accountable to any deity...

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by HockeyPuck

Sure you do... Atheism is just as much a religion as Islam, Buddism, and Christianity...

These religions believe there is a God or gods, etc., and those that live by these religions live their lives being accountable to their deity....

Atheists do the same thing, except they believe that there is no God and therefore live their lives not being accountable to any deity...

Atheism as a religion?

It seems odd for a follower of a faith to try to attack atheism by saying it is also a faith. I think the reasoning is that if atheism is a faith or religion, then atheists have no cause to criticise other faiths or religions. One flaw in this argument is that if atheism were indeed a religion, then theists would have no reason to criticise atheism being taught in schools as part of religious education, or even the setting up of atheist-run schools alongside Baptist, Catholic and Muslim schools.

Atheism, by definition, is the absence of theism. If you cannot say "I believe in a Deity/God/Supreme Being" then you are an atheist. If you are not a theist, then you are an atheist.

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Atheism as a religion?

That's nice...

Atheism, in essence leaves ultimate knowledge and accountablility to man... so basically what I'm saying is that Atheism believes that man is the be all and end all....

BTW, when you add an a- to the beginning of a word, it means "to be against"....

oop, it actually means, "without"

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by HockeyPuck

...Atheism, in essence leaves ultimate knowledge and accountablility to man... so basically what I'm saying is that Atheism believes that man is the be all and end all....

Perhaps, but that does not constitute a "religion":

"Religion is the varied, symbolic expression of, and appropriate response to, that which people deliberately affirm as being of unrestricted value to them."

R.R. Cavanagh, "The Term Religion." Pages 1–19 in T.W. Hall, ed. Introduction to the Study of Religion. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978.

The onus is upon you to prove that Cheese's atheism (humanism?) is of "unrestricted value to him", and in which he participates through some form of "symbolic expression" and response.

[HockeyPuck]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Perhaps, but that does not constitute a "religion":


R.R. Cavanagh, "The Term Religion." Pages 1–19 in T.W. Hall, ed. Introduction to the Study of Religion. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978.

The onus is upon you to prove that Cheese's atheism (humanism?) is of "unrestricted value to him", and in which he participates through some form of "symbolic expression" and response.

I don't have to prove anything - it's a matter of my opinion, your opinion and Cheese....

That being said, you might notice my post count is very low - I'm a noob .... But, I've lurked here long enough to know that Cheese will post some interesting stuff in this OT forum - mainly pushing his atheism at the expense of someone else's religion. IMO, by doing this, he shows that his freedom from any form of deity is very important to him.

I repect Cheese even though I don't know him, but I definitely do not agree with his religious viewpoints and he doesn't have to agree with mine...

From Dictionary.com:
re·li·gion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.

1. 1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
   2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

[troutman]

http://www.skepdic.com/faith.html

Those of us who are atheists, and believe that everything evolved from natural forces, nearly universally maintain that theists and supernaturalists have a very weak case for their belief, weaker even than the case for Bigfoot, Nessie or Santa Claus. Thus, our disbelief is not an act of faith, and therefore, not non-rational as are those of theists and Christian apologists. However, if Christian apologists insist on claiming that their version of Christianity and the rejections of their views are equally acts of faith, I will insist that the apologists have a non-rational faith, while their opponents have a rational faith. Though I think it would be less dishonest and less misleading to admit that atheists and naturalists do not base their beliefs on faith in any sense close to that of religious faith.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by troutman

http://www.skepdic.com/faith.html

Those of us who are atheists, and believe that everything evolved from natural forces, nearly universally maintain that theists and supernaturalists have a very weak case for their belief, weaker even than the case for Bigfoot, Nessie or Santa Claus. Thus, our disbelief is not an act of faith, and therefore, not non-rational as are those of theists and Christian apologists. However, if Christian apologists insist on claiming that their version of Christianity and the rejections of their views are equally acts of faith, I will insist that the apologists have a non-rational faith, while their opponents have a rational faith. Though I think it would be less dishonest and less misleading to admit that atheists and naturalists do not base their beliefs on faith in any sense close to that of religious faith.

I would agree with most of this.
I tend to think that I am largely a rational person, but one who recognizes the necessary constraints of rationalism, which can in fact tell me nothing about anything outside of observable phenomena.

On an un-related note, it is my opinion that the athiests on this board have the COOLEST avatars. Very clever, Cheese; and Troutman, what can I say? If there was no God, there can be no Johnny Cash!

[White Doors]

I don't know if Cheese's version of Atheism is a religion, but I can tell you that he has somewhat of a fanatical viewpoint of people/views that don't agree with his. That may be the closest he gets to religion.

Often the anti-religious align religious fundamentalism with the religion itself - instead of where the blame should really go, to humanity itself with all of it's abundant and fascinating flaws.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by White Doors

I don't know if Cheese's version of Atheism is a religion, but I can tell you that he has somewhat of a fanatical viewpoint of people/views that don't agree with his. That may be the closest he gets to religion.

Often the anti-religious align religious fundamentalism with the religion itself - instead of where the blame should really go, to humanity itself with all of it's abundant and fascinating flaws.

Funny how the "right" side always picks me out of the pile...thats ok.
Im simply here to discuss what the religious fundamentalists dont like to hear...along with many others of course.
As Ive said all along, I personally dont care how you toot your horn...just dont toot it to children as a fact. Thats where I generally get on my soapbox.
Children are very impressionable and the entire Jesus myth should be taught alongside Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. If thats fanatical then so be it...I can be as fanatical in my non-belief as those supposedly in the know.

[Kybosh]

This doesn't really have much to do with this thread but out of curiousity has anyone else read "The Gospel According to Biff"? It doesn't really provide any real insight but it is a pretty entertaining little read.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Funny how the "right" side always picks me out of the pile...thats ok.
Im simply here to discuss what the religious fundamentalists dont like to hear...along with many others of course.
As Ive said all along, I personally dont care how you toot your horn...just dont toot it to children as a fact. Thats where I generally get on my soapbox.
Children are very impressionable and the entire Jesus myth should be taught alongside Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. If thats fanatical then so be it...I can be as fanatical in my non-belief as those supposedly in the know.

So you're saying that I shouldn't teach my children what I believe in, just because you refuse to believe in it?

Tell me Mr. Know it all, how am I supposed to raise my children? How am I supposed to live my life? What am I supposed to believe? I ask because apparently you don't want me or other believers to think for ourselves. You don't want us to 'corrupt' people from your 'truth'. Which is exactly what you are trying to do, you're trying to corrupt them with your conspiracy theories.