I want to talk about atheism

[kimba1]

In matters of satan and demons I'm alot less forgiving in the concept. I've seen alot human failings and refuse to place blame on anybody else but humans. I understand temptation we all have it but refuse to give credit to the devil made that rich guy buy 5k worth of computers to that busty secretary for no reason.

[Plane]

Is atheism never going in such an intolerant path?

There is really no such thing as "atheism"..........

 

So you would not acknowledge the dozens of countries that have one time or another made Atheism the official, State sanctioned, orthodox religion?

[Xavier_Onassis]

So you would not acknowledge the dozens of countries that have one time or another made Atheism the official, State sanctioned, orthodox religion?

Of[ course not, because none of them has done this.
The Soviet Union proclaimed that the Party did not recognize religion, but there was no institutional racism, with atheist priests, choirs and  congregations. Atheism is a single belief. It is not a religion, just a philosophical stance.

[Xavier_Onassis]

But, do you mean that a single instance of demon inspired behavior would prove the principal, no matter how rare?


No, but a single  part of the Bible that is clearly untrue means that the Bible is not perfect,and that suggests that it is not divinely inspired, either. And there is a whole BUNCH of inaccurate crap in the Bible. Google this sometime.

As for demons, they are invisible, odorless, tasteless and otherwise undetectable. Like angels. So I can't imagine how you could prove anything was caused by demons.

Demonic possession is generally thought of as superstition by most educated people.

[Plane]

But, do you mean that a single instance of demon inspired behavior would prove the principal, no matter how rare?


No, but a single  part of the Bible that is clearly untrue means that the Bible is not perfect,and that suggests that it is not divinely inspired, either. And there is a whole BUNCH of inaccurate crap in the Bible. Google this sometime.

As for demons, they are invisible, odorless, tasteless and otherwise undetectable. Like angels. So I can't imagine how you could prove anything was caused by demons.

Demonic possession is generally thought of as superstition by most educated people.

It would be a black swan.
Proof of demons presence might be a bit dangerous to search for and present , so no thank you.
If you have some proof of their nonexistence I would like to see it , I am going to want something stronger than just that the cool crowd thinks so.

I don't know about an error in the Bible, I also cannot claim to understand everything in the bible, the bits I do not understand are not necessarily errors. If we had in our possession a truly true scripture with no errors at all in it, how would we know ?

Some of the "errors " just are not, like the rounding of Pi to three. Rounding Pi to three is rounding, rounding is not error, if you want a Pi that is not rounded at all you need to set aside a lot of time. How serious is the rounding error , the difference between Pi and three?
        3.14 >3 by approximately 5%
            Big one there, if you are really searching.

    The age of the Earth isn't really given in scripture , though the age of humanity is implied by the number of "Begats".
     How old does science say humanity is?
     How old is human history, our collective memories ?
      Comparing the Bible to a text on geology misses the point of the geology text as well as it misses the point of the Bible.

  The Bible is also allowed to be allegorical , I do not think the beautiful woman described in the Song of Solomon had a neck that looked literally like a stone tower or breasts that looked literally like fauns. If you want to count that sort of thing as error,  go on ahead  but you are not going to enjoy Shakespeare much either.
      So do I have to think that the tower of Babel touched the sky?
       No , and I don't think anyone ever did, that does not make the story pointless.

      So I think that the Bible is free of black swans , because I try to be realistic in my expectations. Some of the arguments against the accuracy of the bible carry their own black swan vulnerability , if you want to be that exacting.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Bible is filled with multitudinous crap that is NOT allegorical.
If it is the Word of God, then God is a horrible writer.

There was no Biblical Flood. The Black Sea was joined to the Mediterranean by an earthquake. But the entire world was not covered by water,
There was no Tower of Babel. There were people in Mesopotamia who built Zuggurats. A big one was probably felled by another earthquake,and a story was made up to explain it so people would consider the priest to be a smart person and continue to pay him. Adam and Eve are clearly fictional, no not allegorical, fictional.The whole tale is pure crapola.

[Plane]

  Science tells us that the human race consisted of a very small group something like one million years ago, this is a partial validation of the facts of a story that I used to think was entirely allegorical.

    Under the north sea there is a lost land that used to be productive human habitat, stone tools are brought up in fishing nets and dredges . The flood story is found in several separated traditions , there may be a difference between flooding all of the Earth and just flooding everything that matters , but this would seem like a detail to a story teller and I am impressed with what has survived for more than ten thousand years of mostly oral retelling.

Or perhaps I am wrong and the story is more factual than allegorical, I really don't know what that thing on the flanks of Mount Ararat is.

I don't think it possible that the Moses story is the whole story, but the part about mans relationship to God is the part that makes it matter.

    I think the black swan is waddling around , but he is more mine than yours.
    What scripture is there that says that scripture is simple and easy to understand?
    I could show you the scripture that says the opposite, so flocks of black swans should be expected , even if some of them are dyed .


   Psalms 78:21 I will open my mouth in a parable. I will utter dark sayings of old, which we have heard and known and our fathers have told us.
  2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also has made us able ministers of the new testament, not of the letter but of the spirit for the letter kills but the spirit gives life.

What do you make of such advice?

In the end I don't expect to argue you into belief, that is just not how it is done .

You are demanding of the scriptures in just the opposite way than I am.

[Xavier_Onassis]

   Psalms 78:21 I will open my mouth in a parable. I will utter dark sayings of old, which we have heard and known and our fathers have told us.
  2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also has made us able ministers of the new testament, not of the letter but of the spirit for the letter kills but the spirit gives life.

What do you make of such advice?

The first quote is not advice at all. The "dark sayings" are not mentioned, only referred to as some ancient blather. No content is provided.

The second is gibberish.
"The letter kills but the spirit gives life." What letter?  What the poo is he jabbering about?

 That does not mean anything. It is also not advice. Certainly neither quote is useful to anyone for any purpose.

[Plane]

  You believe that even the densest racist can converse in code.

But cannot imagine King David , Solomon or Jesus doing so?

Even when they say they are going to?

I "get " this , but I credit a blessing from God for each scripture I understand .

I have faith that I will be blessed for each scripture I need and I ask humbly.

I definitely do not get all of them, some of them must be for other people. 

[Xavier_Onassis]

A Perfect God would be able to write in such a manner that everyone would understand exactly the same thing from each sentence, and they would understand perfectly. A vague book has its authority  to blame.

As a divine handbook, the Bible sucks, and sucks mightily.  As I have often said, there should have been a Gospel according to Jesus Christ.
If you want a job done right, do it yourself.

[Plane]

A Perfect God would be able to write in such a manner that everyone would understand exactly the same thing from each sentence, and they would understand perfectly. A vague book has its authority  to blame.

As a divine handbook, the Bible sucks, and sucks mightily.  As I have often said, there should have been a Gospel according to Jesus Christ.
If you want a job done right, do it yourself.

It is better than you can imagine.
Encoded so well that the simplest with the key learn well , but the most sophisticated without the keys are flummoxed.

How is this less than perfect?

[Xavier_Onassis]

You yourself claim not to understand it.

If the goal is to communicate, then no code, no parables, no allegorical claptrap is needed or even desirable.

Again, the Bible sucks at what we are told is its intent. And mightily does it suck.

According to your twisted logic here, a jigsaw puzzle of the Mona Lisa is more perfect than the original painting.

Good writing communicates. Bad writing does not communicate.

Deliberately hiding the meaning from the reader is really, really bad writing.

But I do not think it is an attempt to hide the meaning, I think it is just poorly written.

[Plane]

  Within the scripture are warnings that the meanings are often hidden , and in evidence I present two scriptures in this thread that I understood but you say you don't.

   A message in the clear is better for some purposes , a message in code is better for others.

   Best of all is a message that is convertible , as the Bible is understood mostly when blessed , God can withhold or bestow understanding as he wishes.

  Jesus did this in the very company of his disciples. Telling parables  ...often . 

    I like a bit of Shakespeare too, and because of changes in custom and language I find bits of it hard to understand , this proves Shakespeare was a bad writer? Or does it mark the limits of my ability?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Jesus was NOT a great communicator. If he had been one, people would have understood his silly parables and would not be arguing over what they mean after 2000 years. Few people dispute the meaning of Aesop's fables. Abraham Lincoln was full of useful tales, as was Will Rogers, and no one seems to have problems with understanding what they meant. Aesop, Lincoln, and Rogers were all far, far better at such stuff than Jesus, who was allegedly God and therefore Perfect.

I see no reason to give Jesus a pass because he was divine, born to a virgin, or impressed rabbis at age 12.

In the case of Shakespeare, vagueness stems from changes in the English language and our lack of understanding the customs of England in the 1600's.

There is no reason to use a parable unless it communicates BETTER than stating the point directly.

[Plane]

  Is that how you understand parables?

  How do you understand the concept of Koan?


http://swapmeetdave.com/Bible/Parables/index.htm

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013&version=NIV

Matthew 13
10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.

If I may paraphrase

"Hey Jesus , why so many parables?"

"Hey heaven just isn't for everyone , even if everyone has a chance at it , our enemies are amongst the flock, but my sheep know my voice.