Very interesting...

Yes -- unless one has copies of the Bible in the original Hebrew and Ancient Greek, and is fluent enough in those languages to understand the meaning of every word in its original cultural context (and I've never heard a linguist claim this level of mastery over these languages -- though I freely admit I don't hang around with a lot of linguists), then one doesn't have the unadulterated Word of God. Though, you are absolutely correct in that at least some of the essence may be there. Of course, this assumes that it was the word of God in the first place -- I believe that the term, 'God', itself didn't appear until the Bible was translated into Aramaic.

 

/pours gas on the fire

http://www.glumbert.com/media/atheistdelusion

Actually just ran across that on digg and found it mildly amusing and thought I would share. I haven't actually read this thread but I'm pretty sure I've read it all before

 

Lol I saw that video the other day. I thought the guy was serious until the galaxies and telescope comments.

Pretty good debate attached to the commentary too. It's the first time I've seen somebody try to claim scientific findings (that somehow confirm god's existence) are politically influenced by secret organizations and twisted so that they seem to do the opposite. LOL.

 

WOW! This thread is still going? I lost track of it some 3 or 4 pages ago lol. Feel real strong about your point of views don't you boys and girls ?)

One quick question. Why has humanity discounted the gods of yesterday? How many dieties over the 3 millenia of recorded history have come and gone. All fervently followed by the people of their day. How many more before that?
Would it be "improper" to follow Ra today? Zeus?

 

Roughly 5000. Seriously. Of course that doesn't include the minor ones unknown tribes probably worship.

 

If encouraging people to live their lives as they wish is improper, then I don't want to be "proper".

Is that from Crowley's 'Book of the Law'?

 

People get desensitized through various activities, religious practice included. Often times they are led to believe that humans are incapable of conducting themselves in a civil manner with the absence of a god belief. Or that the world would fall into chaos without threats of hellish afterlife punishment for the wrongdoers, which you don't even have to be in order to be qualified for hell these days. I wonder how people come to this conclusion. If an atheist does good, the religious will say "God is influencing their actions, even if they deny it." which to me is insulting and intellectually self-deceitful to the believer. I understand that their reality consists of a puppetmaster, and puppets, and the idea of a puppet controlling itself is preposterous, and even if it could, it would only do evil. But why must this belief be indoctrinated as fact while any other possibility is dismissed as impossible, because it goes against this particular god belief? What has YAHWEH done to stand out from the 20,000+ (corrected from previous post) other gods mankind has fabricated throughout history? Fulfilled prophecies? Sacrificed sons? Claims of universal fabrication? They've all been done before. Way before.

Doesn't this prove that the religious would rather fervently defend a false belief than realize and accept it is false? Isn't it kind of disturbing that more and more people fall into this trap through crazy indoctrination of children and evangelical prosthelytizing?

I think it is a simple case of not wanting to be wrong. Of course to be wrong about a religion means one's entire reality was wrong. No afterlifes, no miracles, etc. I doubt that would sit well with the majority of religious people, which is why they are so fervent in their belief. But as we know, believing something is real does not make it so. I think the brick wall of "because the bible says so" was erected as a defense against this fact. Believers must have at one point, contemplated the countless contradictions between what the bible claims as reality, and...reality. This probably goes on until the believer finally decides to simply place faith (there's that word) in the bible and accept its version. Then the mental turmoil is over. No longer is the believer's faith "tested", or "influenced by the devil". They will even believe that the entire process was a test from god. Then of course scripture is interpreted in ways that allow the believer to confirm their new faith and curb any remaining doubts. Maybe that is why people quote scripture to try and back what they say so often. I'm sure it feels good, and can even be mistaken as "the holy spirit filling you" but it does nothing in the pursuit of truth. It is simply a substitution.

I feel it is a dangerous habit to be 100% certain of this kind of substitution, as any religion requires its believer to be to reap the benefits it promises. I think it disconnects us from our own universe, our own mortality. Things that should be embraced, not feared to the point that "alternate" versions of reality are prescribed that encourage people to believe they are somehow above nature. Everything dies, but only humans go to heaven, right?