They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

I’m a non-believer myself. However, I am not so hubris to think that my lack of faith constitutes proof that there is no “God”. Frankly, I am comfortable not knowing. I don’t need a book or a church (or a law for that matter) to teach me the difference between right and wrong. Generally, treat others the way you expect to be treated, don’t take things that don’t belong to you (including matters of the heart) and don’t make your vices somebody else’s problem. Do that and you have a pretty good shot at living a happy, healthy life. We’ll all find out what happens at the end far sooner than most of would like.

OP, maybe this helps;

WOW Is that the God you believe in?

I always find it humorous when I read comments of that nature……It says a lot about the individual and their Religious organization.

This is definitely a troll thread to get the atheists and agnostics all riled up.

Cremation only takes a couple hours, and since you`re already dead you can`t feel it, so...

Yep, and if you read the thread you'd see it's already been posted and pointed out.

Is that all that is keeping you in check? the fear of reprisal from God? Scary...

At some point we all die, and no one is guaranteed even another day.

God is not Santa Clause. He’s not there to grant wishes.

He also promised us, guaranteed, that life will be hard. People will attack you for your faith, perhaps kill you or those you care about. He flat told us this would happen.

Now you are free to figure out the truth with out the attached bullshit. @Macchina

Look, and it can’t be seen.
Listen, and it can’t be heard.
Reach, and it can’t be grasped.

Above, it isn’t bright.
Below, it isn’t dark.
Seamless, unnamable,
it returns to the realm of nothing.
Form that includes all forms,
image without an image,
subtle, beyond all conception.

Approach it and there is no beginning;
follow it and there is no end.
You can’t know it, but you can be it,
at ease in your own life.
Just realize where you come from:
this is the essence of wisdom.

It’s not that complicated. He won’t force you to believe. If you want nothing to do with Him, He will have nothing to do with you. You won’t have to see Him for all eternity, should that be your choice.

Free will. He asks so little and gives so much.

WAT????

Tell me which part was unclear and I'll go over it, in exhaustive boring detail.

I'm either fun and flippant and perhaps a little unclear, or boringly scholarly.

Part of faith is the humility to know you don't know everything, and you're probably misunderstanding some things. That kind of humility is like Democritus coming up with Atomic theory thousands of years ago... but he thought there were "sharp" atoms and such.

Would it have been wrong to believe Democritus' atomic theory as originally proposed? Yes and no. The humility goes into believing in things lightly, and having humility to know every little thing that can't be known or checked is subject to change.

We can only "see" things bigger than electrons, we can't even see electrons or photograph them because we'd need sub-electron things to bombard electrons with to see them, and then we wouldn't be able to see what we're using...

Current scientific, particle theory says that we will only truly be able to see and manipulate one level ABOVE the particles we know and can use. Having the humility to say that electrons simply aren't as knowable as atoms, or molecules, is part of what "real" science today means. Something that true christianity has built-in- knowing the mind, abilities, etc. of god is beyond human reckoning.

So, do you want to have a serious debate about the topic at hand or not? State your case and we can get started.

Seriously?  What is now considered canon and what wasn't, was decided by groups of men (the various councils of Nicea, Constantinople, etc.).  Three hundred years after the death of Jesus, Christians were still fighting over the nature of Jesus / God.  The Trinitarians won the argument, and the ideas of those who opposed them were rooted out by fire and sword.  Scriptures that disagreed with the winners of the argument, were straight up burned.  How's that for "change"?

Remember folks, these were just men.  There was nothing special about them.  They had the usual mix of demagogues and bullshitters.  One side won the argument, and that's why most Christians believe what they believe today, and why some books are in their bible, and some aren't.

As for contradictions, that should be easy enough for you to google.  Here is one of the top hits:  https://www.topicsinchristianity.com/new-testament-contradictions/

The label that most closely applies to me is "agnostic deist."  If there is a creator, his / hers / its / their nature is unknowable.  Any belief I have in a creator is open to challenge and review.  I think this belief fits in well with the humility you talk about above.

Now, apply that same humility to the human beings that wrote the Bible, the people that believe it, and are certain they are correct.

To be fair, the Nicean/Constantinopolitan fights were heavily about politics and real power in the Byzantine empire.

Not meaning to start a long conversation here, but there is legitimate criticism about whether the Nicean creed is sufficient and Christian and if the Nicean-Constantipolitan creed, commonly referred to as the Nicean creed (but not) is more political wrangling rather than pure religious doctrine.

I find the idea that men fought and died over something for selfish reasons rather than religious ones inherently makes something less worthwhile or not of divine inspiration to be.... hmmm. I'll call it... small-minded. I think the doctrine we get and all that is in fact hand selected by men, and there's corruptions certainly, but I think men can also be instruments of god, and at the end of the day, if that makes them no more then men fighting over wielding power on earth...

Wasn't that what the Revolutionary War we're celebrating was about? Were the founders and Washington and Jefferson and Franklin not essentially demi-gods? Or could we do something just as good today if we put our minds to it? I struggle to understand the argument that it was gods, not men that did X, unless you're substituting different gods, how that makes any difference if it's important or not, unless you're going full Nihilist.


This is the respectable position of non-believers. I disagree, but I can respect it. Certainly the humility evinced by it keeps your position from self-clowning and self-disproving within moments. While I've reached different conclusions, it also allows for calm, rational, reasonable and pleasant debate. I was already writing a response to you that I've appended this to.

I certainly think EVERYTHING has to be taken with a dose of humility, from people writing, to understanding, translating, and interpreting the translation- everything loses a bunch. I believe the bible talks about "seeing through a glass darkly". No one gets a full vision- Jesus himself said he himself did not know the date of the end of the world. The idea of perfect knowledge, of omniscience, itself is a stupid and never explicitly stated idea. I would hold that even comprehending what "omniscience" means given how complex our understanding of the universe, at present and stupidly incomplete as it is, makes our idea of omniscience self-clowning- i.e. proving how stupid we are for even attempting to talk in such terms.

And Happy 4th.

I’ve read it 3 times cover to cover in 2 different translations and still don’t understand it. Not understanding something doesn’t mean it’s not true or a reality. How could humans even EXPECT to understand a God that created every single thing that you taste, touch, see, or smell? Good grief, just try to imagine that for a second.

I’ve got my issues with the program just like anyone else but I know He is real. Just don’t know what He wants from me.

Come on, that's cop out.

What next, are you going to say that god's own chosen prophets were so beneath understanding that they couldn't even look upon god's face without being obliterated and they could only see him in representations like burning bushes or something?

Come on, everyone knows eternal mysteries like religions are supposed to read like young adult novels.

Right?

/Sarc

Yeah wow there are some really mentally ill people on the board I'm just now realizing.
To admit that some supernatural power is the only thing keeping you from killing people.  That is really scary.  Almost along the lines of what serial killers have said in interviews.

Supernatural powers and current legal regimes, yeah.

What other reason is there to not do so? Sounds like a genetic defect tbh, that you can't adapt to a situation when asked to do so because there's some weird nonspecific  thing standing in the way.

Religious people and people with rule of law removed do so easily enough, and so it would seem that is an adaptive, healthy, darwinian selected trait. Definitely doesn't sound like genetic fitness.

Seems like a defect to not be able to do so with artificial constraints removed.

Hey, OP!

Would you like to learn more about the exact thing you're saying?

Check out the vid I'm linking. This guy does a lot of informative videos about knights/armor and other similar stuff, but he's also multi-lingual and reads Hebrew.

Skip the first ten minutes or so (where he defends himself against youtube critics) and listen to what he says about a real translation of the first line in Genesis.

The bible may not be the problem. It's the translation and what the church wants you to know/believe.

Fascinating stuff which really got me thinking.

Thank me later!



Edit: Understanding what this guy says will lead to more questions, but (for me) none of the (potential) answers are in conflict with what "modern science" (string theory, et al) say and may actually bring us to a higher understanding of the origins of Judeo/Christian Faith than we've (the West) have ever been.

I found it (and the concepts I came to myself, after hearing it), fascinating.

You might too.

In that case the Epicurean paradox fails to understand what God would want from existence.  If you could create, watch, and extinguish infinite universes in an infinitely small amount of time, what is the purpose if your existence?  What would you want?  What do you lack?  Company, limitation, and challenge.

The flow chart above assumes that being all-powerful requires creating a contradiction in terms: It assumes that God can create free will but prevent evil by fiat.  This necessarily limits free will, which defeats the purpose.  If being omnipotent means rewriting the laws of logic to serve your every purpose, then maybe God is not omnipotent by that definition.  Better yet, maybe God chooses not to be.  Whether by nature or by choice, this is not the only limitation God acts within; He also took time to create the world, according to Genesis.  There are others.  Why should we insist on recognizing only a God who fits the most expansive and boring possible definition of omnipotent?  Does a God who enjoys a challenge not merit consideration as still being the most supreme being in existence?  Says who?

It seems to me that God plainly wants what any good parent wants: No good parent wants to enslave their children, but no good parent wants their children to be evil either.  Having both at once means letting your children make their mistakes and learn hard lessons, and clearly that's what God does.  Why is this so inconceivable?

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  Your frank comments about the various councils and the fighting that went on are appreciated.  They were the sausage factory that created modern Christianity.  I was never taught any of this as a Christian.   I had to seek it out on my own.  The obvious reason is that you can't teach a kid that a book is magical, once you know the sordid history behind it.  A bunch of guys, with axes to grind, and a LOT of it had not a damn thing to do with the glory of God.

Other groups of men have done the same damn thing, giving us other religions (Islam, Mormonism, etc.).  They also claim divine inspiration.  Who believes in what is mostly an accident of birth, and what can get drilled into your head when you're young.

And faith?  I was told so many times, when I was questioning things, that I just had to have faith.  Slightly over 50% of humanity have used faith to come to religious beliefs that ARE NOT Christian.  If faith is the tool, well it's a blunt and random tool, isn't it?

Happy 4th.

Only narcissists aspire to "godlike" powers over others, like a religious leader fleecing the rubes, it`s a cheap petty thrill. A far more difficult and noble reward is that of a sense of self accomplishment in the betterment of Mankind.

As I recall (having met a few learned Jews in my time), the Talmud actually has Moses bringing hundreds of "God's laws" to the Israelites, not only ten.

They've since been kinda condensed . . .

Why? Based on what?

Why not achieve for mankind through your own greatness? In fact, why not define what attributes you think are best in mankind and do your best to propagate those and reduce elements of mankind that don't have those?

There's nothing petty about achieving godlike powers, that's the petty cheap version you're talking about. Godlike is definitionally not concerned with the private jet insofar as it achieves their aims.

Epstein kept the trappings up so he could be more effective and keep his breeding program in New Mexico going and consult with Bill Gates. The guy used private jets to entice and allure celebrities to fly with him and get in pictures if not more. And, of course, to enjoy his cargo.

There's a lot that the guy was achieving that is publicly known, it's just not discussed as much as the petty lurid stuff.

613 was the count from a friend who went to Hebrew School.

You know you`re talking to an actual scientist don`t you? lol.

But that means eternal pain,suffering,fire,torture,devil rape, etc. right?


God sure seems like he’d be fun at parties.

I won't try to make sense of it because it was written by goat herder men who lived 1000s of years ago.
Judo-Christianity is based on the Abraham tribes,  is a direct copy of the Torah / and Jewish faith,  which us gentiles are not permitted to be privy to.

Saul of Tarsus re-wrote parts of the bible after the death of  Jesus of Nazareth (Jewish) to make the religion more becoming and inclusive to the pagans so they could grow the religion further.

To "study" the bible and find yourself approved you actually have to learn the history of the entire religion,  the God of the christian bible and the Jewish bible are the same God. which is where things get complicated.
Because you see according to the Jews themselves and the originators of the religion ,   they say that the whole christian thing is bunk.

Trying to make sense of it is a waste of time tho, once you realize the history behind the books.  The reasoning behind the messages in them is all based on common laws and customs of the day.
I noticed that no one dissected my offerings image because that one is pretty damning.   It explains how that the temple offerings were literally eaten by the Jewish priests and his family members because food was scarce and so "god" commanded food offerings.

Go and research some of this yourself. I spent more time than I'd like to admit looking into this all years ago, but your journey will have to start with the Jewish religion because its the origins of the literal christian bible.
You'll see the greatest contradiction to the bible is the jews themself who say that jesus was an imposter and  since they're  "gods chosen people" they would know best.

What you need to know according to the abrahmic religions is that the jews are the only people who are chosen by god.  


The true and original religion of abraham is the jewish one.  so study that.

There's nothing like that in the bible.

I'll never understand why some people are so obsessed with the suffering of this world and so sure that it is the ultimate possible evil, that they cannot conceive of a greater purpose for our souls, for which God would allow it.

I was raised Christian, it wasnt till I was old enough to comprehend the words in the Bible that I realized I could not in good faith call myself a Christian.  It wasnt anything any leftist could say or do.  I read the words and had questions.  Questions that I have never received any sort of answer that made any sense.

First I start to get skeptical over Genesis 1-2 describing the creation of men and man in the multiple versions I have read make it clear that even if you believe a single god created all of creation its pretty clear Adam was created separately from the rest of men.  Adam, the head of gods chosen people, was brought to Eden where he ends up disobeying god and having the punishment dealt out to his line.  That punishment, like excessive modesty for example, the best I can tell does not effect the rest of heathen man from what I can tell by reading later descriptions in the Bible when decedents of Adam and Eve interact with tribes or civilizations outside Eden.

Second I dont understand why the Christian God is such a shit stirrer, from dangling the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life for Adam and Eve, and the reaction to punish them for not just violating his command, but casting them out in fear they would also eat from the Tree of Life and become more like gods.   This sounds an aful like god really just wanted a blind and dumb slave to tend his garden.  Able was a grew livestock, Cain grew plants.  The fight between the two was a direct result of god rejecting Cain's offering while accepting Able's.  If God is all knowing one can assume he understands the impact that rejection would have.  Both sacrificed their labor and sweat, why was both not acceptable?  What does this teach me about this god?  Is this something I choose to honor with my life?

Third.  The Bible was highly controlled over much of the history of Christianity due to most of the world not having access to print, not to mention the illiterate peasantry that relied on what they were told by ruling elites.  Any I to really believe that this book survived an era where specific studies were done on behalf of European monarchs (like Machiavelli's the Prince) delving deep into ways to create leverage to bind the population of a realm to the monarch to stabilize and consolidate their power over long terms really leave one of the most influential books of power untouched?  I read the Bible and it feels more like a manual to create a system of control for a monarch to have a stabile and productive society to leach off of.  Granted this has little to do with the word of god, just my suspicions on the hearts of man.

Forth, building on item three is the primary system of control.  The Bible attempts this by trying to convince the reader they are guilty of sin, even if that sin was the result of your ancestors and because of that guilt you must live on your knees and give much of your labor away as penance.  Just like with CRT I reject the notion that I am guilty for something my ancestors may have done.  I flatly reject the concept of original sin entirely.  I have nothing to atone for on their behalves.  

Fifth is the concept of turning the cheek.  I understand the concept, am willing to participate a bit if I am the slapped, but I cannot abide my Wife nor especially my Children being the recipient of the slap.  I am not the pray for forgiveness type if feel I did right, even if it breaks the written word.  I would be lying to god in my eyes if I were Christian compounding the matter.

These are my biggest items I have discussed with several pastors.  None of which had any sort of guidance on the matter.  I'd love to see if any have other things to say beyond pray for an answer.  At the end of the day if I do see him, I'd love to ask him these things before I am cast into the pit.

I'm not Jewish, so I've done a fair bit of reading into the Judaic origins of many things, and there's a reason I'm not Jewish.

Conversely, Christianity is more than just Jesus and more than just Paul, but in fact created the modern Western and European worlds we see today, and all prior religion, philosophy, etc. is inextricably bound to Christianity.

I don't find the evangelical worship of Israel and immanetizing the echaton to be biblical or Christian and would go as far to say it's heretical and Luciferian.

Doesn't mean Christianity, properly practiced, isn't the best and truest thing we've seen on Earth. The purifying capacity of god means that no matter how impure the vessel that brought us here, it can be made good by god.

Please don't give up.  He is our greatest hope.

Good for you. The world is bigger, more complex and more wonderful and horrible than any single God can make.

No. Follow the one commandment. Don't be a dick.

If that's to plain for you, take a lesson from Rabbi Hilel That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary,

No. Follow the one commandment. Don't be a dick.

If that's too plain for you, take a lesson from Rabbi Hillel , "That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary"

@cthulhu
I have to commend you on this. I very rarely ever hear a non believer offer useful words in regards to faith. Not that my opinion matters, but I’m impressed.

i remember the thread where you talked about your spiritual belief. What was the name of your belief system again? i forgot the name.

I`m confused, are you now trying to argue the merits of the scientific method? Science and superstition are mutually exclusive. You should learn more about electrons, since you use them 24hrs a day.

Happily. I'm nowhere near as well trained as really religious people, but I find most religious "leaders" to be lazy sad sacks who aren't philosophical or intellectually curious at all, and most churches don't demand serious men with serious inquiries, so there's a lot like you I've met who have questions brushed aside. First, understand- we're all men, humans, and fallible. The best we give is interpretations or best guesses. Before you say I'm just a pussy who's selling weak tea, that's literally what scientists, when they're being actually honest, do. There are no 100% god-given answers, merely best guesses as backed up by evidence, or the scientific method and peer review.

Sorry most leaders suck.

Based on what please?

Again, based on what please?


Well, let's be clear here. God made the enlightened angels to carry out his commands, and as best I understand it, Lucifer rebelled and overthrew this order. This is supposed to precede the creation of Adam, so hoping for faithfully following his dictates is... sorta expected, and can be understood he'd be disappointed and not have the garden prepared for disobedience. Lucifer had to move out when he decided to not follow god's rules, and Adam did too. This sounds pretty standard at the time...

As for blind dumb slaves? Slaves to do what? Jesus repeatedly relates his followers to sheep, which my pride itself finds insulting... but that's what we're called to be. Sheep disobey around the margins, but are also supposed to follow because they're fundamentally incapable of dealing with coyotes and wolves on their own. The reasoning is that sheep get themselves killed all the time and horrible fates from disobedience. Maybe you're above average, and you're less likely to do so. Congratulations. Of course, that also usually goes with more adventuruous like seeking out grass that leads to a cliff, but hey, fuck the rules, fuck the herd, it's all about you, amirite? If most people ARE like sheep, and the goal is MANKIND, NOT a single individual's best benefit... then eternal life and not eating by sweat of the brow sounds pretty good tbh.

And lastly, you're trying to understand god through a human lens. I won't even call you a fucking idiot though I'm tempted. I'll just suggest that... maybe... you can entertain the possibility he has bigger plans than you can imagine? IDK, you want a god that's incomprehensibly more powerful, wiser, and knows more then you, then you attribute human motivations and your own ability to understand a god... that's a contradiction friend.


insert "if god knows all why he let bad thing happen?"

I submit, not knowing, that he doesn't know all, as you imagine it. Does that end god for you? If he doesn't have all the magical powers as you imagine them, is that a cancellation of god and christianity for you? If so... what a weak one dimensional understanding of mysteries you have. If the world is as complex as it is, maybe he is powerless to stop the operations as they work. Maybe he's empowered to intervene only insofar as it doesn't stop the clockwork as it works. And maybe the pleas or interventions he doesn't take up were not made in humility to the design and would mess it up.

I've heard it submitted that raising animals was in fact harder, and god let his preference be known, and so when Cain did not bring meat, or sell a portion of his grain to get meat, he was knowingly spurning god's preference. Regardless, that ancient hebraic stuff is interesting to know where we come from, but I subscribe to the idea of an evolved faith, and so fuckery with Cain and Able only matters insofar as scholarship, covenants, being true to his word, and that which hasn't been superseded. Jesus's sacrifice supersedes all others necessary so I'm not exactly worried about my sacrifice being in vain. We can take a deeper look when you answer back about the breaking of covenants or promises to Cain.


I mean not to be mean, but this reads like a clever high schooler's or freshman's refutation of history and civilization. "Because X could happen, I have no proof, prove X didn't happen!"

I'll go one better, but I expect you to actually do some research when I tell you where to look. The Gnostics said there were books left out of the bible and have books that other biblical fathers say have bad provenance so didn't include them like the book of Enoch. This is VERY powerful, very seductive, and in my opinion dangerously seductive heresy, but hey, you want the truth, show you're actually rigorous enough to read dangerous heresy and report back, I'll knock down those strawmen. On the easier side, the Catholics include books the Prots leave out. Feel free to explore those. I warn you that I am mentioning the gnostic books and am risking you to very dangerously seductive ideas that influenced the matrix, but I have hope if you're as honest as you say you are, you'll report back your newfound enlightenment and you've grown past me on a single reading of books I've read and dismissed and clearly you're smarter than me and don't need to listen to me at all anymore.


That's the pelagian heresy you're using, go ahead and look it up, also dangerously seductive. The thing about CRT is it took genuine Christian doctrines and perverted them to destroy the civilization it came from. I find the stuff absolutely toxic, but truly finely honed evil. I literally read the original theorists from Horkheiimer to Marcuse to Benjamin to Adorno. They take biblical doctrines and corrupt them. You WERE warned the devil will come to you and quote scripture right? It's out of context, but that was an explicit warning...


That's not called for. The degradation of your children and wife is not called for. That's an over interpretation of the passage. I suggest you find some seriously biblical and non-PC places to ask. Find some non-vatican 2 catholic churches to ask the priest, or Confessional lutheran priests; but ask if they believe women should submit to their husbands. If no, you're not talking to one serious about scriptural integrity and move on.

There's plenty of jeremiads you can find online about the "turn the other cheek "with a simple google search about how it's more to humiliate the guy slapping, it's turning the cheek once, not twice, and it's when faced with a power too great to fight directly so you use tactics to degrade their moral authority.

And no, you don't get forgiveness if what you think you did was right. "praying" for guidance in most cases is about figuring out where what you did was wrong and what a better solution would be.

Initial attempt, smashed out quickly. Not very hard tbh.

No you're a liar positing things that aren't true to make a strawman.

Try again buddy. True science was made by Christianity, and as the world loses Christianity we get shit like Covid and Fauci.

I'll take calculus back and you can do math without it if you're gonna insist that superstition can't coexist with science then.

I already explained why your Epicurean paradox is a small-minded linguistic trap hinging on narrow unimaginative assumptions about what is implied as the "only possible" meaning of omnipotence.  Those assumptions are  so unsound that they rely on a contradiction, and there is no reason to hold them besides a preoccupation with their contrived conclusion.  That doesn't mean you have to believe in the Bible of course, or even in God, just that your best proof of God's nonexistence (or "unworthiness," in a nutshell) was logically unhelpful sophistry.

Now you're alternately trying so hard to make me view the theological opinions of 2000 year old Jewish leaders as the authoritative say on Christianity, while simultaneously discrediting their potential motives as if it necessarily discredits the whole family of religions.  Surely you don't believe any of those things logically follow from each other, and you're just taking a piss.  You can do that I guess, but it doesn't really interest me.

A lot of people don't put much faith in the Holy Spirit.

That's a shame.

It's Gods voice and what Jesus was telling us.

Listen to it and your life changes.

Do you automatically turn into a saint?  Far from it.

But you do get some great heads up.

The best argument for this I have heard is that god permits this misery as something for us to strive to defeat.  A way to encourage us to improve ourselves.  I can see and understand a creator using this mechanism.  This however flies in the face of Adam and Eve improving themselves when they gained knowledge from the tree and that leaves me with no answer that is consistent with the book when I look at the actions of god.