Jonathan H. B. Lobl

This is a great truth. People are good despite their religion. Not because of it.

God works in delirious ways.

Yes. Just so. If an evil entity had inspired the Bible: Women who had been raped, would be forced to marry their rapist. The Bible would encourage violence against homosexuals. Slavery would be permitted. At minimum, owning people as property would not be forbidden. Blind Faith would be more important than evidence. Think of the horrors that would result. The Bible would never portray God as being genocidal. Or sadistic. Or unjust. The Bible would never order the death of all witches, without explaining exactly what a witch is -- and under what conditions, such an execution should be carried out. Translations of the Books of the Bible, would be left to individual understanding and error. Said evil entity, would then gloat and laugh, every time that this weird, evil nonsense, was attributed to God.

Such a sad word. If.

Pretend that God really was the source, of the Books of the Bible. An English translation, before the English language existed. Well? That would be credible proof. Or we could all be born, able to recite the Scriptures from "memory". That would be impressive. Only God could do that. Now, the apologetics and excuses. Let the good times roll. You know. Our sinful, fallen state. That's why.

It's Dan. You know the drill. No facts. No evidence. Only bald assertions and arguments about "faith". Next comes the insults. Psalms 14 & 53: "The fool says in his heart, there is no God." I think your boat can take it.

Your reasoning is tortured. I will keep this simple. God did not write the Bible. God inspired the Bible. God did not translate the Bible. God did not inspire the translators. They were left to their own best efforts. Poor flawed men. God got bored and wandered off. Your secondary argument, is that God gave us intellect, to figure things out. No evidence. No proof. Just intellect, to see everything wrong with the inerrant word. This is where you start in about "seeing by faith" and how much God values "belief". Blessed are those who have not seen and believe anyway. Around and around and around. What ever floats your boat.

Imagine that. The most popular and long in use, English translation of the Bible -- the Inerrant Word -- got it wrong. Again. It's almost as though God had nothing to do with it. In case I need to say it -- that was sarcasm. That kind of translation error, is exactly what I would expect, if God had no part in it. What kind of God does not protect translations of the inerrant word? A God that does not exist -- or does not care -- or is not capable. Which brings us back to the point of this thread. If Christianity were proven true. History counts for something. What is Christianity, with the King James Bible? About 800 years in error. You have been clear that you don't think the Catholic Church was a legitimate vehicle for the Word. That leaves us with 2,000 years of -- What?

You are making kind assumptions about the mental and emotional health of the God. In the Bible, God describes himself as a "jealous God". This is emotional insecurity. He also has anger issues that carry over for four generations. If you want to go over God's other emotional deficits, there is plenty of material. Exodus 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations Deuteronomy 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations Deuteronomy 6:15 (For the Lord thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the Lord thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth. In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

Nice try. Dan will not -- can not -- disagree with his God about anything. You are asking Dan, to have better morals than God. Dude. It's Dan.

Dan has made it clear, that his morality comes directly from God. At least, God as described and portrayed in the Bible. What then, do we know about the morals of his God? The God that gave Dan his morals. That God. The God that drowned the whole world. This God has no restraint. When he disciplines, he goes all out. Mauling by bears is nothing, compared to drowning the whole world. As described by his wonderful book of stories. What do you think will happen? That Dan will disagree with his God about anything? Anything at all? It won't happen. It can't happen. Faith over all. Please. The horse is worse than dead. It's squishy. Let it go. It's Dan.

An article from Patheos Pagan. Where the snake staffs came from and how they are evolving. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/adamantinemuse/2019/09/three-serpents-two-famous-magical-staffs/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Pagan+News+and+Views&utm_content=37

Or -- his agent -- PR person -- had a talk with him, about marketing an Atheist movie star. Evidently, marketing won out over integrity.

Do you mean God or gods? Do you mean literal or metaphor? Do you mean objective or subjective? There is also the not so small issue of culture. Consider Pele. The Hawaiian goddess of volcanoes. Nobody has hot flashes like Pele. Sometimes, the god is poetry. Not a projection. We can also reference Carl Jung. "Father Sky" and "Mother Earth" Of course, the Bible and Koran are also deeply cultural. Is that God a cultural projection? Yes. A cruel and unjust culture, will project a cruel and unjust God. This is no mere matter of individual foibles.

I have to disagree with you on this one. I have been in way to many arguments, with true believers. The Monotheistic religions are about belief, pretending to be knowledge. I'm not prepared to make sweeping statements about the fathers of Greek Philosophy. The Geometrists like Pythagorus, were describing reality in non-theistic terms. I don't know what they taught about the gods. I have it in mind that Socrates was ordered to suicide over Atheism. Their notion of "corrupting the youth".

Brad Pitt recants. He is no longer an Atheist. https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/09/16/brad-pitt-i-was-rebellious-when-i-said-i-was-an-atheist-i-wasnt-really/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Imagine+No+Religion&utm_content=44

At Christmas time and at Easter; there are always clergy who go off on a rant. They can't stand how these sacred events, are tainted by Pagan elements. We are reminded, yet again, that these are holy-days. These purists amuse me. For instance, they overlook that the Cross itself -- was an ancient symbol of light -- long before Christianity. Of course, their Light of the World, was made to fuse with the old symbol. First, the new religion appropriates all the ancient symbols and practices -- then whines and moans about the presence of impurities. The new religion is not going to go away. We might as well be amused by it. After all. All the old gods were nothing but made up stories. Their God is real. Their big book of stories says so.

Yes. Of course, Buddha was a man and not a god. Still, the idea persists.

Oops. I stand corrected. I thought you were taking Eris Discordia, as a personification of Chaos Theory. My favorite personification is Apathea. She is the goddess who embodies Apathy. What happens when the goddess of Apathy, mates with the god of Procrastination? We may never find out.

To my understanding, it is gods that distinguish between religion and philosophy. Religions have gods. Maybe not worship, but gods. Philosophies don't have gods.

An addendum: Also a display of humor Santa and Satan Santa and Satan are anagrams of each other. Santa is St. Nick. Satan is Old Nick. They are both commonly depicted as wearing red, with black trim. They both corrupt the innocent, with promises of material goods. Clearly, they are the same person. 🎅😈

Yes. There was a historic St. Nick. (Don't confuse him with Old Nick. That's the Devil.) In America, the mythology has expanded without restraint. Santa has his workshop at the North Pole. He's married to Marry Christmas. (A corruption of Merry Christmas). He works with magical flying reindeer. In particular, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer. Beyond that, the circle of mythological associates includes: Frosty the Snowman; various Dickens' characters; The Polar Express (a train); Wooden Soldiers (from the movie); The nutcracker characters; The Grinch (from Dr. Seuss); etc. Santa himself has evolved. Listen to what the children are singing. "He's making a list, checking it twice, He always knows who's naughty or nice. Santa Claus is coming to town. He knows when you are sleeping. He knows when you're awake. He knows when you've been bad or good, So be good for goodness sake." Compare this with standard God mythology. An old man with a beard. Flying around the sky. In the company of magic creatures. Watching everything that we do. Our good deeds and our bad. He keeps lists. He rewards the good and punishes the bad. This is not St. Nick. Santa is a god. At least a godling. IMO 🎅

By all means, let the punishment fit the crime. A return to the good old days. Let us bring back the rack, thumbscrews, red hot irons, the iron boot, whipping post, amputations -- and other instruments of "accountability". We might even take the people who threaten social stability -- and nail them to a cross. It was good enough for the original bleeding heart liberal.