Does this sum up Christian doctrine?

[Quagmire]

You have the chance to address any issues you want with me - I'm not going anywhere. I am not, however, going to respond to someone who's express purpose is to try and annoy me.

What made you think I was talking about you?

Anyway, I made 4 responses to your question, how about addressing the other 3?

Actually, I probably shouldn't have added that 4th one. I should have known that if I gave you an easy out you would take it.

 

[look3467]

You realize, don't you?, that you are relying only on Ancient Scriptures for every thought you are presenting. Don't you ever look around and at the work of hundreds of thousands of dedicated experts who go right to the matter and figure out what has and is really happening? Does all their work and the whole civilization we have build because of it mean nothing to you? Do you want us to go back to the Dark Ages and all be dirt farmers under the control of a gang of brutal knights?

Hi, Charles

You know you have asked an excellent question!
My answer to you is Yes, I have looked at everything I could look at to arrive at my conclusion.
There is a set of books, about 21 of them in numerical sequence entitled "Man, Myth and Magic by RICHARD CAVENDISH.

Man, Myth & Magic was an influential encyclopedia of the supernatural, including magic, mythology and religion. It was edited by Richard Cavendish. >>>Wikipedia

After reading through all of them and highlighting many sentences, I got a broad perspective of the worlds beliefs, practices and traditions.

But prior to those books I've read as many books as I could find about the end time scenarios.
I became a student of the end times with a passion.

Ive read the bible several times over, over the period of my life to gather general and intimate knowledge (Experience)of the creator enough to confirm His existence in my life.

I've had to deal with in my family: Mormon beliefs, Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh day Adventist, Catholic, as well as with non-believers.

After dealing with those under the Southern Baptist belief of "If you don't believe in Jesus as your Savior, you are going to burn in hell forever" I was out to tell everybody about Jesus and or pretty much condemn them if they did not.

Because there was always this thought, this feeling that there was more to it than what I believed, I challenged my self to find out.

I felt that of all the religious and non religious beliefs, there had to be a common thread that would bind them all together, no matter how diverse they were one from another.

I found it! Right there in front of me for so many years, the bible.

The common thread was "God's love for mankind".

The bible gives me the whole story from start to finish of the wonderful works of God in the creation and salvation of mankind.

Not just a story like as in the book of Genesis, or like Moses and the ten Commandments, but the real spiritual story behind all that is written to reveal God's works.

It is very simple spiritual story and not clouded up by mankind's imaginations.

There is no other book apart from the bible to give me a logical, complete from beginning to end, sensitive and loving character of who God is.

The bible is written in such a way that one can extract the truth but not before the spirit of God gives us the ability.

The ability to comprehend the works of God can only be given by God Himself when we recognize Him in the form of a body: Jesus.

The books and it's entire 24 volume books could not give me an answer to the question, How great is the love of God?

But the bible does!

And so, your right quoting you "you are relying only on Ancient Scriptures for every thought you are presenting."

After all my soul searching, prayer and asking God directly, I feel that he has given me personally, wisdom in understanding.

That's all I can say and of which I now have a wonderful perspective all believers and non believers alike with no condemnation towards any one.

I will condemn any evil behavior that does not fit "Love thy neighbor as thy self".

Blessings, AJ

 

[waitasec]

Is it? Or is it spiritual?

how can you tell the difference between emotional meaning and a spiritual one?

 

[gnomon]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

That's not what he said.

edit: Or even supposedly said because I can only source it from someone claiming to have posted it in it's entirety from an insert in Free Inquiry. Here it is and it contains a different message regarding belief and reads as much for a plug for the magazine than anything else:

Dear Friend,​

If you live in America, the chances are good that your next door neighbours believe the following: the Inventor of the laws of physics and the Programmer of the DNA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn’t think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet what he really cares about is “sin”, abortion, how often you go to church, and whether gay people should marry. Statistically, the chances are that your neighbours believe all that – and they can vote.

​

In other parts of the world, there is a good chance that your neighbours believe you should be beheaded if you draw a cartoon of a desert warlord who copulated with a child and flew into the sky on a winged horse. In other places, there’s a good chance that your neighbors think their wishes will be granted if they pray to a human figure with an elephant’s trunk.

​

Even if your neighbours don’t hold any of those mutually contradictory beliefs, they probably take it for granted that we should unquestioningly respect those who do. And a huge majority of American and British newspapers and periodicals go along with this abject kow-towing to what their educated editorial staff must know, in their heart of hearts, is nonsense.

​

In all this darkness we discern occasional pinpoints of light, beacons of evidence-based intelligence. There are just a few publications that serve as light-houses in a dark, foggy ocean, and of these my favourite in all the English-speaking free world is Free Inquiry. In keeping with my pessimistic opening, its circulation is not large, but it is growing. Free Inquiry’s list of regular columnists is as star-studded as any in America. Free Inquiry is committed to piercing the darkness, rolling back the fog, and restoring the Enlightenment values that inspired the founders of this great Republic.​

I think it is clear that we are gaining ground, and I believe our pace is accelerating. Free Inquiry is in the vanguard of this exhilarating adventure in critical thinking. Please subscribe to, and join me in celebrating, a magazine that believes all ideas are open to rational debate and critical examination, a magazine that is not afraid to speak out in language that flashes as clear as a light-house on a dark night.

​

Richard Dawkins



​

 

[sojourner]

how can you tell the difference between emotional meaning and a spiritual one?

Emotional meaning doesn't go beyond the immediate sphere of the emotion, itself. "I am happy." "This is what makes me sad." Spiritual meaning goes beyond that. Spiritual meaning is holistic, that is, it takes into account the whole person. Spiritual meaning lies at the core of your being.

 

[sojourner]

That's not what he said.

edit: Or even supposedly said because I can only source it from someone claiming to have posted it in it's entirety from an insert in Free Inquiry. Here it is and it contains a different message regarding belief and reads as much for a plug for the magazine than anything else:

Dear Friend,​

If you live in America, the chances are good that your next door neighbours believe the following: the Inventor of the laws of physics and the Programmer of the DNA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn’t think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet what he really cares about is “sin”, abortion, how often you go to church, and whether gay people should marry. Statistically, the chances are that your neighbours believe all that – and they can vote.

​

In other parts of the world, there is a good chance that your neighbours believe you should be beheaded if you draw a cartoon of a desert warlord who copulated with a child and flew into the sky on a winged horse. In other places, there’s a good chance that your neighbors think their wishes will be granted if they pray to a human figure with an elephant’s trunk.

​

Even if your neighbours don’t hold any of those mutually contradictory beliefs, they probably take it for granted that we should unquestioningly respect those who do. And a huge majority of American and British newspapers and periodicals go along with this abject kow-towing to what their educated editorial staff must know, in their heart of hearts, is nonsense.

​

In all this darkness we discern occasional pinpoints of light, beacons of evidence-based intelligence. There are just a few publications that serve as light-houses in a dark, foggy ocean, and of these my favourite in all the English-speaking free world is Free Inquiry. In keeping with my pessimistic opening, its circulation is not large, but it is growing. Free Inquiry’s list of regular columnists is as star-studded as any in America. Free Inquiry is committed to piercing the darkness, rolling back the fog, and restoring the Enlightenment values that inspired the founders of this great Republic.​

I think it is clear that we are gaining ground, and I believe our pace is accelerating. Free Inquiry is in the vanguard of this exhilarating adventure in critical thinking. Please subscribe to, and join me in celebrating, a magazine that believes all ideas are open to rational debate and critical examination, a magazine that is not afraid to speak out in language that flashes as clear as a light-house on a dark night.

​

Richard Dawkins



​

Well, that certainly puts a different spin on things. Dawkins didn't specify that "this is what Christians believe," as stated in the OP.

I still disagree with him, though. He's taken all the meaning out of the mythos, which is like unto taking all the flavor out of a hot fudge sundae, and presenting it as "the truth." Without it's meaning, myth isn't myth anymore. Myth exists to help us ascribe meaning to our search for truth. We don't eat hot fudge sundaes because someone told us to. We eat them because they taste wonderful and they satisfy our palate. We don't believe myths because "somebody told us to." We believe myths because they help us derive meaning out of life.

 

[gnomon]

Well, that certainly puts a different spin on things. Dawkins didn't specify that "this is what Christians believe," as stated in the OP.

I still disagree with him, though. He's taken all the meaning out of the mythos, which is like unto taking all the flavor out of a hot fudge sundae, and presenting it as "the truth." Without it's meaning, myth isn't myth anymore. Myth exists to help us ascribe meaning to our search for truth. We don't eat hot fudge sundaes because someone told us to. We eat them because they taste wonderful and they satisfy our palate. We don't believe myths because "somebody told us to." We believe myths because they help us derive meaning out of life.

That may be the case in that Dawkins often overlooks the importance of religion as a transmission of culture. Reading the full text I think he nails much of Western protestant beliefs spot on. His description is exactly how my Sunday school classes presented the Baptist beliefs in which I was raised and I wouldn't even call them literalists.

But, more importantly, the whole blurb is really just a push for the magazine in which he is a senior editor and not really something that raised debating points.

So I probably just spammed the forum by providing the full quote.

 

[sojourner]

That may be the case in that Dawkins often overlooks the importance of religion as a transmission of culture. Reading the full text I think he nails much of Western protestant beliefs spot on. His description is exactly how my Sunday school classes presented the Baptist beliefs in which I was raised and I wouldn't even call them literalists.

But, more importantly, the whole blurb is really just a push for the magazine in which he is a senior editor and not really something that raised debating points.

So I probably just spammed the forum by providing the full quote.

Well, that's what I thought, too, after having read the full quote. He's pandering for a wider audience. I think what's important to note about his "spin" on belief is that many people do just sorta "believe things" because that's what they've been told. Instead of entering into the real work that myth provokes, they just sort of use it as an easy "substitute" for critical thinking.

Speaking for myself, the myth aids me in critical thinking, because it provides a juxtaposition from which to make comparisons. Whenever a scientific discovery is made, I quickly move to the "is this all there is?" stance. revisiting the myth helps me to establish meaning for the new discovery, in light of not only what we already know, but in light of possibility for what might be.

 

[waitasec]

Emotional meaning doesn't go beyond the immediate sphere of the emotion, itself. "I am happy." "This is what makes me sad." Spiritual meaning goes beyond that. Spiritual meaning is holistic, that is, it takes into account the whole person. Spiritual meaning lies at the core of your being.

what is holistic is standing by the courage of ones convictions,
following ones personal truth, or their integrity. i see nothing spiritual about that.

 

[sojourner]

what is holistic is standing by the courage of ones convictions,
following ones personal truth, or their integrity. i see nothing spiritual about that.

You're forgetting that this isn't one man's world. What is holistic is considering the needs of others and acting justly, not conflating one's own importance. it takes a lot of soul-searching to walk that line, and there is everything spiritual about that.

 

[waitasec]

You're forgetting that this isn't one man's world. What is holistic is considering the needs of others and acting justly, not conflating one's own importance. it takes a lot of soul-searching to walk that line, and there is everything spiritual about that.

who says following the courage of ones convictions would be to serve selfish endeavors?

 

[sojourner]

who says following the courage of ones convictions would be to serve selfish endeavors?

Because, since we live in a pluralistic world, others' convictions must be considered as instrumental to our own.

 

[waitasec]

Because, since we live in a pluralistic world, others' convictions must be considered as instrumental to our own.

i don't agree with that.
philanthropists are highly regarded in this pluralistic world as those who stand by the courage of their convictions, they inspire.