Can Non-Christians be Moral?

The best of the best
Post Reply
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Post by poptart »

Felix wrote:that's what comes from a Catholic upbringing.....
I've encountered a LOT of people from a catholic upbringing who have been jaded toward 'Christianity' by the experience.
I'm pretty sure you've got a lot of company there, Felix.

Dinsdale wrote:Dude -- I'm on record as having not fallen for the "millions of animals lived within walking distance of Noah's house" bit.
Two quick points there .....

- Noah was to take two of every kind of animal into the ark, not two of every species -- perhaps a couple/few thousand animals

- God brought them to Noah (Genesis 7:9, 15)
User avatar
Felix
2012 JAFFL Champ
Posts: 9264
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: probably on a golf course

Post by Felix »

poptart wrote:
- Noah was to take two of every kind of animal into the ark, not two of every species -- perhaps a couple/few thousand animals
do me a favor tart....take an open minded look at this

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noa ... ml#fitting

and tell me how to resolve the whole idea of a catastrophic world-wide flood when all the laws of physics say it simply could not have happened.....there's no geologic evidence whatsoever....

and of course if your going to trot out that whole "kind" argument, you have to realize this would necessitate the "kind" speciate at a rate of about three new animals per month....or what I like to term Superevolution
get out, get out while there's still time
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Post by poptart »

Felix,

We could go back and forth each day on flood issues until about 2009 -- posting links, discussing issues ... etc ...
It's not at the heart of what is important.

Is the veracity of the flood account what keeps you from believing that Jesus is the Christ, or is it something else?

The message of the Bible is simple.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

1 -- God is creator
2 -- Darkness reigns on earth
3 -- God provides our safety


The flood is not something a person needs to get hung up on.


Dinsdale wrote:According to the Bible, anyone who doesn't embrace slavery and stonings isn't following christian doctrine.
Very silly.
User avatar
RadioFan
Liberal Media Conspirator
Posts: 7487
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:59 am
Location: Tulsa

Post by RadioFan »

poptart wrote:Is the veracity of the flood account what keeps you from believing that Jesus is the Christ, or is it something else?
Not here, pop.

Jesus is the Christ; the flood story is allegory. As is the Ark story.

Hope that helps, Felix.
Van wrote:It's like rimming an unbathed fat chick from Missouri. It's highly distinctive, miserably unforgettable and completely wrong.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Post by poptart »

One can view the ark account as allegory.

When Adam and Eve left God's Word, and mankind came into the -- sin, satan, death -- problem, they tried to cover their nakedness with leaves.
God then stepped in, immediately promised the future Christ (Genesis 3:15) and clothed them in animal skin (shedding of blood) -- which is representative of the future Christ.
This shows that only God can provide protection for man, not man himself.

The entire Old Testament is chok full of these kinds of incidents pointing toward the coming Christ.

In Exodus 12, those who painted the blood of the lamb on their doorpost in Egypt were passed over by God when He smoke Egypt with plagues.
They were saved by painting the blood.
Again pointing toward the future Christ.
The blood -- representative of Christ.

Those who got in Noah's ark were saved, when all else were destroyed.
The ark -- representative of the Christ.

Right now there is one way for man to be saved -- taking the Christ.
User avatar
PSUFAN
dents with meaning
Posts: 18324
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: BLITZBURGH

Post by PSUFAN »

One can view the ark account as allegory.
HERESY!!! EVERY BLEEPIN' SYLLABLE IS 100% TRUE!!!

--thumpers

Question for poppy: say Blondiebabe is hang-gliding past a deserted island, and she squeezes out a pup, who lands and survives into adulthood without encountering other humans (or ANY of the creatures his mom beds down with). How does he get the word? Is he safe from The Flames? Can he truly be Moral?
King Crimson wrote:anytime you have a smoke tunnel and it's not Judas Priest in the mid 80's....watch out.
mvscal wrote:France totally kicks ass.
User avatar
Mikey
Carbon Neutral since 1955
Posts: 29529
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 6:06 pm
Location: Paradise

Post by Mikey »

mvscal wrote:I think he just goes to Limbo for a millenia or six. It's a gentler sort of torment that takes circumstance into account.

Pretty fair and open minded if you ask me.
Didn't they cancel Limbo in the 60s or 70s?
User avatar
Felix
2012 JAFFL Champ
Posts: 9264
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: probably on a golf course

Post by Felix »

RadioFan wrote: the flood story is allegory. As is the Ark story.

Hope that helps, Felix.
not really....

how is one supposed to separate the allegories and fables from the "word of God"

(much of which is written by people that never actually met Jesus :? )
get out, get out while there's still time
Voice of Reason
Elwood
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:15 pm

Post by Voice of Reason »

Felix wrote:
how is one supposed to separate the allegories and fables from the "word of God"
The same way you seperate Truth from Fiction in Star Wars
"The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church."

- Ferdinand Magellan
Goober McTuber
World Renowned Last Word Whore
Posts: 25891
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:07 pm

Post by Goober McTuber »

Felix wrote:
RadioFan wrote: the flood story is allegory. As is the Ark story.

Hope that helps, Felix.
not really....

how is one supposed to separate the allegories and fables from the "word of God"

(much of which is written by people that never actually met Jesus :? )
Why don't you just ask Wolfman?
Joe in PB wrote: Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote: They couldn't even kick that doctors ass

Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
User avatar
Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Insha'Allah
Posts: 19031
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: filling molotovs

Post by Shlomart Ben Yisrael »

Voice of Reason wrote:
Felix wrote:
how is one supposed to separate the allegories and fables from the "word of God"
The same way you seperate Truth from Fiction in Star Wars
Duelling light-sabres with Darth Vader?

Okay...I'll give it a shot...
rock rock to the planet rock ... don't stop
Felix wrote:you've become very bitter since you became jewish......
Kierland drop-kicking Wolftard wrote: Aren’t you part of the silent generation?
Why don’t you just STFU.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Post by poptart »

PSUFAN wrote:Question for poppy: say Blondiebabe is hang-gliding past a deserted island, and she squeezes out a pup, who lands and survives into adulthood without encountering other humans (or ANY of the creatures his mom beds down with). How does he get the word? Is he safe from The Flames? Can he truly be Moral?
These are good questions, and not one's I've taken lightly.
I've thought about them a lot -- as have many people.

1. A person in a remote area has no way of getting the Word -- unless God decides to make a personal visit, not likely, as Christ has come and finished everything.
The final words of Christ on earth, both before and after the resurrection, were to go to all the world, every nation, and tell of Christ -- the solution to mankind's problem.

2. All people come from the seed of Adam, and as such, are within the hand of satan. The person in the remote area is within this problem. This troubles a lot of people. I'll tell you what it says within the Bible about this -- other than what I cited above about believers going to all nations to tell of Christ. Btw, the end will not come until Christ is spoken of in all the world.

There are many instances spoken of in the Bible where we are told that Christ knew believers before the foundation of the world. Or that he had planned for our salvation before the foundation of the world.

Here are three verses .....


Ephesians 1:4,5
4 According as he (God) hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,


2Timothy 1:9
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

1Peter 1:20
20 Who (Christ) verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,


What I can understand is that in some way, or realm, God knew the believers (His children) prior to the world we see. We are his children, and his method of 'collecting' us back from the hand of satan is by our hearing and receiving the Christ who He sent.

The people in remote areas who never receive news of Christ are just not God's children, and they were not His children prior to the world that we see.
I guess that is a bottom line way to put it.

3. The remote area person could live up to a moral standard, yes, I do think so.
User avatar
Nacho
Elwood
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:19 am

Post by Nacho »

Romans 1:18-20

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Save me some of that corn for laters...
User avatar
Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Insha'Allah
Posts: 19031
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: filling molotovs

Post by Shlomart Ben Yisrael »

Nacho wrote:Romans 1:18-20

...God's invisible qualities...

...clearly seen...
Something of a contradiction, no?
rock rock to the planet rock ... don't stop
Felix wrote:you've become very bitter since you became jewish......
Kierland drop-kicking Wolftard wrote: Aren’t you part of the silent generation?
Why don’t you just STFU.
User avatar
RadioFan
Liberal Media Conspirator
Posts: 7487
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:59 am
Location: Tulsa

Post by RadioFan »

Felix wrote:
RadioFan wrote: the flood story is allegory. As is the Ark story.

Hope that helps, Felix.
not really....

how is one supposed to separate the allegories and fables from the "word of God"

(much of which is written by people that never actually met Jesus :? )
That's where the "faith" part comes in, along with a religion/demonination, if one so chooses.

Personally, everything Jesus said is the word of God. He alluded to the Old Testament in the sense of "follow the laws" of the 10 commandments. But it's what Jesus didn't say that gets people to arguing -- Everything from drinking alcohol to dancing to abortion to homosexuality to a plethora of other issues.

(There were other Gospels written, btw, of the accounts of Jesus, that weren't included in the "official" version of the Bible at various councils, including Nicaea, but that's a topic for an entirely different thread, at least.)

But the main message of Jesus, without a doubt, is love thine enemies. He didn't say, "love your friends" or even "love strangers," but "love your enemies." That is some hard-core amazing stuff, to put it crassly.

That sentiment, along with contemplating the Trinity -- is what does it for me.
Van wrote:It's like rimming an unbathed fat chick from Missouri. It's highly distinctive, miserably unforgettable and completely wrong.
User avatar
Felix
2012 JAFFL Champ
Posts: 9264
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: probably on a golf course

Re:

Post by Felix »

RadioFan wrote:
Personally, everything Jesus said is the word of God.
but of course we'll never really know exactly what Jesus said because everything you've read is second and third hand at best and probably sixth or seventh hand in reality.....
get out, get out while there's still time
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re:

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

RadioFan wrote:Personally, everything Jesus said is the word of God.
Ya mean, even stuff like:

"Hey, Peter, toss me a bagel."
"Wow, is it frigging hot today, or what?"
"No more of that wine for me...tomorrow I'll be pissing out my asshole!'
"Judas, you are SUCH a dick!"
(walking behind Mary Magdelene): "BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM!!"

Or did you think that Jebus only "spake" pearls of holy wisdom?
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
RadioFan
Liberal Media Conspirator
Posts: 7487
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:59 am
Location: Tulsa

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by RadioFan »

Uh, no, MtLR.

:?:
Van wrote:It's like rimming an unbathed fat chick from Missouri. It's highly distinctive, miserably unforgettable and completely wrong.
User avatar
rozy
Cowboy
Posts: 2928
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 3:45 pm

Re: Re:

Post by rozy »

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:
RadioFan wrote:Personally, everything Jesus said is the word of God.
Ya mean, even stuff like:

"Hey, Peter, toss me a bagel."
"Wow, is it frigging hot today, or what?"
"No more of that wine for me...tomorrow I'll be pissing out my asshole!'
"Judas, you are SUCH a dick!"
(walking behind Mary Magdelene): "BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM!!"

Or did you think that Jebus only "spake" pearls of holy wisdom?
Nah, it sounded more like he was identifying Jesus as God. Something you have done (to some extent) in the past, which makes your post rather interesting to say the least.
John Boehner wrote:Boehner said. "In Congress, we have a red button, a green button and a yellow button, alright. Green means 'yes,' red means 'no,' and yellow means you're a chicken shit. And the last thing we need in the White House, in the oval office, behind that big desk, is some chicken who wants to push this yellow button.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Re:

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

rozy wrote:Nah, it sounded more like he was identifying Jesus as God. Something you have done (to some extent) in the past, which makes your post rather interesting to say the least.
I believe that Jesus is an aspect of God (member of the Trinity, yadda-yadda), but that he was also fully human. I don't believe for a frigging second that everything Jesus ever said in His life had some sort of grave, mystical, Godlike importance. Hell, the Gospels show that his omniscience was sort of an on-again-off-again thing (e.g., he'd mention that "only the Father" knew certain things - I don't have Scripture and verse handy, but I'm sure that other peeps could look it up).

Some Christers insist on reading weird, deep shit into every syllable, and it makes them look and sound like the people that Monty Python parodied in "The Life of Brian" ("Blessed are the cheesemakers").

I also agree with those who point out that every single statement attributed to Jesus has been handed to us second or third hand, written down decades after they were allegedly spoken. Oh sure, we Christians can ease our concerns with that issue by arguing that the folks who wrote down what they think they remembered Him saying (and those who translated it) were "guided by the Holy Spirit," but when it comes down to it, the FACT remains that we have absolutely nothing written by the man himself. You can also count me among those that believes that Jesus's true teachings were perverted by well-meaning followers who came after His death, as well as by that con-man Saul/Paul. Helps explain why they couldn't get their stories straight, despite alleged "Divine Inspiration."
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
Felix
2012 JAFFL Champ
Posts: 9264
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: probably on a golf course

Re: Re:

Post by Felix »

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: Jesus's true teachings were perverted by well-meaning followers who came after His death, as well as by that con-man Saul/Paul. Helps explain why they couldn't get their stories straight, despite alleged "Divine Inspiration."
WINNER!!!!!
get out, get out while there's still time
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by poptart »

The four Gospels were authored by four different people.
They gave accounts of happenings over a few year period of time.
Some accounts are seemingly second hand.
They were written many years after the fact.

Imagine four people attend a wedding.
They (or perhaps a friend of an attendee) write about the events of the wedding many years later.
Think they might come out with somewhat different 'versions' of events?
Different points of view or emphasis?
Different perspectives?

But the fundamentals -- the critically important -- points to be passed on would be consistent.

Hey, if the four Gospels we have to read all said the very same thing then COLLUSION would no doubt be the charge.
What it comes down to is that those who want to dismiss the Word will find a 'suitable' reason (in their mind) to do so.


Mike wrote:Jesus's true teachings were perverted by well-meaning followers who came after His death
Really?

What did Jesus TRULY teach that was perverted, and how do you, Mike the Lab Rat, have this information?
User avatar
Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Insha'Allah
Posts: 19031
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: filling molotovs

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Shlomart Ben Yisrael »

poptart wrote:The four Gospels were authored by four different people.
...and about 200 or so scribes.

Most people of that era were illiterate, including Peter and John.
rock rock to the planet rock ... don't stop
Felix wrote:you've become very bitter since you became jewish......
Kierland drop-kicking Wolftard wrote: Aren’t you part of the silent generation?
Why don’t you just STFU.
User avatar
JayDuck
Quack Whore
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:52 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by JayDuck »

poptart wrote:
What did Jesus TRULY teach that was perverted

Why does everything have to be a Catholic joke?
User avatar
Nacho
Elwood
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:19 am

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Nacho »

mvscal wrote:
Mike the Lab Rat wrote:(walking behind Mary Magdelene): "BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM-BOBBA-BOOM!!"
He definitely never said that. More like: "C'mon Simon, spread your other cheeks and let me pound that sweet cornhole!!!!"
I guess we'll have to wait on Mike to get back on that one. He just might have a source on what Jesus said and how it was perverted that nobody else has...
Save me some of that corn for laters...
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

Well, right of the top of my head, there's that whole Virgin Birth horseshit.

Jesus never mentioned it.

However, His followers (and their minions) insisted on playing the same game that the followers of pagan deities played, and claimed that Jesus was born of a virgin. Worked for Sol Invictus (as did the whole story about dying and then rising from the dead after three days, btw).

Toss in the completely fabricated census that Caeser Augustus allegedly commanded (no records of it and the description of it makes NO sense in light of Roman history), the completely fabricated "slaughter of the firstborn," and it becomes apparent that a lot of "retcon" work had been done to bend OT "prophecies" and history to legitimize their claims.

How 'bout all the frigging rules and "Sacraments" that the Roman Catholics and various Protestant denominations came up with by "interpreting Scripture." Sure as hell flies in the face of Jesus's habit of smacking down Pharisees and their thing for following every jot and tittle of The Law.

And as for Paul? Unless you buy his horsecrap story about "meeting Jesus in a vision," he comes off as little more than a Madison Avenue pitchman who saved a small Jewish cult with little mass appeal by changing the spiel to attract Gentiles. After he convinced the Disciples to drop the rules on diet and circumcision ("Quick, guys, let's call it a ...'circumcision through the SPIRIT'...yeah, THAT'S the ticket!"), the Christian founders stopped hearing "You want me to cut off my WHAT?!?!" from prospective members.

Jesus made a point of saying that "not one letter" of the Law would be abolished until Heaven and Earth passed away...but, as Dinsdale pointed out, we Christians (since the earliest days of the church) have gone cherry-picking out of the OT to decide which rules of the Law "really" apply and which ones don't. I know, I know, the Holy Spirit helped the Church Fathers do the picking.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
PSUFAN
dents with meaning
Posts: 18324
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: BLITZBURGH

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by PSUFAN »

Joseph: Mary, WTF? You're KNOCKED UP???
Mary: oh Joe, GOD knocked me up. It wasn't our neighbor, no indeed!
Jimi: hey Joe, where you going with that gun in your hand?
King Crimson wrote:anytime you have a smoke tunnel and it's not Judas Priest in the mid 80's....watch out.
mvscal wrote:France totally kicks ass.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

mvscal wrote:I don't know what you're talking about. Augustus ordered a number of censuses taken during his reign. It's a Latin word for cryin out loud. How could it possibly "make no sense in light of Roman history"?
According to none other than Dr. William Cook, Distinguished Teaching Professor of History (SUNY/Geneseo), there are no historically accurate and accepted (meaning "accepted by historians not desperate to 'prove' the accuracy of the Gospels...") records indicating that Caeser Augustus decreed a census be done when/how it is described in the Gospel of Luke. Christian apologists keep twisting historical records to "prove" otherwise, but apparently they're bending and stretching in a desperate attempt to make the Gospels seem historically accurate.

Nor is there any evidence AT ALL for the alleged order by herod to slaughter the firstborn kids under a year old. None. Nada. It was just propaganda (although Herod apparently was quite a prick...). The only "evidence" is the brief account in the NT.

The whole horseshit about having folks travel back to their place of birth for the census was wholly made up by the Gospel author to legitimize claims of Jesus's bloodline and his specific birthplace. The authors of the Gospels were famous for playing fast-and-loose with historical facts to buttress their claims for Jesus's being the prophesied Messiah. Hell, Jewish historians and theologians have been poking holes in the Christian interpretations of the OT for millenia...
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

mvscal wrote:Cook is a either a fraudulent tard or a bald-faced liar. His parsing of "no historically accurate and accepted" record of Augustus' census is complete bollocks.
Hmmmmm...who to believe...Distinguished Teaching Professor and renowned history professor (specializing in medieval history, the Bible, the High Middle Ages) who I've known for two decades (had for three classes, had as a guest lecturer in my class)...or some anonymous dude on an intenet chatboard.

You lose.

Oh, and although I'm not a huge fan of Wikipedia, here's a relevant quote:
According to Luke, Caesar Augustus ordered a census be conducted of the "..entire Roman World", during Quirinius's governorship of Syria and that this is the reason that Joseph and Mary, who lived in Nazareth, were in Bethlehem, King David's place of birth, when Jesus was born.

There is no record of a census that would meet this description. The emperor Augustus reported in his Deeds of the Divine Augustus making censuses of Roman citizens in 28 BC, 8 BC and AD 14.[1], but clearly this would exclude Joseph, who was not a Roman citizen. There was a provincial census conducted by Quirinius in Iudaea Province and Syria in AD 6 or 7.

Luke, however, in Luke 1:5 implies that John and Jesus were conceived during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, a decade earlier. If Jesus was conceived during the reign of Herod, then Luke must be wrong about Jesus being born during the census. According to Luke, however, the census was the reason Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem, where according to both Luke and Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born. Matthew records nothing about a census, and appears to imply that the family lived in Bethlehem[2]; both agree Jesus was born there but raised in Nazareth.
mvscal wrote:There were at least three general censuses taken during his reign and no doubt a number of other regional ones taken during the time. The chronology is a little dodgy, but that isn't a reason to reject the account on that basis.
There were NO censuses that required the residents of the region (especially non-Roman citizens) in question to trek back to their places of birth for the sheer purpose of the census. That wasn't how Rome did it and served no logical purpose. To claim otherwise is horsecrap you pulled out of your ass for the sake of being a contrarian know-it-all.

And, asshat, Cook is as far from an atheist as you can be. The guy is a frigging Christer of the first order (Papist) and has gone on religious pilgrimages. One of the truly confounding/inspiring things about his Bible course is how he shreds the historical accuracy of both the Old and New Testaments while still being as devout as he is. On the last day of his class he discusses the apparent contradiction, explaining that -for him- there must, despite the scientific and historical errors, be a great truth in the words of a carpenter's son who preached a simple message for three years in a backwater section of the Roman Empire in order for it to have had the impact that it has had. Cook is a great teacher and is recognized by his peers as a great historian and teacher. He could easily have used his class as a venue for antireligious justifications and instead turns it into a way for students to use a more discerning faith (as opposed to blind, unquestioning acceptance of the literal words of the Bible).
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

Sorry for the double-post.

That's what happens when I try to engage in a theological debate while a three-year-old is bugging the ever-loving crap out of me.
Last edited by Mike the Lab Rat on Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by poptart »

We're shown in Genesis that man was created as the kind of being who must live by God's Word and God's grace.
Apart from this is failure, suffering and death.
The result of man being apart from God's Word is seen throughout the world and throughout history.

So when satan sought to break down mankind, what was the first point of attack?

Discredit God's Word.

Genesis 3 -- don't listen to God's Word, you will not die, you will become like Gods

Satan, the one who deceives the whole world. Revelation 12:9.


God's Word is everything.


Mike, you deny the virgin birth and yet immediately following man leaving God's Word, and mankind being brought into the sin, satan and death problem, God promised the solution through the seed of the Woman -- virgin birth.

Mankind, corrupt and hopelessly infected from Adam, is unable to help himself.
No seed of man can ever work.
So God Himself sends His 'seed' through the woman.

Of course, Isaiah 7:14 later speaks to the virgin birth.

It's fairly ironic that you bring a charge of 'cherry picking' against some Christians, while you yourself deny parts (and critical ones) of the Bible which your 'intellect' has decided are not correct.

Mike wrote:Jesus made a point of saying that "not one letter" of the Law would be abolished until Heaven and Earth passed away
You somehow fail to recognize the spiritual implication of the event of Genesis 3, and so it's not surprising to know that you also fail to recognize the spiritual implication here.

If you're interested, read .....

Matthew 5:17-20
Mark 7:14-23
Matthew 5:21-28
Matthew 9:13
Matthew 12:7

The requirement of sacrifice in order for sins to be forgiven is still in effect, but the requirement has been fulfilled by the death of Jesus Christ.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

mvscal wrote:
Mike the Lab Rat wrote:The emperor Augustus reported in his Deeds of the Divine Augustus making censuses of Roman citizens in 28 BC, 8 BC and AD 14.[1], but clearly this would exclude Joseph, who was not a Roman citizen.
A fact which is completely irrelevant for the purposes of a census. The primary purpose of census taking was establishing a baseline for tax assessment.
It is NOT irrelevant - the whole point of the Gospel of Luke mentioning the census as described was to establish a reason for Joseph to traipse his ass to another location convenient for the "fulfillment of Scripture".

The problem is...the author kind of made the shit up.
Mike the Lab Rat wrote:There were NO censuses that required the residents of the region (especially non-Roman citizens) in question to trek back to their places of birth for the sheer purpose of the census.
mvscal wrote:Says who?
Says the folks who saw fit to discuss the topic in the Wiki entry, historians who actually know stuff about that period - as opposed to you, who has yet to back a single one of your contrarian positions with anything other than insults and claims you pull out of your ass.
Mike the Lab Rat wrote:That wasn't how Rome did it and served no logical purpose.
mvscal wrote:You're a pinhead. Of course that was how they did it. Don't tell me you honestly suppose that census officials went tramping through every dung heap in the Empire, do you? It makes far more sense for the yokels to come to centralized locations to register.
What part of the above information is too complicated for your six or seven neurons to process? The FACT is that Joseph was NOT a Roman citizen and not subject to the aformentioned censuses. Oh, and please explain, you dimwit, how it makes the census taker travel less if the yokels travel back to their places of birth (not, as you've conveniently twisted it, "centralized locations")? All this results in is a shuffling of yokels, with the same amount of traveling for the census taker. Wouldn't it be easier to just ASK people where they were born, instead of having everyone close up shop, relocate for the sheer purpose of telling some adminstrative lackey "Yep, I was born here," and then having to travel BACK to where they lived? Doesn't that strike you as a hell of a lot of needless disruption and pretty damned stupid?

The alleged census as described in Luke told folks that they had to go back to where they were BORN. It doesn't save any time. All it does is provide a literary excuse for Jesus to be born in Bethlehem and give Jesus' followers another argument for his legitimacy.

The fact remains that, as described in Luke, the process makes no sense and has no precedent or evidence. If you have historical evidence showing otherwise, describing a census in which non-Romans had to trek back to their birthplace solely for the purpose of the census, please feel free to provide it. That's all you have to do.
mvscal wrote:Not much of a "Christer" if he doesn't believe the Gospels. What better cloak for his hypocrisy and dishonesty than to proclaim himself a "true believer" whilst shitting on the documents that his alleged faith is based upon?
Contrary to the fundamentalists (and those who like to attack Christianity), one does NOT have to believe in the scientific or historic accuracy of every jot and tittle of Scripture in order to be Christian. Dinsdale's whole line of argument that Christians have to obey all the "stoning kids" crap from Leviticus is the perfect example of a straw man, since NO mainline Christian denomination has ever held that Christians must adhere to all the Judaic Laws of Moses. Circumcision and dietary rules got tossed, the day of worship got changed...all within a relatively short amount of time. Dr. Cook attacks the Bible as a historically/scientifically accurate book so that students can understand it better in the context in which it was written - by a scientifically primitive, academically untrained (as far as modern historical methodology is concerned) people who were trying to explain God's relationship with His people. The authors of the Bible interpreted every event through the lens of God's relationship in their lives - e.g., a military loss for the Jews was not blamed on poor strategy, but due to God's choosing to punish or test the Jews. Thanks to Cook's methods, most his students (myself included) were better able to reconcile the glaring historical/scientific errors and contradictions with our belief in the religious messages.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

poptart wrote:Mike, you deny the virgin birth and yet immediately following man leaving God's Word, and mankind being brought into the sin, satan and death problem, God promised the solution through the seed of the Woman -- virgin birth.

Of course, Isaiah 7:14 later speaks to the virgin birth.
Actually, my Jewish friends like to point out that Christians interpret Isaiah much differently than was intended. For example, they claim that the word we translate as "virgin" actually only means "young girl," and that the whole stuff about the great kid being born refers to an actual kid named Immanuel who was born right around the time of Isaiah.

I loved listening to my fundy friends and Jewish friends argue over how each side either misinterpreted or misunderstood "their" Scripture.
poptart wrote:It's fairly ironic that you bring a charge of 'cherry picking' against some Christians, while you yourself deny parts (and critical ones) of the Bible which your 'intellect' has decided are not correct.
The fact is that the Bible has scientific errors in it. Period. The Bible also has historical errors in it and a heck of a lot of contradictions in it. Only the most credulous, dimwitted boob could honestly claim to have read the Bible and found it to be historically and scientifically accurate and inerrant.

Now, this doesn't cause a problem if one believes (as I, and most mainline denominations do) that the Bible is not supposed to be used as a science or history text. It was not written for those purposes. If one instead believes that the "divinely inspired" but humanly flawed/limited authors set out to write an interpretation of their world that shows us God's relationship with His people and how we should live (i.e., it is inerrant in the matter of faith and morals, then the historical/scientific/contradiction issues aren't a religious dealbreaker. It's only the boobs who claim that every single word must be true or the whole thing is in question who have an issue. Those are the morons I like to tweak.
poptart wrote:The requirement of sacrifice in order for sins to be forgiven is still in effect, but the requirement has been fulfilled by the death of Jesus Christ.
So the Christians claim. However, if it were all so blinking obvious, you'd think that the Jews, the Muslims, etc. would all be able to read the very same words you do and agree. Hell, if it were obvious, you wouldn't have Biblical scholars who remained Jews.

However, it's NOT obvious and depends wholly upon a predisposition to believe in the divinity of Jesus and interpret Scripture in a way that rationalizes your own beliefs.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
Felix
2012 JAFFL Champ
Posts: 9264
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: probably on a golf course

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Felix »

lemme see, where have I heard the story of Jesus and the virgin birth before.....

oh yeah, the Egyptian God Horus......

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

the parallels are remarkable.....
get out, get out while there's still time
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

Here's more to chew on (emphasis added by me):

"[Mithras] was said to have been sent by a father-god to vanquish darkness and evil in the world. Born of a virgin (a birth witnessed only by shepherds), Mithras was described variously as the Way, the Truth, the Light, the Word, the Son of God, and the Good Shepherd and was often depicted carrying a lamb upon his shoulders. Followers of Mithras celebrated December 25th (the winter solstice) by ringing bells, singing hymns, lighting candles, giving gifts, and administering a sacrament of bread and water. Between December 25th and the spring equinox (Easter, from the Latin for earth goddess) came the 40 days' search for Osiris, a god of justice and love. The cult also observed Black Friday, commemorating Mithras' sacrificial bull-slaying which fructified the earth. Worn out by the battle, Mithras is symbolically represented as a corpse and is placed in a sacred rock tomb from which he is removed after three days in a festival of rejoicing"

" Who Do Men Say That I Am?" by Kerry Temple Originally published in The Humanist, May/June 1991.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by poptart »

Mike, if someone asks you why they should believe in Jesus Christ, what do you say?

Why believe?

Why is it needed?
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

poptart wrote:Mike, if someone asks you why they should believe in Jesus Christ, what do you say?
"Believe or don't. It's up to you."

I have no desire to "spread the word" or "share my faith." That evangelical proselytizing shit is obnoxious.

I choose to believe because of a completely irrational thing called "faith."

I know danged well that the Bible is an unreliable source of scientific or historical information, written by imperfect humans (with a definite agenda that colored their writings) who couldn't get their stories straight. As a result of that, I refuse to hinge my faith on the scientific or historical accuracy of every word of Scripture. Unlike a lot of the mindless drones who thump the Bible, I'll admit that a good chunk of the Bible is allegorical and inaccurate and therefore don't have an issue when someone tries to tweak my faith by pointing out a timeline contradiction, scientific error, etc.

I choose to believe in the teachings of Jesus and in His divinity, regardless of all the baggage his followers created and without a need for corroborating "evidence" from historians. It's 100% irrational, but my folks introduced me to this irrationality, it comforts me, it gives me strength, guidance, and hope, and that's a big part of why I persist in it.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by poptart »

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:"Believe or don't. It's up to you."

I have no desire to "spread the word" or "share my faith." That evangelical proselytizing shit is obnoxious.
The very last thing Jesus said to his disciples both before and after his resurrection was to go to all the world, all nations, with the message of Christ.

If your father was on his death bed and had one more thing to to say to you, would you not regard the words that he wanted to speak as being VERY important?

Why would Christ stress bringing the Gospel to all the world, all nations, as the very last point He made?

Well, all the people of the world are trapped in a cursed existence.
Hopelessly doomed to failure and eternal destruction.

That's where you'd be, Mike, if you hadn't been blessed enough for someone to tell you of Christ, who IS life.


You don't believe in the virgin birth.
You think a lot of the Bible is rubbish, and is fraught with unthruths.
You think Paul, who wrote a large portion of the New Testament, 'hijacked' the faith.
You don't care about the final words of Jesus.
.... or perhaps think they were never said, I dunno.

With the way you flick away part of Scripture, like a booger off your finger, if they don't pass the Mike the Lab Rat intelligence test, who really knows?
User avatar
Mike the Lab Rat
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: western NY

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by Mike the Lab Rat »

poptart wrote:The very last thing Jesus said to his disciples both before and after his resurrection was to go to all the world, all nations, with the message of Christ.
Jesus gave the command to the guys with whom he worked and whomever they commissioned. Didn't he also promise them that they'd have really cool proofs of their commission (provided by the Holy Spirit)? Stuff like immunity to poison, ability to do exorcisms, speaking in tongues, etc?

The obnoxious freaks that came in later years and centuries seemed to have lost those "proofs" and resorted to the sword, torture, and governmenentally-sanctioned oppression.

It's the 21st century. If someone wants to learn more about Christ, they are free to peruse the internet (to do online research or find a church/Church that will speak with them). People pushing their devotion to their interpretation of what to believe and how is obnoxious and unAmerican.
poptart wrote:Why would Christ stress bringing the Gospel to all the world, all nations, as the very last point He made?
Because at that time, with no international media, no internet, etc., His message wouldn't have gotten really far unless they spread it.

Gee, does the fact that none of the holy rollers bent on converting the whole world seem to have any of the original "powers" that Jesus gave his disciples mean that the current wave is illegitimate?
poptart wrote:You don't believe in the virgin birth.
Nope, and it's not relevant, despite your beliefs to the contrary. I don't think that the whole "fulfilling Isaiah" bit is anything but retconning, which is a stand that Jewish theologians and a lot of Biblical historians have pointed out (maybe if Mary had named Jesus "Immanuel" it would have fit better...).
poptart wrote:You think a lot of the Bible is rubbish, and is fraught with untruths.
The Bible has a lot of beautiful allegories, poetry, legends, and is a wonderful book full of great moral truths. However, the irrefutable FACT is that it is riddled with all sorts of scientific errors, historical errors, and internal contradictions...which makes sense in light of the limited academic/scientific level of those writing & compiling it.

Anyone who, in the 21st century, honestly believes that the Bible is scientifically and historically 100% accurate is a freaking clueless dick-in-the-dirt-dumb moron.
poptart wrote:You think Paul, who wrote a large portion of the New Testament, 'hijacked' the faith.
Bingo. He was, in many ways, both the best and worst thing to happen to Christianity.

The Apostles and Disciples were not having a great deal of success spreading the Good News. They couldn't convince the mainline Jews that their Way was legit, and not too many Gentiles wanted to convert to Judaism (especially not with the deal-breaker of circumcision).

Paul, who claimed to have met Jesus in a freaking VISION (as opposed to actually having run with the guy), comes out with a set of relaxed membership requirements, beats the Apostles/Disciples in a debate over the issue, and takes his idea and runs with it. I give the guy props for increasing membership. However, his writings (as beuatiful as some of them are) were stuff he made up whole cloth out of his own head - the guy was NOT an Apostle and didn't run with Jesus, and he made shit up that bears no resemblance to things that Jesus actually is credited with saying in the Gospels.

Paul's martyrdom doesn't give any legitimacy to his teachings, IMNSHO, because history is full of self-deluded folks who were willing to die for their beliefs (e.g., Jim Jones/Guyana, Heaven's Gate, Muslims). The whole "it MUST be true, since they were willing to die for it" horseshit defense doesn't work. All it means is that the individuals believed in it enough to die for it...that doesn't serve as a proof of their beliefs' truth.
poptart wrote:You don't care about the final words of Jesus.
.... or perhaps think they were never said, I dunno.
Jesus told his Apostles/Disciples, in a time of primitive communication, to spread the word. He didn't authorize Jesuits to torture and kill aboriginal peoples who refused to convert, he didn't authorize the Dominican Order to torture and kill Jews who refused to convert, he didn't authorize his followers to kill men, women, and children who didn't quite have the same way of expressing their Christianity (e.g., the Albigensian Crusade), and he didn't authorize the old biddies down the block to freaking ring my doorbell every week and pester me to accept THEIR version of Christianity. However, each and every one of the aformentioned examples has been legitimized by Christ's followers as "following his last command."

Maybe I should ask them to swallow some arsenic to prove their credentials. Or speak a language in which they've never had formal training. No Holy Spirit powers? You're a fraud and must get off my porch.

Like I said, pop, neither I nor anyone I run with believes that 100% acceptance of the scientific/historical claims in the Bible is necessary for belief in Christ. We know enough religious history to know how the books of the canon were assembled by committee to jibe with the "powers that be." There's a great deal of beauty in the Bible as compiled and there are great truths in it, but it takes an adult, discerning faith to wade through the tome to see the "Big Picture."

In my opinion, folks who turn around and say "you must buy every letter, every syllable, as the full unvarnished, accurate truth, no matter what science and historians show you" are childlike, credulous dolts desperate to cling to a black-and-white, Santa Claus-level, religious and intellectual world. Mental midgets, every last one of them.

If someone asks why I believe, I just say "faith" and leave it at that. I refuse to whip out a Bible to defend my views, given that all someone has to do is poke the same holes in it that I already have. I didn't witness the events claimed in the NT, I don't buy a lot of the mythological stuff that well-meaning but primitive folks wrote down...and yet, I believe in the divinity of Christ. That drives both fundy folks AND atheists nuts. That means I'm doing something right.

I also refuse to prosyletize (heck, aside from these spirited exchanges, I don't even usually discuss my faith with folks). If folks want to understand how my faith works, they should just see how my family and I live our lives, treat other folks, and leave it at that.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
User avatar
poptart
Quitty McQuitface
Posts: 15211
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:45 pm

Re: Can Non-Christians be Moral?

Post by poptart »

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Jesus told his Apostles/Disciples, in a time of primitive communication, to spread the word.
Jesus told US to spread the message that He is the Christ.

He gave instructions to spread the message to all the world, all nations, to the uttermost part of the earth. -- something those He was speaking directly to at that moment were not capable of doing.


Mike, you don't believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Or .... some of it might be.
At least the parts that seem correct to you.

As we look at the PHENOMENAL scope of His creation in this world, and universe we live in, we can see that God's greatness and power is unspeakable.

That being so, why in the world would he provide such a half-assed book of His 'Word' for you to look at?
Post Reply