And of course christianity is fabricated on how do we get here. The very first page of bible talks about God creating the world. Jesus talks a lot about afterlife and heaven and how to live here so that we can get to heaven. It’s not just “lifestyle of living now” that’s way oversimplified.
I was a Democrat, yes.
Is atheism ever anything more than a critical theory against the idea of God and faith? Isn’t atheism a declaration of, “I am a materialist, and I believe in a material world?”
And that is perfectly okay! All people of faith are asking of atheists is to understand that we believe that the world goes beyond what is material/physical and extends into a second dimension of spirit and spirituality. This means, not only do we want to care for our bodies and minds to make them the best possible, but we also want to grow and strengthen in spirit, or the true essence of what we are. Our belief is that spirit extends beyond our mind, certainly beyond or physical bodies.
atheism is a rejection of theism by its definition but does not say “I am a materialist” … you dont have to believe God to believe there are metaphysical things in reality…let alone a God that speaks, has emotions, sent Jesus, or got some random lady pregnant 2000 years ago
Did you not get the joke/play on of words with “Materialist!”
What I don’t get is the "you don’t have to believe God to believe…a God that speaks…
that’s not what I said. I said you dont have to believe in theistic God to believe metaphysical entities exist. The term God is blurry anyway…thus, simply believing metaphysical things exist certainly does not require belief in a God that speaks, or has emotions, as described by classical / western religion and mythology. God and metaphysics are not the same thing, you seem to be confusing metaphysics with supernatural
I do understand metaphysics, and it has nothing to do with God, so I was wondering why you were speaking of them in the same thought/sentence.
My point is that people of faith and God believe in spirit as opposed to metaphysics. But just as people of faith do no rule out the physical world or its metaphysics, we do not rule out spirit/God. In other words, we are exploring an entirely different dimension, one in which some haven’t any interest. But that disinterest isn’t going to make people of faith’s interest in exploring it go away.
Huh?? This is what you said, just this morning
That’s what I was responding to. Materialism is not metaphysics. Atheists can believe metaphysical things and still not believe in God .
You also just said this!
Beyond “physical world” is metaphysics I think … beyond physical world, and spirit isnt owned by religion. atheists can be spiritual. atheists can believe in non physical things. it diesnt mean you must believe in a theistic god
Why are we even going down this rabbit hole we were talking about if virgin birth was myth or allegory, what does any of this have to do with it
I am trying to understand your beliefs. All you seem to be doing is telling me about my beliefs–and you are missing the boat in that regard as well, because as many people of faith that there are, there are about that many approaches to scripture. Add in the atheists and we have even more. What I attempt to do is trace back each scripture to its source, its time, its culture, history, and language. Who was the original audience and what was the intent/purpose of the authors?
As I mentioned early on, it was clearly the intent of the author of Revelation to use allegory and figurative speech in the apocalyptic style of literature popular at that time. We don’t see that style of literature in Luke’s accounts. Nor is that style used by Matthew. Matthew’s style was to use the Old Testament to foreshadow New Testament events. John’s style was to approach the life of Jesus from a spiritual angle. Mark’s Gospel and the New Testament Letters seem to be the most straight forward recording of events.
When you come in and agree with people who say that Matthew and Luke’s accounts are allegory, then I expect more set forth from a literature standpoint that demonstrates the Nativity story was written as an allegory, Noting it must be allegory because there is no such thing as a virgin birth doesn’t make a good case for what the author believed and how he presented his beliefs to his audience. It only tells me you believe the Nativity story is fiction, but perhaps think it is more polite to call it “allegory.” You are not pointing out areas where you see Luke believing he was writing an allegory.
Hahaha sure ok
So, nothing more? We’re done here?
Except that’s not what you said you said it couldnt have been allegory because Mary was a real person…I cant discuss things with you if you cant follow along your own words
That is how Luke in his Gospel presented her. Do you disagree?
We’ve gone over this already
I’m not convinced you are being honest in your intentions so yes
All religious parables, creation myths and destruction prophecies come from the same lost culture.
Praise be to cthulhu. May be raise from his deep slumber.