At What Point?

[domer76]

Agreed.

But I actually "get" the fundamentalist position. Why on earth would the all-knowing, all-seeing, creator of all things (including time itself) ever "change"?

Exactly.

 

[Into the Night]

Try not being a douche. It works better.

It's not my fault you have trouble with English!

 

[Into the Night]

Look in the mirror and tell yourself when you chose to be straight. If it's all a choice it was a choice for you as well.

It is my choice.

 

[domer76]

a concept that you continue to misuse.....

I’m being generous, dumbfuck. Instead, one could easily say you made up shit to cover your theological fuckups.

 

[Into the Night]

Okay that's fine.

I hate discussions about the stock market and professional baseball and generally avoid them like the plague.

I only got interested in religion when I realized I couldn't have a complete, integrated conception of human history, sociology, and human culture without a working knowledge of the religious traditions.

That is how I am able to make an integrated connection between Rome, the Middle Ages, the Byzantine Empire, Christianity , and western monasticism.

Well, since you don't understand any of the religions except the ones you are part of, you obviously can't make any connection either.

 

[Into the Night]

I’m being generous, dumbfuck. Instead, one could easily say you made up shit to cover your theological fuckups.

You are describing yourself again, Sybil. You cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else.

 

[Into the Night]

It's reasonable to parse the law into "ritual purity" and "divine eternal" except insofar as the BIble does NOT make this distinction. Nowhere to my recollection does Jesus say "...Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the "ritual purity" laws, till all be fulfilled."

It is a nice exegesis to break the law up this way. And certainly it kind of feels like dispensationalism.

It really seems that it is yet one more way to square the circle of the Bible. Along with simply jettisoning those books one doesn't necessarily feel comfortable with (as you do with the OT) it really helps move God into a more ecumenical, universal God.

As opposed to the fierce partisan for a tiny uplands tribe in a desertified corner of the world.




Yes, Jesus seems to on the whole recast the laws in simplified forms without reliance on the ritual purity laws. Or at least the authors of the Gospels do.

This is the stuff I find valuable in the Bible. It is the good stuff. But it is hard to parse that out from the OT when even Jesus states: "...Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."




Even THAT was a debate in the early Church. I believe you said elsewhere something I agree with: Paul is largely responsible for Christianity. (Apologies if you didn't say that, but it is something that makes a lot of sense) which really kind of is a "John Smith with the golden tablets" kind of moment. A way to see how the "sausage" of a new faith is created leveraging the tenants (loosely) of the old faith and upending it simultaneously.

But most Christians would still prefer the faith to be defined by Christ, not someone who never met him.




The reason it is important to keep the OT in mind when reading the NT or being a Christian is:

1. It is the "origin story" of the faith. Jesus relies on the older faith to build his newer church
2. It is as viable and valid a "biography" of God as anything else. It is presumably the SAME God as in the NT
3. It is disallowed per the Christian faith to simply jettison the OT (Marcionite Heresy)
4. It is an EXCELLENT x-ray of the "God-Concept" to show how God EVOLVES exactly as a human construction would be expected to. (Why would God suddenly become a lover of all people across the earth after being a partisan handing over towns to his chosen people to be slaughtered by them or commanding genocides through his prophet?)


The OT is where we first meet God. The NT is the next book in the series and the authors decided that they needed to "change up" the character to make him fit more current times.

We even see it today! God is constantly changing to meet our needs.


That's the whole point of keeping the OT in mind in these discussions.

Try reading the Bible.

 

[Into the Night]

So you compare homosexuals to murderers?

Manslaughter, actually, for older times. Their presence created a disease menace. That's why they were stoned to death back then.

Fortunately, that is no longer necessary due to modern medicine. Most of these diseases can be contained or controlled sufficiently to protect the bulk of the population from them.

For the homo, however, they still suffer from the effects of their behavior. They live, but often with AIDS and other maladies, not to mention their selfish attitude.

There's a reason neither Jesus Chris nor God condoned this behavior.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed.

But I actually "get" the fundamentalist position. Why on earth would the all-knowing, all-seeing, creator of all things (including time itself) ever "change"?

Not fundamentalism.

A fundamentalist is one that tries to prove their religion True. That's not possible, since ALL religions are based on some initial circular argument with arguments extending from that. A fundamentalist is one that commits the Circular Argument fallacy in an effort to prove their religion True.

It is not possible to prove a circular argument either True or False.

 

[Litmus]

No, it is a historical fact that the political and economic collapse of the western Roman empire, the depopulation of cities, and the disruption of trade networks led to a period of economic and intellectual decline of western Europe.

The primary cause was not Christianity. If that were true, the brand of Greek Orthodox Christianity practiced in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) would have had the same effect; but the Byzantine Empire was vibrant and flourished throughout late antiquity and the middle ages.

It's a historical fact that literacy and education in western Europe during the bleak period of the early middle ages was kept alive in large measure by the monasteries, monks, and scribes.

When you get to things like the Scopes monkey trial, then you can really make legitimate complaints about the toxic effect of fundamentalist Christianity on educated thought.

the church burned people for doing science.

but of course in your dumb view, only protestants can do any wrong.

you have the intellectual development of an Inquisitor.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I’m being generous, dumbfuck. Instead, one could easily say you made up shit to cover your theological fuckups.

it would simply be more of your lies, fuckwit......

 

[Into the Night]

the church burned people for doing science.

Quite true. Galileo was lucky. He was shown the instruments of torture, but decided to become quiet and suffer only house arrest. His crime? Falsifying the terracentric universe.

but of course in your dumb view, only protestants can do any wrong.

you have the intellectual development of an Inquisitor.

I have to agree with you there.

 

[Kafka]

Not fundamentalism.

A fundamentalist is one that tries to prove their religion True. That's not possible, since ALL religions are based on some initial circular argument with arguments extending from that. A fundamentalist is one that commits the Circular Argument fallacy in an effort to prove their religion True.

It is not possible to prove a circular argument either True or False.

Moron says what?

 

[Cypress]

the church burned people for doing science.

but of course in your dumb view, only protestants can do any wrong.

you have the intellectual development of an Inquisitor.

Let's get the facts right.

Experimental science didn't exist in any measurable way in western Europe until the 16th century.

Religious heretics were burned at the stake, which was a common punishment for a variety of crimes in pre-modern Europe.

Christianity was the major sponsor of natural philosophy prior to the Renaissance, and astronomy and math were considered an integral part of a monastic education. Mostly because they need the skills to predict celestial events for purpose of the liturgical calendar.

Things like the Scopes monkey trial and the persecution of Galileo are legitimate to discuss, but nobody was burned at the stake.

 

[Litmus]

Let's get the facts right.

Experimental science didn't exist in any measurable way in western Europe until the 16th century.

Religious heretics were burned at the stake, which was a common punishment for a variety of crimes in pre-modern Europe.

Christianity was the major sponsor of natural philosophy prior to the Renaissance, and astronomy and math were considered an integral part of a monastic education. Mostly because they need the skills to predict celestial events for purpose of the liturgical calendar.

Things like the Scopes monkey trial and the persecution of Galileo are legitimate to discuss, but nobody was burned at the stake.

but a monastic education was not for people in general.

they were also the suppressors of science and the burners of scientists.

your "only protestants are bad" paradigm is horseshit, but it's typical of masons and their "always back the totalitarian crazy people" policy.

keep religion crazy, to avoid real discussions of morality.

protestantism is a ray of light in the dark catholic reign of terror.

you're ignorant of everything involving christianity it seems.

 

[Cypress]

but a monastic education was not for people in general.

they were also the suppressors of science and the burners of scientists.

your "only protestants are bad" paradigm is horseshit, but it's typical of masons and their "always back the totalitarian crazy people" policy.

keep religion crazy, to avoid real discussions of morality.

protestantism is a ray of light in the dark catholic reign of terror.

you're ignorant of everything involving christianity it seems.

This is where your tenth grade education has left you unequipped to understand European history.

Not only were you unaware that a monastic education in the middle ages included astronomy, logic, and mathematics...

I'm sure you were completely unaware that the Byzantine Empire - under the direct influence of Greek Orthodox Christianity - made profound advances in the sciences, technology, medicine. And the Byzantines were responsible for the transmission of technical/scientific knowledge and Greek logic to Renaissance Italy and the Islamic world.

The Byzantines were very nearly a Greek Orthodox Christian theocracy.

You're welcome to backtrack and retreat to the outrageous treatment of Galileo, but he wasn't burned at the stake which was the foundation of your original claim.

 

[Litmus]

This is where your tenth grade education has left you unequipped to understand European history.

Not only were you unaware that a monastic education in the middle ages included astronomy, logic, and mathematics...

I'm sure you were completely unaware that the Byzantine Empire - under the direct influence of Greek Orthodox Christianity - made profound advances in the sciences, technology, medicine. And the Byzantines were responsible for the transmission of technical and scientific knowledge and Greek logic to Renaissance Italy and the Islamic world.

The Byzantines were very nearly a Greek Orthodox Christian theocracy.

You're welcome to backtrack and retreat to Galileo, but he wasn't burned at the stake which was the foundation of your original claim.

the rich romans abandoned Rome and went to run the Byzantium empire from Venice and put Europe on extinguish, leaving their devil church behind to burn knowledge and good from the earth.

the black nobiliity, the venetians and the doge, and Byzantium. the oligarchs.. the forever men.

now who's uneducated.

still you.

 

[Cypress]

the rich romans abandoned Rome and went to run the Byzantium empire from Venice and put Europe on extinguish, leaving their devil church behind to burn knowledge and good from the earth.

the black nobiliity, the venetians and the doge, and Byzantium. the oligarchs.. the forever men.

now who's uneducated.

still you.

The "Byzantium" Empire was run from Constantinople, not from Venice. "Byzantium" is the old Greek name for what became the city of Constantinople.

Posters tend to get facts wrong when they frantically Google a topic they knew nothing about three minutes earlier.


I noticed how you tried to move the goaleposts, hoping I wouldn't notice. You started out saying "Christianity" was burning scientists. No such hostility to science and natural philosophy ever existed under Greek Orthodox Christianity in the Eastern Roman Empire...so you tried to modify your claim to heap the blame only on the Catholic church.

 

[Into the Night]

Let's get the facts right.

Let's see you try to redefine words again.

Experimental science didn't exist in any measurable way in western Europe until the 16th century.

Science is not experiments. There is no such thing as 'experimental science'.

Religious heretics were burned at the stake, which was a common punishment for a variety of crimes in pre-modern Europe.

Christianity was the major sponsor of natural philosophy prior to the Renaissance, and astronomy and math were considered an integral part of a monastic education. Mostly because they need the skills to predict celestial events for purpose of the liturgical calendar.

That primarily came from Islam, not Christianity.

Things like the Scopes monkey trial and the persecution of Galileo are legitimate to discuss, but nobody was burned at the stake.

Because Galileo relented enough to suffer house arrest instead.

 

[Into the Night]

but a monastic education was not for people in general.

they were also the suppressors of science and the burners of scientists.

Tell that to Descartes, Galileo, Kepler, and many other Christian scientists.

your "only protestants are bad" paradigm is horseshit, but it's typical of masons and their "always back the totalitarian crazy people" policy.

Freemasons have no such policy.

keep religion crazy, to avoid real discussions of morality.

It could be argued (and has) that ALL religion is crazy.

protestantism is a ray of light in the dark catholic reign of terror.

I could agree to a certain amount with that.

you're ignorant of everything involving christianity it seems.

I think you had better do some serious navel gazing and ask yourself what 'Christianity' actually IS.