The Pharaoh, Exodus, God, and the Meme that started an argument

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-21-2016, 02:43 PM)GMDino Wrote: Exactly.  But far too many never get to that point BECAUSE of the indoctrination.  And those that DO choose to question their faith are presented with...more indoctrination in the form of religious "facts".

I'm totally cool with each person's faith being their own.  Mine has ebbed and flowed for years now.  I have different ideas about what to believe from time to time.  But let's be clear, I didn't have a choice.  Left to my own devices with no religious education I may have reached a "there must be something bigger" moment when I was younger and then abandoned it as I grew and became more educated.  But that was not an option.  It was believe or burn.  And if you get that put into your head long enough even adult doubts can get squelched.

And that's not to bash anyone who still believes what they were told/taught.  But it WAS what you were taught...and now you still have faith that it is true.

Too often, the biggest problem with Religion are the people that organize and preach it. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-21-2016, 02:51 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: But keep it to yourself and stop shoving it down everyones throats.

Another lazy refrain. 

No one is shoving anything down your throat. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-21-2016, 07:38 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How many adults choose to have faith in Santa, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy after the indoctrination ends during childhood?

Probably the same amount that were able to personally experience that they were, indeed, real. 

DISCLAIMER: The answer is obviously, zero. But it's not comparable since i've been confronted with all the above and am of the belief that only one is really real. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-23-2016, 09:44 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I think a major problem with organized religions is that, in trying to reconcile religious beliefs with living in a society or many different beliefs, there is a tendency for insecurity and a competitive spirit to arise. The concept that a religion should be a set of beliefs for an individual to adopt and live his or her own live by becomes warped into the concept that a religion needs to control and run a society in order to make sure that everyone adopts those beliefs and runs their lives in the "proper way". And that begs the question of, "If your religion is the one true religion, why would it need to force people to believe in it?" People can't help but question this as the logic behind forcing a religion upon others is flawed. And that questioning further increases the insecurity of the organized religion to the point of entrenchment. 

I certainly don't remember Jesus telling his disciples to build massive churches and try to attract as many people as possible, while highlighting certain teachings and ignoring others, so they can live in mansions with fat bank accounts. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-24-2016, 02:11 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Probably the same amount that were able to personally experience that they were, indeed, real. 

DISCLAIMER: The answer is obviously, zero. But it's not comparable since i've been confronted with all the above and am of the belief that only one is really real. 

(09-24-2016, 01:53 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I get how an eternal fate would cause some to act a certain way to "guarantee" they get the outcome they want. But in practicality, it makes little sense. With no tangible evidence that it will happen, who would continue to believe in something for years or decades? 

In my personal experience, and those that i know personally, it's the day to day experience that keeps the belief tangible. As i've stated on many occasions, simply reading something in a book, or hearing from someone else, isn't nearly enough for me to hang on to a belief for an extended period of time. 


"Intellectuals" like to read things, see verifiable recreatable evidence of things and come to a "logical" conclusion. That's never going to happen with Religion, so it's a waste of time to even debate that angle. 

If you can't hang onto your belief without tangible evidence, what is the difference between you and "intellectuals"?

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-25-2016, 01:13 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If you can't hang onto your belief without tangible evidence, what is the difference between you and "intellectuals"?

I would never question someone's decisions or their belief when going through troubling times. My story just points out that, regardless of those troubling times, i never doubted that God was real. I just chose to not live in the pain and i covered that up by trying to do things that would make me not feel it as much. After a while, i realized it didn't work. 

My issue with the "intellectuals" is, how intellectual can you be when you understand that something is based on faith, yet you choose to speak out and deny it because you can't see or test it? It's like running a test on something and ignoring the most crucial aspect of it. Makes zero sense.

[Bengalzona]

(09-25-2016, 01:13 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If you can't hang onto your belief without tangible evidence, what is the difference between you and "intellectuals"?

Exactly. Lack of evidence or even evidence to the contrary is implicit in the definition of belief. If your belief is conditioned upon having evidence, then it isn't really a belief.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2016, 12:05 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I would never question someone's decisions or their belief when going through troubling times. My story just points out that, regardless of those troubling times, i never doubted that God was real. I just chose to not live in the pain and i covered that up by trying to do things that would make me not feel it as much. After a while, i realized it didn't work. 

My issue with the "intellectuals" is, how intellectual can you be when you understand that something is based on faith, yet you choose to speak out and deny it because you can't see or test it? It's like running a test on something and ignoring the most crucial aspect of it. Makes zero sense.

Maybe I misunderstood, I thought you meant the daily experience which keep the belief tangible are evidence  

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-25-2016, 01:08 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Maybe I misunderstood, I thought you meant the daily experience which keep the belief tangible are evidence  

Daily experiences as opposed to simply reading or hearing about something and believing. 

But yes, it's those things i've experienced myself that convinced/convince me. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2016, 01:29 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Daily experiences as opposed to simply reading or hearing about something and believing. 

But yes, it's those things i've experienced myself that convinced/convince me. 

You believe because of evidence, but your problem with intellectuals is their desire for evidence?  I'm obviously missing your point. 

[Bengalzona]

(09-25-2016, 04:21 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You believe because of evidence, but your problem with intellectuals is their desire for evidence?  I'm obviously missing your point. 

Evidence is something that you can show someone else. A personal experience would not necessarily be evidence.

If I saw Bigfoot, I couldn't really expect others to know that I saw it without some sort of evidence to support.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-25-2016, 04:21 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You believe because of evidence, but your problem with intellectuals is their desire for evidence?  I'm obviously missing your point. 

Yes you are. 

Faith is based on a one on one relationship between man and God. It's up to each person to believe or not based on their experience.

I believe because of my personal experiences. But i can't show you physical proof. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2016, 04:26 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Evidence is something that you can show someone else. A personal experience would not necessarily be evidence.

If I saw Bigfoot, I couldn't really expect others to know that I saw it without some sort of evidence to support.

People are convicted or exonerated of crimes based upon eyewitness testimony every day. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2016, 05:03 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yes you are. 

Faith is based on a one on one relationship between man and God. It's up to each person to believe or not based on their experience.

I believe because of my personal experiences. But i can't show you physical proof. 

I still fail to see your point. You believe based upon evidence while claiming your problem with intellectuals is they require evidence in order to believe. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-26-2016, 01:00 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I still fail to see your point. You believe based upon evidence while claiming your problem with intellectuals is they require evidence in order to believe. 

Yes. 

But my issue isn't with wanting evidence, in and of itself. My issue is dismissing something due to a lack of physical evidence, when what they are dismissing is based on a faith, and it's--or it should be--understood that it's based in believing on the unseen. 

I can come to a conclusion on any number of things in any number of ways, but i can't always physically demonstrate how i came to that conclusion. 

[Bengalzona]

(09-26-2016, 12:56 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: People are convicted or exonerated of crimes based upon eyewitness testimony every day. 

Hence the qualifier "not necessarily".

As a race, humans are really pretty inconsistent with treating eyewitness testimony.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-26-2016, 08:08 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Yes. 

But my issue isn't with wanting evidence, in and of itself. My issue is dismissing something due to a lack of physical evidence, when what they are dismissing is based on a faith, and it's--or it should be--understood that it's based in believing on the unseen. 

I can come to a conclusion on any number of things in any number of ways, but i can't always physically demonstrate how i came to that conclusion. 

Is the Bible evidence?

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-26-2016, 11:08 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Is the Bible evidence?

For me personally, no. The Bible is...i hope this doesn't sound as bad as i think it does...to me, a history book. A book with guidelines on how i should live. 

Now that you ask, i realize i've never really looked at it as anything specific. It's a book that i can read for reassurance, to study for answers to questions i might have. A reference for questions others may have. Things like that. 

I can't really say it's something that has been any kind of deciding factor in shaping my belief in the beginning. That's why i've always said, for me, my belief is based on more than words i've read or heard from others. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-27-2016, 12:58 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: For me personally, no. The Bible is...i hope this doesn't sound as bad as i think it does...to me, a history book. A book with guidelines on how i should live. 

Now that you ask, i realize i've never really looked at it as anything specific. It's a book that i can read for reassurance, to study for answers to questions i might have. A reference for questions others may have. Things like that. 

I can't really say it's something that has been any kind of deciding factor in shaping my belief in the beginning. That's why i've always said, for me, my belief is based on more than words i've read or heard from others. 

I don't believe the Bible because I've read the Bible. It is inconsistent, contradictary, and illogical. 

The creator of the universe would be the ultimate intellectual because the creator is the subject matter expert on every subject. I understand faith based belief, but we are taught the Bible was written by God. Specifically, different authors (many unknown, but presumed to be written by specific men...and only men) influenced by the Holy Spirit. Correct?  If God wrote the Bible and is the ultimate intellectual then why does He contradict Himself so much and why is it so illogical?

I'll give you two examples. We've already touched on free will. God gave us free will and wants us to do they right thing and even though He knew what we are going to do before He created the universe we still have to choose to do that thing He knows we are going to do, but if we were to choose to do something different than what He knows we are going to do then He would already know. 

It's like if you and I sat down at a poker table in Vegas. Before we started playing, I know every card every player will be dealt in the exact order it will be dealt, I know every decision every player will make, I know who will win and lose, and how much. So if I know you will lose all your money trying to draw to an inside straight flush are you ever going to fold or win or decide to do anything else other than what I know you're going to do?  No. You're going to lose trying to draw to an inside straight flush infinity out of infinity times. There is only one outcome and it is the same outcome I knew would happen before we sat down at the table and before we decided to travel to Vegas and before you and I were born and before the game of poker was invented and even before the atoms used to make the molecules which form the playing cards and all matter in the universe even existed. So even though you still have yet to choose to lose that hand, you are going to choose to lose that hand. You will never win. I know you will never win.

Unless, God usurps your free will like he did Pharaoh's free will in Exodus. In which case, you don't have free will. So we all have free will except when God decides to over rule our free will to carry out His plan. That's a major contradiction which has been rationalized for over 2000 years and I'm just not buying any of the rationalizations. 

Second example, the Fall of Man. God punished Adam and Eve (and all of posterity) for disobeying him and eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Before they ate, they had no concept of good or evil. Right or wrong. They had no conscience. That thing that tells us not to do something because we know it is wrong. Like disobeying God, for example. 

That would be like me punishing my infant child for shitting in his diaper after I commanded him not to shit in his diaper although I know with 100% certainty the infant is definitely going to shit in his diaper after I ordered him not to shit in his diaper because he doesn't yet understand not to disobey his father. If I punished my infant son for doing something he didn't understand was wrong that would make me not only a complete idiot, but an awful father who doesn't have any business having kids because I obviously don't have the intellectual capacity to raise a child, let alone create a universe. 

With all that being said, I'm not saying "God" doesn't exist. I don't know. I'm undecided. However, "in the beginning" is just another way of saying, "Once upon a time."  The Bible is just an anthology of mythology. No different than Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Norse, Hindu, Aztec, etc, etc, etc mythology. 

I don't believe any single religion has it right regarding god, but I think there may be a little truth to each. I just try to live my life the best I can. If that isnt good enough for "God" then He isn't much of a god. 

People can believe what ever religion they choose. However, people confuse respecting their right to believe with respecting their belief. I don't have to respect their religious belief any more than I have to respect someone's belief Justin Bieber is a great singer. I don't want to have laws based upon specific religions anymore than I want to hear Justin Bieber on the radio 24/7. 

[Dill]

(10-07-2016, 11:49 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I don't believe the Bible because I've read the Bible. It is inconsistent, contradictary, and illogical. 

I have read the Bible, first, as a collection of translated, ancient documents which track something of tribal movements and cultural practices the first Millenium BC Palstine. It's histories are not "history" though. E.g., the Exodus story is pieced together hundreds of years after the supposed fact and shaped by doctrinal needs of 9-7th century BC Jews. Those needs are what it tells us about. Not about the actual deeds of some dude named "Moshe" and an historical Pharoah.

Second I read it because so much written and done over the last 2,000 years has been based upon or inflected by it. Can't understand our (Western) history or current U.S. politics while remaining ignorant of that book and the denominations dividing over it.