Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[dawwg]

Catholicism can never recover from the evil it has spread, and continues to spread the world over.

If we let them stew in their own shyte that'll teach 'em, allowing for reincarnation. So what's your objection?

[Sculptor1]

Catholicism can never recover from the evil it has spread, and continues to spread the world over.

If we let them stew in their own shyte that'll teach 'em, allowing for reincarnation. So what's your objection?

What is my objection to what?
And what is re-incarnation?

[dawwg]

What's your objection to old Saturn stewing his morsels in their own shyte?
There's no accounting for taste.
[image]https://i.postimg.cc/3wpFn0xF/Untitled.jpg[/image]

[GaryLouisSmith]

I'm neither a scholar nor a historian, but I've been bitten by the Christ Myth "bug". I can't be a clearing house for a huge fund of Christ Myth information. My chief motive for this post is to see the issue kicked around - to see what readers think of this issue.

I will start off by saying that I pray to Jesus; I am gay: and I think the Church today is mainly the creation of heterosexualists who wanted to make God in their own image. I have been a strongly religious gay activist for many years and I have spent a lot of time studying philosophy and theology. I am a Platonic Realist. I love philosophical debate. Unfortunately, most atheists don’t. So if you want to strongly object to what I have to say, please do. I love a good rant.

First, I want to say that if Jesus is a myth, the writer of that myth sure didn’t do a very good job. What we do know of the historical Jesus is almost nothing. And what we do see as his character is a pouty complainer. He was very argumentative – like me. He just did not have good “communication skills”. I think an airtight case can be easily made that he was gay with “the disciple Jesus loved”. I have known a lot of fa**oty guys just like him. A holy terror. And as with Socrates, they just had enough of him and killed him. The New Age loving Jesus is nowhere to be found in the Bible. The New Testament is mainly a cover-up. They were covering up his homosexuality.

Now for Paul. In the book of Galatians, Paul’s main idea is that the Law of the Jews was not given by God, but by a lower order of angels and anyone who follows it is an idolater. Read it.

As for the sacrifice of Jesus. When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.

If you want to know why I pray to Jesus, it is because I want to. It is a great pleasure. Lover God.

[MAYA EL]

MAYA EL: And even then I still can't put that much credit into it because just like the Dead Sea Scrolls they were sucked up and carefully examined before we ever got our hands on them and I promise you all conflicting documentation stayed hidden or got Rewritten.

We know that didn't happen because much of the information in it is considered heretical by the Catholic Church (e.g., the statement that Jesus was married), and they would have preferred it never saw the light of day.

One should not confuse the historical evidence that Jesus the man existed with evidence for the claim by the Church that the historical Jesus was literally the son of God - two very different things.

I wouldn't go so far as to say two very different things. More like the same coin just different sides of it .
Have you ever heard of the piso family?

[Felix]

MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?

I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?

GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.

I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.

[GaryLouisSmith]

MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?

I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?

GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.

I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.

Neurotic, erotic, what's the difference? There is none.

[Felix]

Well, fear is considered to be the basis of neurosis. If you are afraid or nervous about sex, than it is unlikely to be erotic. Perhaps neurosis is too weak a term for what you described but I am not a psychiatrist so will not go there....

[GaryLouisSmith]

Well, fear is considered to be the basis of neurosis. If you are afraid or nervous about sex, than it is unlikely to be erotic. Perhaps neurosis is too weak a term for what you described but I am not a psychiatrist so will not go there....

Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person? It is really scaaaaaaaary.

[MAYA EL]

MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?

I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?

GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.

I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.

I did not say "hey what do you think about the piso family conspiracy? It's what I believe in and that's why I'm not a Christian "
I simply asked if you have heard of it or not .
And i highly doubt there is rock hard evidence of jesus having existed.
Not to mention the fact that we write differently (especially in the USA ) back before the dark ages the written codex was written in such a way that you can't take it at face value because its Hellenistic/apocalyptic/alchemical so that to the untrained person that gets there hands on a book they shouldn't have access to they will hopefully not be able to understand the true meaning of what's written.
Every character is simply a representation for something usually completely different then the character being used for the story and so the ignorant man that reads the bible and thinks that moses found a burning Bush that didn't burn that also had God in it on top of a mountain
While the man that was trained in the particular style used he interprets it to say that during a long fast a d in medatation a man activates his pineal gland and by activation of it he connects with the God mind and it changes his personality and walk of life forever .

(Just an example)

[Felix]

Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person?

I can't honestly say I ever found that to be frightening, if I did, I'd want to take a good look at myself to find the source of that neurotic tendency.

[GaryLouisSmith]

Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person?

I can't honestly say I ever found that to be frightening, if I did, I'd want to take a good look at myself to find the source of that neurotic tendency.

Trembling in the presence of Beauty appears to be one of the great pleasures in life that you seem to have missed.

[anonymous66]

You don't have to convince me that the Bible says that Jesus said he was the Son of God. You have to convince me that Jesus actually said those words.

Ok then that's a slightly different issue.

Since it has been around 20 centuries since all that happened, and since the Gospel authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) and Paul do not agree in their narratives exactly, we will never know exactly what happened back in those days long ago.

During those 20 centuries Christianity has undergone many changes that make it unrecognizable from its original form. Today it is just another organized religion used as a vehicle to control the masses.

Religion itself is a black box and a dead end. It is very good for brainwashing children, but once these children grow up then they themselves are caught in a trap that they most often do not have the tools to escape from.

Pure philosophy provides those tools.

Philosophy provides rationalism for those who are thinking, stoicism for those who are suffering, and epicureanism for those who are most fortunate.

And if you want to believe in a philosophy-God, then Aristotle, Aquinas, and Leibniz provide proofs of God which will give anyone seeking God individually and independently of organized religion a way to do so.

Have you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.

[h_k_s]

Ok then that's a slightly different issue.

Since it has been around 20 centuries since all that happened, and since the Gospel authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) and Paul do not agree in their narratives exactly, we will never know exactly what happened back in those days long ago.

During those 20 centuries Christianity has undergone many changes that make it unrecognizable from its original form. Today it is just another organized religion used as a vehicle to control the masses.

Religion itself is a black box and a dead end. It is very good for brainwashing children, but once these children grow up then they themselves are caught in a trap that they most often do not have the tools to escape from.

Pure philosophy provides those tools.

Philosophy provides rationalism for those who are thinking, stoicism for those who are suffering, and epicureanism for those who are most fortunate.

And if you want to believe in a philosophy-God, then Aristotle, Aquinas, and Leibniz provide proofs of God which will give anyone seeking God individually and independently of organized religion a way to do so.

Have you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.

The various atheistic theories simply do not interest me.

I view them all as Satanic, although there is also a chance that someone like Bertrand Russell was driven to atheism simply by his own hard life during WW1 England. He was jailed for his anti-war and anti-propaganda views. 100 years later we now know he was right, that WW1 was a futile mistake, and that lying to the population through propaganda is immoral. However he was quite alone in his fight against them both back then. His ill treatment is what led him to conclude there is no God, although assuming such involves a plethora of contradictions and fallacies.

If you are given a hard life to bear, it is simply a test of your worthiness of the love of God. This theme is mentioned in Keanu Reeves's movie "Constantine." If you cannot bear it without denying God, then you are not worthy. End of test. You failed.

There are other reasons for atheism as well. Born with a silver spoon and no needs at all will also lead to atheism. These people are not very useful to God therefore there is no loss when they become lost.

[anonymous66]

Have you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.

The various atheistic theories...

To be clear- Don Cupitt is not an atheist- he is a Christian non-realist. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/ ... es-dawkins

I am one of the now-unfashionable and increasingly beleaguered Church of England liberals who will be raising a glass next year to toast the 30th anniversary of the publication of the Revd Don Cupitt’s Taking Leave of God. Theological conserva­tives may not think there is much to learn from Cupitt’s arch-liberal classic, but they should think again.

The book’s provocative title ap­peared to say that we could dispense with God altogether, and many jumped to this conclusion, calling Cupitt a “Christian atheist”. In fact, Cupitt was trying to make theology more truthful: he wanted to purify our ideas of God rather than dis­pense with them.

The book’s title came from the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart: “Man’s last and highest parting comes when, for God’s sake, he takes leave of God.” In other words, it is only when we let go of our inade­quate concepts of God that we can finally grasp divinity in its truth and purity.