Religion Is Made Up

[SWIM]

You know what matters? Love matters. Compassion matters. Justice matters. Peace matters. Humility matters. Nature matters. Truth matters. Reality matters. You matter.

 

[Open_Minded]

So, the Acts, the Pauline letters and Revelations are problematic and Luke and John simple 'difficult'. So how to get benefit from those?

 

John isn't as difficult as one might think -

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&a...st&p=148696

the author of John wrote about Jesus differently than the authors of the synoptic gospels. The very first verses of John point to Jesus as the WORD made Flesh. The LOGOS, WISDOM, SOPHIA made flesh IN Jesus.

 

The author of John also had Jesus say, "Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."

 

Specifically the author of John was pointing to something WITHIN Jesus. Even a literalist does not believe Jesus physically walked the earth before Abraham. So, twice to my immediate recollection the author of John points to something transcendent and Sacred that he sees WITHIN Jesus. One of those times he intentionally uses the words "I AM" thereby pointing back to an understanding of God that any Jewish listener would recognize. And this "I AM" is not the physical form of Jesus, because that physical form did not walk the earth before Abraham.

 

So... I have always looked at the "I am" passages unique to John's gospel in light of this. To me when the author of John attributes the words, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" to Jesus he is pointing to the LOGOS within Jesus. He is saying, "Sacred WISDOM is the way, and the truth, and the life". Everyone has access to Sacred WISDOM - so - to me - this verse is very inclusive. It does not exclude by religious affiliation. It points to Sacred WISDOM as being the way, being the truth, being the life.

 

And as far as the Acts and the Pauline letters - they are what they are. They are a snapshot of early Christianity (one snapshot). There is wisdom in Paul's letters - and the rest of it can be accepted for what it is - written in a time and place very different from our own. We do not have to chain ourselves to ancient beliefs about how women should act or to one snapshot of early Christianity which defiles human flesh.

 

The discovery of the Gnostic texts - does give us a broader picture of early Christianity and that (in the end) may free the Christian church from the literalists.

[Ouroboros]

If religious leaders admit religion is a myth, which is polite not to call it an outright lie, then to continue to teach the religion as truth and given to us by god, is a disservice to humanity. How can anyone show honor and respect to the 'authority' of something that is make-believe? I just don't get some peopel's attitudes towards having to have something to worship or belong to some religious group even if they don't believe what is being taught.

What is lie and truth? We don't have all the answers for the Universe or how it works. Science is only approximations of how things are. Science use symbols and models to describe things, even though the models and symbols are not the actual thing. For instance do you know the planetary atom model? Also called Bohr atom model. It's not actually completely true. The electrons don't spin as separate particles but they exists in a cloud of interchangeable quantum events. They exist in each level based on probability only. So the model is just a visualization to understand atoms. Even though we know this today, the Atheism symbol is based on that image. I guess you have seen the American Atheist symbol with the atom model making an "A." That is not lying. But yet, that model is not really true, so maybe it is lying after all, and we should demand the destruction of all those symbols? I think it's dangerous to become to dogmatic and fundamentalist regardless of belief or ideology. Don't make the mistake to demand more than you should. Plato thought art, music and any kind of live or invented representation should not be allowed in his description of the Republic, just because it would mislead of the True Form of things. Now, that is a totalitarian state, and we don't like that. We like art, music and literature. Some things describe parts of life as prose and indirect references, because we find it beautiful or meaningful. In another discussion we were asked why sunsets are beautiful. And we concluded that it's based on subjective experience of reality. Now, can't religion be such a thing too? That some people think it's somehow "beautiful" to describe the world in indirect symbolic language, and it's not lying, but it's representing. Does it make sense? After all, most movies are make believe, but we don't outlaw them. But on the other hand, of course, we don't start making laws based on a movie we saw. So when religion becomes political, that's when it becomes seriously defect and dangerous, but don't mistake that extreme with the basic human need for something to believe in or the need for prose or art.

 

I didn't want to chew you out HZ, so please take my apology, but I felt it had to be pointed out that your little comment is a slippery-slope. (You're an awesome poster )

[Ouroboros]

I have found that by studying Plato and Aristotle (and I will get the rest of the later philosophers too - eventually), you can see the strong connection between the Greek/Roman thought and Christianity. There are several fundamental concepts in Christianity and in the New Testament that clearly were influenced by the Hellenistic ideas. I also have found that I can make more sense out of Christianity by understanding these early philosophers.

 

The concept of Logos is very similar to the Forms. It's the idea that things got an essence, or perfect and innate description of the things purpose. In other words, a rock is a rock because its "rock" features exists in some higher, perfect plane. A kind of blue print . Its purpose is to be a rock. And the idea is that all things purpose or Form can be traced back to the Universal Form or Purpose of all things, and this Form for all things existed before the actual physical existence of things. This "super-form" for all things is the same concept as Logos.

 

Now some of the philosophers back then disagreed, but this is just one of the connections I've seen so far.

[Grandpa Harley]

So, the Acts, the Pauline letters and Revelations are problematic and Luke and John simple 'difficult'. So how to get benefit from those?

 

John isn't as difficult as one might think -

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&a...st&p=148696

the author of John wrote about Jesus differently than the authors of the synoptic gospels. The very first verses of John point to Jesus as the WORD made Flesh. The LOGOS, WISDOM, SOPHIA made flesh IN Jesus.

 

The author of John also had Jesus say, "Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."

 

Specifically the author of John was pointing to something WITHIN Jesus. Even a literalist does not believe Jesus physically walked the earth before Abraham. So, twice to my immediate recollection the author of John points to something transcendent and Sacred that he sees WITHIN Jesus. One of those times he intentionally uses the words "I AM" thereby pointing back to an understanding of God that any Jewish listener would recognize. And this "I AM" is not the physical form of Jesus, because that physical form did not walk the earth before Abraham.

 

So... I have always looked at the "I am" passages unique to John's gospel in light of this. To me when the author of John attributes the words, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" to Jesus he is pointing to the LOGOS within Jesus. He is saying, "Sacred WISDOM is the way, and the truth, and the life". Everyone has access to Sacred WISDOM - so - to me - this verse is very inclusive. It does not exclude by religious affiliation. It points to Sacred WISDOM as being the way, being the truth, being the life.

 

And as far as the Acts and the Pauline letters - they are what they are. They are a snapshot of early Christianity (one snapshot). There is wisdom in Paul's letters - and the rest of it can be accepted for what it is - written in a time and place very different from our own. We do not have to chain ourselves to ancient beliefs about how women should act or to one snapshot of early Christianity which defiles human flesh.

 

The discovery of the Gnostic texts - does give us a broader picture of early Christianity and that (in the end) may free the Christian church from the literalists.

 

By 'difficult' if didn't mean obscure, since I 'got' the mystic bits of John in my teens... it's the exclusivist clap trap that makes John 'difficult' as to whether it's worth retaing and Paul and Revelations pretty much worth burning from every damned copy of the Bible... Basically the book is a dead text. You can't change it, you can't challenge it, you just end up trying to hang on it the social mores of one's time to a better or worse fit... it's interesting to note that the Bible was a far easier fit to our more barbaric times than our more humanist ones... the number of Humanist thinkers who cast the bible aside outnumbers the one's who embrace it as a humanist tome... To get to Paul's 'wisdom' it's like swimming in the pipe ful of raw sewage and foetid offal with no place to get your head up for a breath... the few pearls really are not worth the stink they carry... I notice you don't address the Revelation problem at all... Even Martin Luther considered that Revelations should be dropped but he was over ruled... and when a creature as essential vile as Luther thought it was beyond the pale, one has a problem...

 

As to a physical form 'before Abraham'... do you mean in front of or prior to? There was some 'physical form' of Jehovah kicking back and eating olives and drinking wine with old Abe before Sodom and Gommorah gor creamed... who was that?

[Open_Minded]

By 'difficult' if didn't mean obscure, since I 'got' the mystic bits of John in my teens... it's the exclusivist clap trap that makes John 'difficult' as to whether it's worth retaing and Paul and Revelations pretty much worth burning from every damned copy of the Bible... Basically the book is a dead text. You can't change it, you can't challenge it, you just end up trying to hang on it the social mores of one's time to a better or worse fit... i<snip>

 

Hello Grandpa:

 

Folks could argue to the end of time whether a specific book from the Bible (or the entire Bible itself) should be "retained" or "burnt". The fact is that the Bible will be with us for a long time to come and kicking out revelations or Paul or anything else won't happen.

 

In addition, neither will the Gnostic texts be added. The Bible is what it is - there are many things humans can do with that fact:

 

1. We can literalize it
   
2. We can take it for what it is - the good the bad and the ugly. We can find value in it - as it is. Learn the lessons it has to teach us (all of them - even the violent tribal god lessons).
   
3. We can try to change it - I don't see that happening anytime soon.
   

[Grandpa Harley]

The bible is an anthology. Not a book. To defend it as invariant means it's wholly without value... it is a dead book... there are better moral counter examples than it... in the end we're heading to the 'rehabilitation' and 'enabling' of the religious mindset, which is as far from mystic as Dawkins is from religion... the book is tainted. It needs killing. I like Spong, but he is a doomed minority and we all know it. I won't see it in my lifetime, but I really hope Chrisitanity becomes the same sort of foot note that the Gods of Egypt are... a collective insanity with small goods and great evils...

 

and you STILL give no opinion of Revelation... nor whether Paul's 'wisdom' is really worth the hideousness you have to dive into to get them.

[The-Captain]

By 'difficult' if didn't mean obscure, since I 'got' the mystic bits of John in my teens... it's the exclusivist clap trap that makes John 'difficult' as to whether it's worth retaing and Paul and Revelations pretty much worth burning from every damned copy of the Bible... Basically the book is a dead text. You can't change it, you can't challenge it, you just end up trying to hang on it the social mores of one's time to a better or worse fit... i<snip>

 

Hello Grandpa:

 

Folks could argue to the end of time whether a specific book from the Bible (or the entire Bible itself) should be "retained" or "burnt". The fact is that the Bible will be with us for a long time to come and kicking out revelations or Paul or anything else won't happen.

 

In addition, neither will the Gnostic texts be added. The Bible is what it is - there are many things humans can do with that fact:

 

1. We can literalize it
   
2. We can take it for what it is - the good the bad and the ugly. We can find value in it - as it is. Learn the lessons it has to teach us (all of them - even the violent tribal god lessons).
   
3. We can try to change it - I don't see that happening anytime soon.
   

 

Or we could utterly forget about it and move on to better things.

[Open_Minded]

Or we could utterly forget about it and move on to better things.

Well - if you can "forget about it" in the world of George W. Bush and Mike Huckabee - more power to you.

 

 

Just for the record - I don't feel a need to "forget about it". On a personal level I find much value in the Bible (as do I in many other things). But, having said that, I can certainly understand why others would choose to "forget about it". I just don't think the literalists amongst us make that a likely possibility.

[The-Captain]

Or we could utterly forget about it and move on to better things.

Well - if you can "forget about it" in the world of George W. Bush and Mike Huckabee - more power to you.

 

 

Just for the record - I don't feel a need to "forget about it". On a personal level I find much value in the Bible (as do I in many other things). But, having said that, I can certainly understand why others would choose to "forget about it". I just don't think the literalists amongst us make that a likely possibility.

 

Im currently looking for an uncharted Pacific atoll to help me facilitate "forgetting about it"

 

I thought about it a bit more. Perhaps its hubris on my part, but I think I learned what can be learned from the Bible. Christianity played a large part in my development as a person, both good and bad. It would be more appropriate to say that I'm moving on rather than forgetting everything.

[Grandpa Harley]

Or we could utterly forget about it and move on to better things.

Well - if you can "forget about it" in the world of George W. Bush and Mike Huckabee - more power to you.

 

 

Just for the record - I don't feel a need to "forget about it". On a personal level I find much value in the Bible (as do I in many other things). But, having said that, I can certainly understand why others would choose to "forget about it". I just don't think the literalists amongst us make that a likely possibility.

 

Im currently looking for an uncharted Pacific atoll to help me facilitate "forgetting about it"

 

I thought about it a bit more. Perhaps its hubris on my part, but I think I learned what can be learned from the Bible. Christianity played a large part in my development as a person, both good and bad. It would be more appropriate to say that I'm moving on rather than forgetting everything.

 

Evolution is no bad thing... the bible is quickly exhausted in it's wisdom...

[Thurisaz]

I believe that God is real

 

"A" God (or a pantheon of deities), very possible. Babblegawd jehoover, definitely no. That monster is (fortunately) logically impossible.

 

and everyone knows in a part of their heart that this is so.

 

Ah, arrogant morontheist crap again. I'm soooo surprised... NOT.

[Kratos]

Thurisaz,

 

At least I am consistent. Why are "The Asgard" more believable as "invisible friends"?

 

By the way, did I accidently stumble into the Lion's Den where personal attacks are allowed?

 

Just checking.

[Evolution_beyond]

but i think Jesus himself spoke of the 'myths' as if they were real events, eg. jonah inside the belly of the whale, sodom and gomorrah, the flood, and the wilderness events like the snake on the pole.

 

This is an interpretation of what Jesus meant. Jesus compared the story of Jonah to what he was saying about the Son of Man being dead and buried for three days and three nights (itself probably a mythical and symbolic thing). Just because he said "Jonah was in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights" doesn't mean anything. He was just stating what was in the story itself - you have no way of knowing whether he thought it was a literal event or a meaningful fable.

 

And I don't remember Jesus ever mentioning the other Old Testament stories you mentioned so I can't comment on them.

[Grandpa Harley]

Thurisaz,

 

At least I am consistent. Why are "The Asgard" more believable as "invisible friends"?

 

By the way, did I accidently stumble into the Lion's Den where personal attacks are allowed?

 

Just checking.

 

From my understanding the The Asgard are not a literal truth, but a method of thinking about the world. A way of functionally interfacing to an impersonal, uncaring, primal force. The masks of God, if you will... but then, You've not read Campbell, and thuis are coming from a place of ignorance on the way religions actually work.

 

You treat Jesus as a literal, triune, truth, and Paul as a god chosen prophet (which is an undertone of your apparent view of your self, since you seem to think you've had a divine revelation on 'How to real the Bible the one and only, pat. pend. "Correct" way'...) all literally true. Basically, the whole Astreja pantheon and it's cosmology, is a metaphor, and it's followers know this... You think Jesus got better after three days having hung on the cross for four hours... Odin hung over the pit of hell, from a tree too... went there as a man, returned as a God... it's a common theme, but Odin did a lot better than four paltrey hours, and he'd had one of his eyes ripped out too...

 

In the Rúnatal, a section of the Hávamál, Odin is attributed with discovering runes. He was hanged from the tree called Yggdrasill while pierced by his own javelin for nine days and nights, in order to learn the wisdom that would give him power in the nine worlds. Nine is a significant number in Norse magical practice (there were, for example, nine realms of existence), thereby learning nine (later eighteen) magical songs and eighteen magical runes.

and that was well before the whole Jesus myth was even thought of... and NINE days... not four paltry hours...

[R. S. Martin]

I know I will be in the minority, but whereas I agree that most of religion is made-up, I do not believe that God is.

 

I believe that God is real and everyone knows in a part of their heart that this is so.

 

<snip>

 

It is not easy to be rid of religion when you know in your heart that God is there. But, I cannot deny that knowing so it is what I am left with.

 

John

 

Kratos, I am one of "everyone." By asserting that I know in my heart that God is real you write off an entire lifetime of searching for evidence that God is real. Read this post and then provide the evidence by which you know that I know that God is real.

[Grandpa Harley]

Arrogance and hubris from a self appointed prophet...

[R. S. Martin]

I like John Shelby Spong - I've read him for years. And - for years - (long before John Shelby Spong) I've considered the Bible one story of humanity's search for the Sacred. Like Spong, I see a "developing narrative" in the Bible. And - I believe that there is as much to learn from the violent tribal God narratives as there is to learn from the God of Love narratives. If we do not really soak in the dangers of a tribal understanding of God we will continue to kill each other over these issues. Those violent tribal narratives are there to remind us - to teach us from the history of human behavior. We can learn from those narratives, or we can repeat the mistakes of those narratives. The choice is ours.

 

Awesome statement and is what Ive come to see and I feel more free than I ever have in my life! Its as if Ive become an honest human being and am no longer playing cover up with the bible. It is what it is. And there just are no words for finally seeing this and accepting it as it is instead of trying to make it into a contortionist.

 

sojourner

 

 

 

While a few of you may be able to see it this way, it seems the majority of powerful religionists are not. And that is why the Bible and Koran are very seriously dangerous books. Abraham thought God told him to kill his son. His spiritual descendents to day are killing each other because they thought God told them to do so. The entire Old Testament, and much of the New, supports this killing.

[Ouroboros]

From my understanding the The Asgard are not a literal truth, but a method of thinking about the world. A way of functionally interfacing to an impersonal, uncaring, primal force. The masks of God, if you will... but then, You've not read Campbell, and thuis are coming from a place of ignorance on the way religions actually work.

What? Kratos has not read Joseph Campbell? That's heresy! It's a must, for anyone that is on a journey to understand mythology and religion.

 

Kratos, I truly recommend anything by Joseph Campbell. It will open your eyes.

[The-Captain]

I like John Shelby Spong - I've read him for years. And - for years - (long before John Shelby Spong) I've considered the Bible one story of humanity's search for the Sacred. Like Spong, I see a "developing narrative" in the Bible. And - I believe that there is as much to learn from the violent tribal God narratives as there is to learn from the God of Love narratives. If we do not really soak in the dangers of a tribal understanding of God we will continue to kill each other over these issues. Those violent tribal narratives are there to remind us - to teach us from the history of human behavior. We can learn from those narratives, or we can repeat the mistakes of those narratives. The choice is ours.

 

Awesome statement and is what Ive come to see and I feel more free than I ever have in my life! Its as if Ive become an honest human being and am no longer playing cover up with the bible. It is what it is. And there just are no words for finally seeing this and accepting it as it is instead of trying to make it into a contortionist.

 

sojourner

 

 

 

While a few of you may be able to see it this way, it seems the majority of powerful religionists are not. And that is why the Bible and Koran are very seriously dangerous books. Abraham thought God told him to kill his son. His spiritual descendents to day are killing each other because they thought God told them to do so. The entire Old Testament, and much of the New, supports this killing.

 

Maybe you guys, and like minded folks, should consider divorcing yourselves from the christian label.

[Grandpa Harley]

We've been down this road before, Neo...

[Grandpa Harley]

From my understanding the The Asgard are not a literal truth, but a method of thinking about the world. A way of functionally interfacing to an impersonal, uncaring, primal force. The masks of God, if you will... but then, You've not read Campbell, and thuis are coming from a place of ignorance on the way religions actually work.

What? Kratos has not read Joseph Campbell? That's heresy! It's a must, for anyone that is on a journey to understand mythology and religion.

 

Kratos, I truly recommend anything by Joseph Campbell. It will open your eyes.

 

It's not on the Christian ministers list... Only clergy I know who've read it are 'odd' (Fr. Richard, Fr. Charlie, Bishop Spong... )

[Ouroboros]

It's not on the Christian ministers list... Only clergy I know who've read it are 'odd' (Fr. Richard, Fr. Charlie, Bishop Spong... )

Yeah, yeah, I know that! Of course I do.

 

But Kratos has shown a certain level of willingness to look into these things, so it would be a shame if he didn't get to know Joseph Campbell's stuff. So I'm a bit surprised that he hasn't gone to that point yet. Consider that he's interested in learning, he most definitely should. And of course he should read Shelby-Spong and many other too, but Joe C. is definitely very important.

[Grandpa Harley]

He was underwhelmed by a reasonably exhaustive list of books that would give him an insight into where the Atheists, Unversalists, American New Thought followers, and Deists I've interacted with here that I complied... I'm still not sure quite how badly I was insulted since it was so parabolic as to be indecipherable... I'm pretty certain he was insulting, however.

[Open_Minded]

Kratos, I truly recommend anything by Joseph Campbell. It will open your eyes.

It's not on the Christian ministers list... Only clergy I know who've read it are 'odd' (Fr. Richard, Fr. Charlie, Bishop Spong... )

 

OK - Gramps - I'm going to call you on that one. Not only is it on the shelf of my church's pastor, it is also on the reading list of our regional ELCA Lutheran (fairly mainstream) seminary. I know this - because I know the professor of Hebrew Scriptures at that seminary. My guess is - that if it's on their reading list - it's on the reading list of most ELCA Seminaries.

 

Not only that - but within my congregation - we discuss mythology all the time. Just a few Sundays ago - during our contemporary service - we discussed the mythology around the virgin birth story. I'm not saying every ELCA congregation would discuss those things, but our church is not your typical "liberal" church. It's a 150 year-old congregation with a lot of elderly people raised on the traditional theology. They're open minded folks - but they're hardly raving liberals either.

 

It's all relative - Gramps. The whole of Christianity cannot be defined by one individual's experience of it.