Monotheism...

[scotpens]

I think a lot of folks are shocked that atheists are more often than not nicer than many religious people known to them.

Atheists are also frequently more knowledgeable about the Bible than a lot of professed Christians.

 

[Amaris]

Atheists are also frequently more knowledgeable about the Bible than a lot of professed Christians.

Understanding the Bible tends to lead a lot of conservative Christians away from that fundamentalism, though not always, and often they do become atheists. I remember an atheist in high school who knew so much about the Bible, it spurred me on to know more just so I could realize where he was coming from.

 

[Swedish Borg]

Atheists are also frequently more knowledgeable about the Bible than a lot of professed Christians.

Asimov knew a lot about the bible. He wrote a study of the bible that is longer than the bible itself.

 

[Timewalker]

Atheists are also frequently more knowledgeable about the Bible than a lot of professed Christians.

This takes me back to college, when the friend who introduced me to Whovian fandom became a "born-again Christian".

So our conversations were no longer about Doctor Who. Instead, he decided that I really needed to become a believer as well.

That went over like the proverbial lead balloon, given that my major in college was anthropology. There was one evening when he started quoting chapters and verses at me, and I said, "Actually, this is how it goes..." and corrected him on a few errors.

I used to work in musical theatre, and we did productions of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and Jesus Christ Superstar. There were a couple of songs in each of them that had symbolism and references to things I didn't understand, so I reasoned that since those rock operas are based on bible stories, I should go to the source to figure out what the songs were about.

That led to reading Egyptian history (just curious to know if archaeologists had been able to verify any part of the Joseph story). The unintentional result was getting hooked on reading about various other historical events and figuring out what parts of the historical fiction I was reading was real history and what parts weren't. Fast-forward some more years and I was a consultant on another production of JCS; seems that the person who was head of the props department was a bit uncertain about some of the items she had to find or make. So I gave her a Reader's Digest condensed version of the history and background of the time and setting, and she wondered how I knew that (ie. what languages were used on the sign on the cross). It's interesting where a bit of reading can take a person.

Anyway, the outcome of the conversation with my friend in college was him getting frustrated at not being able to stump me. He finally said, "If you know so much about this, why don't you BELIEVE it?"

The final conversation was his one last try at converting me. One of my classmates from my anthropology courses happened to wander by and joined the conversation. My friend (now a distant acquaintance) stomped off in a huff.

My classmate grinned at me and said, "That was mean." I had to agree, and while I wish my Whovian friend well, I was sick and tired of the proselytizing. Between that and my sociology instructor trying to convert me to Mormonism, I'd had enough.

Asimov knew a lot about the bible. He wrote a study of the bible that is longer than the bible itself.

Asimov was basically a modern-day Renaissance man. He knew a lot about many things. His view was that if he wanted to write about something, he should know what he was talking about. So he did his research and it showed.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Why are you asking me instead of who brought it up?
Also, welcome to Thread Drift. hope you survive the experience.

But when a mod asks everyone to get back to the topic at hand, it's maybe not a good idea to keep going back to the off-topic subjects.

Not addressing this to you specifically, but all participants: if you want to talk about Pluto, or Cosmos, or how one science personality is better than another science personality, please start a new thread, or post it in the random thoughts thread, or whatever. It is out of place here.

Do you honestly think this has anything to do with monotheism?

Also, please don't mini-mod.

 

[at Quark's]

I think a lot of folks are shocked that atheists are more often than not nicer than many religious people known to them.

That has been my experience as well - by far, most of them are nice people. It may be a consequence of many of them having had to travel a personal path, waging an internal struggle to arrive at their convictions, facing the rejection of their community, which is not necessarily the case for believers (though some have had similar experiences).

When I wrote about 'zealous' atheists, I was thinking of the polemic brand of people that whenever someone only peripherally mentions he or she is a believer, ask to explain some contradictions in the bible to them, subscribe to religious boards with names like 'ReligionIsPoison' and start interfering in discussions between believers that the entire discussion is nonsense as religion is a bunch of hooey anyways and people should open up their eyes. The type of people that you secretly hope never convert to believers because they would probably become the fanatically proselytizing type. It's not so much what they say as the lack of respect with which it is done. Fortunately, they're comparatively rare.

Understanding the Bible tends to lead a lot of conservative Christians away from that fundamentalism, though not always, and often they do become atheists. I remember an atheist in high school who knew so much about the Bible, it spurred me on to know more just so I could realize where he was coming from.

One thing I found interesting when reading Karen Amstrong's books on religion is her contention that fundamentalism with its emphasis on biblical literalism is basically a modern current, in contrast to what many people think. As in, that it's typically a reaction to and rejection of the alienation caused by more modern societies and a science-infused worldview, when even in ancient times, a literal vs. a more metaphorical understanding of the bible wasn't as much an issue as it is today- both brands of believers have existed side by side since the earliest centuries. In the early centuries of christianity, people were branded as heretic for asserting that Christ never was human (for example), but not necessarily for stating that, say, perhaps not all of Genesis should be taken literally.

 

[Swedish Borg]

...It may be a consequence of many of them having had to travel a personal path, waging an internal struggle to arrive at their convictions, facing the rejection of their community, which is not necessarily the case for believers

Well, then I suppose that I am very fortunate because I didn't have to struggle to remain an Atheist... I've never been a believer, my parents didn't feel necessary to force a belief nor even a lack thereof on me.

When I wrote about 'zealous' atheists, I was thinking of the polemic brand of people that whenever someone only peripherally mentions he or she is a believer, ask to explain some contradictions in the bible to them, subscribe to religious boards with names like 'ReligionIsPoison' and start interfering in discussions between believers that the entire discussion is nonsense as religion is a bunch of hooey anyways and people should open up their eyes. The type of people that you secretly hope never convert to believers because they would probably become the fanatically proselytizing type. It's not so much what they say as the lack of respect with which it is done. Fortunately, they're comparatively rare.
....

Well, where I live people don't talk about their religion unless they want a new recruit (but those are rather rare) or they are surrounded by religious people (I guess, not that I've ever asked) in some gathering. If it happened though, I would do what I did once when two smokers were discussing the merits of different brands of cigarettes, I'd simply, walk away.

 

[Amaris]

One thing I found interesting when reading Karen Amstrong's books on religion is her contention that fundamentalism with its emphasis on biblical literalism is basically a modern current, in contrast to what many people think. As in, that it's typically a reaction to and rejection of the alienation caused by more modern societies and a science-infused worldview, when even in ancient times, a literal vs. a more metaphorical understanding of the bible wasn't as much an issue as it is today- both brands of believers have existed side by side since the earliest centuries. In the early centuries of christianity, people were branded as heretic for asserting that Christ never was human (for example), but not necessarily for stating that, say, perhaps not all of Genesis should be taken literally.

She would be correct. The modern Evangelical movement is based on a modern interpretation of a more recent translation of the Bible. It's the telephone game of fundamentalist Christianity, which is why so many fundamentalist Christians support politicians who the early church would have condemned as cruel and living solely in their flesh. Just my opinion, but I see it as a direct answer to the Enlightenment, where science began to take authority, and the church found itself losing ground to a system that didn't put them at the top of the hierarchy just by virtue of them saying so.

I think that is why modern Evangelical, fundamentalist Christianity is so at odds with science, and why we're seeing a new cult of Christianity develop that embraces anti-Christian principles, because it's about power, and it's about control. No longer is it about the Good News, but about who gets to make the most and take the most. Prosperity gospel is a step-child of that faith as well, and you can see it every time an evangelist claims that the world is sinful for its indulgences, after which they step onto their Citation X personal jet and fly to Rio for, uh, sabbatical.

One of the reasons I left the faith was because what seemed natural to me: love, empathy, kindness, compassion, generosity, was pushed away as being "touchy feely," "communism," or "the voice of Satan."

I thought to myself "if this is the voice of Satan, then what is the voice of God?" and that was one more piece chipped away in my belief system.

 

[Swedish Borg]

She would be correct. The modern Evangelical movement is based on a modern interpretation of a more recent translation of the Bible. It's the telephone game of fundamentalist Christianity, which is why so many fundamentalist Christians support politicians who the early church would have condemned as cruel and living solely in their flesh. Just my opinion, but I see it as a direct answer to the Enlightenment, where science began to take authority, and the church found itself losing ground to a system that didn't put them at the top of the hierarchy just by virtue of them saying so.

I think that is why modern Evangelical, fundamentalist Christianity is so at odds with science, and why we're seeing a new cult of Christianity develop that embraces anti-Christian principles, because it's about power, and it's about control. No longer is it about the Good News, but about who gets to make the most and take the most. Prosperity gospel is a step-child of that faith as well, and you can see it every time an evangelist claims that the world is sinful for its indulgences, after which they step onto their Citation X personal jet and fly to Rio for, uh, sabbatical.

One of the reasons I left the faith was because what seemed natural to me: love, empathy, kindness, compassion, generosity, was pushed away as being "touchy feely," "communism," or "the voice of Satan."

I thought to myself "if this is the voice of Satan, then what is the voice of God?" and that was one more piece chipped away in my belief system.

I think in the case of the battle against science, religion is but a pretext, the real idea is to defend the status quo which most often advantages big corporations. Who wants anti-pollution regulations when they are the owners of big highly polluting plants?

 

[Amaris]

I think in the case of the battle against science, religion is but a pretext, the real idea is to defend the status quo which most often advantages big corporations. Who wants anti-pollution regulations when they are the owners of big highly polluting plants?

Oh, definitely, the church is being used to support the state. In the US, it's practically the same thing at this point, and they do so because it's economically advantageous for them. The quote "when Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross" (attributed to Sinclair Lewis but who knows, really) is quite accurate, because the modern Christian movement reinforces the authoritarianism of the state, turning laws into commandments. I believe that fascism is already here.

 

[at Quark's]

Well, then I suppose that I am very fortunate because I didn't have to struggle to remain an Atheist... I've never been a believer, my parents didn't feel necessary to force a belief nor even a lack thereof on me.

Well, where I live people don't talk about their religion unless they want a new recruit (but those are rather rare) or they are surrounded by religious people (I guess, not that I've ever asked) in some gathering. If it happened though, I would do what I did once when two smokers were discussing the merits of different brands of cigarettes, I'd simply, walk away.

Where I live (the Netherlands), that's generally true as well (the country at large is quite secularized), but even there, there are still some very conservative religious communities and villages found across the country (we have our own 'bible belt' for example), and if you have the bad luck of being born in one of those ...

 

[publiusr]

That can’t touch my state of Alabama...

 

[at Quark's]

One of the reasons I left the faith was because what seemed natural to me: love, empathy, kindness, compassion, generosity, was pushed away as being "touchy feely," "communism," or "the voice of Satan."

I thought to myself "if this is the voice of Satan, then what is the voice of God?" and that was one more piece chipped away in my belief system.

Sounds recognizable. A few years before I left the church myself, I had come to the conclusion 'we' essentially were the Pharisees Christ was preaching against- not that I was (or am) any better, myself.

 

[Swedish Borg]

Sounds recognizable. A few years before I left the church myself, I had come to the conclusion 'we' essentially were the Pharisees Christ was preaching against- not that I was (or am) any better, myself.

Looks like they went through an inversion nebula or a Voyager anomaly of some kind... Like the one seen in Twisted maybe.

 

[Swedish Borg]

I seem to remember that there was a curious passage in the NT about Jesus losing his temper and beating the crap out of a bunch of mercantile assholes who were making money out of selling sacred stuff (I guess). It looks like if he came back today he wouldn't have any time left to do anything else.

 

[auntiehill]

I seem to remember that there was a curious passage in the NT about Jesus losing his temper and beating the crap out of a bunch of mercantile assholes who were making money out of selling sacred stuff (I guess). It looks like if he came back today he wouldn't have any time left to do anything else.

I think you are referring to the passage where Jesus throws the money-lenders out of the Temple.

And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. And he told those who sold the pigeons, "Take these things away; do not make my Father's house a house of trade".

— John 2:13–16
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

— Matthew 21:12–13

Apparently Joel Osteen didn't read that part of his Bible.

 

[Amaris]

I think you are referring to the passage where Jesus throws the money-lenders out of the Temple.


Apparently Joel Osteen didn't read that part of his Bible.

It is, without a doubt, one of my favorite Biblical passages. That one, Acts 2:44-45, and Acts 4:32-37.

 

[publiusr]

I seem to remember that there was a curious passage in the NT about Jesus losing his temper and beating the crap out of a bunch

Jesus was a union man

Acts 4:35

“And distribution was made unto every man according as he had need”

No wonder so many libertarians are atheists...

That might explain a little hostility towards atheists. You work as an indentured servant and all you have is the story of Dives and the Abominable Fancy—and Mr. Hellfire club with the puffy sleeve shirts says whoever dies with the most toys wins. It’s enough to make you throw your rake down and walk off. No feelings for their fellow man.

Then too, I think one of the reasons some kids fear Santa might be some ancestral memory of laying on a slab under a bearded Druid.

Ever notice how some children can’t stand to hear singing? And will shout to break it up?

Maybe it is woo... but as a child—when I heard adults sing...it made my skin crawl. In TAS, Spock hummed a note to open a door...emulating a note of a captor...ugh...audio uncanny valley...

 

[Amaris]

Jesus was a union man
Acts 4:35

“And distribution was made into every man according as he had need”

No wonder so many libertarians are atheists...

That might explain a little hostility towards atheists. You work as an indentured servant and all you have is the story of Dives and the Abominable Fancy—and Mr. Hellfire club with the puffy sleeve shirts says whoever dies with the most toys wins. It’s enough to make you throw your rake down and walk off. No feelings for their fellow man.

Then too, I think one of the reasons some kids fear Santa might be some ancestral memory of laying on a slab under a bearded Druid.

Ever notice how some children can’t stand to hear singing? And will shout to break it up?

Maybe it is woo... but as a child—when I heard adults sing...it made my skin crawl. In TAS, Spock hummed a note to open a door...emulating a note of a captor...ugh...audio uncanny valley...

 

[at Quark's]

I think that is why modern Evangelical, fundamentalist Christianity is so at odds with science, and why we're seeing a new cult of Christianity develop that embraces anti-Christian principles, because it's about power, and it's about control. No longer is it about the Good News, but about who gets to make the most and take the most. Prosperity gospel is a step-child of that faith as well, and you can see it every time an evangelist claims that the world is sinful for its indulgences, after which they step onto their Citation X personal jet and fly to Rio for, uh, sabbatical.

Reminds me of this video of a GOP Jesus. Though, to be fair, one probably could make a similar video (on different points of course) about a 'Democratic' Jesus.