4 ms·

Flag burning is a great example in fact: the outrage simply never reaches the levels it is with holy text burnings. Not to stone-the-tourists, burn-the-embassy

by varjag 3y ago

Flag burning is a great example in fact: the outrage simply never reaches the levels it is with holy text burnings. Not to stone-the-tourists, burn-the-embassy levels of outrage: possibly (speculating here) because flag burning does not assault one's identity in a way similar to demonstrating the futility of one's beliefs. If we get to the punishments, things were clearly handed swiftly in the Old Testament. The Biblical concept of Hell as we know it (the place of eternal punishment) didn't emerge until the New Testament as it was in a way redundant. And come on, we know holy texts are full of things which are clearly wrong, in exactly the same way astrology is. The temptation to gloss over them as ornamental bits is huge, but to believers they are doctrinal.

ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
> And come on, we know holy texts are full of things which are clearly wrong, in exactly the same way astrology is. The temptation to gloss over them as ornamental bits is huge, but to believers they are doctrinal. I can't think of any precise statements that are clear enough to be proved true or false. Usually holy texts have vague enough language that it's very much a case of interpretation. e.g. The Genesis creation story states that God created the universe in 6 days, but any attempt to demonstrate that it is false will have believers declaring that a "day" is not a precise measurement of time.
- varjag 3y ago
  Walking on water (or parting it at will) is rather unambiguous. The whole resurrection thing also would be mocked as taking Walking Dead seriously if not most people grew up seeing that believing this is acceptable.
  - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
    An account of someone walking on water or parting it is clear enough, but is meaningless without supporting evidence. Of course, supporting evidence would need to be stronger than our everyday experience of people not being able to walk on water. It reminds me somewhat of James Randi's debunking of psychic powers - despite people having witnessed miraculous feats of spoon bending etc. no-one could replicate it under controlled conditions.
- baremetal 3y ago
  >The Genesis creation story states that God created the universe in 6 days, but any attempt to demonstrate that it is false will have believers declaring that a "day" is not a precise measurement of time. The Bible is rather clear that God doesn't measure time like humans do. "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." 2 Peter 3:8
  - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
    Okay, so are the 6 days actually 6 thousand years?
    - baremetal 3y ago
      I take it to mean the creation account is from God's perspective not ours. I don't have the slightest problem with modern science and it's reckoning of creation. The universe started with light in both accounts.
      - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
        > The universe started with light in both accounts. First light was estimated to be about 240,000 to 300,000 years after the big bang, so I would hesitate to say that the universe started with light [1]. You could determine that the first "day" started 300,000 years or so after the big bang, but then that throws off the other timings of creation. This demonstrates how the bible isn't even precise enough to be proven wrong as the "day" can seem to mean whatever people want it to mean. > I take it to mean the creation account is from God's perspective not ours. This sounds to me almost like a get-out clause as presumably God's perspective can be interpreted to be anything you want and cannot be proven false (similar to how an invisible pink unicorn's perspective can never be proven false). [1] https://phys.org/news/2016-11-universe.html https://phys.org/news/2016-11-universe.html
        olddustytrail 3y ago
        That's just a bizarre definition of light. By that definition the center of a star is dark because the photons keep getting reabsorbed immediately. Which is always true from a photons point of view anyway, so what's the difference? In fact you might as well say that the universe was dark until the first eye evolved.
- machina_ex_deus 3y ago
  Your view of the six days of creation is backwards. It is a story that is meant to justify the division into weeks and the concept of Shabbat, a day off once in a week. It is probably the most widespread social policy that had ever been spread by any religion. You can look everywhere in the world, including the non judeo Christian parts, and see the work week with a day off implemented. It is such an intuitive and effective policy that nearly everyone forgot where it came from - but back then, it took a lot of effort to get people on board with it. So don't judge the merit of the story by whether it's physically how the world was created, but by how the message and the consequences it teaches the reader have changed the world. Every time you have the weekend to look forward to, remember that without some people believing God created the world in 6 days, you would be working non stop, or without the same day as your family to stop and rest. It's definitely debatable whether that's how the world was created (I don't think it was that way), but the merits of the message of story are also undeniable. And it is the kind of message you can only get people initially on board with using drastic beliefs.
baremetal 3y ago
>The Biblical concept of Hell as we know it (the place of eternal punishment) didn't emerge until the New Testament as it was in a way redundant. The OT did have a concept of Hell. It is called "Sheol"[1]. "Therefore Sheol enlarges its throat, and opens wide its enormous jaws, and down go Zion’s nobles and masses, her revelers and carousers!" Isaiah 5:14 "As drought and heat consume the melting snow, so Sheol steals those who have sinned. " Job 24:19 I could go on. [1] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7585.htm https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7585.htm
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

by varjag 3y ago

ndsipa_pomu 3y ago

> And come on, we know holy texts are full of things which are clearly wrong, in exactly the same way astrology is. The temptation to gloss over them as ornamental bits is huge, but to believers they are doctrinal. I can't think of any precise statements that are clear enough to be proved true or false. Usually holy texts have vague enough language that it's very much a case of interpretation. e.g. The Genesis creation story states that God created the universe in 6 days, but any attempt to demonstrate that it is false will have believers declaring that a "day" is not a precise measurement of time.

varjag 3y ago
Walking on water (or parting it at will) is rather unambiguous. The whole resurrection thing also would be mocked as taking Walking Dead seriously if not most people grew up seeing that believing this is acceptable.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
  An account of someone walking on water or parting it is clear enough, but is meaningless without supporting evidence. Of course, supporting evidence would need to be stronger than our everyday experience of people not being able to walk on water. It reminds me somewhat of James Randi's debunking of psychic powers - despite people having witnessed miraculous feats of spoon bending etc. no-one could replicate it under controlled conditions.
baremetal 3y ago
>The Genesis creation story states that God created the universe in 6 days, but any attempt to demonstrate that it is false will have believers declaring that a "day" is not a precise measurement of time. The Bible is rather clear that God doesn't measure time like humans do. "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." 2 Peter 3:8
- ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
  Okay, so are the 6 days actually 6 thousand years?
  - baremetal 3y ago
    I take it to mean the creation account is from God's perspective not ours. I don't have the slightest problem with modern science and it's reckoning of creation. The universe started with light in both accounts.
    - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
      > The universe started with light in both accounts. First light was estimated to be about 240,000 to 300,000 years after the big bang, so I would hesitate to say that the universe started with light [1]. You could determine that the first "day" started 300,000 years or so after the big bang, but then that throws off the other timings of creation. This demonstrates how the bible isn't even precise enough to be proven wrong as the "day" can seem to mean whatever people want it to mean. > I take it to mean the creation account is from God's perspective not ours. This sounds to me almost like a get-out clause as presumably God's perspective can be interpreted to be anything you want and cannot be proven false (similar to how an invisible pink unicorn's perspective can never be proven false). [1] https://phys.org/news/2016-11-universe.html https://phys.org/news/2016-11-universe.html
      - olddustytrail 3y ago
        That's just a bizarre definition of light. By that definition the center of a star is dark because the photons keep getting reabsorbed immediately. Which is always true from a photons point of view anyway, so what's the difference? In fact you might as well say that the universe was dark until the first eye evolved.
machina_ex_deus 3y ago
Your view of the six days of creation is backwards. It is a story that is meant to justify the division into weeks and the concept of Shabbat, a day off once in a week. It is probably the most widespread social policy that had ever been spread by any religion. You can look everywhere in the world, including the non judeo Christian parts, and see the work week with a day off implemented. It is such an intuitive and effective policy that nearly everyone forgot where it came from - but back then, it took a lot of effort to get people on board with it. So don't judge the merit of the story by whether it's physically how the world was created, but by how the message and the consequences it teaches the reader have changed the world. Every time you have the weekend to look forward to, remember that without some people believing God created the world in 6 days, you would be working non stop, or without the same day as your family to stop and rest. It's definitely debatable whether that's how the world was created (I don't think it was that way), but the merits of the message of story are also undeniable. And it is the kind of message you can only get people initially on board with using drastic beliefs.

baremetal 3y ago

>The Biblical concept of Hell as we know it (the place of eternal punishment) didn't emerge until the New Testament as it was in a way redundant. The OT did have a concept of Hell. It is called "Sheol"[1]. "Therefore Sheol enlarges its throat, and opens wide its enormous jaws, and down go Zion’s nobles and masses, her revelers and carousers!" Isaiah 5:14 "As drought and heat consume the melting snow, so Sheol steals those who have sinned. " Job 24:19 I could go on. [1] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7585.htm https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7585.htm

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]