"Do I have religion right?”
How to Know if You Have the Wrong Religion
Please read this very thought-provoking article:
https://johnpavlovitz.com/2021/08/25..._DvBXciG71gdeo
|
"Do I have religion right?”
How to Know if You Have the Wrong Religion
Please read this very thought-provoking article:
https://johnpavlovitz.com/2021/08/25..._DvBXciG71gdeo
I read the article and the writer says what I have thought for many, many years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
It's never what one BELIEVES, but how one ACTS. THAT is the right religion for anyone.
Belief-based religions are a throwback to our primitive selves. Witness how the Bible developed over the centuries. From talking snake stories for children to the sublime message of love from Christ. Even the Gospel message is still tainted with remnants of the original worship of power - the powerful sky god who demanded obeisance from all the adherents.
As humanity evolved, so his grasp of religion also evolved. Large segments of humanity remain in the throes of ancient gods which is a reflection of the different stages of evolution humans are subject to.
Your question is one worth discussing.
What does love and care and empathy get us in the end? And if someone has little or none, then what?
Loving, caring and empathizing are not done for our benefit that will get something for us in the end. They are for the one receiving those things. When they are carried out for OUR sake, they will quickly disappear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
For those who have little or none, what they get or don't get is not our concern. We can continue with them, or "shake the dust off our feet."
Will we earn heaven (or be consigned to hell) depending if we love/care/empathize (or not)?
Should attaining heaven be our reason for
loving/carving/empathizing?
I understood your question the first time. I gave the best answer I could.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Desiring the good should be our reason. Desiring heaven in exchange for loving is just another form of buying and selling.Quote:
Should attaining heaven be our reason for loving/carving/empathizing?
So that's what you believe?Quote:
It's never what one BELIEVES, but how one ACTS. THAT is the right religion for anyone.
You have both stated belief after belief above. Belief is everything. It governs actions. We act because we believe something.
The author in the article said this. "The right religious worldview is the one that makes you a more empathetic human being—period. It is the belief system that enables you to be more aware of the suffering in the world and propels you into other people’s lives to alleviate that suffering." That is, of course, a belief he has which he claims is right and which he BELIEVES everyone should adhere to, believe, and act on. It is, he said, the "right religious worldview". So I suppose it's safe to say that he considers believing the "right thing" to be everything.
I prefer to listen to the man who was raised from the dead.
I am sorry to say (again!) that you have missed the meaning.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Words have shades of meaning, sometimes connotations, sometimes based on context, sometimes just differences.
In this case, "belief" is used in the narrow sense of religious belief. Other shades of meaning would include my belief that I am sitting at a computer writing this. This latter sense is not the same as what the previous posts have referred to when using the word. I hope this isn't too confusing for you.
As far as the linked article goes, you may believe whatever you desire whether it agrees with the author or not. That is your privilege.
Who acted. He loved/cared/empathized.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Do you believe what He said?
What He said or what you say He said?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
What He said as recorded in the New Testament. Do you believe those words?
We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Then how do you know this is true? "Who acted. He loved/cared/empathized."
BTW, this is hardly true. " just transcriptions and translations over the centuries." It's not even close to being true.
In the same way, how do you know hell exists?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Of course the NT has been added to and changed to suit the ruler or pope or priest in power over the scribes.
Because I believe what He said. You clearly do not. And there is no good reason to believe we do not have an accurate account of what He said.
What do you believe He said? Everything exactly as printed in the KJV Bible?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I would reference the Greek manuscripts, but the KJV is sufficient.
But you have already said you don't believe we know what He said, so there's no real point in continuing this.
You are already misconstruing what I'VE said!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Nothing has been misconstrued. This was a very clear statement. Your refusal to simply say you believe what He said also speaks volumes.Quote:
We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries.
So you KNOW which are His exact words.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
If you don't believe the NT account is reliable, then you cannot know this is true. "Who acted. He loved/cared/empathized."
Can't have it both ways.
We're talking about WORDS said, not account (the overall story).Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Both the actions and statements of Christ are related with words. Either those words are reliable or they're not. Can't have it both ways just to suit your preconceived ideas. To suggest His actions are reliably recorded but His words are not is a preposterous idea.
If you ever decide, get back with me.
Who recorded them, wrote them down, when He said them?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Again, to suggest His actions are reliably recorded but His words are not is a preposterous idea. The same argument you just used for His statements can be used of those who observed His actions. There is no difference. You are only making a distinction because you think His actions support your preconceived notions (they do not) but His words don't. And you are the same person who just weeks ago had her hair on fire trying to suggest that a word He spoke repeatedly (agape) meant unconditional love. But how can you even know He ever used the word??? You say the accounts of His speech are unreliable ("We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries."). If so, how can you know He ever used "agape"?
I should tell you that NO ONE tries to advance the argument you are using. NO ONE does. It is sheer foolishness.
Deleted...removed.
When Jesus spoke the word love, especially when He told us to love one another, He meant agape, unconditionally. Of course, He knows we're human, restrained by the bondage of sin, so we can only dream of loving unconditionally. Our flesh -- our ego, our selfness, -- won't allow it, and we can't get beyond philos.
When on the cross, did He really say,“Elí, Elí, lemá sabachtháni?” or is that the cry of despair that the Gospel writers knew Jesus would have uttered as our suffering Savior?
How do you know He ever used the word "agape"? Remember that, according to you, the accounts of the words He spoke are unreliable.Quote:
When Jesus spoke the word love, especially when He told us to love one another, He meant agape, unconditionally.
Even worse, according to you, "Of course the NT has been added to and changed to suit the ruler or pope or priest in power over the scribes."Quote:
"We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries."
So how can you claim to know He ever used "agape"? How can you claim to know what He said???
He spoke Aramaic and Greek. His entire life was one of selfless love -- the agape kind, not eros or philos. Selfless love was the center of His teachings.
But how can you know any of that? Remember that, according to you, the NT text is not reliable. So how can you know these things?Quote:
His entire life was one of love -- the agape kind, not eros or philos.
Quote:
"We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries."
Quote:
"Of course the NT has been added to and changed to suit the ruler or pope or priest in power over the scribes."
They all agree regarding Jesus as being the perfect example of unconditional love.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
If I may jump in here for a moment - all Christian denominations accept the hope for a heavenly reward as a valid motivator to live a good life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
I didn't want my original statement to be misleading.
You are trying to have your cake and eat it as well. All of the unreliable NT texts (according to you) agreeing on something amounts to nothing. They all agree about a coming day of judgment, but you reject that. It all comes back to a simple guiding principle you use. Any text that agrees with you is great, and any text that disagrees with you is suspect. You inform the Bible rather than the Bible guiding your beliefs.Quote:
They all agree regarding Jesus as being the perfect example of unconditional love.
I think we've talked this to death. You have, it seems to me, such a predictable pattern. Your liberal worldview guides your beliefs, and then you go to the Bible in search of support. But you are always suspicious, so it's always about proof texts, or an unreliable NT text (unless it agrees with you), or someone is a fundie, and on and on it goes. Anything to keep from violating liberal dogma.
I hope you don't rue that upcoming day of judgment -- or maybe you're just getting your own personal unhappiness out. Like we learned in counseling psych grad school, bullying, incivility, intimidation, and other forms of disrespectful behavior chills communication and discussion, undercuts individual contributions to posts, and, in general, undermines morale.
Oh for goodness sake. You have an inconsistent belief. You believe the text of the NT when it seems to describe the Jesus you like, and yet you will not believe that same text when Jesus says what you don't like. It's not my issue. It's yours to deal with. You always want to blame the other person when it's you that needs correcting.
I'll give you the last word. It'll be your chance to explain the strange belief that the NT is reliable where it agrees with you and unreliable where it does not agree with you. Go for it.
Your conclusion is totally incorrect. As Athos has said more than once, reading comprehension is not your strong point.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
That is such a thoroughly dishonest answer I can't let it go by. It's just another example of your idea that it's always the other guy's fault. This post said it all.
You said, "His entire life was one of love -- the agape kind, not eros or philos."
I replied, "But how can you know any of that? Remember that, according to you, the NT text is not reliable. So how can you know these things?" And I noted two former posts of yours clearly showing that you might have a writing comprehension problem, but reading comprehension is not the issue. They were scarcely a resounding endorsement of the NT's reliability.
Quote:
"We don't have His exact words, just transcriptions and translations over the centuries."
Dear WG, if the text of the NT is unreliable as you say it is, then none of it can be trusted. Your faith is just emptiness in that case.Quote:
"Of course the NT has been added to and changed to suit the ruler or pope or priest in power over the scribes."
I never said the NT text isn't reliable! And we DON'T have Jesus' exact words!
We can't verify the accuracy of Jesus' words. Jesus spoke Aramic and Greek, not English. Matthew and Mark were not at the foot of the cross, yet they wrote Jesus' words that were translated over and over again for centuries. How accurate were they by the time we read them in English?
Yeah. That makes a lot of sense. The words we have of Christ are not really right, but by George the text sure is reliable! Surely you can see the silliness of that position.Quote:
I never said the NT text isn't reliable! And we DON'T have Jesus' exact words!
Either we have an accurate account or we don't. If it is accurate, then we can be confident of both the words AND actions of Jesus. If it's not, then it cannot help us. But you cannot hold that it both IS and IS NOT accurate.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:45 AM. |