RE: Yes, even Atheists... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 2:39:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK

Like I said, I could be wrong in describing her beliefs. I'm sure she could talk all day on this subject with you. :)

I have never heard that story about the tree before. Of course, being in the Bible Belt, I'm sure the churches I grew up in made their own interpretation of the bible. Which is why I do not identify with any specific denomination. I just tell people I believe in God and I have a relationship with Him. I think every religion picks pieces and makes them sound good to their plan.

I thought the tree thing was common knowledge.
I was taught that at RE (Religious Education) at school and also at Sunday school that I was forced to attend when I was a youngster.

Perhaps the US and the bible belt have modified their religious teachings somewhat.

Whatever works for you, more power to your elbow [:)]



ETA: I was 'christened' and shoved into RE as CofE (Church of England) which is protestant.
Perhaps the catholics and other christians still believe Jesus was nailed to a cross?? I have no idea myself.




TNDommeK -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 2:46:32 AM)

I grew up in Church of God, southern baptist, and Methodist but never heard that.
I'd like to think the power lies in my weenus. Lol. I love my elbow skin!! Lol




DomKen -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 6:13:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Yes, the christions stole the idea of the symbol of the cross and why they make that particular gesture the way they do.
As far as I know, the Jesus character (and I admit that as a human being, a person, he did actually exist in real life), was actually nailed to a tree, not a cross - which the christians portray as his crucifiction.
The Romans used crosses to show beggars, thieves, vagabonds etc to the passing masses to deter them from those crimes. They thought that Jesus' crime was so heinous that he didn't even desrve the luxury of a cross - hence he was nailed to a tree.
And that is why the sign of the cross for christians is such a hypocrissy that it's absurd to the extreme.

The Romans crucified people on wooden crosses not trees. Also the biggest trees growing around Jerusalem at the time were olive trees and they could be most kindly described as large bushes. If Jesus existed and was executed by the Romans it was on a cross. And it was a method of execution not some means of shaming criminals. In general the person was tied to the crossbar but not by by the legs, this meant in order to breathe the victim had to push against the cross with his legs and eventually become exhausted and die by suffocation. It really was an awful way to die and was used to great effect by the Romans. After the slave revolt lead by Spartacus the roman legions crucified 6000 survivors along the appian way from Rome to Capua.




cordeliasub -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 7:43:14 AM)

quote:

Would it change your opinion to find out that they were counter-protesting an anti gay rights protest where these young ladies were maced and beaten by the protesters who also attacked journalists covering the protest?


I hope none of the anti-gay rights people doing that claimed to be Christians (though sadly I'd bet a bunch of them do) because ain't NOTHING Christ-like about that crap.




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 7:55:47 AM)

FR

Without parsing through the doctrinal aspects of how the Pope stated this, I would just like to say that I support any notion of evaluating people based on what they do in their lives to help others irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc., etc., etc. In other words there are good and bad in every bunch, and in fact, arguably, good and bad in every individual. Anything that helps those trying to do good in the world feel united with others of the same mind set is a positive movement forward for humanity. I would rather be aligned with those trying to move the world forward in positive ways than simply aligned with those who look and pray like me. The ultimate goals of "goodness", "peace", "humanity" etc. should matter more than one's personal relationship to religion. [sm=2cents.gif]




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 8:04:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Yes, the christions stole the idea of the symbol of the cross and why they make that particular gesture the way they do.
As far as I know, the Jesus character (and I admit that as a human being, a person, he did actually exist in real life), was actually nailed to a tree, not a cross - which the christians portray as his crucifiction.
The Romans used crosses to show beggars, thieves, vagabonds etc to the passing masses to deter them from those crimes. They thought that Jesus' crime was so heinous that he didn't even desrve the luxury of a cross - hence he was nailed to a tree.
And that is why the sign of the cross for christians is such a hypocrissy that it's absurd to the extreme.

The Romans crucified people on wooden crosses not trees. Also the biggest trees growing around Jerusalem at the time were olive trees and they could be most kindly described as large bushes. If Jesus existed and was executed by the Romans it was on a cross. And it was a method of execution not some means of shaming criminals. In general the person was tied to the crossbar but not by by the legs, this meant in order to breathe the victim had to push against the cross with his legs and eventually become exhausted and die by suffocation. It really was an awful way to die and was used to great effect by the Romans. After the slave revolt lead by Spartacus the roman legions crucified 6000 survivors along the appian way from Rome to Capua.


That's pretty much what I was taught with the exception that Jesus was actually nailed to a tree because the romans thought his crime was so heinous that he didn't even deserve the luxury of a cross. They wanted to show that they saw him as the lowest of the low and even beneath common criminals.

And incidentally, the Mrs was also taught the same thing as well because I asked her before I made that post.
I was born and raised in Kent until I left the area in my early 30's and lived elsewhere.
The Mrs was born near Brighton and spent her life near Malvern since she was aged 4 and her mum was catholic.
What's the odds of two completely unrelated people, of different faith backgrounds, being taught the very same religious 'story' in different areas of the country nine years apart? Those odds have gotta be very very slim don't you think?




UllrsIshtar -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 8:24:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

That's pretty much what I was taught with the exception that Jesus was actually nailed to a tree because the romans thought his crime was so heinous that he didn't even deserve the luxury of a cross. They wanted to show that they saw him as the lowest of the low and even beneath common criminals.

And incidentally, the Mrs was also taught the same thing as well because I asked her before I made that post.
I was born and raised in Kent until I left the area in my early 30's and lived elsewhere.
The Mrs was born near Brighton and spent her life near Malvern since she was aged 4 and her mum was catholic.
What's the odds of two completely unrelated people, of different faith backgrounds, being taught the very same religious 'story' in different areas of the country nine years apart? Those odds have gotta be very very slim don't you think?



Euhm if they story gets around, it's very likely that such a thing would happen.

I'd like to see some references for the idea that Jesus was nailed to a tree please. Any singular scholarly source you can come up with that supports this idea will suffice.

My father has a PhD in Church history, and wroth several books on the subject of Jesus and the crucifixion, I've proofread for him and discussed stuff like this at length, and it is my understanding that you're going off a mistranslation of the Greek word xylon (ξύλον) which means:
I. wood cut and ready for use, firewood, timber (in these senses the word is usually in the plural);
II. piece of wood, log, beam, post or an object made of wood, such as a spoon, the Trojan horse, a cudgel or club, an instrument of punishment (a collar for someone's neck, stocks to confine his feet or to confine his neck, arms and legs, a gallows to hang him, or a stake to impale him), a table, a bench as in the theatre;
III. a tree
IV. a blockhead or a stubborn person;
V. a measure of length.[7]

Or the Latin word crux which means "a tree, frame, or other wooden instruments of execution, on which criminals were impaled or hanged" and "in particular, a cross"

There is nothing in the New Testament that speaks of the shape of the wood Jesus was nailed to, however, it was specifically mentioned that Jesus carried the wood he was nailed to, which means that the idea that he was nailed to a rooted tree, instead of a piece of wood that may or may not have been cross shaped, is rather ludicrous. What is far more likely is that Jesus was nailed to a simple straight stake, or a T shaped shake, as both where common methods in the day. Especially when considering the alternative of the root words in question, it should be rather clear that any translations of those words to mean "tree" as in a literal rooted tree are most likely inaccurate translations of the original, and what was meant instead are some of the other available meanings to those words.





DomKen -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 8:45:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Yes, the christions stole the idea of the symbol of the cross and why they make that particular gesture the way they do.
As far as I know, the Jesus character (and I admit that as a human being, a person, he did actually exist in real life), was actually nailed to a tree, not a cross - which the christians portray as his crucifiction.
The Romans used crosses to show beggars, thieves, vagabonds etc to the passing masses to deter them from those crimes. They thought that Jesus' crime was so heinous that he didn't even desrve the luxury of a cross - hence he was nailed to a tree.
And that is why the sign of the cross for christians is such a hypocrissy that it's absurd to the extreme.

The Romans crucified people on wooden crosses not trees. Also the biggest trees growing around Jerusalem at the time were olive trees and they could be most kindly described as large bushes. If Jesus existed and was executed by the Romans it was on a cross. And it was a method of execution not some means of shaming criminals. In general the person was tied to the crossbar but not by by the legs, this meant in order to breathe the victim had to push against the cross with his legs and eventually become exhausted and die by suffocation. It really was an awful way to die and was used to great effect by the Romans. After the slave revolt lead by Spartacus the roman legions crucified 6000 survivors along the appian way from Rome to Capua.


That's pretty much what I was taught with the exception that Jesus was actually nailed to a tree because the romans thought his crime was so heinous that he didn't even deserve the luxury of a cross. They wanted to show that they saw him as the lowest of the low and even beneath common criminals.

And incidentally, the Mrs was also taught the same thing as well because I asked her before I made that post.
I was born and raised in Kent until I left the area in my early 30's and lived elsewhere.
The Mrs was born near Brighton and spent her life near Malvern since she was aged 4 and her mum was catholic.
What's the odds of two completely unrelated people, of different faith backgrounds, being taught the very same religious 'story' in different areas of the country nine years apart? Those odds have gotta be very very slim don't you think?

The story comes from a couple of passages in Acts. However the synoptic gospels, written at the same time as Acts, all agree that it was a cross. But as I said if it happened the Romans prefered to use crosses and there simply were not trees suitable for hanging a man from in that place at that time.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 9:36:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
I'd like to see some references for the idea that Jesus was nailed to a tree please. Any singular scholarly source you can come up with that supports this idea will suffice.


I can only go by what I was taught as a kid at infant school and Sunday school.

However, I dredged up a couple of references that I found -
http://www.errancy.com/cross-or-tree/
http://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.sr/CT/BQA/k/175/Was-Jesus-Crucified-on-Cross-Stake-Matthew-2735.htm
http://www.morocco.com/forums/people-book-peuple-du-livre/19996-jesus-crucified-tree-according-peter-cross-according-others.html
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Acts-5-30/
http://hope-of-israel.org.nz/cructree.html

These seem to have a mixed bag of tree and cross (as did many websites) -
http://www.answering-christianity.com/was_jesus_crucified.htm
http://www.albatrus.org/english/religions/pagan/was_jesus_crucified_on_cross.htm *

It seems evident that it's quite a mixed bag and nobody, not even the scholars, can agree which it is.
From a quick read, it would appear that the Basic English Bible, the King James Bible, and various other scriptures based on the old testament and Jewish doctrines are tending to refer to a tree; whereas anything based on the New Testament seem to favour a cross.

So you may well be correct in saying there is no reference to a tree in the New Testament.
However, many bibles and texts based on the Old testament refer to a tree.

So I guess it depends upon which version of the Bible you were taught from as to whether you heard it as a tree or a cross.
As CofE, I was brought up on the King James Bible at infant school and the Basic English Bible at Sunday school where both sets of scriptures do indeed refer to a tree; hence no confusion in my early years.

* This also confirms my post that the Pagans used the 'cross' long before any christians -
"The history of the cross, and its worship and use as a religious symbol by pagan nations long before the time of Christ, shows us plainly that it is not a symbol that Christians should attach any reverence toward."
- and further on -
"That the cross was widely known in pre-Christian times as an emblem has been clearly shown by independent investigators. Indeed. it was a well-known HEATHEN SIGN."

So all you christians out there that have any deference to a cross, it would seem that you are worshipping a Pagan heathen sign - not one that belongs to christianity! [:D]




GotSteel -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 10:14:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

quote:

My personal belief is show people love and nine times out of ten they will return the favor.


I agree.


That's a nice feeling, did it work out for him?



[image]local://upfiles/566126/98F2BB050DBA407492EE623A41C5A8A7.jpg[/image]




cordeliasub -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 10:39:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

quote:

My personal belief is show people love and nine times out of ten they will return the favor.


I agree.


That's a nice feeling, did it work out for him?



[image]local://upfiles/566126/98F2BB050DBA407492EE623A41C5A8A7.jpg[/image]



Depends on how you look at it.

Sadly, he was shot by someone who arrogantly thought he shouldn't be allowed to do what he did.

In that sense, maybe not.

Then again....did his life and message inspire change? I think so. So, in the strictly unselfish sense (and I have a feeling that unselfishness was part of this man's nature), then it DID work out well....because his life made a difference.

I guess we have to ask ourselves....am I only in this thing for me, or do I care about others?




TNDommeK -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 12:54:55 PM)

Like I said, nine times out of ten. Meaning, there's always one idiot in the bunch that screws it up for the rest. So that one out of ten was the idiot.




GotSteel -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 3:25:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

quote:

Would it change your opinion to find out that they were counter-protesting an anti gay rights protest where these young ladies were maced and beaten by the protesters who also attacked journalists covering the protest?


I hope none of the anti-gay rights people doing that claimed to be Christians (though sadly I'd bet a bunch of them do) because ain't NOTHING Christ-like about that crap.


It was the Catholic group Civitas.





cordeliasub -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 3:51:52 PM)

Ah

That really is a shame. Everyone has a right to their views and beliefs, but spewing vitriol over others seems.....less than Biblical




thishereboi -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 5:03:57 PM)

quote:

It seems evident that it's quite a mixed bag and nobody, not even the scholars, can agree which it is.


It does seem that way. Now you can find something that tells me why I would care which one it was? Does it really make any difference in the long run?




blacksword404 -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 5:06:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

quote:

My personal belief is show people love and nine times out of ten they will return the favor.


I agree.


That's a nice feeling, did it work out for him?



[image]local://upfiles/566126/98F2BB050DBA407492EE623A41C5A8A7.jpg[/image]


Love wasn't his primary purpose. He believed in people. And he believed that shame would get people to act. How many people could you watch get beat up and bitten by dogs every night before you couldn't stand it anymore? He took that abuse. And he did it out of love.




dcnovice -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 5:55:15 PM)

quote:

That's a nice feeling, did it work out for him?

A lot depends, I think, on whether you believe the story ends with the assassin's bullet.

MLK didn't.




GotSteel -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 7:38:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
Because I ran out of other explanations for the event when I tried to explain it rationally...

That constitutes the argument from ignorance, yes?



Yes.

Is there a problem with me labeling an experience that I have no explanation for as "God", rather than labeling it "unexplained" or any other random term?


This question surprises me since we're in agreement that your reasoning is fallacious, that is the problem.




UllrsIshtar -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/28/2013 8:34:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
Because I ran out of other explanations for the event when I tried to explain it rationally...

That constitutes the argument from ignorance, yes?



Yes.

Is there a problem with me labeling an experience that I have no explanation for as "God", rather than labeling it "unexplained" or any other random term?


This question surprises me since we're in agreement that your reasoning is fallacious, that is the problem.


My reasoning if fallacious, because it's not based on logical patterns at all. It's based on a total lack of any evidence whatsoever, and in lieu of that evidence, I put a label on it that implies a certain concept that is at all not proven by the lack of evidence.

However...

I'm not trying to proof the existence of God, to you, to me, or to anybody else. What I'm doing is labeling an experience I had.

In order to label something, without claiming that the label is factually accurate because I so labeled it, I don't need a logical argument to back it up.
Claiming I do would be like claiming I need a logical argument to name a painting I made the name I feel it deserves. There is no logic, because the subject I'm dealing with (the labeling of a feeling) isn't a logical argument.

Now, if I would pose that my experience proved to myself that God exists as a definitive fact, then absolutely, I would follow your reasoning that because of the fallacious logic that statement would be problematic.
But I don't do that. I don't consider my experience proof of anything at all. I just observe that I felt a certain way, and that feeling like that changed me in such a way that I afterwards gained the completely irrational, illogical, unprovable feeling of "faith". I then label that experience, without being too concerned about the accuracy of the label, because all my attempts at defining an accurate label for it have failed, and I therefore labeled it merely the most appropriate label at my disposal.




GotSteel -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/29/2013 4:51:36 AM)

quote:

My personal belief is show people love and nine times out of ten they will return the favor.


quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub
Depends on how you look at it.

Sadly, he was shot by someone who arrogantly thought he shouldn't be allowed to do what he did.

In that sense, maybe not.

Then again....did his life and message inspire change? I think so. So, in the strictly unselfish sense (and I have a feeling that unselfishness was part of this man's nature), then it DID work out well....because his life made a difference.

I guess we have to ask ourselves....am I only in this thing for me, or do I care about others?


The whole be good to others and they'll be good to you is great when you're in the in-group but when you're a second class citizen and the social norm is to shit on you, just loving people is insufficient. In that case getting equality actually requires protesting. Martin Luther King Jr. despite his incredibly tame protesting was branded an extremest, threatened, beaten, bombed, stabbed, jailed, shot at and finally murdered.

So when one starts looking at the Black Panthers, guys brandishing weapons screaming black power, sure it looks crazy in a vacuum but in context it's pretty understandable how they got there.




Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.09375