And Christ puts the lie to the OT god. Good idea...that guy was an asshole.Right. Why is that bad?
Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
And Christ puts the lie to the OT god. Good idea...that guy was an asshole.Right. Why is that bad?
Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
And Christ puts the lie to the OT god. Good idea...that guy was an asshole.
If you read the OT, plenty of figures suffer in the name of God. I do not see a pattern of reward for faith. The theme I read out of Job is the sovereignty of God.And I see the OT god once again rewarding unwavering belief with wealth and health. A narrative that gets tossed in the shitter when Jesus comes on the scene. The whole "your reward comes in the next life" is a direct repudiation of Job's story. Like I said...believe whatever you like but don't pretend the Job story doesn't say what it clearly says about your god.
This is something you're really wonder about? How many "Americans" will be saved?How many Americans do you think will be saved?
Considering how many Americans reject God, I think it will be 50/50...at best.
I believe Christ was the resurrection. But, again... I have no way of knowing for absolute certain what happened 2000 years ago. I have no way of knowing what happened 200 years ago! I can't absolutely vouch for anything that happens outside of my own personal experience. No one can do that, that I'm aware of.So you believe Jesus physically resurrected from the dead, as His apostles believed?
I don't think you answered that. If you did, I missed it.
You may be interested in work of psychiatrist Carl Jung (and maybe Dostoevsky). I would start by trying to get an understanding of Archetypes and the collective unconsciousness (maybe on youtube) and maybe some of his lighter works and work your way up to Aion and the Red Book. That's what I've been reading recently.That's not really true. I can easily see how an intelligent person would hold that view but not ethical one. It's odd how you would judge someone based on that one position.
If person claims human life is as valuable as ants, then they're clearly not ethical.
I can understand from the atheist viewpoint the claim that human lives are no more important than ants. It makes perfect sense from the atheist view since we're all just reduced to atoms.
I spent years reading atheist philosophy. Existentialism from Camus to Sartre. I'm not claiming I am a PhD but I totally understand the atheist view point.
Which philosophers have you studied? Can you recommend any to me?
You may be interested in work of psychiatrist Carl Jung (and maybe Dostoevsky). I would start by trying to get an understanding of Archetypes and the collective unconsciousness (maybe on youtube) and maybe some of his lighter works and work your way up to Aion and the Red Book. That's what I've been reading recently.
James 3:17 But the wisdom from above, first, indeed, is pure, then peaceable, gentle, well-convinced, full of kindness and good fruits, uncontentious, and unhypocritical—
Jame 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
I like this video particularly his comments starting about 8:30 but other bits to.
Well you’re ahead of me then. I haven’t read “Notes from the Underground”. I’ll have to put that on my list.Thanks! I read both in college.
Jung "Memories, Dreams and Reflections" was great.
"Notes from the Underground" by Dostoyevsky may be my favorite book.
I also read "Crime and Punishment" and "The Idiot" by Dostoevsky.
Was Jung a Christian? I don't think so but could never figure it out.
Dostoevsky definitely was.
Have you ever heard of, or listen to, read about Alan Watts?Well you’re ahead of me then. I haven’t read “Notes from the Underground”. I’ll have to put that on my list.
It’s a bit controversial whether Carl Jung was a Christian. He was definitely raised a Christian. I believe he was, privately. When asked if he believed in God as a child he said “Oh yes” and when asked about now he said “(now) I know. I don’t need to believe”. He later walked that back a bit apparently.
No I haven't. Just googled him. Believe it or not though, I was just (before reading your post) wondering whether Buddhists get leeway under John 3:3-7. Or even an atheist like Sam Harris who is a big proponent of spiritualism thru meditation.Have you ever heard of, or listen to, read about Alan Watts?
Alan Watts was, originally, raised Catholic. I think he "evolved" into a more Eastern belief system.No I haven't. Just googled him. Believe it or not though, I was just (before reading your post) wondering whether Buddhists get leeway under John 3:3-7. Or even an atheist like Sam Harris who is a big proponent of spiritualism thru meditation.
For parts of this he almost sounds like Christopher Hitchens (which I don't mind) but his comments on Divine inspiration starting at about 12:30 I really like. He even briefly mentions archetypes and the collective unconscious so a Carl Jung influence. "Or it (divine inspiration) might come thru dreams, thru archetypal messages from the collective unconscious thru which the holy spirit could be said to work." I think it's much deeper than that though (difficult to explain of course as he says).Alan Watts was, originally, raised Catholic. I think he "evolved" into a more Eastern belief system.
I thought t was interesting how he suggested that Christianity institutionalized GUILT as a virtue!For parts of this he almost sounds like Christopher Hitchens (which I don't mind) but his comments on Divine inspiration starting at about 12:30 I really like. He even briefly mentions archetypes and the collective unconscious so a Carl Jung influence. "Or it (divine inspiration) might come thru dreams, thru archetypal messages from the collective unconscious thru which the holy spirit could be said to work." I think it's much deeper than that though (difficult to explain of course as he says).
Well, if I understand you correctly, the bit about religion post-1800, in the backdrop (or underlying ideas or collective unconscious) of the likes of Nietzsche, Marx, Engels, Darwin, and so on, some of them sort of radical ideas even today, it sort of makes sense that a portion of society would have a backlash in the opposite direction.I thought t was interesting how he suggested that Christianity institutionalized GUILT as a virtue!
It's interesting, and important, to note that, prior to approximately the 19th century, there was no such thing as the Pope's "infallibility" and the Bible as being "absolutely correct." That was introduced in and around the beginning of 19th Century. Imagine the 1800 years prior, where that kind of thinking could be considered idolatrous. It's really had a profound effect on how it has come to be interpreted. And, I don't think the effect has been very positive.
Whew! I have to close my eyes and listen to him. All those Parkinson's-like tics are distracting to me. I've LISTENED to him before and his accent is soooo thick that it's difficult for me.Well, if I understand you correctly, the bit about religion post-1800, in the backdrop (or underlying ideas or collective unconscious) of the likes of Nietzsche, Marx, Engels, Darwin, and so on, some of them sort of radical ideas even today, it sort of makes sense that a portion of society would have a backlash in the opposite direction.
Here's a joke for ya.
The Apostles asked Jesus "will many be saved?" and He responded by saying "enter through the narrow gate."
This may mean He was saying few get to Heaven.
Sounds like he is telling us fatties don’t get in.
Alan Watts was, originally, raised Catholic. I think he "evolved" into a more Eastern belief system.
Oh, for sure. Watts was a step on the path to Jung. It's a one, constant realization for me.By the way, Alan Watts recommends C G Jung "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" here at 40:00. It's the only book I've heard him directly recommend. I've been listening to some of his talks on Youtube, pretty good stuff.
The Apostles asked Jesus "will many be saved?" and He responded by saying "enter through the narrow gate."
This may mean He was saying few get to Heaven.
And there will be really long lines.Sounds like he is telling us fatties don’t get in.
I would just say bits resonated as true, were synthesized, built on and he walked down his own path (with his own nuanced thoughts and tons of other influences). It sort of happens that way thru history, of course. I didn't mean to overemphasize Jung, just inspired me recently.Oh, for sure. Watts was a step on the path to Jung. It's a one, constant realization for me.