Would you believe in God if holy texts were different

Shad · May 14, 2019

ideogenous_mover said:
Could the written material actually play a major role in what is stopping you from believing? There are many ways the material could probably be different. In the bible there is an emphasis on war at times, and the morality can be quite ancient and severe. If alternatively, the bible was a pure doctrine of the best clear cut philosophical morals, with no parsing through metaphor and hard to understand riddle-like wisdom, would that make more of an impression on you. What if it even contained science, perhaps conveyed to prophets, telling us how to produce the best medicines or engineer electrics cars the best way. Or organize cities and government most efficiently, in a manner that was straight to the point. Instead, it obliges you to dig laboriously through ancient stories from the iron age like an archeologist. And from a long story of twists and turns arcane and hard to understand, you wrest from it what you believe is some relevant ingot of wisdom. But what if everything were crystal clear, with no twists and turns and controversy. With one simple testament relevant to all of modernity with principles clear as a mountain stream, with no need for clashing schools of interpretation and debate.

No as I reject the concept that God only talks to select individuals especially those from an era in which "demonic possess" was a credible diagnosis of medical issues and birds blood spattered on an altar did something.

InChrist · May 14, 2019

Kelly of the Phoenix said:
The Prince of Peace attacked people with a whip. That might give some people pause.

Yes, hopefully some people. If you notice in the text, the only people Jesus spoke harshly to or used the whip around were the religious hypocrites and those using the temple as a means for profit and taking advantage of the common people. Jesus always treated the sick, needy, or sinners with love and compassion.

Left Coast · May 14, 2019

InChrist said:
It appears that your lack of faith is simply a reality which you yourself have shared and made clear, so I am not attacking your lack of faith, simply acknowledging what you have stated. The scriptures are clear that if a person does not believe in or know Christ then then they are spiritually blind, so it really would make no difference what evidence I present to you, would it?

That is what your scriptures claim about me, yes, but my point is that what your scriptures claim about me is not a rational response to what we're discussing. It is a way of not responding to my actual argument by claiming there is something wrong with me. It's a logical fallacy called ad hominem.

When He did show Himself some believed, but many also rejected Him even though they saw Him in the flesh, experienced His love, or saw healings and miracles. They still crucified Him! How many times did God demonstrate His love, guidance, and power right before the eyes of the children of Israel and yet they still disbelieved and repeatedly fell away? Do you really think that people visibly seeing God is always going to be enough if one's heart and attitude is not right toward God to start with? If having their own way or clinging to their sin is more important?

You could use the exact same reasoning in regards to any of the other times he allegedly showed himself. If it didn't stop him then, why would it stop him now?

amorphous_constellation · May 15, 2019

IndigoChild5559 said:
It's because I trust my perceptions. I experience God.

I guess If it keeps you healthy, I wouldn't want you to question your perception of whatever gives you that stable sense of order. I don't think there's much I could say to someone with your view.

I think the scenes that seem most interesting in the bible are those that describe figures or prophets alone in nature. Whether it was Abraham or Jesus alone in the desert, or Jonah in the sea, or maybe Job, I think he was alone as well. So I guess what God did to lead them there partly involved a test to the perception, though he would meet the human perception halfway actually, for I think an intuition of a Watcher would come naturally when a lone man was to stare into the duney horizons of a middle-eastern landscape. I think it seems like that particular God emanated out of that landscape.

FlyingTeaPot · May 24, 2019

ideogenous_mover said:
Could the written material actually play a major role in what is stopping you from believing? There are many ways the material could probably be different. In the bible there is an emphasis on war at times, and the morality can be quite ancient and severe. If alternatively, the bible was a pure doctrine of the best clear cut philosophical morals, with no parsing through metaphor and hard to understand riddle-like wisdom, would that make more of an impression on you. What if it even contained science, perhaps conveyed to prophets, telling us how to produce the best medicines or engineer electrics cars the best way. Or organize cities and government most efficiently, in a manner that was straight to the point. Instead, it obliges you to dig laboriously through ancient stories from the iron age like an archeologist. And from a long story of twists and turns arcane and hard to understand, you wrest from it what you believe is some relevant ingot of wisdom. But what if everything were crystal clear, with no twists and turns and controversy. With one simple testament relevant to all of modernity with principles clear as a mountain stream, with no need for clashing schools of interpretation and debate.

To be believable, such a book would need to contain proof for all its claims.

Spirit of Light · May 24, 2019

ideogenous_mover said:
Could the written material actually play a major role in what is stopping you from believing? There are many ways the material could probably be different. In the bible there is an emphasis on war at times, and the morality can be quite ancient and severe. If alternatively, the bible was a pure doctrine of the best clear cut philosophical morals, with no parsing through metaphor and hard to understand riddle-like wisdom, would that make more of an impression on you. What if it even contained science, perhaps conveyed to prophets, telling us how to produce the best medicines or engineer electrics cars the best way. Or organize cities and government most efficiently, in a manner that was straight to the point. Instead, it obliges you to dig laboriously through ancient stories from the iron age like an archeologist. And from a long story of twists and turns arcane and hard to understand, you wrest from it what you believe is some relevant ingot of wisdom. But what if everything were crystal clear, with no twists and turns and controversy. With one simple testament relevant to all of modernity with principles clear as a mountain stream, with no need for clashing schools of interpretation and debate.

The teaching of the different spiritual paths from the teacher (Buddha, Jesus and so on) Should not be changed, just because we today think differently about the world. I we do want to enlighten to the truth we must follow the path as it was intended to, and not change those part we as society disagree with.

If we change the text it does not become a true teaching and nobody would be able to cultivate it.

Vinayaka · May 24, 2019

ideogenous_mover said:
Could the written material actually play a major role in what is stopping you from believing?

If the religion and discussion around it is a text based religion, then possibly clearer language would help. In the same sense, I may have had more appreciation for Shakespeare had it been translated, or the same stories written later.

But for religions like mine that are experience based, the texts or words of figures of the past are totally meaningless. What counts is the present experience. Religion is living it, not reading it.

amorphous_constellation · May 24, 2019

Vinayaka said:
But for religions like mine that are experience based, the texts or words of figures of the past are totally meaningless. What counts is the present experience. Religion is living it, not reading it.

That sounds interesting and possibly more exciting than text based religions, but text or at least words seem to be an important part of many traditions. So much so that phonetic sounds, alphabets, and the words can have mystical or spiritual properties said to be imbued in them, or at least that's what I read.

Vinayaka · May 24, 2019

ideogenous_mover said:
That sounds interesting and possibly more exciting than text based religions, but text or at least words seem to be an important part of many traditions. So much so that phonetic sounds, alphabets, and the words can have mystical or spiritual properties said to be imbued in them, or at least that's what I read.

Yes that's true in Hinduism, but it's the sounds that are used to invoke the presence of the divine, moreso than as a tool for philosophical discourse.

But you're right, in some religions, the text is the very core of things. So much so that adherents use excessive quoting, no escape from that text.

Would you believe in God if holy texts were different

Shad

Veteran Member

InChrist

Free4ever

Left Coast

This Is Water

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member

FlyingTeaPot

Irrational Rationalist. Educated Fool.

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want

Vinayaka

devotee

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member

Vinayaka

devotee