Do you ever wish you "got it"?

Avatar image for btaylor2404
btaylor2404

11353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#1 btaylor2404
Member since 2003 • 11353 Posts
I use the wording here according to my thought process. I used to think and say that being around religious people, or in church made me feel like everyone was speaking some foreign language I couldn't understand. I don't anymore, I'm at peace and confident in my views as an Atheist, just wondering if any others have thought or are thinking that way?
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

I know what religious people are referring to most of the time if that's what you're asking. I feel that they're just like me really, only that they like to muse a lot about fiction, sort of like me, but they don't call it fiction.

Avatar image for btaylor2404
btaylor2404

11353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#3 btaylor2404
Member since 2003 • 11353 Posts

I know what religious people are referring to most of the time if that's what you're asking. I feel that they're just like me really, only that they like to muse a lot about fiction, sort of like me, but they don't call it fiction.

Genetic_Code

Your kinda onto what I'm getting at. I go to church weekly. I look at these hundreds of people really into God and all and sometimes my mind wonders off to what is wrong with everyone, or is it me? Now I rarely do that anymore, I just think about what's being preached and disagree or agree with it in my head, but at one point in time I did. Hence the I don't get what everyone else gets.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Your kinda onto what I'm getting at. I go to church weekly. I look at these hundreds of people really into God and all and sometimes my mind wonders off to what is wrong with everyone, or is it me? Now I rarely do that anymore, I just think about what's being preached and disagree or agree with it in my head, but at one point in time I did. Hence the I don't get what everyone else gets.

btaylor2404

Then yes, because I'm around religious people all the time and I'm used to talking about subjects like that even without having to state my beliefs, although it's been a month since I've gone to church.

Also, I think "fiction" is too strong of a word to use as I did in my post. There is historical fact to the Bible, after all.

Avatar image for btaylor2404
btaylor2404

11353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#5 btaylor2404
Member since 2003 • 11353 Posts
Well since it's just me and you here, I don't think fiction is too strong. If 20 or so people take the word of a man, then 20-100 years later write it down, it's fiction to me. Thanks for answering, just wanted to know if it was just me that used to think that way.
Avatar image for SimpJee
SimpJee

18309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 SimpJee
Member since 2002 • 18309 Posts
Nah, if "getting it" entails ignoring the implausibility of the Bible's God. Or the Muslim god, been reading the Quran and it's the same kind of things.
Avatar image for domatron23
domatron23

6226

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 domatron23
Member since 2007 • 6226 Posts
I think that I just don't "get it". I went to a Christian meeting recently and I just couldn't help but feel awkward when they were praying and talking about creation etc.
Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#8 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts

Nah, if "getting it" entails ignoring the implausibility of the Bible's God. Or the Muslim god, been reading the Quran and it's the same kind of things.SimpJee

I'll bite; what is so...implausible about the Bible's God specifically?

Avatar image for Junkie_man
Junkie_man

1219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Junkie_man
Member since 2008 • 1219 Posts
I don't "get it". I could never seriously pray without feeling ridiculous or a hypocrite. Same goes for the hymns I have to sing in my school assemblies. I feel uncomfortable when people start talking about their relationship with God. The whole concept of accepting something like God on faith at all is very alien to me. I don't like things which don't offer a testable hypothesis or any deeper analysis. I can't accept that miracles happen. I'd need to know how miracles work.
Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts

I don't "get it". I could never seriously pray without feeling ridiculous or a hypocrite. Same goes for the hymns I have to sing in my school assemblies. I feel uncomfortable when people start talking about their relationship with God. The whole concept of accepting something like God on faith at all is very alien to me. I don't like things which don't offer a testable hypothesis or any deeper analysis. I can't accept that miracles happen. I'd need to know how miracles work.Junkie_man

Even as a Christian myself, I would probably feel uncomfortable too when other's talk about their relationship with God; I just don't know, but for some reason, it seems that many times, such a faith is superficial, where everything is all right, God is a nice, all knowing man, and Church is a fun time.

I agree, many times, such faith does seem fake.

Avatar image for btaylor2404
btaylor2404

11353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#11 btaylor2404
Member since 2003 • 11353 Posts

I don't "get it". I could never seriously pray without feeling ridiculous or a hypocrite. Same goes for the hymns I have to sing in my school assemblies. I feel uncomfortable when people start talking about their relationship with God. The whole concept of accepting something like God on faith at all is very alien to me. I don't like things which don't offer a testable hypothesis or any deeper analysis. I can't accept that miracles happen. I'd need to know how miracles work.Junkie_man

Took a while, but you've hit on exactally what I mean. When people start talking about their relationship with God one of two things happens, my mind goes WTF? how does this person think like this and we are so much alike in so many ways, or I think their just plain nuts.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Something else to consider is how people conceive things. For example, I always find it strange how people could find the Virgin Mary out of this:

I can kind of see it, but I really have to focus out some parts to make it seem legit.

Avatar image for SimpJee
SimpJee

18309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 SimpJee
Member since 2002 • 18309 Posts

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]Nah, if "getting it" entails ignoring the implausibility of the Bible's God. Or the Muslim god, been reading the Quran and it's the same kind of things.STWELCH

I'll bite; what is so...implausible about the Bible's God specifically?

This is a quick reply but the gist of why is that it's written by multiple people who had unknown agenda's, science/archaeology/anthropology has proven some of the statements in the bible to be suspicious or false, crazy assertions (virgin giving birth, etc.), giant 180 from Old to New Testament, contradictions disproving God's all powerful via "the writers of the bible were writing what God wanted them to say" which seems fishy in itself.

This was just a quick rundown, we can get into detail wherever you want :P

Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#14 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts
[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]Nah, if "getting it" entails ignoring the implausibility of the Bible's God. Or the Muslim god, been reading the Quran and it's the same kind of things.SimpJee

I'll bite; what is so...implausible about the Bible's God specifically?

This is a quick reply but the gist of why is that it's written by multiple people who had unknown agenda's, science/archaeology/anthropology has proven some of the statements in the bible to be suspicious or false, crazy assertions (virgin giving birth, etc.), giant 180 from Old to New Testament, contradictions disproving God's all powerful via "the writers of the bible were writing what God wanted them to say" which seems fishy in itself.

This was just a quick rundown, we can get into detail wherever you want :P

Oh, please do go into detail. :)

Avatar image for SimpJee
SimpJee

18309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 SimpJee
Member since 2002 • 18309 Posts

Oh, please do go into detail. :)
STWELCH

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#16 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]Oh, please do go into detail. :)
SimpJee

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Well, the Bible itself has really never been interpretated literally by a major strand of Christianity until the early 1900's, when fundamentalism started to appear. In fact, medieval theologians did a four level grid for interpretating the Bible (The moral, literal, allegorical, and eschatological).

I think the main problem comes from a literal reading of the Bible. Which really makes absolutely no sense if done completely, since Paul himself used allegory extensively in interpretation.

Avatar image for SimpJee
SimpJee

18309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 SimpJee
Member since 2002 • 18309 Posts
[QUOTE="SimpJee"]

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]Oh, please do go into detail. :)
STWELCH

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Well, the Bible itself has really never been interpretated literally by a major strand of Christianity until the early 1900's, when fundamentalism started to appear. In fact, medieval theologians did a four level grid for interpretating the Bible (The moral, literal, allegorical, and eschatological).

I think the main problem comes from a literal reading of the Bible. Which really makes absolutely no sense if done completely, since Paul himself used allegory extensively in interpretation.

In anywhere else in your life, have you ever taken something written with so much allegory so seriously? The exception people make for the bible, those that know about the arguements against Christianity and have thought about them, confuses me very much.

Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#18 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts
[QUOTE="STWELCH"][QUOTE="SimpJee"]

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]Oh, please do go into detail. :)
SimpJee

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Well, the Bible itself has really never been interpretated literally by a major strand of Christianity until the early 1900's, when fundamentalism started to appear. In fact, medieval theologians did a four level grid for interpretating the Bible (The moral, literal, allegorical, and eschatological).

I think the main problem comes from a literal reading of the Bible. Which really makes absolutely no sense if done completely, since Paul himself used allegory extensively in interpretation.

In anywhere else in your life, have you ever taken something written with so much allegory so seriously? The exception people make for the bible, those that know about the arguements against Christianity and have thought about them, confuses me very much.

I believe that allegory, metaphor, and symbols are the only means in which such concepts can be related. We take art seriously, we take literature seriously, we take poetry seriously, we take our morality seriously.

The Bible isn't the exception; it is the pinnacle.

Avatar image for espoac
espoac

4342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#19 espoac
Member since 2005 • 4342 Posts

[QUOTE="SimpJee"][QUOTE="STWELCH"][QUOTE="SimpJee"]


[QUOTE="STWELCH"]Oh, please do go into detail. :)
STWELCH

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Well, the Bible itself has really never been interpretated literally by a major strand of Christianity until the early 1900's, when fundamentalism started to appear. In fact, medieval theologians did a four level grid for interpretating the Bible (The moral, literal, allegorical, and eschatological).

I think the main problem comes from a literal reading of the Bible. Which really makes absolutely no sense if done completely, since Paul himself used allegory extensively in interpretation.

In anywhere else in your life, have you ever taken something written with so much allegory so seriously? The exception people make for the bible, those that know about the arguements against Christianity and have thought about them, confuses me very much.

I believe that allegory, metaphor, and symbols are the only means in which such concepts can be related. We take art seriously, we take literature seriously, we take poetry seriously, we take our morality seriously.

The Bible isn't the exception; it is the pinnacle.

The problem with the Bible however, lies in that it is, in theory, relating an absolute, objective message in a way that lends itself to subjectivity. The reason that literature, poetry and art use figurative devices, at least in my opinion, is because it makes the meaning of that particular work all the more profound when, it is eventually discovered. In making people search for meaning in their work, artists, writers and poets effectively add value to their theme.

The Bible, however, since it's relating the "ultimate truth" that makes grown men cry and such, should have no use for these figurative devices. On top of that, given the broad spectrum of people who read the Bible, this sort of language may in fact limit the number of people who actually understand it, despite their best efforts. And lastly, only compounding the problem is the fact that the Bible is allegedly the word of God. Now, why didn't out all-wise creator foresee these problems?

I hope this at least explains my bewilderment at Christians who are more than happy to pick apart the Bible as if they're reading Shakespeare. When in fact, the Bible should be so much more than the great works of literature. Its meaning should be 10x more profound and 10x more obvious.

Avatar image for STWELCH
STWELCH

4805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 STWELCH
Member since 2005 • 4805 Posts

[QUOTE="STWELCH"][QUOTE="SimpJee"][QUOTE="STWELCH"][QUOTE="SimpJee"]


[QUOTE="STWELCH"]Oh, please do go into detail. :)
espoac

Specifically which part? You can find most of this stuff online.

When you look at the bible objectively, this stuff pops out on its own really.

Well, the Bible itself has really never been interpretated literally by a major strand of Christianity until the early 1900's, when fundamentalism started to appear. In fact, medieval theologians did a four level grid for interpretating the Bible (The moral, literal, allegorical, and eschatological).

I think the main problem comes from a literal reading of the Bible. Which really makes absolutely no sense if done completely, since Paul himself used allegory extensively in interpretation.

In anywhere else in your life, have you ever taken something written with so much allegory so seriously? The exception people make for the bible, those that know about the arguements against Christianity and have thought about them, confuses me very much.

I believe that allegory, metaphor, and symbols are the only means in which such concepts can be related. We take art seriously, we take literature seriously, we take poetry seriously, we take our morality seriously.

The Bible isn't the exception; it is the pinnacle.

The problem with the Bible however, lies in that it is, in theory, relating an absolute, objective message in a way that lends itself to subjectivity. The reason that literature, poetry and art use figurative devices, at least in my opinion, is because it makes the meaning of that particular work all the more profound when, it is eventually discovered. In making people search for meaning in their work, artists, writers and poets effectively add value to their theme.

The Bible, however, since it's relating the "ultimate truth" that makes grown men cry and such, should have no use for these figurative devices. On top of that, given the broad spectrum of people who read the Bible, this sort of language may in fact limit the number of people who actually understand it, despite their best efforts. And lastly, only compounding the problem is the fact that the Bible is allegedly the word of God. Now, why didn't out all-wise creator foresee these problems?

I hope this at least explains my bewilderment at Christians who are more than happy to pick apart the Bible as if they're reading Shakespeare. When in fact, the Bible should be so much more than the great works of literature. Its meaning should be 10x more profound and 10x more obvious.

Again, my belief on the matter is this: The Bible is not the word of God; it is an accounting of the Word (The Logos/Christ) through both the OT (The law) and in concrete being (NT).

I would critique your concept of God, but that shall wait.

In regards to symbols, it is due to subjectivity that it is lended; symbolic meaning is intrinsically subjective, which allows such an interpretation be drawn from the symbols to fit the existential questions for people who are reading it.

Of course, you do have the problem of people taking the symbols literally, which is where you see the positions of the evangelical right come into view. So be it, I may disagree with them on such interpretation, but atleast their own the posistion of attempting to answer such existential questions.