Original Sin?

August 24th, 2015 at 9:44:34 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Even more Good News from Neurologica.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/does-science-prove-god/

It's partly an argument I constantly make. In fact, I'd claim I've made it better, but then I had the luxury of multiple postings.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
October 12th, 2015 at 9:38:10 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
More Good News to spread:

http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2015/10/12/shroud_of_turin_dna_comes_from_all_over_world.html

You can end your bondage to an object.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
October 12th, 2015 at 12:31:31 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
I love the shroud, it has a pic of
Jesus the Giant on it. A 6' Jesus
that would have towered over
his disciples. Goliath was only
6' 9" and would barely make a
good NBA player. Yet he was so
tall he was called a giant. If Jesus
was really 6' tall, as the man on
the shroud is, it would surely have
been mentioned somewhere.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 12th, 2015 at 12:49:12 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
The Shroud shrouded in mystery. I usually don't read Nareed's posts but I do like that line from the end of the article.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 12th, 2015 at 2:03:48 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble
The Shroud shrouded in mystery.


The real mystery is why a 6' Jesus was
never mentioned. You have two conclusions.
Jesus was not 6' tall. The shroud is a fake.
Duh.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 12th, 2015 at 6:54:45 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Really only those two conclusions? Maybe the interpretation of the shroud's image could be off?
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 12th, 2015 at 8:35:11 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble
Really only those two conclusions? Maybe the interpretation of the shroud's image could be off?


We already went down that road. An
expert on these types of images said
the figure is 6' tall.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 13th, 2015 at 5:26:29 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
Maybe it got wet and stretched.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
October 21st, 2015 at 1:55:29 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
I'm listening to a lecture series on military history. Surprisingly, the lecturer delves deeply into the tangible origins of beliefs, customs and practices of various ancient civilizations. In particular he brings up religious beliefs.

According to his analysis, it seems likely Yahweh, or Jehovah, was derived by the Israelites from an Assyrian war deity. This would explain quite a lot. You'd expect a war god to be bloodthirsty and prone to use excessive force. How best to defeat an enemy, after all?

But he doesn't stop there. He makes a good, if brief, case that latter iterations of Jehovah as well as the appearance of Satan, reflect aspects of the Zoroastrian faith as practiced by the Persians, with Jehovah incorporating aspects of the good god, Ahura Mazda, and Satan of the bad god, Ariman.

Further, the Persians believed the world would end when the forces of Ariman faced off against those of Ahura Mazda. The latter would be led by a human savior, who'd be born from a virgin.

As ancient peoples go, the Assyrians stand out for cruelty. One can imagine what their war god was like. And that ultimately is what Christians, Jews and maybe even Muslims claim as a source of morality.

I'll admit to a great, big heap of confirmation bias on my part. But it's the one thing I've learned so far that even begins to make sense of Western religions, and how they've been moderated by other institutions over time. Now the progression of the decline of the Roman Empire to Dark Ages to Renaissance to Enlightenment to the Present begins to make logical sense.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
October 21st, 2015 at 5:59:08 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
In re my last post, it boils down to the following:

The dominant Western religion is a philosophical derivation of the war god of a people particularly cruel in warfare, but adapted to every day life. It is somewhat moderated by the latter adoption of two Zoroastrian deities, then further modified by the ideas born of 1) the old war-god period prophecies and 2) Either Jesus or his followers as set down in the New Testament canon.

But throughout all this, the moral core of the whole thing remains the old war deity, cruel, demanding, vengeful and bloodthirsty. The attempt to change him to a loving god fails completely. You get a "loving" god for whom too many morally neutral or inconsequential actions are sins which deserve harsh punishment, or at the very least a great deal of atonement and penitence. Not to mention his followers (supplicants?) keep finding ways to assert their own cruelty and vengefulness through him as a sacred act. No wonder this theology regards brutal, bloody murder as an act of "love" and "redemption."

And it's humanity that's supposed to be "broken"?

If this sorry, pell-mell agglomeration of primitive superstitions and really bad ideas is real (HA!), he should be begging us for forgiveness.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER