OT: The Theology Thread

[bunomatic]

People do not need God to be morally responsible. 

[dEnnis the Menace]

Yes, I am sure Jesus was not the only person the Jews executed for blasphemy.  However I do believe the sentence would be death by stoning as the out of control mob stoned Stephen the first martyr.  Would it help to point you to the over 300 prophecies in the old testament that were fulfilled in Christ (I am sure you may debate those but 300?).  For example, Isaiah, where many of the prophecies about Christ's death and resurrection are found was written 500+ years before Christ.  I don't think there are any scholars that try to debate that Isaiah and the other old testament books were written well before Christ was born.

 

Back to the crucifixion, I find it interesting that roughly 50 years earlier the crucifixion would not have happened because Rome would not have yet garnered enough control where the Jews were not allowed to execute anyone which was why Pilate ended up passing the sentence and Christ would have been stoned (negating Isaiah's prophecies) and roughly 50 years later the crucifixion would not have happened because Jerusalem had fallen and Rome would not have cared about Jews who wanted a blasphemer crucified.  Actually there was a pretty narrow time in history where Christ could have been crucified in the manner which it occurred.       

 

Regarding your 2nd paragraph, that's not historically accurate.  The Jews could execute anyone they pleased, but the Romans had to execute Jesus because The Jewish faith does not allow executions during the Passover.  

 

In regards to the prophecies, it is just amazing to go back and read them and see how it panned out.  

 

And Bun, you are correct that you do not need God to be morally responsible.  I attribute my attempts at being morally responsible to my upbringing paired with the church.   

[Drunkard]

Perhaps people need to come to the realization they aren't fables just because they might not be easy to believe.  Some may be parables like the Rich Man and Lazarus story but I believe all the miracles of Jesus' ministry were true.  The problem is without the fabric of the Bible that ties the Gospel together there is no philosophy that holds water.  What you are suggesting is that humanism can result in society creating a utopia where people act selflessly for the greater good.  I agree it sounds awesome but it is not religion that makes this impossible.  It is human nature and I propose history has adequately taught us that people, while capable of doing good, cannot overcome their basic nature to BE good (or good enough).  Removing God from the equation only makes things worse as evidenced by many countries like Russia that have largely been able to do just that.

The fact that you believe the stories doesn't make them true either though. The reason I called them fables is because they are a bunch of stories (whether they were based on actual events or not) that are designed to convey some type of moral whether it's about Adam, Eve, and the talking snake, Noah and his family, Jobe/Job or however you spell it, and so on. By definition that makes them fables, whether you want to believe in them or not. I realize these examples are from the Old Testament but I see the stories of Jesus's miracles in the same vein, whether it was walking on water, healing lepers, curing the blind, or feeding hundreds or thousands of people (it's been decades since I've read it so I can't remember). Maybe they were allegories and not meant to be taken literally. Maybe Jesus just fed the spiritual hunger of all those people and didn't actually feed tons of people with just a few fish and loaves of bread. Maybe he cured the man of his spiritual blindness by convincing him that he was the son of God and didn't cure his actual eye sight because it could be possible that the man wasn't actually physically blind to begin with. Maybe (just maybe) none of it really happened and there was no Jesus Christ. Maybe he was real and he was an awesome guy and role model and the people who knew him exaggerated his story and/or put words in his mouth, especially after he died when he wasn't able to do anything about it.

 

Secondly, to try to cherry pick Russia as some sort of proof that you need God/Religion is flat out intellectually dishonest. This thread has remained pretty civil but I can name a half dozen examples of countries that did horrible things and used their religion to justify it. Just look at the way women and homosexuals get treated in many of the Muslim countries even to this day, look at the Crusades and Inquisition that went through Europe hundreds of years ago and look at the way religion was used to justify treatment of the Indians and the way they used it to justify slavery here in the United States as well less than 200 years ago. There are examples on both sides of good and bad so to attempt to cherry pick in order to make a wide sweeping generalization like that is just cheap.

[MattPie]

FWIW, 47% of Russians self-report at Christian.

[Drunkard]

FWIW, 47% of Russians self-report at Christian.

Another good point. I believe a lot of Russian Christians are Eastern Orthodox like a lot of the Greeks.

[I am Defecting]

It's also a tough judge that accuses Russians of being immoral without knowing anything about day-to-day life there and things that may be better or worse.

Like saying Leafs Fans are reprehensible from a never-crossed-the-border perspective.

[woods-racer]

I will try to expand on SMJ's Russian comment in a direction that maybe he was headed for.

 

If it weren't for the removal of religion and several other historical and cultural believes and traditions by Stalin and his predecessors to form the perfect state, that Russia today could be a more open and diverse country.

 

But the butchering of 10's of millions of people, some authors I have read where reporting in the 60 million range, for religious or political believes has lead to a country that is still in fear of being open and friendly to religion in fear of death or torture.

 

If my memory serves me correct Christians, Jews, and Muslims were a dominate political force pre-communist Russia. They where systematically eliminated in much the same form as the German SS death camps operated.

 

The Russian people are trapped by the fear of returning to the church that some day they may be off to Siberia for doing it. Maybe the point being, the absence of religion and reliance solely on the state to achieve moral good of society has shown to have been a complete failure in Russia.

[Ogre]

People do not need God to be morally responsible.

I agree whole heartedly. I remember the old Kahniakenhaka stories told by the old grandmas. The creator watched the people for the most part. The people lived by the kaianerakowa(Great Law of Peace). The people lived a moral life not because the creator was going to judge them. They lived a moral life because the people relied on them. They were a big part of the community. I guess you'd say that community was the religion. I don't entirely know what I'm driving at here. I guess I would relate it to the message it seems Jesus was getting at(to me)(if he did/does exist).

The old grandmas used to say "The best chief is not the one who persuades the people to see his point of view. It is instead the one in whose presence most people find it easiest to arrive at the truth."

[K-9]

It's also a tough judge that accuses Russians of being immoral without knowing anything about day-to-day life there and things that may be better or worse.

Like saying Leafs Fans are reprehensible from a never-crossed-the-border perspective.

I hear ya. I found it ironic that he cites Russia considering Russia's long history of diverse religious observance. As if communist Russia is the only Russia the world has ever known.

[darksabre]

I will try to expand on SMJ's Russian comment in a direction that maybe he was headed for.

 

If it weren't for the removal of religion and several other historical and cultural believes and traditions by Stalin and his predecessors to form the perfect state, that Russia today could be a more open and diverse country.

 

But the butchering of 10's of millions of people, some authors I have read where reporting in the 60 million range, for religious or political believes has lead to a country that is still in fear of being open and friendly to religion in fear of death or torture.

 

If my memory serves me correct Christians, Jews, and Muslims were a dominate political force pre-communist Russia. They where systematically eliminated in much the same form as the German SS death camps operated.

 

The Russian people are trapped by the fear of returning to the church that some day they may be off to Siberia for doing it. Maybe the point being, the absence of religion and reliance solely on the state to achieve moral good of society has shown to have been a complete failure in Russia.

Are we declaring ourselves morally superior to Russians?

[woods-racer]

Are we declaring ourselves morally superior to Russians?

No, I just hope we are morally superior to Stalin.

 

 I understand that a person that is faithful to a religion is not instantly a moral person, and that the opposite is also true. A person of no religious faith does not imply an immoral person. 

 

But trying to eliminate religion did not make Russia and it's satellite blocks less adverse to war or  crimes against humanity because religion was not to be a factor. 

[K-9]

No, I just hope we are morally superior to Stalin.

 

 I understand that a person that is faithful to a religion is not instantly a moral person, and that the opposite is also true. A person of no religious faith does not imply an immoral person. 

 

But trying to eliminate religion did not make Russia and it's satellite blocks less adverse to war or  crimes against humanity because religion was not to be a factor.

 

Communist Russia may have created fear to openly express religious beliefs and driven that expression under ground, but I don't think that's the case anymore. A law passed in 1997 guarantees the right of all Russians the free exercise of religion.

[woods-racer]

Communist Russia may have created fear to openly express religious beliefs and driven that expression under ground, but I don't think that's the case anymore. A law passed in 1997 guarantees the right of all Russians the free exercise of religion.

Thank you for that.

 

Not sure as there is no fear to the survivors of those that went underground still.

 

The hope that a Jew, a Muslim,  and a Christian can sit around sipping coffee and telling jokes about the Irish in Russia seems like a pleasant way to end my day.

[Taro T]

Communist Russia may have created fear to openly express religious beliefs and driven that expression under ground, but I don't think that's the case anymore. A law passed in 1997 guarantees the right of all Russians the free exercise of religion.

Pretty sure Russia has laws against poisoning ex-pats and blowing up apartment buildings. Aso, pretty sure they signed a treaty wherein they said if Ukraine would give up their nukes, their territorial intergrity would be honored. Doesn't mean stuff doesn't happen. Just sayin'.

[K-9]

Pretty sure Russia has laws against poisoning ex-pats and blowing up apartment buildings. Aso, pretty sure they signed a treaty wherein they said if Ukraine would give up their nukes, their territorial intergrity would be honored. Doesn't mean stuff doesn't happen. Just sayin'.

Passing laws and adhering to them are two separate concepts as our own experience in this country has illustrated as well.

 

The point is that the Russian government felt compelled to make such a radical departure from previous regimes as a result of the will of the people for it to happen. Pretty amazing.

[LastPommerFan]

Russia has, probably, the closest relationship between the majority religion and the government of any of the G8 Nations. 

 

Putin and the Patriarch Kirill are very close (possibly even back to the KGB days) and there is no doubt that they each use the other's influence to advance their own causes. I imagine there are very few Russian Orthodox today that are afraid to openly express their faith.

 

Now, Jews and Muslims, that's a different story.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Whiskey Bottle of Emotion

[smj]

I will try to expand on SMJ's Russian comment in a direction that maybe he was headed for.

 

If it weren't for the removal of religion and several other historical and cultural believes and traditions by Stalin and his predecessors to form the perfect state, that Russia today could be a more open and diverse country.

 

But the butchering of 10's of millions of people, some authors I have read where reporting in the 60 million range, for religious or political believes has lead to a country that is still in fear of being open and friendly to religion in fear of death or torture.

 

If my memory serves me correct Christians, Jews, and Muslims were a dominate political force pre-communist Russia. They where systematically eliminated in much the same form as the German SS death camps operated.

 

The Russian people are trapped by the fear of returning to the church that some day they may be off to Siberia for doing it. Maybe the point being, the absence of religion and reliance solely on the state to achieve moral good of society has shown to have been a complete failure in Russia.

Thank you...yes this is the history I was referring to.  I was not trying to disparage a whole nation and was not referring to today's Russia.  I was trying to stay away from the C word (Communism).  When Russia tried to eliminate God from the equation the results were not good and I was responding to someone that stated once we remove religion from the equation we will be able to move forward.  I just don't think that is true.  Similar to North Korea.  I am not a humanist.  I don't believe there is evidence that people, even well-intentioned, can create utopia on earth or anything close to it.  

 

I am also trying to make a distinction between true Christianity and religion.  The evil done under the banner of religion is in direct contrast to the message of Christ.  To me, an even clearer indication of why we need Christ - humans are flawed and always will be present company included. 

 

Thank you all for your comments.  I am not trying to get anyone's blood boiling - I am just trying to share why I believe in Christ (distinct from religion in my view).  I understand not everyone shares that view.

Are we declaring ourselves morally superior to Russians?

No - this was a response to a statement that removing gods and saviors out of the equation will only help the core message.  I was referring to a period in history when a country (Russia was not the only one) stated the intention to remove belief in God from the country and what the results were. 

[smj]

Secondly, to try to cherry pick Russia as some sort of proof that you need God/Religion is flat out intellectually dishonest. This thread has remained pretty civil but I can name a half dozen examples of countries that did horrible things and used their religion to justify it. Just look at the way women and homosexuals get treated in many of the Muslim countries even to this day, look at the Crusades and Inquisition that went through Europe hundreds of years ago and look at the way religion was used to justify treatment of the Indians and the way they used it to justify slavery here in the United States as well less than 200 years ago. There are examples on both sides of good and bad so to attempt to cherry pick in order to make a wide sweeping generalization like that is just cheap.

I hope the further explanation has helped because I was not trying to cherry pick Russia to prove you need God/Religion.  I don't believe in Religion myself.  You are exactly correct, all sorts of groups have done terrible things throughout history.   

 

To me that's one of the proofs that God exists.  If there is no God then is there really morality anyway?  I mean if we are just higher evolved animals why wouldn't we live 100% according to our own self-interest under whatever banner that might be? If there is no God how can I make a dishonest argument or make a "cheap" generalization?  Not trying to argue so please don't get upset but human nature itself is one of the reasons for my faith even though by definition I can't prove I am right. 

[MattPie]

Thank you...yes this is the history I was referring to.  I was not trying to disparage a whole nation and was not referring to today's Russia.  I was trying to stay away from the C word (Communism).  When Russia tried to eliminate God from the equation the results were not good and I was responding to someone that stated once we remove religion from the equation we will be able to move forward.  I just don't think that is true.  Similar to North Korea.  I am not a humanist.  I don't believe there is evidence that people, even well-intentioned, can create utopia on earth or anything close to it.  

 

I am also trying to make a distinction between true Christianity and religion.  The evil done under the banner of religion is in direct contrast to the message of Christ.  To me, an even clearer indication of why we need Christ - humans are flawed and always will be present company included.

1st para: equating what happened in Russia over the course of the 20th century (and especially Stalin) and the official lack of religion is in my mind questionable. I honestly don't believe that religion or a lack thereof played a part in Stalin's plan other than to be a convenient excuse to get rid of political undesirables (in his eyes, of course). Stalin was plenty of psychopath that he'd have found a reason to execute those people while paying lip-service to being a Christain if required (like most other dictators).

 

I'm not going to call it Utopia, but as an example polling in Sweden reports that 17% of people believe in god (although 45% believe theres a spirit-force of some description) and 34% are atheist. Only 2% in Sweden regularily attend religious services. Norway has similar numbers. Those two countries aren't exactly spiralling into death camps and debauchery. I think saying that people can't rule themselves without religion severly underestimates people.

[smj]

I hear ya. I found it ironic that he cites Russia considering Russia's long history of diverse religious observance. As if communist Russia is the only Russia the world has ever known.

I am sorry I was not more specific.  Yes, I was referring to the period in Russia's history when, unfortunately, their government removed God from the country. 

Edited June 9, 2015 by smj

[Kruppstahl]

I thought this was the theology thread, not the religion thread.

Those are mostly two different things.

[smj]

1st para: equating what happened in Russia over the course of the 20th century (and especially Stalin) and the official lack of religion is in my mind questionable. I honestly don't believe that religion or a lack thereof played a part in Stalin's plan other than to be a convenient excuse to get rid of political undesirables (in his eyes, of course). Stalin was plenty of psychopath that he'd have found a reason to execute those people while paying lip-service to being a Christain if required (like most other dictators).

 

I'm not going to call it Utopia, but as an example polling in Sweden reports that 17% of people believe in god (although 45% believe theres a spirit-force of some description) and 34% are atheist. Only 2% in Sweden regularily attend religious services. Norway has similar numbers. Those two countries aren't exactly spiralling into death camps and debauchery. I think saying that people can't rule themselves without religion severly underestimates people.

MattPie - that's a good point regarding Stalin.  Hitler essentially allowed the church to exist in Germany as long as it wouldn't interfere with his plans.  I would argue that essentially removed God from Germany as well.  A really interesting person to read is Dietrich Bonhoeffer who tried to live out his faith during that period in Germany and actually became part of a plot to kill Hitler and ended up dying in prison.  A man who lived is convictions.

 

I am not saying that people can't rule themselves without religion - I agree with you.  The US with its separation of church and state is basically ruling itself without religion.  I am arguing with the logic that if humans keep trying harder and we eliminate all these things that divide us like religion we will end up with a peaceful, utopian world.  I am saying I believe that there is a God, humans are sinful beings and the Bible is the only book that explains who we are as psychological, emotional and spiritual beings and reconciliation to a perfect God is found through Christ on an individual basis.     

Edited June 9, 2015 by smj

[MattPie]

I hope the further explanation has helped because I was not trying to cherry pick Russia to prove you need God/Religion.  I don't believe in Religion myself.  You are exactly correct, all sorts of groups have done terrible things throughout history.   

 

To me that's one of the proofs that God exists.  If there is no God then is there really morality anyway?  I mean if we are just higher evolved animals why wouldn't we live 100% according to our own self-interest under whatever banner that might be? If there is no God how can I make a dishonest argument or make a "cheap" generalization?  Not trying to argue so please don't get upset but human nature itself is one of the reasons for my faith even though by definition I can't prove I am right. 

 

I think you're underestimating people again. :) I look at soceities as people understanding that what's "good for me" might be worse for everyone else, and in the long term worse for me too. Humans seem to natually organize themselves into groups with at least some leadership structure, I think because it's easier than being out for yourself 100% of the time. Sure, it takes away some of my personal freedom, but I don't have to constantly defend myself from everyone else too. Morality is a learned concept, either from religion or soceity in general. I can't deny that I was raised moderately Christian (semi-regular church, etc), but it's not like I'm walking around thinking that God will be mad at me if I do something "bad" to someone else; I treat other people with respect because I want to be a positive aspect in someone else's day. I don't need a book to tell me that. :)

[bunomatic]

I think you're underestimating people again. :) I look at soceities as people understanding that what's "good for me" might be worse for everyone else, and in the long term worse for me too. Humans seem to natually organize themselves into groups with at least some leadership structure, I think because it's easier than being out for yourself 100% of the time. Sure, it takes away some of my personal freedom, but I don't have to constantly defend myself from everyone else too. Morality is a learned concept, either from religion or soceity in general. I can't deny that I was raised moderately Christian (semi-regular church, etc), but it's not like I'm walking around thinking that God will be mad at me if I do something "bad" to someone else; I treat other people with respect because I want to be a positive aspect in someone else's day. I don't need a book to tell me that. :)

Good post. I was raised by parents that never practiced a religion but THEY taught me right from wrong and also taught me to respect others. My morality was given to me by good parents. I respect no man like I respect my father. Same goes with my mother. Some aren't so lucky in terms of the parenting they receive.  A fear of god isn't what keeps me on the straight path. I believe you don't need god to be a good person but if you are one of those that does need god to be a good person then by all means, turn to god. Whatever works for you. 

[smj]

Good post. I was raised by parents that never practiced a religion but THEY taught me right from wrong and also taught me to respect others. My morality was given to me by good parents. I respect no man like I respect my father. Same goes with my mother. Some aren't so lucky in terms of the parenting they receive.  A fear of god isn't what keeps me on the straight path. I believe you don't need god to be a good person but if you are one of those that does need god to be a good person then by all means, turn to god. Whatever works for you.

A fear of God isn't what I'm describing. So I guess you are arguing there is no God.

 

However, if there is no God than what I've never been able to understand is where do morals originate from? What creates absolute truth if there is no lawgiver? If there isn't absolute truth and relativism carries the day as many people believe, then who determines morality? If truth is relative than how can anyone declare their viewpoint as valid over another? If no viewpoint carries more weight than another by definition than doesn't chaos become the eventual outcome with no absolute standard to tie things together? It seems that we want enough of God to prevent chaos but not enough of God to lose our independence. In other words, if there is no God why is anyone interested in playing fair? How can anyone define a "good" person?

Edited June 10, 2015 by smj