|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Mar 16, 2017 11:07:51 GMT
That is just wrong. Judaism is not a religion of an anthropomorphic deity. Christianity might be in some way, but notice how long and still how much Judaism opposes that aspect in Christianity. Judaism is very much not the worship of an old man with long white hair and a beard who lives in the clouds. That is merely an accommodation to adults with learning difficulties and children. Rather, Judaism is a complex ethical system far more than anything else. Christianity, or some of its “followers” anyway, trample the ethics underfoot. It is characteristic of people who cannot understand the abstract to trample ethics underfoot. The reason is they depend on their own worldly government and its military and never quite get the most important points of Judaism, not killing people, not needing to, and not needing ever to implement government management of their parental duties. The serious dynamic tension in society you apparently missed is between such a “god” and militaristic people with regimented thinking. Regimented thinking depends on simplicity of orders. Such people require a deity to be anthropomorphic. Apparently not ”everyone” got something critical “metaphoric” or not. You watch too much television and fail to detect the military propaganda there. Much of the military opposes religion. They want religion to appear silly. They support efforts that make religion appear silly like saying the book of Genesis should be taken literally when no religion does. Answers-in-Genesis is not a religion. As much as I appreciate the effort at precision I must point out that it fails to be precise. In order to be precise you need some common standard of definition. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 22, 2017 22:36:33 GMT
That is just wrong. Judaism is not a religion of an anthropomorphic deity. Christianity might be in some way, but notice how long and still how much Judaism opposes that aspect in Christianity. Judaism is very much not the worship of an old man with long white hair and a beard who lives in the clouds. That is merely an accommodation to adults with learning difficulties and children. Rather, Judaism is a complex ethical system far more than anything else. Surely you jest. The Judaic God is the being that destroyed entire civilizations because they worshiped other Gods, correct? You don't think such jealousy isn't an anthropomorphic quality? When I say "anthropomorphism" this isn't limited to pictorial depictions of God as a human; rather it's about the attribution of human thoughts/emotions to God. Sure, Judaism is an ethics system, and God is seen as the being that bequeathed and enforces that ethical system, and in that sense the Judaic God is anthropomorphic. But this goes back to whether it's man in God's image or God in man's image. No idea what you're saying here. You, like Ada, love playing the "no true Christian/religion" when it comes to anyone or anything you don't agree with. For someone professing to support "standards" when it comes to definitions you seem amazingly willing to subvert those standards whenever it suits you. It's more precise than just "agnostic" or "atheist" when someone is between the mid-point and the extreme end. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Mar 23, 2017 8:53:46 GMT
I've been known to jest. The Reader's Digest magazine said "Laughter is the best medicine." I can also be very serious though. I'm being serious here. Not correct. Some "civilizations" practiced human sacrifice, were beyond murderous and licentious. It was necessary to defend against their advances. God did not forbid idols of "other" gods, he forbid idols of "any" god including himself. What jealousy? Who's "jealous" of wanton murderers? No, that's what you need to stop doing. By you, and you need to quit doing that. How about now? There are rules of membership. Some do not follow them. They are not members if they do not follow the rules of membership. Some of them are deliberate posers who want to tarnish a reputation. There is no "logical fallacy" on our part. It's on your part. Some groups have almost no rules of membership at all especially atheists and some styles of Christians. Nevertheless they refuse to acknowledge the bad behavior of people who do follow their simple rule. Talk about irony. If you want more precision just ask me, it's my job. Such people can more precisely be described as " wavering" between atheism and agnosticism. We have standards there. |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 24, 2017 15:18:35 GMT
You are, naturally, entitled to your opinion.
|
|
