Original Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter billcu1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JamesTheJust said:
  1. Arguing that a religion is false just because there are many other religions is a perfect example of what’s called, in logic circles, the genetic fallacy.
Arguing that the Bible or the Church teaching its true because the bible or church told me so is circular reasoning.
Click to expand...
 
PendingTheist said:
As far as our manuscripts, in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19) the disciples are instructed to go to all nations and Mark 16:20 says to proclaim everywhere but the ending of Mark 16:9-20 is not present in two 4th-century manuscripts Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the earliest complete manuscripts of Mark. In fairness, there are spaces left at the end of each of these manuscripts which may indicate the copyist purposely left a blank space for whatever reason. However, since evidence shows Matthew borrowed Mark then the Great Commission may also be an interpolation.

Other biblical passages missing from the earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53—8:11 which includes the popular passage of Jesus excusing the woman who was caught in adultery. Many Christians are unaware of this despite being footnoted in their bibles and still assert the infallibility of God’s word. There is also evidence scribes changed parts of scripture as noted in Mark 1:41 which describes the story of Jesus’ healing a man with a skin disease. The surviving manuscripts preserve verse 41 in two different forms: 41 "And [feeling compassion (Greek))/becoming angry (Latin)], reaching out his hand, he touched him and said, “I wish, be cleansed.” Most English translations render the beginning of verse 41 so as to emphasize Jesus’ compassion for this poor outcast leper, “moved with compassion/filled with pity.” In doing so, they are following the Greek text found in most of our manuscripts. The wording of one of our oldest witnesses, Codex Bezae, which is supported by three Old Latin manuscripts, is puzzling. Here, rather than saying that Jesus felt compassion for the man, the text indicates that he became angry. Christian scribes would have preferred the text to be simple to understand and non-problematic. Which is more likely, that a scribe copying this text would change it to say that Jesus became wrathful instead of compassionate, or to say that Jesus became compassionate instead wrathful? When seen from this perspective, the latter is obviously more likely. Became angry, is the more difficult reading and therefore more likely to be “original.”
Click to expand...
  1. For an in-depth refutation of the supposed “absence” of Mark 16:9-20, see this thread:
    forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=542749
2a. Mind providing sources for the apparently missing parts of John?

2b. The Gospels were written in Greek, so whatever the Greek says is what the author really meant (duh).
 
PendingTheist said:
JamesTheJust;11451012 said:
1. Arguing that a religion is false just because there are many other religions is a perfect example of what’s called, in logic circles, the genetic fallacy.

Arguing that the Bible or the Church teaching its true because the bible or church told me so is circular reasoning.
Click to expand...
I said it before in this thread, I’ll say it again:

Quote:
Question Originally Posted by PendingTheist:
How does one assert the bible is inspired by looking toward the bible as evidence? Is this circular reasoning?

Response Posted by JamesTheJust:
No, because we do not appeal solely to the Bible. This fallacy is only committed by our separated Protestant brethren. We have a corroboration in Catholicism:
  1. Sacred Scripture supports Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium.
  2. Sacred Tradition supports the Magisterium and Sacred Scripture.
  3. The Magisterium supports Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
It’s a three-legged stool.
Click to expand...
 
PendingTheist said:
Arguing that the Bible or the Church teaching its true because the bible or church told me so is circular reasoning.
Click to expand...
What we have to do is to establish a relationship with God.
We are not here to come up with the most valid model of what this is all about.
The ultimate goal: face-to-face with our Creator, encountering the Ground of our being, simple Reality, that is what It is.
Arguing may get you somewhere, probably to frustration and confusion, face-to-face with the ignorance that characterizes the human condition.
As long as we are dealing with ideas only, we will be chasing shadows, wisps of smoke.
As we come to know Him, it all make sense. This appearance of circularity is because ultimately, the Truth is the Truth.
 
JamesTheJust said:
  1. See link above. It’s important to note that the Bible mentioning something does not mean God condones it.
2a. I’d say, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned…” (Romans 5:12) is pretty clear, wouldn’t you?

2b. He established His Church to clearly define what isn’t clearly defined in the Bible. Saying that this argument is irrelevant due to the number of untrue Christian denominations is another textbook example of the genetic fallacy.
Click to expand...
Slavery is mentioned in both the Old and New Testament. It appears condoned to me but I guess for you God allows it but regulates it, such as Exodus 21:20 ““If a man strikes his male servant or his female servant with a staff so that he or she dies as a result of the blow, he will surely be punished. However, if the injured servant survives one or two days, the owner will not be punished, for he has suffered the loss”. Just curious what does the church teach as to who regulated the punishment to the owner and what if the slave died between a day or two- is or isn’t there a punishment? You would think once the beaten slave survived 24 hours the owner is not punished, so why “or two”? In reality, if your victims dies from your doing you are guilty no matter the time, would you agree? God seems to give more specific instructions on mixing fabrics, women’s uncleanliness, what not to eat and how to cure Leprosy than the vague time frame for punishment on a severely beaten slave.

With there being 1.2 billion Catholics, 800 million Christian non-Catholics and 5 billion non-Christians, do you think God did a good job clearly sending His message if He really wants to sanctify and eventually save us?
 
JamesTheJust said:
PendingTheist;11451032:
I said it before in this thread, I’ll say it again:

Quote:
Question Originally Posted by PendingTheist:
How does one assert the bible is inspired by looking toward the bible as evidence? Is this circular reasoning?

Response Posted by JamesTheJust:
No, because we do not appeal solely to the Bible. This fallacy is only committed by our separated Protestant brethren. We have a corroboration in Catholicism:
  1. Sacred Scripture supports Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium.
  2. Sacred Tradition supports the Magisterium and Sacred Scripture.
  3. The Magisterium supports Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
It’s a three-legged stool.
Click to expand...
More like “triangular reasoning” than a three legged stool or circular reasoning.
Click to expand...
 
PendingTheist said:
Slavery is mentioned in both the Old and New Testament. It appears condoned to me but I guess for you God allows it but regulates it, such as Exodus 21:20 ““If a man strikes his male servant or his female servant with a staff so that he or she dies as a result of the blow, he will surely be punished. However, if the injured servant survives one or two days, the owner will not be punished, for he has suffered the loss”. Just curious what does the church teach as to who regulated the punishment to the owner and what if the slave died between a day or two- is or isn’t there a punishment? You would think once the beaten slave survived 24 hours the owner is not punished, so why “or two”? In reality, if your victims dies from your doing you are guilty no matter the time, would you agree? God seems to give more specific instructions on mixing fabrics, women’s uncleanliness, what not to eat and how to cure Leprosy than the vague time frame for punishment on a severely beaten slave.

With there being 1.2 billion Catholics, 800 million Christian non-Catholics and 5 billion non-Christians, do you think God did a good job clearly sending His message if He really wants to sanctify and eventually save us?
Click to expand...
  1. Are you arguing that the Bible is not inspired because you can’t understand it? That’s a big non sequitur.
  2. I can say, “genetic fallacy” countless times, but you just refuse to hear me.
 
  1. Are you arguing that the Bible is not inspired because you can’t understand it? That’s a big non sequitur.
  2. I can say, “genetic fallacy” countless times, but you just refuse to hear me.
  3. I would have hoped God didn’t inspire slave regulation which apparently He did and instead endorsed “all lives are equal” like Bill and Melinda Gates have quoted on their web page. Maybe commanding, “no human shall own another human as property” as a commandment could have prevented centuries of suffering. If He did inspire this repugnance, how can one worship such a being?
  4. The genetic fallacy, also known as fallacy of origins, fallacy of virtue, is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone’s origin rather than its current meaning or context.
    So your saying I’m not putting slavery in the correct context? I really like to understand what you mean and give me an example using slavery in scripture. Thanks.
 
  1. He didn’t inspire it, but slavery was necessary for the primitive political, economic, and social systems that had developed in that age. This is why, in the New Testament, St Paul repeatedly says that we are all equal in Christ, as society had, by then, advanced enough so that slavery was no longer necessary for it to function. The whole Epistle to Philemon is a New Testament argument against slavery. Take, for example, 1:16-
16 no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord.
  1. The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question. Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are irrelevant to its merits. Thus, the amount of Christian denominations or religions which have fallen away from Truth has no bearing on the truth value of a particular Christian denomination or religion.
PS. May I ask, what does “pending Christian” mean?
 
PendingTheist said:
  1. I would have hoped God didn’t inspire slave regulation which apparently He did and instead endorsed “all lives are equal” like Bill and Melinda Gates have quoted on their web page. Maybe commanding, “no human shall own another human as property” as a commandment could have prevented centuries of suffering. If He did inspire this repugnance, how can one worship such a being?
Click to expand...
Fr. Barron just released a great video about the alleged “evils” of the Bible:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=1A65Wfr2is0

While the passages are probably not entirely figurative, they must be interpreted, as Fr Barron says, in light if Christ. They signify much more than what they seem to at face value.
 
JamesTheJust said:
Fr. Barron just released a great video about the alleged “evils” of the Bible:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=1A65Wfr2is0

While the passages are probably not entirely figurative, they must be interpreted, as Fr Barron says, in light if Christ. They signify much more than what they seem to at face value.
Click to expand...
  1. I label myself as a “pending” theist as a Trojan horse to gain acceptance into forums as I feel if I were to say agonist atheist then I would not be allowed in. I was raised catholic, married and became a born again which had me read the bible. BIG mistake as I was unaware of the brutality and immorality that was never taught to me in CCD and find apologetic reasons unconvincing. I thus am waiting (pending decision) for better evidence as to which God or gods to praise out of the thousands of religions and denominations if one even exists. Unfortunately they all require faith so I am left with demonstrable evidence in hope of finding the true one so you would think if Jesus loved me as much as He loved Thomas He would give me a doubting Thomas experience, or a Saul-Paul Damascus revelation or just allow me to wrestle Him like He did with Jacob-Isreal in Genesis.
  2. Apologists will explain genocide as hyperbole in the bible, despite God commanding it, as survivors were found later. However, in 1 Samuel 15:7-34 God was furious with Saul because Samuel did not kill ALL the Amalekites: men, women, infants, suckling, ox, sheep, camels and asses. King Agag was spared along with the best of the animals. To please God, Samuel hacks Agag into pieces “before the Lord”. A month ago I had seen the You Tube video of the popular Father Baron as he plays the allegoric card claiming God is showing that evil needs to be extinguished 100% using biblical genocide as a metaphor. The obvious problem with this explanation is who to say the resurrection was not allegorical as well. And we all know what Paul said in I Corinthians 15:14 “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is futile and your faith is empty”. How are we to understand slavery and rape as metaphors? Are we God’s “slaves” as sung in the Christian song “Unworthy” and Jesus was “raped” of His perfect earthly life? However, the trump card to explain ALL is not to go by your own understanding as we don’t have the skills as written in Proverbs 3:5 and sung in the powerful and classic song “My Savior, My God”. We only need to know God loves and Jesus saves. If this is so, they why attend bible studies, read theology books or listen to sermons knowing you can’t possible understand biblical messages due to the lack of skills. Scientists admit they may never have all the answers but don’t share the Christian low self-esteem they don’t possess the ability to understand.
  3. James, I truly appreciate you communicating with me. I find it difficult to explain myself to theistic family members without harsh words being exchange so I joined a forum to get some questions off my chest and you have been very helpful. I apologize as many of my responses are long winded as they are excerpts from my 50 page deconversion letter.
 
PendingTheist said:
  1. I label myself as a “pending” theist as a Trojan horse to gain acceptance into forums as I feel if I were to say agonist atheist then I would not be allowed in. I was raised catholic, married and became a born again which had me read the bible. BIG mistake as I was unaware of the brutality and immorality that was never taught to me in CCD and find apologetic reasons unconvincing. I thus am waiting (pending decision) for better evidence as to which God or gods to praise out of the thousands of religions and denominations if one even exists. Unfortunately they all require faith so I am left with demonstrable evidence in hope of finding the true one so you would think if Jesus loved me as much as He loved Thomas He would give me a doubting Thomas experience, or a Saul-Paul Damascus revelation or just allow me to wrestle Him like He did with Jacob-Isreal in Genesis.
  2. Apologists will explain genocide as hyperbole in the bible, despite God commanding it, as survivors were found later. However, in 1 Samuel 15:7-34 God was furious with Saul because Samuel did not kill ALL the Amalekites: men, women, infants, suckling, ox, sheep, camels and asses. King Agag was spared along with the best of the animals. To please God, Samuel hacks Agag into pieces “before the Lord”. A month ago I had seen the You Tube video of the popular Father Baron as he plays the allegoric card claiming God is showing that evil needs to be extinguished 100% using biblical genocide as a metaphor. The obvious problem with this explanation is who to say the resurrection was not allegorical as well. And we all know what Paul said in I Corinthians 15:14 “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is futile and your faith is empty”. How are we to understand slavery and rape as metaphors? Are we God’s “slaves” as sung in the Christian song “Unworthy” and Jesus was “raped” of His perfect earthly life? However, the trump card to explain ALL is not to go by your own understanding as we don’t have the skills as written in Proverbs 3:5 and sung in the powerful and classic song “My Savior, My God”. We only need to know God loves and Jesus saves. If this is so, they why attend bible studies, read theology books or listen to sermons knowing you can’t possible understand biblical messages due to the lack of skills. Scientists admit they may never have all the answers but don’t share the Christian low self-esteem they don’t possess the ability to understand.
  3. James, I truly appreciate you communicating with me. I find it difficult to explain myself to theistic family members without harsh words being exchange so I joined a forum to get some questions off my chest and you have been very helpful. I apologize as many of my responses are long winded as they are excerpts from my 50 page deconversion letter.
Click to expand...
  1. Ah, I see. I hope you rediscover your faith someday. :o God loves you, but He needs you to love Him back by your own will, not because of some mystical experience!
  2. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=492483&page=4
    That thread is an in-depth discussion of the “immorality” of the Bible. Saying that the Resurrection is figurative because a different book written separately hundreds of years before is a non sequitur. If you don’t like the figurative interpretation, that’s fine. Ultimately, as I said before and as Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens (May he RIP) have conceded, God is the only logical source of objective morality. If He deems something moral, there are no other standards with which you can judge morality. Also, ever noticed that the people the Israelites killed were incredibly immoral? The Canaanites, for example, raped, tortured, and sacrificed humans, worshipped pagan gods, and abused nature and wildlife. There’s a concept in Catholic soteriology called temporal punishment, maybe that’s what the Canaanites and the other peoples like them were receiving… 👍
  3. I don’t mind long responses. You’ll be in my prayers! 🙂
 
JamesTheJust said:
  1. Ah, I see. I hope you rediscover your faith someday. :o God loves you, but He needs you to love Him back by your own will, not because of some mystical experience!
  2. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=492483&page=4
    That thread is an in-depth discussion of the “immorality” of the Bible. Saying that the Resurrection is figurative because a different book written separately hundreds of years before is a non sequitur. If you don’t like the figurative interpretation, that’s fine. Ultimately, as I said before and as Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens (May he RIP) have conceded, God is the only logical source of objective morality. If He deems something moral, there are no other standards with which you can judge morality. Also, ever noticed that the people the Israelites killed were incredibly immoral? The Canaanites, for example, raped, tortured, and sacrificed humans, worshipped pagan gods, and abused nature and wildlife. There’s a concept in Catholic soteriology called temporal punishment, maybe that’s what the Canaanites and the other peoples like them were receiving… 👍
  3. I don’t mind long responses. You’ll be in my prayers! 🙂
Click to expand...
  1. Since God is Omniscient And Loves me as much as He did Thomas and Saul-Paul, He would know what would change my belief. He may be using my lack of faith in his plan to act as an adversary, like Satan did to Job, to test others of faith but at my salvation.
  2. I haven’t read the thread yet, but I don’t really care if Objective morality exists. In reality, which is all we have evidence for, we all pretty much agree good health, no pain and living are preferable to poor health, pain and death. Using these relative “absolutes” we can base our decisions on what is right/ wrong, good/bad along with human attributes of knowing reality, reasoning, evidence and empathy. Morality is a common topic when trying to give reason for the existence of God because of objective vs. subjective values. After reading the Old Testament, I could never understand how morality can come from the Bible, a.k.a. God’s Word. If the bible is true then whatever God says is moral and true Christians would have to agree. If God tells a group of Jews to commit genocide and keep the virgins for yourselves, then this is moral. If your slave dies after 2 days from a beating you gave him or her then this is moral as God says they are your property. I would think most, if not all humane and sane beings would agree kicking a pregnant woman in the stomach is wrong with or without religion. Except for psychopaths, we have the ability to empathize, without divine guidance, if a creature is suffering and/or dies. And with that empathy, we develop values and apply them to specific situations to help make moral decisions. We innately possess attachment mechanisms to help one another as a social species to increase our chances to procreate. A toddler reaching up to its parent is no different than a Pentecostal reaching up to its Heavenly Father in praise. We have no absolutes but we are moving towards an objective morality as we learn. Moral laws, as is mathematics, are a universal constant. Where morality is constant across most cultures, mathematics is constant across all societies because it is absolute. Moral codes arise out of human emotion which can vary in different parts of the world with different cultures whereas mathematics describes things we can test and theorize and is only dependent on physical laws and not subjective emotions. We subjectively use our huge frontal lobes to tame our animalistic limbic system to help create moral infrastructure. When parts of the limbic system are damaged, like the ventral tegmental area or the prefrontal cortex, it can lead to immoral behaviors like drug, alcohol and sexual addictions. Morals are changing as is the periodic table. If morality doesn’t mean minimizing human suffering but rather following a certain set of rules from authority regardless of human well-being then this is dogma.
I would hope ALL Christians agree slavery is morally repugnant but am curious how they came to this conclusion if it is condoned and regulated in both the Old and New Testament. There is no specific passage abolishing slavery. To use “Love your neighbor as yourself” is taking a general commandment and applying it to fit one’s innate morals in today’s society. Christianity gets credit for this philosophy but it is seen in Leviticus 19:18 as well as many other religions and ethnic traditions. In fact, the “Golden Rule” by Confucianism and Buddhism long predates Christianity as we see in one of the Buddhist verses: “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful” (Udana-Varga 5,18). I would think believers use their own humanity and moral compass to come to this conclusion just how most people, regardless of belief, come to this as well as other issues on morality. A higher power is not needed to know good health, no pain and living are preferable to poor health, pain and death. ’ .
 
PendingTheist said:
  1. Since God is Omniscient And Loves me as much as He did Thomas and Saul-Paul, He would know what would change my belief. He may be using my lack of faith in his plan to act as an adversary, like Satan did to Job, to test others of faith but at my salvation.
  2. I haven’t read the thread yet, but I don’t really care if Objective morality exists. In reality, which is all we have evidence for, we all pretty much agree good health, no pain and living are preferable to poor health, pain and death. Using these relative “absolutes” we can base our decisions on what is right/ wrong, good/bad along with human attributes of knowing reality, reasoning, evidence and empathy. Morality is a common topic when trying to give reason for the existence of God because of objective vs. subjective values. After reading the Old Testament, I could never understand how morality can come from the Bible, a.k.a. God’s Word. If the bible is true then whatever God says is moral and true Christians would have to agree. If God tells a group of Jews to commit genocide and keep the virgins for yourselves, then this is moral. If your slave dies after 2 days from a beating you gave him or her then this is moral as God says they are your property. I would think most, if not all humane and sane beings would agree kicking a pregnant woman in the stomach is wrong with or without religion. Except for psychopaths, we have the ability to empathize, without divine guidance, if a creature is suffering and/or dies. And with that empathy, we develop values and apply them to specific situations to help make moral decisions. We innately possess attachment mechanisms to help one another as a social species to increase our chances to procreate. A toddler reaching up to its parent is no different than a Pentecostal reaching up to its Heavenly Father in praise. We have no absolutes but we are moving towards an objective morality as we learn. Moral laws, as is mathematics, are a universal constant. Where morality is constant across most cultures, mathematics is constant across all societies because it is absolute. Moral codes arise out of human emotion which can vary in different parts of the world with different cultures whereas mathematics describes things we can test and theorize and is only dependent on physical laws and not subjective emotions. We subjectively use our huge frontal lobes to tame our animalistic limbic system to help create moral infrastructure. When parts of the limbic system are damaged, like the ventral tegmental area or the prefrontal cortex, it can lead to immoral behaviors like drug, alcohol and sexual addictions. Morals are changing as is the periodic table. If morality doesn’t mean minimizing human suffering but rather following a certain set of rules from authority regardless of human well-being then this is dogma.
I would hope ALL Christians agree slavery is morally repugnant but am curious how they came to this conclusion if it is condoned and regulated in both the Old and New Testament. There is no specific passage abolishing slavery. To use “Love your neighbor as yourself” is taking a general commandment and applying it to fit one’s innate morals in today’s society. Christianity gets credit for this philosophy but it is seen in Leviticus 19:18 as well as many other religions and ethnic traditions. In fact, the “Golden Rule” by Confucianism and Buddhism long predates Christianity as we see in one of the Buddhist verses: “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful” (Udana-Varga 5,18). I would think believers use their own humanity and moral compass to come to this conclusion just how most people, regardless of belief, come to this as well as other issues on morality. A higher power is not needed to know good health, no pain and living are preferable to poor health, pain and death.
Click to expand...
  1. Could be. God tests many. (Frankly, it seems like you’re failing…)
2a. If there was objective morality apart from God, then you would have the authority to say His actions are immoral. But since there is not, you can only critique Him based on subjective morality, which only applies to those who accept it. Yes, your second premise is somewhat true, but you commit an argumentum ad absurdum fallacy by essentially saying, “What God did is wrong according to my subjective moral values, therefore it is wrong.” You would be laughed out of any Philosophy class for saying that.

2b. Notice that those actions are only permissible with Divine command. Also, you misunderstand the term “objective morality”. Objective morality means that, independent of a consensus of the world’s cultures (which certainly doesn’t exist) and the judgement of a human’s limbic system, something can be classified as moral or immoral.

3a. Yes, most Christians (I don’t want to generalize) and all Catholics who follow Church teaching would agree that slavery is morally wrong. (I think it is interesting to note that the Church condemned the African slave trade at its very beginning, in the papal bull Sicut Dudum, issued in 1435). Did you read my previous post? I referred you to the New Testament Epistle to Philemon, the entire subject of which is the condemnation of slavery. Go ahead, dig up your dusty old Bible- it’s all there.
As I said, in OT times, slavery was necessary to sustain the primitive economic system. When it ceased to be, i.e in NT times, St Paul abolished it under the inspiration of God.

3b. It would have been close to impossible for a Jew of Jesus’s time to know, or even care, what Buddhism or Confucianism say. Thus, the saying was an invention of Jesus.

3c. “use their own moral compass…” -PendingTheist
Aha! I’ve caught you in the act! Who’s to decide which personal moral compass is right? Exactly. You can’t do that unless you have a higher power. You can’t expect others to come to the same moral conclusions as you have.
 
James, I read the short Thread from 2010 and was very unimpressed.
 
It basically reiterated the points I made. Please respond to my full post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top