A good rule of thumb:
When we find ourselves mocking the patterns of others, it’s because our own patterns have been rejected and we feel frustrated that we can’t opt out of the game or that when we try to play the game, we end up going in circles.

The solution: openness, dialogue
The risk: vulnerability, humiliation

Not surprising. You can't go against dogma, and Trump is truly the dogma of the evangelical right these days.

One more thing that makes me glad and proud to be an atheist.

I mean, that is literally a story about a famous evangelical pastor and theologian arguing against voting for Trump, so I don't really think it makes your case.

1.Even many non-religious English Literature professors consider the King James Bible the greatest work of Modern English literature. Even Christopher Hitchens admired the literary quality of the KJB.

2. While I don't agree that the Bible endorses slavery (as the term is used today), misogyny or genocide, even if it did endorse those things, would that be bad?

This is a helpful essay for Christians who struggle reconciling evolution with the Christian story:

https://www.academia.edu/41458517/Se...igins_of_Death

I want to point out an important disagreement that I mentioned to the author on another forum. He says, “But once the human brain arrived, death’s purpose had been completed” to explain the development of the idea of circumcision, which he claims to be symbolic of cutting off death and the sexual reproduction driven, stage of evolution.

I see it differently. Death still plays a necessary role in the mind based evolutionary stage which follows the mindless, sex based stage. It’s important to understand that consciousness/mind/soul is represented as male and the flesh is represented as female, and that the emanation of the male — represented by consuming the forbidden fruit — is accompanied by death/sin/Satan.

I think our ancestors had an intuitional understanding of this truth as well as the idea that one has to be sinless to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. This, combined with the realization of necessary sacrifice, resulted in an underlying attitude of antagonism toward the male, which led to the ritual of circumcision.

It’s similar to how insights of the idea that the price for more life is death resulted in the misguided sacrifices littered throughout history.

Also, insights of the idea that the flesh is sinful - that had to contribute as well to circumcision.

If we follow this pattern in evolution — the female cells emanating the mind/consciousness + death (senescence), developing a feminine body to protect it, reproductive variation via sex, mind/consciousness emerging from the body, and then the mind returning back to the body to bring about new life — then we can apply the pattern to Christian theological history.

-Virgin Mary + Jesus (asexual female emanates the male/mind)
-The crucifixion of Jesus / persecution of early Christians (senescence/death)
-A masculine theology told in metaphor/parables protected by a feminine theology (Christ consciousness vs “body of Christ” )
-Denominational variation of Protestantism (sexual reproductive variance)
-The hope of the “second coming” (emergent mind returning to the body)

*The virgin birth of the messianic male is symbolic of the advancement beyond female selection driven, sexual reproduction - symbolizing a leap to a mind based, male driven, new stage of evolution.

It’s not essential to understand much of what I shared in the previous posts. The main takeaway is that the Christian story can integrate evolution with no issues. The patterns of consciousness will reflect at other levels whether that is evolutionary history, theological history, or individual development.

Genesis 12:2-3
Abraham is not only the “father of nations” and the beginning in the line to Christ but also the father of atheism. He is the original Prodigal Son. All of that is revealed in this quote for someone who has “eyes to see”.

That's laughable. The book is almost unreadable.

It absolutely does endorse slavery, and gives rules for how to deal with your slaves. If a god can tell his people not to eat shellfish or mix linen and wool, he could certainly tell them to not own other humans.

Misogyny is there too. Women are considered property in the bible. A rape of a woman is a a crime against the property of the father or husband.

No genocide in the bible. You're either reading a different book or you don't know the meaning of the word.

But you reveal everything I need to know about you when you ask if endorsing these things would be bad.

So glad I'm not a part of your delusion.

nutjobs itt

Don't be so hard on yourself.

I'm not surprised that you find it almost unreadable. May I suggest the NIV? I agree that some passages in the KJV are difficult to read.



The Bible specifically forbids manstealing, which means the chattel slavery in America was against God's law.


Men and women are equal in the eyes of God. No so much in pagan cultures, like Ancient Greece.


God never orders the destruction of a people without giving them the opportunity to repent and turn from their wicked ways.


I don't agree that I'm delusional, but in a "from the goo to the zoo to you" worldview, being delusional isn't inherently good or bad.

I'm flattered that your very first post ever on 2+2 is a response to a post of mine.

Welcome to the Forums! And thank you for sharing!

Addendum: Based on your chosen SN, I suspect you're about 14 and are violating the age requirement in the TOS.

My reads are usually way off, though.

[QUOTE=ChuckTheFucc;56702669] Please explain.

I responded to your post.

Have a nice day!

[QUOTE=lagtight;56702837] Oops, looks like Chuck got chucked.

I'd bet money that lagtight voted for Trump.

You would win that bet.

Here is Charles McGrath, the former editor of the NYT Book Review on the KJV:

I completely agree and regard the KJV as a great piece of literature.

+1. The KJV is the Nuts. It is my go to version when reading the Bible.

As does virtually EVERY English Literature professor.

Thanks for the article.

Same here!

Christianity Today:

For those not familiar, Ravi Zacharias was one of the most well-known Christian apologists in the world.

Another reality check for Christendom.

David French wrote a pretty long article about this as well.

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/...-from-complete