True Christianity is athesitic

TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
True Christianity is athesitic

True Christianity is atheistic



From Peter Rollins, How (Not) to Speak of God.



"...there is a sense in which Christianity is atheistic because it rejects its own understanding of God...God's name is above every other name that we could ascribe...


This process reminds us that God transcends all earthly names and, as such, escapes our attempts at absolute understanding...


  In opposition to the fundamentalist, who can be defined as one who believes what they believe, the Christian can be said to operate with an a/theistic discourse, which makes claims about God while simultaneously acknowledging these claims are provisional, uncertain and insufficient."



This author goes on to posit that those Christians who equate their beliefs and theological systems with God as conceptual idolators who really worship their objectification of God rather than God.  Idolatry is the attempt to make accessible either aesthetically (statues, icons, etc.Eye-wink or conceptually via a theological system or dogma the essence of God.  



While we might not agree with the author and see perhaps more of a practice of Christian agnosticism an interesting observation is apparent about most theologians (Craig et al) and theists in general ( for example Muslims as well ).  They really believe in their conceptual construct rather than the god they profess

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3123
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:They really

TGBaker wrote:

They really believe in their conceptual construct rather than the god they profess

They all invent a god of convenience.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:True

TGBaker wrote:

True Christianity is atheistic

Of course it is. It's a necessity for them to be atheists.

They have to reject all other purported gods, but by double standards.

They blatantly discriminate, and reject all other purported gods, by a much lower standard of scrutiny, than the one that they promote.

That's a massive conflict of interest.

They are the definition of bias, hypocrisy, discrimination, and militant dismissiveness.

 

They display completely unreasonable methods of drawing firm conclusions.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
My god is better than yours

I guess it gets down to my conceptual idol is better than your conceptual idol which is to say the Christian worships his/her own thoughts and ideas. A Muslim is really worshipping her/his own ideas.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


100percentAtheist
atheist
100percentAtheist's picture
Posts: 679
Joined: 2010-05-02
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:I guess it

TGBaker wrote:

I guess it gets down to my conceptual idol is better than your conceptual idol which is to say the Christian worships his/her own thoughts and ideas. A Muslim is really worshipping her/his own ideas.

 

It is like Mickey Jagger's fans vs. John Lennon's fans. Smiling

 


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:True

TGBaker wrote:

True Christianity is atheistic


LOL. I posted this once before on this forum.  The first Atheists were Chrsitians. They were the first ones to be called Atheists by the Romans. The reason they were called atheists is that their belief in a one God (in three persons) caused Christians to deny the Roman pluralistic belief in 1000's of Gods.  Their monotheism was called Atheism by them.

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1829
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:I guess it

TGBaker wrote:

I guess it gets down to my conceptual idol is better than your conceptual idol which is to say the Christian worships his/her own thoughts and ideas. A Muslim is really worshipping her/his own ideas.

Isn't that true for all perception? You can replace the word idol with any noun.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1829
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:LOL. I posted

Whitefox wrote:

LOL. I posted this once before on this forum.  The first Atheists were Chrsitians. They were the first ones to be called Atheists by the Romans. The reason they were called atheists is that their belief in a one God (in three persons) caused Christians to deny the Roman pluralistic belief in 1000's of Gods.  Their monotheism was called Atheism by them.

If that's true then the Romans didn't understand Greek, because atheist comes from the Greek 'a-theos' meaning not a theist.  It doesn't mean not a multi-theist.

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:TGBaker

Whitefox wrote:

TGBaker wrote:

True Christianity is atheistic


LOL. I posted this once before on this forum.  The first Atheists were Chrsitians. They were the first ones to be called Atheists by the Romans. The reason they were called atheists is that their belief in a one God (in three persons) caused Christians to deny the Roman pluralistic belief in 1000's of Gods.  Their monotheism was called Atheism by them.

 

I think the author makes that point elsewhere but that was not his point here. The real point is that since most Christians have a system of understanding about god then tend to worship that idea of god rather than god when in fact many of their beliefs about could are or could be wrong. They are then worshipping an idol that they have built rather and the subject of their language. They put god in a box. Obviously a Calvinistic god and an Armenian god are two different things/persons what have you.  At least one of them is an idol and not god. Same thing with comparing a Catholic construct of God with one of the 30,000 protestant constructs. Seems like the title should be Christians are idol worshippers.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
This reminds me...Why is it

This reminds me...

Why is it that the Romans supposedly didn't like Christianity? Christianity was actually perfect for them because it desired it's adherents to be subservient to earthly authority.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5800
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Interesting.In my current

Interesting.

In my current set of arguments against Theism, I use much the same point: while the existence of God doesn't really work as a plausible idea, IF He existed as such a mighty being, they could not know with any certainty anything about the specific attributes and motives of such a being, including how it actually regarded us mortals, if it cared at all.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1

BobSpence1 wrote:

Interesting.

In my current set of arguments against Theism, I use much the same point: while the existence of God doesn't really work as a plausible idea, IF He existed as such a mighty being, they could not know with any certainty anything about the specific attributes and motives of such a being, including how it actually regarded us mortals, if it cared at all.

 

Yes  I have a little more sympathy for mysticism. The source or origin is beyond all knowing ... dang that Plank time. I wonder if it is mathematics.  Is the two dimensional event horizon of our universe ( a la Susskind's string theory) which generates our space-time really pure math?  Is it a pure mathematical potentiality field of Being ( in the classic sense ) which actualizes as existence or an infinite example of big bangs???? Pure speculation... and almost religious...

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


Thunderios
atheist
Posts: 261
Joined: 2010-12-26
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1

BobSpence1 wrote:

Interesting.

In my current set of arguments against Theism, I use much the same point: while the existence of God doesn't really work as a plausible idea, IF He existed as such a mighty being, they could not know with any certainty anything about the specific attributes and motives of such a being, including how it actually regarded us mortals, if it cared at all.


I thought of a similar argument: if people say God is above logic (which they sometimes do to dodge all philosophical arguments), then you can say that Gods decisions don't have to be based on faith the way we perceive it, but based on his superlogical way of judging people. We would perceive it as random, though, so it wouldn't matter what you would do...

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3088
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is onlineOnline
jcgadfly wrote:This reminds

jcgadfly wrote:

This reminds me...

Why is it that the Romans supposedly didn't like Christianity? Christianity was actually perfect for them because it desired it's adherents to be subservient to earthly authority.

christianity disavowed the cult of the emperor's divinity, and, considering pretty much every emperor after tiberius (excluding the "five good emperors"--and even most of them persecuted christians) were stupid and vain, that was a big problem for them.

add to this the fact that, unlike judaism, christianity claimed to offer a truth universally relevant to all humans, and indeed proselytized agressively, and you have something that annoyed the emperors very much.  you have to remember that the religions of the ancient mediterranean operated in a way not unlike pokemon cards: trade 'em, collect 'em, gotta catch 'em all.  christianity, on the other hand, taught that all loyalties were tentative other than the loyalty to christ.  once again, this was bound to infuriate any stupid emperor, and make any intelligent emperor nervous for entirely different, and altogether justifiable, reasons.

christ's little speech about "render unto caesar" and paul's admonishments about obeying earthly authority were nothing more than dodgy diplomacy, and every early christian knew that.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen