and the teachings of Jesus about love are of the Creator?
2006-11-26 07:04:37 · 20 answers · asked by curious_inquisitor 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Michael - Because you say my reasons are not good, that means they are not?
2006-11-26 07:36:43 · update #1
Budding Author - I see, the Creator would not give us laws and talk to us about love. I disagree. You make no sense.
2006-11-26 08:33:54 · update #2
Michael - "The universe does not require a creator".
That is being debated. And your side is losing.
2006-11-26 08:40:05 · update #3
COMMANDMENTS...
JUST FOLLOW JESUS TEACHING IN MATTHEW AND LUKE WHICH ARE IN LEV AND DEUT.
LOVE GOD AND YOUR NEIGHBOR.
ALL THE REST WILL FALL IN LINE
2006-11-26 07:08:56 · answer #1 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Well, this is the way I look at it.
Indeed, there is a need for mythos as opposed to logos. But that has nothing to do with ascertaining anything factual, because that's not the purpose that mythos serves.
I would not have said "reasonable", though, in this manner, because you are confusing mythos with logos, and bad things invariably happen when you do.
Mythos attempts to find the meaning of things (which belong to the inner realm) , logos attempts to relate external realities.
But, that aside, the self-story of the specific tribes who wrote about their tribal God (in the OT) isn't all that different from the self-story of the Chinese, or the Native Americans, or the Celts or the Germanic tribes.
As for the NT, during what is referred to as the Axial Age (from around 700 to 200 BCE), prophets and reformers arose all over the world, and the great faiths of confession and compassion (Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Monotheism) all come into being around the same time.
If what we have is a whole series of self-stories of different people (including the exploits of a tribal creator God or Gods, and the conviction that the people of the tribe are special and superior, and others are inferior); if we also have a NUMBER of religions that are based in the Ethic of Reciprocity, then how can a person say that one, and only one, is the true spiritual path?
It's not unreasonable to say that the self-story of the bible is a true thing; it is the inner truth that is in any self-story of a people..
It IS unreasonable to say that it is the only true thing.
2006-11-26 10:10:45 · answer #2 · answered by Praise Singer 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be reasonable to believe in a "creator" if the bible made "God" an intelligent being, however, it depicts "God" as riddled with faults and human characteristics.
"You see, the religious people -- most of them -- really think this planet is an experiment. That's what their beliefs come down to. Some god or other is always fixing and poking, messing around with tradesmen's wives, giving tablets on mountains, commanding you to mutilate your children, telling people what words they can say and what words they can't say, making people feel guilty about enjoying themselves, and like that. Why can't the gods leave well enough alone? All this intervention speaks of incompetence. If God didn't want Lot's wife to look back, why didn't he make her obedient, so she'd do what her husband told her? Or if he hadn't made Lot such a shithead, maybe she would've listened to him more. If God is omnipotent and omniscient, why didn't he start the universe out in the first place so it would come out the way he wants? Why's he constantly repairing and complaining? No, there's one thing the Bible makes clear: The biblical God is a sloppy manufacturer. He's not good at design, he's not good at execution. He'd be out of business if there was any competition. ...The Earth is an object lesson for the apprentice gods. 'If you really screw up,' they get told, 'you'll make something like Earth.'" ~Carl Sagan
"What I'm saying is, if God wanted to send us a message, and ancient writings were the only way he could think of doing it, he could have done a better job." ~Carl Sagan revisited
2006-11-26 07:12:59 · answer #3 · answered by Sweetchild Danielle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First off, to many people it is unreasonable to believe in a Creator ("If God created the universe, who created God?" The usual reply, "God was always there". Counter-reply, "then why couldn't the universe always be there?"). But regardless, lets assume that it is reasonable to believe in a Creator (I do believe in God by the way).
What is the problem with people believing in the commandments and teachings of Jesus? Simple, Christianity has no monopoly on God. Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and other religions also provide religious scriptures of claimed divine origin. Even if you have a creator, what proves that your religion is correct and everyone else's is wrong?
2006-11-26 07:14:13 · answer #4 · answered by The Doctor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the first place, why do you think it is 'reasonale' to belive in a creator? Its not reasonable, its completely unbelievable.
Then to hop straight from that onto Jesus who according to Christians was (and still is) the creator.
Then onto the Old Testament 10 commandments?
I was about t go into a little rant then , but I really dont want to squash all your beliefs, believe in your ' creator' if you really feel the need, do you also need to believe all the rest of the trimmings?
This is too easy, I give up!
2006-11-26 07:15:30 · answer #5 · answered by budding author 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not reasonable to believe in a Creator.
There is no evidence of a Creator. The universe does not require a Creator. Therefore, there is no need to hold the belief in a creator, and the concept can be discarded.
Since your premise is false, your question is unanswerable.
2006-11-26 07:06:20 · answer #6 · answered by Michael 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I will accept the given that there is a creator (even though that is where my personal faith bogs down)
But the chances of the actual creator being the one described in the Bible is quite low. There have been thousands of faiths claiming divine origin, what makes Christianity/Judaism so special? Since there has been no empirically recorded proof for any religion, its really just a toss up.
2006-11-26 07:08:25 · answer #7 · answered by DonSoze 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
First off - the proper translation of the 'Commandments' is actually more like 'Suggestions for living a better life'...
On the other hand - Jesus' message about loving one another is simple common sense, and therefore I would suspect that whatever created the universe would probably also have included that as a basic element inherent in everything.
The goal is to strive for perfection in loving everyone and everything.
Although as humans we can never achieve perfection, the challenge is in striving to love absolutely.
And it is certainly an honorable and good goal.
Jesus was a brilliant philosopher if you will, he narrowed everything down to the most basic of all things.
Love.
-dh
2006-11-26 07:10:06 · answer #8 · answered by delicateharmony 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I beg to differ about the reasonableness of belief in a Creator. *Reason* is logic, and logic begs the question - from whence came the Creator?
Believing in a Creator is something you may *reasonably* do without having to answer to *reason* - faith is not *about logic* Why can the faithful not get this right? Why must they try to justify faith using reason? It's blasphemy, I tell you. /rant
It's perfectly reasonable to say that Jesus' teachings about love are "of" the Creator.
2006-11-26 07:08:38 · answer #9 · answered by zilmag 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It is not reasonable to believe in a creator. A creator is only one of many possibilities. Jesus is also only one of many possibilities. The Ten Commandments are only one of many sets of instructions for living.
The world is full of lots of possibilities.
a
2006-11-26 07:11:02 · answer #10 · answered by Alan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who said that it is reasonable to believe in a creator?
I believe that falls into the category of Faith, not Reason.
If it is Faith that you are talking about, then yes the teachings could be of the creator
2006-11-26 07:15:13 · answer #11 · answered by saopaco 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋