How many read this forum

rockbeer

robindch wrote:

...suggesting that, far from exalting wisdom, reason and philosophy, being "foolish" was actually something that god looked for!

Excellent post Robin.

One thing you can't accuse the christian god of is not knowing his limitations.

PDN

robindch wrote:

I did, of course, say 'markedly' capricious and specifically in comparison to the deity of the old testament who was quite happy to kill people, or have them killed, for the most selfish of reasons.

In contrast to this, the Roman deities, as the Greek deities, were pretty much ordinary people writ large, and they expressed little of the grand oriental despotism and military expansionism of the christian deity. Heavens above, the Romans and the Greeks even had their gods of Reason -- Athena/Minerva and Apollo! But sadly, as belief in the christian deity increased, belief in these gods, and the careful qualities and prudent values they stood for, slowly dissipated and was lost.

Yes, careful qualities and prudent values:

Robigo, goddess of blight. She is also a Roman goddess of corn. Farmers worshipped her to protect their crops from blight, which she would send upon them if not appeased.

Vertumnus, the god of seasons, change and plant growth, as well as gardens and fruit trees. He could change his form at will; using this power he tricked Pomona into talking to him by disguising himself as an old woman and gaining entry to her orchard, then using a narrative warning of the dangers of rejecting a suitor to seduce her.

Porus, the personification of Plenty. He was seduced by Penia (Poverty) while drunk on more than his fill of nectar at Aphrodite's birthday. Penia gave birth to Eros (Love) from their union.

Verminus ("worm-god"),the god of the cattle-worms. He was known for exposing worms and healing cows if appeased with an offering of the finest veal. This would of course involve killing a young cow, and so it was only done by those who had large herds of cows. This may be the reason that Verminus doesn't appear in many texts of Rome.

Juturna, the goddess of fountains, wells and springs. She was a sister of Turnus and supported him against Aeneas. She was also the mother of Fontus by her husband, Janus. Jupiter turned her into a water nymph. Juturna had an affair with Jupiter but the secret was betrayed by another nymph, Larunda, whom Jupiter struck with muteness as punishment.

Dea Tacita, goddess of the dead. In later times, she was equated with the earth goddess Larenta. In this guise, Dea Tacita was worshipped at a festival called Larentalia on December 23. Goddesses Mutae Tacitae were invoked to destroy a hated person. These silent goddesses are the personification of terror of obscurity.

We could go on ad infinitum. I am intrigued that a skeptic would find it sad that worship of such non-capricious gods ceased.

Sangre

As oppposed to a God who destroyed the world with a flood, turned people to salt and killed the first born of a whole nation?

I think the God(s) of both religions can be quite irratic, to say the least.

PDN

robindch wrote:

[Paul] quite clearly, is saying nothing at all about temple prostitution, but quite explicitly saying that not only should christians reject the jewish sign-seeking and the greek search for rational wisdom for which they were famous

Come on, Robin, I am quite sure that you are aware that Paul uses the term 'Greek' consistently throughout his epistles to refer to all Gentiles, particularly when 'Greek' is coupled with 'Jew'.

Invoking the image of the wise, white-bearded, wisdom-loving Greek may fool some readers, but we both know different. In 1st Century Corinth, Plato, Socrates & Aristotle had been largely abandoned for a mish-mash of esoteric and gnostic philosophies that, in their vaunted wisdom, would have despised the simple message of Christ's Incarnation, Atoning Death and Resurrection. While Strabo's claim of 1000 temple prostitutes in one single Corinthian temple refers to pre-Christian times (and is probably an early urban legend), I know of no serious historian who would deny that temple prostitution was a part of Corinthian religious thought and practice in Paul's day.

Embarrassingly for christians, Paul then continues with: "Not many of you were wise by human standards; [...] God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise" ...suggesting that, far from exalting wisdom, reason and philosophy, being "foolish" was actually something that god looked for!

Embarrassingly? Not in the slightest. Rather this is a truth in which every Christian, particularly those who value reason, should glory.

Unlike the gnostic cults that offered salvation only to a select group of intellectuals, Christianity has always been open to the weak, the poor, the oppressed etc. - those who appear weak and foolish in the eyes of those who are powerful.

You very carefully edited your quote from 1 Corinthians Chapter One in order to convey the impression that Paul was exalting foolishness over reason and rational thinking. Was this because you knew such an argument is unsustainable when we actually look at what the intervening dots (.....) in your quote actually say?

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. (1 Corinthians 1:18-29)

Now, if Paul was simply exalting foolishness over reason, why raise the issues of his hearer's weakness, lack of influence, low social standing etc.? Taken in context his message is clear to anyone who really wishes to understand.

The Gospel message in Corinth had not, for the most part, been accepted by those who were puffed up with power, wealth, and the latest philosophical craze. Instead it had been embraced by common people who were derided as being 'weak', 'foolish' and 'powerless'.

Any literate person can see that Paul identifies the 'foolishness' of which he speaks. It is the message of Christ's crucifixion.

If you really want to insist that Paul was referring to actually being foolish, then you must also believe that Paul believed God to be both foolish and weak! I have yet to encounter any theologian, historian, or literary critic who would seriously advance such a daft notion. Paul refers to the 'weakness' and 'foolishness' of God because that is how the pagan philosophers saw things. Equally they saw the preaching of the cross as 'foolishness'.

toiletduck

Atheist. Rarely post but read here religiously.

robindch

PDN wrote:

I am intrigued that a skeptic would find it sad that worship of such non-capricious gods ceased.

Heavens, PDN, you should really read my posts more carefully! I do phrase them as carefully as I can

robin wrote:

the Romans and the Greeks even had their gods of Reason -- Athena/Minerva and Apollo! But sadly, as belief in the christian deity increased, belief in these gods (ie, Athena/Minerva and Apollo), and the careful qualities and prudent values they stood for, slowly dissipated and was lost.

I'm off for the weekend -- have a good one folks!

PDN

robindch wrote:

I'm off for the weekend -- have a good one folks!

Have a good weekend. May God go with you.

dan719

dan719 wrote:

You asked me how my hypothesis would be affected by Christian scientists? My hypothesis being that the Catholic Church and Religion in general has held back science. And you try to refute me with this particular list? Galileo is a prime example. Forced to retract his statements and then placed under house arrest. Case closed.

He was given permission ot write his book, he was forced to retract it because he used the book to insult the pope the whole way through
look up "simplicius"

Dades

toiletduck wrote:

Atheist. Rarely post but read here religiously.

Have a good weekend, anyone heading off...

Asiaprod

PDN wrote:

Have a good weekend. May God go with you.

Haha:D , PDN, you really are a welcome addition to the fora.
Psss, next time send the Ethos too, that will make my day.

Galvasean

PDN wrote:

Have a good weekend. May God go with you.

"God's gonna sit this one out."

-Sorry, couldn't resist!

carl_

one more smelly lurker to add

lookinforpicnic

Atheist and someone who doesn't belief in anything supernatural (bright/heathen).

Take a look at the forum about once a week, more regularly if i can but very busy with my thesis at the moment, once its submitted I'd say I'll be on it more. Very handy for keeping up with issues relating to atheism links to magazine articles TV programmes etc. Don't post much as generally not interested in arguing with religious folk myself as I don't have much patience and if i started it would take up too much of my time, and I prefer to spend my time advancing my own understanding rather than convincing people of what I already know. I do very much enjoy reading some of the posts (Scofflaws and Wicknights come to mind), and I look around for little tid bits of information in topics that interest me (neuroscience, cognitive science and philosophy of mind) and in such issues i'll post the odd time.

interestinguser

I do very much enjoy reading some of the posts (Scofflaws and Wicknights come to mind)

Same as.

Atheist myself and I post only every now and again. I read a lot more than I post

Ickle Magoo

I love reading this forum & often find myself laughing or "Uh-huh"ing along with posters but I can never say what I mean so, erm, succinctly as some other posters here!