Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game?

Let’s start with what follows and see if we have a discussion.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Further.
pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, “The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it.”

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, “God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning.”

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.

youtube.com/watch?v=oR02cia … =PLCBF574D

Regards
DL

Indeed.

Before the scribes took god out of our hearts and put him in the sky somewhere.

Even today, Karaite Jews, who det5ermine the beliefs within Jewry, remain esoteric ecumenists and put man above god, where we belong.

Regards
DL

He was a Jew. The issue was what Early Christians believed.

And yet he believed in the pre-existence of souls, miracles from Jesus and demons and angels. I have told you this before, and yet you trot Origen out as an expert.

That was directed at non-Christian Jews on moral issues to show them that Jesus was the fulfillment of Moses. But since you are bringing up Matthew…
trusting-in-jesus.com/Mirac … tthew.html
He also speaks of many miracles and note…these are not presented in the poetic language of the OT/Torah. They are presented as flat tales. They are not presented in the flowery allegorical language of, say, Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, they are presented in clear recounting events ways. There is absolutely no indication we should take them as anything other than they are written…accounts of what happened. And many Early Christians took them this way.

Now you write early Gnostic Christians. Fine. In relation to some of them, you are correct as far as literalism. Other gnostics did believe in supernatural phenomena. Though the term itself is silly. If you believe it is real, it is natural. If you do not believe it is real, it is unreal. It is not supernatural. It simply does not exist. That term has led to so many wasted conversations since believers are accused of creating a new ontological category (supernatural), regardless of whether this is true or not.

You keep repeating the same things without making adjustments for counterevidence for years.
Regards
DL
[/quote]

You missed the point, which he was agreeing on, that the term supernatural is misleading. And it’s amazing how much you give beliefs of Jews as evidence of the beliefs of Christians.

Now you write early Gnostic Christians. Fine. In relation to some of them, you are correct as far as literalism. Other gnostics did believe in supernatural phenomena. Though the term itself is silly. If you believe it is real, it is natural. If you do not believe it is real, it is unreal. It is not supernatural. It simply does not exist. That term has led to so many wasted conversations since believers are accused of creating a new ontological category (supernatural), regardless of whether this is true or not.

You keep repeating the same things without making adjustments for counterevidence for years.
Regards
DL
[/quote]

[/quote]
When you are correct, you do not change.

You make your statement while ignoring that the more brain dead literalist theists come up with (new) arguments. Get serious.

You seem to want to believe that the ancients were as stupid as the literalist idol worshipers are today. They weren’t and were mostly all esoteric ecumenists like Jesus was.

You like to think Jesus was only talking to Jews while he was a universalists and talking to everyone.

Regards
DL

The whole bible has been written by Jews.

If you can’t see that then ------

Regards
DL

The New Testament is full of Greek ideas. If it was written by Jews, then they had already been “corrupted” by contact with Greeks.

I’m not sure what that means. If God exists, then He permeates all existence, at least in the sense of being the architect of all that is. You might as well say “put man above gravity, where we belong”. It’s just as strange.

And if God doesn’t exist, then why talk about God at all.

Because both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/

youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL

I’m pretty sure all that has nothing to do with what I wrote in my post. :confused:

Because both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/

youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL
[/quote]
I’m pretty sure all that has nothing to do with what I wrote in my post. :confused:
[/quote]
If you cannot get that it does -----

Regards
DL

That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue in the posts related to this one. And sure, I know that. It was about the term ‘supernatural’.

Well, you cite Origen as one of the enlightened early chrisitians and he believed in supernatural things. This has been pointed out before. Yet, you do not change and continue to use him as an expert, as if he agrees with you, when he does not. That particular quote does, but since he is an example of an important early Christian and he believed in supernatural things, his use is a terrible one. You also seem to think presenting three, well, actually two examples of early Christians is strong or even mild evidence of what Early Christians believed as a whole. You might want to look up Cherry Picking fallacy.

I don’t ignore that. Feel free to demonstrate that.

Notice how you do not respond to the points I make, but try to make it seem stupid I have the position I have, without you adding any more substance or responding to the points I made. What makes you think this kind of behavior is a philosophical discussion? What kind of example are you trying to set for rationality?

And here you just restate your opinion. I know you belief this.

No, I have never argued that Jesus was only speaking to Jews. I did mention something about what Matthew was doing.

It’s years and you still cannot engage in a real discussion. You cherry pick, do not respond to arguments, tell other people what their opinions are when they have not argued these opinions, restate your opinion as if it is an argument, and insult large groups of people.

If the whole I idea is that gnostics are so rational compared to others, it might be worth your while to learn how to demonstrate rationality.

Try this.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL

Yes, although not all believers are intelligent, of course.

Religious people live better lives than atheists do. That’s proven by the social sciences.

Being religious means a better life in this world (happier, live longer, less depression, less suicide, more giving) and hopefully a much better life in the next.

And the mind that refuses to discuss ideas that point out flaws in its ideas would then be no mind at all. Not to mention how much you discuss people and insultingly.

And since you like to appeal to authority, try this…

From the mouth of your authority, and much as there are many things I admire about her, she is not my authority.

Care to discuss your other authority Origen and his supernatural ideas?

Better is a subjective thing.

Sure the religious live a bit longer and happier lives, but to a thinker, as compared to a sheeple, cannot see being a sheeple as better than a thinker.

The small difference is not enough to make an atheist put his mind in intellectual and especially moral dissonance.

We value our minds and truth more than theists. By we I mean thinkers, not atheists. Not being an atheist, I cannot speak for them.

At present, atheists are beginning the trend of providing what were known as mystery schools. Some are calling them atheist churches. That trend will give them the longer and happier lives without them having to insult their intellect and morals.

They know how utterly stupid and brain killing idol worship of a genocidal son murdering god can be. They have seen what it does to Christians and Muslims.

They are not interested in growing atheism with inquisitions and jihads.
That is why countries with less religiosity are more peaceful and law abiding.

Regards
DL

Nope. I prefer to give my views.

BTW. I look for wisdom saying and do not care who says them. The words are more important than the speaker.

Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.

Faith is a way to quit using, “God given” power of Reason and Logic, and cause the faithful to embrace doctrines that moral people reject.

The God of the OT says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” [Isaiah 1:18]

How can literalists reason on God when they must ignore reason and logic and discard them when turning into literalist?

Those who are literalists can only reply somewhat in the fashion that Martin Luther did.
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”

This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes the believers mind as it is pure idol worship.

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths. We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.

Regards
DL

In a few decades when they’re dead, atheists will see the error of their ways, unfortunately. Pride comes before the fall.

Let’s hope they change before then.

Better is a subjective thing.

Sure the religious live a bit longer and happier lives, but to a thinker, as compared to a sheeple, cannot see being a sheeple as better than a thinker.

The small difference is not enough to make an atheist put his mind in intellectual and especially moral dissonance.

We value our minds and truth more than theists. By we I mean thinkers, not atheists. Not being an atheist, I cannot speak for them.

At present, atheists are beginning the trend of providing what were known as mystery schools. Some are calling them atheist churches. That trend will give them the longer and happier lives without them having to insult their intellect and morals.

They know how utterly stupid and brain killing idol worship of a genocidal son murdering god can be. They have seen what it does to Christians and Muslims.

They are not interested in growing atheism with inquisitions and jihads.
That is why countries with less religiosity are more peaceful and law abiding.

Regards
DL
[/quote]
In a few decades when they’re dead, atheists will see the error of their ways, unfortunately. Pride comes before the fall.

Let’s hope they change before then.
[/quote]
Fear mongering. A poor apologists last lying retort.

Your lying clergy must have gotten to you when too young and you still have yet to reach the age of reason.

Go try your garbage and lies on children.

Regards
DL

But most atheists know hardly anything about religion or theology. They are only guided by their own egos.

Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens (RIP) are the perfect examples. They are experts in their field, so they assume they are experts in every field.

In reality, they have a 7th grade education in religion and theology. Watching them “debate” is embarrassing because of their ignorance.

I include you in this group because of your cliche generalizations and obvious narcissism.

Oh and regards to your ignorant assumptions, I was an atheist for 10 years until I began my own study. I know how you people think.