Conservatives Think The Bible Is Too Liberal So They’re Rewriting It

I've been wondering this for a while. What is your belief then? Just kinda curious.



As for the topic itself I was raised on the KJV and I won't completely disregard it for a new version. Then again I'm not sure where I fall on the "conservative/liberal" scale but I'm sure it's somewhere near libertarian anyway.

 

Plus, I think the entire god concept is antiquated and silly in the modern, scientific age. Gods fill gaps in understanding as well as offer strength and comfort in a large, unpredictable, and often cruel world. One can continue to look to an increasingly useless belief system for the sake of emotional satisfaction, or one can look ahead and try to come to terms with the vast universe before us as we explore it scientifically. For me at least, there is no good way to have both, at least as long as the god concept is tied to specific mythological teachings that run counter to at least certain scientific theories and certain realities that beg to be accepted as well as differ with religious tradition. Modern Christian churches are still clinging to texts written by flat-earthers and morality tales that were written long before modern ethical and moral ideas had fully developed.

It's still just a few years ago that I walked away from Christianity, in my very late 20s. The only thing I ever wanted from it, though, was immortality. I was willing to cling to that faith as long as I did because I wanted eternal life. There was nothing else about it that was particularly appealing to me, and of course I had started recognising how at odds it was with science, in terms of both existing scientific theories and the scientific method itself, which is certainly one of the best tools we have for separating fantasy from reality and making meaningful discoveries and progress.

 

You don't need to worry. Anything not worthy of God will fall by the wayside from God's direction. I use the King's James version--tried and true through the ages but also use an NIV version which is easier to read. The differences I may find between a King James or new version seem small but to me aren't. One verse might say "God will lead you to righteousness" where the newer version will say "God will guide you to righteousness" . In a case like that I will go with the King James.

 

Not anything worthy of God will fall by the wayside?

Then why has nothing fallen by the wayside?

 

I would hope most people of X religion would oppose changing their religious text for purely religious purposes.

However, the lack of objection in this thread is telling. It seems more people have an issue with a hilarious picture of Jesus and Mohamed in the film "Broke Back Mecca", merchants saying "Happy Holidays", than do the purely political revision of their own Holy text.

 

Hmmmmmmm... I am not even aware of a specific term to describe my beliefs.

I would like to think there is a continuation of conscienceness after death, even though I know there is little/no evidence to suggest the validity of such a position. I am (obviously) very critical of theistic beliefs that require "it just takes faith" to answer questions that are either counter intuitive, contradictory, hateful, ignorant, aggressively stupid, or simple deny reality.

 

If the philosophy was as simple as "Jesus died for our sins," then yes, I'd be inclined to believe you, but its not that simple and this is definitely not the entire Christian philosophy that many believe our country was founded on.

 

The philosophy evolved....Judeo-Christian philosophy calls for making peace not war, being generally tolerant and respectful of others as you would want to be treated. When people think this way, they can see things they didn't before....like how unfair it is to treat other human beings indignantly just because they are not 'nobility', happen to think the way you do, etc. Judeo-Christian philosophy calls for helping those less fortunate. This led to the ideas that brought about the French Revolution which was the influence for our own Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

 

So you are saying you lack the ability to understand what an all powerful God is? Why am I not surprised?

 

I notice how you ask silly questions, are unable to address your own position, and contribute nothing to the discussion.

 

How many mentions of Jesus in the US Constitution? How many mentions of God even?

 

Then why are there branches of Christianity who demean and put down those who are different, specifically lgbt and multicultural people, to the point of violence? Isn't this in direct contradiction with that philosophy? And yet many Christians state that these actions are in line with both Christianity and our country.

 

Christianity is about striving to live one's life to the highest ideal with God as the final arbiter however, human beings are not perfect and often let their greed, arrogance, etc. subvert the teachings. I know of no Christians today that advocate a belief that homosexuals and multicultural people should be the target of violence.

 

The discussion is not about 'mentions' of Jesus in the U.S. Constitution.

 

Westboro Baptist Church, the Klu Klux Klan, very conservative fundamentalist Baptist sects (mostly on the homosexual front nowadays), most fundamentalist Christian groups in general really. These are sects that teach that certain people are below others.

 

Not to mention all the ones who say LDS and Catholicism are cults!

 

Larf. The funny thing about the Christian god is that it's actually a very fuzzy concept, one associated with emotional states and concepts more than anything else. That is, believers are simply choosing to pin their emotions onto an invisible friend in the sky and attribute a number of their own thoughts and feelings to that figure, hence references to "feeling God's presence" and so forth.

This also makes God an emotional crutch, of course. Feeling down? Overwhelmed? Turn to God! Turn to Jesus! Or, if you're not Christian, you might turn to a different monotheistic construct or something a bit more different, such as the spirits of your ancesors or a specific deity in a pantheon.

 

That would be outrageous in a population of human beings who are known to be perfect which is.....really......a premise I disagree with.

 

Secular Humanism is a cult.
Environmentalism is a cult
Climate Change is a cult
Atheism is a cult

And not one of them claim to have a strict set of morals and values. It's all relative to..............no one really knows/the best propaganda of the day?/clever sound bites?/.....etc.

 

Who cares??? Conservatives don't act according to the bible's principles anyway, unless they're trying to emulate the bad guys?

 

Who does have a set of 'strict' moral values? how 'strict"?
like, absolute?

If all those things are cults, then so is coffee drinking and watching tv, ie, the word now has no meaning.

- - - Updated - - -

Why pick on cons? Nobody does.

 

Pot meet kettle......

 

As opposed to atheists who seem to be the most angry and miserable people on the planet? I'll take Christians any day.

 

How people seem to you says here more about you than it does about anyone else.

 

Remind me: Which group is constantly fussing about stupid stuff like gay marriage and "happy holidays"?