Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

RWStanding
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 12:23 pm

Christianity

Post by RWStanding »

Christianity
Britain used to refer to itself as a Christian country.
There seems to be little agreement as to what we are today.
In modern terms:
Christianity is not about simple freedom of the individual will.
Christianity is not about simple obedience to moral codes.
Christianity is about informed conformity to altruist values.
Human and other rights and duties are legal constructs based on values.
User avatar
Janoah
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:26 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Janoah »

however, is Christianity Philosophically True?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 8058
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

  • “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”—John 3:16, King James Version.
The above is an offer from God to all humans to accept and enter into a Contract [divine covenant] with God and Jesus Christ.
Anyone who had surrendered and believe in Jesus Christ and accept the offer in John 3:16 has entered into a Contract with God.
The contracted believer is thus a Christian of Christianity i.e. 'Christ'.

Signing a Contract with God
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24687

Terms of any contract cannot be arbitrary and must be made known upon signing the contract and cannot be changed unless accepted by both parties.
The terms of the contract [morals, etc. soteriological, various compliances] a Christian is contractually bound are in the Gospels [sole Constitution] and no where else.

That is Christianity and Christians in a nutshell.

Anything outside the above terms and conditions are merely pseudo-Christianity.
User avatar
Janoah
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:26 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Janoah »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 5:49 am
  • “For God
My question was, is the Christian concept of the One from a philosophical point of view true?
Let's say Aristotle proved that the One, the Primary cause (or first uncaused cause) - is immaterial.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 8058
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Janoah wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 8:39 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 5:49 am
  • “For God
My question was, is the Christian concept of the One from a philosophical point of view true?
Let's say Aristotle proved that the One, the Primary cause (or first uncaused cause) - is immaterial.
I was not addressing your question but the OP. Anyway, ..

According to what is typical reality and philosophy-proper, the Christian concept of the One, cannot be true and God is an impossibility to be real. Note this thread of mine.

God is an Impossibility to be Real
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

Nevertheless, given the inherent unavoidable existential crisis within all humans, Christianity [with its pros and cons] has utility [psychological] to the majority of people relative to the previous and current phase of evolution [not the future].
At present the pros of Christianity outweigh its cons, so it is effectively a good thing for humanity.

However, it is evident the cons of Christianity are outweighing its pros as we are moving towards the future. As such Christianity [evil Islam as priority] need to be weaned off gradually and be replaced by fool proof methods to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis within all humans.
User avatar
Janoah
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:26 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Janoah »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:26 am
According to what is typical reality and philosophy-proper, the Christian concept of the One, cannot be true and God is an impossibility to be real. Note this thread of mine.

God is an Impossibility to be Real
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704
I brought the existing real there,
in my opinion, the One is regularity of nature.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 5:49 am
  • “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”—John 3:16, King James Version.
The above is an offer from God to all humans to accept and enter into a Contract [divine covenant] with God and Jesus Christ.

.../...

Terms of any contract cannot be arbitrary and must be made known upon signing the contract and cannot be changed unless accepted by both parties.
How is this supposed to work for children? Are their parents allowed to sign the contract for them?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15273
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:56 pm How is this supposed to work for children? Are their parents allowed to sign the contract for them?
While not entirely incorrect, VA's summary is somewhat incorrect.

Perhaps its chief problem is that it's in the language of contract, which isn't a good metaphor for what Christianity entails. "Covenantal" might be better, but is still potentially insufficient. "Relational" might be generally better, but fails to point out the volitional elements that VA quite rightly points out. So it's difficult to select a single metaphor, but I would choose the Biblical emphasis on relationship as primary.

The upshot is that it takes not much knowledge for a child to know its relationship to a parent. And it takes not much knowledge for a new Christian to understand that he/she has entered into a new relationship with God. As with a child, much of the full understanding of that relationship comes progressively, and later.

Faith is simple, sometimes even instant: faithfulness is complex and of duration. That might be one way to say it. Faith saves; faithfulness is to follow. Learning that one wants to be a Christian is relatively easy; learning what that fully entails can take a whole lifetime.

A child that can recognize a relationship can recognize a relationship with God. A person capable of grasping a simple proposition can grasp the simple proposition that Somebody cares for them and wants them to enter into a relationship. And it's very good that the entry point for Christianity is so accessible; for if it were not, then a great many people -- not just children -- would have no access to God.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pm
Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:56 pm How is this supposed to work for children? Are their parents allowed to sign the contract for them?
A child that can recognize a relationship can recognize a relationship with God. A person capable of grasping a simple proposition can grasp the simple proposition that Somebody cares for them and wants them to enter into a relationship.
Well, children believe in all sorts of invisible figures. What does that really mean to them? They eventually let go of all of them... as makes sense. It is only in the case of adults that have a use for maintaining a belief in something, that they will do so... even against all to the contrary.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pm And it's very good that the entry point for Christianity is so accessible; for if it were not, then a great many people -- not just children -- would have no access to God.
That makes no sense. Please explain further.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15273
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:42 pm Well, children believe in all sorts of invisible figures.
They also believe in visible ones. And as they mature, they also become capable of understanding that concepts are also quite capable of being real.

A thing doesn't become fictive merely because a child can believe in it. Most of what they believe in is also real.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pm And it's very good that the entry point for Christianity is so accessible; for if it were not, then a great many people -- not just children -- would have no access to God.
That makes no sense. Please explain further.
Well, let us suppose that there's a God who wishes all people to have an opportunity to know Him.

If the entry point to such knowledge is too high -- say, demanding advanced scholarship, complex mental gymnastics, technical information, vast historical data, and so on -- then all those who lack such knowledge, including children, the handicapped, those of lower intelligence, and so on, would simply have no way they could ever know God. Entering into a relationship with God would then be a matter only possible to the elites, to the highly intelligent, the advanced, the fully mature, and so on. It would be an aristocratic luxury, and we would have to suppose God cared nothing for the simple, the mentally-challenged, or children, at the very least -- and perhaps as well, that He loved the intellectual and despised the lowly.

This is not the God of the Bible. Jesus Christ was born in a stable. Even ignorant shepherds could find him there. But so too could wise men.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:17 pm it's very good that the entry point for Christianity is so accessible; for if it were not, then a great many people -- not just children -- would have no access to God.
Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:42 pm That makes no sense. Please explain further.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 5:17 pmWell, let us suppose that there's a God who wishes all people to have an opportunity to know Him.
Why would he 'wish' for anything?

It's not that hard if he created it.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pmIf the entry point to such knowledge is too high
Why would there even need to be an entry point when you're already inside god's world or god's plan or whatever?

Isn't it humans who judge 'inside' and 'outside'?

If there were a male god who created a bunch of free-thinking beings, and he wanted to have a relationship with them, why couldn't he just do so without any question or bizarre tests? Wouldn't he understand their limitations? Would you threaten a child to believe in you or risk rejection and peril? Why allow his message to be distorted by everyone who puts their hands on it and passes it around, tainted by their own limitations and purposes?

Why not show up, clearly visible to all, and say "Here's the deal. I'm real. I created you. I know how to communicate with you without the use of an ancient book of absurd stories and mixed meanings. Ignore those who claim to speak for me... and don't follow me around like sheep. I want the best for you, and I will help you to a certain extent. But I've given you free will to choose what you do with yourself and your life. You have a great creative opportunity. You will discover there are natural repercussions -- nothing eternal, though... I have your back... and it's all cool. I love you."
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15273
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:53 pm Isn't it humans who judge 'inside' and 'outside'?
No, of course not. Human beings are fallible judges.
If there were a male god who created a bunch of free-thinking beings, and he wanted to have a relationship with them, why couldn't he just do so without any question or bizarre tests?
Because they are beings with their own will, which also must be respected.

Relationships cannot be unilateral. (Well, we have names for those sorts of 'relationships,' but not usually complimentary ones.) Relationships must be undertaken consensually by both parties, or what you have is not relationship but compulsion of some sort.
Why not show up, clearly visible to all...
He did.

They crucified Him.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 5278
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:17 pm
Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:53 pm Isn't it humans who judge 'inside' and 'outside'?
No, of course not. Human beings are fallible judges.
Of course not? Human beings make up all kinds of things. Being fallible doesn't stop them from judging.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:17 pm
If there were a male god who created a bunch of free-thinking beings, and he wanted to have a relationship with them, why couldn't he just do so without any question or bizarre tests?
Because they are beings with their own will, which also must be respected.
I already acknowledged that. When you're given a job, your 'boss man' tells you the conditions of the job and environment. You have freedom within those parameters and are respected to do what you're capable of. There's no reason a god couldn't show up in the same way: "Here you go... see what you can do!" Surely people would do a much better job with their lives if they weren't tangled up in the misleading paths of religion.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:17 pm
Why not show up, clearly visible to all...
He did.

They crucified Him.
That's a dramatic story from a storybook. The way it has been re-told makes no sense. Why would any god play such bizarre games to demonstrate love? It actually seems kind of shocking that you (or anyone) could still believe archaic twisted stories that are a distortion/product of primitive man! Surely, any creative power would be vastly beyond such fearful, controlling, and nonsensical notions.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 15273
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:44 pm Being fallible doesn't stop them from judging.
Right. But they make wrong judgments sometimes...and the way we know that is by objective standards. So their judgment is judged by objective facts..
There's no reason a god couldn't show up in the same way: "Here you go... see what you can do!"

What makes you think He hasn't?
Surely people would do a much better job with their lives if they weren't tangled up in the misleading paths of religion.
Oh, I agree completely. Religion is bunk. Only the truth sets people free.

Christianity isn't religion, though. Religion is the human attempt to reach the divine by his own wit and methods. Christianity is God reaching down to humankind.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:17 pm
Why not show up, clearly visible to all...
He did.

They crucified Him.
That's a dramatic story from a storybook.
It is indeed the most dramatic story in history. But it also happens to be true.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 8058
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Lacewing wrote: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:56 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sat Aug 28, 2021 5:49 am
  • “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”—John 3:16, King James Version.
The above is an offer from God to all humans to accept and enter into a Contract [divine covenant] with God and Jesus Christ.

.../...

Terms of any contract cannot be arbitrary and must be made known upon signing the contract and cannot be changed unless accepted by both parties.
How is this supposed to work for children? Are their parents allowed to sign the contract for them?
The God of Christianity via Jesus made the offer in the Gospel in John 3:16 and alike. This is indisputable.

Thus babies, toddlers are obviously not Christians by definition re Gospels but children from 3, 4, 5 onwards can be guided by the Christian parents and guardians to enter [not sign literally] into a contract with God and qualify to be a Christian.

Note I prefer the term 'contract' rather than the more appropriate divine "covenant".
The term "contract" implied the obligation that Christians are contractually bound to obey whatever in the Gospels [the terms of the contract].

Fortunately, the critical contractual term all Christians are bound to is that they MUST love all and even their enemies. Therefore Christianity is inherent a pacifist religion, regardless of whether Christians behave well-manneredly or badly.

Similar in Islam, a "Muslim" implied a believer who had entered into a contract [divine covenant] (Arabic ʿahd and mīthāq) with Allah with the Quran containing all the terms of the contract.
Unfortunately, the Quran, i.e. the terms of the contract for a Muslim, contains commands that they kill non-Muslim upon any threat* [fasadin] to Islam.
*Disbelieving Islam itself is a threat among others, e.g. drawing of cartoons, etc.
As such, Islam is an inherently evil laden religion.

Fortunately not all Muslims comply fully with the term of their divine contract.
But even if 10% do comply fully, that is >150 million of them :shock: looking for an opportunity to kill non-Muslims upon any threat to the religion to reap greater rewards for such compliances.
Post Reply