You refuse to put faith in things that cannot be proved? Sad if true. But it's probably not.

I'm a very practicing Christian, my wife is nothing. I presume you could call her agnostic. She just doesn't care. Religion was never a problem between us, I don't try to convert her, and neither does she. Politics is more of a divide as she's more conservative than me (she's not conservative, but she mainly informs herself with traditional medias… God the anti-trans disinformation is strong there!). But we work things out by respecting each others and viewing our differences as a strength. For example, we have children, I speak about my faith, she speaks about her lack of faith, and this way our children will have the chance to choose.

I’ll use an actual biblical example. Moses didn’t exist, and the Exodus was not a historical event. I think the people who wrote these texts knew that to some extent. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be so many inconsistencies. They weren’t stupid; they knew what a contradiction was.

But I don’t care. How would the fate of a people 3000 years ago change my life today? It wouldn’t. But the story is a lesson, a lesson that can change my life today. I believe that people were inspired by God to convey a message. They did so in their own language and cultural framework, using the rhetorical tools available to them: myth. That message can be summed up in a few words: God wants God’s people to be free, and God walks with us when we try to free ourselves. I’m not a slave in Egypt, but I’m not always free. I can be a slave to my anger, my passions, or a habit, and God helps me in my struggle for freedom. When I read the story of the Exodus, I look for what it can teach me about freedom today.

How do I know the Bible is truer than, say, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, or the IKEA catalogue? The truth is, I don’t. I do think, not just believe, but philosophically think that something beyond the world, which we might call “God” as an approximation, exists. Or, to be more precise, I think its existence is more probable than its nonexistence. I don’t know that it exists; it just makes more sense to me.

As for the rest, yes, those are beliefs, not certainties. I can live with that. Uncertainty is part of life! If we acted only when we knew something for sure, we’d do nothing. A lot of people like to lie to themselves, pretending that we can know whether God exists, that our political ideology is the best one, or what is right and wrong. Sometimes we can know these things. For example, I know that my political ideology is better than fascism; I have no uncertainty about that. But in most cases, we can’t be certain. I could stop at “a God probably exists” while continuing my life as if not, but I choose to thrive in uncertainty rather than fight it, and that leaves me freer to explore and open myself to other traditions and schools of thought.

I said that most Christians (by far) believe people can be saved without believing, while a minority believe that salvation is impossible without the correct belief. I believe something else. I belong to another minority, probably the smallest one: I believe there is more than one legitimate spiritual path. The Catholic Church still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church; it’s just that some people are members of the Church without knowing it. I believe the Church is one path among others, and simply the one that fits me today. The Bible helps me, the liberal Christian tradition nourishes me, and the community shelters me.

God is unknowable by definition. We’re talking about a being that exists outside time and space, so our words can’t legitimately claim to describe it. When we describe things, words that seem to contradict one another may both be true. It’s like two people describing the same mountain: someone on its northern face might describe it as a different mountain from the one described by someone on its southern face, even though they’re both describing the same mountain.

If I’m wrong, if there is no God, or if I’m irredeemably ignorant of the One True Religion™, it’s not a big deal. My faith has helped me live a better, fuller, and freer life. Who cares if an effective medicine turns out to be a placebo? And if I’m wrong and only people who believe a precise set of doctrines are saved, then I don’t want to be saved by such an assholish God. So everything works out for the best. (Though that idea makes no sense to me.)

I’m fine with anyone who is fine with anyone who is fine with anyone.

That's the way :-)

Yes, I agree with you on the last part. I'm happily married with someone who doesn't believe, and I couldn't live with the idea that she could be damned just for that.

You speak about basics, and you explain something written by Matthew using something Mark wrote? My citation was a part of a succession of citations to show what the general vibe of the Bible was, not a way to explain the details of a particular text, which is absurd. And the you ignore that I showed that Deuteronomy 21:18-21 doesn't speak about kids? You know adult children exist too? This law was written when fathers could kill their children freely until they were married; this law imposes an exterior party, a social control on that practice, and is an other example of what I said (and that you dutifully ignored, you love to ignore what contradicts your hatred, don't you?): the law was not written in a vacuum, but pushes things in the right direction. Deuteronomy 21:18-21 is an explanation of Exodus 21:17, as it was written later. The fact what we find this law horrible is just the proof that this law worked! And then you invent laws? Gleaning is totally forbidden during the Sabbat, even to pick up a fallen fruit and eating it is forbidden! You're intellectually dishonest and insulting, I love to discuss these things with people disagreeing with me, but I have no time to loose with disrespectful people. You're blocked.

You're mixing things up, maybe because I'm not clear or maybe consciously. It's probably the first. I hope.

What most Christians believe is that one can be saved without believing, and I proved that citing official Catholic texts. Maybe these texts aren't true to the Bible, but that is of no consequence, they're still a proof that most Christians believe what I said. The first question was not “can non-Christian be saved?” it was “do Christians believe that non-Christian can be saved?” and these are two different things.

Now, about the Bible, I did not contradict myself. Let's take an other text: The Capital by Marx and Engels. It's not a simple text: to understand it wholly, you must have a strong economical, philosophical and historical culture. It needs time, efforts, and this text is still debated today, as there are different legitimate interpretations. But even without them, you can read it and some things will be clear, for example that capitalism should be fought. A text can be difficult on its parts and clear on the whole on a few subjects.

It's the case with the Bible. That the Law is not eternal is very clear, so if you see a text that says the contrary it should either be dismissed as a text contradicting the whole message, or interpreted to find the actual message.

I love the outdoors! I often look at it from my window.

Again, the Bible ≠ God, except for fundamentalists.

I don't care how “anti-authoritarian” a socialist is. They believe that a highly centralized one-party state and rapid, state-directed industrialization and collectivization, accompanied by extensive political repression, censorship, and the suppression of dissent will lead to communism.

It doesn't make sense, does it? Some traditions give birth to opposing schools, and it's unjust to conflate the two just because they share a name. What your describing is fundamentalism, not Christianity, and “progressive fundamentalism” doesn't have any sense, just like “anti-authoritarian stalinism”.

Just wait to learn about the OMNICOLON.

Fuck, I may have said too much.

Judeo-Christian religions that believe in hell as the destination for people who do not believe in their god

If you studied the theology of judeo-Christian religions, you'd learn that this view is very much a minority one. In Christianity for example, outside evangelicalism, nobody teaches that (Catholicism teaches for example that a “hidden Jesus” saves outside the church). In Judaism, as far as I know, no sect teaches that at all. In Islam, outside a few sects, nobody teaches that either (in shia islam for example, most non-Muslims are Jahil-e-Qasir, “inculpable ignorant”).

Are communities basically same as reddit subs?

Yes.

How convenient for you that you get to pick and choose which parts you like.

It's not cherrypicking, it's interpretation. I do not arbitrarily choose, I study the context, and use the Love of God as an hermeneutical key, to cite Martin Luther.

Even though your own lord and savior said that he didn’t come to abolish the old law but to fulfill it, and that not a single bit of that old law will change until the end of the earth (paraphrasing Matthew 5:17).

I answered about this text here.

The server you're on is of little importance. You're on Lemmy.world, I'm on sh.itjust.works, and we can discuss as if we were on the same server. To discover Lemmy lemmy.world is a good server; maybe when you'll understand more you'll want to move but not necessarily.

It works more or less like Reddit. If you want to talk about Perchance, you should go to its community: [email protected]

The parts aren't, the whole is, and I showed why. You have the right to disagree of course; but then it's not a bad thing to answer to arguments by arguments.

You can't change the subject of the discussion on a whim. The original argument was that Christians worshiped a God that condone slavery and child murder. I showed that, for most Christians, it isn't the case.

(And by the way, these events did not happen. The Exodus is a myth according to the historians, so yes, I'm allowed to say so)

I feel free, thank you. I hope than one day, you'll learn that it makes more happy to actually think that there's more than one legitimate way to see the world.

And is himself apparently full of hatred.