Spiritual but not religious?

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ nice! I've lost another 2-3 pounds last week - and the fasting days really help. Hey, fasting ... it even ties in with the topic at hand (spirituality).

 

I'll bump the Low-Carb Diet thread soon enough with some things I've been eating.  I'd like to start trying new recipes again. 

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ I surely loved the Charlton Heston movie as a kid. Yul Brynner was perfect as the evil pharaoh.

My dad is a huge fan of that film.  The first time I ever saw it though was in a hospital room on Easter after a drunk driver hit us. 

Exodus is surely an inspiring story ... like most of the old testament, it's good stories, but simply IMO not anything that we today should base anything on. It's outdated in every aspect ... especially as far as morality is concerned. Of course the movie kind of simplifies things ... the slaves are depicted as peaceful and generous while the Egyptians are depicted as ruthless tyrants. Even Jesus didn't mind slavery, and much less the old testament. From the movie you might even gather that God advocated against slavery and oppression in general ...

^ The Bible may not encourage to keep slaves, but it surely doesn't advise against it either ... as far as I can remember it contains some advice on how to treat slaves, which I guess can be seen as a sign that whoever wrote the passages saw nothing wrong in keeping slaves ... otherwise I'm pretty sure he would have mentioned it (it's a long book).

Given that the Bible hasn't changed over the years I find it strange though that many Christians seem to feel like the "Christian values" had a lot to do with the abolishment of slavery. Any Christians who had a part in these movements can't have drawn their inspiration from their religion, can they?

BTW: Raping and pillaging are also quite common in the old testament ... nothing wrong with that according to the book, provided that it's God's chosen people who do it.

How do you know, were you there?

http://www.evilbible.com/Biblical%20Contradictions.htm

Sorry, could not resist ... this is priceless.

Gosh, so only Enoch is older than you then? 

seventhsojourn wrote: stonebeard wrote: Here's my two offensive cents: Believing in religious dogma is delusional and nonsensical, but if delusions make you happy then fine, be delusional. Nevertheless, it would be better if we all had as few delusions as possible; they're all dangerous in varying degrees. Religion is volatile; spirituality is volatile, but less so. Besides the so-called "SBNR" people are a lot more likely to want to listen to Enya and buy small trickling water fountains for serenity, rather than kill a Dutchman when he offends their sky daddy. So kudos to them. Now take the next step and believe in none of that nonsense.   Delusion: An abnormal belief which is held with absolute subjective certainty, which requires no external proof, which may be held in the face of contradictory evidence, and which has personal significance and importance to the individual concerned. Excluded are those beliefs which can be understood as part of the subject's cultural or religious background... (Oxford Handbook of Psychiatry).

When pressed, I'll be the first to assert how little we know concerning our epistemological limits, whereas a majority of *minimally hypocritical/contradictory* religious people, when pressed about what they know
wouldn't throw it all up in the air, lest their religion mean nothing.

I find it silly for me to explicate the nature of the religious-nonreligious dialogue like this when we all know how this goes down with most religious folks.

Epignosis wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ Keep in mind though that wife and children of slaves belonged to the master forever. I reject any form of slavery, no matter how cozy it was for hebrew slaves compared to those on the cotton fields. That's a convenient belief to hold now.  I would bet you would not hold such a view if you were an impoverished Hebrew in those days (where there was no government assistance). In contrast, the Hebrews were slaves in Egypt because they were Hebrews (Exodus 1:9-11). Edit: And your comment about wives and children is inaccurate too.  You must do a better job reading what the Bible says before spouting off nonsense from so scholarly a resource as evilbible.com

What makes you so sure that your interpretation is more correct? As far as I know they're quoting from the King James version, and I think that it's reasonable for me to do so.

BTW: If slavery was so great for the people back then, one wonders why they ever revolted against their masters.