Are you religious?

[Chippy_Tea]

Bet this debate livens late evening when a few beers have been sunk.

I agree and i was going to delete it for that reason, a word of warning Gunge has been removed from the Snug due to breaking the rules and being reported for doing so, be careful out there. :thumba:

 

[strange-steve]

The parable of the Good Samaritan is often misrepresented. Jesus wanted to show that an all-powerful God doesn't really "need" anything from man, while a chap in need is in need indeed. The priest and the Levite were on their way to to Jerusalem and, as they were a priest and a Levite, their work would have been in the Temple. If they became contaminated with blood, they would be ritually unclean and unable to enter the inner sanctum of the Temple.
Samaritans were also Jews, but considered heretics by the others and they were excluded from cult of the Temple and were unconcerned with ritual uncleanliness.
Who was the better man? The one who left his fellow in trouble to conduct the service of God, or the man who helped his friend in need?
Discuss the above with reference to home brewing techniques and the distribution of product. (15 marks)

Interesting theory, but as is often the case the context is revealing. Jesus had just stated the two greatest commands, love for God and love for neighbour and the parable was in response to a man's question, "who is my neighbour?", and afterwards he asked the man which of the 3 made himself neighbour. Then when the man answered correctly Jesus said go and do the same. I don't think there's much ambiguity about the point, it's just a shame that so few Christians put it into practice.

 

[Gulpitdarn]

As a good guess, I'd say Christs pre human name was Michael. Language would have been the same as Adam which is ancient Hebrew. 3 & 4 I'm not sure of.

 

[simon12]

For those who identify as Christian, (or anyone else) here are a few simple questions about the fundamentals of that religion.

1 What was Christ's given name?
2 What language did he speak?
3 How many years after his death, was the first gospel (Matthew) written?
4 And finally, how many years after was his death was the fourth (John) written?

I doubt anyone can get all 4 correct (approximately) without Googling.

1 Jesus is the English spelling would have to google to find what that was in Aramaic
2 Aramaic
3 No one knows for sure what date Jesus died (30 or 33AD) or what date Mathew was written
4 No one knows for sure what date Jesus died (30 or 33AD) or what date John was written
I am sure this is correct without googling

 

[Gulpitdarn]

1 Jesus is the English spelling would have to google to find what that was in Aramaic

Yeshua?

 

[An Ankoù]

Interesting theory, but as is often the case the context is revealing. Jesus had just stated the two greatest commands, love for God and love for neighbour and the parable was in response to a man's question, "who is my neighbour?", and afterwards he asked the man which of the 3 made himself neighbour. Then when the man answered correctly Jesus said go and do the same. I don't think there's much ambiguity about the point, it's just a shame that so few Christians put it into practice.

Quite so. And by putting a Samaritan as the neighbourly man rather than one of the Temple elite he challenges the teachers of the Law. Love of neighbour is the second commandment yet Jesus seems to teach that the first can only be fully achieved by practice of the second. For me Jesus is a revolutionary, not a mealy-mouthed conformist. When I think that May started by flaunting her "Christian credentials" it makes me sick to the stomach.
(Not too far, I hope, Chippy)

 

[kelper]

I commend the writings of Ingersoll.

" We have already compared the benefits of theology and science. When the theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and hovels for the many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all the children of men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor were clad in rags and skins -- they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones. The day of Science dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the necessities of to-day. Men in the middle ranks of life have more of the conveniences and elegancies than the princes and kings of the theological times. But above and over all this, is the development of mind. There is more of value in the brain of an average man of today -- of a master-mechanic, of a chemist, of a naturalist, of an inventor, than there was in the brain of the world four hundred years ago. These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did not drop from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found in cathedrals or behind altars -- neither were they searched for with holy candles. They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and experience -- and for them all, man is indebted to man. "

-- Robert Green Ingersoll, "God in The Constitution"

And Hitchins

"Religion attacks us in our deepest integrity — the core of our self-respect. Religion says that we would not know right from wrong, we would not know an evil, wicked act from a decent human act without divine permission, without divine authority or without, even worse, either the fear of a divine punishment or the hope of a divine reward. It strips us of the right to make our own determination, as all humans always have, about what is and what is not a right human action."


— Christopher Hitchens

These are not attacks on Christianity but more general.

 

[MmmBeer]

1 Jesus is the English spelling would have to google to find what that was in Aramaic
2 Aramaic
3 No one knows for sure what date Jesus died (30 or 33AD) or what date Mathew was written
4 No one knows for sure what date Jesus died (30 or 33AD) or what date John was written
I am sure this is correct without googling

That's quite a good attempt.
1 Jesus is the Greek translation, the actual name is thought to be Joshua, or similar.
2 Aramaic
3 30 - 40 years later
4 60 - 70 years later, he must have been pretty ancient (if he actually did write it)

The answers could probably also have been 'Nobody knows' in true QI tradition.

 

[simon12]

Yeshua?

Just checked, according to my Study Bible (ESV) the Greek Iēsous would be his every day name Yeshua is Hebrew and would be Joshua in English.

 

[An Ankoù]

That's quite a good attempt.
1 Jesus is the Greek translation, the actual name is thought to be Joshua, or similar.
2 Aramaic
3 30 - 40 years later
4 60 - 70 years later, he must have been pretty ancient (if he actually did write it)

The answers could probably also have been 'Nobody knows' in true QI tradition.

Jesus also read Hebrew (of which Aramaic is a dialect) as he was able to quote from the scrolls, which are always written in Hebrew. He probably had some knowledge of Greek (the lingua franca of the Roman occupation) and Latin (the low language of the occupying troops).

 

[simon12]

That's quite a good attempt.
1 Jesus is the Greek translation, the actual name is thought to be Joshua, or similar.
2 Aramaic
3 30 - 40 years later
4 60 - 70 years later, he must have been pretty ancient (if he actually did write it)

The answers could probably also have been 'Nobody knows' in true QI tradition.

Checking study Bible
1 Iēsous in Greek which is Jesus in English and his every day name. Yeshua is Hebrew and would be Joshua in English.
2 Aramaic
3 Author, Date, and Recipients
Matthew was probably written in the late 50s or early 60s A.D. Matthew (also called Levi), the former tax collector who became Jesus’ disciple, is the author. The original audience may have been the church in Antioch of Syria. Its members included Jewish and Gentile Christians.
4 Author, Date, and Recipients
John the son of Zebedee wrote this Gospel. He was a Palestinian Jew, one of the 12 disciples, and a member of Jesus’ inner apostolic circle. He was referred to as the disciple “whom Jesus loved” (13:23). John also wrote 1–3 John and Revelation. He likely wrote his Gospel account between A.D. 70 (the date of the destruction of the temple) and A.D. 100 (the reputed end of John’s life). It was likely written from Ephesus in Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey), one of the most important cities of the Roman Empire at the time. His original audience consisted of Jews and Gentiles living in the larger Greco-Roman world in Ephesus and beyond, toward the close of the first century A.D.

 

[simon12]

I commend the writings of Ingersoll.

" We have already compared the benefits of theology and science. When the theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and hovels for the many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all the children of men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor were clad in rags and skins -- they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones. The day of Science dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the necessities of to-day. Men in the middle ranks of life have more of the conveniences and elegancies than the princes and kings of the theological times. But above and over all this, is the development of mind. There is more of value in the brain of an average man of today -- of a master-mechanic, of a chemist, of a naturalist, of an inventor, than there was in the brain of the world four hundred years ago. These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did not drop from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found in cathedrals or behind altars -- neither were they searched for with holy candles. They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and experience -- and for them all, man is indebted to man. "
.

I think this incorrectly thinks science advances due to lack of religion. From a Christian point of view its true there was a long medieval period where the church was wrongly given much power over the state and used it to exploit the general population and was ended in the reformation as it had nothing to do with biblical teachings. Though its fair to point out thew Vatican is hording a load of cash and many churches near me do small things to help the poor, homeless and others in the community while spending millions on new church buildings whci h could really help people in a more meaningful way. I would also note secularism hasn't helped the issues he attacks religion for.

 

[simon12]

I commend the writings of Ingersoll.

"Religion attacks us in our deepest integrity — the core of our self-respect. Religion says that we would not know right from wrong, we would not know an evil, wicked act from a decent human act without divine permission, without divine authority or without, even worse, either the fear of a divine punishment or the hope of a divine reward. It strips us of the right to make our own determination, as all humans always have, about what is and what is not a right human action."


— Christopher Hitchens

These are not attacks on Christianity but more general.

If talking of Christianity I think the simple answer to every single part is no it doesn't or you have got it wrong

 

[kelper]

I have been collecting quotes on religion, belief and atheism. If anyone wants to read them, please PM me. I fear I will offend some members here and that is not my wish. I am a keen student of religions. They fascinate me. But I am no believer. I suppose I am a cultural Christian by upbringing. My parents brought me up as a Christian until they realised I had made my own choices, at age 12. They never went to church after that. Duty done!

 

[user 23602]

But I seriously do not get

Agreed. None is a bit of a cop-out. But a quiz can have twenty options. It's too late for OP to modify the questions and it would spoil the previous responses. I would look at the UK census questions to see their taxonomy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom

None is not a cop out. If you don't have any belief is a certified religion, then that's an option. Other, is to broad.

 

[kelper]

/i Thank God for the Arabs /i who preserved so much of human knowledge during the dark ages. Since the Arabs got Islam they have achieved nothing. Or was it the oil?

/i = irony

 

[Clint]

All religions seem vast collectors but poor distributers of wealth.

 

[BeerCat]

All religions seem vast collectors but poor distributers of wealth.

Ha very well said!

 

[simon12]

All religions seem vast collectors but poor distributers of wealth.

Yes in Christianity the blatant prosperity gospel still thrives and theres a whole load of better disguised teachings going on as well. Despite the bible teachings about the love of money and the example set by the early church in Acts. If chruches/preachers etc stuck to Sola Scriptura from the reformation this would not happen or at least wouldn't be taught by Christianity there would still be peaple saying there Christians while living in a purely selfish way. On a seperate but relevant note I used to think if the Lawless one/Antichrist of Revelation appeared he would stick out like a saw thumb but there are many teachings creeping into the main steam church at the moment preparing the way for his acceptance.

I think Islam has specific taxes you must pay to the poor and also condemns hording money but not sure exactly how it works.

 

[Slid]

I go for agnostic these days. And worse, in that not only is there no real suggestion of deity, it is clear by now that such hypothetical deities as may exist have so little interest in human affairs, that there is no actual worth in even discussing such hypothetical existence.