Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 1505295" data-attributes="member: 2189">Weird thing is, I can agree with what you just said also.&nbsp; I even understand how a major theologian like Paul Tillich or New Testament theologian Robert M. Price can call themselves Christian Atheists.&nbsp; On a certain level I consider myself one. Read the Gospel of Thomas from the Nag Hammadi Library and see if it doesn&#039;t leave you in many places going WOW!&nbsp; Who were the gnostics?&nbsp; Who were the Essenes?&nbsp; Who were the Marcionites?&nbsp; Here&#039;s the real biggee.&nbsp; Who was Chrestus and who were the Chrestians?&nbsp; Who were the losers as orthodox christianity won in the 4th century CE?&nbsp; Ponder this question, does having won make your position morally and philosophically right?&nbsp; Hmmmmmm!I can understand how the Buddhists can on the one hand be a religion while on the other be called an atheist.&nbsp; I can also see why the legends are that Jesus in his missing years among other places went to India to study and that Thomas after the death of Jesus went to live and even died in India.&nbsp; I don&#039;t have to accept the legends as true or untrue in order to understand the appeal and how the 2 philosophies would be compatible.&nbsp; Krishna and Jesus in many areas are mirror images of one another.&nbsp;&nbsp; I even understand how one can be an atheist, an agnostic, a spiritialist, a humanist and a mythicist all at the same time. Even at times ponder the idea of deism, pantheism or even panentheism.&nbsp; I think you of all people here understand that no one is a dictionary perfect &quot;ist&quot; or &quot;ism&quot; of any kind.&nbsp; We as humans are vastly too complex for such boxes.&nbsp; We may fight to the death to stay in a box we think we belong in or we may fight to stay out of a box we think we don&#039;t belong in but no single box is ever big enough.&nbsp; And let&#039;s make note and remember, I&#039;ve already said in this thread just a page or so back that I&#039;m not interested in throwing out the baby with the bathwater.Here&#039;s a fun one for you to consider sometime.&nbsp; Atheism is nothing more than a default position, an unintended consequence of rigid and absolute monotheism when the believer comes to the reality that his/her lone god is really like all the rest.&nbsp; Once that discovery is made, there is little conclusion left to reach.&nbsp; But here&#039;s the kicker, what if our definition of the word god is all wrong in the first place? Now the rabbit hole is really getting deep! <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wink.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 1505295, member: 2189"] Weird thing is, I can agree with what you just said also. I even understand how a major theologian like Paul Tillich or New Testament theologian Robert M. Price can call themselves Christian Atheists. On a certain level I consider myself one. Read the Gospel of Thomas from the Nag Hammadi Library and see if it doesn't leave you in many places going WOW! Who were the gnostics? Who were the Essenes? Who were the Marcionites? Here's the real biggee. Who was Chrestus and who were the Chrestians? Who were the losers as orthodox christianity won in the 4th century CE? Ponder this question, does having won make your position morally and philosophically right? Hmmmmmm! I can understand how the Buddhists can on the one hand be a religion while on the other be called an atheist. I can also see why the legends are that Jesus in his missing years among other places went to India to study and that Thomas after the death of Jesus went to live and even died in India. I don't have to accept the legends as true or untrue in order to understand the appeal and how the 2 philosophies would be compatible. Krishna and Jesus in many areas are mirror images of one another. I even understand how one can be an atheist, an agnostic, a spiritialist, a humanist and a mythicist all at the same time. Even at times ponder the idea of deism, pantheism or even panentheism. I think you of all people here understand that no one is a dictionary perfect "ist" or "ism" of any kind. We as humans are vastly too complex for such boxes. We may fight to the death to stay in a box we think we belong in or we may fight to stay out of a box we think we don't belong in but no single box is ever big enough. And let's make note and remember, I've already said in this thread just a page or so back that I'm not interested in throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Here's a fun one for you to consider sometime. Atheism is nothing more than a default position, an unintended consequence of rigid and absolute monotheism when the believer comes to the reality that his/her lone god is really like all the rest. Once that discovery is made, there is little conclusion left to reach. But here's the kicker, what if our definition of the word god is all wrong in the first place? Now the rabbit hole is really getting deep! ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification