Biff the unclean

Insanity is when, due to forces beyond your control, you abandon the ability to reason.
Faith is when, at the urging of authority figures, you abandon the ability to reason.

"Faith in God" and "faith in the Bible" are quickly shown to be nothing more than faith in human authority figures. You see that all the time around here with both Christians and Jews when they freak out over Atheists taking the "literal" meaning of Bible stories instead of the convoluted (tortured to appear to say the opposite of what a straight reading of the book clearly states) reinterpertaion foisted on them by some huckster of a religious "leader."

dado

according to this *nobody* has faith because short of a psyche ward there are no individuals who have abondoned reason.

you may now begin equivocating...

Mageth

And you missed the "smiley" at the end of my comment.

BTW, I understand dado's interpretation, and am reasonably familiar with "ancient Jewish tradition", though admittedly not as familiar as I should be. And, since the Tanakh is their holy text first and foremost, I respect their interpretations more often than Christian interpretations. Christians do waaay too much unwarranted projection of their beliefs and concept onto the Tanakh, IMO.

Well, I did say "more modern interpretation", didn't I? Would you say the Rabbinic traditions are possibly "more modern" than a possible original interpretation that's more along the lines of what I posted, based on a plain text reading?

In any case, both views are interpretations.

Indeed, they do.

I recall taking Faith "to task" for reading into Genesis what simply isn't there, and in my opinion for which there is little or no basis in the text to support as an interpretation. Interpretations are fine, necessary really, but I'd like to see an interpretation actually based on something that's there and not simply a projection of some beliefs or concepts developed much later back into the story.

And, if I recall, I admitted that dado's interpretation can be read into the story of Abraham and Isaac. My basic interpretation of the story is, I feel, based on simply a "plain text" reading of the story, not on any "Greek Letter." But I can see how dado's interpretation is valid and supportable. I'm down with it.

Though note that I did "read into" the Abraham and Isaac story somewhat in my next-to-last post to dado. But all such "reading into" on my part is simply speculation, and hopefully I made that clear, and is supportable in the text. And it seemed to jibe pretty welll with dado's interpretation....

These are myths we're talking about, after all. IMO, myths are open to multiple (reasonable) interpretations. And I can gain insight from multiple interpretations, e.g. dado's and mine. The story can be read in multiple ways.

And good for them.

Biff the unclean

If you don't take literature literally then you are doing no more than making things up by yourself. Which is fine, quite commendable. Only don't pretend that you are useing the Bible as your source of authority when you are not.

That seems to be a consistant difference between Atheists & Theists here. They both understand that the Bible is overflowing with horrible crap and they both reject the horrible crap. Atheists by straight forward rejection. Theists by pretending that it says the opposite of what is written in it.

dado

don't tell Biff. according to him agreeing with a theist makes you an idiot and me a huckster.

Mageth

I'm sure there's enough we disagree on to make even Biff happy.

Biff knows what I'm talking about...

dado

if you're going to make ridiculous accusations, you'd better back them up with a link to where i said something like that.

no it is not. i've posted a hundred times on IIDB that imo *everybody* brings their beliefs *to* the texts long before they derive any beliefs *from* the texts. this is a common theist understanding - whether you choose to acknoweldge it or not. it is even built into the theological platform of the world's largest x'ian sect.

for a place supposedly filled with rationalists, there is an astounding level of ostriching going on...

Biff the unclean

"Equivocating"??!! The irony is thick around here. Aren't you the one who pretends to know the true secret Hebrew meaning of the Bible? The meaning that one cannot get by reading translations made by some of our greatest Hebrew scholars?

I assume you mean 'psycho' ward and not psyche which would be a soul ward. Faith is the abandonment of reason. It's advocates revel in their abandonment of reason. They like to call it being "beyond reason." While its sources are not the same as the sources of insanity the end result is indistinguishable. The only difference being that the insane usually have abandoned reason on every topic and the faithful usually (but not always) abandon reason on a limited number of topics.
If you go downtown you will never find a street corner Physics Professor carrying on at the top of his lungs about inertia, or wailing against some ancient wall about friction.

Biff the unclean

That would be Roman Catholicism and Catholicism is based on just the opposite. Their Pope is their final authority. Catholics aren't supposed to make the religion up as they go along.

I understand that you have a great deal of trouble with rationalism since your religious views appear to be based on egocentrism.
Now please remove your head from the sand.
If your magic texts have a different meaning for everyone who reads them that can only be because they are meaningless and intrinsically worthless as a means of communication.

dado

oh my. who wants first crack at this - or should we just send the unfortunate boy some Umberto, Derrida and Joyce?

lol.

that is without a doubt the single most uneducated post i have read on IIDB this week.