Atheists vs. Christians

Originally posted by knightmeister
He's been around for a while preaching the (selected) teachings of Jesus to us , so I thought it would be worth clarifying if he actually believed that Jesus was the Son of the Living God or not (which was what J. taught)

I can't think of anyone else on this forum who has not made it relatively clear where they stand (Atheist or Theist) on this ...[text shortened]... he believes he was who he said he was? You should at the very least find it highly curious.

I am indifferent to any kind of preaching and to any kind of authority and I am indifferent to the concept of the religion.
I don't see why an individual has not the right to express his personal opinion regarding any matter, religion included. Is such a thing prohibited by your religion? In case you assume that somebody is wrong, you can always show it to him with every due respect. Needless to be offensive;

Originally posted by knightmeister
You have no religion? Everybody follows something they believe to be true. The word religion derives from the greek to follow I think.

The verb (prn. threeskaevoh) means "I worship a deity/ I exercise my religious duties, and some sientists believe that is associated with the meaning of "guard/ secure" also. It is also unclear if there is a relation with the word "thronos" (throne), and if such a thing will be scientifically accepted then we may conclude that the very meaning of the verb threeskaevo, from which derives the "religion" in English, at first it was also used to describe "the guard of the throne", ie "the guard of the authority".

What I follow? I have a deep respect for Life and I try to avoid egoism. Regarding the Truth I accept no authority and I check this matter constantly, therefore my secular truth always change. My spirituality has nothing to do with a religion as you mean it, KM, but I am ready to die right now for the people I love.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You have no religion? Everybody follows something they believe to be true. The word religion derives from the greek to follow I think.

It derives from the Latin root ligare, which means 'to bind'.

Originally posted by bbarr
It derives from the Latin root ligare, which means 'to bind'.

That's interesting. I thought that the idea of following was in the word somewhere as well though? Is the latin meaning something like to "bind oneself" to something?

Originally posted by bbarr
It derives from the Latin root ligare, which means 'to bind'.

Hi bbar;

No, where did you find this piece of information? The root is the sanscritic dadhara ("I sat"😉, which gave the sanscritic Dharma (place/ law), and then we have the anceient Greek dhronos (later thronos/ throne), where from derives the Latin "firmus" ("stable"😉;

Originally posted by black beetle
The verb (prn. threeskaevoh) means "I worship a deity/ I exercise my religious duties, and some sientists believe that is associated with the meaning of "guard/ secure" also. It is also unclear if there is a relation with the word "thronos" (throne), and if such a thing will be scientifically accepted then we may conclude that the very meaning of the ve ...[text shortened]... a religion as you mean it, KM, but I am ready to die right now for the people I love.

Do you accept there is a Truth , as opposed to truth?

Originally posted by knightmeister
Do you accept there is a Truth , as opposed to truth?

Even if I accepted it, it would be my own irrational opinion and again I would not have the right to push nobody to accept it. Activism over here is dangerous. We constantly seek the Truth using Science and Philosophy. Everything else is "truth" until proven wrong, and of course there are many issues that we ignore -but this does not forces at all to accept an irrational explanation, ie a "religion" as you mean it;

Originally posted by black beetle
I am indifferent to any kind of preaching and to any kind of authority and I am indifferent to the concept of the religion.
I don't see why an individual has not the right to express his personal opinion regarding any matter, religion included. Is such a thing prohibited by your religion? In case you assume that somebody is wrong, you can always show it to him with every due respect. Needless to be offensive;

I am not being offensive I am simply pointing a few things out that to me seem highly inconsistent.

ToO has put himself out there by claiming the authority of the teachings of Jesus. He uses Jesus's words and quotes them authoritatively in a way that is critical of Chritians and Christianity.

Now , that's fine , any religion has to be able to take criticism and challenge but it needs to be an honest challenge and the reasons for it need to be up front. ToO is not up front about his motivation or what his personal beliefs actually are NOR does he want to talk about whether he meets the very standard himself by which he is judging others NOR will he respond to a counter-challenge himself. He dishes it out but hides away and ducks and nobody really knows what he really believes.

If you think that's being offensive then fine.

Originally posted by black beetle
Hi bbar;

No, where did you find this piece of information? The root is the sanscritic dadhara ("I sat"😉, which gave the sanscritic Dharma (place/ law), and then we have the anceient Greek dhronos (later thronos/ throne), where from derives the Latin "firmus" ("stable"😉;

Check out the Oxford English Dictionary, or if you want a detailed history of the word, check out the following article:

The Etymology of Religion
Sarah F. Hoyt
Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 32, No. 2 (1912), pp. 126-129

Note: Cicero apparently thought the latin root was relegere, which means "to go over again in speech or thought", but even he inconsistently took religiosi to be essentially connected with 'obligation' which is derived from ligare.

Originally posted by bbarr
Check out the Oxford English Dictionary, or if you want a detailed history of the word, check out the following article:

The Etymology of Religion
Sarah F. Hoyt
Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 32, No. 2 (1912), pp. 126-129

I know that source, but there have been overviews since then. Right know I have handy the "Big Babiniotis , Athens 2005, prof. Babiniotis.

Originally posted by black beetle
I know that source, but there have been overviews since then. Right know I have handy the "Big Babiniotis , Athens 2005, prof. Babiniotis.

Oh my friend bbar, now I see what you mean! You are talking about the english word "religion"/ ligare, while I was explaining the roots of the anceient Greek verb from which derives the word "religion" in Greek (threeskeea = religion). Sorry for this confusion!

Originally posted by black beetle
I know that source, but there have been overviews since then. Right know I have handy the "Big Babiniotis , Athens 2005, prof. Babiniotis.

Overviews of the OED? If you have a criticism of the Hoyt article, please present it. In any case, typical etymologies show morphemic/phonetic connections between current words and their historical antecedents. Tracing back 'religion' to 'religare' or 'relegere' clearly makes sense, both morphemically/phonetically and conceptually. There may be conceptual connections between the the Sanskrit and Greek words you're claiming as antecedents of 'religion', but you have not shown any morphemic/phonetic connection between the putative etymological roots and the current word.

Originally posted by black beetle
Oh my friend bbar, now I see what you mean! You are talking about the english word "religion"/ ligare, while I was explaining the roots of the anceient Greek verb from which derives the word "religion" in Greek (threeskeea = religion). Sorry for this confusion!

Oh! Thanks, that clears up my confusion.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I am not being offensive I am simply pointing a few things out that to me seem highly inconsistent.

ToO has put himself out there by claiming the authority of the teachings of Jesus. He uses Jesus's words and quotes them authoritatively in a way that is critical of Chritians and Christianity.

Now , that's fine , any religion has to be able to t ...[text shortened]... dy really knows what he really believes.

If you think that's being offensive then fine.

Once again, if you have something to post on this topic, then post it, otherwise move on. You've hijacked enough threads with your witch-hunt.

And please stop telling lies about me. I have explained numerous times what I believe and my motivation for advocating that people follow the teachings of Jesus. The world would be a much better place if they did. If you wonder why I believe that atheists who believe in living a life of truth, love, humility, compassion, justice etc. would "walk the walk" better than "Christians", take a look in the mirror. It's because I've encountered plenty of the likes of you. It seems Gandhi had the same experience.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
-- Gandhi

Originally posted by black beetle
Oh my friend bbar, now I see what you mean! You are talking about the english word "religion"/ ligare, while I was explaining the roots of the anceient Greek verb from which derives the word "religion" in Greek (threeskeea = religion). Sorry for this confusion!

Anyway is nice to see how the very meaning of the word "religion" has slight but serious changes (sanscritic to greek versus latin to english).

But I think that we highjacked ToO's thread -sorry ToO dude!

Have a nice weekend everybody🙂