complementary comments of the month
Two comments in the last few days have stood out for me. And they go together so beautifully, I can’t help but bring them together for the viewing and pondering pleasure of the general public.
Mahatma Gandhi is probably in the same hell that Adolf Hitler is probably in and Jeffery Dahmer is probably in heaven. The difference is the blood of Jesus Christ. NO sin is more powerful than that blood and good wo[r]ks without it only the make the flames of hell hotter.
There are two kinds of people on this earth. Those who have been born dead and damned in the first man Adam (that’s everybody except Jesus) and those who have been born again into new life in the last. (that’s all those so eternally elected out of the first group by the Father and given to His Son) (John 6, Romans 5 and 1st Corinthians 15) Tiribulus
The type of belief system described in the quote above teaches nothing of logic, compassion, justice or fairness, and doesn’t even begin to address what I had always understood was central to Christianity – the Golden Rule of many great philosophers – ‘love they neighbour as thyself’. I despair of anyone who can hold such beliefs, and many blogging buddies have engaged Tiribulus in discussion over the last week or so (it feels like years?) in an attempt to help him crawl out of this unfortunate world view.
But when it comes down to it, we all need a pinch of wisdom from our Finnish friend Raut, explaining what he learned from another, rather similar blogger he’s been investing a lot of time in:
At first, you see, I thought he just had some misinformation and that I could set him on a path to seek out better venues of info, if he chose to, but then slowly – much too slowly – I realized, that he was just making stuff up and pulling wild claims from his hat. And that he was totally incapable of even getting my meaning, no matter how I put my words.
It is good to have conversations with people who disagree with you sometimes, just to test your views, but one can hardly call it even a conversation, if the other person does not even understand what you are talking about and the both of you simply end up talking past each other…
With a child one can level down the terminology and explain what one means by few more words, but with someone who has very high presuppositions and biases, who has created his own alternate history and has no clue as to how the real world works (and we did cover his ignorance in geology, biology, evolution, economics, could you have guessed – the Bible, history and the entire scientific method) then ultimately, there is no way to have a meaningfull conversations. We could not even agree on the meaning of words, as he had some special meanings of his own, that he was adamant on keeping to. It was much like talking to a kid who has invented his own secret language in wich common words have special secret meanings and he thinks himself clever for being the only one who knows those special secret meanigs of words.
The final moment in any conversation by wich you can recognize an idiot, is when the other person starts to proclaim victory. An ignorant person is not necessarily an idiot, but there are idiots out there. If a person relates to a conversation as a competition and proclaims victories (based on who knows what nonsense, like in my example), well, that just tells you, that such a person is not a very mature individual and, that you are not actually even having a conversation. Rather just, that winning the competition is so much more important to that person, than trying to get to the bottom of the issue, that he/she is not even open to any suggestions you make. That of course explains why one is not getting through and every comment has to be re-explained as the other party renders what you said into a new strawman form and then argues against that. Even if the person does not openly express they feel they are in a competition rather than a conversation, when suddenly “nope” turns out to be a perfectly valid argument for them, you should know it is a competition and no longer has anything to do with having a discussion and contemplating the actual subject.
This is what I learned from that discussion. So, maybe it was not totally wasted on me.
Violet says: “doesn’t even begin to address what I had always understood was central to Christianity”
This is how I know you were never EVER a Christian Violet.
Here’s some more for ya from another site a while back to somebody you don’t know. He calls himself Professor X:
“Jesus didn’t have a message at all. He was and IS the message. The fulfillment of even then ancient prophecy beginning 6 thousand years ago in the 3rd chapter of Genesis. He is the promise to Abraham, the fulfillment of all the law of Moses, the center of the history of the nation of Israel and the subject of all the prophets from Isaiah to Malachi. He did not come here so we could lead happy fulfilled lives. It’s also true that He didn’t come here to condemn the world because He said the world was condemned already when He got here. He came to save His people out of it, like I told you before. Both Jews and Gentiles, all children of Abraham by faith.
There are two covenants of God in force in this world Doc. The first is the one that Adam broke that EVERYone is born into and is condemned under. That’s what Jesus was talkin about. And the new covenant in His blood as payment for the broken first one. There are town kinds of people on this earth. Those who have born once and are dead in that old covenant, and those who have been born again into the very life of the risen divine Christ in the new. Absolutely NOTHING makes any difference with God EXCEPT what you do with that new covenant. Jeffery Dahmer convinced me that he trusted Jesus Christ as his righteousness before the one true and living God as commanded. If I’m right then he is my brother and will be a forgiven child of my Father God for all eternity. If you die without Christ (a thing I very much hope not to be the case) you will be assigned to eternal perdition with the devil and his demons. “
LikeLike
“This is how I know you were never EVER a Christian Violet.”
Haha, I didn’t see that one coming Greg! Me, along with all the Catholics, Quakers and every other group or individual that doesn’t subscribe to your obscure interpretation of the Bible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ya know, every time one you folks spouts off about my “fringe” or “obscure” or “unique” interpretation of the Bible, Ruth winces. Because she knows that’s not true. Come on Ruth. Can ya see your way clear to, if nothing else, be fair and tell your friends what you already said in the other discussion? That my views were mainstream unremarkable Christianity on this continent for it’s first 300 years of history.
Can you do that? I’d do it for you and I think you believe I would. I can prove it easily, but it will carry more weight coming from you.
LikeLike
“That my views were mainstream unremarkable Christianity on this continent for it’s first 300 years of history.”
Woopeedoo! Your global religion is over 2000 years old. I call the mainstream of your corner of the world for such a short period of time – obscure.
LikeLike
Except they were the moral foundation for the most powerful and prosperous nation in the history of the world and even our least Christian founders told us so.
Gotta go til later. Have fun.
http://tiribulus.net/index3.html
LikeLike
Don’t know much about world history, do you? How are you defining powerful and prosperous. America had a 150 year window from which it’s already declining. As civilizations go, that’s not by any means impressive.
LikeLike
Violet I am sorry but as a Christian I am gong to have to correct you on this one.
It’s actually Woop DEE doo.
OK. Continue.
LikeLike
Oh yes, that looks much better! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
You have to show a little tolerance, Hayden, given she’s English – on the Continent, the English language ceased to evolve, once they lost the Colonies – Mother England never quite recovered from that, “empty nest” syndrome set in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Who’s English?
LikeLike
I THOUGHT you were, are you not?
LikeLike
Nope
LikeLike
THAT’S right! I remember now – you’re Welsh! Mea culpa —
LikeLike
Sorry, I’ve been rather busy today and haven’t frequented the blogosphere except to get caught up on some reading.
Yes, Calvinism was the mainstream school of Christian thought for it’s first 100 years before Arminianism took hold. But even then 5 point Calvinism enjoyed a wide membership and even still today. However, Tiribulus, I would caution you that although that is so in America the world is a pretty big place and so people outside the US might think it obscure because of the numbers of Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, and various other sects of Christianity. While it enjoyed much success early on in American history that hardly makes it mainstream worldwide. But you are correct that in the US Calvinism isn’t an unusual nor “fringe” belief system even today.
LikeLike
Yes, Ruth, but Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, and various other sects of Christianity are all going to hell. Only T’s sect will survive – except for T of course – it’s the pride thing. In fact, knowing that T will spend eternity in hell with me, almost makes me want to apply for a death-bed conversion! I said, almost —
LikeLike
Regardless of what T thinks of their theology, these are various sects within the religion of Christianity.
I did see him say somewhere, though, that to be a TRUE CHRISTIAN all you have to do is admit that you’re a POS without the blood of Jesus to cover it up. So now you know what you need to do when you’re on your deathbed to get it right. 😉
LikeLike
Well Ruth, this was far more than I hoped for. Thank you. To reasonable people, this comment should gain you respect. Because it required that you side with a brain damaged pariah against your friends in order to maintain the truth. Not the truth of my views, but the truth that they are not “fringe” by a long shot. I must say thought that the cradle of modern Calvinism is Europe. Also, the doctrines erroneously but now incurably labeled as Calvinism, predate John Calvin, even outside the scriptures by 1200 years.going back to Augustine who became MORE “Calvinistic” the longer he lived.
And To Victoria. I would believe what I believe if Calvin were never born. Your rather thin and preposterous grasping attempts to discredit him mean nothing to me even if true. I have no pope.
LikeLike
“Also, the doctrines erroneously but now incurably labeled as Calvinism, predate John Calvin, even outside the scriptures by 1200 years.going back to Augustine who became MORE “Calvinistic” the longer he lived.”
Greg, you keep digging a deeper hole. Some info on your buddy, Augustine:
and
(Augustine) shows significant evidence of having been an epileptic. Page 48 – 49.
Click to access Epilepsy_and_Mysticism.pdf
See the thing is, Greg, there are religious (who have been indoctrinated) and then there are hyper-religious (who were primarily responsible for the indoctrination). They are the ones who have convinced the rest of the believers that their delusions are real.
” I would believe what I believe if Calvin were never born.”
I believe it — you have the personality and behavior of the hyper-religious.
LikeLike
Sad, really.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do not agree with your beliefs but disagreeing with your beliefs does not change what’s happened in history.
I understand that the cradle of modern Calvinism is Europe, but that doesn’t make nor did it make Calvinism mainstream there. Roman Catholocism and it’s offshoot, Anglican, have been and continue to be considered mainstream in Europe. As to how widespread Calvinism is or was within Europe is not something I’m familiar with. But I do know that the Calvinists, along with Presbyterians, Methodists, and a few other sects left Europe for America to escape persecution for their “heresies”.
LikeLike
“I have no pope.” – Nor clearly, a clue.
LikeLike
I know the person Raut was “chatting” to. Certifiably, assbackwards insane. No kind way of putting it. I extradited myself from the conversation upon seeing the first wall of utter nonsense he put down.
LikeLike
That must have a real insane guy for the amount of patience you have is really impressive
LikeLike
He’s a loyal Insanitybytes fan, which tells you a lot.
LikeLike
Hey, watch it! I’m a loyal Insanity fan.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t have a season pass yet, although the pay-to-play individual tickets are awfully expensive 🙂
LikeLike
Now that is quite serious
LikeLike
Yeah, I know him too. Insufferable. To be fair, Greg’s not that bad in comparison, but there are still lessons to be learned.
LikeLike
Maybe Raut should try typing slowly, the person may have slow compression abilities.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I think you already have a candidate for Renan’s book. Some members of the human family have lost the plot to an extent that no reasonable conversation can be had with them.
LikeLike
Oh nice idea! I’ll see if I get a postal address. 😀
LikeLike
Please don’t give any of Renan’s books to any actual Christians please or anyone who is prone to dogmatism for that matter.
LikeLike
why, it may help them try to look for a different Jesus at least
LikeLike
Or lead them to Renan’s dangerous 19th century views on race link and link, which many of them might take quite literally and not critically evaluate.
LikeLike
In that case, I will not lead them there
LikeLike
While I agree that Renan views were racist, he was a product of his time. What he had to say about 19th century Jews is certainly applicable to today’s Islamists who boast that they will fly the crescent flag over Parliament, and institute Sharia law throughout England:
I should have said, “today’s radical Islamists,” as there are followers of Islam in England who have no such motives. I’m afraid I sounded a bit racist there myself for a moment.
LikeLike
According to our hyper-religious resident, Tiribulus, his god created Jeffery Dahmer, a chosen elect, and allowed Dahmer to commit serial rape, murder and dismemberment of men and boys, then munch on them to his heart’s and belly’s content.
Now, after causing horrific, imaginable suffering, Dahmer (who was declared legally insane with severe mental illness) need only confess that he is evil and ask for forgiveness and is washed in the blood.
Presto — now he frolics through the “tulips” with the almighty top alpha male ape in the celestial jungle for eternity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NOW YOU GOT IT!!!!!!
She CAN be taught.
LikeLike
Don’t flatter yourself, Greg. I understood the madness of your belief system long before you showed up on the scene.
LikeLike
You did a heroic job of hiding it.
Here’s one for you too. http://tiribulus.net/judge.html
Later.
LikeLike
“You did a heroic job of hiding it”
Hardly. I’ve been quite open, online, about my deconversion.
LikeLike
Woosh!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Given enough time for the newness to wear off, and who knows, his appetite might return – with the right marinade, gods can be quite tasty.
LikeLike
Actually, Dahmer being Saved makes sense to me.
Confessing he is evil and had done evil things, he is enabled to, er, rewire his brain in different directions. He is Saved. Having seen the better way of being, he has a chance of following it.
As for predestination- as I am Anglican-Quaker, that is not my way, but if Dahmer’s conversion is sincere, he might look back on his evil way of being, and wonder how he might now be committed to Good, and conclude that it was all God’s doing, marvellous in our sight, not his own virtue at all.
LikeLike
We’ll never know – he wound up on the wrong end of a broom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“We’ll never know – he wound up on the wrong end of a broom.”
I’m not sure why i “Liked” this post. It certainly isn’t very Christian of me but I like it none the less.
LikeLike
Yeah, well, I’m certainly not a Christian, and even I wince at what I said, it must have been horrible to die of such massive internal injuries – I guess there must be something of the dark side in both of us. Still, it must be admitted that prisons have their own justice systems, sometimes more efficient than those on the outside. I suppose we could ask SOM —
LikeLiked by 1 person
XVII. Of Predestination and Election.
Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God’s purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God’s mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.
As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God’s Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.
Furthermore, we must receive God’s promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.
Chapter XVII of the 39 articles of the Church of England (Anglican) before she apostatized. Once a very Calvinistic church which is my point.
Yes, Dahmer’s conversion is a magnificent display of the electing grace and unstoppable power of the triumphant conquering king of the hearts of men who has mercy on whom He will and whom He will He hardens. (Romans 9, Exodus 10 and 11)
LikeLike
What a crock of horse hockey! You must really fear death, to buy into that load of crap, just to delude yourself into believing that the end of your life isn’t the end of you. No amount of magic can save you from the fate that awaits us all.
LikeLike
In another couple of hundred years, even your god will join all of the others in the graveyard of dead gods. If he had any sense, he’d commit suicide and put us out of his misery.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Do you have an advanced degree in point missing by any chance? True or not. That IS the theological legacy of CLAIRE’S church. Oh yes it is. Look it up.
LikeLike
arch-
If u really wanted to know as to the him/her, u could find out in 8.43 seconds @ self portrait link top of page
LikeLike
You don’t get it, CS – I don’t care —
Anyone who can quote Paul, who hijacked the Cristian cult, to say we should trivialize or outright ignore relevant information – well, let’s just say that what you are, is equally irrelevant information.
LikeLike
—-Arch—-
————Anyone who can quote Paul, who hijacked the Cristian cult,————-
Even your friends should challenge you on such an absurd statement. But if it floats your boat, go for it.
LikeLike
Nan – sic ’em –!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Arch, they are NOT going to read her book. No matter how utterly Fantastic it is.
LikeLike
“Actually, Dahmer being Saved makes sense to me.”
I don’t think this is the offensive part of the quote. If a benevolent creator superbeing did in fact exist, I don’t think an eternity of torment would be a logical situation for any sentient being it created. The offensive part is the odd delight that Greg effused in the idea of anyone, nevermind clearly decent people like Gandhi, facing an eternity of torment. AND thinking this idea can be reconciled with any kind of creator deity that would be 1. benevolent and 2. deserving of worship. And smugly declaring that because he [insert condition – believes in Jesus and says sorry?] he is a *special* chosen one in the few of the creation. It’s embarrassing. As well as being disgusting by the lack of humanity, I’m horrified by the lack of logic and embarrassed for him at the conceited nature of such a belief.
LikeLike
Indeed. But my reply was to Neuronotes, who wrote of Dahmer in Heaven.
That is hopeful, imv. If Jeffrey Dahmer can be Saved, no-one is beyond redemption. You do not have to be good, you just have to mean well. Or, what is happening now is utterly important, but always you may be cleansed of what is past.
On those without the Christian heritage being damned, “What is that to you?” says Jesus. Certainly it is horrible to take delight in it, though Tiribulus’ comment you quoted in your post merely asserts it, rather than taking delight. At best, though, it takes away any sense of desert. If Gandhi has not earned Heaven, I have not earned it either. “I am as a weaned child.” So we carry on, doing our best.
Though I see Death in the Gospels as often metaphorical- Prodigal Son was “dead and is alive again”, “Let the dead bury their dead”- and the Kingdom of Heaven as here. So when Jesus says to the man crucified by him “Today you will be with me in Paradise”- he means right there, then, on the cross, but seeing the world clearly without illusion or damaging resentment. I do not seek a reward after I die, but a sane way of being in the world here and now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Indeed. But my reply was to Neuronotes, who wrote of Dahmer in Heaven.
That is hopeful, imv. If Jeffrey Dahmer can be Saved, no-one is beyond redemption. You do not have to be good, you just have to mean well. Or, what is happening now is utterly important, but always you may be cleansed of what is past. “
Clare, yesterday I wrote you a rather extensive post (saved it if you really want to read it), but decided not to post because myself and others have posted this research until we’re blue in the face. Apologies for the trite saying. It’s just that we have, at our fingertips abundant research (causation) of antisocial and prosocial behavior. My point to Greg was that he has a very Iron/Bronze age understanding of what he deems as “sin”. But he’s not alone.
If there is a merciful, benevolent god, this god would have indeed given Dahmer a pass into heave because this god would have understood Dahmer’s childhood experiences, pons dysfunction and other neurological/environmental issues that led to his antisocial behavior.
When you gain a better understanding of how environment affects our body/brain, including gene expression, then you don’t see humans as depraved and evil. You see them as humans extremely susceptible and at the mercy of their environment. But Greg’s solution is, again, primitive. While we may never be able to eliminate the suffering, we can implement preventative measures to curtail this suffering. The first way to eliminate this suffering is to make sure that primary caregivers and their offspring have safe, non-toxic environments in order to form attachment/bonding and proper brain development, and also promote the education of emotional intelligence to lessen tribalism and Othering.
It’s really not complicated, but we make it complicated when we incorporate authoritarian religion as a means of solving the social ills they have played a major role in causing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Correction: I and others
LikeLike
Oh, go on, post it. However many people you persuade, there will always be another ignoramus. I will even read it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
{{{hug}}}
OK, twist my arm. 😀
LikeLike
“…myself and others have posted this research until we’re blue in the face.”
Latest image of N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ:
LikeLike
LOL That was incredibly insightful. 😀
LikeLike
I do what I can —
LikeLike
“When you gain a better understanding of how environment affects our body/brain, including gene expression, then you don’t see humans as depraved and evil. You see them as humans extremely susceptible and at the mercy of their environment.”
This is exactly the problem I have with the Christian notion of ‘sin’ that drives me round the bend. When people take the kind of attitude that other humans are ‘born evil’ or ‘choosing evil’ they are ignoring everything that goes into determining what actions we take. And I get infuriated with the ‘well, I’ve had terrible experiences and I’ve turned out okay, so they have no excuse’ line of thought as well. So what? They haven’t had the same experiences or the same physiology processing every experience. Not recognising this is slowing down our ability as a species to improve conditions for everyone, which we could easily be so much further forward with at this stage in our understanding.
LikeLike
“Not recognising this is slowing down our ability as a species to improve conditions for everyone, which we could easily be so much further forward with at this stage in our understanding.”
Spot on — and there’s numerous “pagan” studies that confirm your statement.
LikeLike
Clare, I’d also like to point out that a recent survey was done in the UK (results came out this past week) where the majority of people there thought that religion did more harm than good. This confirms the data we have in the U.S. and internationally that the most religious countries and states tend to have the most social dysfunction. This is not a coincidence.
LikeLike
Ya know Claire, this is a fair minded post overall. Knowing full well of what I’ve been forgiven. The sins I’ve committed right in Gods’ face AFTER I knew better? I delight in the death of NO one. I am in no position. Nobody can earn heaven and the very attempt is a damnable affront to the gracious gifting God. He offers it free for the asking to any who will come empty handed relying only on the blood of His Son in faith. And I’m gonna be so unbelievably bold and arrogant as to try to try n buy it from Him with my filthy “good” works?
I’d burn myself at the stake first.
The Pharisee and the Tax Collector
Luke 18:
9-He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10-“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11-The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13-But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14-I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”
Got abuncha pharisees around here. Dahmer was the tax collector. So am I. Tax collectors were the lowest form of scum on earth to the Jews of that day. They were themselves Jews who were used as pawns of Rome to collect the taxes for Caesar. If that wasn’t bed enough they were notorious crooked thieves who overcharged and pocketed the extra knowing that the Roman soldiers wouldn’t do anything. He was giving the EXACT same example as I was with Ghandi and Dahmer. The pharisees were the most righteous and law abiding, alms giving and religious overachievers of the time. Tax collectors were the Dahmers.
Jesus clear point is the same one that David learned 1000 years earlier. When finally confronted with the sin of stealing a man’s wife, an exceedingly LOYAL man, and setting him up to be killed in battle. David wrote the 51st Psalm in tears beginning, NOT with all of his temple sacrifices and rituals, but, HAVE MERCY ON ME OH GOD!!! He ends that psalm thusly:
“15-O Lord, open my lips,
and my mouth will declare your praise.
16-For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it;
you will not be pleased with a burnt offering.
17-The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.
18-Do good to Zion in your good pleasure;
build up the walls of Jerusalem;
19-then will you delight in right sacrifices,
in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings;
then bulls will be offered on your altar.”
David understood grace a thousand years before the coming of His savior. He knew God’s point wasn’t really the Levitical system of animal sacrifices. Without a heart of broken repentance relying purely on the LORD’S mercy alone, the sacrifices meant nothing. Jesus Christ, the man born fully God and who therefore had infinite worth, (otherwise He could only die for one other person) did by the shedding of His own blood, fulfill all the law and the prophets, purchasing in time all those who were promised to Him by His Father in eternity. Only He knows them. A large % will be the tax collectors and Jeffery Dahmer’s of the world because the greater the sin the the greater His glory in forgiving it.
LikeLike
I almost forgot Claire. Ya really did steer off into the weeds at the end there though. That ain’t what it says, but I’m not gittin into all that. This blog is becoming a part time job for me and I have others I still owe responses to from long before Violet’s setu.. uhhh.. I mean invitation. 😉
LikeLike
Greg, OK, we get that you felt like you were scum of the earth and treated your wife like shit. You were a drunk. You tuned to alcohol to numb what ever it was that you needed to numb. Am I right so far? Did you have adverse childhood experiences or did the alcoholism gene run in your family or both?
Why is it that you cannot face reality? It is a, b, c, or d? Why do you loath yourself so much that you will not embrace your humanity? You are really cocky as hell, no pun intended, and that is a sure sign of your fragile ego and mental state. Many people have overcome major trauma and other obstacles in their life, but they did so without replacing one addictive drug for another. The God drug — dopamine. Your latest addiction does more harm to humanity because rather than just loathing yourself, you aim to get off of humanity to loath themselves.
Why do you have disdain for those who are/were prosocial yet refused to bow down to a man-made construct? Jealousy. Yeah, a chip off the old block, eh?
LikeLike
Correction: You aim to get all of humanity to loath themselves.
LikeLike
None of my story is a secret Victoria. The part you found is from LONG after I was already a Christian. I could write a book and some have suggested that I do so, though I doubt I ever will. If I could pay somebody a trillion dollars to be as wrong as possible, you will have caused me to waste my money by doing it for free. God may have more purpose here than I thought. Let me get my response to Ruth done and then I’ll answer whatever questions you have. It’s only fair that I may have a few too. Start a thread at your place. if not then everybody will know who’s afraid of what. However, Brandon may be an upcoming project too. I don’t know yet.
It isn’t any wonder in these days of a wishy washy,relativistic,, eclectic, backslidden, world worshiping church that you would call anything that smacks of actual conviction, “cocky” and “arrogant”. I understand.
LikeLike
“Start a thread at your place. if not then everybody will know who’s afraid of what.”
This is a form of emotional manipulation recognized in people with antisocial, borderline, and narcissistic personality disorders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_manipulation
LikeLike
“Brandon may be an upcoming project too. I don’t know yet.” *Choke* Do you think he’s always like that or he’s exploding with all the attention?
LikeLike
LOL — oh, I bet he’s “exploding” alright. Would love to do an experiment on him — putting electrodes on his fingers to measure the changes in skin resistance, how much he sweats (Galvantic Skin Response) while looking at religious words. 😉
Starting at minute marker 18:30 BBC documentary “God on the Brain”
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/god-on-the-brain/
LikeLike
Here’s another quick tip. I am no busier now with exactly what I’m doing here than I have been for years. I am getting no more attention. I promise.
LikeLike
Brandon’s and T’s goals are the same, though their approaches differ – the former lulls you into a false sense of security, while the latter dares you.
LikeLike
Maybe T is Brandon’s alter ego. The friendly bespectacled naive face, and the in-your-face bearded biker arrogant face.
LikeLike
Oh please!! 😀 Stop with your psycho babbling BS already will ya? Are you afraid of me? We’re not even in the same state for God’s sake. Even if we were. I’d hold the door and remove my hat for you. There is no need whatsoever. You’re not nearly as solid in these eggheaded convictions as you’d like your fellow mental masturbators here to believe. Good grief. Will you cut it out? YADA YADA YADA YADA YADA YADA , BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH! Come on now. Start your thread and we’ll talk. Surely a razor sharp neuro queen such as yourself could NEVER have anything to fear from an anachronistic hipocatomally eroded, lame brain like me. I’ll answer all your questions and you answer mine. Totally even. In your house with all YOUR friends around. Nice n safe.
LikeLike
Ahh, but more emotional manipulation. Btw, you’ve already answered all my questions and then some. 😉
LikeLike
Allow me to translate, Neuro – he wants a shot at proselytizing to YOUR subscribers, he knows he’s burned out here.
LikeLike
Bingo.
LikeLike
“God may have more purpose here than I thought” Yes, this benevolent superbeing is so concerned with your ramblings on an obscure blog that he forgot about the millions of Syrian refugees suffering around the world. Isn’t it weird people are calling you arrogant?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s another tip. Not only can God personally hear the prayers of millions of His children at once, but He can also have many works happening through those children simultaneously as well. The most important thing for me to do right now is what he wants me to do. At the moment it has nothing to do with Syria. I’m sorry Violet, but your credibility in knowledge of the Christian faith continues to drop precipitously.
LikeLike
I see what you mean. So while all those millions of people are suffering (what does it matter? most of them are going to hell anyway, very few Jesus believers there), you think your god is aware and doing something mysteriously useless, while carefully guiding your important tit for tat discussions on a blog. The most important thing is YOU. Of course.
LikeLike
“And I’m gonna be so unbelievably bold and arrogant as to try to try n buy it from Him with my filthy “good” works?”
Apparently not. But you feel comfortable with the belief that he designed you and chose you to be ‘saved’ from the beginning, while designing most of population of India or China, or countless other countries of billions, to burn in hell. Yeah, that makes total sense! 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
A perfect example of a very fragile ego who needs to feel “special”. He is incredibly transparent. I really feel sorry for him, but especially for those who buy into his perception of reality. It’s one thing to believe in a benevolent god; it’s a whole ‘nutter ball game when you believe in a malevolent god yet claim this god is benevolent.
LikeLike
Exactly! And just so weird that he can’t see it. I’m baffled.
LikeLike
And yet the nuttiest ball game of all is to have no idea how or why 1+1=2, but be so eye poppingly arrogant as to fancy yourself capable of telling me what benevolent and malevolent mean. You just will not understand that God is God and you are not. He is not impressed with your opinion.
Actually Violet I wish I could live in China. I mean that. God is REALLY moving there. Best estimates are that there are 300 million Christians in China and I’m quite certain a far larger % of them are true converts than in the now largely dead and rotting worldly western church.
For your own research please watch at least part one of this series. I’m linking it below. These are Chinese Christians and their stories. Oh how I wish I could worship with them.
LikeLike
Again, shockingly narrow view of the world. That’s less than 2% of the current population. How many billions before that knew nothing of Jesus? Honestly, you need to travel a little outside of Bubblesville.
LikeLike
“And yet the nuttiest ball game of all is to have no idea how or why 1+1=2.
No, Greg, the nuttiest ball game is refusing to educate yourself outside of your Iron/Bronze Age belief system. Your 1 + 1 = 2 is a decoy.
LikeLike
And Greg, if you’re still interested in pursuing the 1+1 nonsense, there was someone who seemed to have quite a good grip on logic who tore your whole premise to pieces on one of the previous posts. You ignored the comment. Not surprisingly, I guess there’s not much you can do with that.
LikeLike
I think you have the wrong link Violet. I mean that in a seriously I don’t see what you’re talking about there .
LikeLike
Sorry, yes, my fault, I just changed the comment settings and it renamed the link:
LikeLike
“Oh how I wish I could worship with them.”
Maybe we could take up a collection and buy you a ticket – one way, of course – how do you feel about slow boats –?
LikeLike
“I’d burn myself at the stake first.” – OK if I sell tickets?
LikeLiked by 1 person
HAHA!! Ok, Arch, THAT was a good one 😀 😀
LikeLike
I’ve got some matches too, feel free to keep the book —
LikeLike
@Clare — as per your request — just scratching the surface:
and
http://learn.fi.edu/learn/brain/head.html
My point with Greg was how primitive his mindset is — how lacking his knowledge is about biology, neurology, and psychology when it comes to “sin” and what needs to take place to positively affect society. Yahweh broke nearly all the preventive rules.
LikeLike
“My point with Greg was how primitive his mindset is — how lacking his knowledge is about biology, neurology, and psychology when it comes to ‘sin’ and what needs to take place to positively affect society.”
It doesn’t matter – once it is assumed that, “god is all,” everything else is a sub-set, and irrelevant.
LikeLike
“superficially engaging phoniness” – Brandon –?
LikeLike
Ooops, the first half of my post got cut off. Cont.
Unfortunately, Clare, I doubt, (as a psychopath) he (Dahmer) could rewire his brain. I’ve read a good bit about his childhood. He showed all the signs of attachment disorder and/or traumatic brain injury in the prefrontal cortex. His mother was very mentally ill and he experienced much neglect. When a child experiences neglect and doesn’t have their emotional needs me — he/she are at a very high risk of pons dysfunction (brain stem), which plays a major role on developing appropriated relationships with everyone.
So, if there is a merciful god, he would not be held accountable. It would matter not whether he admitted he was evil or not. Psychopaths are cunning, deceptive and lie. He knew what he was doing was wrong. When you look at the neuroolgical studies, psychopaths and those with prefrontal cortex brain injuries, know right from wrong if they sustain these injuries as adults, they are simply unable to change their behavior. Dahmer would have most likely continued had he been let out of prison.
There is, IMO, no such thing as “evil” in the way that most Christians define it. When humans do horrific things to others, their brain is damaged or did not develop properly — no fault of their own.
LikeLike
Sorry about the WordPress malfunction, just had a similar experience when two letters of my HTML encoding disappeared from between their brackets – YAY, WordPress!
LikeLike
It was my fault. I was doing a C/P from a file I saved it in, and didn’t copy the entire comment.
Leave already or stop your bitchin’. 😀
SomeMost of us happen to like WP.LikeLike
“Leave already or stop your bitchin’. 😀
SomeMost of us happen to like WP.”a) If I left, you would miss me and cry into your pillow at night – I can’t allow that to happen.
b) Some of us (commenters) are Christian, as well, thereby proving that nobody’s perfect. Except me, of course —
LikeLike
You heathen, you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
LOL — how long did that take you to find. 😈
LikeLike
About ten seconds – I archived it.
LikeLike
Oh, impressed. Last time you said it took you at least an hour. Nothing like the little blue pill, eh? 😀
LikeLike
That’s why I archived it, I was in a bit of a hurry on that occasion. Normally I like to take my time with anything I do – you only get out of something, what you put into it —
LikeLike
Could have fooled me. You bitched and moaned (no pun intended) about it taking you so long.
LikeLike
That’s because I originally had to search through two pages of Nate’s blog to find it – once found, I pulled it off, and as I mentioned (if you’d turn up your Beltone), I archived it to my own personal version of your “Cloud.”
LikeLike
No wonder it took you so long. I posted it on one of Violet’s posts a we had just been active on the day before. Didn’t post it on Nate’s blog. 😉
LikeLike
I don’t know! It could easily have been Vi’s blog, and not Nate’s. Now will you bug off before I tell Carmen you’re picking on me again?!
She always says, “You know what THAT means –” And I say, “Yeah, it means she has a disposition that would sour milk!”
LikeLike
You only get out of something, what you put into it 😉
LikeLike
Only woman I ever knew who’s always a half-step ahead of me! I could have said a full step, but – I didn’t —
LikeLike
Why doesn’t that surprise me?
LikeLike
We should really cool it, before Vi suggests we get a room – and she’ll do it!
LikeLike
How predictable of you.
LikeLike
“How predictable of you.” – If by that, you mean maintaining decorum in a social setting, thank you!
LikeLike
No, that was not at all what I meant.
LikeLike
Arch can’t leave. BECAUSE HE WON”T GET HIS SITE UP!
Seriously man. What’s it been? Four months?
LikeLike
Alright, already! I’ll start looking into it – TODAY!
(or maybe tomorrow, for sure –)
LikeLike
You never loved me.
LikeLike
Only from afar —
LikeLike
Rautakky’s comments remind me of a conversation I was having with Colorstorm over on his/her blog – any information I presented that conflicted with the Bible, was pseudo-science, essentially that which Paul warned against..
LikeLike
Dang-
supposed to go here-
sorry Tirib
LikeLike
Your god preordained that you would do that —
LikeLike
HE DID!!! Looky there!! You can be taught too!! 😉 The existence and movement of every quark and neutrino in His universe is under His direct command. He misses not a one. He also is so wise and powerful as to be able to irreversibly decree the free volitions of the wills of men. How does that work? I dunno. I just live here. I didn’t build the place.
Here, lemme save ya some typing:
“look you stupid dumbf**k!! Only a demented brain dead d**kh**d could believe something this idiotic.”
How’d I do? 😀
LikeLike
I wouldn’t know, I don’t speak that way. There may be atheists who do, but I’m not acquainted with any. In fact, the only people I know of with that kind of vocabulary, have been Christians.
LikeLike
Ok
LikeLike
” He also is so wise and powerful as to be able to irreversibly decree the free volitions of the wills of men. How does that work? I dunno. I just live here. I didn’t build the place. ”
Greg, every 5 seconds a child under the age of 5 dies a horrible death from starvation. You have successfully shown that your god would make the worst of serial killing psychopaths blush. With having such an understanding, anyone who would worship such a deity has no integrity.
LikeLike
What’s probably worse, in terms of the version of Christianity that Greg is so delighted to believe is the Truth, is that he believes that all these kids that starve to death (given that most won’t be Christians of any sort, nevermind True Christians in the blood of Christ, or whatever) after they die a horrible death of starvation, they get to experience an eternity of some form of torment. I mean, really. You can’t expect much in the way of humanity from someone who’s happy to think that a benevolent creator deity could make plans like that! It’s such a twisted belief system you’d think it would have died out by now.
LikeLike
“It’s such a twisted belief system you’d think it would have died out by now.”
There is a silver lining. The more they proselytize in detail like Greg’s doing, the greater likelihood that people will awaken from their dopamine drunken stupor and see this inhumane belief system for what it is. A product of madmen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Neuro
VioletW
It is amusing that all these NEW mind numbing accusations and misrepresentations sprang from an honest answer that was suppled as to whether someone was male or female.
Very interesting. And they who are doing the character assassination are slandering a decent man, while they sit down and drink coffee and discuss how the paltry ant farm can question the Creator.
LikeLike
I told you, no one cares, yet you seem not to be able to accept your own insignificance, to us – yet WE’RE the paltry ant farm! Amusing.
LikeLike
This coming from a person who clearly DOES NOT CARE
_____________________________________________
archaeopteryx1 says:
November 8, 2014 at 6:49 pm
Speaking of Rev. Weems’ lie about Washington, to establish the value of telling the truth, what do you suppose Paul, in the 3rd Chapter of Romans, meant when he wrote: “For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?”
archaeopteryx1 says:
November 8, 2014 at 6:59 pm
I rather take that to mean, “If I lie in order to add to god’s glory, where’s the harm in that?” – basically Rev. Weems’ “end-justifies-the-means” philosophy.
Colorstorm says:
November 8, 2014 at 7:21 pm
No Arch, Paul was not advocating lying for the ‘greater good.’
He just explained that ‘all men are liars,’ and he included himself in that long train of misfits. The ‘lie’ was his life in opposition to God, while he thought he was doing God a favour.
This ‘lie’ abounded to God’s glory, for the grace of God can reach the most hardened.
______________________________________________________________________
http://thenakedtruth2.wordpress.com/2014/11/02/stephen-the-atheist-and-the-dew-drop/
LikeLike
“St Paul and temporal lobe epilepsy”
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1032067/
Brackets are mine regarding sudden religious conversion, a common manifestation of temporal lobe epilepsy.
Click to access se04_religiosity.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m sure I’ll have a use for that “pagan” data at some point in the future —
LikeLike
Neur-
After a cursory look at your links, and because of the length and scope of the arguments, out of fairness to you, and prudence on my part, I certainly will have a due response.
Paul the apostle was certainly on the radar of these men who spoke of his mental state. 😉
LikeLike
Colorstorm, I was married to a man who developed the behavior and personality just like Paul and many of the other characters of the Bible. He started having non-convulsive, cognitive seizures about 4 years after we were married. He had a sudden religious conversion became hyper-religious. If I didn’t see it and experience it with my own eyes, I might be more skeptical of the extensive research. 1 in 10 people will have at least one seizure in their lifetime. Depending on where those seizures take place in the brain will determine their perception of reality and behavior.
“If an epileptic seizure is focused in a particular sweet spot in the temporal lobe, a person won´t have motor seizures, but instead something more subtle. The effect is something like a cognitive seizure, marked by changes of personality, hyperreligiosity (an obsession with religion and feelings of religious certainity), hypergraphia (extensive writing on a subject, usually about religion), the false sense of an external presence, and, often, the hearing voices that are attributed to a god. Some fraction of history´s prophets, martyrs, and leaders appear to have had temporal lobe epilepsy.” ~David Eagleman, Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain
LikeLike
Neur-
I have tried to be decent and engage u in good faith. There is an idea floated that ‘no one cares here,’ as to what I post.
Since u are included in the ‘here……………’ and since this idea was not ‘put down as fallacy,’ speak but the word, lest I waste my valuable time, and this valuable space in a response that will be shredded without cogitation.
I surely would answer, but if you are one of the ones ‘who don’t care,’ I will not dignify your concerns. (this was brought up in your thread so yes, u need to address it)
LikeLike
It’s my cogitation that you don’t do anything with your time that would render it valuable – remember, I’ve seen your blog ramblings.
LikeLike
Colorstorm, if I didn’t care, why would I even waste my time with you. I care, not only for you, but for those you infect and affect with your primitive belief system.
LikeLike
Neuro-
As promised, here is my response to the links u sent-
(excerpt)
………But the apostle is still charged with ‘temporal lobe disorder,‘ a condition affecting 1-2% of the population, including epileptic attacks and seizures, therefore casting aspersion on his person and sanity, which explained his hallucinations, therefore making him an incredible witness, and calling into doubt his ministry and tossing aside his epistles as rubbish, and the obvious ancillary connection, that Christianity is a fraudulent faith.
Can’t post entirely, here, but here it is in full
http://thenakedtruth2.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/pauls-ahem-mental-problem/
LikeLike
Colorstorm, thanks for your comment and post. I will address it shortly at the bottom of Violet’s comment section because it is rather lengthy.
LikeLike
I take it, Neuro, that you’ve seen the verbiage he spewed on his own site? He must have thought he was proving SOMEthing, but once I’d waded through all of the biblical quotations, signifying nothing, it certainly wasn’t clear what that might have been.
LikeLike
Arch, yets I did read his post, which as I said, lent more validity to the medical analysis.
LikeLike
*yes
LikeLike
“This coming from a person who clearly DOES NOT CARE”
I’m reasonably certain that I made that clear at the onset, when I said, “NO ONE CARES!” – possibly you’re just a little slow on the uptake. And I have no idea what your quoting me was intended to prove. Does ANYone? Do YOU?
LikeLike
I am not happy at the the presence of even one scintilla of evil or suffering in God’s creation Violet. Neither is God. He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. (Ezekiel 18:32) He is not a sadistic tyrant who delights in inflicting pain. ALL the suffering you claim to so lament is caused by the very same sinful rebellion that you keep quoting me in these pagan brain studies Victoria.
SIN is the cause of evil and suffering. Has God decreed it? Yes He has, but He has also decreed that it shall be so ordered by Himself as to serve holy and righteous ends. Namely His own glory. He’s REAL stuck on Himself. He does everything He does ultimately FOR Himself. He can do it n you can’t. Because He is worthy of that kind of exaltation and you’re not. Neither, most assuredly, am I btw.
He’s bigger n us see? A lot smarter too. Not too mention MUCH older. He is powerful enough to call light and matter into existence from nothing by mere fiat command. He has never EVER learned anything. He has always known everything. Actual AND possible. He is immutable. He never changes. He always IS every one of His perfections perfectly. He has no beginning and no end. He simply eternally IS. That’s what His name that He gave to Moses in Exodus 3:14 means. The self and eternally existent ONE and only. “I just AM”.
Governing, for lack of a better word, all of these mind melting attributes of His, is His spotless and blinding holiness. EHV REE THING He thinks, does and IS, is pure and righteous and good and just and HOLY. BECAUSE of who and what He is. HE IS THE STANDARD. NOT YOU. For about the tenth time now.
Every one of your insolent, emotional, pathetic, self worshiping, whining, whimpering accusations against the King and creator of the universe will be brought to your oh so sorrowful remembrance at the judgment if you do not repent and forsake this life of abominable sin and beg the blood of His spotless lamb be your forgiveness.
This absolutely is an application of what Paul was talkin about in Romans 1 Brandon. They “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man”. These self worshipers you see here are the quintessential object lesson in that very thing. Suppressing God’s truth in their unrighteousness, exchanging it for a lie and worshiping and serving the creature rather than the Creator. No clearer examples could ever be found.
LikeLike
As I wrote earlier — your belief system is the product of madmen. Anyone who will justify what you justify is
a) most likely neurologically challenged
b) profoundly indoctrinated by a death cult
c) dealing with a form of Stockholm syndrome
d) or all of the above
You simply can’t see how effed up it all is. Your god knew that he was going to create “fucked-up” human beings, but apparently he gets his rocks off by making people suffer because of his own fuck-up.
You see how sick that is, Greg? Of course you don’t. ➡ d
The reality is — there are organic/environmental reasons why humans do harm to others. Your god, Yahweh, is too primitive to understand that. The reality is, your god doesn’t care about antisocial or prosocial behavior. He only cares about being worshiped.
LikeLike
And yet every word you’ve written, T, has come from the styluses of Bronze Age priests, with no more knowledge of how the world works than our average 4th grader today. Your gullibility astonishes me.
LikeLike
Greg, I find it ironic that you started here discussing some sort of logic issue – the whole 1+1=2 game, yet you can’t see how your logic is crumbled at the most basic level. You believe this invisible god created everything, knows everything, controls everything, yet has no hand in the creation of the thing you call sin, or in the suffering that you believe comes as a result of the ‘creation’ you believe it. Please, think about it.
In the quote at the start of this post, you seem positively thrilled at the idea that Gandhi is in a place of eternal torment because he wasn’t a Christian. It really is a tragic belief system that could make such a twisted thought appealing – eternal torment for someone who was clearly a good person who has contributed to much to human history. Can you not see this?
He is the standard, not us? No. Your impression of the standard that you glean from the nonsensical ramblings in the Bible is the standard you are referring to. And even this standard isn’t universally held by all Christians. As I’ve said before, I know many Christians who have studied theology for much longer than you, who at least believe in a truly loving creator, and look for genuine good in all the messages they see in the Bible. It’s still delusion, but it’s not as potentially harmful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
His “1+1” gambit fell apart because he couldn’t maneuver us into saying what he needed us to say for it to work. If someone attempts a “Knock-Knock” joke, and no one is willing to say, “Who’s there?” the whole thing falls on its face.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Greg,
Let’s try a different tact, shall we? Can we just do a thought experiment for a moment?
Pretend, just momentarily, that your God is fictitious. Would you agree that if this being is imaginary that it is also somewhat monstrous? You have already copped to this entity being narcissistic. “He’s REAL stuck on himself.”
So, this imaginary entity creates a universe in which he not only CREATES evil but also commissions it so that he can rescue some portion of that creation from it. Is this entity culpable for evil or not? Do you think the mere existence of such an entity entitles it to exaltation?
LikeLike
And Ruth once again hits me with a worthy set of questions. I’m on my way out the door to work though and will be on and offline all day. These have been all been answered. I will in your case reiterate later.
Many of you guys are 5 hours ahead of me. That makes for very inconvenient scheduling on both sides of the pond.
LikeLike
“Many of you guys are 5 hours ahead of me” – more like 2000 years —
LikeLiked by 1 person
If Roughseas was here I’m confident she’d award that with a snort!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve seen that snort enough, I can just imagine it and pretend she is. But I could concentrate better if she would quit dancing in her underwear – oh wait, that’s just in my head, isn’t it?
LikeLike
Sigh, where did I put that ‘dislike’ button?
LikeLike
SHE started it!
LikeLike
This whole concept of the elect going to heaven and the non-elect going to hell kind of goes against the notion of original sin, completely eradicating the need for Jesus to die for anyone’s sins. And you’re right, it ignores ideas like justice, compassion, or fairness. Ironically, because this view is different than some Bible verses, if his view is wrong then he gets to share hell with the rest of us sinners.
And another thing, it always grinds my gears when Christians sit there and claim de-converts never were TRUE CHRISTIANS(TM). It reminds me of when I was little, and people would sit there and say some imaginary thing didn’t happen in a game we were playing. Only now, as an adult, it seems sad and pathetic. Thankfully, it really works to highlight how awful “loving” Christians can be to people.
I just wish all other Toxic Christians were as honest in their hatred so society can hurry up and abandon these faith-based beliefs already.
LikeLiked by 4 people
It’s just one of those twisted situations that belief in an omniscient, all-powerful deity leaves people in, because it’s thoroughly illogical given the world we live in. There are only two conclusions they can come to: first is that there’s no way to properly understand what the superbeing is up to, but to put faith in the fact that it’ll all work in a loving, fair way that humans for now can’t understand; and the second is to reinterpret what ‘love’, ‘compassion’ and ‘justice’ would mean for the superbeing, and mix them with the behaviour of a psychopath. I have much more respect for the Christians who take the supernatural trump card and acknowledge it makes no sense. Those who choose to reconcile eternal torment with any form of benevolence are on a losing path that can only affect their behaviour negatively.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just have to do this:
Violet yells: “Woopeedoo! Your global religion is over 2000 years old. I call the mainstream of your corner of the world for such a short period of time – obscure.
Woefully uninformed.
archaeopteryx1 says: “…Only T’s sect will survive”
Total misrepresentation, which my comments here have denied several times.
pinkagendist says: “Don’t know much about world history, do you? How are you defining powerful and prosperous. America had a 150 year window from which it’s already declining. As civilizations go, that’s not by any means impressive.”
Does not pay attention when people speak and hands his opponent a 32 inch Louisville slugger and then bends forward offering his head as a target.
Victoria says: “Don’t flatter yourself, Greg. I understood the madness of your belief system long before you showed up on the scene.”
Similar to the Pink guy above, addresses a point I clearly was NOT making.
siriusbizinus says: “This whole concept of the elect going to heaven and the non-elect going to hell kind of goes against the notion of original sin, completely eradicating the need for Jesus to die for anyone’s sins.”
Truly monumental and breathtaking ignorance of an opponent’s position, necessitating a strawman argument by definition.
You are stockpiling ineptitude here Violet in impressive Championship fashion. I attribute this to sin, NOT stupidity. A young man asked me several years for some tips on internet debating. The following is what I threw together for him. I now humbly offer it to you with all humility and sincerity. Forget it’s from me. I actually believe it will be helpful. I MUST soon be getting to Ruth’s response in the “deconversion thread”. Not only has she shown herself to be thoughtful and rigorous in our interaction, but honorable as well. She deserves that and she will get it. I think she can see how one can get sidetracked around here and understand my delay.
===========================================================
My principles of online debate
Above all else I seek to magnify and glorify God and not myself.
1. Be absolutely persuaded of the truth of the position/propositions you are defending. And therefore…
2. Be absolutely prayed up, versed, prepared and expert in the position/propositions you are defending. OR…
3. Be no more dogmatic in your defense than you are confident in the strength of the particular position/propositions that are the subject at hand.
4. Master literally every conceivable attack upon my own position/s by genuinely pretending to be the most formidable opponent I could ever meet and arguing as if them against my own position/s. I kid you not, I ruthlessly and jealously defend my oppositions positions to myself as if my life depended on them being true. Which leads me to…
5. NEVER glibly underestimate your opponent. ALWAYS assume your opponent is 10 times smarter, 10 times more qualified and 10 times more informed than you are. He DOES NOT have to be stupid to be wrong. In fact, the more intelligent he is, the more potential for truly spectacular error.
6. NEVER claim victory unless you have successfully overcome the very best of the worldview your opponent is advancing. Leaving loose ends for others to find and hit you with later is both sloppy engagement and loses credibility for your own worldview.
7. Be very careful and deliberate in hearing my opponent’s representations of his position/propositions and answer only after I’m sure I understand. OR, ask him to explain in more detail so as not to carelessly misrepresent him and/or convey a dismissive or disrespectful attitude. (that needs work sometimes.)
8. Don’t be too quick either to answer OR to divulge an observed vulnerability. Patience in the context of an online debate is a virtue indeed and sometimes vulnerabilities will lead to others which can then be wielded together with compounded effectiveness. I will sometimes sit on something an opponent has said for MONTHS.
8. Always remember that winning the argument is nothing more than sinful pride if not done in a way that demonstrates a loving desire to see my opponent brought into the truth and not merely a desire to to show myself the superior debater.
==========================================================
LikeLike
“I now humbly offer it to you with all humility and sincerity.”
You don’t know the meaning of those words.
LikeLike
Tiribulus, I have to admit, as a Christian myself, I feel on the fence about how you engage our atheist friends. Part of me wants to be like, yeah, I’m glad that someone is blasting out this epistemology complete with debate rules. But as a serious matter, your epistemology and approach seems to run parallel with an arrogant in-your-face attitude which is precisely the opposite nature of Christ.
We are both Christians, but I think we have different worldviews. Would you want to debate me claiming yours is superior? As if we can take a measuring stick and actually make this determination? This is not biblical epistemology to me, it’s modernism or structuralism. It’s a philosophical underpinning that we can thank the Enlightenment for rather than the bible. If I am going to interpret an epistemology out of the bible, I think a good hermeneutic is Christ. As he emptied himself, would you not want an epistemology that has emptied itself to become love and humility?
I don’t want to come off as too poignant, but despite it’s sensitive nature, I think this discussion is worth your consideration.
LikeLiked by 2 people
tiribulus@yahoo.com
LikeLike
“tiribulus@yahoo.com” – Ah, the old, “Let’s go where no one can hear us” trick!
LikeLike
This is the ONLY time that I have ever been glad to see you!
LikeLike
Oh, Brandon…we’ve butted heads a couple of times but, well, I could hug you right now.
LikeLike
EEEwww!
LikeLike
I’m sorry, arch. Would you like one too? :p
LikeLike
Not if you hugged him first! Whatever he has could be contagious.
LikeLike
It’s okay. I tried to kick him in the shins over at Nate’s after this. So it’s all good. 😉
LikeLike
:-0
LikeLike
Brandon, any update on your chat with Tiribulus that you’d care to share? I suspect you both have lots in common belief-wise but you are just more reticent to express these darker sides in public than he is. You want to be seen as a ‘good’ Christian in the eyes of all, but he’s so swamped the redefinition of ‘good’ that’s part of his belief that he doesn’t care what others think.
LikeLike
Maybe they have been praying for the souls of the heathens here
LikeLike
Hey Violet, I think Tiribulus would not mind me saying that we are just discussing the possibility of a debate/discussion.
We have some things in common, some things not in common. I have not held back any of my beliefs, though. I want to be seen by the community as honest. That’s important to me, so that’s what my PR campaign is aimed at. 🙂 I have nothing to hide. Sure, we’ve all got deep dark secrets, but my beliefs are not included in this category.
I mean one thing to keep in mind is that since I am an ex-atheist, I have a working memory of what drove me there. So, I understand something about your thoughts and don’t dismiss them. I guess that’s why I stick around. The thought is that my opinion is more valuable because of my experience. Of course, that’s not always the case. I also just love youz guyz.
LikeLike
“I guess that’s why I stick around.” – I DO hope you’re not doing that on my account —
LikeLike
“I am an ex-atheist, I have a working memory of what drove me there”
Oooh, you gave me an idea for a post, thanks!
LikeLike
Violet says: “but he’s so swamped the redefinition of good”
No my dear. The Satanic serpent has redefined “good”. You have bought it hook, line and sinker. How well I know. I did too the first 20 years of my life.
Victoria tells me above about dying children and Violet says :”Greg is so delighted to believe is the Truth, is that he believes that all these kids that starve to death”
I am not happy at the the presence of even one scintilla of evil or suffering in God’s creation Violet. Neither is God. He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. (Ezekiel 18:32) He is not a sadistic tyrant who delights in inflicting pain. ALL the suffering you claim to so lament is caused by the very same sinful rebellion that you keep quoting me in these pagan brain studies Victoria.
SIN is the cause of evil and suffering. Has God decreed it? Yes He has, but He has also decreed that it shall be so ordered by Himself as to serve holy and righteous ends. Namely His own glory. He’s REAL stuck on Himself. He does everything He does ultimately FOR Himself. He can do it n you can’t. Because He is worthy of that kind of exaltation and you’re not. Neither, most assuredly, am I btw.
He’s bigger n us see? A lot smarter too. Not too mention MUCH older. He is powerful enough to call light and matter into existence from nothing by mere fiat command. He has never EVER learned anything. He has always known everything. Actual AND possible. He is immutable. He never changes. He always IS every one of His perfections perfectly. He has no beginning and no end. He simply eternally IS. That’s what His name that He gave to Moses in Exodus 3:14 means. The self and eternally existent ONE and only. “I just AM”.
Governing, for lack of a better word, all of these mind melting attributes of His, is His spotless and blinding holiness. EHV REE THING He thinks, does and IS, is pure and righteous and good and just and HOLY. BECAUSE of who and what He is. HE IS THE STANDARD. NOT YOU. For about the tenth time now.
Every one of your insolent, emotional, pathetic, self worshiping, whining, whimpering accusations against the King and creator of the universe will be brought to your oh so sorrowful remembrance at the judgment if you do not repent and forsake this life of abominable sin and beg the blood of His spotless lamb be your forgiveness.
This absolutely is an application of what Paul was talkin about in Romans 1 Brandon. They “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man”. These self worshipers you see here are the quintessential object lesson in that very thing. Suppressing God’s truth in their unrighteousness, exchanging it for a lie and worshiping and serving the creature rather than the Creator. No clearer examples could ever be found.
LikeLike
“He’s REAL stuck on Himself. He does everything He does ultimately FOR Himself. He can do it n you can’t.”
So essentially, you’re saying that might makes right. Your god seems a bit short on a quality we mere humans have found to be quite valuable – humility. A true leader leads by examples, not orders.
LikeLiked by 2 people
archaeopteryx1 says: “So essentially, you’re saying that might makes right. Your god seems a bit short on a quality we mere humans have found to be quite valuable – humility. A true leader leads by examples, not orders.”
In His case, and ONLY His, might IS right. Human values are dead and decomposing in sin. What you value could not be less relevant.
archaeopteryx1 says: “His “1+1″ gambit fell apart “
God’s eternal truth is the foundation of all being and thought. It is not possible that it could fall apart. Ruth and I are still having that conversation. I am working on her response. It will take a while. As arrogant as this will no doubt sound, I HAVE had high level, challenging debates with formidable pagan opponents on epistemology. That’s what I expected when Violet invited me here to be beat up on. I have been sorely disappointed. Ruth is the only one who has even peeked above the snooze level here. Go back over to the “deconversion” thread Arch and give me a grown up definition of “probability” and we’ll talk some more. OR… you can prattle on with some more meaningless juvenile twaddle. Either way I’ll have plenty to do. Ya know what’s funny? I bet we’d like each other in real life 🙂 Seriously.
LikeLike
“I bet we’d like each other in real life” – talk about a sucker bet!
LikeLike
Violet, I don’t know if you have read “Godless In Dixie”, Neil Carter’s recent post titled “Games Christians Play: Making Your Faith Impossible to Disprove”
A few excerpts from a very insightful post (with emphasis highlighted with an arrow) reminded me of what Raut wrote when having discourse with InsanityB.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2014/11/12/games-christians-play-making-your-faith-impossible-to-disprove/
LikeLike
I’m a bit wary of this kind of thing though, because surely we do similar things to a certain extent regardless of what our world view is. I don’t want to delude myself into a false sense of security that because I’ve managed to shed religious belief, I can suddenly see everything clearly and without bias. Life is a weird experience, and the urges that lead humans to be superstitious and set up belief systems are still with us, certainly along with more knowledge at this point in time that enables us to be more rational, but I’m sure all our brains are involved in odd little exercises that would surprise us if we could see it objectively.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I’m a bit wary of this kind of thing though, because surely we do similar things to a certain extent regardless of what our world view is.”
Which is why having critical thinking skills and an understanding of scientific method is so necessary. We are all capable of bias, which was his point.
LikeLike
violetwisp on November 13, 2014 at 9:33 pm said:
Sorry, yes, my fault, I just changed the comment settings and it renamed the link:
https://violetwisp.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/obvious-falsehoods-an-appeal-to-christians/#comment-13840
You really can’t be serious with this Violet. I hadn’t seen that until just now. I’m a little disheartened that Ruth gave that a like. I thought we were doing better than that. There must a point missing demon that hangs around this blog and inflicts himself on all the unsuspecting secularists. RUTH gets my next response on that topic. Maybe I need a different example with you people. 1+1 equaling 2 is not even the actual point. It’s only a lab specimen for logic. Nevermind.
LikeLike
archaeopteryx1 on November 13, 2014 at 9:45 pm said:
Allow me to translate, Neuro – he wants a shot at proselytizing to YOUR subscribers, he knows he’s burned out here.
You folks really don’t listen. I have a hundred other places I could be. Not to mention, I have a feeling that it’d be the same crew as here. The kind of discussion I was talking about with Victoria needs it’s own space is all. If she wants to ask me some questions, then fine. Should I not then also be able to ask her some? She says I’ve answered all hers though, so it looks like she got over on me. That’s ok.
I’m gonna be off to our men’s meeting here soon. Jolly well have to carry on without me. Put away your hankies I’ll be back. 😉
LikeLike
“I have a hundred other places I could be.” – I just looked around and didn’t notice anyone begging you to stay. You know what they say about dead fish and visitors —
LikeLike
Pingback: the journey from theism to atheism | violetwisp
… you people.’
If ever there was a more condescending remark I don’t know what it is.
LikeLike
Really? Doesn’t seem that bad. ‘…you vile heathens’ is what he meant. And if memory serves me correctly that’s what he called ‘us’ (loosely) after our pleasant introduction on Becky’s post.
LikeLike
I found the comment about us heathens being projects more condescending. But we do need to give credit where credit is due. First of all he’s being honest about that instead of using that smarmy “friendship evangelism”. Second of all he’s not trying to claim that the God he worships is ALL-loving. In his theology there are some of us who God will not give the gift of faith. We were created for eternal perdition. I think it’s a bit intellectually dishonest to try to get God off the hook for that. But the only way he can, or is even trying to, is that his God is the creator so if he wants to burn some of us for all eternity that’s his prerogative and if his God says that’s a good thing it is.
I’m just so relieved that I don’t have to do the mental gymnastics it takes to believe this sort of thing. He deserves a gold medal.
LikeLike
“First of all he’s being honest about that instead of using that smarmy “friendship evangelism”.”
I agree. His honesty is refreshing and rare. If more Christians were as honest and educated about their belief system, rather than gorging on fluffy pink cotton candy ideology, we wouldn’t have near the believers we have in this day and age. I appreciate that Greg is bringing to the forefront the core of Christianity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
God is not on any hook for me to get Him off of.
To the extent that I am at fault for being actually condescending, I do apologize. While it’s no excuse, I am still a mortal man this side of the resurrection and I get tired and impatient sometimes with the rest of humanity.
“I’m just so relieved that I don’t have to do the mental gymnastics it takes to believe this sort of thing. He deserves a gold medal.”
The thought life of ALL sinful finite people is nothing BUT “mental gymnastics”. Faith in other words, as I have been saying all along. It’s only a matter what in. Once again. Yours is in you which answers nothing and mine is the one true and living God which answers everything.
LikeLike
Yours is in you which answers nothing and mine is the one true and living God which answers everything.
I’ll be the first to admit that humanity doesn’t have all the answers for the how’s and why’s of life. I don’t know why that’s such a terrible thing. I guess if one needs to know all the answers to everything then Yahweh may provide some level of comfort in that all one has to do is say “God is the answer”. The search is over, guys. We don’t need to know anything more.
Apparently, though, through the generations that hasn’t been enough because there are those constantly seeking to find more and more answers. Ones that don’t seem to include the notion of a god.
The only think I would add is that if I am wrong, perhaps I have not been selected by your God to take part in that giant Wedding Feast of the Lamb and instead he has selected me for perdition. You said yourself he hardens whom he hardens.
LikeLike
We WILL get there Ruth. I have to go for a while, but here’s another tidbit for you. It is not possible to know ANYthing without knowing EVERYthing. (You may even wind up agreeing)
Mankind has NONE of the answers, not even how and why 1+1=2. It is a trick of conscience that Georg Cantor, Ludwig Boltzmann, Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing were unable to live with, by which mankind generally whistles it’s way through life in the darkness of it’s own sin and finitude.
LikeLike
“Mankind has NONE of the answers, not even how and why 1+1=2”
Honestly, I think you should drop that line. It’s embarrassing. You didn’t even start to get anywhere with it.
LikeLike
I think he’s dragging it out intentionally, like an ace in the hole or something…
LikeLike
“Mankind has NONE of the answers” And by the way, why should we? We’re just another little animal that can think a little bit more than the ones we see around us.
LikeLike
“Mankind has NONE of the answers, not even how and why 1+1=2.” – but it doesn’t always, in a Base 2 system, it equals 10. If you’re into computers, you should know that.
LikeLike
It is not possible to know ANYthing without knowing EVERYthing. (You may even wind up agreeing)
Unless you are capitalizing EVERY in the sense that it is a proper noun(God) then this is quite the assertion. You know everything, do you?
LikeLike
The thought life of ALL sinful finite people is nothing BUT “mental gymnastics”. Faith in other words, as I have been saying all along.
Ok. I do mental gymnastics and you do not. *shrug*
LikeLike
“instead of using that smarmy ‘friendship evangelism’” – Ah, you could only mean Brandon!
LikeLike
It is a dismissive, offhand remark that reeks of arrogance. So much so that no matter how structured, logical and honest are the arguments offered for consideration he will, like WLC, hand wave them away as inconsequential.
This is a perfect demonstration of indoctrination.
People like this are merely blowhards and are deserving of every ounce of contempt if only because they refuse to behave honestly.
If Eusebius was quite willing to ”lie for god” then people as piss-willy as Tiribulus, Colorstorm – and to a slightly lessor degree, Brandon, would have no qualms so long as their own agenda is not compromised.
LikeLike
Aw, Brandon says he loves us. Do you doubt his sincerity?
LikeLike
What do you think?
LikeLike
I want to know if either of them are using real pictures.
LikeLike
You mean are their Avatars of them?
LikeLike
Yeah, like ours are of us.
LikeLike
Who knows?
LikeLike
Colorstorm dismisses entirely the Documentary Hypothesis, the fact that the “Mark, “Matthew,” “Luke” and “John” Gospels were written anonymously, decades after the alleged fact, that the “flood” story was a plagiarization of the “Epic of Gilgamesh,” as false – he claims Paul told him to.
LikeLike
🙂
LikeLike
You people
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_people
I remember during the presidential campaign, Ann Romney made the headlines about how condescending she came across when she said “we’ve given all YOU PEOPLE need to know”.
LikeLike
Oh Victoria, you put Ark’s analysis to shame. Poor Ark. I get it now. 🙂
LikeLike
Ruth says of me: “First of all he’s being honest about that instead of using that smarmy “friendship evangelism”.
And Victoria responds with:
“I agree. His honesty is refreshing and rare. If more Christians were as honest and educated about their belief system, rather than gorging on fluffy pink cotton candy ideology, we wouldn’t have near the believers we have in this day and age. I appreciate that Greg is bringing to the forefront the core of Christianity.”
We DON’T have near the believers we think we do in this day and age. Never have in ANY age for that matter.
“I appreciate that Greg is bringing to the forefront the core of Christianity.”
This isn’t the first time I’ve been told this Victoria. Or the 5th. I am not ashamed of nor do I attempt to recreate the most high God in my own image. I don’t gloss over scripture, I don’t worship so called science OVER scripture and as a servant of He holds the very breath of every one of His creatures in His sovereign hand, I give no intellectual or spiritual or emotional quarter. Unlike our friend Brandon, I grant you NOTHING. There is no such thing as a single legitimate thought in contradiction to the word of almighty God. God is God and you are not. Every burden is on YOU. Some of what you are calling condescension and arrogance is simply the unavoidable perception of a man with actual convictions in today’s world.
Another busy day ahead. I’ll try n keep up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“He holds the very breath of every one of His creatures in His sovereign hand, I give no intellectual or spiritual or emotional quarter. Unlike our friend Brandon, I grant you NOTHING.
You and Brandon are more alike than not. You both claim to have “holy psychic powers”, knowing the mind of god. I’m pretty sure your bible says that no one knows the thoughts of god except the spirit of god. But then again, the spirit is all based on imaginations and the little voices in your head which originated in Paul’s head. The average person speaks to themselves (in their head) at a rate of 300 to 1000 words per minute. It’s amazing to me how you can discern the internal dialog — which is of the spirit and which are your own though processes.
” I don’t gloss over scripture, I don’t worship so called science OVER scripture and as a servant of He holds the very breath of every one of His creatures in His sovereign hand,”
Quite true — you are an antagonist to humanity. You are an enabler of your god’s projection — in a co-dependent relationship. You also view everything through the lens of worship. I don’t worship science either. I use it as a tool to help me think critically, because the human brain is good at duping itself.
I’ll give you an example. Did you ever masturbate? A rhetorical questions, of course, lol. Did you fantasize about getting it on with the perfect woman and it got you hard? Did you come? Most likely you did. But you fooled your brain which fool the body into thinking it was real. Belief in god is no different and the belief that you are one with what you perceive as the perfect creator can give you the same heroine (dopamine) type rush as an ejaculation.
God is God and you are not.
Thank goodness. I wouldn’t want to be compared to anyone with such depravity and a lack of integrity, that’s for sure, so thanks for the compliment.
As a reminder, there have been at least 42,001 sects of Christianity all with their own interpretation of the word of your almighty god.
Every burden is on YOU. Some of what you are calling condescension and arrogance is simply the unavoidable perception of a man with actual convictions in today’s world.
Yeah, it’s called hyper-religiosity in the DMS (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). 😀
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Mary had a little lamb,
His fleece was white as snow,
And everywhere that Mary went,
The lamb was sure to go.”
—-Sarah Hale—-
LikeLike
That must have made for some crowded conditions in the little girl’s room!
LikeLike
Btw, Greg, speaking of sex and god, I posted a BBC documentary “God on the Brain” about research done with normal people and those who were hyper-religious. All subjects were wired for a GSR (galvanic skin response) test. When hyper-religious people were shown words about god/religion, they had the same physical response as people who were shown erotic words. People who were not hyper-religious didn’t have the same response when shown god/religous words. 😉
LikeLike
“When hyper-religious people were shown words about god/religion, they had the same physical response as people who were shown erotic words.”
Believe it or not, I once dated a preacher’s daughter (I also once dated a missionary’s daughter, who certainly didn’t restrict herself to the missionary position!) – I could have used that information then.
LikeLike
LOL — I shouldn’t encouraging you by responding. 😀
Devout Christian men are scared chitless of women’s sexuality. Just ask Augustine of Hippo. The God god is a jealous god. “Thou shalt not love or get off more with a women than with me.”
LikeLike
“I shouldn’t encouraging you by responding. 😀 ” – And yet you did – BIG operant conditioning fail! (wubbles?)
LikeLike
Here I am, a grown man saying wubbles – see what a bad influence you are?
LikeLike
That’s OK Arch, you did a CYA when you put a question mark after it. 😀
Now it’s time for you to respond to my comment and tell me that we should take this to email. 😛
LikeLike
Correction: tempteth
LikeLike
“Now it’s time for you to respond to my comment and tell me that we should take this to email. 😛 – that’s not where I’d PREFER to take it, but you’re there and I’m here —
Not as “predictable” as you thought, huh?
LikeLike
Very predictable. I’m telling Carmen. 😉
LikeLike
“Mama Carmen – Arch is hitting on me – AGAIN!“
LikeLike
LOL — sumptin’ like that.
LikeLike
Go ahead, tell her – I can almost hear her cackle now! She thinks you and I are very funny, we are her “Days of Our Lives” —
LikeLike
Done.
LikeLike
What did I tell you? – First sentence of her email response included, “cackle, cackle. . .“
LikeLike
Arch, that’s ‘cuz I told her you said she’d probably cackle and shared a link to our conversation.
LikeLike
Blame it on da debil. He doth tempted me. 😈
LikeLike
Hey, go have a look at Insanity’s latest post, Clandestine Christians. I don’t know what to make of it, she must be taking the piss.
LikeLike
Just checked it out. I laughed my ass off. She writes:
“If people know you’re a Christian, you will flat out be passed over for jobs, alienated from your family members, not invited to the good parties, socially left behind.”
Pull out the violins. Read about Evangelical Persecution Complex.
As far as the shift that’s going on? Well, studies show that your most dysfunctional countries (and states) tend to be the most religious. The more religiously conservative they are the more dysfunction. America has been hijacked by religious extremism. Religious corporations are people too, and have more constitutional rights than actual people do. I suspect, with the take-over of the Senate, and a very conservative Supreme Court, it will get much worse.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-secular-life/201410/secular-societies-fare-better-religious-societies
Yes, Insanity is indeed fanning the flames. 😉
LikeLike
What is she complaining about, she can always get a job at Hobby Lobby!
LikeLike
Hahah, true that. She is so fulla bulla. Right-wing Christians in America who claim persecution are just whining because Christianity is privileged in this country, holds the power and doesn’t want to share it. More than 75 percent of the United States identifies as Christian, and 8 in 10 believe the bible is the inspired word of god.
She’s just like most religious right-wingers — spoiled titty babies. They want ‘momma’ all to themselves.
LikeLike
That’s a great post, thanks for the link. I love all those persecuted Bible quotes I’d forgotten existed. I sometimes feel when I read posts like that from Insanity that she knows she’s making it up, she’s playing some sort of game. There’s something almost tongue-in-cheek about her tone. But then again …
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I sometimes feel when I read posts like that from Insanity that she knows she’s making it up, she’s playing some sort of game.”
Yes, I gather that too. In a recent book written by a biblical scholar at Notre Dame University “The Myth of Christian Persecution: How Early Christians Invented a Story of Martyrdom.” it states that what accounts for this orgy of self-pity is the fact that it is hard-wired into Christianity itself; that the persecution of Christians is the historical equivalent of a false memory.
The author further writes “The textual evidence indicates all these tales of persecution were composed after, not before, Christianity had become the favored religion of the Roman Empire in the early fourth century. In short, they belong to an invented tradition of victimization.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/3/christians-persecutioncomplex.html
LikeLike
LikeLike
And dare I say, it shows in the bedroom — indeed it does. Worst lovers ever.
LikeLike
Not even the most intoxicating, enrapturing sex I have ever had with my beloved wife is worthy to be compared with the knowledge of our redemption in Christ. If by “hyper religious” you mean somebody actually born again into new life in Christ, then I accept the label gladly.
LikeLike
“Not even the most intoxicating, enrapturing sex I have ever had with my beloved wife is worthy to be compared with the knowledge of our redemption in Christ.”
I rest my case. 😉
LikeLike
Well, WELL!! Now isn’t that a statement – “Not even the most intoxicating, enrapturing sex I have ever had with my beloved wife is worthy to be compared with the knowledge of our redemption in Christ”.
I’m wondering how beloved your wife is, with that kind of comparison. It must make her feel quite indispensable.
I have a recommendation for you, Trib. Get a sex toy – you know, the blow-up variety.
Do keep talking, however – you are personifying the studies Victoria presents!
LikeLike
Carmen says: “Do keep talking, however – you are personifying the studies Victoria presents!”
I have a feeling that’s probably true. 😉
LikeLike
“Some of what you are calling condescension and arrogance is simply the unavoidable perception of a man with actual convictions in today’s world.”
Interestingly, I, too, am a man with actual convictions in today’s world, and those don’t include a god OR condescension and arrogance – well, maybe a little arrogance from time to time —
LikeLike
Ruth on November 13, 2014 at 3:11 pm
Ruth says: “Pretend, just momentarily, that your God is fictitious. Would you agree that if this being is imaginary that it is also somewhat monstrous?”
It is not possible for me to even pretend that my God doesn’t exist. He is Himself required even to conceive of the idea of pretending that He doesn’t exist. His existence is the only primary and necessary fact from which all others are derived. I’m not being difficult for the sake of it. You are asking me to conceive of something that is infinitely less logical than 1+1 equaling 234,987.
Ruth says: “You have already copped to this entity being narcissistic. “He’s REAL stuck on himself.”
I have copped to no such thing. For us to be stuck on ourselves is narcissistic. A bad thing. For Him to do all that He He does for His own glory is to be God. A good thing.
Ruth says: “So, this imaginary entity creates a universe in which he not only CREATES evil”
No He does not create evil. He decrees that the free and morally accountable actions of His creature will create evil. Again, by divine mechanisms known only to Himself. I will never understand how that works without trusting that He does, not only understand, but order it to His own holy purposes. Just like I (and you) will never be able to account for 1+1 equaling 2 without faith. Your faith is just as irrational as you accuse mine of being, but delivers nothing.
A child does not know what his father knows, but he knows that his father knows it. He has no idea how Daddy’s grown up world operates. He simply trusts that Daddy does. I do the same. Jesus Himself said that we must come to Him as little children.
Ruth says: “but also commissions it so that he can rescue some portion of that creation from it.”
That is true.
Ruth asks: “Is this entity culpable for evil or not?”
No He is not, as I have said multiple times 🙂
Ruth asks: “Do you think the mere existence of such an entity entitles it to exaltation?”
If by “this entity” you are referring to the God of the ancient Christian scriptures, then yes. His mere existence entitles him to whatever He says. I will quote the confession to you again. Which I hold to be exceedingly biblical.
“God hath all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself; and is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; he is the alone foundation of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom, are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open and manifest; his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain. He is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands. To him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience he is pleased to require of them.”
No sarcasm Ruth. Taking 20 minutes and reading that confession would answer many of your questions to me.
I must be offline for a few hours. TTYL
LikeLike
For what it’s worth I used to hold many of these same ideas about God so what you are saying isn’t the least foreign to me. I’ve read through part of the confession. I understand what the confession is saying I just don’t believe the same things about your God now that you do. Even as heretical Southern Baptist Arminian I understood determinism/predestination at a certain level. How could we say that God is in control of everything and at the same time say we have freewill? Yes, I know the standard special pleading…God’s ways are higher than our ways and his thoughts higher than our thoughts.
Would you say the God you believe in is beyond logic?
LikeLike
Ruth on November 14, 2014 at 5:49 pm quotes me as saying:
It is not possible to know ANYthing without knowing EVERYthing. (You may even wind up agreeing)
And then responds with:
Unless you are capitalizing EVERY in the sense that it is a proper noun(God)
My capitalizations are the rough equivalent of vocal emphasis since we can’t hear each other’s voice or see each other’s face. I apologize if that wasn’t clear. It is homiletical rather than grammatical.
Ruth asks: “then this is quite the assertion. You know everything, do you?”
No, but I know who does. Much of these latest comments of mine are copied and pasted out my several year old document that I linked 8 or 9 days ago and everybody said they read. Here’s a bigger piece of the quote from above:
Ruth asks: “For what it’s worth I used to hold many of these same ideas about God so what you are saying isn’t the least foreign to me.”
You are the only one here I believe ever had any clue of what the Christian faith is.
Ruth asks: “heretical Southern Baptist Arminian”
If by “heretic” we mean a person who is in error severe enough to exclude them from broad saving orthodoxy, then I disagree that Southern Baptists or other Arminians are ipso facto heretics.(Though many Southern Baptists are VERY strong Calvinists) Arminianism is in my view deplorable error, but is not in itself “heresy” in the mortally dangerous sense. I would say that every self professed Arminian who is a true Christian is also a confused Calvinist.
Ruth says: “I understood determinism/predestination at a certain level. How could we say that God is in control of everything and at the same time say we have freewill? Yes, I know the standard special pleading…God’s ways are higher than our ways and his thoughts higher than our thoughts.”
I will not ardently dispute your charge of special pleading in the case of the living God. I will however say that His case IS special and therefore special claims for Him are not only allowed, but commanded and necessary.
Ruth asks: “Would you say the God you believe in is beyond logic?”
Please see the block quote above, but in short, ultimately yes. The mind of God is the source of logic. The nature of God is to Him the boundary of logic. (no, He cannot make a rock so big that He can’t move it) He has designed us as finite replicas of Himself. We are hence also logical beings, but our logic is derived from His and is therefore inoperable without Him. Adam’s sin was the attempt to do so and every one of His children are born with his fallen nature still attempting to make sense of themselves and their reality without self conscious surrender to God’s divine parenthood. You folks here are living breathing object lessons.
I’ll say again. The whole 1+1=2 thing is only a representative example of logic for the sake of discussion. It could be anything. Regardless of what hip n groovy alternative base blah blah blah schemes anybody throws at me, the fact remains that we LIVE every second as if 1+1 CERTAINLY equals two every time, because in order for us to function, it MUST. I’ve been asking WHY and have gotten a whole heap of uncertainty, like I always do, from people who are just as certain as I am, except with no basis for being so and who are therefore forced to fall back on a fuzzy conception of probability they can’t define either.
LikeLike
“No He does not create evil.” – I think he would disagree with you —
Isaiah 45:7
LikeLiked by 2 people
HAHAHA!! It was killin me not to bring up Isaiah 45:7 first 😀
That’s the King James. Please note 3 modern translations from an army of Hebrew scholars
LikeLike
“It is not possible for me to even pretend that my God doesn’t exist….His existence is the only primary and necessary fact from which all others are derived.” = FEAR. I remember feeling like that and would have made up ridiculous assertions like you have to avoid even going there. The only thing we can be sure exists is our own conscientious – basic, basic, basic. To pretend to yourself otherwise is unbelievably silly.
LikeLike
Violet says:”The only thing we can be sure exists is our own conscientious”
We have a Cartesian in our midst boys n girls.
Fear she says. O:) God has not given me a spirit of fear, but of power, love and a sound mine, praise His holy name. (2 Timothy 1:7)
LikeLike
Sorry Greg. While you may brag about not fearing and having a sound mind, that’s not what the fMRI scans show. Conservatives tend to have a larger right amygdala (fear, disgust, aggression). Yeah, yeah, I know, them there fMRI machines are Pagan.
LikeLike
If I didn’t have a sound mind would I know that(and could I even be convinced) or would I wholeheartedly believe my mind is sound?
LikeLike
I doubt it.
LikeLike
That’s what I’m thinkin’.
LikeLike
So you’re onboard with the unsound mind hypothesis for me too huh? 😦
Oh well. You’re still a more than worthy conversationalist in my book Ruth.
LikeLike
I’m throwing myself under the same bus…
LikeLike
Here’s the thing, Greg: When I believed that the blood of Jesus covered all my sins and I was an unworthy recipient of such a blessing I didn’t think I was crazy or delusional. I was certain that my belief was true. And I feared for those who didn’t believe. If only….
Now on this side of it – not believing – I still don’t think I’m crazy or delusional. I think my mind is perfectly sound(well, as sound as a mind can be). I’m a fairly reasonable person.
I don’t know if you’re not of sound mind or not. I’m not trying to give out an internet diagnosis and, frankly, when I was a Christian that sort of accusation wouldn’t have been at all productive and it would have been offensive.
Looking back on it I think I was deluded, but who’s to say I’m not now? We’re all deluded in some ways. Especially if we are so very certain that we aren’t.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well, quite frankly, Ruth, I was in the same shoes you were, and regardless of Greg’s assumptions, we have nearly identical beliefs. I don’t know if Greg is hyper-religious bit he had nearly identical behavior to my late husband after he became hyper-religious and others in the vast amount of research. No amount of reason, knowledge or studies will change their beliefs. It’s neurological.
But I’m not going to apologize for sharing information that could actually save someone’s life, but I totally respect where you are coming from. If you saw my emails you’d understand why I take the heat.
LikeLike
I wasn’t slighting the information you share nor you in any way whatsoever so if this came across that way it was assuredly unintentional.
I completely respect and appreciate the research you do. It is certainly not my area of expertise. I don’t think you owe anyone an apology. You put the information out there and people can do with it what they may. I just know that when I was in my hyper-religious state none of what you share would have meant a thing to me because, like Greg, I thought I knew the Great Physician. So any studies or reasoning or knowledge would have been immediately cast aside in one felled swoop with, “Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” 1 Corinthians 1:20.
I wasn’t attempting to undermine you or your work in any way. I’m just remembering how it was to be on the other side is all.
LikeLike
Ruth, thank you so much for your comment. I don’t think you were in a clinical hyper-religious state. I do think you had a profound love for the Christian god, as did I. But I was gullible and trusting. It wasn’t until I started really studying for myself, that my blinders came off. It is why I have the utmost respect for you because I know from personal experience how hard it is to step outside of your comfort zone (in a very religious environment) and question. It is, as I say so often, not for the faint of heart.
Btw, this took place this past week in Austin, TX at a Starbucks. They’ve gotten bold. No more abuse behind church walls. Fundies do a great disservice to humanity and they cause enormous harm in the name of primitive superstition.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/just-another-day-in-the-bible-belt-video-shows-bizarre-saliva-spewing-exorcism-outside-starbucks/
368,379 people killed, 306,096 injured and over $2,815,931,000 in economic damages”
http://whatstheharm.net/exorcisms.html
LikeLike
I guess what I was taking the long way around to say was that I’m recognizing what a b&%^@ I must have been to converse with about this, with my oh so smug, certainty of certainties.
LikeLike
I meant, I doubt that you would know that your mind wasn’t sound if it wasn’t sound. Is that clear as mud? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
WHAT’S THIS!!!
A muddy mind 😉
Church time
LikeLike
Go prey, I mean pray for our “muddy” minds. 😉
LikeLike
Greg, that’s not what numerous peer-reviewed studies show. fMRI scans demonstrate that the more conservative one is the more gray matter volume (larger) right amygdala they have.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
Yeah, yeah, I hear you — “those Pagan fMRI machines — they lie”. 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ooops, sorry for the nearly duplicate comment. At first my original comment about fMRI scans didn’t show up. I refreshed and it still didn’t show up, so I made another comment.
LikeLike
All hail WordPress!
LikeLike
LikeLike
Machines don’t lie. People do. TTYL
LikeLike
You just told on yourself. 😈
LikeLiked by 1 person
DID NOT!! SO THERE!!! (yer tern)
LikeLike
Go to church you heathen. 😛
LikeLike
LOL! It is actually fun to be able to good off a little huh? I wish you could believe this whole thing is not about me proving I’M right. It really isn’t.
LikeLike
archaeopteryx1 on November 14, 2014 at 3:45 pm quotes me as saying:
“Some of what you are calling condescension and arrogance is simply the unavoidable perception of a man with actual convictions in today’s world.”
And then responds with
Interestingly, I, too, am a man with actual convictions in today’s world, and those don’t include a god OR condescension and arrogance – well, maybe a little arrogance from time to time –
How certain are you of these convictions? That’s what convictions are ya know. Stuff you’re sure about and are willing to go on record saying so. Please tell me one of your convictions and go on record with your certainty in it’s regard.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve already made it clear that all is probability, but I’d say that there is a 99.9999% probability that there is no clear and compelling evidence that a god exists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Colorstorm, your post was even more confirmation of Paul’s mental state, especially with you posting all his extremely negative, traumatic experiences which would most certainly contribute to limbic lability affecting the temporal lobes. Read the stats here at the Epilepsy Foundation and remember — I shared with you from medical journals that TLE is frequently misdiagnosed because of its cognitive, religious manifestations. Almost 500 new cases of Epilepsy are diagnosed every day in the United States. At least half of those will be TLE. That’s just those who were diagnosed. You do the math.
http://www.epilepsy.com/node/986825
It’s much higher in war-torn places, and can you name a time when the hub of 3 major religiions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism wasn’t at war in the last couple of thousands years? Brain injury is the signature wound of war according to the Department of Defense, and brain injury is a leading cause of seizure. According to Brain Injury Awareness and the Franklin Institute, sustaining a mild traumatic brain injury (concussion) can cause delusions and you don’t have to be knocked unconscious. That’s just one cause of delusion and seizures.
But then you go on and add icing on top of the cake when you brought up “Peter, James, and John on the mountain when they beheld the raiment of the Lord white as snow, as they saw His face above the brightness of the sun”.
Ever heard of earthquake lights? Ever heard of mass hysteria? Ever heard of the power of suggestion? Your brain is electrical and magnetic fields, infrasound and even space weather such as cosmic rays, earth directed coronal mass ejections and geomagnetic storming can affect melatonin, increase electrical activity in the brain, cause your eyeball to vibrate at around 18 to 19 Hz, and induce hallucinations. NASA has done extensive studies on this as well.
As NASA explains — when the stress of an earthquake hits the rock, it breaks chemical bonds involved in these defects, creating holes of positive electrical charge. These ‘p holes’ can flow vertically through the fault to the surface, triggering strong local electric fields that can generate light. But if you tend to have limibic lability, are superstitious, have religious indoctrination, and increased gray matter volume in the right amygdala (common among greater conservatism according to fMRI studies, then you are going to created your own explanation of the phenomena as has been the case throughout history.
Colorstrom, considering that there is an abundant amount of information at our fingertips that would explain phenomena which would be associated with your cultural/religious background. I do not think you have turned over every stone. I think you simply need to believe and have settled. That’s OK — just don’t go around telling children that it’s true. There are too many variables that you simply have not considered, which is why, in order to believe, you have to rely on faith. We had an excuse before the age of information. We don’t now, not unless people don’t have access to this information, or have a neurological disorder and will continue to experience delusions without medical intervention.
I could share hundreds of studies that’s taken me over 10 years to read and digest. You read one book associated with your cultural upbringing — add a good dose of faith, and you claim to have the truth.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Neuro- or V. if u prefer-
I wonder if u really thought about the ramifications since it was answered so quickly.
That said, I ‘liked’ your post, not because I agree, but because it was civil, personally non inflammatory, and u actually addressed content.
I certainly have follow up, when time permits.
LikeLike
The reason I answered so quickly was because I have a vast library of information stored in my brain, as well as in my files and blogs. I earned my unbelief, and I can’t ever image a god who would not find questioning and studying outside the box an honorable thing.
I will also have to say that I cannot worship a deity who does not practice what he preached. “Do as I say, not as I do”. Had Yahweh been left out of the mix and Jesus didn’t support this god as being his father and the creator, I might have not questioned as much as I did.
I am grateful for this journey because I see humanity in a much more positive light, unlike many believers who consider humanity to be depraved. I never set out to disprove god. It was quite the opposite.
Thank you for the like. 🙂
LikeLike
And that —
— is based on the assumption that the above statement isn’t pure fabrication, as much of the Buybull is!
LikeLike
Arch, it is certainly likely that it was a fabrication. But as I mentioned to Colorstorm, there are other causes that could have contributed to possible hallucinations. Todd Murphy, a behavioral neuroscientist, writes:
I just think people are too trusting of other people’s opinions when it is so apparent that there are vast explanations for these phenomena.
LikeLike
In case you’re unaware of it, Neuro, CS and IB are assailing your neurological theories on his site:
http://thenakedtruth2.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/pauls-ahem-mental-problem/
You won’t believe what IB is contending!
LikeLike
Thanks Arch. IB? LOL I might check it out later. I have more important things to do right now.
LikeLike
Well, if you don’t have time to lurk, I’ll paste the highlight for you – SOM in the comments section forgetting to keep his trolling enough under the radar to look convincing!
“My Saint Paul moment happened when my whole life flashed before my eyes and I became so terrified that I went temporarily blind and the part of my brain that remembers the names of movie stars and acquaintances got fired.
But instead of having God talk to me, I was left to stew for hours in the ER because nobody knew what was wrong with me.
Since I wasn’t bleeding and no bones were broken I suppose I was better left out of sight out of mind.”
LikeLike
I should mention, not only trusting of other people’s opinions, but also their experiences. I remember a time when my partner was having these religious experiences due to his neurological disorder, and he was very convincing. I did believe him at first. The preachers and elders also told him that his experiences were real. They were sorely wrong.
LikeLike
-N-notes
There is neither time nor paper to address everything responses above. When I mentioned your quickness of answer, it was not to discredit your learning, but I was hoping you would have spent more time thinking about mine.
That said, Reading between the lines and even out in the open, u default to Paul’s ‘delusions and seizures.’ I covered that, but I must ask:
When Paul was standing idly by at the stoning of Stephen, was he in his right mind?
And does the thought occur that what happened to him, happened exactly as the text reads?
LikeLike
“but I was hoping you would have spent more time thinking about mine.”
Colorstorm, I do not mean to come across as condescending, but its a counter I’ve read many times. I appreciate you making an effort to state your case but you brought nothing new to the discussion.
Acts 7 is not a reliable source. I would recommend you reading the Acts Seminar.
“The Seminar on the Acts of the Apostles began deliberations in 2001, with the task of going through the canonical Acts of the Apostles from beginning to end and evaluating it for historical accuracy.
The goal was to produce a red-letter edition of Acts, following the publication model the Jesus Seminar used in The Five Gospels and The Acts of Jesus. With such a tool in hand, students of the Bible will be better able to address issues of Christian origins.”
http://www.westarinstitute.org/projects/the-jesus-seminar/seminar-on-the-acts-of-the-apostles/
LikeLike
Soooooooo V:
You gained nothing from my post, but me as a reasonable person gained a lot from yours, and the links, which led me to see your position a bit more clearly.
And they are quantum leaps and links which you make-
Modern day psycologists good-
Paul the apostle bad–yea ok.
I’ve seen that circus before.
LikeLike
Victoria’s first two VIDEOS were flat down awesome!! I mean it. Along with Ruth’s (but for a different reason), they have been added to my to repertoire of extraordinarily useful tools. This a completely serious comment here btw. You should really watch those Colorstorm. He hasn’t said, but I have a feeling Brandon already has.
LikeLike
It’s not a circus, Colorstorm. People die. Did you get a chance to look at the link I posted where the guys were doing an deliverance/exorcism on a man who was experiencing depression — calling out a “suicidal spirit”?
Nevertheless, the research is out there abundantly now, and while we can’t prove that Paul had TLE, there are many characteristics about Paul that would lead most professionals to think he was hyper-religious.
I have yet to get an answer from Christians as to how they discern. We know that hyper-religiosity is a major feature of certain types of common neurological disorders, and because of the very war-like environments back in the day, it was probably much more common. That’s not even taking into account all the other environmental, neurological and physiological conditions than can cause hallucinations, confabulations, and sensed presence experiences, to name a few.
How do you discern? How did those back in the day, who knew nothing of these disorders, or environmental phenomena, discern?
You will know them by their fruits? That, in itself, has major holes, for Yahweh has produced rotten fruit all throughout the bible, and so have his followers.
LikeLike
“I’ve seen that circus before.” – Unfortunately for you, you never see yourself as the clown.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi V!
Something to think about.
I perused your ‘Acts seminar’ and can sum it up very nicely. It appears the people involved voted year after year that the book of Acts is ‘mythical,’ which makes it unreliable, which in turn makes the writer Luke appear as dubious. Hmmm. I would be slow to challenge the learned and detailed doctor Luke.
Just another confirmation from you and your ‘sources,’ that the scriptures are unreliable and cannot be trusted. I’d respect u more, if u would just say u don’t believe them, than to say there are mistakes, inaccuracies, or lies.
Btw, what do u think is mythical in the book of Acts? (I must have missed the part where Luke wrote of the roc 😉
LikeLike
“I would be slow to challenge the learned and detailed doctor Luke.
I’ve always taken you to be a bit slow in most things, CS.
Most reliable biblical scholars agree that the authors of all four Gospels were written anonymously, the names they now bear given to them in the 2nd or 3rd century CE. They also agree that the anonymous author of the “Gospel According to Luke,” was also the author of “the Acts.” Since “Acts” was written – as established by The Acts Seminar – at some point in the early 2nd century, some 40+ years after the purported death of Paul, the author could hardly have been the actual Luke. The “Acts” author was also using the letters of Paul (as well as his own vivid imagination) to write “Acts,” so I’m not clear where you get the idea that the author was at all “learned and detailed.” Clearly, he got many of the details regarding the geography of Israel wrong, it’s almost as though he’d never been there!
LikeLike
Luke says: Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,—
Noooooo Arch, Luke was not a man of detail, and as a physician, surely he was careless also in his medical knowledge and practice.
Luke says: ‘The former treatise I have made O Theophilus, of ALL the things that Jesus BEGAN to do and both teach………..’ speaking obviously of his previous book the gospel of Luke-
Be honest, Arch- just admit you do not believe the scriptures, but do not cite men who call the true accounts mythical. You will lose this argument every time.
But tkx for the compliments
LikeLike
Be honest, Arch- just admit you do not believe the scriptures, but do not cite men who call the true accounts mythical.
Question, CS – when did the real Luke meet Jesus?
LikeLike
Where did I ever get the idea that Dr. Luke was a man of detail? Hmm let me think………….. Besides the excellent examples given you already, maybe you should read what HE wrote, rather than what OTHERS say he wrote.
Start with the geneology in chapter three. No mistakes. Perfect detail. Get back to me in a year or two after you have exhausted all your efforts to find an error.
LikeLike
You didn’t answer my question, was that deliberate? “When did the real Luke meet Jesus“
LikeLike
Arch-
‘When did the real Luke meet Jesus?’
Since NO answer will satiate your curiosity, I’ll refer you to the book of Luke, where you can draw your own conclusions.
I will have no part in accommodating you in your snare.
Still puzzled though, why you would question somebody who by your own words ‘you dont care,’ and why you continually refer to a book that you think is a fable.
(hint hint- the answer is in the book)
LikeLike
“Since NO answer will satiate your curiosity, I’ll refer you to the book of Luke, where you can draw your own conclusions.”
I’ve read the “Gospel of Luke,” written anonymously, and it not only doesn’t mention Luke meeting Jesus, it doesn’t mention Luke at all! You ARE aware, I would hope, that 65% of the Gospel of Luke was taken directly from the Gospel of Mark – the anonymous author thus makes it clear that he wasn’t there at all, has NO first-hand knowledge of the events, real or not, and is relying entirely on hear-say information. THAT is the conclusion I drew.
“I will have no part in accommodating you in your snare.” – Which means that you have no intention of answering my question of when Luke – the learned and detailed doctor – met Jesus, which in turn means that the actual answer would not be beneficial to your contentions.
“Still puzzled though, why you would question somebody who by your own words ‘you dont care,’ and why you continually refer to a book that you think is a fable.”
Because I want you to use that brilliant mind of yours to prove me wrong, of course.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Arch, arch, arch,
I have no desire to prove you wrong. You are responsible for your own eyelids.
I will leave you this:
There is an excellent word that is used ONCE, count it ONCE in the English bible; and since it was mind you, inspired, I would tend to take note of how, when, where, and why it was used.
The word was used by Dr. Luke alone, ordered by the Spirit of God to make a point, and to be considered by whosoever reads.
The word is found in the book of Acts, chapter one, and it is:
INFALLIBLE, and it relates to infallible proofs surrounding the, ahem, resurrection of the Lord from among the dead..
Surely you know what it means. But your paltry assertion that ‘my answer would not be beneficial…..’ is rather amusing.
You may not appreciate it, but as Pater said he was an ‘eyewitness of the majesty of the Lord,’ there are things that only Luke could have known.
But this would not be beneficial to your contentions 😉
LikeLike
“Pater said he was an ‘eyewitness of the majesty of the Lord,’ there are things that only Luke could have known”
Do YOU know it? If so, you clearly read it, as could “Luke” have, or heard it via hearsay, just as I’ve contended all along. But that would not be beneficial to your contentions.
LikeLike
Excellent point! When an infallible text reports something being infallible, you know you’re on to a winner! By the way, did you test your Bible knowledge yet?
LikeLike
Hey V”
If Dr. Luke used the word ‘Infallible proofs,’ as describing the real, incontrovertible, magnificent unimpeachable, verifiable, and glorious resurrecton of of a man from the dead, that’s fine by me.
And oh, yea, above 500 witness of these infallible proofs. You may have missed the idea that this outstanding word was only used once.
Wordsmiths, students, and scholars may find this remarkable, others, eh, not so much..
LikeLike
Seriously, check out the wee test at the link. I’m sure you’ll enjoy it and it’s all anonymous.
LikeLike
saw it before- clever
😉
interesting, but all have correct answers in context
LikeLike
Whatever mental gymnastics you need to help you through the day … 😀
LikeLike
hey v-
Don’t know about the mental gymnastics wherof you speak, but tks for the smiley guy
LikeLike
Colorstorm, 500 witnesses? Infallible proofs? Verifiable? My like mass hysteria, if it even happened. Btw, you remember those hundreds of thousands of Christians who reported apparitions of the Virgin Mary over a Coptic Orthodox church in Zeitoun, near Cairo Egypt between April 1968 and May 1971.
Or what about the experiments done showing that people will go with majority opinion (at least 75% of subjects tested) even when it contradicts evidence right before their very eyes.
Here’s a fun fact: 😀
“A penis panic is a mass hysteria event or panic in which male members of a population suddenly experience the belief that their genitals are getting smaller or disappearing entirely. Penis panics have occurred around the world.
An epidemic struck Singapore in 1967, resulting in thousands of reported cases. Government and medical officials alleviated the outbreak only by a massive campaign to reassure men of the anatomical impossibility of retraction together with a media blackout on the spread of the condition.”
http://listverse.com/2009/03/16/top-10-bizarre-cases-of-mass-hysteria/
LikeLike
Neuro-
(and the whole cast of the A-team)
All your examples of religious fervor (include Medjugorje, Fatima, etc) and ‘suggestion’ have happened of course. I’ve seen it myself; as people seek truth.
The question you need ask though is: do these kind of things have the imprimatur of Heaven and what is the standard for determining this?
Your vid example and everything in it can easily be discerned by weighing it against ‘what is truth?’
________________
Was that Condi Rice??
LikeLike
Huh?
LikeLike
I was drawing attention to your own analogy-
I’ve seen the hysteria, I’ve seen the ‘excitement’ apart from truth,
……………unlike many infallible proofs
.Your link and the contents can all be weighed easily by the word of God also- if there is no standard, then everything———- or nothing———– is right.
LikeLike
So, let me get this straight, Colorstorm. Your belief system is the truth, and nothing but the truth, and all other systems of belief or lack thereof are false, and this is all based on your indoctrination and interpretation of an archaic book full of copying errors, deliberate omissions, embellishments, forgeries, and contradictions.
There are 2.18 billion Christians of all ages around the world, representing nearly a third of the global population of around 7 billion.
So basically, 2/3s of the world are lost and going to hell according to you and probably Greg.
Wow, you’re god is an awesome god. 😉
LikeLike
Dang V:
That is a loaded comment. Why do most conversations default to heaven or hell? just sayin.
Testifying means I cannot fairly answer the claims of others. I can only really speak of what I know, what I have been persuaded of.
I do know that other books of ‘faith’ are not on the radar of most so called atheists to challenge or chastise. At least not in the vitriolic way that is commonly done, as proof enough in these threads.
If a thousand people challenged the carpenters ‘level,’ and gave their opinion of whether the board was straight, all thousand can be wrong. Me? I’m going with the standard of the level.
Wouldn’t you, if you wanted it right? The bubble never lies. Kind of like God.
.
My concern is not the 2/3 rds.
LikeLike
Why do most conversations default to heaven or hell?
Why shouldn’t it be?
“My concern is not the 2/3 rds.”
Why am I not surprised?
♫ I see your true colors shinning through ♫
LikeLike
Hey neuroN-
Why do most conversations default to heaven or hell? Really, you can’t see the impropriety? God cannot be contained in a thimble.
At a heart surgeons convention, why should they discuss poison ivy? My point?
The word of God is a l a r g e book, with the doctrines of heaven and hell framing a wee part, that’s why.
You appear to want to have that discussion to justify your contempt, and that’s fine,. but I do not have to join your reindeer games.
How about discussing the ‘blindness in part of israel?’ or the brilliant mind and life of Stephen? or a thousand other good scriptural truths?
As to your 2/3 inference that was meant to be derogatory;
Please do not present a false modesty, as if YOU could care for the 2/3rds. How about the one fellow who needs a hand, you know, the guy down the road.
Tha’s God’s way, ya know, not the 99 but the ONE. That’s my context,
but tkx for the song….
LikeLike
Your “word of God” is not inerrant, but it is tribal and all though out, exhibits behavior of madmen.
That you worship such a book and deity without ever questioning says a lot about your state of mind.
Btw, I do care for all of humanity — for the well being of our species. I do not see humans as depraved and evil. That’s the difference between you and me.
I am a humanitarian. I believe in humanity. You are a follower of your cultural religion, and believe in an Iron/Bronze Age war god, Yahweh, and justify its behavior to save your hide from the flames of hell it created for those who refuse to bow down to this mythological dictator. You see how that works? $$$
LikeLike
Neuro-
I have sent you 2 posts here, and you have addressed the merits of neither.
Now you attributed to me the usage of a word, and I dare you to find it in any of my posts to you
‘depraved.’ You are not a sloppy reader and thinker, but u missed the boat here; your assumptions get u into trouble.
I’m careful what words I use, and in what context; now, please, reread my posts here this morning, and address the content if u are able 😉
Stop the sleight of hand and base accusations, they are not befitting of academia.
LikeLike
Colorstorm, what part of “the bible is not inerrant do you not get? You have not done your homework. That is clear. You chose, willingly to remain in your bubble of belief. You have demonstrated that you think you have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. What else can there be stated?
What part of “I refuse to bow down and worship a biblical dictator” do you not get? I have far more ethics and became more prosocial after I left Christianity. I will not lower my standards just because my culture states that this god among millions men have created is “the” creator. Christians can’t even get along within their own tribe.
Christian can’t even come together in agreement as to what the actual interpretations of scripture mean. There’s so much disunity in your tribe and that infects the rest of us. Who in their right mind would want to gleefully be a part of such instability unless they were indoctrinated to not see it for what it really is. Tribalism.
I repeat — I will not lower my standards of ethics and worship your god.
LikeLike
Neuro-
five sighs
Your inability to face the merits presented is rather stentorian. If this was a scored debate, any fair panel would dismiss you for malfeasance.
For thousands of years, other foes have tried to discredit the scriptures. They are dead, God is God, and the scriptures still live.
You trying to find fault with God’s word is like you trying to paint a rainbow in the sky: impossible.
You can accuse and malign, scoff, ignore, but God’s word has wore out every hammer, and yours is just one more.
Lower your standards??And what standards do ya have, and where did they come from?
Take another look at the last two posts, you have some homework 😉
LikeLike
One of the things that turned me off about Christianity was this prevailing personality trait — a great need to feel special, therefore believing they are the chosen ones. But Christianity isn’t the only religion that displays this common personality trait.
However, that is not why I left. As I’ve already explained before, I left because I studied extensively and found the bible and Yahweh to be incredibly human, exhibiting both prosocial and antisocial behavior, and the stories aligning with the education of the times it was written in.
LikeLike
“The bubble never lies. Kind of like God.”
You’re absolutely right CS – your god never lies! – because your god never says anything. Other men SAY that he said something, thousands of years ago, but we have only their testimony for that, and they’re not around for cross-examination, are they? Men who, themselves, are quite capable of lying “for the greater good” – of superstitious wishful thinking – of hallucinations – of mistranslation – of editorial misquoting – of ultra-religious psychoses, similar to your own – but there no trace of your god in any of that.
I really wish they were around! I would love to get them on a witness stand and, say, ask Moses how he survived on a mountaintop with out food and water for “forty days and forty nights,” then throw him in a jail cell for “forty days and forty nights,” without food and water, and see how that works out for him. Or maybe ask Jonah how well he got along with the stomach acid of that “big fish” for three days and nights. Or ask Noah how the tree sloths got from Australia to Iraq, when their feet aren’t even evolved for walking – they live their entire lives in trees. Bet we’d get a lot of “um” and “uh,” don’t you?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yea arch-
Try convincing yourself the wind doesn’t exist; after all you can’t see it or hear it huh?
You must be one special person.
Nice work, Your parents must have been proud.
LikeLike
“Try convincing yourself the wind doesn’t exist; after all you can’t see it or hear it huh?”
But it can be quantified and measured – can your god? How about your Holy Spook?
LikeLike
I can’t believe you even dignified that embarrassing wind comment with a response … you know if they use that they’re clueless and beyond help.
LikeLike
I just hate giving him the last word on the subject, it makes him think he left me speechless.
LikeLike
archaeopteryx1 on November 18, 2014 at 4:31 am said:
I just hate giving him the last word on the subject, it makes him think he left me speechless.
I left you speechless a couple weeks ago. The fact that you refuse to shut up should not be in any way confused with the idea that you have actually said anything. 😀
LikeLike
“I left you speechless a couple weeks ago.” – Don’t ever get that mistaken idea – you may well have said something to which I didn’t consider it worth responding, but that’s nothing unusual. And I don’t know ANYone who’s uttered more words and said less than you have.
LikeLike
Can’t hear the wind? You’ve never been near a tornado, have you?
LikeLike
Arch-
Aren’t you tired of all your circus tricks?
I said: ‘try convincing yourself the wind doesn’t exist, after all you can’t see it or hear it…’
Of course you can see it AND hear it!
You can see it through what it moves, and same as hearing. Evidence!
You cannot see sarcasm? And in your attempt to malign once more, you are proving the inevitble:
FAITH is the SUBSTANCE……………..the evidence of things not seen. Yes Virgina there is a God.
Thank you for allowing me this Kodak moment.
LikeLike
Wisp-
Arch
Apparently the Creator didn’t think the topic of the wind was trivial.
“—————The wind bloweth where it wills, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit———————” so says Jesus Christ
Oh how we are careless in our opinions. There is a depth to this that is bottomless.
LikeLike
“The wind bloweth where it wills, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth:”
The sad thing is — you are dead serious.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/where-does-wind-come-from/
LikeLike
Yea yea, I know Notes-
Your same sources will also cite where and how the rainbow is made, NEVER crossing their minds,
that the Origin of wind, the breath of man, light, water, heat, cold, all come from the same place.
No thoughts I notice on the ‘wind blowing where it wills,’ and that teaching, didn’t think so, just one more mock notch on the belt eh.
2000 years of learned scientists are all dead, and God is still God. 4000 more will come along, and God will still be God.
Man will continue to mock, and God will still be God.
LikeLike
You keep going on and on about God being God, and attribute this god of your culture, Yahweh, as being the creator of the universe. You believe in the god of concubines, magical incantations, chosen people, and stonings.
You are pretending to know that you know that Yahweh is “the” creator, and have even convinced yourself that your pretense is authentic.
Anyone who has the courage to actually pay attention to their inner voice, and gut instinct, knows that the Abrahamic god is one of the greatest mythologies ever sold.
LikeLike
Neuro said-
—————You are pretending to know that you know that Yahweh is “the” creator, and have even convinced yourself that your pretense is authentic————-
This is a great thought from you. Obviously I disagree, but it is still good.
Just a little difference: There is an authenticity, but there is no pretense. 😉
LikeLike
I agree, CS. You authentically believe in your pretense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
neur-
Unlike others, I can actually find value in disagreement.
Try it sometime.
Related:
A man was born blind. He was given sight freely for the first time. Everybody knew his blindness was authentic.EVERYBODY.
People had the audacity to question him and his parents, trying to find a NEW defect in him, yet the thought never crossed their mind to:
-ask him what he thinks of this thing called ‘seeing’
-ask him what he thinks about colors
-actually be happy for him
-marvel in the mystery of HOW this happened
etc etc etc
Do you see any connection?
LikeLike
CS — it was a fact that this guy was blind. There was evidence that didn’t require faith.
When I questioned you about a god that requires faith, and it states in your book of faith that it is vital that you have faith in order to believe your god exists, how can you not see (no pun intended) that this should send up red flags?
The religious hierarchy, through a book/organized religion, asks of you to die to yourself, or the penalty is eternal damnation. It asks you to give a percentage of your money and time to the churches hierarchy, follow this cultural god by faith, and by faith you will earn a reward of eternal life if you play by all the rules.
In the mean time, cultures are taken over by missionaries, wars are declared in the name of your god, discrimination is sanctioned, the bible becomes a best selling book in history, churches and cathedrals line the globe, millions of clergy are employed and empowered, and they get tax exception (in America) investing their wealth making them even wealthier so they can bring more people into the fold ensuring job security, and a cushy retirement.
When I engage in discourse with you, I am not offended that you believe in god. I am aware that religion can be beneficial for people if it does not promote shame, fear and psychological and physical harm. What I take issue with is that authoritarian religion, in particular, the Abrahamic faiths, has a history of using unscrupulous tactics that program peoples brains without their conscious awareness, interferes with people seeking professional help who have undiagnosed mental health issues, takes advantage of people’s trust and good intentions, and convinces them that they can’t be prosocial without belief in their god which requires faith to believe in this god.
LikeLike
I agree with a lot of your premises here as to the egregiousness of stuff done ‘in the name of the Lord.’ However, I do not make the connection, because people are miscreants, and in some cases religious imposters, thats makes God culpable. No, He is error free.
You said and I quote:
————————————————————–
CS — it was a fact that this guy was blind. There was evidence that didn’t require faith.
—————————————————————
You have gone on record before a world wide audience and said this was a ‘fact,’ yet you also say that the eyewitness account of Peter , James, and John on the mount, was no doubt a hallucination.
You then questioned the mental sanity of Paul the apostle. Hmmmm. Same book. One account is reliable, one is not.
Takes a big person to have that kind of superhuman skill’ Me, just a weakling who believes all those accounts.
LikeLike
CS, one can prove blindness. One cannot prove god based on someone perception of reality — someone who had visions — hallucinations which could be have been caused by any number of factors including neurological disorders, oxygen deprivation, hormonal imbalances, i.e., melatonin, sleep deprivation, barren landscapes, long periods of isolation, extreme hunger, extreme cold, serious injuries causing shock, dehydration, infrasound, natural and man-made, drugs alcohol, and the list goes on and on. I’ve already shared some limited information with you. I hope you can see the difference.
What I find incredibly interesting is that you will reject every possible natural explanation but support a supernatural one based solely on someones opinion/personal experience(s). You’ve shown that you have closed your mind to any data presented to you that doesn’t align with your interpretation of an archaic book/authoritarian religion.
None of us who were once believers like you liked facing the fact that we’d been misled. You’re whole world view comes crashing down, and you have to start over again. I can assure you it’s not a piece of cake, but rather a bitter pill, especially if you were fully committed, which I think you are.
Colorstorm, you”re not ready. If, in the future, you ever get to that place, there is a compassionate support system of people online who can assist you in answering questions. Thank you for the discourse and I wish you the best on your journey.
~Victoria
LikeLike
Sure V:
I accept your resignation with regret; but the throne of God and heaven cannot be moved by paltry attacks, insolent comments, and a complete despising and ignoring of God’s perfect word.
I take your note to mean you have lost all hope in this possible ‘convert,’ but where would I go?
From light to darkness?
Btw, all that was needed to dismantle your world view was one smooth stone, and that big man Goliath, had a great fall. 😉
Your views will change, but God’s word remains forever settled in heaven.
LikeLike
If god exists, then he/she/it only appears to those with mental disorders. Everybody else requires faith.
LikeLike
My friend Tiribulis will take the baton and happily answer this comment; as I’m thinking he will do it more justice 😉
LikeLike
Here ya go, a repost of a comment that u scoffed at, but was silent when your friends made the same observation.
(others will nod the head and smile in silent agreement, but refrain from affirming this, lest their character be maligned)
Heck, they may even say: CS may be on to something 😉
——————————————————————————————–Why do most conversations default to heaven or hell? Really, you can’t see the impropriety? God cannot be contained in a thimble.
At a heart surgeons convention, why should they discuss poison ivy? My point?
The word of God is a l a r g e book, with the doctrines of heaven and hell framing a wee part, that’s why.————–
———————————————————————————–
LikeLike
Hey CS — What you can’t seem to comprehend is — you chose a god (Yahweh) who had no emotional intelligence — a tribal war god who commanded murder and stealing and allowed for little girls to be raped by “godly” men after they slaughtered their parents and siblings.
The same god that sees you as a shameful, sinful creature, willed into existence by this supposedly all-knowing, perfect god so that he can forgive you for not being perfect.
I just can’t believe a mind that could or would make this universe would share exactly the same insecurities, the same need for respect and recognition, the same demand for loyalty, submission and obedience and the same murderous rage of the worst of human kings and your average alpha male chimpanzee.
If a god doesn’t practice what he/she/it demands of its creation, this god isn’t worth a pot to piss in, much less my devotion.
LikeLike
NN-
A man goes to a strange city, and says ‘my oh my, people are so friendly around here,’ but the thought never crossed his mind that it was his own outlook.
Your viewpoint is similar, for it appears u only see God as a froward tyrant. You do not see his mercy and grace.
You judge him according to your bias, and you refuse to consider that possibly, He has perfect reasons for everything He does, and that it is simply you who do not comprehend..
Suggestion? Visit another city. ‘Travel is fatal to bigotry.’
Samuel Clemens aka Mark Twain
LikeLike
Dictators are charming and cunning.
That’s how they lure their prey.
LikeLike
Kinda like this NN-
With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful; with an upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright;
With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.
LikeLike
Kinda like this CS:
Last-Minute Message For a Time Capsule
“I have to tell you this, whoever you are:
that on one summer morning here, the ocean
pounded in on tumbledown breakers,
a south wind, bustling along the shore,
whipped the froth into little rainbows,
and a reckless gull swept down the beach
as if to fly were everything it needed.
I thought of your hovering saucers,
looking for clues, and I wanted to write this down,
so it wouldn’t be lost forever – –
that once upon a time we had
meadows here, and astonishing things,
swans and frogs and luna moths
and blue skies that could stagger your heart.
We could have had them still,
and welcomed you to earth, but
we also had the righteous ones
who worshipped the True Faith, and Holy War.
When you go home to your shining galaxy,
say that what you learned
from this dead and barren place is
to beware the righteous ones.”
― Philip Appleman
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not sure why you can’t Neuro connect the dots of your own argument.
You continually represent the God you don’t believe in, as WAR MONGER, as a God of injustice, and I point out to you that possibly it could be due to your very outlook, for I see God as MERCIFUL and slow to anger.
He needs not prove anything other than that which is already provided. To an honest conscience, the evidence abounds.
Somehow you turn it around and accuse me of self righteousness? You do not see the hypocrisy of your very arrogance?
How is referring to God’s word self ingratiating?
Have you read the posts of your friends who malign, misrepresent, slander, accuse, avoid, and insult? Yes, and you share that same lunch.
But hey, doesn’t bother me, just pointing it out for your own sake.
Tirib recent post regarding this very thing was spot on. You have no case with your baseless and inane assumptions.
Mr Appleman? He has my sympathies.
LikeLike
“You continually represent the God you don’t believe in,”
I’ll try this one more time. It is you who is representing a god who is tribal, gets off on warring, murdering men women and children who don’t submit and obey like slaves; gets men to steal, destroy and pillage, and rewards them by letting them take girls for themselves to rape and make servants off.
Again, this is a behavior exhibited in the worst of human kings and your average alpha male chimpanzee.
This is the god your beloved Jesus told you to worship. You, then, turn around and justify it before the whole world. What does this say about your character?
LikeLike
What I’m seeing here, CS, is that you’re saying you turn a blind eye to all but the “MERCIFUL” parts.
LikeLike
You know ARCH you have inadvertantly observed a truth that you will no doubt ignore, but that’s fine, I’ll tell u anyway.
A blind eye? Of course not. I am well aware of King Saul wiping out all the Amalekites——– the bastards in the land. Oh wait, he DIDN’T take them all out now did he? But that’s for another time.
But a blind eye? No. How about a thankful heart?
The fact that God is merciful AT ALL, ah, now we are making progress.
You have no idea as to the egregiousness of sin, and what an affront it is to a holy God, so when he destroys Sodom, He can do what he wants.
But when he chooses to be merciful……………..folks may want to pay attention, and that my friend is the message of the gospel.
The trouble with man is they refuse to see things from God’s perspective. God is not on trial. Man is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Saul? Why Saul? Let’s go all the way back to Joshua. Or innocent Egyptian babies? – not that any of this really happened, it’s all bs, but the fact that you believe and condone it, is very real.
LikeLike
Arch-
Condone it? Who am I to give God my approval like he needs it?
He can do what he wants, and has perfect reasons. You and I do not.
But I can assure you, Every knee will bow, its just a matter of where and when.
LikeLike
“Every knee will bow, its just a matter of where and when.” – So says the mortal, superstitious, Bronze Age men who wrote the Buybull, why should anyone believe them?
LikeLike
LikeLike
“one smooth stone, and that big man Goliath, had a great fall. 😉” – Another fairy tale.
LikeLike
“…one smooth stone, and that big man Goliath, had a great fall. 😉” – And all the king’s horses, and all the king’s men – oh, wait, that was another fairy tale.
LikeLike
It seems he’s a male Kathy.
LikeLike
Arch, did you see this yet?
LikeLike
I have now -it sounds exactly like what we have here.
LikeLike
2000 years of learned scientists lived, but are all dead, while God never existed. 4000 more will come along, and God will still never exist.
Christians will continue to bow and scrape, and God will still not exist.
LikeLike
“Changes in air pressure over a specified horizontal distance cause air molecules from the region of relatively high air pressure to rush toward the area of low pressure.”
This can be easily visualized as water flowing from a high elevation, to a lower one – except of course, for those who never read anything but religious material.
LikeLike
“Changes in air pressure over a specified horizontal distance cause air molecules from the region of relatively high air pressure to rush toward the area of low pressure.”
This can be easily visualized as water flowing from a higher elevation, to a lower one – except of course, for those who never read anything but religious material.
LikeLike
“thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth”
I guess your omniscient god, when he wrote that, hadn’t yet heard about windsocks – I can tell you not only where it came from, but where it’s going, and meteorologists, equipped with Doppler radar (something your omniscient god never mentions), can tell you that, far in advance. Guess he got it wrong again, huh?
LikeLike
Five sighs again arch-
This truth by the Lord is above your pay grade-
(Don’t worry, if a learned master didn’t understand it, it’s no surprise you don’t get it)
Would you like to try ‘Sports’ for 200?
____________________________________
LikeLike
“A penis panic is a mass hysteria event or panic in which male members of a population suddenly experience the belief that their genitals are getting smaller or disappearing entirely.”
What do they call it when we experience the belief that our genitals are getting bigger?
(Neuronotes: “Wishful thinking!”
LikeLike
LOL — so instead, they go “fishing”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“And oh, yea, above 500 witness of these infallible proofs.”
What “infallible proofs” do you have of these “500 witnesses”?
LikeLike
“maybe you should read what HE wrote, rather than what OTHERS say he wrote.”
That’s the difference between us (one of MANY), CS – I’ve read what it was claimed he wrote AND what others say he wrote.
LikeLike
Colorstorm, here’s something to think about.
http://www.westarinstitute.org/projects/the-jesus-seminar/seminar-on-the-acts-of-the-apostles/acts-seminar-to-complete-its-work-at-spring-meeting/
“I’d respect u more, if u would just say u don’t believe them, than to say there are mistakes, inaccuracies, or lies.”
I’ve never been shy at stating that I don’t believe the bible is inerrant. Neither have I been shy to state that the bible is full of “mistakes, inaccuracies, and lies”. I just used different terms like forgeries, contradictions, copying errors, deliberate embellishments and omissions. .
LikeLiked by 2 people
Also Neuro-
You make assumptions that are a tad myopic. You know nothing of my cultural/religious background; this is not an insult, but an observation; for u assume also that ‘i read one book.’ to come to such conclusions. etc..
That is a bit narrow minded, and if you would read more of what I’ve written, your view of my past may widen.
And once more, to challenge somebody by saying: ‘don;t say this or that to children’, is equally not cool.
I think between the two of us, I would be less apt to ‘offend one of the little ones.’. Milk, milk, milk milk……………..
LikeLike
Colorstorm, the moment you started posting comments you made assumptions. You had “the” truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Am I right? Everybody else is in error who doesn’t line up to your interpretation of scriptures or your religion. Am I right?
And about your comment that I said you only read one book. What I basically said was you base your whole belief on one book and faith. Everything has to line up to your book of culture, the bible, am I right?
About offending. If you get offended easily, then it’s probably not in your best interest to have discourse with me. I do not have much patience with people who have such a certainty that they will reject anything that doesn’t align with an archaic book known to be full of potholes written by men for an archaic culture. It’s time to come off the milk.
Your tummy will be upset at first, but eventually it will become easier to digest solid food. I’m using that as an analogy because I know from my own journey that it was very hard for me to step outside of my comfort zone. You have not demonstrated, to me at least, that you are willing to put your wisdom teeth to use.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey Neuro-
I’ don’t see where u keep coming up with this ‘being offended’ line-
You can’t offend me- 😉
LikeLike
Fair enough. I’m just basing it on some of your past comments. If I’ve not offended you then I’m happy about that, as it is not my intention. I just don’t sugarcoat stuff.
Just who are those “little ones” you are concerned I might offend?
LikeLike
Neuro-!!
It’s the children that u keep reminding ‘us’ to stay away from remember? .
I was giving you a handful of your own food.
According to you Neuro (what do u prefer to be called btw?) any time a person opens scripture to a child, he ‘offends ‘them.’
And I told you I would be less apt to offend them with my message, then u would with yours 😉
LikeLike
There are many scriptures I would most definitely not share with a child — for it would cause them horrible night terrors, nightmares, low self-esteem. You appear to be quite desensitized to the horrors your god committed. Yes, Christianity sugarcoats genocide with children.
LikeLike
How is teaching children to think critically and ask questions bad for children?
LikeLike
Touche-
How are teaching virtues, and seeking wisdom bad for children?
‘Children obey your parents.’
‘give to the poor’
‘visit the sick’
‘visit the fatherless.’
‘remember the widows’
So which of these is bad to teach children? The word of God is a large book, with tons of applications, and a whole lot of good stuff…..
And your examples, I concur btw-
LikeLike
Heh, only remember the widows over 60. Apparently the younger ones are “busy bodies” and thinking about getting it on.
There’s nothing wrong with teaching prosocial behavior, but don’t, for one minute, think that Jesus brought anything new to the table. If he existed, he was most likely a guru who spent time in the desert and experienced hallucinations due to fasting.
What I take issue with, Colorstorm, is that the majority of the bible is antisocial and tribal. It is fear based. Would you tell your children that when Jesus comes back, he’s going to call the birds down from the sky to gorge on the dead carcases of people who didn’t submit to Yahweh through Jesus?
LikeLike
Hey V:
O so you admit that the scriptures have value, as in ‘prosocial behaviour,’ but you have no use for the ‘parts’ that you personally find distasteful.
As to what I may or may not ‘teach’ little ones, its called wisdom. All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient.
Again I’ll repeat, its not good to cause the little ones heartache.
LikeLike
Colorstorm, the bible has writings of prosocial behavior, yes. That doesn’t make prosocial behavior divine.
Btw, speaking of heartache, did you ever hit your children (if you have them) with a rod, or another instrument including your hands? If you did then you brought heartache and possible mental health issues and disease in adulthood, according to a vast amount of peer-reviewed studies, including one of the largest investigations ever conducted to assess associations between childhood maltreatment and later-life health and well-being. — the Adverse Childhood Experience study done by the Center for Disease Control.
See what the teachings in your bible teachings can cause:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/acestudy/findings.html
No child should honor a parent who abuses them, whether that be physical, psychological or sexual. Corporal punishment is child abuse yet condoned in your bible, not to mention, as Arch pointed out — stoning them to death. That’s some god you worship there.
LikeLike
“…not to mention, as Arch pointed out — stoning them to death”
Gives a whole new meaning to rocking your kid to sleep —
LikeLiked by 1 person
A little comic relief. That’s a good one Arch. LOL
LikeLike
(In my hurry to get to church, I forget to submit this this morning)
carmen on November 16, 2014 at 1:41 pm quotes Colorstorm as saying:
Colorstorm said, “arch, you mock what you do not understand. That’s ok, there are countless millions who are with you”.
And then responds.
I would be one of those ‘countless millions’ and would speak to that, if I may. That haughty, ‘because-I’m-so-wise’ response is laughable, in that those of us who mock, do so because we DO understand. We understand perfectly – man made god, not the other way around, Colorstorm. We get it.
Like Neuro has said, it’s time the few of you on here who DON’T understand, start reading and thinking. All your posturing and sounds-wise-but-aren’t ‘speeches’ are falling on deaf ears, however entertaining they might be.
Madam I can’t get anybody here to tell me how and why 1+1=2. Ruth is the only one even taking a grown up stab. Then I can’t them get to define “probability” for me when they themselves declare that their reality is governed by it.
You understand nothing. Literally NOTHING. You “get” NOTHING, perceive NOTHING and would contribute NOTHING to the world, were it not for inescapable servitude to a God who orders even the scorn of sinners to praise His glorious name.
There were probably 1.5 million Jews in the nation of Israel when in 1st Kings 19 God told a lamenting prophet Elijah, who thought he was the only faithful servant of the Lord left:
That’s a fraction of GOD’S OWN covenant nation who were actually His. There is from Noah to the end of time, a remnant in biblical theology, even among those who claim His name who are actually known by Him, indeed FOREknown by Him, as His truly redeemed covenant people. It is no mystery that a small percentage of people today, IN THE VISIBLE CHURCH, bear any resemblance to what His word teaches, to say nothing of a dead a deluded idolatrous world.
Every time one of you opens your mouth, you proclaim God’s truth and make yourself a liar. You have no choice. Being God, he has fixed all things in favor. He always wins. Always
LikeLike
From your mouth to the toilet bowl, where it belongs – then a quick flush, and it’s gone —
LikeLike
“1+1=2. Ruth is the only one even taking a grown up stab.”
What part of 1 + 1 = 2 doesn’t prove that Yahweh is the creator don’t you get?
LikeLike
Wow! You are just “like”-ing everything I say today! This might be a good time to ask if you’ve reconsidered my offer to fool around —
LikeLike
Hopefully it will be incentive for you to check your email more often and not put me at the bottom of your list to check because you say you are saving the best for last, you silver-tongued, smooth-talker you.
*roll eyes*
I may like a man with a slow hand, but damn…not that slow.
LikeLike
“Children obey your parents.” – or they’ll take you outside of the city gates and stone you to death! (Can’t have residents stepping in all that kiddie-goo!) I think they should teach that to all of the starry-eyed little kiddies in Kindergarten, don’t you, CS?
LikeLike
arch-
You mock what you do not understand. That’s ok, there are countless millions who are with you.
LikeLike
I can’t seem to get this comment to go where it ought to –
Colorstorm said, “arch, you mock what you do not understand. That’s ok, there are countless millions who are with you”.
I would be one of those ‘countless millions’ and would speak to that, if I may. That haughty, ‘because-I’m-so-wise’ response is laughable, in that those of us who mock, do so because we DO understand. We understand perfectly – man made god, not the other way around, Colorstorm. We get it.
Like Neuro has said, it’s time the few of you on here who DON’T understand, start reading and thinking. All your posturing and sounds-wise-but-aren’t ‘speeches’ are falling on deaf ears, however entertaining they might be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey Carm-
They may be falling on deaf ears TODAY, but God made seven says in a week, 😉
LikeLike
LikeLike
“You can’t offend me” – he’s right, Neuro – his BuyBull has already told him that his god thinks he’s garbage because of what Adam did (but he loves him!) – you can’t compete with that!
LikeLike
“If you get offended easily, then it’s probably not in your best interest to have discourse with me.” – Oh, that’s a FACT, CS – take it from her favorite whipping boy!
LikeLike
LikeLike
Just putting out a feeler: would anyone be interested in a debate between me and Tiribulus about epistemology which may end up involving biblical exegesis?
I grew a beard just before I put this feeler out. See?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is that really you, Brandon? When my daughter was little, she was scared chitless of men with burly beards. It wasn’t until many years later that I learned that these types of beards are intended to scare potential predators — in other words, “me alpha male — you dead meat.”
I just found it interesting how intuitive she was as a baby and toddler. So, yeah, you two bearded brutes go at it. Should be interesting. 😀
LikeLiked by 2 people
Very interesting, Victoria! Yeah, this is me when I had a beard. At the moment it’s not like this, but I thought if I’m going debate a guy with a beard, I should beard up. 🙂
Also, maybe Arch will stop thinking my avatar is designed to be “smarmy” as part of my friendship evangelism master plan.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LOL — I wouldn’t hold my breath. 😀
LikeLike
Smarmy is as smarmy does.
LikeLike
What if they’re saying, “Ho, ho, ho!”?
LikeLike
Victoris says: ” in other words, “me alpha male — you dead meat.”
Actually it was “me married man —- wife likes beard.”. But ya know, that’s not nefarious or sinister enough for you so I understand.
LikeLike
anaivethinker asks: “Just putting out a feeler: would anyone be interested in a debate between me and Tiribulus about [biblical] epistemology…?”
I had to fill in that missing word real quick, you understand I’m sure 😉
anaivethinker asks: “which may end up involving biblical exegesis?”
It will most assuredly end up involving biblical exegesis and exposition.
anaivethinker asays: “I grew a beard just before I put this feeler out. See?”
Awright, now ya messed me ALL up. If you mean to say that you grew that cliff shrub in the last two days since we’ve been talkin, I may as well forfeit right now. It took me a few months to grow mine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why it’s the Tiribulus Twins!
“…would anyone be interested in a debate between me and Tiribulus about epistemology”
I say that whatever the two of you decide to do in privacy, is no one’s business but yours!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hell yeah! Where?
LikeLike
We’re working that out.
In case anybody is interested, I threw Victoria and Ruth’s videos together on a simple DVD and put it in an ISO file HERE 2.6 gigs, but I have pretty good upstream bandwidth where I am.
Any disc burning software that burns ISO images will make it into a DVD that will play like in your set top player on your TV.
LikeLike
Pingback: Brandon… anaivethinker
(In my hurry to get to church, I forget to submit this this morning)
carmen on November 16, 2014 at 1:41 pm quotes Colorstorm as saying:
Colorstorm said, “arch, you mock what you do not understand. That’s ok, there are countless millions who are with you”.
And then responds.
I would be one of those ‘countless millions’ and would speak to that, if I may. That haughty, ‘because-I’m-so-wise’ response is laughable, in that those of us who mock, do so because we DO understand. We understand perfectly – man made god, not the other way around, Colorstorm. We get it.
Like Neuro has said, it’s time the few of you on here who DON’T understand, start reading and thinking. All your posturing and sounds-wise-but-aren’t ‘speeches’ are falling on deaf ears, however entertaining they might be.
Madam I can’t get anybody here to tell me how and why 1+1=2. Ruth is the only one even taking a grown up stab. Then I can’t them get to define “probability” for me when they themselves declare that their reality is governed by it.
You understand nothing. Literally NOTHING. You “get” NOTHING, perceive NOTHING and would contribute NOTHING to the world, were it not for inescapable servitude to a God who orders even the scorn of sinners to praise His glorious name.
There were probably 1.5 million Jews in the nation of Israel when in 1st Kings 19 God told a lamenting prophet Elijah, who thought he was the only faithful servant of the Lord left:
That’s a fraction of GOD’S OWN covenant nation who were actually His. There is from Noah to the end of time, a remnant in biblical theology, even among those who claim His name who are actually known by Him, indeed FOREknown by Him, as His truly redeemed covenant people. It is no mystery that a small percentage of people today, IN THE VISIBLE CHURCH, bear any resemblance to what His word teaches, to say nothing of a dead a deluded idolatrous world.
Every time one of you opens your mouth, you proclaim God’s truth and make yourself a liar. You have no choice. Being God, he has fixed all things in favor. He always wins. Always
LikeLike
On 1+1=2, I don’t know, but I understand Bertrand Russell wrote a book proving it, logically.
What do you think of Occasionalism? That was the Muslim idea that things dropped fall to Earth because it was God’s will, and God could change that at any moment. Against that, I would say that God in God’s mercy gives us a universe of rules we can find out, to make our lives pleasanter, or to avoid giving a sign to a corrupt generation.
LikeLike
Gee, Trib – you must have really wanted to emphasize that last point of yours!
I’d like to respond to that by saying what’s obvious to most of us on here, Trib. Every time you open YOUR mouth, you sound more like the tribal, narcissistic, petulant god of the old testament – you know, the one proclaiming, “Love me (and praise me constantly) OR ELSE!”
You’re really starting to sound like you are the one needing convincing. In case you might not have noticed, it isn’t working for me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Love me (and praise me constantly) OR ELSE!””
That’s what these Fundies don’t seem to get, Carmen – for them, “Heaven” is about walking along streets of gold with the loved ones who have gone on before, but the Bible makes it clear, you’re there to praise god, around the clock, 24/7 – “church” that lasts forever, as Mark Twain put it. It’s hard to decide which is the real Hell!
LikeLike
Yup, arch – if that’s heaven, I don’t want it.
Then again, if I was to imagine a ‘heaven’ (and I think that’s where it exists – entirely in the imagination) it would probably include a plethora of musicians , many interesting (and bad-ass!) people, and wine – lots of wine. . now THAT sounds like fun!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Carmen, when I see people like Greg and the things they writes, I can’t help but think about death anxiety. People like him are willing to throw humanity under the bus and worship a tyrant in order to save their ass, metaphorically speaking.
LikeLike
Not in the agenda, Carmen – it’s not about you, it’s all about HIM.
LikeLike
Working? It’s my job to preach. The results are up to the Holy Spirit.
Stuff to do for church later. I’ll be on and off until tonight when it’s unfortunately quiet around here due to the time difference. Unavoidable.
LikeLike
N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ on November 16, 2014 at 7:30 pm said:
What part of 1 + 1 = 2 doesn’t prove that Yahweh is the creator don’t you get?
What part of “that’s not an argument” don’t you?
LikeLike
It most certainly is an argument. Again, what part of 1 + 1 = 2 doesn’t not prove that Yahweh is the creator don’t you get?
LikeLike
Ohhhhhhhh yes it does 😉
LikeLike
Oh really? Do explain, and don’t quote your idols, Augustine and Calvin or claim to know it through faith or what’s written in an archaic book. Show me using the scientific method, that Yahweh is the creator.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Victoria says: “Oh really? Do explain, and don’t quote your idols, Augustine and Calvin”
Um, to the best of my recollection I have not quoted Calvin or Augustine even once since I’ve been around here.
“Show me using the scientific method, that Yahweh is the creator.”
Thank you Victoria. The so called “scientific method” AND 1+1 certainly equaling 2 are two ways of stating the same thing. Both of which you take entirely on FAITH. Unless and until you tell me how and why I should believe either one. Why should I put any trust in the “scientific method” which is enslaved to logic for it’s existence and function? Show me. NOT using faith, which you say you don’t accept, OR using the “scientific method” itself, which would be the grand daddy of all question begging circular arguments.
I’ll be patiently waiting for the rest of eternity for your answer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And this is your counter? sigh
There’s been thousands of gods and plenty of war gods, but you pick out one of the most anti-human, antisocial war gods of them all. So, again, why Yahweh?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The so called “scientific method” AND 1+1 certainly equaling 2 are two ways of stating the same thing. Both of which you take entirely on FAITH.”
Greg, you laughed at me a while back for some Cartesian comment I made, and yet your argument doesn’t extend beyond Descarte’s starting point. As Victoria says, even if we all accept that we can’t be sure of anything, you are still completely unable to demonstrate why this means that your one interpretation of the religion from one invisible god story among millions is suddenly FACT.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Show me using the scientific method, that Yahweh is the creator.” Haha, you did!
LikeLike
I did Violet? What am I missing. 😀
LikeLike
He’s probably scribbling it all out right now …
LikeLike
Oh, I just got you comment, Violet, which was confirming what I told you elsewhere. I though you meant that I had proved, via scientific method, that Yahweh existed. I was scratching my head there for a minute. LOL
About him probably scribbling it all out right now — I seriously doubt it. He thinks the scientific method is “enslaved to logic”. 😀
LikeLike
. . .and GOD FORBID anyone use logic!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Carmen says: “.and GOD FORBID anyone use logic!”
PLEASE READ THIS
Really.folks. I give you far more respect than you give me. I’m working at church til later.
LikeLike
This is my spam folder 5 times ….
LikeLike
That’s an interesting accusation considering the fact that you justify crimes against humanity when Yahweh is leading the way.
LikeLike
Carmen says: “. . .and GOD FORBID anyone use logic!”
From above on this very page:
Really.folks? I give you far more respect than you give me. I’m working at church til later.
LikeLike
.. .. sigh . . the idea of being a responsible parent, Trib, and the goal for all parents, is to equip children to grow up and THINK FOR THEMSELVES, so they can make adult decisions. We’re not little children. We’re adults and capable of doing just that – thinking for ourselves. You seem to be absolutely giddy with the idea that it’s a noble thing to be so gullible.
Only in religion is gullibility a virtue. Respect, Trib? I think you should start respecting yourself.
LikeLike
“A child does not know what his father knows, but he knows that his father knows it.”
He can also grow up to find that his father is mistaken on a number of issues he previously thought his father knew.
LikeLiked by 1 person
With his earthly father this is true. Not with the eternally omniscient and immutable Father God.
I don’t know how Cantor’s infinities work. I know my Father, who is their source and who knows everything does though. I also know that His triunity wherein one and many, unity and diversity, find equal ultimacy, fully answers every one of those what are to us, unsolvable mysteries.
As stupid as that will be to you, you have given NO answer. Not even an attempt. Probability Arch. Go back over to the deconversion thread and define probability for me. On and on you carp and prattle while bringing nothing of substance. You can do better.
LikeLike
I did give you a definition, and told you that if you weren’t satisfied with it, to suck it up. Nothing has changed.
LikeLike
You copied and pasted a pitiful sophomoric definition from somebody’s dictionary because you’ve never even once given it more than 2 seconds thought. I’m asking you to THINK for yourself, and tell me what you believe “probability” to be. It seems kinda important doesn’t it? Bein that to you it is the highest attainable category of knowledge? Call me crazy (oops ya’ll already did), but I’d want to know what this is if it we’re me.
The consolation for you is that you are certainly in no danger of thinking as deeply as Cantor and Boltzmann did and will no doubt numbly plod through life convincing yourself that such basic ignorance is bliss indeed. Their fate will never be yours.
LikeLike
I see no reason to repeat myself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see no reason for you to repeat yourself either, which is why I’m asking you to actually think this time. Not because I think you’re a moron who can’t do it. Just the opposite actually.
LikeLike
You have a belief system based on the suppositions of superstitious men dead 3000 years – if you have no more sense than that, why should I waste my time with you? grow up – there IS no Santa Claus!
LikeLike
I’ll keep that in mind.
LikeLike
I said on this very page: ” I use the same logic everybody else does,”
Carmen, mocking me, as if I had NOT said this numerous time, says: “. . .and GOD FORBID anyone use logic!
Listen closely now please. I have been AFFIRMING logic since the first minute I peeked my head into this blog. I have a very good reason for doing so. What’s yours? That’s what I’m asking. Up to this minute, only Ruth has gotten close to understanding that and attempted a grown up conversation accordingly.
LikeLike
Which means it’s logical (in your mind) to accept that a spirit impregnated a virgin, a dead body was resurrected and magically floated up to ‘heaven’, and an underworld furnace exists which tortures ‘sinners’ forever.
And you wonder why you are mocked.
LikeLike
Nevermind
LikeLike
Trib, clever graphic! ha, ha!
Now use logic to decide that you’ve had enough of fairy tales and join the rest of us in the world of reality – there’s no such thing as imaginary sky-daddies, however much you wish it to be so.
LikeLike
Tiribulus wrote: “The so called “scientific method” AND 1+1 certainly equaling 2 are two ways of stating the same thing. Both of which you take entirely on FAITH. Unless and until you tell me how and why I should believe either one. Why should I put any trust in the “scientific method” which is enslaved to logic for it’s existence and function?”
We do not take 1+1=2 on faith. It is an abstract description of what we observe in the material observable reality. And we can even confirm our perception of reality by repeating the test. It is verifiable and therefore we are highly warranted in our belief that this will be the result in the future also. Faith is not involved. Faith as described in the Oxford dictionary when we speak about religious faith, that is: “Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.”
Same applies to the scientific method. The fact, that the scientific method is logical is the very reason why it is the best method we have to get to even close to any even remotely reliable perception of objective reality. Why? Simply because in our experience logic is highly descriptive of reality we happen to exist in, nothing more.
Where do any particular gods step in?
This is for you Violet. 😉 Now let us see what good it will do.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that Violet wasn’t as gleefully optimistic at your irrelevant comment as you are.
You are clueless beyond measure sir and one more person with no idea of what epistemology is. Ruth, I hope you read this guy’s comment. This is what I’m up against everywhere I go.
rautakyy, if you wish to have any hope of making a valuable contribution to this dialog, I would ask that you please view Victoria’s VIDEOS. They are probably the quickest cure to your embarrassing ignorance and I will be forever grateful to her for putting them at my disposable. As I told her. Had I known of their existence, I would have posted them myself. They are NOT Christian, but…… yes they are 😉 That’s how God works ya see.
I reiterate, these are not mine. N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ posted them and didn’t wanna touch em again after I demonstrated how valuable they were to me. Ruth remains the only person on this blog who does not make shallow meaningless condescending remarks like my new friend rautakyy has above.
LikeLike
Greg, you’re really showing your insecurity now, which is clothed in narcissistic behavior. As far as the videos I posted, I shared them with you for the purpose of testing your perception of reality. I got my suspicions confirmed, which I noted right after I got your feedback.
— http://youtu.be/m30mG3JKzA8 —
Btw, Rautakyy is one of the most respected and knowledgeable bloggers on WP.
LikeLike
“Btw, Rautakyy is one of the most respected and knowledgeable bloggers on WP.”
EXCELLENT!!! Let him watch your videos and join RUTH AND I
LikeLike
“Violet wasn’t as gleefully optimistic at your irrelevant comment as you are.”
The comment is spot on. I suspected you might go off on a tangent, but I didn’t know you were so lost that you might think it irrelevant or even ignorant. Think about what he’s saying here Greg.
LikeLike
This is the kind of response that worries me. This is creating a hierarchy with yourself on top. Even if you are correct, why not meet Rautakyy at some common point and carefully explain things instead of making Raut inferior as in irrelevant, clueless, ignorant?
I’ve been impressed with Raut’s level of engagement. There was a time when we were writing 4 pages single spaced a night back and forth and I learned a lot.
LikeLike
This is engagement without engaging Brandon. I’ll answer your email here. You may be impressed with Rautakyy. I am not. The only common point we have is the image of God at the epistemological level.There is no other neutral ground. I’ve made myself clear in the emails. Rather than worry about me, either accept or decline. Actually YOU challenged ME first. Unless I misunderstood. I am neither encouraging nor discouraging you from doing it.I have plenty to do and Ruth alone would keep me busy right now. I am far behind with her actually impressive engagement.
I told you right up front we would not be on the same side and everything I expected out of these folks because of it. I sent you prep materials and made suggestions for how to explain the break from your normal style of format on your blog and for keeping the layout clean as went.
I don’t know what else you want from from me? Take your time. As I say. Ruth is keeping me busy. I doubt she’ll say so and I couldn’t really expect her to, but she’ll know exactly what I mean about Rautakyy. He’s not even close.
LikeLike
Greg, I think having any common ground like the image of God or human dignity or the English language, is enough reason to never dismiss someone. Suppose a patient walks into a doctor’s office and the doctor says, “I have the biopsy report back. You have cancer” and the patient says, “Naw, I don’t believe in that stupid stuff.” Isn’t it the doctor’s duty to try to explain to the patient what this means? The doctor is privileged with education. Suppose you too are privileged by God, this means you have a duty to work with any common ground at all for the sake of loving one’s neighbor, loving one’s enemy, and human dignity.
And, you should know something. You interpreted my comment as a challenge, but I meant for those questions to be rhetorical as in a classical diatribe. That doesn’t mean I don’t want to engage with you. Do you think your interpretation derives from the defensive stance your worldview forces you to take?
I wouldn’t even say presuppositionalism or strong fideism necessitates arrogance in conversation. The former does create a dangerous hierarchy between believer and nonbeliever which I think is sub-biblical, but it does not necessitate arrogance in conversation. So, I’m not asking you to give up your epistemology. What I am asking is to please be considerate of Rautakyy’s human dignity when you formulate a response.
LikeLike
As he is a creature of God and my brother in Adam, I hold Rautakyy’s human dignity to be absolutely precious on that basis. His first interaction with me is probably the most arrogant and condescending remark that I have seen yet on this site:
Nobody even took notice of that. As if he had just unceremoniously vanquished my position when in fact, he hadn’t even addressed it AT ALL. 🙂 As Ruth, so deftly and diplomatically affirmed.
I have been told my brain doesn’t function properly, I’m a coward, a weakling, a simpleton and most recently, a man bringing “12 year old reasoning” to this blog by the woman who invited me here.
None of that apparently is “arrogant” though. 😉 (yes, I do realize that Christians are held to a higher standard and should be) Far from dismissing the man as he so contemptuously and sneeringly dismissed me, I have asked him to watch Victoria’s own excellent videos and join Ruth and I. I was serious. Let’s see if he does. The funny thing if he does is, for a while Ruth will probably spend her time explaining to him that he in fact does not understand. Even though I’ve just said that. I bet she STILL does it. Because she is not afraid (like you are btw) of what I may be right about. As long as it doesn’t include my God being the answer as I contend, she’s fine with the rest of what I say being true. (Just like Kamui)
For you though Brandon? if I’m right about what Ruth is willing to concede to me? Then the God I preach MUST be the answer. Mustn’t he? A thing at least as unthinkable to you as it is to her. Is it not? Oh yes it is. THAT would mean that the faith of your family that you originally fled is a whole lot more correct than you are willing to even consider. You abandoned the historic gospel in order to worship the wisdom of men and THEN, once you saw that apostates like Francis Collins and his crew had provided you a way to keep your idols, you decided God was worth giving another chance. You may have returned to theism, but not the God of the bible or His Christ which your theology calls a liar. At least Peter Enns is honest about that.
Come on now. Stop this halting cautious pokin around with me and start your thread and we’ll talk if you want to. And I DO mean talk. I’m not gonna yell at you or beat you down with insults. I AM interested however in showing the difference between our Gods. Mine is THE standard for everything like the scriptures teach. Yours is what’s left after man is done cutting away the parts he doesn’t like. I could be wrong but I get the sense that at the bottom your heart, you know that. This emergent compromise ain’t what the bible teaches.
LikeLiked by 1 person
““This is for you Violet. 😉 Now let us see what good it will do.”
Nobody even took notice of that. As if he had just unceremoniously vanquished my position when in fact, he hadn’t even addressed it AT ALL. 🙂 As Ruth, so deftly and diplomatically affirmed.”
Just to clarify:
1. That wasn’t Raut being arrogant. He had posted something mentioning Christians using logic to ‘prove’ their god exists, and I asked me if would pop over and explain to you the flaws in the argument. He was reluctant to do so based on his many wasted experiences getting caught up with Christians discussing things like this, but he’s such a nice guy he did it anyway. Where do you see arrogance in him openly stating it was a blog buddy favour for me? Where do you see arrogance in him recognising from past experience that the Christian in question would dismiss it all? He was right. As usual.
2. Ruth so deftly and diplomatically affirmed that you are terrible at explaining your position, and that she is the only person who can make sense of your ramblings. Patience and experience with Christians of a similar ilk being some of her many skills.
3. I apologise for the patronising 12 year old reasoning comment. I have so little patience for pretentious philosophical overthinking masquerading as some sort of deep and intellectual endeavour. I do find it incredible that people are so ‘amazed’ by the universe they can only come to the conclusion it was created, given how far we have come in terms of understanding our existence. A creator god that had been this clever would have left no clues – not a series of ever decreasing clues depending on how much humans understand. However, the crowning glory is always when Christians/Muslims/Sikhs/Aztecs conclude that it is their god that must have done it. Foolish isn’t in it (unless you lived a hundred or more years ago, in which case it’s completely understandable).
LikeLiked by 2 people
And I didn’t know a thing of this back story until just now, did I? There’s no need to apologize Violet. Abusive vitriol and snide condescension don’t bother me. My only point was the double standard. I could fill a comment at least as long as 5 of my regular long ones copying and pasting just the dismissive face slapping treatment I’ve gotten here.
You might understand (might not too) if you actually read my comments. Raul was not spot on. As Ruth recognized, he answered what I was not asking. The fact that you think he said anything about my line of argumentation, if I might gently assert, simply shows that you don’t understand either.
It’s not that it’s that tremendously difficult. It’s FOREIGN to how people are used to thinking. Cantor and Boltzmann were thinking on this foundational level which is why Victoria’s videos are so useful .
LikeLike
Greg, of course, Raut should have been more sensitive with his opening, but he did spend time on the content. Of course, people have insulted you and it’s pathetic and disappointing. Please remember the first blog post you were involved in on Violetwisp and what I said.
Yes, we do have differences and I’m not sure you entirely know what they are. It’s curious that you think I’m scared and you think you know what my parents believed. Those kinds of comments are unnecessary.
The real issue, the one you are not addressing is your own behavior. Not anyone else’s but your own. It doesn’t matter if everyone here insulted you, it’s still your responsibility to demonstrate love and charity. If Christ was persecuted, you should expect to be as well. I’m not picking on you, but I know you are a follower of Christ, so I can raise this criticism legitimately. I have also criticized atheists by appealing to secular humanism and give myself a good deal of self-criticism. It’s OK. It’s just part of being human, but what you do with criticism like this is up to you.
Emergent compromise? . . . why don’t we at least lay out our positions before we toss around pejoratives.
LikeLike
I reject your definitions of love and charity. I have retaliated against and or insulted nobody’s person and have assumed the best of everyone’s abilities and for a while intentions as well.You quite typically mistake godly conviction for arrogance and a lack of love. That discussion will go nowhere.
Start your thread sir and state your objections to my epistemology. I have given you a mountain of material to base it on. Either tell me that’s what you want to do and I will look forward to you taking all the time you need to prepare, or don’t. I will not however waste more time on sniveling about whether I talked mean to somebody or not. I’ve had it up to here with quivering, whimpering harmless Christians who are just as uncertain about God as the pagans their supposed to be proclaiming him to.
If I am wrong about anything I’ve said so far, it will come out as we go and I will publicly repent for my presumptuous error.
What do you say?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I’ve had it up to here with quivering, whimpering harmless Christians who are just as uncertain about God as the pagans their supposed to be proclaiming him to.” – And here we have still more arrogance —
LikeLike
My guess is, T, that you had a father-figure in your life who browbeat you the way you now browbeat others – no one should do that to a child. I’ve seen my own grandson bullied the same way.
LikeLike
ArcH-
Want Arrogance? See Dawkins, and Bill Maher, Bill Nye as well.. Heck, just look at posts here if you want to see arrogance. Some worship certain bloggers.
But boasting in the Lord is far from arrogance. David said “You come to me with a spear you uncircumcised Philistine. I come to you in the name of the Living God.’ See the difference Arch? He boasted all right. Confident? Yep. Did he boast of himself? Nope.
And people accused Paul of ‘boasting’ for just mentioning 195 lashes. Sure, he was boasting, yea ok, uh huh. Believe that and you get the ‘fool for the day award.’
See how easy it is to mess things up because of bias?
LikeLike
“David said “You come to me with a spear you uncircumcised Philistine. I come to you in the name of the Living God.’” – So say the superstitious, mortal men who wrote the Buybull – why should anyone believe them?
“A wet bird never flies at night!” – makes just as much sense.
LikeLike
In a single comment, he has devalued both Brandon and Rautakky, yet has the arrogance to profess not to be arrogant —
LikeLiked by 1 person
And the irony is that the intellect of each of them surpasses his own exponentially.
LikeLike
You are clueless beyond measure sir and one more person with no idea of what epistemology is. Ruth, I hope you read this guy’s comment. This is what I’m up against everywhere I go.
Raut took a stab and engaged you on your question of how and why we know that 1+1=2 and he gave a rather good explanation. I realize that this wasn’t exactly what you were after, but the quote above is a pretty good example of why “these folks” are engaging you the way they are. It’s arrogant. You can call it arrogance about your God if you want, but since “these folks” don’t believe in your God it just sounds like plain ol’ arrogance.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hmmm….I agree 100% with you, Raut. But I don’t think that T’s point is that 1+1 equaling 2 nor the scientific method are not reliable nor uncertain. I think he’s making the very point that they are. He’s asking us to think a step beyond that. Why is it observable? Is it only logic because we can observe it or is it logic regardless of whether we can observe it?
This is not me agreeing with Tiribulus. Far from it. I just think he uses the 1+1=2 as an example of logic that is observable. But what makes this logic so?
LikeLike
Yes, Ruth, I understand. My approach was obviously not fruitfull. Much like I feared beforehand.
Laws of nature exist regardless of our perception of them. We call our perception and understanding of them logic. That was my point. It might be worlds apart from what Tiribulus was after, but my question still stands. Where do any particular gods step in?
Repeating 1+1=2 does nothing to prove any particular god claims as true, because we allready know why we know this much and no gods were required to explain it.
We may fall on an epistemological path and seek some particular god hiding there somewhere in the gaps of our knowledge, but what sort of god is that? If we set out to seek a specific god, and it can only be found in the gaps of our knowledge, by naming stuff we do not have sufficient information to evaluate, to be the god of our choise, what have we found exactly?
If there are gods that are doing as much to hide from human observation, as they obviously are since none appear very frequently, if indeed at all, other than in anecdotal stories not unsimilar to UFO stories, in this material observable universe, is it even a remotely likely possibility, that they expect us to seek them out from epistemology, or some other philosophical hideout? Most gods according to their adherents seem only to be concerned for humans to accept their existance on blind faith in (new or old) traditions most often inherited from obviously ignorant and superstitious people with tribal moralistic values. The most vile versions of gods offer the fear factor as a motivator to do so and invoke might makes right as justification to this, wich is why I am justified in calling them vile.
Oh by the way, I do not mind being called arrogant, because I am. I do not see arrogance as necessarily a bad thing. If I am ignorant about something I appriciate being enlightened about it.
LikeLike
Sorry I misspelled your name earlier, rautakyy – two k’s, one y – I followed your dialogue with Brandon, very insightful, you certainly held your own. Here, regrettably, we have a schoolyard bully who respects no one’s opinion but his own.
LikeLike
No sweat, archaeopteryx1. We both have difficult nicks. I truly KNOW, even regardless of my “ignorance of epistemology”, that I just happened to study a bit in the university, that you did not do it on purpose. 😉
LikeLike
Listen friend. This isn’t exactly your fault because Violet called you in WAAAAY late, but you are wasting page space. This one was worse than the last.You seem like a sharp fella and I can take all the arrogance there is. However. I repeat, with love and charity, please watch Victoria’s videos and do some reading around. You are not even accidentally bumping up against any of the points of my argument.
Maybe Ruth will do better than myself at helping you see this. No offense man. Honest. They seem to consider you their champion (or one of em) which automatically intrigues me. I welcome the dialog, but this is not getting us anywhere.
LikeLike
I actually think he is addressing some of the points of your argument. Is not your argument that because the laws of logic exist there must be some governor[in your scenario Yahweh] of those laws? Or did I miss the boat on that? When Rautakyy says:
“Laws of nature exist regardless of our perception of them. We call our perception and understanding of them logic.”
Isn’t this what you’ve been saying?
and then he follows it up with:
“That was my point. It might be worlds apart from what Tiribulus was after, but my question still stands. Where do any particular gods step in?”
This is the question we are asking you to answer. You have boldly claimed that it can’t be just any creator but the one you have decided to put your trust in and to follow, Yahweh. You have boldly claimed that you will demonstrate that. I’ve been waiting for you to do this and have been, so far, patient in abiding your systematic worldview take on things. I’d like to advance past “the laws of logic exist therefor…”. We all know and agree that the laws of nature exist regardless of our perception of them. What next? How do you leap from there to Yahweh?
LikeLike
I’m glad to read this Ruth because I was beginning to wonder if I’d missed where he’s addressed this. He’s been asked countless times and I haven’t seen any comment where he’s even started to respond to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Can you please summarise the key points in your argument? All I’ve seen is repetitive ramblings running to 10000s of words and claims that no-one is getting it. So just a few bullet points might help us all understand what points you think you’ve made.
LikeLike
@Tiribulus, who is wasting page space here? You have written several comments after I made my point about us actually knowing how we know 1+1=2 (and not requiring any gods to achieve this) and asking a simple question of how does that relate to any gods, but instead of trying to answer my simple question, or even attempting to explain what you meant by your matemathical example, you have blabbered line after line how I totally missed your point. Well, hooray for boobies! I am sorry if I did not cath your drift, but I was merely trying to cut to the chace. Is there a point to the 1+1=2???
Who is wasting page space here? You are here to give excuses like might makes right to a particularly immoral god most of the readers of this page have long since abandoned as a fairytale suggestion anyway and most of them never did share such vile moralistic views as you do with your god. Most of the people reading this, or at least participating here are deconvertees, or less religious people than you, to whom, you having succumbed to the tribal moralism of the Bible, only works to strengthen their resolve and understanding the vile nature of your god, or in case of the possible agnostic doubters as a final push towards atheism. In that sense, you certainly are not wasting page space in my book.
Or did you just say I am wasting page space to drive me out of the sandbox? Was it a conscious attempt, or a mere panic reaction to something I said? Why would you think this was all about you? I was quoted in the original post too, remember? 😉
Now, if there is an argument for the existance of your god behind the 1+1=2, or something that leads to such, let us hear it. If you have made it somewhere else, please give me a link to it. I certainly feel like I am wasting my precious little time with you (as I have only this one life, but you seem certain – for what ever reason, escapes me – that you have all eternity), but let us try once more. You can not know wether some of us are predestined by your god to the heaven thing after all, can you? If you have a good and valid argument why any of the rest of us should accept your particular god really exists, then simply make it. If Jeffery Dahmer could be saved, then so could any one of us, right? But we should first be able to accept your god as something other than a mere myth. Correct? Preferably a less immoral myth, but if that is the reality, then so be it. Is your god expecting us to auto-suggest ourselves into believing something we would otherwise find ridiculous, or is there actually some eyeopening evidence, that could make your particular god claim more plausible, than all the other gods in human history? You do know, the deconvertees (from one religion, or a nother) have heard most arguments for gods and found them wanting. Do you? Do you have something special, or are you just going to end up with special pleading for your god?
I read the thread abowe and watched the videos before I made my first comment. How are they supposed to open up your example about the 1+1=2 or prove that any gods exist? Or do you think the videos Victoria posted excuse the lack of morals and ethical understanding your god is presenting? Or what?
Do not be scared, I am no champion to anyone and English is not even my native language.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is meant as no slight to you personally Raul, but Ruth has invested significant time and thought into a meaningful conversation. Brandon has now committed to a separate dialog on his blog. I went over it earlier today and there are a dozen places before I ever heard of Violet where I’m at various levels of commitment to contributions.
All head butting aside. Please feel free to follow with Ruth in the “deconversion” thread. Unlike God, I am not unlimited in my intellectual resources. I am not going to commit to yet another line of conversation here.
LikeLike
Fair enough. As I said, I felt I was wasting my time.
LikeLike
I think you nailed him! Much like his hero!
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I just think he uses the 1+1=2 as an example of logic that is observable. But what makes this logic so?” – Irrelevant obfuscation, Ruth, as it has no bearing on the Midianite desert god, YHWH.
This is exactly why I chose not to play – never accept another man’s bar bet – he knows how the trick works, and you don’t.
LikeLike
If it’s a “trick” what difference does it make how it works. Does not truth always win over falsehood? How could a man who preaches the bronze age Midianite god of the buybull EVER trick you Arch?
LikeLike
Well, as I said to Tiribulus over on the “deconversion” post, this doesn’t seem like a particularly new argument. It seems the same to me as the “uncaused first cause” or the “unmoved first mover” argument. Both of these have been addressed by minds far greater than mine.
LikeLike
I’m not of the opinion that this is some “trick”. Maybe he thinks it’s a “gotcha” but I don’t. Greg and others who are believers truly have faith that the reason 1+1=2, and the base of all knowledge, is YHWH.
Obviously I disagree with that conclusion and feel I have very valid reasons for doing so.
LikeLike
Colorstorm says: “The trouble with man is they refuse to see things from God’s perspective. God is not on trial. Man is.”
Indeed. The verdict is long in. Guilty. Everybody. There is pardon for those who forsake their own attempts at righteousness and plead the blood of Christ as payment for their crimes. All other claims are already rejected.
Colorstorm says: “But boasting in the Lord is far from arrogance.”
1st Corinthians 1:31 and 2nd Corinthians 10:17 too.
“Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”
Not as Greg, but as a Christian. A redeemed and adopted child of the God who created the universe and who exercises sovereign unassailable dominion over the whole of all that is. He is my Father and my wisdom and my strength and my shield and my life. How could it ever be possible to really believe that and NOT be absolutely convinced that to the extent HIS word is on your lips that you are right in Him and everybody who disagrees is wrong? How?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Everything you boast about is according to the superstitious, mortal, Bronze Age men who wrote the Buybull, why should anyone believe them?
LikeLike
Alright Greg, I will make a blog post dedicated to a debate. One condition is that I will not start with objections. I would rather you formulate a short opening statement. It could be about your philosophy or exegesis of Romans 1 or both. In your opening statement it would be good to focus more on establishing a position rather than anticipating objections. Another condition is that anyone can join. If someone recapitulates an issue that has already be addressed, then we can moderate this. The last condition is that when we get to a point where nothing fruitful can be said, we should agree to disagree, shake hands, and go along being friends. Would you like to modify one of these or add more conditions?
What should I name the post? How about “Debate with Tiribulus” or “Presuppositional worldview: a friendly debate”? What do you think would be appropriate?
I guess one last thing needs to be said. I’m unsure of the pace of the debate because I work many hours, and in general, prefer to be thorough and well-researched when needed. I suspect that some of it will go quicker, other times there may be a lull at least from me. We’ll just have to communicate to keep up with these sorts of issues.
LikeLike
“I would rather you formulate a short opening statement.” – Good luck with that short thing —
LikeLike
Brandon says: “Alright Greg, I will make a blog post dedicated to a debate.”
I sense that you think you see in me a newly perceived vulnerability. That’s all I’ll say about that for now.
Brandon says: “you formulate a short opening statement.”
Ok 🙂 But, I don’t do formal college style debates. Opening statements, cross, rebuttal etc. Complete waste of time. I just like to talk to people.
Brandon says: “It could be about your philosophy or exegesis of Romans 1 or both.”
I have one ready.
Brandon says: “In your opening statement it would be good to focus more on establishing a position rather than anticipating objections.”
However, if right off the bat you are going to be dictating to me how I can and cannot pursue this debate, it will not last long. I cannot be constrained by what you want me to tell you and how you want me to tell it to you. I certainly will not be doing that to you. If that’s not what you mean then I apologize in advance.
Brandon says: “Another condition is that anyone can join.”
It’s your blog. My only point with that was if you have the same comment nesting setup that Violet has here, it will be as hard to keep a flow going there as it is here. I cannot stand nested comments. (you can change that ya know Violet) They are all out of order and the simple solution is to cite somebody when addressing them. That’s why I suggested a separate thread for their crew to heckle like they do here. I have no problem with whoever wants to be there. I just didn’t want us to have to be stepping over and around mountains of unrelated abuse in order to have a discussion.
Brandon says: “If someone recapitulates an issue that has already be addressed, then we can moderate this.”
You’ll be doing the moderating. Like I say. Its’ your blog.
Brandon says: “The last condition is that when we get to a point where nothing fruitful can be said, we should agree to disagree, shake hands, and go along being friends.”
I’ll just agree to this for now and not say more if or until it comes up later. I have no desire to become hostile enemies through this.
Brandon says: “Would you like to modify one of these or add more conditions?”
Well, I gave some thoughts above
Brandon says: “What should I name the post? How about “Debate with Tiribulus” or “Presuppositional worldview: a friendly debate”? What do you think would be appropriate?”
Whatever you think. No sarcasm. Doesn’t matter to me. It is again, your blog.
Brandon says: “I guess one last thing needs to be said. I’m unsure of the pace of the debate because I work many hours, and in general, prefer to be thorough and well-researched when needed. I suspect that some of it will go quicker, other times there may be a lull at least from me. We’ll just have to communicate to keep up with these sorts of issues.”
I would not have it any other way Brandon. No pressure from either side. If a person hasn’t been faced at their best, then they haven’t been faced at all. Ruth has won herself a place in my heart (in only the most appropriate way of course). I WILL continue with her until… whenever 🙂 So that will take time too. I also have like a half dozen others that are coasting at the moment. They may demand attention at any time as well, so as I say. NO time pressure.
LikeLike
Greg, no new perceived vulnerability. 🙂 I don’t view this as a competition, rather an exercise of mutual exchange.
I agree with you, no constraints, no formal structure. I just meant that it might be better to sort of see what objections I bring up rather than anticipating a plethora of objections from the get go. It’s just a suggestion though.
The more time I spend on WP, the more I agree. I’m not sure what would happen to old comment sections if I tried to change the format, so I think I’ll keep it how it is for now. We don’t have to use the nesting though. We can just reply at the bottom each time.
Yes but since I’m inviting you over and you are obliging I think it’s appropriate that you have some say about these things since it is dedicated to discussion with you and your worldview.
I think it will be titled something like “Epistemology and Christianity: a discussion” and have a little text in the post about how the idea came about and what we intend to accomplish.
Thanks. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay 🙂
LikeLike
Wake me when it’s over.
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
“I cannot be constrained by what you want me to tell you” – and yet you expect that from us.
LikeLike
Just for you, Rautakyy:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahaha! Exellent.
archaeopteryx1 wrote: “I think you nailed him! Much like his hero!”
Yes, I was there, I was one of the Roman “Germanic” auxilia who hanged the carpenter Yeshua on the cross. Of course we did not nail him to it, we had professional carpenters – his collegues and competitors – to do the job for us. We were paid by Ioshua from Arimathea to save the life of this “nazarine”, or monk if you will, because he was considered not guilty by many to the herecy he was convicted from. At least by our commander in charge, Pilatus of the Pontius family, who as a true Roman was always ready to use the “divida et impera” politics, but who was not in the least bit interrested in the religious arguments of the Jewish fundamentalists. Saving the life of this dude who had disrupted the religious unity of the ever restless Jews was his plot and he looked the other way when we made a bit of of buck by selling the carpenter who had merely hang on the cross for few hours, unlike the typical victims of this execution method, who were there for days and weeks.
We had to make it look like Roman justice had happened, though, and we made him and his friend swear oaths to their god, that he would not make public appearances in Jerusalem afterwards, or our commander might feel inclined to punish us. I guess they took those oaths seriously. Besides, we had him up there long enough, that he would not survive for long. The infection of his wounds would soon kill him anyway. Our centurion was a religious man, who actually wanted to save the carpenter-monk, because the carpenter monk might be a son of some local god, and that killing him might get the local gods angry at us. The centurion was scared when there was a bit of a storm and we were worried that our cooluses (helmets) might get rusty if it started to rain. We laughed to the centurion and tried to explain him, that “son of god” meant a different thing all together to the Jews than to the Romans and Greeks. That they would call anybody who was following their sacred laws written by their theocratic ancestors “a son of god”. But he would not listen, because he was taken by his superstitious fears. I guess it would paid him better to visit local brothells to understand the mindset of the Jews and learn about their customs.
None of us from my unit were guarding the tomb and we were the only unit in Jerusalem at the time being. As the nearest legion was in Syria, we really needed all the divida et impera our commander could muster. The story about guards was a fabrication by some of the followers of this mad monk, they came up with a lot later after they had first decided to explain the disappearance of Yeshua from the tomb, rather than accepting the obvious, that he left with Ioshua, to that he had resurrected, like some Aegyptian Farao. That is why the guards only appear on one of the so called testimonies of the events, though what it really reveals is how much hogwash there is in those fairy tales about the man.
How can I tell you this after all these centuries? Because I am the son of war god Tursa, and I can not die. I was tens of thousands of years old already when those events took place, but I am here and you can examine my eyewittness account and ask me any questions related to the historical places and events I have participated. If any of you are ready to take a supernatural explanation to the events at Jerusalem some two millenia ago at face value, then you have no excuse not to take at face value my personal eyewittness account to the same events.
LikeLike
Yea rauttaky-there is a difference between your account and that of scripture-
No fool would give his life for your web of deceit you have spun.
But u do get extra points for creativity, then again I’m reminded that Satan walks about with a silvery tongue looking for they with itching ears.
Please do not take this as an invitation for dialog, as this is a one way ticket.
LikeLike
“No fool would give his life for your web of deceit you have spun”
Oh, but they would for a web of deceit about a guy who turns water into wine, withers fig trees, and feeds 5,000 people with a couple of dead fish and a package of hamburger buns – got it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
WELL WRITTEN! Ark, eat your heart out —
LikeLike
Well, since neither Tiribulus, nor ColorStorm want to play with me (and they are within their right not to engage me), because I am the “Satan” or they are otherwise busy, I’ll play with archaeopteryx1, carmen and the rest of you. And most propably shall find it a lot more interresting and fun.
No, I do not expect any fool would give their lives for my “web of deciet”. That is the entire point!!! My story is totally bogus, not because what I described is far more likely to explain the possible historical events of the Jesus story, than the Gospels themselves, but because I made an unsubstantiated supernatural claim, much like the Gospels do.
People dying for any ideals do not make those ideals any more true, than ideals nobody has ever died for. Or would any of you think a nazi-stormtrooper throwing his life away 1945 in Berlin made the ideals of the Nazies any more true?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“People dying for any ideals do not make those ideals any more true”
That’s what we’ve been telling Kathy over on Nate’s blog, for months now, but she can’t seem to grasp it. She maintains that no one would give their lives for something that wasn’t true. Then we ask her about the truth of Islam vs the Islamic suicide bombers – somehow, in her mind, that’s different.
LikeLike
No, you are not “the Satan”. I told you where you can find me sir. I was already engaged in significant conversation when you got here with a rather capable lady who is willing to address the foundational questions that Victoria brought with her videos. Not to mention the nonstop onslaught of the rest of these folks here. You are welcome to join us and I’ll do my best. There are only so many hours in a day. I can’t responsibly carry on meaningful conversations with every new reinforcement Violet decides to sic on me. Nuthin personal.
LikeLike
@archaeopteryx1, it is kinda sad how that kind of numbskull behaviour makes religious people seem like total idiots, when they most likely are not such in any other field of life. The real damage comes from these religious fantasies actually affecting their other views, like stuff about environment, or social concepts of justice.
@Tiribulus, as I said before – Fair enough. I also said you have every right not to engage me because you are otherwise engaged. I am engaged in several other conversations in the net and way much more importantly to me I have a family, a job and my hobbies as well to attend to. I am busy too and that is why I do not comment in a very rapid pace anywhere.
By no means did I mean you thought I was Satan, though I suppose it is nice to have you reassure me, that you think I am not. 😉 How do you know I am not, is a nother matter. You said you were busy and indeed it was ColorStorm, who connected my “creativity” to Satan being talented. I may be arrogant, proud and even talented, but my former comment and the story about son of Tursa was based on more facts of the historical reality of the observable material reality we, you and I and possibly some dude called Yeshua once inhabited, than the creativity of the unknown writers of the mutually contradicting legends of the Gospels from two millenia ago, nor on my creativity. Only creative part required for it, was to make the supernatural claim, that I am the son of war god Tursa and as such can not die.
I do not mean to force you to any conversation, but it does not mean I can not continue my conversation with other people here and as you committed to this conversation before your comments may well be addressed. That is the nature of such public conversations. Right? I hope I have not misrepresented, or abused your comments.
LikeLike
Since Colorstorm’s comment above was uttered by someone who truly believes there’s an invisible silvery-tongued devil walking about, we’ll all take that comment for what it’s worth.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Carmen!
Tkx for your commendation, don’t get much of that in this part of the world.
(sarcasm off)
Here’s something for ya on a slow news day; I’m guessing there will be SOMETHING for you to agree with, then again…………….
http://thenakedtruth2.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/do-you-have-a-primitive-belief/
LikeLike
To all of those who celebrate it Thursday, HAPPY T-GIVING!
LikeLike