independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 21st Oct 2019 9:57pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > The Essay that will mow down any atheist: MLK, at age 28!
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 4 of 10 <123456789>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #90 posted 10/06/18 6:36pm

toejam

avatar

CherryMoon57 said:

'And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.' Matthew 13:58

.

Exactly the kind of excuse making we might expect if Jesus' miraclulous abilities were a superstition - blame the unbeliever! This is really little different to what happens when a fake psychic comes up against someone who sees through their fakery - suddenly the psychic's abilities evaporate due to the "negative energy" (or what-have-you) of the one who can see through it.

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #91 posted 10/06/18 7:37pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


CherryMoon57 said:

There are also those who blindly follow GPS instructions and end up driving into lakes, on edge of cliffs, etc... Blind faith in anything is dangerous.



That’s me! Ive followed the wrong GPS absolutely. And others have followed religion to the same ends and far worse.

.


Blind faith is so often a misused term and such a broad concept. One of the religiously held beliefs that is shamefully destructive is the blind conviction that your group is superior to the other group, therefore you can dismiss their beliefs as being a result of mental impairment etc. This blind faith in beliefs is a main cause of intolerances based merely on race, gender, culture, sexual orientation and identity, political and religious beliefs. Couple this with greed and you have the cause of so much evil in the world.


.


However, where you follow, at the very least, the humanist aspects of what MLK's essay says in seeking be full, complex and multi-dimensional loving, moralistic and positive people, then how much better would the world be for all?



Yeah. Well the evolution of human emotion and behavior is probably didn’t happen with one man suddenly having a revelation that was relayed to the rest of the group. As with the behaviors of all species, these are evolutionary traits that allow a species to develop to where it is or was. The good and the bad.

Here is one hypothesis I’ve seen about some of our motivations.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih....d/25890689
Human beings are the most social and the most violent creatures on Earth. The combination of cooperation and aggression enabled us to dominate our ecosystem. However, the existence of violent impulses would have made it difficult or impossible for humans to live in close-knit families and clans without destroying each other. Nature's answer was the development of guilt, shame and anxiety-internal emotional inhibitions or restraints specifically against aggressive self-assertion within the family and other close relationships. The theory of negative legacy emotions proposes the first unitary concept for the biopsychosocial function of guilt, shame and anxiety, and seeks their origin in biological evolution and natural selection. Natural selection favored individuals with built-in emotional restraints that reduced conflicts within their family and tribal unit, optimizing their capacity to survive and reproduce within the protection of their small, intimate societies, while maintaining their capacity for violence against outsiders. Unfortunately, these negative legacy emotions are rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #92 posted 10/06/18 9:55pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

Blind faith is so often a misused term and such a broad concept. One of the religiously held beliefs that is shamefully destructive is the blind conviction that your group is superior to the other group, therefore you can dismiss their beliefs as being a result of mental impairment etc. This blind faith in beliefs is a main cause of intolerances based merely on race, gender, culture, sexual orientation and identity, political and religious beliefs. Couple this with greed and you have the cause of so much evil in the world.

.

However, where you follow, at the very least, the humanist aspects of what MLK's essay says in seeking be full, complex and multi-dimensional loving, moralistic and positive people, then how much better would the world be for all?

Yeah. Well the evolution of human emotion and behavior is probably didn’t happen with one man suddenly having a revelation that was relayed to the rest of the group. As with the behaviors of all species, these are evolutionary traits that allow a species to develop to where it is or was. The good and the bad. Here is one hypothesis I’ve seen about some of our motivations. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih....d/25890689 Human beings are the most social and the most violent creatures on Earth. The combination of cooperation and aggression enabled us to dominate our ecosystem. However, the existence of violent impulses would have made it difficult or impossible for humans to live in close-knit families and clans without destroying each other. Nature's answer was the development of guilt, shame and anxiety-internal emotional inhibitions or restraints specifically against aggressive self-assertion within the family and other close relationships. The theory of negative legacy emotions proposes the first unitary concept for the biopsychosocial function of guilt, shame and anxiety, and seeks their origin in biological evolution and natural selection. Natural selection favored individuals with built-in emotional restraints that reduced conflicts within their family and tribal unit, optimizing their capacity to survive and reproduce within the protection of their small, intimate societies, while maintaining their capacity for violence against outsiders. Unfortunately, these negative legacy emotions are rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders.

.

Excusing racism, misogyny (and misandry), discriminatory treatment of people with different sexual preferences and indentities and the violence and greed in political, economic and religious decisions as just a result of evolution is a defeatist position. Nuture vs nature allows for us to better ourselves over a sad evolutionary survival minimum standard - again, this is possible without needing to rely on God. We can do it ourselves - well perhaps with your next President.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #93 posted 10/07/18 6:39am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


Blind faith is so often a misused term and such a broad concept. One of the religiously held beliefs that is shamefully destructive is the blind conviction that your group is superior to the other group, therefore you can dismiss their beliefs as being a result of mental impairment etc. This blind faith in beliefs is a main cause of intolerances based merely on race, gender, culture, sexual orientation and identity, political and religious beliefs. Couple this with greed and you have the cause of so much evil in the world.


.


However, where you follow, at the very least, the humanist aspects of what MLK's essay says in seeking be full, complex and multi-dimensional loving, moralistic and positive people, then how much better would the world be for all?



Yeah. Well the evolution of human emotion and behavior is probably didn’t happen with one man suddenly having a revelation that was relayed to the rest of the group. As with the behaviors of all species, these are evolutionary traits that allow a species to develop to where it is or was. The good and the bad. Here is one hypothesis I’ve seen about some of our motivations. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih....d/25890689 Human beings are the most social and the most violent creatures on Earth. The combination of cooperation and aggression enabled us to dominate our ecosystem. However, the existence of violent impulses would have made it difficult or impossible for humans to live in close-knit families and clans without destroying each other. Nature's answer was the development of guilt, shame and anxiety-internal emotional inhibitions or restraints specifically against aggressive self-assertion within the family and other close relationships. The theory of negative legacy emotions proposes the first unitary concept for the biopsychosocial function of guilt, shame and anxiety, and seeks their origin in biological evolution and natural selection. Natural selection favored individuals with built-in emotional restraints that reduced conflicts within their family and tribal unit, optimizing their capacity to survive and reproduce within the protection of their small, intimate societies, while maintaining their capacity for violence against outsiders. Unfortunately, these negative legacy emotions are rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders.

.


Excusing racism, misogyny (and misandry), discriminatory treatment of people with different sexual preferences and indentities and the violence and greed in political, economic and religious decisions as just a result of evolution is a defeatist position. Nuture vs nature allows for us to better ourselves over a sad evolutionary survival minimum standard - again, this is possible without needing to rely on God. We can do it ourselves - well perhaps with your next President.



Who’s excusing anything.
How did you come to that conclusion?
The south and slave owners and America and nazi Germany and Spain through the inquisition and colonialism have all been very religious and believed in god. Human evolution is an on going thing. We learn and adapt.
[Edited 10/7/18 6:59am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #94 posted 10/07/18 12:28pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

Excusing racism, misogyny (and misandry), discriminatory treatment of people with different sexual preferences and indentities and the violence and greed in political, economic and religious decisions as just a result of evolution is a defeatist position. Nuture vs nature allows for us to better ourselves over a sad evolutionary survival minimum standard - again, this is possible without needing to rely on God. We can do it ourselves - well perhaps with your next President.

Who’s excusing anything. How did you come to that conclusion? The south and slave owners and America and nazi Germany and Spain through the inquisition and colonialism have all been very religious and believed in god. Human evolution is an on going thing. We learn and adapt. [Edited 10/7/18 6:59am]

.

By the application of comprehension skills. The paper is about a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions. It is excusing us being in the author's words "the most violent creatures" by attributing this as evolutionary outcomes that are "rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders."

.

There is nothing in the abstract you quoted that says we learned and adapted away from this sad assessment of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, quite the opposite. You really should read what you quote before you quote it. The other thing you have not comprehened is that I have not shied away from the bad things that have been in the name of religion as highlighted above and I never claimed that just because you believe in God then you are better person. Human learning and adaption is not simply down to evolution, we can be better (or worse) than that.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #95 posted 10/07/18 12:43pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Love as the ultimate goal. Sounds good to me.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #96 posted 10/07/18 12:55pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


Excusing racism, misogyny (and misandry), discriminatory treatment of people with different sexual preferences and indentities and the violence and greed in political, economic and religious decisions as just a result of evolution is a defeatist position. Nuture vs nature allows for us to better ourselves over a sad evolutionary survival minimum standard - again, this is possible without needing to rely on God. We can do it ourselves - well perhaps with your next President.



Who’s excusing anything. How did you come to that conclusion? The south and slave owners and America and nazi Germany and Spain through the inquisition and colonialism have all been very religious and believed in god. Human evolution is an on going thing. We learn and adapt. [Edited 10/7/18 6:59am]

.


By the application of comprehension skills. The paper is about a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions. It is excusing us being in the author's words "the most violent creatures" by attributing this as evolutionary outcomes that are "rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders."


.


There is nothing in the abstract you quoted that says we learned and adapted away from this sad assessment of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, quite the opposite. You really should read what you quote before you quote it. The other thing you have not comprehened is that I have not shied away from the bad things that have been in the name of religion as highlighted above and I never claimed that just because you believe in God then you are better person. Human learning and adaption is not simply down to evolution, we can be better (or worse) than that.



Lol yes you’re lacking comprehension skills as you are myopic in not seeing the larger picture I was showing with ONE sample.
I think you’re smarter than this. Your
post comes off as childish petulance in trying to “win” an argument you can’t win.
lol
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #97 posted 10/07/18 1:04pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

By the application of comprehension skills. The paper is about a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions. It is excusing us being in the author's words "the most violent creatures" by attributing this as evolutionary outcomes that are "rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders."

.

There is nothing in the abstract you quoted that says we learned and adapted away from this sad assessment of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, quite the opposite. You really should read what you quote before you quote it. The other thing you have not comprehened is that I have not shied away from the bad things that have been in the name of religion as highlighted above and I never claimed that just because you believe in God then you are better person. Human learning and adaption is not simply down to evolution, we can be better (or worse) than that.

Lol yes you’re lacking comprehension skills as you are myopic in not seeing the larger picture I was showing with ONE sample. I think you’re smarter than this. Your post comes off as childish petulance in trying to “win” an argument you can’t win. lol

.

So, having been shown that the paper you chose was about attributing our failings to a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, you go back this type of post.

.

Goodbye. Come back when you have something worth contributing rather than just yet another Ugot2shakesumthin delusion of granduer.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #98 posted 10/07/18 1:04pm

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

Love as the ultimate goal. Sounds good to me.

.

Agreed

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #99 posted 10/07/18 1:30pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


By the application of comprehension skills. The paper is about a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions. It is excusing us being in the author's words "the most violent creatures" by attributing this as evolutionary outcomes that are "rudimentary and often ineffective in their psychosocial and developmental function. As a result, they produce many unintended untoward effects, including the frequent breakdown of restraints in the family and the uninhibited unleashing of violence against outsiders."


.


There is nothing in the abstract you quoted that says we learned and adapted away from this sad assessment of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, quite the opposite. You really should read what you quote before you quote it. The other thing you have not comprehened is that I have not shied away from the bad things that have been in the name of religion as highlighted above and I never claimed that just because you believe in God then you are better person. Human learning and adaption is not simply down to evolution, we can be better (or worse) than that.



Lol yes you’re lacking comprehension skills as you are myopic in not seeing the larger picture I was showing with ONE sample. I think you’re smarter than this. Your post comes off as childish petulance in trying to “win” an argument you can’t win. lol

.


So, having been shown that the paper you chose was about attributing our failings to a theory of the evolution of negative legacy emotions, you go back this type of post.


.


Goodbye. Come back when you have something worth contributing rather than just yet another Ugot2shakesumthin delusion of granduer.



lol.
Ok Ian. Whatever
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #100 posted 10/07/18 2:35pm

CherryMoon57

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

The south and slave owners and America and nazi Germany and Spain through the inquisition and colonialism have all been very religious and believed in god.

And yet, they broke the Golden Rule, the Greatest Commandment and the 6th commandment. Do you really think these people were very religious or that they believed in God? Think again.

Open your heart open your mind
A train is leaving all day
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #101 posted 10/07/18 3:20pm

CherryMoon57

avatar

toejam said:

CherryMoon57 said:

'And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.' Matthew 13:58

.

1. Exactly the kind of excuse making we might expect if Jesus' miraclulous abilities were a superstition - blame the unbeliever! 2. This is really little different to what happens when a fake psychic comes up against someone who sees through their fakery - suddenly the psychic's abilities evaporate due to the "negative energy" (or what-have-you) of the one who can see through it.


1. You don't really expect God to do all the work for you, do you? What would be the point in that?

2. This is not the best comparison. First there is a big difference between magic and miracles. Real magic (which excludes the fake psychics) does not come directly from God (rather an occult or demonic source) and does not glorify Him, while miracles do. Psychics also tend to perform their tricks for personal gain, while Jesus didn't. Secondly, how many psychics can you name who have been called the son of God and have successfully and consistently changed billions of lives around the world for so many years? Despite all the naysayers, the Bible still remains the most spread and translated book in the whole wide world. I don’t know any other ‘psychics’ who have achieved this.

The people who keep asking why God doesn’t manifest Himself in their life are usually the same ones who turn the other way as soon as something points towards Him.

[Edited 10/7/18 15:56pm]

Open your heart open your mind
A train is leaving all day
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #102 posted 10/07/18 11:35pm

toejam

avatar

CherryMoon57 said:

1. You don't really expect God to do all the work for you, do you? What would be the point in that?

.

I don't expect God to do anything because I don't think he's there to do anything. If he does exist, then a point in him revealing himself to me might be to show me that I'm wrong in thinking he isn't there. But he doesn't do that - consistent with my thought that he's a superstition.

.

2. This is not the best comparison. First there is a big difference between magic and miracles. Real magic (which excludes the fake psychics) does not come directly from God (rather an occult or demonic source) and does not glorify Him, while miracles do. Psychics also tend to perform their tricks for personal gain, while Jesus didn't. Secondly, how many psychics can you name who have been called the son of God and have successfully and consistently changed billions of lives around the world for so many years?

.

There is so little certain about the Historical Jesus that to say with surety he didn't do fake miracles for personal gain is not something that can be taken for granted as a solid historical fact. Maybe he did? I don't know. There is an early tradition about Jesus being anointed with expensive oil worth a years worth of wages, and when he was questioned whether this was extravagant he responded with something to the effect of: "You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me". Jesus liked his expensive oils. Elsewhere (Luke 8) it is said that a group of women he "cured of evil spirits" supported him financially - one of whom, Joanna, is said to have been a wife of a steward of King Herod. It's unlikely she would have been poor and destitute. So I don't know that Jesus didn't take advantage of others with fake miracles for his personal gain.

.

And there are also debates among scholars as to whether any of the miracle stories attributed to Jesus are at all historical. And not all bogus psychics or miracle workers need to be consciously fraudulent. There are plenty who genuinely think they have some gift when in fact they don't. So maybe Jesus' miracles stories are all later fabrications? Or maybe Jesus was personally deluded into thinking he had a power he didn't? I don't know.
.
These are just three plausible scenarios. It's a stretch to think that all of them can be ruled out. I find your claim that Jesus didn't do miracles for personal gain something that simply cannot be taken for granted as a definitive historical fact. We really don't know. And I suspect I've done more research on this than yourself.

.

Despite all the naysayers, the Bible still remains the most spread and translated book in the whole wide world. I don’t know any other ‘psychics’ who have achieved this.

.

The spreading of the Bible is no guarantee of its reliability. What do you think the second most widely spread book in the world is? My guess would be the Koran. Is the Koran's mass spreading a tell tale sign of its reliability? Hell no!

.

The people who keep asking why God doesn’t manifest Himself in their life are usually the same ones who turn the other way as soon as something points towards Him.

.

This strikes me as another blame the unbeliever for their unbelief! kind of response. What points toward God?

.

[Edited 10/7/18 23:41pm]

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #103 posted 10/08/18 1:46am

CherryMoon57

avatar

toejam said:

CherryMoon57 said:

1. You don't really expect God to do all the work for you, do you? What would be the point in that?

.

I don't expect God to do anything because I don't think he's there to do anything. If he does exist, then a point in him revealing himself to me might be to show me that I'm wrong in thinking he isn't there. But he doesn't do that - consistent with my thought that he's a superstition.

.

2. This is not the best comparison. First there is a big difference between magic and miracles. Real magic (which excludes the fake psychics) does not come directly from God (rather an occult or demonic source) and does not glorify Him, while miracles do. Psychics also tend to perform their tricks for personal gain, while Jesus didn't. Secondly, how many psychics can you name who have been called the son of God and have successfully and consistently changed billions of lives around the world for so many years?

.

There is so little certain about the Historical Jesus that to say with surety he didn't do fake miracles for personal gain is not something that can be taken for granted as a solid historical fact. Maybe he did? I don't know. There is an early tradition about Jesus being anointed with expensive oil worth a years worth of wages, and when he was questioned whether this was extravagant he responded with something to the effect of: "You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me". Jesus liked his expensive oils. Elsewhere (Luke 8) it is said that a group of women he "cured of evil spirits" supported him financially - one of whom, Joanna, is said to have been a wife of a steward of King Herod. It's unlikely she would have been poor and destitute. So I don't know that Jesus didn't take advantage of others with fake miracles for his personal gain.

.

And there are also debates among scholars as to whether any of the miracle stories attributed to Jesus are at all historical. And not all bogus psychics or miracle workers need to be consciously fraudulent. There are plenty who genuinely think they have some gift when in fact they don't. So maybe Jesus' miracles stories are all later fabrications? Or maybe Jesus was personally deluded into thinking he had a power he didn't? I don't know.
.
These are just three plausible scenarios. It's a stretch to think that all of them can be ruled out. I find your claim that Jesus didn't do miracles for personal gain something that simply cannot be taken for granted as a definitive historical fact. We really don't know. And I suspect I've done more research on this than yourself.

.

Despite all the naysayers, the Bible still remains the most spread and translated book in the whole wide world. I don’t know any other ‘psychics’ who have achieved this.

.

The spreading of the Bible is no guarantee of its reliability. What do you think the second most widely spread book in the world is? My guess would be the Koran. Is the Koran's mass spreading a tell tale sign of its reliability? Hell no!

.

The people who keep asking why God doesn’t manifest Himself in their life are usually the same ones who turn the other way as soon as something points towards Him.

.

This strikes me as another blame the unbeliever for their unbelief! kind of response. What points toward God?

.

[Edited 10/7/18 23:41pm]



That's a very impressive reading list toejam, if it was a research contest, I am sure you would be the winner. Unfortunately, it is not, at least not for me, even though I have also done my research and I do agree that there will always be scholars who question christianity because that is the job of scholars to question pretty much everything on earth and beyond, and they get paid for it.

As for me I have had first hand evidence so the fact remains that God exists because I have had an undeniable proof of His existence, and I also trust the message of love, truth and salvation that the Bible contains. I didn't have to pay anyone for all of this and at the end of the day, Jesus had to die for us so I am not sure where you are getting at with this. All it took me was a minimal degree of faith, not mountains of extensive reading in search of some flaws as an excuse for my inability to trust God.

Also remember that not everyone can afford an education yet God is available to anyone, rich or poor, young or old, educated or not, because the amount of knowledge you proudly gather will never impact on how close you are to God.


most-read-books.jpg

[Edited 10/8/18 2:19am]

Open your heart open your mind
A train is leaving all day
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #104 posted 10/08/18 2:48am

jaawwnn

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Love as the ultimate goal. Sounds good to me.

Me too. I don't see God in there.

I got no problem with him though, i'm sure he'll be cool with me not being bothered with him as long as I live a cool life. cool cool cool

I'd imagine he had some questions for those "spreading the word" through crusades and the like though, hmm?

[Edited 10/8/18 2:49am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #105 posted 10/08/18 3:32am

CherryMoon57

avatar

jaawwnn said:

2freaky4church1 said:

Love as the ultimate goal. Sounds good to me.

Me too. I don't see God in there.

I got no problem with him though, i'm sure he'll be cool with me not being bothered with him as long as I live a cool life. cool cool cool

I'd imagine he had some questions for those "spreading the word" through crusades and the like though, hmm?

[Edited 10/8/18 2:49am]

Don't worry jaawwnn, I am sure the judgement will be fair for everybody.

Open your heart open your mind
A train is leaving all day
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #106 posted 10/08/18 3:39am

CherryMoon57

avatar

toejam said:

What points toward God?



Everything. Even the atheists' reading interests and the threads they participate in.

Open your heart open your mind
A train is leaving all day
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #107 posted 10/08/18 4:30am

IanRG

CherryMoon57 said:

toejam said:

What points toward God?



Everything. Even the atheists' reading interests and the threads they participate in.

.

Especially that list and how it demonstrates how loud God can be yet not heard, how persistent God can be yet ignored and how God drives us to seek understanding yet when a person only responds to this by seeking confirmation of their pre-determined lack of belief then understanding alludes them. I remember from before toejam started on this list and the arguments were the same back then.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #108 posted 10/08/18 11:26am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



CherryMoon57 said:



toejam said:



What points toward God?






Everything. Even the atheists' reading interests and the threads they participate in.



.


[b]Especially that list and how it demonstrates how loud God can be yet not heard, how persistent God can be yet ignored and how God drives us to seek understanding yet when a person only responds to this by seeking confirmation of their pre-determined lack of belief then understanding alludes them.[b] I remember from before toejam started on this list and the arguments were the same back then.



Or...text book definition of delusion.

Sounds like the symptoms of delusions
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #109 posted 10/08/18 1:39pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

[b]Especially that list and how it demonstrates how loud God can be yet not heard, how persistent God can be yet ignored and how God drives us to seek understanding yet when a person only responds to this by seeking confirmation of their pre-determined lack of belief then understanding alludes them.[b] I remember from before toejam started on this list and the arguments were the same back then.

Or...text book definition of delusion. Sounds like the symptoms of delusions

.

No, toejam is not deluded - He is obsessed.

.

No one would spend the amount of time, effort and money that he has on trying to convince others on a musician's unofficial fansite and a number of other places around the web that their beliefs are wrong without being obsessed. It is either a totally self-inflicted obsession or it is an obsession inspired by God seeking to engage with him. As a former atheist, I favour the later explanation having lived through the same. You, as a current atheist, will see it as the former - but don't delude yourself (well, any further than you already have) - neither of us can prove the source of the obsession one way or the other.

.

It is not a text book definition of delusion because his list is not his delusion, it is a symtom of appeal to authority logic errors - He thinks people will be so impressed by him repeatedly rolling out his facebook list that he maintains it so religiously in the expectation that, when rolled out, we may change our beliefs (toejam has confirmed here a number of times that his posts in religious threads here are because he is seeking to change people's beliefs). What he is saying is "You have to believe me because I have read all these important people." He used the term "Historical Jesus" because this is the core focus of his study - A movement that is intent on redefining Jesus as just a human. Naturally, if this is your opening assumption, you will find what toejam finds.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #110 posted 10/08/18 1:47pm

toejam

avatar

CherryMoon57 said:

That's a very impressive reading list toejam, if it was a research contest, I am sure you would be the winner. Unfortunately, it is not, at least not for me, even though I have also done my research and I do agree that there will always be scholars who question christianity because that is the job of scholars to question pretty much everything on earth and beyond, and they get paid for it.
.
As for me I have had first hand evidence so the fact remains that God exists because I have had an undeniable proof of His existence, and I also trust the message of love, truth and salvation that the Bible contains. I didn't have to pay anyone for all of this and at the end of the day, Jesus had to die for us so I am not sure where you are getting at with this. All it took me was a minimal degree of faith, not mountains of extensive reading in search of some flaws as an excuse for my inability to trust God.

.

Also remember that not everyone can afford an education yet God is available to anyone, rich or poor, young or old, educated or not, because the amount of knowledge you proudly gather will never impact on how close you are to God.

.

I used to have a minimal degree of faith, and now I don't. That's because I came to see that the idea of God actually makes better sense as a superstition. There is no one else that I know personally whom I was ever requested to place faith in first before they would reveal themselves to me. The fact that we are expected to place faith in God before evidence is perhaps a tell-tale sign that something is off here - i.e. it's exactly the kind of request we might hear if the God in question is a superstition, and it's the kind of request that opens one's mind up to suggestion and projection. Personally, I can't bring myself to believe something that I don't. I can't just make myself believe something on a whim - like choosing between ice-cream flavors. I can pretend, but I don't care to pretend. The evidence and argument need to be persuasive.

.

So far the closest thing you've offered as a piece of evidence for God is that the Bible is the most widely circulated book in the world. Can you explain why you consider this good evidence for the existence of God? In the Middle Eastern world, the Koran is far and away the most widely read and circulated book. Is the Koran's widespread circulation evidence for its theological reliability? No. Similarly, historians are well aware of several factors for why the Bible gained widespread circulation in the West that do not require an appeal to divine assistance. So why do you see its spread as somehow a reliable indicator of its theological reliability?

.

[Edited 10/8/18 13:51pm]

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #111 posted 10/08/18 1:57pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


[b]Especially that list and how it demonstrates how loud God can be yet not heard, how persistent God can be yet ignored and how God drives us to seek understanding yet when a person only responds to this by seeking confirmation of their pre-determined lack of belief then understanding alludes them.[b] I remember from before toejam started on this list and the arguments were the same back then.



Or...text book definition of delusion. Sounds like the symptoms of delusions

.


No, toejam is not deluded - He is obsessed.


.


No one would spend the amount of time, effort and money that he has on trying to convince others on a musician's unofficial fansite and a number of other places around the web that their beliefs are wrong without being obsessed. It is either a totally self-inflicted obsession or it is an obsession inspired by God seeking to engage with him. As a former atheist, I favour the later explanation having lived through the same. You, as a current atheist, will see it as the former - but don't delude yourself (well, any further than you already have) - neither of us can prove the source of the obsession one way or the other.


.


It is not a text book definition of delusion because his list is not his delusion, it is a symtom of appeal to authority logic errors - He thinks people will be so impressed by him repeatedly rolling out his facebook list that he maintains it so religiously in the expectation that, when rolled out, we may change our beliefs (toejam has confirmed here a number of times that his posts in religious threads here are because he is seeking to change people's beliefs). What he is saying is "You have to believe me because I have read all these important people." He used the term "Historical Jesus" because this is the core focus of his study - A movement that is intent on redefining Jesus as just a human. Naturally, if this is your opening assumption, you will find what toejam finds.

.


lol
You sound frustrated.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #112 posted 10/08/18 2:00pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

No, toejam is not deluded - He is obsessed.

.

No one would spend the amount of time, effort and money that he has on trying to convince others on a musician's unofficial fansite and a number of other places around the web that their beliefs are wrong without being obsessed. It is either a totally self-inflicted obsession or it is an obsession inspired by God seeking to engage with him. As a former atheist, I favour the later explanation having lived through the same. You, as a current atheist, will see it as the former - but don't delude yourself (well, any further than you already have) - neither of us can prove the source of the obsession one way or the other.

.

It is not a text book definition of delusion because his list is not his delusion, it is a symtom of appeal to authority logic errors - He thinks people will be so impressed by him repeatedly rolling out his facebook list that he maintains it so religiously in the expectation that, when rolled out, we may change our beliefs (toejam has confirmed here a number of times that his posts in religious threads here are because he is seeking to change people's beliefs). What he is saying is "You have to believe me because I have read all these important people." He used the term "Historical Jesus" because this is the core focus of his study - A movement that is intent on redefining Jesus as just a human. Naturally, if this is your opening assumption, you will find what toejam finds.

. lol You sound frustrated.

.

With what?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #113 posted 10/08/18 2:28pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Toejam, you are mad at God. What happened to harm you like that?

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #114 posted 10/08/18 2:34pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


No, toejam is not deluded - He is obsessed.


.


No one would spend the amount of time, effort and money that he has on trying to convince others on a musician's unofficial fansite and a number of other places around the web that their beliefs are wrong without being obsessed. It is either a totally self-inflicted obsession or it is an obsession inspired by God seeking to engage with him. As a former atheist, I favour the later explanation having lived through the same. You, as a current atheist, will see it as the former - but don't delude yourself (well, any further than you already have) - neither of us can prove the source of the obsession one way or the other.


.


It is not a text book definition of delusion because his list is not his delusion, it is a symtom of appeal to authority logic errors - He thinks people will be so impressed by him repeatedly rolling out his facebook list that he maintains it so religiously in the expectation that, when rolled out, we may change our beliefs (toejam has confirmed here a number of times that his posts in religious threads here are because he is seeking to change people's beliefs). What he is saying is "You have to believe me because I have read all these important people." He used the term "Historical Jesus" because this is the core focus of his study - A movement that is intent on redefining Jesus as just a human. Naturally, if this is your opening assumption, you will find what toejam finds.



. lol You sound frustrated.

.


With what?



Your inability to defend your faith.

You’ve resorted to name calling and childish tantrums. You send a lot of time on this subject I expect better.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #115 posted 10/08/18 2:42pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

With what?

Your inability to defend your faith. You’ve resorted to name calling and childish tantrums. You send a lot of time on this subject I expect better.

.

Please learn to read. I have not been defending my faith here at all. Look back, I have been arguing for MLK's positivity regardless of whether you are Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or humanist. You can identify which are the things I said because they have IanRG in the top teft corner of the response box.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #116 posted 10/08/18 2:49pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

He is saying he was not fully formed until God entered his life. The proof was his ministry and the fact that he was willing to be shot dead. No Atheist has that kind of spine. I hope I could die for someone else; hoping there is no need for it. lol

Guys, watch the Evangelical Doug Wilson make Chris Hitchens his little play thing, and I dislike Wilson's on a lot of things.

Awe about a black hole. Where did that awe come from? Where does artistic love come from? What makes you become affected by music, something in nature, an animal, a child? God put the Crab Nebula there to show us his love for wonder. Crushing wonder makes you mighty dull. Why Christ said you need to present yourself the way a mere child does. But put away foolish things.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #117 posted 10/08/18 2:55pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

IanRG said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


IanRG said:


.


With what?



Your inability to defend your faith. You’ve resorted to name calling and childish tantrums. You send a lot of time on this subject I expect better.

.


Please learn to read. I have not been defending my faith here at all. Look back, I have been arguing for MLK's positivity regardless of whether you are Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or humanist. You can identify which are the things I said because they have IanRG in the top teft corner of the response box.



Whoa. If you say so. Again as someone who spends so much time on the subject of faith and god i expected more you for whatever reason. Your arguments are paper thin then you get upset and start name calling. If any casual person with a curiosity on the topic can destroy your arguments and cause you to lose it, then you have a lot of work to do if this is what you are serious about. Which it seems it is.
[Edited 10/8/18 14:57pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #118 posted 10/08/18 3:15pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Ian, we need to love our foes. They respond to idiots in our ranks like these dickheads:

Go to 1700 minute mark. Makes me respect Bush a bit. Apostate asses. If you believe in one God you are fine--Muslim, Jew, Christian. Bible misreading suckcockers. Robert P. George, to his credit would flay this.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #119 posted 10/08/18 3:27pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

IanRG said:

.

Please learn to read. I have not been defending my faith here at all. Look back, I have been arguing for MLK's positivity regardless of whether you are Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or humanist. You can identify which are the things I said because they have IanRG in the top teft corner of the response box.

Whoa. If you say so. Again as someone who spends so much time on the subject of faith and god i expected more you for whatever reason. Your arguments are paper thin then you get upset and start name calling. If any casual person with a curiosity on the topic can destroy your arguments and cause you to lose it, then you have a lot of work to do if this is what you are serious about. Which it seems it is. [Edited 10/8/18 14:57pm]

.

Please learn to read. I have not spent any of my time in this thread on faith, quite the opposite. I spoke about the positivity and love of even a humanist response to MLK's essay to the chagrin of Freaky above.

.

The name calling was started by you when you dismissed people who disagree with you as mentally impaired. Defending against this delusion of superiority is not name calling.

.

Thank you for clearly demonstrating my first point by your posts: Whilst I can learn from things like MLK's writings whether they come from this or that religion or philosophical point of view, one of the faiths I have learned almost nothing from is fundamentalist atheism.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 4 of 10 <123456789>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > The Essay that will mow down any atheist: MLK, at age 28!