He was right. I did start with D&D...
He was proof that religion can truly rot minds.
NOOOOOOOOOO
His comics have a certain camp humour, and you have to hand it to him that he certainly put his money where his mouth was and tried right up to the end to reach people.
And while his "chicklet" format is horribly dated now, in the 1960s it was kind of innovative. Use of the new, secular medium of comic books to try and spread the Word was quite an innovation.
Quote from: Martinus on October 25, 2016, 01:30:01 PM
He was right. I did start with D&D...
Yeah it's a horrible system.
Haw Haw
That said, the echoes of Gnosticism in Restorationist Christianity are fascinating. Chick himself (in his colorful illustrations of Christian history) argues that the Bogomils and Cathars were bearers of the light of the True Christian Church -- a tradition that was repressed by Constantine and survived via secret practice until the Reformation and the present.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 02:02:11 PM
He was proof that religion can truly rot minds.
A rabid ant-catholic. You had a lot in common.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 03:19:00 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 02:02:11 PM
He was proof that religion can truly rot minds.
A rabid ant-catholic. You had a lot in common.
I... don't think you understand.
I think I do.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
Quote from: The Brain on October 25, 2016, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 25, 2016, 01:30:01 PM
He was right. I did start with D&D...
Yeah it's a horrible system.
:lol: Marti failed his save throw +1 Bag of Holding Dicks
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.chick.com%2Ftractimages67491%2F0042%2F0042_02.gif&hash=3df64279bde2bfcd39982f91e266648b89bc7e77)
Dude was an hysterical POS. The world is better off.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview6%2F20150912%2F5248937%2Ffurio-guinta-disgusted-spit-o.gif&hash=d96b80e32036592e874c2c39be989bfa3bd76c26)
Future Raz:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.chick.com%2Ftractimages67491%2F0082%2F0082_20.gif&hash=06bbd27af5b4a9c2ea32a16617a27d909086189e)
God is the Silver Surfer! :o
So Raz and commies both hate Nazis, therefore Raz is a commie.
Quote from: Martinus on October 25, 2016, 01:30:01 PM
He was right. I did start with D&D...
Let's be honest, you were headed to hell no matter what.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 25, 2016, 09:39:10 PM
So Raz and commies both hate Nazis, therefore Raz is a commie.
Again you have failed. :( I just took Grumbler's argument and turned it inside out.
Slightly nearer future Raz:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.chick.com%2Ftractimages67491%2F0065%2F0065_19.gif&hash=14f2e3760007e0a25edf2786baae3329e2f09f32)
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 12:16:32 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 25, 2016, 09:39:10 PM
So Raz and commies both hate Nazis, therefore Raz is a commie.
Again you have failed. :( I just took Grumbler's argument and turned it inside out.
Err... you were talking to Hamilcar.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 25, 2016, 10:51:59 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 25, 2016, 01:30:01 PM
He was right. I did start with D&D...
Let's be honest, you were headed to hell no matter what.
How very Calvinist of you.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 26, 2016, 12:36:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 12:16:32 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 25, 2016, 09:39:10 PM
So Raz and commies both hate Nazis, therefore Raz is a commie.
Again you have failed. :( I just took Grumbler's argument and turned it inside out.
Err... you were talking to Hamilcar.
Hamilcar and grumbler both dislike Raz, therefore Hamilcar is grumbler. :contract:
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:41:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
No, I don't why don't you spell it out for me.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 26, 2016, 12:36:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 12:16:32 AM
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 25, 2016, 09:39:10 PM
So Raz and commies both hate Nazis, therefore Raz is a commie.
Again you have failed. :( I just took Grumbler's argument and turned it inside out.
Err... you were talking to Hamilcar.
And this precludes me from borrowing an argument used by Grumbler (and is a typical talking point of the New Athiest movement)?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:55:57 AM
(and is a typical talking point of the New Athiest movement)?
I don't get it. It is kind of a joke they use but a talking point?
I mean I hate mass murderers and Fred Phelps hated mass murderers who were also gay so therefore Fred Phelps and I had a lot in common.
You might save the arguments by grumbler for the threads in which he makes those arguments so the rest of us know wtf you're talking about.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 26, 2016, 09:26:38 AM
You might save the arguments by grumbler for the threads in which he makes those arguments so the rest of us know wtf you're talking about.
Don't be ridiculous. Even if grumbler posted in this thread, it's unlikely we would know wtf Raz is talking about.
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2016, 08:14:19 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:55:57 AM
(and is a typical talking point of the New Athiest movement)?
I don't get it. It is kind of a joke they use but a talking point?
I mean I hate mass murderers and Fred Phelps hated mass murderers who were also gay so therefore Fred Phelps and I had a lot in common.
So, yes you and Fred Phelps did have a lot in common regarding criminal offenses. Presumably, Fred Phelps and I agreed quite a bit on the criminal code. Theft, murder, rape, etc. But we were talking about religious viewpoints. Hamilcar has expressed hatred for all religions. Jack Chick expressed hatred for all religions except one. I on the other hand, have nothing but love and happy fielding for the rest of humanity.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:07:14 AM
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2016, 08:14:19 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:55:57 AM
(and is a typical talking point of the New Athiest movement)?
I don't get it. It is kind of a joke they use but a talking point?
I mean I hate mass murderers and Fred Phelps hated mass murderers who were also gay so therefore Fred Phelps and I had a lot in common.
So, yes you and Fred Phelps did have a lot in common regarding criminal offenses. Presumably, Fred Phelps and I agreed quite a bit on the criminal code. Theft, murder, rape, etc. But we were talking about religious viewpoints. Hamilcar has expressed hatred for all religions. Jack Chick expressed hatred for all religions except one. I on the other hand, have nothing but love and happy fielding for the rest of humanity.
Rurik-lover. <_<
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:07:14 AM
happy fielding
Been staying up late watching the world series?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:54:12 AM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:41:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
No, I don't why don't you spell it out for me.
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target
other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
It's not where you come from, it's where you're headed.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 12:01:52 PM
It's not where you come from, it's where you're headed.
Whatever, Dollar Store Confucius.
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
Something something Ed Harris.
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 12:04:57 PM
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
Yes, everything is just texts and their readings, there is no objective reality, life sucks, I'll go slit my wrists in a warm bath as I sip some cheap Côtes du Rhône.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:00:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:54:12 AM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:41:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
No, I don't why don't you spell it out for me.
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:00:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:54:12 AM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:41:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
No, I don't why don't you spell it out for me.
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
:D
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:00:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 07:54:12 AM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:41:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
I think I do.
I'll bite: how do I have anything in common with a group of deluded people attacking other people over minor details of their delusions?
I stated that already. Anti-Catholic. A person with contempt for all religions differs from a person who has contempt for all religions but his own by hatred of only one religion. So really, you only differ over the issue of one faith out of thousands. On the others you are in agreement.
You don't see the crucial difference between the two?
No, I don't why don't you spell it out for me.
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
:lol: Okay. I'm sure all Logical Positivists feel that way.
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 12:04:57 PM
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
As both a religious person and an engineer I don't see how that is true. But man do I get that alot: Science is wrong because QUANTUM MECHANICS.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:00:48 PM
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 12:05:33 PM
Something something Ed Harris.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-A8yB8OQz_MY%2FT_HDP3TXMAI%2FAAAAAAAACl8%2F51vNkYGB53g%2Fs1600%2F3154004150_33.bmp&hash=f088fe457a2c21a9d9c8daffe40d9a1618f27a75)
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:13:29 PM
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
Chick's worldview was also subject to revision, given further information provided from God. It is just that no such information has come up for a couple thousand years or so.
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
The mythological parts are clearly nonsense, but the more philosophical parts contains some kernels of interest. Not all beliefs are equally absurd -- Mormonism is orders of magnitude sillier.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 26, 2016, 12:20:42 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 12:05:33 PM
Something something Ed Harris.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-A8yB8OQz_MY%2FT_HDP3TXMAI%2FAAAAAAAACl8%2F51vNkYGB53g%2Fs1600%2F3154004150_33.bmp&hash=f088fe457a2c21a9d9c8daffe40d9a1618f27a75)
He sounded white on the phone. :unsure:
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2016, 12:18:57 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 12:04:57 PM
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
As both a religious person and an engineer I don't see how that is true. But man do I get that alot: Science is wrong because QUANTUM MECHANICS.
I'd make a slightly different point: "belief" is generally the choice of which set of mythology one ought to accept.
One ought not to "believe in science" in this sense, because science is basically a tool for winnowing out incorrect theories about how the world works. While accepting correct facts is important in one's choice of mythology, it cannot be decisive, because how one weighs the significance of those facts depends on the weight one gives to abstract, mythological concepts that cannot be disproven - such as freedom, justice, liberty, etc.
Scientific methods could, for example, presumably measure "happiness" (such as via serotonin levels in one's brain). But what to do with this knowledge? If it could be proved that society A, which required mandatory drugging of every person to enforce "happiness", actually produced more happiness per person than society B, which did not, does this "scientifically prove" society A is superior to society B?
The choice, one the actual facts are known, of how to value those facts is one of comparative mythology, not science.
Not that the mythology has to be of the theistic kind.
"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...."
Pretty well every word of this is mythology (not to say it is factually wrong; only that it is not disprovable). There is no way to determine "scientifically" whether or not any of these "self evident Truths" are true or false.
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:36:04 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2016, 12:18:57 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 12:04:57 PM
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
As both a religious person and an engineer I don't see how that is true. But man do I get that alot: Science is wrong because QUANTUM MECHANICS.
I'd make a slightly different point: "belief" is generally the choice of which set of mythology one ought to accept.
One ought not to "believe in science" in this sense, because science is basically a tool for winnowing out incorrect theories about how the world works. While accepting correct facts is important in one's choice of mythology, it cannot be decisive, because how one weighs the significance of those facts depends on the weight one gives to abstract, mythological concepts that cannot be disproven - such as freedom, justice, liberty, etc.
Scientific methods could, for example, presumably measure "happiness" (such as via serotonin levels in one's brain). But what to do with this knowledge? If it could be proved that society A, which required mandatory drugging of every person to enforce "happiness", actually produced more happiness per person than society B, which did not, does this "scientifically prove" society A is superior to society B?
The choice, one the actual facts are known, of how to value those facts is one of comparative mythology, not science.
Not that the mythology has to be of the theistic kind.
"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...."
Pretty well every word of this is mythology (not to say it is factually wrong; only that it is not disprovable). There is no way to determine "scientifically" whether or not any of these "self evident Truths" are true or false.
Men made of straw. Alas!
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:07:14 AM
I on the other hand, have nothing but love and happy fielding for the rest of humanity.
even those that dream of slaughtering you?
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2016, 12:18:57 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 12:04:57 PM
hamil, your belief in rationality and science is a religion, and therefore tribes, tribes everywhere
etc., etc.
As both a religious person and an engineer I don't see how that is true. But man do I get that alot: Science is wrong because QUANTUM MECHANICS.
how is science wrong because a new theory proposes something different under different circumstances?
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
The mythological parts are clearly nonsense, but the more philosophical parts contains some kernels of interest. Not all beliefs are equally absurd -- Mormonism is orders of magnitude sillier.
In Buddhism of the original, Theravada kind, the "mythology" is that the Buddha left his prosperous life after witnessing human suffering and death, wandered around listening to various teachers of his era, decided they did not know how to avoid suffering, and sat under a tree until he worked out his own philosophy, which he then taught to others until he died.
In original Taoism, there appears to be no mythology at all. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu were authors of the key Taoist texts, but we know practically nothing about either.
Both eventually gave their names to religions crowded with the usual gods, demons, angels ("bodhisattvas"), heavens, hells, etc. But that stuff has basically nothing to do with the original religions.
The Buddha's own alleged approach to such stuff was pretty simple - when pressed as to the existence of gods, demons, etc., he professed a sort of profound agnosticism: they may well exist, or not; but if they do, they don't know how to avoid suffering any more than people do! :D
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 12:43:36 PM
how is science wrong because a new theory proposes something different under different circumstances?
I think we can all agree that those claiming 'science is wrong because X theory has been disproved' don't have a clue what science is. :D
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:49:21 PM
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 12:43:36 PM
how is science wrong because a new theory proposes something different under different circumstances?
I think we can all agree that those claiming 'science is wrong because X theory has been disproved' don't have a clue what science is. :D
Speaking of which, have you seen the Fallist movement? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:13:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
Well you sure don't act like it.
I don't have the science background that you do, but I do have a science background. And the various PhDs I worked with, both academically and in the workforce, were much more guarded in their opinions. They rarely made absolute statements of fact - instead it was almost always 'well this is what we understand now, but that may well change with more information'.
Maybe that's just the nature of my science - geology - which inherently has you making educated guesses about stuff that happened millions or billions of years ago, or what exists thousands of metres under the ground. But I don't think so.
And after I said nice things about Jack Chick (it is a RIP thread after all), that's what I hate about religious types like him - his absolute certainty. You're talking about the Will of God. Anyone who says they don't have doubts about knowing the Will of God is either a liar or has not once ever critically thought about their own faith.
I find annoying the tired argument that the sum total of religion is "some old book".
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:59:24 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:13:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
Well you sure don't act like it.
I don't have the science background that you do, but I do have a science background. And the various PhDs I worked with, both academically and in the workforce, were much more guarded in their opinions. They rarely made absolute statements of fact - instead it was almost always 'well this is what we understand now, but that may well change with more information'.
Maybe that's just the nature of my science - geology - which inherently has you making educated guesses about stuff that happened millions or billions of years ago, or what exists thousands of metres under the ground. But I don't think so.
And after I said nice things about Jack Chick (it is a RIP thread after all), that's what I hate about religious types like him - his absolute certainty. You're talking about the Will of God. Anyone who says they don't have doubts about knowing the Will of God is either a liar or has not once ever critically thought about their own faith.
If all religious people were like you, maybe I wouldn't be atheist ;)
Imho, public policies should be decided by the level of knowledge we have today. That's my problem with religion, were all too often, religious people are against advancing our knowledge. No matter if it's the present, the not so distant past, or the very long forgotten past, it seems we should be stuck in time at some specific point and stop advancing because we already know everything that is important.
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
If all religious people were like you, maybe I wouldn't be atheist ;)
Imho, public policies should be decided by the level of knowledge we have today. That's my problem with religion, were all too often, religious people are against advancing our knowledge. No matter if it's the present, the not so distant past, or the very long forgotten past, it seems we should be stuck in time at some specific point and stop advancing because we already know everything that is important.
Most of the Christians I know personally wouldn't say they know exactly what God wants and they've also thought critically about their faith (though, of course, to my standards not enough or they would have given it up).
I don't know any of them who want us to be stuck in a specific point of time/stop advancing.
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
If all religious people were like you, maybe I wouldn't be atheist ;)
Imho, public policies should be decided by the level of knowledge we have today. That's my problem with religion, were all too often, religious people are against advancing our knowledge. No matter if it's the present, the not so distant past, or the very long forgotten past, it seems we should be stuck in time at some specific point and stop advancing because we already know everything that is important.
Perhaps you should read a little bit more about Christianity then. :)
There's not a single religion I can think of that wants us "stuck in time at some specific point". Even the notoriously technology-phobic Amish aren't opposed to all technology - they just think carefully before they decide to adopt a given piece of technology.
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 12:43:36 PM
even those that dream of slaughtering you?
Yes, even Marty.
Quote from: viper37 on October 26, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
If all religious people were like you, maybe I wouldn't be atheist ;)
Imho, public policies should be decided by the level of knowledge we have today. That's my problem with religion, were all too often, religious people are against advancing our knowledge. No matter if it's the present, the not so distant past, or the very long forgotten past, it seems we should be stuck in time at some specific point and stop advancing because we already know everything that is important.
Define "knowledge".
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:00:48 PM
All religions are based on some fundamentally absurd and baseless explanations of the nature of the universe. Jack Chick hating Catholics is just part of his unfounded, irrational belief system. When I dismiss religious people, even if they target other religious peoples' ridiculous views, I come from a position of rationality, science and skepticism.
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
Taoism and Buddhism are like Pret-a-Manger and Whole Foods. It is better than McDonald's but is still a chain. :P
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
:lmfao:
You are so full of shit Marty. Don't ever change. :hug:
One of the awesome things about Christianity it is as deep, or as shallow, as you want it to be. If (in a Polish context) you just want to go to Mass on Sunday, receive communion and then go on your way the rest of the week you can do that. If you want to be more intellectual you can study the history and interpretation of the texts. If you want to be more philosophical you can read the generations of Christian philosophers and theologians. And yes, if you want to be more mystical there is a lengthy Christian tradition of that as well.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:31:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
I think some sort of a critical, empirical approach to spirituality. Check out what is out there, try everything, see what works for you, always question your assumptions. I think it is a deeply human need to reach for transcendence - without it, life is semi-empty. Just don't be a sheep.
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:33:43 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
:lmfao:
You are so full of shit Marty. Don't ever change. :hug:
One of the awesome things about Christianity it is as deep, or as shallow, as you want it to be. If (in a Polish context) you just want to go to Mass on Sunday, receive communion and then go on your way the rest of the week you can do that. If you want to be more intellectual you can study the history and interpretation of the texts. If you want to be more philosophical you can read the generations of Christian philosophers and theologians. And yes, if you want to be more mystical there is a lengthy Christian tradition of that as well.
Fair enough. I think you can be a Christian mystic - many were. But then for some people (yours truly, for example), Christianity doesn't work as available in the socio-cultural context. So you need to look out for other things. Freemasonry, occultism, Buddhism, mysticism etc. I think we should look out for what works for us rather than settling for the "biggest circus in town".
Edit: Also: some of my best friends are deeply devout Christians. ;)
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:31:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
I think some sort of a critical, empirical approach to spirituality. Check out what is out there, try everything, see what works for you, always question your assumptions. I think it is a deeply human need to reach for transcendence - without it, life is semi-empty. Just don't be a sheep.
Transcendence? For adults?
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:38:00 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:31:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
I think some sort of a critical, empirical approach to spirituality. Check out what is out there, try everything, see what works for you, always question your assumptions. I think it is a deeply human need to reach for transcendence - without it, life is semi-empty. Just don't be a sheep.
Transcendence? For adults?
Yup. It's the highest level of Maslov's hierarchy. I found it deeply lacking when I hit 35 or so.
I'm now almost 39 and I'm a much happier individual.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:40:56 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:38:00 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:31:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
I think some sort of a critical, empirical approach to spirituality. Check out what is out there, try everything, see what works for you, always question your assumptions. I think it is a deeply human need to reach for transcendence - without it, life is semi-empty. Just don't be a sheep.
Transcendence? For adults?
Yup. It's the highest level of Maslov's hierarchy. I found it deeply lacking when I hit 35 or so.
:lol: OK gay hippie!
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:13:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
But if that book WAS so written, then his absolute faith in it is perfectly rational.
That is the entire problem with beebs insistence that we should just treat this all the same. It is NOT all the same.
If I truly believed that an apostate might possibly damn my child to an eternity of torment, there is no possible action I can take that is rationally beyond the pale to fight that danger. You cannot start with a irrational premise that results in infinite possible harm and NOT end up with radicalism.
Jack Chick's entire world view and actions make perfect, rational sense given one basic irrational assumption and the beliefs that follow from it.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:43:12 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:40:56 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:38:00 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:34:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 01:31:34 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
And what kind of food is the thinking man's approach?
I think some sort of a critical, empirical approach to spirituality. Check out what is out there, try everything, see what works for you, always question your assumptions. I think it is a deeply human need to reach for transcendence - without it, life is semi-empty. Just don't be a sheep.
Transcendence? For adults?
Yup. It's the highest level of Maslov's hierarchy. I found it deeply lacking when I hit 35 or so.
:lol: OK gay hippie!
:P
I think the camaraderie and spiritual connection aspects of this are quite valuable.
What I protest against is people lazily defaulting to their socio-cultural choice, especially if they then seek to impose their spiritual values on others.
Now I'm hungry. Thanks Mart.
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:46:39 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
The mythological parts are clearly nonsense, but the more philosophical parts contains some kernels of interest. Not all beliefs are equally absurd -- Mormonism is orders of magnitude sillier.
In Buddhism of the original, Theravada kind, the "mythology" is that the Buddha left his prosperous life after witnessing human suffering and death, wandered around listening to various teachers of his era, decided they did not know how to avoid suffering, and sat under a tree until he worked out his own philosophy, which he then taught to others until he died.
In original Taoism, there appears to be no mythology at all. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu were authors of the key Taoist texts, but we know practically nothing about either.
Both eventually gave their names to religions crowded with the usual gods, demons, angels ("bodhisattvas"), heavens, hells, etc. But that stuff has basically nothing to do with the original religions.
The Buddha's own alleged approach to such stuff was pretty simple - when pressed as to the existence of gods, demons, etc., he professed a sort of profound agnosticism: they may well exist, or not; but if they do, they don't know how to avoid suffering any more than people do! :D
See, what you just described there is, IMO, not religion at all, but rather philosophy, and philosophy of the best kind...
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 01:45:55 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:13:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 12:10:47 PM
You know, Jack Chick felt his views were completely rational as well, and could source just about anything he said to an appropriate Bible quotation.
The real similarity between the two of you is your absolute certainty in the correctness of your world view, and the inability give any credit or sympathy to the views of others.
Oh, stop it with the postmodern drivel. There is zero similarity between Chick's views and mine. Why? My world view is subject to revision given new and better data. Error correction if you will. Chick just has a book he thinks was written by the Creator of the Universe.
But if that book WAS so written, then his absolute faith in it is perfectly rational.
That is the entire problem with beebs insistence that we should just treat this all the same. It is NOT all the same.
If I truly believed that an apostate might possibly damn my child to an eternity of torment, there is no possible action I can take that is rationally beyond the pale to fight that danger. You cannot start with a irrational premise that results in infinite possible harm and NOT end up with radicalism.
Jack Chick's entire world view and actions make perfect, rational sense given one basic irrational assumption and the beliefs that follow from it.
You are completely correct. Once you accept a religion's claims, the subsequent actions make perfect sense. I am sure Jack Chick thought he was right, just as the jihadi steering an airplane into a building full of infidels feels nothing but joy at doing his duty and earning his place in paradise.
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 01:49:30 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:46:39 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
The mythological parts are clearly nonsense, but the more philosophical parts contains some kernels of interest. Not all beliefs are equally absurd -- Mormonism is orders of magnitude sillier.
In Buddhism of the original, Theravada kind, the "mythology" is that the Buddha left his prosperous life after witnessing human suffering and death, wandered around listening to various teachers of his era, decided they did not know how to avoid suffering, and sat under a tree until he worked out his own philosophy, which he then taught to others until he died.
In original Taoism, there appears to be no mythology at all. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu were authors of the key Taoist texts, but we know practically nothing about either.
Both eventually gave their names to religions crowded with the usual gods, demons, angels ("bodhisattvas"), heavens, hells, etc. But that stuff has basically nothing to do with the original religions.
The Buddha's own alleged approach to such stuff was pretty simple - when pressed as to the existence of gods, demons, etc., he professed a sort of profound agnosticism: they may well exist, or not; but if they do, they don't know how to avoid suffering any more than people do! :D
See, what you just described there is, IMO, not religion at all, but rather philosophy, and philosophy of the best kind...
Yes, once you strip some of the Eastern "religions" of their supernatural mumbo jumbo, they contain quite a bit of wisdom and insight.
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 01:49:30 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:46:39 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 26, 2016, 12:19:35 PM
What's fundamentally absurd and baseless about Taoism or Buddhism?
The mythological parts are clearly nonsense, but the more philosophical parts contains some kernels of interest. Not all beliefs are equally absurd -- Mormonism is orders of magnitude sillier.
In Buddhism of the original, Theravada kind, the "mythology" is that the Buddha left his prosperous life after witnessing human suffering and death, wandered around listening to various teachers of his era, decided they did not know how to avoid suffering, and sat under a tree until he worked out his own philosophy, which he then taught to others until he died.
In original Taoism, there appears to be no mythology at all. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu were authors of the key Taoist texts, but we know practically nothing about either.
Both eventually gave their names to religions crowded with the usual gods, demons, angels ("bodhisattvas"), heavens, hells, etc. But that stuff has basically nothing to do with the original religions.
The Buddha's own alleged approach to such stuff was pretty simple - when pressed as to the existence of gods, demons, etc., he professed a sort of profound agnosticism: they may well exist, or not; but if they do, they don't know how to avoid suffering any more than people do! :D
See, what you just described there is, IMO, not religion at all, but rather philosophy, and philosophy of the best kind...
That's true. I think there are also certain Western philosophies that follow a similar pattern, but may be more familiar to a Western mind - sadly they are not as widespread as Buddhism and Taoism.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:52:44 PM
That's true. I think there are also certain Western philosophies that follow a similar pattern, but may be more familiar to a Western mind - sadly they are not as widespread as Buddhism and Taoism.
There are aspects of Christianity which made explorations of consciousness of the kind done in the Buddhist/Hindu/Taoist tradition difficult to impossible.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:53:52 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:52:44 PM
That's true. I think there are also certain Western philosophies that follow a similar pattern, but may be more familiar to a Western mind - sadly they are not as widespread as Buddhism and Taoism.
There are aspects of Christianity which made explorations of consciousness of the kind done in the Buddhist/Hindu/Taoist tradition difficult to impossible.
Yes, but the more mystical aspects of Freemasonry, Western Hermeticism, some aspects of Gnosticism, Neoplatonism etc. do this.
And they do so in the spirit of liberty and individualism that is more in sync with the Western mind.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:50:56 PM
You are completely correct. Once you accept a religion's claims, the subsequent actions make perfect sense. I am sure Jack Chick thought he was right, just as the jihadi steering an airplane into a building full of infidels feels nothing but joy at doing his duty and earning his place in paradise.
I always love this old chestnut - that Christians are just the same as Muslims jihadis.
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
The large majority of Christians, even evangelical Christians, thought Jack Chick a bit of a nutter for his continued hostility towards Catholics. The large majority is Muslims view suicide bombers as the opposite of what Islam stands for.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:50:56 PM
You are completely correct. Once you accept a religion's claims, the subsequent actions make perfect sense. I am sure Jack Chick thought he was right, just as the jihadi steering an airplane into a building full of infidels feels nothing but joy at doing his duty and earning his place in paradise.
The depressing part of all this (cue Raz crazy trolling in 3...2...1...) is that realizing this creates a situation where the rationalists among us have to start contemplating some very nasty things, which happens already of course. We drop bombs on people, knowing full well we will kill a lot who are innocent, we engage in wars, we stomp on privacy rights, etc., etc. All to protect against people who honestly and truly believe that the purpose of their lives is their death...along with as many of the non-believers as they can manage.
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
God is evil. No. Sunday. Lutheran state church.
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth. This doesn't even have to be overtly spiritual. It could be a belief in humanism, or social and political activism, or even your kids. Cynical life is unbearable. Just be careful you don't fall into a crusading mode.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Personally, I think religion is the junk-food of spirituality. It satisfies an ubiquitous need, is easy to get and does not require much effort but does so in a way that is low nutrition and harmful to your well being. Mysticism and esoterism, on the other hand, is the equivalent of whole-grain home grown slow food. It takes time and effort to properly prepare but the benefits for your well being are much more pronounced. Atheism ls like arguing one should give up on eating because McDonald's is bad for you.
I guess if one is making a statement that you aren't really alive if you aren't spiritually inclined.
Of course, the metaphor before that was tortured so I guess I shouldn't overanalyze the ending.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
You can't hug a fact. :(
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:50:56 PM
You are completely correct. Once you accept a religion's claims, the subsequent actions make perfect sense. I am sure Jack Chick thought he was right, just as the jihadi steering an airplane into a building full of infidels feels nothing but joy at doing his duty and earning his place in paradise.
I always love this old chestnut - that Christians are just the same as Muslims jihadis.
I think that is a incorrect over-simplification of the point.
Fundamentally, choosing to believe that Allah wants you to do <X> because Passage <A> in Book <Z> is not any different than believing that Jesus wants you to do <Y> because Passage <B> in Book <W> on the basis of religious indonctrination. These are basically the exact same thing.
However, clearly from a practical standpoint, the nature of <X and Y> is rather important, and the justification for them is as well. The nature of the difference at its basic level is not really different though.
Indeed, you laugh off the idea that Christians and jihadis are so different, but the truth is that Christians have done things just as horrific as anything ISIS does on the basis that they thought God wanted them to. They burned people at the stake for the crime of witchcraft because they thought it was pleasing to God. How is that different in kind?
Of course, in todays practical reality, Christians don't do that anymore, so it is simply not an issue. So in that sense, there is a clear and obvious difference that is critical to how we approach those religions.
Quote
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Should we really stone women who go outside on their periods?
What is the proper punishment for denying Christ?
Should we suffer a witch to live?
Yes, lots of questions!
Quote
The large majority of Christians, even evangelical Christians, thought Jack Chick a bit of a nutter for his continued hostility towards Catholics. The large majority is Muslims view suicide bombers as the opposite of what Islam stands for.
I've had evangelical Christians hand me Chick tracks when I was a kid. I am not sure so many of them find him a nutter as you think.
And again, if you accept the premise of HIS particular brand of Christianity, he isn't a nutter at all.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Seems to me you may be using myth also for things that aren't.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth. This doesn't even have to be overtly spiritual. It could be a belief in humanism, or social and political activism, or even your kids. Cynical life is unbearable. Just be careful you don't fall into a crusading mode.
So not believing a myth = cynicism?
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Seems to me you may use myth also for things that aren't.
All these things are a myth. If you think about everything around in a truly and fully cold and rational way, life is not worth living. So you need your myth, your purpose to live. The key is not to live someone else's myth. That's such a waste of life.
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:09:22 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth. This doesn't even have to be overtly spiritual. It could be a belief in humanism, or social and political activism, or even your kids. Cynical life is unbearable. Just be careful you don't fall into a crusading mode.
So not believing a myth = cynicism?
Yeah. If you have nothing that makes you get up in the morning, then what's the point of living?
Incidentally, I don't see the concept of myth in any negative way.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:10:06 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Seems to me you may use myth also for things that aren't.
All these things are a myth. If you think about everything around in a truly and fully cold and rational way, life is not worth living. So you need your myth, your purpose to live. The key is not to live someone else's myth. That's such a waste of life.
You honestly think things like love, a good meal or a child's smile aren't enough? You're a dried up husk of a person.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:12:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:10:06 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Seems to me you may use myth also for things that aren't.
All these things are a myth. If you think about everything around in a truly and fully cold and rational way, life is not worth living. So you need your myth, your purpose to live. The key is not to live someone else's myth. That's such a waste of life.
You honestly think things like love, a good meal or a child's smile aren't enough? You're a dried up husk of a person.
Stop with the name calling. They are enough when they are enough. If they are not enough they aren't enough. I think the mistake is to think one size fits all - different people need different things to satisfy this need. So you need some meta rules to stop people from hurting each other as they seek for their "mythical fulfilment".
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:14:11 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:12:19 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:10:06 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth.
Why would you need myth? Sounds infantile.
I edited my post a bit more. :P
Seems to me you may use myth also for things that aren't.
All these things are a myth. If you think about everything around in a truly and fully cold and rational way, life is not worth living. So you need your myth, your purpose to live. The key is not to live someone else's myth. That's such a waste of life.
You honestly think things like love, a good meal or a child's smile aren't enough? You're a dried up husk of a person.
Stop with the name calling. They are enough when they are enough. If they are not enough they aren't enough. I think the mistake is to think one size fits all - different people need different things to satisfy this need. So you need some meta rules to stop people from hurting each other as they seek for their "mythical fulfilment".
I'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins,
Actually, you are already cheating a bit here Beebs.
That is by no means the "fundamental" message, that has built into a huge set of answers to questions you are not even asking.
Once you accept the fundamental message that there is such a thing as "God" to begin with, THAT opens up a bunch of questions, and you have to literally answer a nearly infinite number if them in a very precise manner to end up with "...Jesus was the Son of God..." and then a bunch more questions to get to "...who died for our sins". And honestly, the answers to those questions are just as ridiculous as "...and then he found the magic glasses that allowed him to read the magic plates...".
I still think that is one of the most insane of all the religious ideas. The basic premise that
1. There is a God.
2. He cares about humans and "sin".
3. This creates a problem because humans sin
4. The solution to said problem somehow involves God pretending to be human and pretending to die.
...
...
...
10. Salvation!
Do you ever wonder about the timing of it all?
I mean, why the long wait from Adam and Eve to Jesus? Why did it take that amount of time? If Jesus was going to be necessary, why not just skip over all the Old Testament stuff and have Jesus come along immediately?
What was it about that particular time that made it the right time for salvation, and not before or after? Surely it wasn't just random or something, right? So why then?
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Then I stand by my husk comment.
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:23:26 PM
I mean, why the long wait from Adam and Eve to Jesus? Why did it take that amount of time? If Jesus was going to be necessary, why not just skip over all the Old Testament stuff and have Jesus come along immediately?
And not murder almost all living things? Come on, you know God.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:26:00 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:23:26 PM
I mean, why the long wait from Adam and Eve to Jesus? Why did it take that amount of time? If Jesus was going to be necessary, why not just skip over all the Old Testament stuff and have Jesus come along immediately?
And not murder almost all living things? Come on, you know God.
The weird thing is that I was raised a born again Christian. My mom was and is very evangelical.
So I was exposed to all this at a young age, and I believed it all because I was told that it was all true, I would burn in hell, etc., etc., etc.
But I can remember sitting in bible classes at a very, very young age asking these kinds of questions. I remember asking my Sunday school teacher if Satan could really just kill people and he told us sure, he could. So I asked, well...why doesn't he then?
I remember wondering these things, these kind of practical sorts of things. Where is heaven, exactly? Where is hell? Are they in some other galaxy or underground, or what?
How does Christ dieing for our sins actually result in salvation? Is God impressed so much by it that he forgives us...in which case it is up to him, right? And can't he just forgive us without the entire Jesus thing? And if he knew how the Jesus thing was going to play out, and we know he did because the "proof" of Jesus was based on prophesy...what was the point of actually doing it?
I spent a good amount of time believing in the "truth" of the fundamentalist Christian view of the world, while still not at all understanding how it could make sense. I think I assumed that the more I learned and understood as I got older, all this would start making sense - my lack of understanding was simply a lack of information or education since I *knew* the conclusion was "true".
So of course asking lots of questions would be the way to understand it better. Instead it just seemed to piss everyone off...
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
The foundation of your understanding of the cosmos is a story so preposterous that you simply have to accept it. Once you have, it opens up contradictions and insoluble puzzles that derive in large part from its patently parochial human origin.
You won't do this, but you could actually approach the question of whether your religion is plausible as a scientific one: are your observations of the world as it is consistent with your god? You'll respond, "of course, god is omnipotent" and I'll retort that "god did it" (just as "it's magic") is an explanation for *any* observation, and it therefore is no explanation at all.
An omnipotent, omniscient god is the philosophical equivalent of a division by zero. It just gives you nonsensical answers. How about this old trope: can your god make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:24:10 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Then I stand by my husk comment.
Why are you bringing US college football into this? :huh:
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:33:36 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:26:00 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:23:26 PM
I mean, why the long wait from Adam and Eve to Jesus? Why did it take that amount of time? If Jesus was going to be necessary, why not just skip over all the Old Testament stuff and have Jesus come along immediately?
And not murder almost all living things? Come on, you know God.
The weird thing is that I was raised a born again Christian. My mom was and is very evangelical.
So I was exposed to all this at a young age, and I believed it all because I was told that it was all true, I would burn in hell, etc., etc., etc.
But I can remember sitting in bible classes at a very, very young age asking these kinds of questions. I remember asking my Sunday school teacher if Satan could really just kill people and he told us sure, he could. So I asked, well...why doesn't he then?
I remember wondering these things, these kind of practical sorts of things. Where is heaven, exactly? Where is hell? Are they in some other galaxy or underground, or what?
How does Christ dieing for our sins actually result in salvation? Is God impressed so much by it that he forgives us...in which case it is up to him, right? And can't he just forgive us without the entire Jesus thing? And if he knew how the Jesus thing was going to play out, and we know he did because the "proof" of Jesus was based on prophesy...what was the point of actually doing it?
I spent a good amount of time believing in the "truth" of the fundamentalist Christian view of the world, while still not at all understanding how it could make sense. I think I assumed that the more I learned and understood as I got older, all this would start making sense - my lack of understanding was simply a lack of information or education since I *knew* the conclusion was "true".
So of course asking lots of questions would be the way to understand it better. Instead it just seemed to piss everyone off...
I'm one generation removed. My dad grew up in a very religious family, and most (all?) of his brothers and sisters are religious, some deeply so. My dad is not religious at all, and AFAIK hasn't been since a very early age. He is certainly a lot more anti-religion than I am... I've always found it curious how my religious relatives managed to deal with that kind of questions and still come out religious.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:24:10 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Then I stand by my husk comment.
Why are you bringing US college football into this? :huh:
God told me.
like religion, science isn't meant to be questioned
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:42:53 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:24:10 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Then I stand by my husk comment.
Why are you bringing US college football into this? :huh:
God told me.
Have a doctor take a look, it's probably just a tumor.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:44:08 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:42:53 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:24:10 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:18:41 PMI'm talking about you. Is it correct that to you they aren't enough?
I don't have children. Love and good meal aren't enough. So yes, it is correct. I found the missing part in what we are discussing here.
Then I stand by my husk comment.
Why are you bringing US college football into this? :huh:
God told me.
Have a doctor take a look, it's probably just a tumor.
It's not a tumor!
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
like religion, science isn't meant to be questioned
I think you'll find that questioning using proven methods is
exactly what science is.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:44:52 PM
It's not a tumor!
Schizophrenia then. Don't worry, there are medications.
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:41:38 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:33:36 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 26, 2016, 02:26:00 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 02:23:26 PM
I mean, why the long wait from Adam and Eve to Jesus? Why did it take that amount of time? If Jesus was going to be necessary, why not just skip over all the Old Testament stuff and have Jesus come along immediately?
And not murder almost all living things? Come on, you know God.
The weird thing is that I was raised a born again Christian. My mom was and is very evangelical.
So I was exposed to all this at a young age, and I believed it all because I was told that it was all true, I would burn in hell, etc., etc., etc.
But I can remember sitting in bible classes at a very, very young age asking these kinds of questions. I remember asking my Sunday school teacher if Satan could really just kill people and he told us sure, he could. So I asked, well...why doesn't he then?
I remember wondering these things, these kind of practical sorts of things. Where is heaven, exactly? Where is hell? Are they in some other galaxy or underground, or what?
How does Christ dieing for our sins actually result in salvation? Is God impressed so much by it that he forgives us...in which case it is up to him, right? And can't he just forgive us without the entire Jesus thing? And if he knew how the Jesus thing was going to play out, and we know he did because the "proof" of Jesus was based on prophesy...what was the point of actually doing it?
I spent a good amount of time believing in the "truth" of the fundamentalist Christian view of the world, while still not at all understanding how it could make sense. I think I assumed that the more I learned and understood as I got older, all this would start making sense - my lack of understanding was simply a lack of information or education since I *knew* the conclusion was "true".
So of course asking lots of questions would be the way to understand it better. Instead it just seemed to piss everyone off...
I'm one generation removed. My dad grew up in a very religious family, and most (all?) of his brothers and sisters are religious, some deeply so. My dad is not religious at all, and AFAIK hasn't been since a very early age. He is certainly a lot more anti-religion than I am... I've always found it curious how my religious relatives managed to deal with that kind of questions and still come out religious.
Crap, I forgot my point in my post!
What I find amazing is that adults manage to get through that questioning phase and just...stop. People like Beeb simply don't let those kinds of questions that have no reasonable answer bother them, they apparently just shut off the part of their brain that demands answers to questions like that.
I don't think I could do that if I wanted to - I don't think I am capable of religious belief in the sense that I don't think I could choose to have faith.
That is my emotional response to Pascal's Wager. If I am in fact wrong, and someone asks me to account for my lack of belief, I figure I can fall back on "I believe as I was created - by you apparently - to believe, and I have no free will to believe in that which is not believable".
There is more to spirituality than blind belief though.
I interpret Marty's comment about the need for myths in terms of organizing principles. Nothing really has inherent meaning. We create our own meaning.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 26, 2016, 03:57:43 PM
I interpret Marty's comment about the need for myths in terms of organizing principles. Nothing really has inherent meaning. We create our own meaning.
Yup. Find your own religion and be its prophet. Don't be a follower of someone else's religion.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 26, 2016, 03:57:43 PM
I interpret Marty's comment about the need for myths in terms of organizing principles. Nothing really has inherent meaning. We create our own meaning.
Yup. Find your own religion and be its prophet. Don't be a follower of someone else's religion.
:D
:D
:P
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:37:18 PM
How about this old trope: can your god make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
Yes. And then he'd lift it just the same.
This is like a atheist's Anselm's Proof. Argument by semantics.
Listen to Minsky. If anyone got God right, it's the Jews.
:yes: Mary did God right.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 26, 2016, 04:08:50 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 02:37:18 PM
How about this old trope: can your god make a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?
Yes. And then he'd lift it just the same.
This is like a atheist's Anselm's Proof. Argument by semantics.
Yeah, I never really found that argument that interesting. It amounts to saying "Can you do something that you cannot do?"
There are pretty obvious logical problems with the concept of omnipotence, and the idea of a God, but the fact that we can semantically define impossible issues isn't one of them.
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 04:17:44 PM
There are pretty obvious logical problems with the concept of omnipotence, and the idea of a God, but the fact that we can semantically define impossible issues isn't one of them.
Really? I think this is at the core of the issue. An omnipotent being just creates increasing depths of logical contradictions and puzzles that make the faithful resort to the idiocy of Tertullian's "I believe
because it is absurd."
Tertulian is right though. A God that can be described by any term is not the opposite of that term - therefore is not truly a God.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 04:10:52 PM
Listen to Minsky. If anyone got God right, it's the Jews.
They certainly have reached exquisite heights of dissembling and rationalization trying to adhere to incoherent and barbaric rules in a world that has since advanced in ethics, science and... pretty much everything.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:11:27 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:09:22 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 26, 2016, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2016, 01:57:23 PM
The thing is - once you accept the fundamental message that Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins, it quite frankly opens up a lot more questions from there. If God exists why is there evil in the world? Are Christians required to keep kosher? So what day of the week is the sabbath? How exactly do we organize God's Church here on earth?
Questions that generally end with, oh that myth my parents told me about might not be true.
True. But life without myth is very dull and boring one. The trick is to find your own life's myth. This doesn't even have to be overtly spiritual. It could be a belief in humanism, or social and political activism, or even your kids. Cynical life is unbearable. Just be careful you don't fall into a crusading mode.
So not believing a myth = cynicism?
Yeah. If you have nothing that makes you get up in the morning, then what's the point of living?
Incidentally, I don't see the concept of myth in any negative way.
So you can't have a reason to get up in the morning without myth?
I'm not saying myth is a negative thing, I just think you are stretching the definition to its breaking point if it covers all things that make you want to live life.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
It's just stupid
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
like religion, science isn't meant to be questioned
???
Thy are nothing alike.
Religion provides accounts and a set of beliefs that are taken as given. The scientific method takes nothing as given other than the fact of the appearance of certain perceptible phenomena.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 04:28:02 PMThey certainly have reached exquisite heights of dissembling and rationalization trying to adhere to incoherent and barbaric rules in a world that has since advanced in ethics, science and... pretty much everything.
Which explains the lack of famous Jewish scientists? :hmm:
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 04:23:35 PM
Really? I think this is at the core of the issue. An omnipotent being just creates increasing depths of logical contradictions and puzzles that make the faithful resort to the idiocy of Tertullian's "I believe because it is absurd."
So then I define "omnipotence" to mean the power to do anything that does not involve logical contradiction.
Yeah, problem solved by definition!
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 26, 2016, 05:22:14 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 04:28:02 PMThey certainly have reached exquisite heights of dissembling and rationalization trying to adhere to incoherent and barbaric rules in a world that has since advanced in ethics, science and... pretty much everything.
Which explains the lack of famous Jewish scientists? :hmm:
It's great training for science and many other intellectual pursuits. But you know that.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 26, 2016, 05:20:01 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on October 26, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
like religion, science isn't meant to be questioned
???
Thy are nothing alike.
Religion provides accounts and a set of beliefs that are taken as given. The scientific method takes nothing as given other than the fact of the appearance of certain perceptible phenomena.
:unsure:
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 04:56:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
It's just stupid
I don't think that a scientific argument.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2016, 04:10:52 PM
Listen to Minsky. If anyone got God right, it's the Jews.
They certainly have reached exquisite heights of dissembling and rationalization trying to adhere to incoherent and barbaric rules in a world that has since advanced in ethics, science and... pretty much everything.
Must explain the concerted efforts since Constantine to eradicate them.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:19:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 04:56:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
It's just stupid
I don't think that a scientific argument.
Neither is religion, god, etc.
Git 'er done.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 06:32:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:19:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 04:56:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
It's just stupid
I don't think that a scientific argument.
Neither is religion, god, etc.
Care to tell us how you came to this brilliant deduction that "It's just stupid"? I love to know how those gears work inside that head of yours.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:43:39 PM
I love to know how those gears work inside that head of yours.
Remember now: this is 11B. He'll grind it until he finds it.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:43:39 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 06:32:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:19:44 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 04:56:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 26, 2016, 01:43:26 PM
Christianity in its various flavors is just so obviously man-made and obsesses over truly parochial concerns. Take a step back, and you can see how ridiculous it is.
Is this a scientific answer? If so, please show your work.
It's just stupid
I don't think that a scientific argument.
Neither is religion, god, etc.
Care to tell us how you came to this brilliant deduction that "It's just stupid"? I love to know how those gears work inside that head of yours.
Sorry don't believe in fairy tales, the bible, or the great juju of the mountain. Your stuff, along with all other religions, belongs on the shelf with Zeus, Appollo, and Cthulhu. Not on the same shelf with reason and logic. You may believe what you like and that's OK.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 26, 2016, 06:47:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 06:43:39 PM
I love to know how those gears work inside that head of yours.
Remember now: this is 11B. He'll grind it until he finds it.
:lol:
I'll pray for you.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 07:08:36 PM
Sorry don't believe in fairy tales, the bible, or the great juju of the mountain. Your stuff, along with all other religions, belongs on the shelf with Zeus, Appollo, and Cthulhu. Not on the same shelf with reason and logic. You may believe what you like and that's OK.
Okay, how did you come to this conclusion? Is it just a hunch?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 08:28:09 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 07:08:36 PM
Sorry don't believe in fairy tales, the bible, or the great juju of the mountain. Your stuff, along with all other religions, belongs on the shelf with Zeus, Appollo, and Cthulhu. Not on the same shelf with reason and logic. You may believe what you like and that's OK.
Okay, how did you come to this conclusion? Is it just a hunch?
So you believe in fairy tales, Zeus and the like? Nothing wrong with that or anything to be embarrassed about Raz. You can and it's OK.
You are dodging my question. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it just an inclination?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:06:40 PM
You are dodging my question. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it just an inclination?
:lol:
I answered. I do not believe in fairy tales and fables. Though some are fascinating pieces of fiction.
You're all goofs.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 26, 2016, 10:42:12 PM
You're all goofs.
Fuck you you mutherfucking goof! I'll cut you!
The Holy Father forgives you for your goofiness. This is, after all, the Holy Year of Mercy. Go in peace, goofs.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 26, 2016, 10:46:29 PM
The Holy Father forgives you for your goofiness. This is, after all, the Holy Year of Mercy. Go in peace, goofs.
In the spirit of Jack Chick, I don't need no forgiveness from the Antichrist in Rome. You motherfucking goof.
Save it for the circle of Hell reserved for curling, plea bargaining and Monopoly money.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 26, 2016, 10:56:45 PM
Save it for the circle of Hell reserved for curling, plea bargaining and Monopoly money.
Pretty sure you need to re-read your Dante. Curling, plea-bargaining and coloured money? Sounds like Paradise to me. :wub:
One thing notable from Dante is how cold hell is, much like the Yukon.
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 26, 2016, 11:15:56 PM
One thing notable from Dante is how cold hell is, much like the Yukon.
Hell has frozen over, and yet the Vancouver Canucks still haven't won the Cup.
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 10:34:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:06:40 PM
You are dodging my question. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it just an inclination?
:lol:
I answered. I do not believe in fairy tales and fables. Though some are fascinating pieces of fiction.
That's not an answer. I asked how you came to this conclusion. :mellow:
Quote from: Razgovory on October 27, 2016, 05:08:14 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on October 26, 2016, 10:34:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2016, 10:06:40 PM
You are dodging my question. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it just an inclination?
:lol:
I answered. I do not believe in fairy tales and fables. Though some are fascinating pieces of fiction.
That's not an answer. I asked how you came to this conclusion. :mellow:
Faith
When I was in basic training they had Chick tracts available for us to read on Sundays. I can't remember how or why but they were there.
That shit used to make me laugh so hard :lol:
https://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0061/0061_01.asp
:rolleyes: :glare:
Quote from: Jaron on October 28, 2016, 11:18:12 AM
https://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0061/0061_01.asp
:rolleyes: :glare:
Well - is he wrong?
He's talking about the anti-Mormon tract Beeb. :secret:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 28, 2016, 12:22:08 PM
He's talking about the anti-Mormon tract Beeb. :secret:
I know. :contract:
I was asking our resident Mormon if anything Chick said about Mormon beliefs is wrong.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 28, 2016, 12:22:08 PM
He's talking about the anti-Mormon tract Beeb. :secret:
Well - is he wrong?
:P
I haven't read everything. Given what he thinks of Catholicism and Islam, I wouldn't be surprised at the factuality of his rant :P