Your God Is Too Small

[ironhorse]

your god is too small by J.B.Phillips 

 

Have you read this book? It is worth reading methinks. 

 

You can read it here:

 

http://thecommonlife.com/files/books/Your_God_is_Too_Small.pdf

[florduh]

If you're going to imagine a god, you might as well imagine a big one.

[ironhorse]

If you're going to imagine a god, you might as well imagine a big one.

 

On this, we can agree.

[sdelsolray]

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

Typical Christian apologetics and related nonsense.  He is a decent writer (perhaps he did an outline and draft first) and clearly demonstrates the myopic, shallow and empty entrails of Christianity.

[ironhorse]

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

Typical Christian apologetics and related nonsense.

 

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

[sdelsolray]

 

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

Typical Christian apologetics and related nonsense.

 

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

 

 

 

No.  I'll leave it to you to find them and list them here.  Just one will do. More would be better.   You are able to identify logic fallacies.  Give it a try.

[ironhorse]

 

 

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

Typical Christian apologetics and related nonsense.

 

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

 

 

 

No.  I'll leave it to you to find them and list them here.  Just one will do. More would be better.   You are able to identify logic fallacies.  Give it a try.

 

 

 

No?

 

Leave it to me?

 

What kind of reply is that?

 

You said you read , I think the first ten pages, and you make these accusations

 

and you demand that I explain?

[sdelsolray]

 

 

 

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

Typical Christian apologetics and related nonsense.

 

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

 

 

 

No.  I'll leave it to you to find them and list them here.  Just one will do. More would be better.   You are able to identify logic fallacies.  Give it a try.

 

 

 

No?

 

Leave it to me?

 

What kind of reply is that?

 

You said you read , I think the first ten pages, and you make these accusations

 

and you demand that I explain?

 

 

 

Well, you spent years skeptically appraising.  You're an expert.  Let's see you skeptically appraise Phillip's paper.  You know, unbiased, objective and rational analysis.

 

Go.

[ironhorse]

Common man, if you read it then bring up the points or drop it, don't try to pin the responsibility on him. Debates don't generally work that way.

 

For me, it seems that people imagine a god about the size of their particular commitment, which kind of reveals the fact that it is a psychological construct at the end of the day. It affects the person to the degree that they envision it helps, it is a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts that through the power of prayer (or rather lack thereof) demonstrates its inability to change reality beyond simply the perception of the believer.

 

 

So, did you read any of the book?

[duderonomy]

You know, Ironhorse did say he was willing to discuss. It's odd that some of you would evade giving evidence for your claims, and refuse to answer simple questions.

 

On the other hand, Ironhorse, just because I'm sticking up for you here doesn't mean that you are exempt from the same rule. Where is that skeptical appraisal?

[bornagainathiest]

your god is too small by J.B.Phillips 

 

Have you read this book? It is worth reading methinks. 

 

You can read it here:

 

http://thecommonlife.com/files/books/Your_God_is_Too_Small.pdf

 

I'd prefer to read the skeptical analysis of your Christian faith that you took years over, Ironhorse.

 

And I'll keep on expressing that preference with every new link you post, every new thread you start and every attempt to drag our attention away from your skeptical analysis.

[rjn]

I skimmed through the first 20 pages (will read it more thoroughly later) and I must say this guy is making some sense if one were to accept the premise. As far as I can tell, he's making the case that people shouldn't be all too worried about being "perfect", and instead accept that they're not, which is actually a rather sympathetic view when contrasted with the neurotic OCD-like behaviour many religious people tend to exhibit.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Size doesn't matter.

[Thought2Much]

You know, Ironhorse did say he was willing to discuss.

 

True, but while ironhorse has shown the ability to troll us into discussing things for him, he hasn't shown any capability of independent thought about the subjects he brings up. You'll notice he never really discusses anything, but just dodges questions and gives cutesy little answers he thinks are profound or clever. I have yet to see anything that registers as actual "discussion" coming from ironhorse.

 

sdelsolray brought up the logical fallacies in the book that ironhorse shared. Can ironhorse identify logical fallacies? We don't know, because he has never shown us here that he can analyze anything that way with what he has "discussed" with us. Perhaps if ironhorse actually discussed the book and the flaws that sdelsolray perceives (or even why those perceived flaws might not be flaws), then we could have an actual discussion. Sadly, we're once again doing ironhorse's thinking and discussing for him.

[qadeshet]

"your god is too small"

 

If you mean small as in non-existant, then we agree. The only thing "god" is good at is remaining so perfectly hidden that we can't even show that he exists.

[sdelsolray]

Common man, if you read it then bring up the points or drop it, don't try to pin the responsibility on him. Debates don't generally work that way.

 

...

 

 

You know, Ironhorse did say he was willing to discuss. It's odd that some of you would evade giving evidence for your claims, and refuse to answer simple questions.

 

...

 

Ironhorse gets special treatment because his pattern on this forum is to avoid debate or discourse.  Mostly he cuts and pastes, adopts that cut and pasted source's position, avoids questions and runs away.  So, I thought I would see if he was capable of or interested in finding the logical fallacies in the JB Phillips reference he cut and pasted.  After all, Ironhorse undertook years of skeptical appraisal of his religious beliefs.  He has even prepared and outline and first draft of it.  

 

It was all pretty much tongue-in-cheek.

[Guest Furball]

“The trouble with people today is that they have not found a god big enough for modern needs.”

 

 

 

-It seems to me that people today have found a god big enough for their modern needs. According to modern evangelism, god can and will meet the modern needs of people such as god will heal their finances, marriage, anxieties, drug addiction, answers to life and death etc. etc. etc. the list goes on. 

[♦ Fuego ♦]

From my experiences in church over 3 decades, people commonly either choose what attributes their god has, or by reading scripture come to a conclusion that god is far more strict about holiness than they thought possible and they can be really annoying people picking on everything YOU do, looking for how the devil will get you.

 

All in all, their imagination creates the god that is most popular in their circle of friends (typically all love, always good, feels great, grace and mercy, gets them parking spots and helps them find lost keys), or that they imagine is watching their thoughts and whom they want to please by becoming as non-worldly as they can (the church is in SIN, they tolerate demonic lusts and television shows, etc).

 

The year of my deconversion, I had been praying and fasting and looking for answers. When none came, I began to realize that the previous conversations I had with god had been my mind pretending to be him, because it was important to survival that I do what I had read in the Bible. My mind was tired of playing games and wanted a real god to answer. None did. Now I'm here among the ranks of the ex-believers, and I see more than ever that my decision was correct.

[ironhorse]

"Your god is too small for my universe."

~ Carl Sagan

 

 

 

"From the cry which we have so often heard during the war years: "If there is a God, why doesn't He stop Hitler?," to the unspoken questioning in many a Christian heart when a devoted servant of Christ dies from accident or disease at what seems to us a most inopportune moment, there is this universal longing for God to intervene, to show His hand, to vindicate His purpose. I do not pretend to understand the ways of God any more than the next man; but it is surely more fitting as well as more sensible for us to study what God does do and what He does not do as He works in and through the complex fabric of this disintegrated world, than to postulate what we think God ought to do and then feel demoralized and bitterly disappointed because He fails to fulfill what we expect of Him."

~ J. B. Phillips

[sdelsolray]

"Your sky fairies are imaginary little shits"

~sdelsolray

[bornagainathiest]

"Your god is too small for my universe."

~ Carl Sagan

 

 

 

"From the cry which we have so often heard during the war years: "If there is a God, why doesn't He stop Hitler?," to the unspoken questioning in many a Christian heart when a devoted servant of Christ dies from accident or disease at what seems to us a most inopportune moment, there is this universal longing for God to intervene, to show His hand, to vindicate His purpose. I do not pretend to understand the ways of God any more than the next man; but it is surely more fitting as well as more sensible for us to study what God does do and what He does not do as He works in and through the complex fabric of this disintegrated world, than to postulate what we think God ought to do and then feel demoralized and bitterly disappointed because He fails to fulfill what we expect of Him."

~ J. B. Phillips

 

Members and lurkers please note...

 

Once again Ironhorse refuses to defend his Christian faith.

 

Instead he 'represents' his faith by answering sdelsolray's questions with questions of his own.

 

His act of 'representing' is no more than putting up a wall, a barrier which he uses to stop his beliefs from being questioned.

.

.

.

1 Peter 3:15 New International Version (NIV)

 

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord.  Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.  But do this with gentleness and respect,

[dangitbobby83]

...He fails to fulfill what we expect of Him."

~ J. B. Phillips

 

Why not? He created us, right? He supposedly gave us curiosity AND rationality, but then gave us a vague book of contradicting claims and orders, then proceeded to allow the devil to plant 100's of other vague and contrary books all giving more vague and contradicting stories about gods(including more vague and contradicting orders about how to live), with some people even believing he allowed satan to plant fake fossils and fake the age of the earth as some grand BS faith-test, which if we fail, we all get sent to hell. 

 

Considering that he is an immortal ruler of the universe with wisdom and knowledge beyond, he could take a few minutes out of his day to kindly explain to us the overall truth without muddling the message and expecting us puny, small minded idiots not to fuck up figuring out the complete and utter mess of claims and problems associated with his behavior.

 

So I prefer it much easier - Sagan had it right. Your god, IH, is way too small for my universe and his piss poor example and instruction smacks much more of a small-time War Lord in Africa then it does of an all powerful creator. Be rid of the believe of yahweh and it all makes sense! Awesome how that happens.

[ironhorse]

 

You know, Ironhorse did say he was willing to discuss.

 

True, but while ironhorse has shown the ability to troll us into discussing things for him, he hasn't shown any capability of independent thought about the subjects he brings up. You'll notice he never really discusses anything, but just dodges questions and gives cutesy little answers he thinks are profound or clever. I have yet to see anything that registers as actual "discussion" coming from ironhorse.

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss.Perhaps if ironhorse actually discussed the book and the flaws that sdelsolray perceives (or even why those perceived flaws might not be flaws), then we could have an actual discussion. Sadly, we're once again doing ironhorse's thinking and discussing for him.

 

 

"True, but while ironhorse has shown the ability to troll us into discussing things for him, he hasn't shown any capability of independent thought about the subjects he brings up. You'll notice he never really discusses anything, but just dodges questions and gives cutesy little answers he thinks are profound or clever."

 

sdelsolray brought up the logical fallacies in the book that ironhorse shared. Can ironhorse identify logical fallacies? We don't know, because he has never shown us here that he can analyze anything that way with what he has "discussed" with us.

 

~ Thought2Much

 

I don't feel it is even necessary for me to try to defend myself against the accusations that I continually dodge questions or my "cutesy" little answers or anything I write is proof of my utter incapability. 

 

 

Now back to the topic of the thread:

 

sdelsolray did not bring up, or made known, what he read as logical fallacies in the book.

He only stated it contained these fallacies. 

 

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

~ sdelsolray

 

 

And then I asked:

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

 

The book online:

http://thecommonlife.com/files/books/Your_God_is_Too_Small.pdf

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

You know, Ironhorse did say he was willing to discuss.

 

True, but while ironhorse has shown the ability to troll us into discussing things for him, he hasn't shown any capability of independent thought about the subjects he brings up. You'll notice he never really discusses anything, but just dodges questions and gives cutesy little answers he thinks are profound or clever. I have yet to see anything that registers as actual "discussion" coming from ironhorse.

 

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss.Perhaps if ironhorse actually discussed the book and the flaws that sdelsolray perceives (or even why those perceived flaws might not be flaws), then we could have an actual discussion. Sadly, we're once again doing ironhorse's thinking and discussing for him.

 

 

"True, but while ironhorse has shown the ability to troll us into discussing things for him, he hasn't shown any capability of independent thought about the subjects he brings up. You'll notice he never really discusses anything, but just dodges questions and gives cutesy little answers he thinks are profound or clever."

 

sdelsolray brought up the logical fallacies in the book that ironhorse shared. Can ironhorse identify logical fallacies? We don't know, because he has never shown us here that he can analyze anything that way with what he has "discussed" with us.

 

~ Thought2Much

 

I don't feel it is even necessary for me to try to defend myself against the accusations that I continually dodge questions or my "cutesy" little answers or anything I write is proof of my utter incapability. 

 

 

Now back to the topic of the thread:

 

sdelsolray did not bring up, or made known, what he read as logical fallacies in the book.

He only stated it contained these fallacies. 

 

Within the first 10 pages of his 92 page tome, Phillips provides over a dozen mere assertions, at least four straw man fallacies and several other irrational statements, along with a Godwin for good measure.

 

~ sdelsolray

 

 

And then I asked:

Can you elaborate on one?

 

I'm willing to discuss. 

 

The book online:

http://thecommonlife.com/files/books/Your_God_is_Too_Small.pdf

 

 

That's interesting, Ironhorse.

 

Today you wrote...

 

I don't feel it is even necessary for me to try to defend myself against the accusations that I continually dodge questions or my "cutesy" little answers or anything I write is proof of my utter incapability. 

.

.

.

Yet four days ago you wrote...

 

"I know and accept that I am woefully inadequate in a lot of things."

 

 http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/72329-some-notes-about-me/page-3#.VzT76IQrJD8 (post # 50.)

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

There is no defense against the accusation that Ironhorse dodges our questions because it is simply a fact.  No amount of arguing, sliding, hiding, or denying can change it.