Life, The Universe, And Everything; Continued

[BuddyFerris]

...continuing a previous conversation between the Ex-Cs and one puny Christian...

 

 

Here's the summary after 60+ pages:

 

Ex-Cs - 864 points, but 621 were insult points and don't contribute to the final score for content.

Grand total: 243 points

 

Puny Christian - 249 points, including 11 for thinly veiled put-downs which don't count.

There were 153 moderately rude failures to respond noted, but no points awarded.

Grand total: 238 points

 

Individual special awards for the first 60 pages go to:

Grandpa Harley, most likely to speak his mind while actually having one

HanSolo, most likely to find a way to disagree reasonably (more or less) regardless of the weight of the argument against him

 

Honorable mention:

Legion Reglis, for content and thought (lacks vehemence in disagreement, inadequate use of profanity)

Dano, unanimously voted most youthful 71 year old on the thread

DevaLight, most noticed for her absence; the coolest of summer breezes

Alanh, the only open-minded atheist in upstate NY

Vigile_del_fuoco1, for least pronounceable name

Mankey, for cleverly hiding an occasional gem in a pile of rant

Kujroikaze, special mention for actually reading the post to which he was responding

Sparrow, special mention for most consecutive, non-repetitive insults

 

___________________________________________________________________

 

After evolution, misquoted scripture, narrow-minded rationalism, and free will, let me propose something of which ChurchWorker would probably disapprove. Church, as it is practiced in the democracies, is annoying. Why?

 

I had lunch with an atheist friend the other day; we discovered that we agreed on many things about church and religion. Televangelists are generally an embarrassment to everybody. Church services are somewhere between mediocre entertainment and just plain dull. Church buildings costing millions are an unconscionable waste when the community has real needs that could be addressed. Thoughts?

 

Buddy Ferris

[Mankey]

...continuing a previous conversation between the Ex-Cs and one puny Christian...

For someone who has Gods help you sure do whine a lot. Besides it really don't matter how many people you are up against....what matters is whether or not your ideas or arguments are rational. Also, any questions you might ask should be based on a genuine desire to understand and not to bolster circular reasoning, like begging the question and argument from ignorance.

Here's the summary after 60+ pages:

 

Ex-Cs - 864 points, but 621 were insult points and don't contribute to the final score for content.

Grand total: 243 points

You are too delusional to rationally assess that thread of yours.

 

Puny Christian - 249 points, including 11 for thinly veiled put-downs which don't count.

There were 153 moderately rude failures to respond noted, but no points awarded.

Grand total: 238 points

Read above. There was no formal debate going on. Its nice that you admit being evasive. I still doubt that you will cease being evasive. I doubt that you will stop presenting illogic through verbose weasel wording....

 

Honorable mention:

Mankey, for cleverly hiding an occasional gem in a pile of rant

Hey. I did not ignore the fact that there were Christians who resisted the Nazis. However...the Confessing Church was much too late as Christianity has a very long history of anti-semitism. Protestant and Catholic. You are too close minded to actually absorb what I had posted in your other thread. Rants/Rehtoric can be void of illogic. You would not recognize a logical argument if it bit you in the ass Buddy. You can't even avoid being evasive and sometimes your statements are riddled with logical fallacies.

 

You speak of narrow-minded rationalism, yet you never demonstrated that there is anything wrong with the rational methods we got......but even if you could....you.....in no way.....can excuse the bigoted close mindedness of faith....as the bible defines faith. Pointing out the limitations of rational systems in no way excuses faith. Faith is irrational close mindedness. Add that to a 'revelation' from God and you have trouble. Peoples bigotry comes from their culture and their holy books. Through faith prejudice gets deified and in effect makes a person an impenetrable wall. We can do without revelations from peoples invisible friends thank you very much.

 

.....let me propose something of which ChurchWorker would probably disapprove. Church, as it is practiced in the democracies, is annoying. Why?

Because the bible and Christianity are bullshit, Christianity should keep its irrational nose out of people affairs and especially politics. Christianity is pretty much a system based on ignorance and prejudice. Democracy needs rational citizens and not delusional citizens with prejudices. Things are bad enough in politics without more bullshit. If churches want to help then churches should keep Christianity in church.

I had lunch with an atheist friend the other day; we discovered that we agreed on many things about church and religion. Televangelists are generally an embarrassment to everybody. Church services are somewhere between mediocre entertainment and just plain dull. Church buildings costing millions are an unconscionable waste when the community has real needs that could be addressed. Thoughts?

 

Buddy Ferris

The best way to fix church is by everyone admitting that they can in no way prove that their God exists and there for they should embrace the very reasonable position that reason trumps faith. No matter what the bible might say. If the bibles writers were wrong about some things then accept that. Faith should be a personal matter where reason trumps faith. I am talking faith as the bible defines it. This in itself would mitigate harm.

 

If you are for a more tolerant Christianity I will not tell you to stop. I on the other hand will undermine faith every chance I get. I wish you luck while I do my own thing.

 

I would be surprised if any heathen continued any further dialogue with you. You make naked assertions and when asked to back them up you evade by attacking reason or sometimes you even move on to another topic. Your statements are sometimes riddled with logical fallacies. It is clear that your motivations are simply to to cast doubt on rational methods so that there appears to be room for your delusional, illogical mind rot.

 

You go on and on and on...without actually building an argument for your Christianity. Your attacking reason only exposes the fact that there is no real merit in believing in your God.

 

YOU ARE A HEADLESS CHICKEN.

[BuddyFerris]

Thanks, Mankey. We can always count on you to rise to the occasion.

Tell me how faith is so unreasonable. The way you use of the word means 'take it as true without asking for a reason'. I'm more inclined to 'faith is OK because there's good reason to accept it'; e.g., I'm inclined to have faith that a chair will hold me because I'm familiar with chairs, sat on a few, and understand the plan, so the next chair comes along and I'll have good reason to have faith in its' being able to hold me. I'm inclined toward the Bible's meaning faith in the same way. Abraham, by faith, blah, blah, blah. Abraham had faith because he had good reasons up front to extend his expectation (faith) to the next level.

Buddy

[Vigile]

That's not faith Buddy, that's just paying attention to probabilities. How in the hell can you determine the odds for healed cancer, an afterlife, the existance of a god, etc...?

 

If you think that's the type of faith that's in the bible, then you haven't read it.

 

Ok, let the slippery squirming begin once again...

[Mankey]

Thanks, Mankey. We can always count on you to rise to the occasion.

Tell me how faith is so unreasonable. The way you use of the word means 'take it as true without asking for a reason'. I'm more inclined to 'faith is OK because there's good reason to accept it'; e.g., I'm inclined to have faith that a chair will hold me because I'm familiar with chairs, sat on a few, and understand the plan, so the next chair comes along and I'll have good reason to have faith in its' being able to hold me. I'm inclined toward the Bible's meaning faith in the same way. Abraham, by faith, blah, blah, blah. Abraham had faith because he had good reasons up front to extend his expectation (faith) to the next level.

Buddy

Bust out the scripture old man. I'm gonna make you do most of the work this time. Then we well see what scripture says and what people are expected by the apostle paul and a few other bible writers.

 

If you can't give all relevant scripture, then I suppose I will..I guess. But lets see what all you really understand from scripture.

 

What we are going to see is that WE are to believe blindly and the stories of the patriarchs who actually interacted with God is a story of revelation to THEM. A revelation from the creator is real revelation...that is if it isn't some delusion..but I digress.....

 

However a revelation from the creator to another mankey is not any kind of revelation to us....those of us that didn't have the good fortune of gideon or thomas..abraham...moses ect...

 

We will see that faith in jesus is based purely on blind hope. Paul goes into detail about this. But go ahead and give us all pertinent scripture old man that backs your ideas about biblical faith.

[BuddyFerris]

That's not faith Buddy, that's just paying attention to probabilities. How in the hell can you determine the odds for healed cancer, an afterlife, the existance of a god, etc...?

 

If you think that's the type of faith that's in the bible, then you haven't read it.

 

Ok, let the slippery squirming begin once again...

Good morning, Vigile.

When I was a kid, I heard some of the 'just believe' stuff. I never found that in the tone of the Bible, though. I found a lot of 'that you might know' kind of statements, but I never found the suggestion that I should be unquestioning or that I should believe without reason.

 

A couple of guys here have flailed away about the faith issue as though it were the most unreasonable of ideas. Faith is imbedded in the way we think; you can't sample every premise, but some are extensions of others. Chair, other similar chairs, faith in performance of the next chair. The moon shot was an extension of several known capabilities. Extrapolate this from that.

 

You may call my view of it 'paying attention to probabilities', but that's what I think we're offered. People were encouraged to have faith on the basis of a good beginning point. They were shown miracles and encouraged to have faith for more. They were given examples and encouraged to do likewise. I may be wrong, but I'd be surprised if there were a passage that meant anything like 'just have faith, and everything will be fine'.

 

It may be that our Western rendering of the concept is what's twisted. Did you have something specific in mind for the 'type of faith that's in the bible'?

 

Buddy

[Mankey]

That's not faith Buddy, that's just paying attention to probabilities. How in the hell can you determine the odds for healed cancer, an afterlife, the existance of a god, etc...?

 

If you think that's the type of faith that's in the bible, then you haven't read it.

 

Ok, let the slippery squirming begin once again...

Good morning, Vigile.

When I was a kid, I heard some of the 'just believe' stuff. I never found that in the tone of the Bible, though. I found a lot of 'that you might know' kind of statements, but I never found the suggestion that I should be unquestioning or that I should believe without reason.

 

A couple of guys here have flailed away about the faith issue as though it were the most unreasonable of ideas. Faith is imbedded in the way we think; you can't sample every premise, but some are extensions of others. Chair, other similar chairs, faith in performance of the next chair. The moon shot was an extension of several known capabilities. Extrapolate this from that.

 

You may call my view of it 'paying attention to probabilities', but that's what I think we're offered. People were encouraged to have faith on the basis of a good beginning point. They were shown miracles and encouraged to have faith for more. They were given examples and encouraged to do likewise. I may be wrong, but I'd be surprised if there were a passage that meant anything like 'just have faith, and everything will be fine'.

 

It may be that our Western rendering of the concept is what's twisted. Did you have something specific in mind for the 'type of faith that's in the bible'?

 

Buddy

No. YOU. You bust out all pertinent scripture in regards faith. You do the work. I'll add any scripture you might have forgot....but first lets see why you believe faith isn't narrow minded hope in jesus.

 

Alleged miracles in no way proves God had anything to do with the miracle workers in question given us by the bible stories. Everything in the bible can only be taken on blind faith. Everyone after the apostles are to live by blind faith -therefore faith is narrow minded believin'. Paul says so.

 

I am curious if you even know what you are talking about when it comes to biblical faith.

[Vigile]

I never found that in the tone of the Bible, though. I found a lot of 'that you might know' kind of statements, but I never found the suggestion that I should be unquestioning or that I should believe without reason.

 

That's all well and good, but tell me exactly what reasons we have for believing god exists, that he heals people, that he answers prayer, that he created the world, that Jesus rose from the dead...

 

These are the types of things we have zero evidence to back up. Believing these types of fantastic things demands not learned observation, which is what you are trying to redefine faith to be, but the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

You are trying to disingenuisly redefine religious faith. Faith that your chair will support your weight is not biblical faith by any measure. It is, as I said, understanding probabilities. Moreover, if we wish, we can study the strength of the chair in a lab and put it to a stress test to ensure that it will hold.

 

Again, religious faith is very different. To try and sneak in a common use of the word to try and make biblical faith sound more reasonable is IMO a dirty trick and not very intellectually honest.

 

Where does the bible offer paying attention to probabilities? The bible says that prayers will be answered. It's my oberservation that they are in fact not. If my chair had the same record as god's answered prayer, I'd never sit down. I could go on, but why beat a dead horse?

 

The guys that flayed you on the faith issue were correct. "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" is indeed an unsupportable position.

[Mankey]

I never found that in the tone of the Bible, though. I found a lot of 'that you might know' kind of statements, but I never found the suggestion that I should be unquestioning or that I should believe without reason.

 

That's all well and good, but tell me exactly what reasons we have for believing god exists, that he heals people, that he answers prayer, that he created the world, that Jesus rose from the dead...

 

These are the types of things we have zero evidence to back up. Believing these types of fantastic things demands not learned observation, which is what you are trying to redefine faith to be, but the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

You are trying to disingenuisly redefine religious faith. Faith that your chair will support your weight is not biblical faith by any measure. It is, as I said, understanding probabilities. Moreover, if we wish, we can study the strength of the chair in a lab and put it to a stress test to ensure that it will hold.

 

Again, religious faith is very different. To try and sneak in a common use of the word to try and make biblical faith sound more reasonable is IMO a dirty trick and not very intellectually honest.

 

Where does the bible offer paying attention to probabilities? The bible says that prayers will be answered. It's my oberservation that they are in fact not. If my chair had the same record as god's answered prayer, I'd never sit down. I could go on, but why beat a dead horse?

 

The guys that flayed you on the faith issue were correct. "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" is indeed an unsupportable position.

I'd really love to hear him back his ideas of faith based on scripture. I thought it would be funny to watch him twist scripture...hehe.

 

What the hell kind of Christian is he? He comes off more as a theist philosopher bullshitter than a bible believing Christian. But then theology is sometimes about twisting scripture....so sometimes we see all denominations cherry picking and twisting sometimes.

 

Hey Buddy why not become a deist....you'll feel better defending that than Christianity.

[Vigile]

The thing is, it doesn't matter how he twists scripture on this issue. Religion is about magical things and believing in magical things takes a very different type of gulibility faith than the common misapplication of the word. He is trying the old bait and switch trick. Stupider people might fall for it.

[Mankey]

The thing is, it doesn't matter how he twists scripture on this issue. Religion is about magical things and believing in magical things takes a very different type of gulibility faith than the common misapplication of the word. He is trying the old bait and switch trick. Stupider people might fall for it.

Hey! I resembled that remark.....

 

 

 

 

 

I used to fall for it....hehe. Out of one side of their mouths they use faith as the bible defines it.....until faith is criticized by a skeptic. The bible don't ask that faith in it be defended through reason. No where. Thats what is so telling when a Christian tries too...haha.

 

The fact that faith is irrational really hurts the Christian intellectuals pride.

[Legion]

Faith is imbedded in the way we think; ...

By and large I am inclined to agree with this, but I would probably choose a word other than "faith". Especially around here.

 

Another loaded word around here is the word "sacred."

[Sparrow]

Here's the summary after 60+ pages:

 

Ex-Cs - 864 points, but 621 were insult points and don't contribute to the final score for content.

Grand total: 243 points

 

Puny Christian - 249 points, including 11 for thinly veiled put-downs which don't count.

There were 153 moderately rude failures to respond noted, but no points awarded.

Grand total: 238 points

 

You really are a stupid idiot - you're more than stupid - plus points for the people who were nice to you, minus points for the people who weren't

 

You really are a fucking idiot

 

Can someone ban this idiot? It's the same shit again.

 

Spatz

[Robbobrob]

___________________________________________________________________

 

After evolution, misquoted scripture, narrow-minded rationalism, and free will, let me propose something of which ChurchWorker would probably disapprove. Church, as it is practiced in the democracies, is annoying. Why?

 

I had lunch with an atheist friend the other day; we discovered that we agreed on many things about church and religion. Televangelists are generally an embarrassment to everybody. Church services are somewhere between mediocre entertainment and just plain dull. Church buildings costing millions are an unconscionable waste when the community has real needs that could be addressed. Thoughts?

 

Buddy Ferris

 

Sometimes it is good not to be mentioned by name.....

 

Church, as I just stated in a Mr. J thread, was developed for the sole purpose of population control. Get the masses to control themselves, and the rulers of the land can take care of the few who do not buy into the control.

 

In the USA (which is not a democracy, but a democratic republic, just to be a stickler to reality), such control is not necessary, because our leaders are given their power from the people, through elections, not by convincing the population they are Heaven-ordained for their right to rule.

 

Church, in the American system, does not have the power it does in kingdoms or dictatorships. Power comes from the ground up, not Heaven down.

 

Church actually impeeds this process, confusing the masses as to which direction power in reality comes from. And so, we get people in power staying in power long after they should have stepped down or been voted out of office.

[Sparrow]

...text...

 

Buddy Ferris

 

Really guys, this is going to be another 60 pages of the same shit. Buddy has to have the intestinal fortitude to admit what he is, wants, thinks ... without all the bullshit ... or go away.

 

I mean, this IS an ex-christian web site.

 

Spatz

[Mankey]

Faith is imbedded in the way we think; ...

By and large I am inclined to agree with this, but I would probably choose a word other than "faith". Especially around here.

 

Another loaded word around here is the word "sacred."

What the heck does our being geared for induction...more or less... have to do with faith as the bible defines it?

 

He can't admit that faith is irrational so he must equivocate.

[Legion]

Faith is imbedded in the way we think; ...

By and large I am inclined to agree with this, but I would probably choose a word other than "faith". Especially around here.

 

Another loaded word around here is the word "sacred."

What the heck does our being geared for induction...more or less... have to do with faith as the bible defines it?

 

He can't admit that faith is irrational so he must equivocate.

Like I said Mankey, faith is loaded word around here. The word does not get my hackles up however. I recognize that even though I have no religious convictions whatsoever, I still have faith.

 

I have faith that understanding can be obtained.

I have faith that the world makes sense.

 

Now it's not "Biblical" faith, but it is still faith. It could, in fact, be the case that the world is senseless.

[bush country]

Here's the summary after 60+ pages:

 

Ex-Cs - 864 points, but 621 were insult points and don't contribute to the final score for content.

Grand total: 243 points

 

Puny Christian - 249 points, including 11 for thinly veiled put-downs which don't count.

There were 153 moderately rude failures to respond noted, but no points awarded.

Grand total: 238 points

 

You really are a stupid idiot - you're more than stupid - plus points for the people who were nice to you, minus points for the people who weren't

 

You really are a fucking idiot

 

Can someone ban this idiot? It's the same shit again.

 

Spatz

 

I'm with Sparrow on this one.

 

When I read page 1 of the previous thread I thought that BF was just doing this for attention, not for any real debate or exchange of ideas. Now this has been confirmed. He's just doing it to keep score. And he is using us to do it.

 

Skip N. - would you, could you, kick his ass out?

 

Please?

[Mankey]

Faith is imbedded in the way we think; ...

By and large I am inclined to agree with this, but I would probably choose a word other than "faith". Especially around here.

 

Another loaded word around here is the word "sacred."

What the heck does our being geared for induction...more or less... have to do with faith as the bible defines it?

 

He can't admit that faith is irrational so he must equivocate.

Like I said Mankey, faith is loaded word around here. The word does not get my hackles up however. I recognize that even though I have no religious convictions whatsoever, I still have faith.

 

I have faith that understanding can be obtained.

I have faith that the world makes sense.

 

Now it's not "Biblical" faith, but it is still faith. It could, in fact, be the case that the world is senseless.

Confidence or rational hope is not faith as apostle paul defines it.

 

The world a lot of times makes sense because we are geared to understand through our physical senses and reason. But sometimes things don't seem to make sense, sure.

 

"It could, in fact, be the case that the world is senseless"

 

As far as I can tell the universe is what it is the way it is and we are geared to make sense of it through our physical senses and reason. Emotions play a part as well.

[Mankey]

...text...

 

Buddy Ferris

 

Really guys, this is going to be another 60 pages of the same shit. Buddy has to have the intestinal fortitude to admit what he is, wants, thinks ... without all the bullshit ... or go away.

 

I mean, this IS an ex-christian web site.

 

Spatz

I think Legion and I can start another thread about faith. We don't need this one to do that in.

[Japedo]

In my not so humble opinion...

 

Banning a Christian will give them the persecution complex they so crave and lay claims to. If Buddy were to be banned it would justify his bullshit faith in his mind, the last thing we should do is become enablers to his crippled faith..

 

True, I believe he's an attention whore, but.. the best way to remedy that is cease giving him the attention he craves. He either backs up his claims or he'll get bored and go else where for his ego stroked.

 

As far as the mighty ex-Christians against the puny Christian.. he clearly has a David and goliath complex and also pulls numbers out of his ass like he does faith having facts.

[Legion]

I agree with Japedo. I think we should refrain from banning him.

 

I suspect that he has some nugget of knowledge that he is hanging on to, which he believes gives him an edge. I want to see what that nugget is.

 

Come on Buddy! Give us the nugget! Stop dancing around!

[Mankey]

I agree with Japedo. I think we should refrain from banning him.

 

I suspect that he has some nugget of knowledge that he is hanging on to, which he believes gives him an edge. I want to see what that nugget is.

 

Come on Buddy! Give us the nugget! Stop dancing around!

I prefer the topic be about faith as the bible defines it myself. No more water cooler discussions where things wander a bit. He thinks there is merit in believing in the bible's claims and this is the lions den. He prefers the bible over science.

[BuddyFerris]

I never found that in the tone of the Bible, though. I found a lot of 'that you might know' kind of statements, but I never found the suggestion that I should be unquestioning or that I should believe without reason.

That's all well and good, but tell me exactly what reasons we have for believing god exists, that he heals people, that he answers prayer, that he created the world, that Jesus rose from the dead... ...

Vigile, et al.,

You ask the right question with 'what reasons do we have?' I simplifies things a bit to remember that the Bible wasn't addressed to non-believers; it was written to those that believe already and to remind, encourage, instruct, etc. The Bible doesn't say anywhere that it (the book) is needed in order for a person to believe. The proposition is pretty clear; people believe because they have adequate reason to do so or they don't. What does the Bible say about the folks who genuinely don't have a beginning point of adequate reason so that they can begin the process of belief? Virtually nothing.

 

There is the passage where God does the sheep and goats thing. What's the criteria there? I was hungry and you fed me, thirsty and you geve me something to drink, and so on. That's not talking about Abraham who was justified by faith. Perhaps it's talking about the gentiles Paul referred to who, without the law, were obedient to it by virtue of their consciences instructing them.

 

What does an honest person do with that which they cannot believe because they have no adequate reason? They don't believe it.

 

You might review what you've been told the book says on the subject. It was all written to believers (Jews first, and later the Christians), and the condemnation is pointed toward those who knew better and chose to reject the truth even though they had adequate proof in front of them. This is primarily the religious Jews. Doesn't say anything about the conscientious agnostic or atheist in there.

 

Dang, I'm behind. Started this at lunch, finished over supper, behind again.

Buddy

[BuddyFerris]

Here's the summary after 60+ pages:

... Can someone ban this idiot? It's the same shit again.

Spatz

I'm with Sparrow on this one.

 

When I read page 1 of the previous thread I thought that BF was just doing this for attention, not for any real debate or exchange of ideas. Now this has been confirmed. He's just doing it to keep score. And he is using us to do it.

 

Skip N. - would you, could you, kick his ass out?

 

Please?

Bush country,

The thread's opening was sarcasm, numbers were fictitious, the honorable mention lines were simple recognition for thoughtful participation and contribution. The 'what's wrong with church question' was legit. You'll note an extraordinary response from Robbobrob on the subject. If it doesn't serve you in any fashion, I understand your complaint. It has provided me a wealth of thought for which I am truly thankful. Feel free to join in.

Buddy