ogilvy Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and another thing......on the christian forum, when i asked my question about 'but isnt God extremely cruel for doing these t hings in the OT??', they couldnt seem to address the issue at all. instead there were such long over-worded replies, i coudnt wade thru them and there was no point becos they werent addressing the question i asked. its as if they have to use a lot of abstract verbage to avoid answering a simple question which a 5 yr old could answer. 'yes, it is cruel to send a famine so bad that people will eat each other'.its like the story of 'The Emporer's New Clothes' exactly like it. i've been very disillusioned to find that 95% of people i ased the question would not address it. i thought christianity was about truth. there have been a handful of people who have seen the point of it and admitted they didnt have an answer. they were the good ones. btw, i believed the bible to be every word inspired by God, and am still nice and not like a rabid dog! and i still dont think they can help it that they think they should proclaim the gospel, because they believe they're saving you from hell, which would be a kind act, wouldnt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and another thing......on the christian forum, when i asked my question about 'but isnt God extremely cruel for doing these t hings in the OT??', they couldnt seem to address the issue at all. instead there were such long over-worded replies, i coudnt wade thru them and there was no point becos they werent addressing the question i asked. its as if they have to use a lot of abstract verbage to avoid answering a simple question which a 5 yr old could answer. 'yes, it is cruel to send a famine so bad that people will eat each other'.its like the story of 'The Emporer's New Clothes' exactly like it. i've been very disillusioned to find that 95% of people i ased the question would not address it. i thought christianity was about truth. there have been a handful of people who have seen the point of it and admitted they didnt have an answer. they were the good ones.btw, i believed the bible to be every word inspired by God, and am still nice and not like a rabid dog! and i still dont think they can help it that they think they should proclaim the gospel, because they believe they're saving you from hell, which would be a kind act, wouldnt it? When you believed, you were a contagion... no better than a rabid dog. You came to your senses. Well done. And think what you like... Question: if it made sense such that it wasn't a single minded ignoring the facts that allowed you to continue believing, then why did you deconvert? As to kind acts... BOLLOCKS! It's getting prizes from their demon god for more souls... the fact they'll drop you like a hot brick if you don't subscribe to their collective delusion indicates anything but even common human decency... There are times people here spend too much time trying to find redeeming features where there are none. It's the whole 'Good Nazi' (GODWIN!) shit. Sorry, but it just get stiresome after a while... there are no 'good' religious Christians, simply the ones we forgive, like errant pets. THe Fundy ones are a plague, the liberal ones are enablers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and another thing......on the christian forum, when i asked my question about 'but isnt God extremely cruel for doing these t hings in the OT??', they couldnt seem to address the issue at all. instead there were such long over-worded replies, i coudnt wade thru them and there was no point becos they werent addressing the question i asked. its as if they have to use a lot of abstract verbage to avoid answering a simple question which a 5 yr old could answer. 'yes, it is cruel to send a famine so bad that people will eat each other'.its like the story of 'The Emporer's New Clothes' exactly like it. i've been very disillusioned to find that 95% of people i ased the question would not address it. i thought christianity was about truth. there have been a handful of people who have seen the point of it and admitted they didnt have an answer. they were the good ones.btw, i believed the bible to be every word inspired by God, and am still nice and not like a rabid dog! and i still dont think they can help it that they think they should proclaim the gospel, because they believe they're saving you from hell, which would be a kind act, wouldnt it? When you believed, you were a contagion... no better than a rabid dog. You came to your senses. Well done. And think what you like... Question: if it made sense such that it wasn't a single minded ignoring the facts that allowed you to continue believing, then why did you deconvert? As to kind acts... BOLLOCKS! It's getting prizes from their demon god for more souls... the fact they'll drop you like a hot brick if you don't subscribe to their collective delusion indicates anything but even common human decency... There are times people here spend too much time trying to find redeeming features where there are none. It's the whole 'Good Nazi' (GODWIN!) shit. Sorry, but it just get stiresome after a while... there are no 'good' religious Christians, simply the ones we forgive, like errant pets. THe Fundy ones are a plague, the liberal ones are enablers... that seems a bit extreme. how is it any better than their attitude?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I don't get pleasure thinking that someone who doesn't share my baseless opinions is going to be tortured forever because of it... whether that's 'better' I don't know, but it's a defining difference. Respect is earned, same as opprobrium, and after a while of the shit heads who come here, I think I'm being kind saying they are worse than rabid dogs: rabid dogs don't choose illness, these people do. Rabid dogs don't choose to spread their illness, these people do Hell, it's becoming Why are Rabid Dogs better than Christians type viral e-mail list 1) rabid dogs don't choose to be rabid and dangerous, Christians do 2) Rabid dogs don't choose to spread their contagion, Christians do 3) Rabid dogs are easier to spot and avoid before they try to sink their teeth in... Any more for any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 When you believed, you were a contagion... no better than a rabid dog. You came to your senses. Well done. And think what you like... Question: if it made sense such that it wasn't a single minded ignoring the facts that allowed you to continue believing, then why did you deconvert? *Snip* Sorry, but it just gets tiresome after a while... there are no 'good' religious Christians, simply the ones we forgive, like errant pets. THe Fundy ones are a plague, the liberal ones are enablers... The reasons for my deconversion were many - but one of the most significant ones was that I was treated with love and respect as a fellow human being despite my ridiculous belief system by a number of non christians. Gramps, if I had encountered you whilst still a Christian I would have found your approach to be hugely enabling - as in enabling my christian beliefs to continue. I don't get pleasure thinking that someone who doesn't share my baseless opinions is going to be tortured forever because of it... whether that's 'better' I don't know, but it's a defining difference. Hell, it's becoming Why are Rabid Dogs better than Christians type viral e-mail list 1) rabid dogs don't choose to be rabid and dangerous, Christians do 2) Rabid dogs don't choose to spread their contagion, Christians do 3) Rabid dogs are easier to spot and avoid before they try to sink their teeth in... Any more for any more? You make a distinction here that you seem not to apply ... if the distinction is purely those who take pleasure in the idea of everlasting torture then liberal christians are not part of this group, nor are a good percentage of fundamentalists. Gramps you seem to have an almost christian view of free will ... We choose belief or non belief on the basis of a combination of our genes, experience and knowledge to date. Well bully for us that we had the genes, experience and knowledge to 'choose' as we have. Not something that entitles us to even a smidgen of smugness methinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 My opinion also fails my own 'Blacks' 'Women' and 'Jews' test: If you replace the subject with one of those three and it becomes offensive, then the original idea was offensive... I hold my hand up to that. Still plugging away at the doctrine that we can't overcome our evolutionary imperative dogma I see... it's one of those things that is a self supporting meme since everything can be adduced as proof of the truth of it, when actually it's frame of reference is wrong. Christians seem to have the idea that there is a Universal Free Will, as an extrinsic quality... bit like their ideas of Love, or Evil... when really is intrinsic to the organism, which is free to do what ever it likes within terms of it's physical limits. There is no Extrinsic Free will while ever we need oxygen, water, food and there are the limitations of the Physical universe wit interact with. However, the fact I don't kill every male I meet and take their mate by force (or they just become my harem) means that we've over come one Evolutionary imperative... We don't have the same word for enemy and stranger... so there's another... if we the robots you claim, we'd still be in the Great Rift Valley... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and you're right... the word 'pleasure' was wrong... some Fundies don't like the idea, but still think it's going to happen and I've yet to have a straight answer out of a Liberal that makes any damned sense at all even in terms of their church... BTW good edit on "We choose belief or non belief on the basis of a combination of our genes, experience and knowledge to date. Well bully for us that we had the genes, experience and knowledge to 'choose' as we have." That was dangerously close to Eugenics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 My opinion also fails my own 'Blacks' 'Women' and 'Jews' test: If you replace the subject with one of those three and it becomes offensive, then the original idea was offensive... I hold my hand up to that. Still plugging away at the doctrine that we can't overcome our evolutionary imperative dogma I see... it's one of those things that is a self supporting meme since everything can be adduced as proof of the truth of it, when actually it's frame of reference is wrong. Christians seem to have the idea that there is a Universal Free Will, as an extrinsic quality... bit like their ideas of Love, or Evil... when really is intrinsic to the organism, which is free to do what ever it likes within terms of it's physical limits. There is no Extrinsic Free will while ever we need oxygen, water, food and there are the limitations of the Physical universe wit interact with. However, the fact I don't kill every male I meet and take their mate by force (or they just become my harem) means that we've over come one Evolutionary imperative... We don't have the same word for enemy and stranger... so there's another... if we the robots you claim, we'd still be in the Great Rift Valley... Your explanation of the difference between seeing freewill as either an extrinsic or instrinsic quality is an interesting one, although I would see a divide within christiandom on this one - doesn't this depend on whether the christian adheres to calvinism or not? Where did I claim that we are robots? I claimed that we are the product of our genes, experience and knowledge to date. I do not believe it to be impossible for us to rise above cetain biological imperatives or social conditioning - just that when we do we owe this to the interplay between our genes, experience and knowledge ... so nothing for us to feel smug about, grateful maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and you're right... the word 'pleasure' was worng... some Fundies don't like the idea, but still think it's going to happen and I've yet to have a straight answer of of a Liberal that makes any damned sense at all even in terms of their church... You are an enigma. You have graciousness by the bucketful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I have a theory, one in which I cannot at this time prove or disprove. I suspect that the tendency of human beings to follow a dogma is really a survival mechanism.... Doesn't sound off the wall at all to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Your explanation of the difference between seeing freewill as either an extrinsic or instrinsic quality is an interesting one, although I would see a divide within christiandom on this one - doesn't this depend on whether the christian adheres to calvinism or not? Where did I claim that we are robots? I claimed that we are the product of our genes, experience and knowledge to date. I do not believe it to be impossible for us to rise above cetain biological imperatives or social conditioning - just that when we do we owe this to the interplay between our genes, experience and knowledge ... so nothing for us to feel smug about, grateful maybe. Grateful to what? As to the idea of Calvism... Calvism's 'free will' isn't free at all, and generally the other 'Free Will' Doctrines I've seen are linked more to an extrinsics force than an internal one... again, like 'Love'... or 'Evil'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I have a theory, one in which I cannot at this time prove or disprove. I suspect that the tendency of human beings to follow a dogma is really a survival mechanism. It goes along with the 'safety in numbers' addage. Well, the following of dogma is simply a step beyond that. If everyone follows the same general beliefs and organizes they stand the best chance at survival in a savage world. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and any other belief system has made it of such high importance that it now goes beyond survival. Just one of my off the wall suspicions. No I'd agree with that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 and you're right... the word 'pleasure' was worng... some Fundies don't like the idea, but still think it's going to happen and I've yet to have a straight answer of of a Liberal that makes any damned sense at all even in terms of their church... You are an enigma. You have graciousness by the bucketful. and you are as fragrant as you are lovely... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Grateful to what? As to the idea of Calvism... Calvism's 'free will' isn't free at all, and generally the other 'Free Will' Doctrines I've seen are linked more to an extrinsics force than an internal one... again, like 'Love'... or 'Evil'... I may have been reading your explanation too simplistically - as in Christians seeing free will extrinsically available (predestined by an outside force) or intrinsically available (thus outside the sovereignty of God). Not sure now what I'm saying nor what you are saying! Grateful to what? Grateful to nature, grateful to everyone who contributed to my life's experience and knowledge, grateful to random chance, grateful to purposeful intervention, grateful to the interplay between my genes, knowledge and experience to date. My grate runneth over ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 "My grate runneth over ..." There are pills you can get for that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Not something that entitles us to even a smidgen of smugness methinks. BTW good edit on "We choose belief or non belief on the basis of a combination of our genes, experience and knowledge to date. Well bully for us that we had the genes, experience and knowledge to 'choose' as we have." That was dangerously close to Eugenics... Gramps, I am currently studying evolutionary psychology. This just may have been peeking through in my writing. I am struck by the fact that there is a great big 'therefore'... that occurs within this field and seems to have nothing to do with the science and everything to do with one's life philosophy and politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Oh damned right! What was it Orwell said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Oh damned right! What was it Orwell said? Tell me - (I'm thinly read) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 "A man always likes the smell of his own farts" Basically, when opinion is trumping science (pardon the pun) it's nearly always wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts