Why Do Smart People Fall For Christianity?

[Badger]

 

 

 

By the way, he does say materialism makes sense, but Christianity makes more sense. How can something make sense (assuming to the fullest extent) and something else make any more or less sense (if it's still to the fullest extent)? It's like "my 100% has more percent than your 100%." Silly Christian logic...

 

 

Silly straw man.

 

Eh?

 

I'd say you used a red herring there.

 

You need to study logical fallacies. It's even sillier to hear Christians attempting to use logic and fallacies and then fail.

 

I meant that I find Christianity more probable than materialsm. That is it. Not at all what you assumed.

 

Peace. I stop it here.

[falemon]

 

Silly straw man.

 

But isn't calling min a straw man a straw man in itself?

I meant that I find Christianity more probable than materialsm. That is it. Not at all what you assumed.

 

Peace. I stop it here.

 

Probable? You kidding me. Who in their right mind accepts a probable account of absolute undeniable written fact about the origins of the Universe, thousands of years of history and the declared living identity of the Universe's architect?

 

To hell with probability, the Bible needs to make us certain of its truth not mildly convinced just a little bit more than the sound explanation of evolution and processes we know happen in space.

[Ouroboros]

 

I meant that I find Christianity more probable than materialsm. That is it. Not at all what you assumed.

Ok. I can accept your view that it's more probable (even though I disagree). I actually disagree a little on materialism making sense too, i.e. in agreement with Galien.

 

"Making sense" means something is justifiable, practicable, and intelligible.

 

If materialism was justified to you. And it was practicable, and also intelligible to you. Then it can't really be less justified, practical, or intelligible all of a sudden compared to something that is more justified, etc. Either it is justified or it isn't. Either it is practicable or it isn't. Either it is intelligible or it isn'.t Green doesn't come in greener or less green. Green is green. Same with "making sense."

 

Therefore, your original claim was poorly supported.

 

However, your claim for something being more or less probable is acceptable.

 

Peace. I stop it here.

I have no problem with it.

 

By the way, you were changing the goal posts above by changing your statement.

[Ouroboros]

But isn't calling min a straw man a straw man in itself?

Straw man is when someone creates a false representation of an argument and attacks this new false argument. A misrepresentation followed by a rebuttal of the misrepresentation.

 

Calling something a straw man when it isn't is more of an attempt of leading the argument away from the original discussion. A misdirection basically.

 

Since he didn't make an argument but only a claim, my rebuttal wasn't a straw man, simply because he wasn't clear what he meant (poor word choice). And then coming back and accusing of a logical fallacy because of that, that's an attempt of misdirecting the discussion away from his poor choice of words.

 

But he did respond after that by correcting his initial claim. The first claim wasn't qualified. The modified claim has a qualifier.

[Badger]

I stand corrected.

[Vigile]

I stand corrected.

 

There's hope for you yet Badger.

[florduh]

My red straw man raises you one herring.

[Badger]

 

I stand corrected.

 

There's hope for you yet Badger.

 

 

I seriously doubt that. I used to visit here some years ago, when I was kind of loosing my faith. Had hard times, you know. But then I started to read epistemology and philosophy of religion... and I found my blind faith again!

[Ouroboros]

I stand corrected.

You're sure you're not sitting while typing that?

 

Just kidding.

 

It's all good.

 

It all started with that I just wanted to argue something with someone. You're an easy target... well, because of your predisposition of being one of "those guys."

[Ouroboros]

My red straw man raises you one herring.

It's an ad hom herring. A lot of butter and a touch of lemon. Yummy.

[Vigile]

 

 

I stand corrected.

 

There's hope for you yet Badger.

 

 

I seriously doubt that. I used to visit here some years ago, when I was kind of loosing my faith. Had hard times, you know. But then I started to read epistemology and philosophy of religion... and I found my blind faith again!

 

 

Keep your faith, lose your faith.  None of my business. I was referring to the fact that you can admit when you are wrong about something.  So few people are able to do this. That raises your stature of humanity in my estimation. 

[Vigile]

 

My red straw man raises you one herring.

It's an ad hom herring. A lot of butter and a touch of lemon. Yummy.

 

 

Hans is ad punning again.

[Ouroboros]

Hans is ad punning again.

I wonder if there's a fallacy like that. I'd be its greatest offender. Well, most people are quite offended by my constant punning anyway.

[Galien]

 

Hans is ad punning again.

I wonder if there's a fallacy like that. I'd be its greatest offender. Well, most people are quite offended by my constant punning anyway.

 

I like your punning.

 

But I would like to find the person responsible for coining the whole logical fallacy stuff and shove his red herring up his ad hominem. Just saying.

[Ouroboros]

But I would like to find the person responsible for coining the whole logical fallacy stuff and shove his red herring up his ad hominem. Just saying.

You mean his phallacy...

 

Hey, maybe there's something to this.

 

People who can't stop using fallacies in their arguments are just trying to size up their phalluses?

 

[falemon]

 

But I would like to find the person responsible for coining the whole logical fallacy stuff and shove his red herring up his ad hominem. Just saying.

You mean his phallacy...

 

Hey, maybe there's something to this.

 

People who can't stop using fallacies in their arguments are just trying to size up their phalluses?

 

Legendary!

[RipVanWinkle]

I have some thoughts about christianity and whether it makes good sense. We must define "christianity" before assessing whether it makes sense. And there are many types practiced. It is the fundamentalists' and those like it that do not make sense. There belief can be described roughly as follows:

 

Omnipotent, perfect god, that can accomplish anything and everything.

Omniscient god who knows everything that has ever happened, is happening and will  happen.

All good, kind and forgiving god.

A god who is just.

 

Before creation this god knew that mankind would not follow His rules, wouldl not resist  temptation (would eat the forbidden fruit) and would not be satisfied with all that it will be given, and who's descendants will sin in every possible way. He knew that these people would worship  false gods. For some reason god would really get upset when people worshiped a non-existent god. In fact, He would go ballistic.

 

And god knew before creation that He would condemn to death the the man and woman He first created and billions of their unborn descendants, and He knew He would send them to hell where they will suffer and burn eternally without hope. God must like torturing his creatures, or else he wouldn't do it. Being all powerful, He certainly didn't have to.

 

All this, despite the fact that god gave mankind no choice as to  whether they wished to be born under these conditions. God , being all powerful. could have chosen to merely let them die without any other punishment.  

 

Further, god deliberately put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in a place where it would be easy access to the first humans, yet forbidding them from eating the fruit thereof on the threat of death. He did this even though he knew the man  woman would, in fact, eat the forbidden fruit. God did not tell the man or woman that he and and the woman and billions of their descendants would suffer in hell forever if they ate the forbidden fruit. Moreover, god allowed the devil to do his evil among and to the creatures, placing them under huge temptations for their whole natural lives. Even though god knew all of these things beforehand, god murdered all of humanity, except for Noah and his family, because of their sins, just as god knew they would before any human was created.

 

But god, in His great mercy, provided an escape route for Noah and his family. God had a plan to have His own son appear on earth in human form so god could have him cruelly murdered as a sacrifice for all of mankind. Nobody ordered god to sacrifice his son. Nobody could have. It was his choice. But there was a condition to this "gracious" act: All people, even those who would live  thousands of years in the future. would have to believe, without evidence, that god's son had been crucified, died and was buried; that after 3 days god's son would, despite all natural law, rise up from the dead, visit a few people, walk through a door, eat supper and then disappear into the sky.

The son of god wrote absolutely nothing during his life on earth. Nor were there any written accounts of the son's life, death or resurrection which were written during his lifetime. A few decades later "Paul", a person who never met or heard Jesus, wrote some letters. Indeed, Paul declared himself a new disciple of Jesus. Paul wrote in his letters basically a new religion, whose principles in some instances, were inconsistent with what Jesus had said according to the Gospels. Paul's letters constitute the earliest documents about Jesus that have survived.

 

The time Jesus lived was a time of ubiquitous superstition, when the scientific method had not been thought of, a time when witches were thought to exist, and miracles were thought to be common. The Catholic church was created about 300 years after Jesus, and has left murder,  oppression, torture, lies and blasphemy in its path. It was a cause of the dark ages which held the development of  Western Civilization behind for many centuries.

 

The above are just some of the reasons Xtianiy does not make sense. There are many other things that could be said about this issue, but I think I made my point to all except christians of course. Their logic is on such a high level that we mere mortals cannot understand. 

[Galien]

 

But I would like to find the person responsible for coining the whole logical fallacy stuff and shove his red herring up his ad hominem. Just saying.

You mean his phallacy...

 

Hey, maybe there's something to this.

 

People who can't stop using fallacies in their arguments are just trying to size up their phalluses?

 

 

Actually I find both those who use them and those who point them out equally annoying, and probably stemming from being less than well endowed

[Tardis]

Do they?

 

Does anyone convert to xianity that isn't merely responding to youthful & cultural indoctrination?

I wasn't brought up fundamentalist- went to a very middle-of-the-road church (Episcopal) as a kid, and was taught the "basics": God is good, try to be a good person etc, nothing extreme. Then I started getting Chick tracts at Halloween- suprise suprise! The scant religion I'd been taught turned out to be useless- these illustrated booklets said my sould was "lost" and I never even knew it. Started watching televangeists who preached the same paranoid belief system.

 

I was at the ripe age for conversion- so even though my "cultural indoctrination" was a very recent thing, it sucked me in. (BTW I was a gifted honors student who'd always loved Science and Sci-Fi) So I guess I'd fall under the category of "youthful and cultural indoctrination". I was never rebellious, I'd always tried to be a good kid, a good person- so I was really ripe for deceit.

 

It seems like most Fundys grew up in Fundy churches- I feel like the "odd man out" because I was a true convert (at age 15) and as a convert became an absolute zealot for years. Reason and logic were always at war with the Dogma, especially the dogma of Eternel Hell, but I forced myself to believe it- I brainwashed myself(!) Only now in my early 40s am I realizing the extent of the damage I did to my own psyche.

[Tardis]

BTW Xtianity doesn't have to make sense because "...His ways are not our ways..."

 

That exact wooly thinking was always used to justify the notion of Eternal Hell- how God could mete out infinite punishment for finite sins and still be fair...

[bornagainathiest]

I have some thoughts about christianity and whether it makes good sense. We must define "christianity" before assessing whether it makes sense. And there are many types practiced. It is the fundamentalists' and those like it that do not make sense. There belief can be described roughly as follows:

 

Omnipotent, perfect god, that can accomplish anything and everything.

Omniscient god who knows everything that has ever happened, is happening and will  happen.

All good, kind and forgiving god.

A god who is just.

 

Before creation this god knew that mankind would not follow His rules, wouldl not resist  temptation (would eat the forbidden fruit) and would not be satisfied with all that it will be given, and who's descendants will sin in every possible way. He knew that these people would worship  false gods. For some reason god would really get upset when people worshiped a non-existent god. In fact, He would go ballistic.

 

And god knew before creation that He would condemn to death the the man and woman He first created and billions of their unborn descendants, and He knew He would send them to hell where they will suffer and burn eternally without hope. God must like torturing his creatures, or else he wouldn't do it. Being all powerful, He certainly didn't have to.

 

All this, despite the fact that god gave mankind no choice as to  whether they wished to be born under these conditions. God , being all powerful. could have chosen to merely let them die without any other punishment.  

 

Further, god deliberately put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in a place where it would be easy access to the first humans, yet forbidding them from eating the fruit thereof on the threat of death. He did this even though he knew the man  woman would, in fact, eat the forbidden fruit. God did not tell the man or woman that he and and the woman and billions of their descendants would suffer in hell forever if they ate the forbidden fruit. Moreover, god allowed the devil to do his evil among and to the creatures, placing them under huge temptations for their whole natural lives. Even though god knew all of these things beforehand, god murdered all of humanity, except for Noah and his family, because of their sins, just as god knew they would before any human was created.

 

But god, in His great mercy, provided an escape route for Noah and his family. God had a plan to have His own son appear on earth in human form so god could have him cruelly murdered as a sacrifice for all of mankind. Nobody ordered god to sacrifice his son. Nobody could have. It was his choice. But there was a condition to this "gracious" act: All people, even those who would live  thousands of years in the future. would have to believe, without evidence, that god's son had been crucified, died and was buried; that after 3 days god's son would, despite all natural law, rise up from the dead, visit a few people, walk through a door, eat supper and then disappear into the sky.

The son of god wrote absolutely nothing during his life on earth. Nor were there any written accounts of the son's life, death or resurrection which were written during his lifetime. A few decades later "Paul", a person who never met or heard Jesus, wrote some letters. Indeed, Paul declared himself a new disciple of Jesus. Paul wrote in his letters basically a new religion, whose principles in some instances, were inconsistent with what Jesus had said according to the Gospels. Paul's letters constitute the earliest documents about Jesus that have survived.

 

The time Jesus lived was a time of ubiquitous superstition, when the scientific method had not been thought of, a time when witches were thought to exist, and miracles were thought to be common. The Catholic church was created about 300 years after Jesus, and has left murder,  oppression, torture, lies and blasphemy in its path. It was a cause of the dark ages which held the development of  Western Civilization behind for many centuries.

 

The above are just some of the reasons Xtianiy does not make sense. There are many other things that could be said about this issue, but I think I made my point to all except christians of course. Their logic is on such a high level that we mere mortals cannot understand. 

 

Hey Bill!

 

I agree with (almost) everything you wrote here.  The one bit where we diverge is emboldened.  Just for the record, it gives me no pleasure to disagree with you. 

 

This is (yet another) one of those truly, heart-breakingly sad instances where the human race could have gone down a brighter, more-sensible road to a better future, but instead went down a darker, less-sensible one to a troubled past and a no-less-troubled present , causing unnecessary suffering for billions. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erastothenes

 

This guy lived centuries before Jesus.

 

Just imagine how different world history would have been if the Middle Eastern and later on, the European civilizations, had rejected dogma and superstition (the way of Jesus) in favor of observation, analysis, experimentation and critical thought (the way of Erastothenes)...?

 

As I said, it gives me no pleasure to write this.

 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[mcdaddy]

 

 

I have some thoughts about christianity and whether it makes good sense. We must define "christianity" before assessing whether it makes sense. And there are many types practiced. It is the fundamentalists' and those like it that do not make sense. There belief can be described roughly as follows:

 

Omnipotent, perfect god, that can accomplish anything and everything.

Omniscient god who knows everything that has ever happened, is happening and will happen.

All good, kind and forgiving god.

A god who is just.

 

Before creation this god knew that mankind would not follow His rules, wouldl not resist temptation (would eat the forbidden fruit) and would not be satisfied with all that it will be given, and who's descendants will sin in every possible way. He knew that these people would worship false gods. For some reason god would really get upset when people worshiped a non-existent god. In fact, He would go ballistic.

 

And god knew before creation that He would condemn to death the the man and woman He first created and billions of their unborn descendants, and He knew He would send them to hell where they will suffer and burn eternally without hope. God must like torturing his creatures, or else he wouldn't do it. Being all powerful, He certainly didn't have to.

 

All this, despite the fact that god gave mankind no choice as to whether they wished to be born under these conditions. God , being all powerful. could have chosen to merely let them die without any other punishment.

 

Further, god deliberately put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in a place where it would be easy access to the first humans, yet forbidding them from eating the fruit thereof on the threat of death. He did this even though he knew the man woman would, in fact, eat the forbidden fruit. God did not tell the man or woman that he and and the woman and billions of their descendants would suffer in hell forever if they ate the forbidden fruit. Moreover, god allowed the devil to do his evil among and to the creatures, placing them under huge temptations for their whole natural lives. Even though god knew all of these things beforehand, god murdered all of humanity, except for Noah and his family, because of their sins, just as god knew they would before any human was created.

 

But god, in His great mercy, provided an escape route for Noah and his family. God had a plan to have His own son appear on earth in human form so god could have him cruelly murdered as a sacrifice for all of mankind. Nobody ordered god to sacrifice his son. Nobody could have. It was his choice. But there was a condition to this "gracious" act: All people, even those who would live thousands of years in the future. would have to believe, without evidence, that god's son had been crucified, died and was buried; that after 3 days god's son would, despite all natural law, rise up from the dead, visit a few people, walk through a door, eat supper and then disappear into the sky.

The son of god wrote absolutely nothing during his life on earth. Nor were there any written accounts of the son's life, death or resurrection which were written during his lifetime. A few decades later "Paul", a person who never met or heard Jesus, wrote some letters. Indeed, Paul declared himself a new disciple of Jesus. Paul wrote in his letters basically a new religion, whose principles in some instances, were inconsistent with what Jesus had said according to the Gospels. Paul's letters constitute the earliest documents about Jesus that have survived.

 

The time Jesus lived was a time of ubiquitous superstition, when the scientific method had not been thought of, a time when witches were thought to exist, and miracles were thought to be common. The Catholic church was created about 300 years after Jesus, and has left murder, oppression, torture, lies and blasphemy in its path. It was a cause of the dark ages which held the development of Western Civilization behind for many centuries.

 

The above are just some of the reasons Xtianiy does not make sense. There are many other things that could be said about this issue, but I think I made my point to all except christians of course. Their logic is on such a high level that we mere mortals cannot understand.

Hey Bill!

 

I agree with (almost) everything you wrote here. The one bit where we diverge is emboldened. Just for the record, it gives me no pleasure to disagree with you.

 

This is (yet another) one of those truly, heart-breakingly sad instances where the human race could have gone down a brighter, more-sensible road to a better future, but instead went down a darker, less-sensible one to a troubled past and a no-less-troubled present , causing unnecessary suffering for billions.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erastothenes

 

This guy lived centuries before Jesus.

 

Just imagine how different world history would have been if the Middle Eastern and later on, the European civilizations, had rejected dogma and superstition (the way of Jesus) in favor of observation, analysis, experimentation and critical thought (the way of Erastothenes)...?

 

As I said, it gives me no pleasure to write this.

 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

Erastothenes?

 

Meh. He's only second best.

 

[Akheia]

Wait, who's the best then?

[falemon]

Wait, who's the best then?

 

 

 

According to an entry^[5] in the Suda (a 10th century reference), his contemporaries nicknamed him beta, from the second letter of the Greek alphabet, because he supposedly proved himself to be the second best in the world in almost every field

[Akheia]

OH YOU