One to not read

Read any good books lately?
User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

One to not read

Postby Lausten » Wed May 14, 2014 1:02 pm

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frankschaeffer/2014/05/one-reason-atheism-doesnt-really-answer-anything/
Frank Schaeffer seems to have gone off the deep end with this one. The title of his new book, "Why I am an Atheist Who Believes in God", seems to be attracting the wrath of atheists more than anything. I don't plan to read the book, but the comments explaining what is wrong with his theme are quite good. They expose the problems with trying to come up with a spiritual-but-not-religious philosophy and provide some workable ideas for developing a philosophy of life based on reality.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4817
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Austin Harper » Wed May 14, 2014 5:54 pm

Who says atheism has to answer anything?
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Monster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4971
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Monster » Thu May 15, 2014 1:01 pm

Atheism doesn't answer anything. Except for the question, "Does any god exist?"
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Lausten » Thu May 15, 2014 3:56 pm

Obviously atheism is not intended as an answer. Why Frank thinks it would be is beyond me. By pointing it out, he isn't just stating the obvious, he's specifically recommending that you not consider it. He's saying, don't consider that your believe system might be wrong. The exact opposite of the examined life. He says it not only doesn't provide answers, it somehow stifles awe and wonder and mystery. He says we shouldn't get lost in a pursuit of final answers. I'm sure he's been told that's not what scientists do, and that it is not a tenant of atheism (since there are none), but he keeps saying that. He is one of the most devious anti-intellectuals I've come across.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: One to not read

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:03 am

Not knowing where to stick this, I found that last sentence helped me out.

Frank Schaeffer wrote:Breaking NEWS: Bill Maher, Dawkins Fan ‘New Atheist’ Charged with Shooting Three Arab Students Execution Style– Hicks Loved Guns and Richard Dawkins

So do we have our first New Atheist-motivated sectarian killing?

:(
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby digress » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:20 am

You can be an atheist and be a deist.

Deism is the belief in a god or a prime mover. An entity behind it all.

Theism on the other hand is a belief god exists and intervenes. Caring about human affairs and who reveals specific instructions on how to defeat death.

It's not unintelligible to think there may be a god that set the universe into original motion. It's not knowable, but also not unthinkable. The problem is with those who say this mover has a cause and they know what that cause is! That's what leads to the theist.

I wish people would at least make it this far in understanding. Atheism does not equate to no god. Similar to how being born of a virgin, walking on water, or rising from the dead would not prove the messenger, or their message, were a moral one.
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: One to not read

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Feb 12, 2015 6:03 am

Yes. I can see how some would think a cause behind all that awesomeness and wonder, and would find an image, a name, a label for it.

But can they see that I have no need for such, and even if there was a... some thing, so what? What would it matter?

And yet I marvel, admire and enjoy just as much, if not more, as they do. :-D
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Monster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4971
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Monster » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:23 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:Not knowing where to stick this, I found that last sentence helped me out.

Frank Schaeffer wrote:Breaking NEWS: Bill Maher, Dawkins Fan ‘New Atheist’ Charged with Shooting Three Arab Students Execution Style– Hicks Loved Guns and Richard Dawkins

So do we have our first New Atheist-motivated sectarian killing?

:(

It's quite odd. I wonder if he was extremely dogmatic.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: One to not read

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:21 pm

Austin Harper wrote:Who says atheism has to answer anything?


People who are given to the use of "WE," as if being an atheist were like being a member of the B.P.O.E…
People who have forgotten, or perhaps really never knew, the meaning of "SKEPtiCISM."

NMB

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: One to not read

Postby nmblum88 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:32 pm

Lausten wrote:http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frankschaeffer/2014/05/one-reason-atheism-doesnt-really-answer-anything/
Frank Schaeffer seems to have gone off the deep end with this one. The title of his new book, "Why I am an Atheist Who Believes in God", seems to be attracting the wrath of atheists more than anything. I don't plan to read the book, but the comments explaining what is wrong with his theme are quite good. They expose the problems with trying to come up with a spiritual-but-not-religious philosophy and provide some workable ideas for developing a philosophy of life based on reality.


LOL… Sorry to laugh.
But this does remind me of "YOU may take your ideas from reading Aristotle, or Christopehr Hitchens, or even "Peanuts," , but I get mine from the endorsements on a box of Wheaties."
Whew!! When did " a book NOT to read" enter the Skeptical vocabulary?

The last time I saw that phrase in print it was attached to the Vatican's "Index Librorum Prohibitorum."

Norma Manna Blum

PennyDotson
Poster
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:35 pm
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby PennyDotson » Thu Feb 12, 2015 6:40 pm

Thanks for the info on deism/theism, very interesting.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Lausten » Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:19 pm

digress wrote:I wish people would at least make it this far in understanding. Atheism does not equate to no god. Similar to how being born of a virgin, walking on water, or rising from the dead would not prove the messenger, or their message, were a moral one.

Many do make it that far. The question is, what do they have to say. I can only take that one at a time. Frank says God put some love in the universe at the moment of creation. If he left it at that, he wouldn't be able to sell any books. So he goes on to say that Jesus set off "love time bombs" while he was here. They went off during the time of the Enlightenment. So, Descartes, Spinoza, Erasmus and Luther had nothing to do with the changing of the culture. Averroes didn't need to translate Aristotle, grappling with the ideas of reason vs faith wasn't necessary. We just had to sit around living in mud using manure for heat and dying of plagues until the love time bomb went off.

Thanks Jesus.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Lausten » Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:21 pm

nmblum wrote:
Lausten wrote:Whew!! When did " a book NOT to read" enter the Skeptical vocabulary?

The last time I saw that phrase in print it was attached to the Vatican's "Index Librorum Prohibitorum."

Norma Manna Blum

He offered the Kindle version for $1.99 briefly, so I did buy it and read it. But as AronRa says, if you see something on the ground that smells and it's brown, do you pick it up? Your choice Norma.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby digress » Fri Feb 13, 2015 4:43 pm

Lausten wrote:
digress wrote:I wish people would at least make it this far in understanding. Atheism does not equate to no god. Similar to how being born of a virgin, walking on water, or rising from the dead would not prove the messenger, or their message, were a moral one.

Many do make it that far. The question is, what do they have to say. I can only take that one at a time. Frank says God put some love in the universe at the moment of creation. If he left it at that, he wouldn't be able to sell any books. So he goes on to say that Jesus set off "love time bombs" while he was here. They went off during the time of the Enlightenment. So, Descartes, Spinoza, Erasmus and Luther had nothing to do with the changing of the culture. Averroes didn't need to translate Aristotle, grappling with the ideas of reason vs faith wasn't necessary. We just had to sit around living in mud using manure for heat and dying of plagues until the love time bomb went off.

Thanks Jesus.


Shame on the author for using such a devious title. Just another example of how the story of Jesus brings everything down. And people wonder why this smut cannot go ignored.
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby Lausten » Sun Feb 15, 2015 3:09 pm

digress wrote:Shame on the author for using such a devious title. Just another example of how the story of Jesus brings everything down. And people wonder why this smut cannot go ignored.

Although misguided, I believe he is sincere. I've seen a few interviews and talks by him and I used to read his blog. He calls both strident atheists and fundamentalists "certainty addicts" or something like that. That may be true of a few people, but so few, it's not worth mentioning. He applies this "certainty" problem way to broadly, and offers Jesus as a solution.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
sayer
Poster
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 4:57 pm
Custom Title: Critical Thinker

Re: One to not read

Postby sayer » Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:33 pm

Try Waking Up by Sam Harris for spirituality without religion. It can indeed be done

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:19 pm

sayer wrote:Try Waking Up by Sam Harris for spirituality without religion. It can indeed be done

Isn't the word for that: mysticism?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
sayer
Poster
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 4:57 pm
Custom Title: Critical Thinker

Re: One to not read

Postby sayer » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:41 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
sayer wrote:Try Waking Up by Sam Harris for spirituality without religion. It can indeed be done

Isn't the word for that: mysticism?


Idk potentially, I don't think you can really call Sam Harris a mystic though. He's one of the most hardcore atheist rationalists on the planet. But yes if you like it's 'mysticism'.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:47 pm

I didn't call Sam Harris a mystic. Only pointing out the concept of spirituality without religion is so well established, there is a word for it (and others) in the dictionary.

DICTIONARY: Lots of collected wisdom ............. sitting right there. Unused. gives me a mystical feeling just thinking about it.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2389
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: One to not read

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:31 pm

digress wrote:You can be an atheist and be a deist.

Deism is the belief in a god or a prime mover. An entity behind it all.

Theism on the other hand is a belief god exists and intervenes. Caring about human affairs and who reveals specific instructions on how to defeat death.

It's not unintelligible to think there may be a god that set the universe into original motion. It's not knowable, but also not unthinkable. The problem is with those who say this mover has a cause and they know what that cause is! That's what leads to the theist.

I wish people would at least make it this far in understanding. Atheism does not equate to no god. Similar to how being born of a virgin, walking on water, or rising from the dead would not prove the messenger, or their message, were a moral one.



You're touching on a point that has long been of interest to me. I think, based on conversations I've had, that if you asked most people the difference between an atheist and an agnostic, they would say that an agnostic is neutral or undecided on the question of the existence of a god, while the atheist has decided the question in the negative. That, to me, is not what atheism means (or not what I think it should mean). Atheist from its Greek form, means simply "godless." That is, a person who lives without recognizing or acknowledging a god. One can be an atheist and still admit the possibility of a god. I personally call myself both atheist and agnostic, and if asked to be more precise, I simply say I'm a secular humanist---that horrible bogey that the creationists fear so much. My position is, I don't know if there is a god (since I don't have a definition of what a god would be nor any set of criteria that would count as evidence for or against the hypothesis). Furthermore, I'm not occupied by the question at all, since time is short, and I don't think I'll eve get a sufficiently clear statement of the problem to examine it, and if I did, I don't think I would be able to get the evidence to decide it. For those who just like to dream pleasant dreams and hope that they may be true, I say, "God to it." Make yourself happy with fantasy if you like. I'll fantasize about unlimited political power and wealth and beautiful young women lusting after my body. That will make me happy.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 28, 2017 8:10 pm

I also am a secular humanist as the choice meaning I give the Universe from my bedrock as a pragmatic homo-sapien existentialist.

I've spent some time with the academic distinction between belief and non-belief and the thin line between not believing and absolute proof. At the end of the day, I decided most issues could be wrapped up by saying I was an anti-theist. Whether or not whatever could possibly in theory exist or not, I reject it. It might have POWER over me and determine all sorts of things, but I am my own person as best I perceive myself. Right and Wrong is debatable...between me and everyone else including all Gods. I demand no one worship me and require the same from everyone else.

FREEDOM: Leaving other people ALONE. Ha, ha.......it just struck me how similar God is to Trump. Maybe anti-theist should be in Caps?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: One to not read

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:10 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I also am a secular humanist as the choice meaning I give the Universe from my bedrock as a pragmatic homo-sapien existentialist.

I've spent some time with the academic distinction between belief and non-belief and the thin line between not believing and absolute proof. At the end of the day, I decided most issues could be wrapped up by saying I was an anti-theist. Whether or not whatever could possibly in theory exist or not, I reject it. It might have POWER over me and determine all sorts of things, but I am my own person as best I perceive myself. Right and Wrong is debatable...between me and everyone else including all Gods. I demand no one worship me and require the same from everyone else.

FREEDOM: Leaving other people ALONE. Ha, ha.......it just struck me how similar God is to Trump. Maybe anti-theist should be in Caps?

I like the term "anti-theist." The idea that an allegedly superior being wants to be worshipped by beings it deems inferior casts doubt on its superiority, IMO. I mean, I've made yogurt, but I certainly neither wanted nor expected the Lactobacillus acidophilus to sing hymns to my name, or rush off and slay the heathen Streptococcus thermophilus.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:42 pm

Thanks Nikki. May I call you Nikki?

REASON BEING: as my eye flits across the screen, I'm picking your name up as "Lunatic." Which as one of the most rational and stable contributors to this forum is definitely off. I'm thinking if I change my shorthand for you, it might fix my eyesight as well?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: One to not read

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:00 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Thanks Nikki. May I call you Nikki?

REASON BEING: as my eye flits across the screen, I'm picking your name up as "Lunatic." Which as one of the most rational and stable contributors to this forum is definitely off. I'm thinking if I change my shorthand for you, it might fix my eyesight as well?
You absolutely may, since that is my name. My screen name is, of course, a pun on "lunatic," and it's based on the fact that I generally feel like a stranger in a strange land, not only IRL but on most of the Internet. I don't feel like that here, though. And thank you for the compliment!
Image
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: One to not read

Postby Gord » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:22 pm

Can we call you Gord? 'Cause I really am a lunatic.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:44 pm

Everyone calls you Gord. Fairly often as my eye catches your name, I get an image of "a gord." About 6 inches, yellow, twisted, full of bumps. Anything close?

Nikki---as your druthers may, and you haven't asked or implied, "NikkiLuna" would be an excellent nik. Has a Private Detective Ring to it. But always........be yourself. No matter how twisted, yellow and full of bumps you might be.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: One to not read

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:39 am

Gord wrote:Can we call you Gord? 'Cause I really am a lunatic.

Are you... Is this... I'm not sure if you... Never mind. :blink:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: One to not read

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:56 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Everyone calls you Gord. Fairly often as my eye catches your name, I get an image of "a gord." About 6 inches, yellow, twisted, full of bumps. Anything close?

Nikki---as your druthers may, and you haven't asked or implied, "NikkiLuna" would be an excellent nik. Has a Private Detective Ring to it. But always........be yourself. No matter how twisted, yellow and full of bumps you might be.

I always am. While I'm frequently twisted, I am not yellow—either perceptually or in the slang meaning—nor am I full of bumps...to my knowledge. :mrgreen:

While I'm aware that "I worked for the government" is a euphemism for "I lived in Langley," that was not my line of work, and I haven't lived in Virginia since I was two years old. "NikkiLuna" does have a nice ring to it, I agree.

Edit: Duly changed to avoid further confusion with the self-admitted lunatic, Gord. I chose to add Nyx to reflect the origin of my given name plus my affinity for staying up quite late. (Although I was not actually named after Athene Nike, but the wife of the circa 1965 French ambassador to the US, whose name was Nicole.)
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:44 am

Excellent choice. I immediately thought of Stevie Nicks and do associate her with the moon....black dresses and all. Nikki Nyx Says No: nice onomatopoeia should you get tired. Alliteration with the Original. No gords.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: One to not read

Postby Gord » Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:02 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Fairly often as my eye catches your name, I get an image of "a gord." About 6 inches, yellow, twisted, full of bumps. Anything close?

No, that sounds more like a gourd. I'm more of a reflux disease.

Image

Image

Image

In Gord We Trust.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: One to not read

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:04 pm

How much for the tee shirt?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: One to not read

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:38 am

Gord the Child God.jpg

Sooo...... Are you a child God or a God Child? (Frankly, it probably doesn't make much difference under Canadian family law)

Can you smote other forum members? :?:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: One to not read

Postby Gord » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:52 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:How much for the tee shirt?

From $23.95, same as in town: https://www.ingordwetrust.com/

Matthew Ellard wrote:Gord the Child God.jpg
Sooo...... Are you a child God or a God Child? (Frankly, it probably doesn't make much difference under Canadian family law)

No it doesn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Canada and then http://globalnews.ca/news/3512946/comme ... w-is-dead/

Can you smote other forum members? :?:

Yes I can.

smote smote smote :slapfight: smote smote smote
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby digress » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:05 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:You're touching on a point that has long been of interest to me. I think, based on conversations I've had, that if you asked most people the difference between an atheist and an agnostic, they would say that an agnostic is neutral or undecided on the question of the existence of a god, while the atheist has decided the question in the negative. That, to me, is not what atheism means (or not what I think it should mean). Atheist from its Greek form, means simply "godless." That is, a person who lives without recognizing or acknowledging a god. One can be an atheist and still admit the possibility of a god. I personally call myself both atheist and agnostic, and if asked to be more precise, I simply say I'm a secular humanist---that horrible bogey that the creationists fear so much. My position is, I don't know if there is a god (since I don't have a definition of what a god would be nor any set of criteria that would count as evidence for or against the hypothesis). Furthermore, I'm not occupied by the question at all, since time is short, and I don't think I'll eve get a sufficiently clear statement of the problem to examine it, and if I did, I don't think I would be able to get the evidence to decide it. For those who just like to dream pleasant dreams and hope that they may be true, I say, "God to it." Make yourself happy with fantasy if you like. I'll fantasize about unlimited political power and wealth and beautiful young women lusting after my body. That will make me happy.


Well said. But I do not speak or know of any Greek lol

What I can tell you is this. Today, in modern times, nobody forms a church on the basis god exists. They do so based on the belief god is involved in their lives. The word deist has practically fallen off because nobody practices it anymore. When we speak of god it always comes in the formal package of I know god exists because I've some level of interaction with god. Whether its believing god cured your cancer, or helped you in a hard situation, or you gaze down at a tree and say this is gods work. The context of when the greeks spoke of atheism has without a doubt changed within the modern conversation. And sensibly this also means the context of atheism has changed. When someone asks are you atheist, they do not mean to ask do you believe in god, they mean to ask do you believe in the works of god. And to that the atheist would say no. I do not believe in "god"... there is no "god" (no evidence to suggest god is around or involved).

Christopher Hitchens used to state that civilization at one point believed in many gods, and then one god and so they are getting closer to the truth all the time. That this is progress of a kind.

Deism isn't a thing anymore. And so when we speak of atheism it must be within this context of a god who cares and is involved. Not simply a being present in the background of existence.

You can be an atheist and believe in god(deist) because todays context has room for it. It is people who do not understand this who plainly do not understand the context of the conversation in which they speak of. Theists are guilty of this mistake as well and do not know the nature of their own belief system. I've made an effort to bring this misunderstanding to light on these boards but I cannot say if I've been at all successful.

We are a people with amnesia using greek definition to define ourselves. And this is too complicated to bring about even the simplest of understandings.
Last edited by digress on Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: One to not read

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:50 pm

Hi, digress! :wave:

digress wrote:...or you gaze down at a tree and say this is gods work.....

Jeez, how tall are you??

Image
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: One to not read

Postby digress » Mon Aug 14, 2017 12:30 am

i must admit i wrote that response on the second floor of a building ^^
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: One to not read

Postby Gord » Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:36 am

So, not riding on a train then?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2389
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: He Who Usually Means Well
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: One to not read

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Mon Aug 14, 2017 11:40 am

digress wrote:Well said. But I do not speak or know of any Greek lol

What I can tell you is this. Today, in modern times, nobody forms a church on the basis god exists. They do so based on the belief god is involved in their lives. The word deist has practically fallen off because nobody practices it anymore. When we speak of god it always comes in the formal package of I know god exists because I've some level of interaction with god. Whether its believing god cured your cancer, or helped you in a hard situation, or you gaze down at a tree and say this is gods work. The context of when the greeks spoke of atheism has without a doubt changed within the modern conversation. And sensibly this also means the context of atheism has changed. When someone asks are you atheist, they do not mean to ask do you believe in god, they mean to ask do you believe in the works of god. And to that the atheist would say no. I do not believe in "god"... there is no "god" (no evidence to suggest god is around or involved).

Christopher Hitchens used to state that civilization at one point believed in many gods, and then one god and so they are getting closer to the truth all the time. That this is progress of a kind.

Deism isn't a thing anymore. And so when we speak of atheism it must be within this context of a god who cares and is involved. Not simply a being present in the background of existence.

You can be an atheist and believe in god(deist) because todays context has room for it. It is people who do not understand this who plainly do not understand the context of the conversation in which they speak of. Theists are guilty of this mistake as well and do not know the nature of their own belief system. I've made an effort to bring this misunderstanding to light on these boards but I cannot say if I've been at all successful.

We are a people with amnesia using greek definition to define ourselves. And this is too complicated to bring about even the simplest of understandings.


That problem of "gods in the world" is of course a very old one as well. You speak of people who think God cured them of cancer, or otherwise acted in their lives. This is a very dangerous way of thinking. Hitler believed in a kind of god. He thought he was a Man of Destiny and that Fate (or whatever forces he believed in) had saved him from the numerous attempts on his life.

I've just finished reading The Nuns of Sant'Ambrogio, which is a completely factual account of an incident from 1859 recorded in the archives of the Inquisition. There, you find both the Pope and a lot of nuns devoted to the BVM believing so strongly that she was interacting with them that they (the nuns) even forged letters from her, commanding the murder of a fellow nun. (Exactly the way the BVM is always depicted, right?) The nuns even believed their murderous Madre Vicaria when she told them that it was the devil assuming her shape that they saw preparing poison for the nun they attempted to murder. Well, if you can believe that a wafer of bread actually becomes the body of Christ, it's not a large step to believe such things.

The problem for all these believers in divine action (like Pius IX, who believed the BVM had saved him from drowning as a child) is that they cannot explain the mechanism involved. If God saved you from liver cancer, how did he do it? Somehow the cancer cells in your body stopped reproducing themselves, in apparent conflict with the normal course of events (as far as we know the normal course of events—possibly there are sporadic events not subject to any regularity in the universe). What (may be) known is that the cells stopped reproducing. What one can't know is that this is the result of divine action. Since I seem to be on a Greek binge here, I'll just mention Epidauros, site of a temple to the god Asklepios. At that site, there are steles still legible from over 2500 years ago, thanking Asklepios for healing. Are we to believe (1) that Asklepios really did heal these people? (2) that he didn't, but they mistakenly thought he did, while Christians who believe Jesus or the BVM or Saint such-and-such healed them actually were healed in the way they thought? or (3) some natural process is at work in both cases that we don't (yet, anyway) understand, and may never understand, because in fact it is a sporadic event?

Pius IX rewarded the BVM by (1) getting himself proclaimed infallible on matters of faith and (2) proclaiming that the BVM was transported directly into heaven, where she reigns as queen forever (this holiday is still celebrated, and tomorrow—August 15—is the Feast of the Assumption). He further worked to her glory by kidnapping a Jewish boy and raising him as a Catholic despite worldwide protests at this crime. Hardly a model for emulation, one would think, but Pius IX was a hero to John Paul II, and is still a hero to the "traditional Catholic" movement.
"A general conversion among the boys was once effected by the late excellent Mr. Fletcher: one poor boy only excepted, who unfortunately resisted the influence of the Holy Spirit, for which he was severely flogged; which did not fail of the desired effect, and impressed proper notions of religion on his mind."

James Lackington, Memoirs of the First Forty-five Years of the Life of James Lackington, the Present Bookseller


Return to “The Bookshelf”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest