The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail

caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail

Hey all.  It's been a while since I've been on. I appologise, I've been busy. 

The title of this forum is the title of a book I just finished reading.  It's a catchy title, so I figured it'd be a good way to grab someone's attention on here.  The book is written by Becky Garrison. 

If her name doesn't sound familiar, that's fine, it shouldn't.  So why am I wasting your time telling you about this book?  Well, I'm glad you asked.  This is a book written by a True Christian.  HUH?  For all of you who have discussed with me in the past, you understand what I'm talking about and for those of you who haven't you can research my blogs.  Caposkia is my name. 

Anyway, It's written from the viewpoint of how a true Christian feels about of course the atheists in the world today, but more importantly for you, how she feels about Christians in the world. 

This is for all of you arguing with me about how Christians have to be black and white.  How you have to follow a religion and there's nothing outside of religion etc.  She touches on all of this.  I truly think you'll enjoy reading this book and I would like to hear from those of you who have read it if anyone.  If not, I"ll wait till someone finishes it.  It's not a very long book.

When I first came onto this site, I wanted to discuss directly with those who were involved in the infamous television debate that RRS was involved in about the existence of God with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.  They didn't have time and the other non-believers I came across were too opinionated to involve themselves in a conversation that made any progress.  Instead I got into other debates which for the most part were a lot of fun, but I digress. 

Becky mentions this debate as well in her book at the end.  This is for all of you on here I've talked to who would not believe me or had other personal issues with the fact that my opinion didn't flow with their idea of a Christian.  I will breifly say that I hold her viewpoint when she says that if she was at that debate, she would have "crawled out of that church in shame. "

Simply put, we both agree that both sides put forth deplorable excuses for their side and did not defend their side succesfully.  I know I know, many of you will disagree and say that RRS did disprove the existance of God in that debate, but enough with the opinions, I'm saying the other side did just as good of a job proving God.  This debate is a poor excuse to not follow Christ and this book talks about those types of Christians.

This book should clarify many misunderstandings of how True Christians are and I hope bring light to a new understanding of our following. 

It is written differently than most books, but is an informational peice and uses a lot of researched information.  It does focus on the "New Atheists" and is not a book preaching to the masses.  As said, it is from the point of  view of a True Christian.

enjoy, let me know your thoughts.  I would also request, please be respectful in your responses.  I'm here to have mature discussions with people. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:So when the

Brian37 wrote:

So when the atheist states the obvious you assign it to magic, that there must be a puppiteer and super villian vieing for our attention to validate their importance?

I am not important, other than to my family and friends. I was one sperm amoungst millions who happend to fertalize an egg. I am imporant to myself, and to those who value me. But since you agree that we are cosmic dust in the scope of time, what constitutes you to default to "poof" logic rather than the reality that we are, and are without magic?

Both of us will be as equally famous in 1 billion years just as you and I were famous 1 billion years ago. You paint a utopia of magic that doesn't exist, where as we face the reality that we are finite.

You spend your time manufacturing an after life because accepting your mortality frightens you. It frightens any human, including atheists. But we don't cower from reality by trying to escape it with fictional myths.

I don't want to die any more than you do. I simply don't make up stories as to my importance.

Yes, very well put indeed.  So it's now understood that insignificant means important and magic is the way to subconscious bliss.

heh, uh you missed the point that I offered taking a logical approach called Scientific Method with you that you ignored.  Was that fear on your part?


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:I agree

butterbattle wrote:

I agree that we would need to come to an agreement. Unfortunately, I disagree with you on the existence of a spiritual world. 

Given the fact that you've cited faith to justify your epistemological stance on prayer, I really can't imagine this thread traveling anywhere.

 

Which is why the spiritual world would be a good place to start.  We wouldn't need to talk about the existance of a spiritual world if you agreed with me.

I haven't gotten into much information on this thread due to the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic.  If you want to claim my justification is solely on prayer, then so be it and I guess this thread won't travel far.  If you would like to persue the topic open-mindedly and logically, then let me know.

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:caposki, I

BobSpence1 wrote:

caposki, I was reading 'generation' not as a specific time period, which may be based on the average generation to genration period, which has often been assumed to be something like 20 years, at least in recent times, but rather as however long it took for the those currently alive to pass away, or someting like that.

yea, most would read it that way.  That's how the deciples understood it according to the Bible. Though a generation could refer more to a movement or an existance beyond a single lifetime of a human.  I have come to understand it as the generation of the followers of Jesus Christ.  e.g. the people who would continue the ministry that Jesus started.   As of today, there are many people who continue the ministry of Jesus Christ. 

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Of course not

jcgadfly wrote:

Of course not - it sheds light on your other errors.

???

jcgadfly wrote:

You responded to me earlier on observations being made with things other than your eyes.

Like what? Your imagination? The spirit that a Christian has (that no one can define) that Paul says will bear witness to the Spirit of God (which no one can define)?

Sound to me like your saying the only way I can buy what you're selling is if I've already bought it. I have to believe before I can believe?

You can come to your own conclusions if you want, but it doesn't show a whole lotta research.  I must ask with all due respect;  Are you really curious?  I have talked to many on on this site and other locations who state unfounded conclusions about my belief and/or approach to understanding.  It leads me to believe they don't care to listen.  Therefore, I'm not going to take my time to explain anything to them because it won't matter anyway. 

Ultimately, no.  I'm not saying you have to believe before you can believe.  I'm not saying you have to accept anything.  I'm saying consider with an open mind the possibilties AND be willing to try approaches to understanding them.  

Also, I'm not selling you anything.  I don't profit off you converting to Christianity in any way.  I don't get a big Christmas bonus or a pat on the back by a V.I.P.  I don't tally the number I've converted.  It would not faze me to never know whether you "converted" and started following Jesus Christ or not.  That decision would be yours and yours alone.  It is a personal journey that you would have to take, not something that I would dictate to you or anyone else for that matter.  

Contrary to popular belief, each choice you make, follower or not, is your own.  followers of Jesus are "good" as it is understood because they choose to be, not because they're forced to be just as any non-believer is "good" because they choose to be.  

Becoming a follower of Jesus is an understanding and an acceptance.  It has little to do with your behavior, however it will change your life.   

 


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5849
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:BobSpence1

caposkia wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

caposki, I was reading 'generation' not as a specific time period, which may be based on the average generation to generation period, which has often been assumed to be something like 20 years, at least in recent times, but rather as however long it took for the those currently alive to pass away, or something like that.

yea, most would read it that way.  That's how the deciples understood it according to the Bible. Though a generation could refer more to a movement or an existence beyond a single lifetime of a human.  I have come to understand it as the generation of the followers of Jesus Christ.  e.g. the people who would continue the ministry that Jesus started.   As of today, there are many people who continue the ministry of Jesus Christ.  

Honestly, Capioska, that is a very lame, unconvincing, somewhat desperate attempt to propose an unjustified re-reading of the passage to avoid conceding that it a clear failure of 'prophecy' about a rather important aspect of the doctrine. The clear conclusion that this and other similar failures demonstrate that the Bible is just the work of a bunch of men who happened to have a particular set of superstitions just becomes more apparent with every ludicrous attempt you make to argue it away. IOW, if this is the best you can do to answer this important point, you have effectively conceded, but can't let yourself admit it.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Which is why

caposkia wrote:
Which is why the spiritual world would be a good place to start.  We wouldn't need to talk about the existance of a spiritual world if you agreed with me.

Ah, but unfortunately for Jesus, I disagree. Since you possess no evidence to support your belief in a spiritual world, you'll just have to sit there and pout. 

Quote:
I haven't gotten into much information on this thread due to the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic.
 

The topic is bullshit. I have no interest in sacred cups unless they have interesting liquids in them, like venti white chocolate mocha.   

Quote:
If you want to claim my justification is solely on prayer, then so be it and I guess this thread won't travel far.

Well, you can either continue whining that the atheists are misrepresenting your position or you can (God forbid) actually establish a position with logic and science so that we'll have something to discuss. 

Quote:
If you would like to persue the topic open-mindedly and logically, then let me know.

Okay, I'll be honest with you. I love Starbucks! Caramel macchiato is also awesome! 

Pray tell, what exactly is the topic?

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Of course not - it sheds light on your other errors.

???

jcgadfly wrote:

You responded to me earlier on observations being made with things other than your eyes.

Like what? Your imagination? The spirit that a Christian has (that no one can define) that Paul says will bear witness to the Spirit of God (which no one can define)?

Sound to me like your saying the only way I can buy what you're selling is if I've already bought it. I have to believe before I can believe?

You can come to your own conclusions if you want, but it doesn't show a whole lotta research.  I must ask with all due respect;  Are you really curious?  I have talked to many on on this site and other locations who state unfounded conclusions about my belief and/or approach to understanding.  It leads me to believe they don't care to listen.  Therefore, I'm not going to take my time to explain anything to them because it won't matter anyway. 

Ultimately, no.  I'm not saying you have to believe before you can believe.  I'm not saying you have to accept anything.  I'm saying consider with an open mind the possibilties AND be willing to try approaches to understanding them.  

Also, I'm not selling you anything.  I don't profit off you converting to Christianity in any way.  I don't get a big Christmas bonus or a pat on the back by a V.I.P.  I don't tally the number I've converted.  It would not faze me to never know whether you "converted" and started following Jesus Christ or not.  That decision would be yours and yours alone.  It is a personal journey that you would have to take, not something that I would dictate to you or anyone else for that matter.  

Contrary to popular belief, each choice you make, follower or not, is your own.  followers of Jesus are "good" as it is understood because they choose to be, not because they're forced to be just as any non-believer is "good" because they choose to be.  

Becoming a follower of Jesus is an understanding and an acceptance.  It has little to do with your behavior, however it will change your life.   

 

Very wordy dodge that. Care to try the question now?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Honestly,

BobSpence1 wrote:

Honestly, Capioska, that is a very lame, unconvincing, somewhat desperate attempt to propose an unjustified re-reading of the passage to avoid conceding that it a clear failure of 'prophecy' about a rather important aspect of the doctrine. The clear conclusion that this and other similar failures demonstrate that the Bible is just the work of a bunch of men who happened to have a particular set of superstitions just becomes more apparent with every ludicrous attempt you make to argue it away. IOW, if this is the best you can do to answer this important point, you have effectively conceded, but can't let yourself admit it.

...Except for the fact that the book admits that people misunderstood it in its own writing and it's backed up through the languages.  Any group of men who come together to make a writing of some superstitions aren't going to put vague wording into the factor, then claim that people misunderstood it in the same exact writing as you're suggesting.  That wouldn't make any sense. 

They may try to do what the Jehovah's Witnesses have done and either change the writing claiming that the original is a fraud or claim that people misunderstood it after the fact.  Do some homework. This will back itself up. (see Randall Watters)

There is a whole psychological purpose behind that wording in the Bible, I would admit to you that this would be hard to accept, except for the fact that the Bible has done this through all its writings.  NO NOT BE VAGUE for all of you who want to try to change what I'm trying to say, but make wording something you have to think about rather than just read it as is.  This way you remember it easier.

I'm sure you don't care about that technique of writing because you're already convinced that this explanation is a poor attempt at changing a view or understanding. Let's just put it this way, notice how much attention this word has gotten in just this thread alone.  It has been likewise among believers.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Ah, but

butterbattle wrote:

Ah, but unfortunately for Jesus, I disagree. Since you possess no evidence to support your belief in a spiritual world, you'll just have to sit there and pout. 

You can keep coming up with excuses if you want, but as you can see if you look back into this forum, Brian didn't get far with those. 

butterbattle wrote:

The topic is bullshit. I have no interest in sacred cups unless they have interesting liquids in them, like venti white chocolate mocha.   

mmm, that sounds good.  If this topic is as you say it is, then why are you here?

butterbattle wrote:

Well, you can either continue whining that the atheists are misrepresenting your position or you can (God forbid) actually establish a position with logic and science so that we'll have something to discuss. 

offered that already, so far, no one has wanted to take on that discussion. 

note:  of course atheists are going to misrepresent my position.  I don't care.  I care more for those who actually want to know the truth about my position.  The truth about Jesus.

butterbattle wrote:

Okay, I'll be honest with you. I love Starbucks! Caramel macchiato is also awesome! 

Pray tell, what exactly is the topic?

yea, but starbucks charges too much.... though that Caramel Macchiato is quite good... Stick with the local cafe's.  They make them just as good and charge you less.

Anyway, the topic on a new forum could be whatever SPECIFIC topic you'd want it to be.  I suggest starting with the idea of whether there's a spiritual world or not.  Then we can worry about who's belief is right among the religions of the world including atheism.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Very wordy

jcgadfly wrote:

Very wordy dodge that. Care to try the question now?

Wordy due to the fact that you asked 4 questions that had implications attached to them.  Keep it specific next time and leave it with the question you'd like to ask and nothing more.  I'll stick with what I'm assuming the question you wanted me to answer is; "Like what?" 

all 5 senses can be put into play.  Also take into all of that logic, common sense and understanding.  Understanding being the key word.  Experience plays a key part in much of the understanding, but also research. 

e.g. Just because you hear it doesn't mean it's true.  Just becasue you saw it doesn't mean it happened. just becasue you felt it doesn't mean it exists.  

The reason why I emphasize experience and understanding is because the statements under e.g. were told to me in one way or another on this website. 

a little wordy this time just to clarify my intentions. Acceptable?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:butterbattle

caposkia wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Ah, but unfortunately for Jesus, I disagree. Since you possess no evidence to support your belief in a spiritual world, you'll just have to sit there and pout. 

You can keep coming up with excuses if you want, but as you can see if you look back into this forum, Brian didn't get far with those. 

butterbattle wrote:

The topic is bullshit. I have no interest in sacred cups unless they have interesting liquids in them, like venti white chocolate mocha.   

mmm, that sounds good.  If this topic is as you say it is, then why are you here?

butterbattle wrote:

Well, you can either continue whining that the atheists are misrepresenting your position or you can (God forbid) actually establish a position with logic and science so that we'll have something to discuss. 

offered that already, so far, no one has wanted to take on that discussion. 

note:  of course atheists are going to misrepresent my position.  I don't care.  I care more for those who actually want to know the truth about my position.  The truth about Jesus.

butterbattle wrote:

Okay, I'll be honest with you. I love Starbucks! Caramel macchiato is also awesome! 

Pray tell, what exactly is the topic?

yea, but starbucks charges too much.... though that Caramel Macchiato is quite good... Stick with the local cafe's.  They make them just as good and charge you less.

Anyway, the topic on a new forum could be whatever SPECIFIC topic you'd want it to be.  I suggest starting with the idea of whether there's a spiritual world or not.  Then we can worry about who's belief is right among the religions of the world including atheism.

Ok,

If you want me to dumb this down for you, this is not Where's Waldo or "Fun With Dick And Jane".

You, "Spirits exist because you cant prove they dont"

Ok, "Prove that I don't have a purple snarfwidget under my bed"

All you have is a naked assertion and merely claiming something is nothing but evidence that you claimed it.

The majority of the world once believed that the earth was flat, and we now know that is not true.

There is absolutely NO evidence that our thoughts extend beyond our death outside our physical brain.

You merely like the idea of "spirits" based on some delusional desire that merely appeals to you.

I cant get anywhere with you because YOU want me to blindly accept an assertion with no model to present or falsify. I am glad people like you don't write biology textbooks.

But I am quite sure that you have a PHD in neurobiology and a sample of "spirit" atoms that you can identify, heck, why not a "spirit quark" that you can demonstrate are different than material quarks.

But we should all submit to you because "POOF" solves all the problems of your pet naked assertions.

Atheists give up, we have been trounced by myth and naked assertions. Why not just give in to "Poof" logic, it obviously makes Cap happy enough to want to spread his naked assertion.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Very wordy dodge that. Care to try the question now?

Wordy due to the fact that you asked 4 questions that had implications attached to them.  Keep it specific next time and leave it with the question you'd like to ask and nothing more.  I'll stick with what I'm assuming the question you wanted me to answer is; "Like what?" 

all 5 senses can be put into play.  Also take into all of that logic, common sense and understanding.  Understanding being the key word.  Experience plays a key part in much of the understanding, but also research. 

e.g. Just because you hear it doesn't mean it's true.  Just becasue you saw it doesn't mean it happened. just becasue you felt it doesn't mean it exists.  

The reason why I emphasize experience and understanding is because the statements under e.g. were told to me in one way or another on this website. 

a little wordy this time just to clarify my intentions. Acceptable?

"Just because you hear it doesn't mean it's true.  Just because you saw it doesn't mean it happened. just because you felt it doesn't mean it exists."

You saw/heard/felt something - why immediately attribute it to God? Did you look for any other explanations?

If you use logic, common sense, understanding and research it seems that faith and superstition go by the boards (unless you limit it to religious sources).

And you didn't manage to answer my questions. Try again?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5849
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:BobSpence1

caposkia wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

Honestly, Capioska, that is a very lame, unconvincing, somewhat desperate attempt to propose an unjustified re-reading of the passage to avoid conceding that it a clear failure of 'prophecy' about a rather important aspect of the doctrine. The clear conclusion that this and other similar failures demonstrate that the Bible is just the work of a bunch of men who happened to have a particular set of superstitions just becomes more apparent with every ludicrous attempt you make to argue it away. IOW, if this is the best you can do to answer this important point, you have effectively conceded, but can't let yourself admit it.

...Except for the fact that the book admits that people misunderstood it in its own writing and it's backed up through the languages.  Any group of men who come together to make a writing of some superstitions aren't going to put vague wording into the factor, then claim that people misunderstood it in the same exact writing as you're suggesting.  That wouldn't make any sense. 

They may try to do what the Jehovah's Witnesses have done and either change the writing claiming that the original is a fraud or claim that people misunderstood it after the fact.  Do some homework. This will back itself up. (see Randall Watters)

There is a whole psychological purpose behind that wording in the Bible, I would admit to you that this would be hard to accept, except for the fact that the Bible has done this through all its writings.  NO NOT BE VAGUE for all of you who want to try to change what I'm trying to say, but make wording something you have to think about rather than just read it as is.  This way you remember it easier.

I'm sure you don't care about that technique of writing because you're already convinced that this explanation is a poor attempt at changing a view or understanding. Let's just put it this way, notice how much attention this word has gotten in just this thread alone.  It has been likewise among believers.

Can you provide references, verses, whatever, for the assertion

"Except for the fact that the book admits that people misunderstood it in its own writing and it's backed up through the languages."

I can find no support for this assertion. All the attempts I have come across to address what C.S.Lewis called  'the most embarrassing verse in the Bible" either try to argue that in some sense it did happen within that generation, or re-interpret what was meant by the reference to "this generation". It indeed seems to be widely acknowledge to be a problematic verse, by Christians, and many scholars.

So what parts of the text point to this "admission"?

Even assuming such admisssion is in the text, if it was written at a time when it had become apparent that the original expectation of the return was not going to happen, then it proves nothing, because an argument claiming that the original words had been misunderstood is precisely what one would expect to see.

So is there some other text that says that people will misunderstand this speech, and that can be proven to have been written before the failure of the simple interpretaion had become apparent? Otherwise my point stands.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:You can keep

caposkia wrote:
You can keep coming up with excuses if you want, but as you can see if you look back into this forum, Brian didn't get far with those.

Why would I need to offer excuses for not believing in your imaginary friend? You have no evidence for your little spiritual world, period. If you do, then stop playing logical hide and seek and tell us.

Quote:
mmm, that sounds good.  If this topic is as you say it is, then why are you here?

Um, I like coffee? 

Quote:
offered that already, so far, no one has wanted to take on that discussion.

Oh really??

Earlier in this thread, I attempted to have a serious discussion with you and ultimately gave up when I discovered that I could conduct a more intellectually stimulating conversation with my cat. Nevertheless, no one is preventing you from posting something meaningful; you can begin whenever you want. This is simply a facade to shift the blame to the intolerant atheists, kind of like the way intelligent design blames their exile on "science dogma." 

Quote:
note:  of course atheists are going to misrepresent my position.  I don't care.  I care more for those who actually want to know the truth about my position.  The truth about Jesus.

The truth is that Jesus is the son of FSM. You have no evidence to disprove it; therefore, it must be true! 

Quote:
yea, but starbucks charges too much.... though that Caramel Macchiato is quite good... Stick with the local cafe's.  They make them just as good and charge you less.

I agree.

Quote:
Anyway, the topic on a new forum could be whatever SPECIFIC topic you'd want it to be. I suggest starting with the idea of whether there's a spiritual world or not.  Then we can worry about who's belief is right among the religions of the world including atheism.

Okay, I'll start. 

I don't believe in the spiritual world because there's no evidence for it or any objective reason to believe in it.

Your turn. 

 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Cap, just because we all

Cap, just because we all live in "awe" is not a rational reason to worship and dogmatize it. You xains and your jesus interpretations sadden me. The only bit of wisdom regarding story jesus written mostly by understandably ignorant superstitious ancients, was the mostly buried, hidden, destroyed, Gnosis intuition that all is one, or god, or whatever you want to call "the laws that will never change", as now said in thermodynamics.

Awaken from the blinding spell of idol worship separatism. !!!!     How are you friend, you the eyes of g-o-d, doing this joyous and sad day?    


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:Cap,

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Cap, just because we all live in "awe" is not a rational reason to worship and dogmatize it. You xains and your jesus interpretations sadden me. The only bit of wisdom regarding story jesus written mostly by understandably ignorant superstitious ancients, was the mostly buried, hidden, destroyed, Gnosis intuition that all is one, or god, or whatever you want to call "the laws that will never change", as now said in thermodynamics.

Awaken from the blinding spell of idol worship separatism. !!!!     How are you friend, you the eyes of g-o-d, doing this joyous and sad day?    

"I Am God As You" you are one cunt hair away from becoming an atheist and don't realize it.

Atheists do not see ourselves as "separate", or at least they should not be. We simply do not assign magic or emotional reaction to "awe" to a license fill in a gap with "anything I concieve" is true by default by proxy of being the first to claim it.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Hells Bells Brian37 ... that

Hells Bells Brian37 ... that is what I just said about Zero possible cosmic separation. No one could be more atheist than me !!!   We have a communication malfunction. Maybe some of our fellow atheists can help.     LOL


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Psh, IAGAY is an atheist as

Psh, IAGAY is an atheist as far as I'm concerned. When he mentions g-o-d, he's just talking about humanism.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU is the

I AM GOD AS YOU is the pentecostal version of an atheist.  Speaks in tongues, and probably enjoys a tall class of strychnine now and again.

 

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Yo guys, humans are god,

Yo guys, humans are god, it's eyes, atheist caring fun teacher Carl Sagan mused !!!  , and YES, I enjoy a alcohol drink of most anything ... favoring Tequila with my beer lately ....  I live for "happy hour", in prompt succession ....  

All hocus pocus and the retched god of abraham types >     < Me  

  I work pretty hard at making atheism fun and entertaining. Being god and a pissed off atheist caring buddha jesus is a fun role, as "all the world is a stage" .... 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote: The title

caposkia wrote:

 

The title of this forum is the title of a book I just finished reading.  It's a catchy title, so I figured it'd be a good way to grab someone's attention on here.  The book is written by Becky Garrison. 

If her name doesn't sound familiar, that's fine, it shouldn't.  So why am I wasting your time telling you about this book?  Well, I'm glad you asked.  This is a book written by a True Christian.  HUH?  For all of you who have discussed with me in the past, you understand what I'm talking about and for those of you who haven't you can research my blogs.  Caposkia is my name. 

Anyway, It's written from the viewpoint of how a true Christian feels about of course the atheists in the world today, but more importantly for you, how she feels about Christians in the world. 

This is for all of you arguing with me about how Christians have to be black and white.  How you have to follow a religion and there's nothing outside of religion etc.  She touches on all of this.  I truly think you'll enjoy reading this book and I would like to hear from those of you who have read it if anyone.  If not, I"ll wait till someone finishes it.  It's not a very long book.

~ rip ~

This book should clarify many misunderstandings of how True Christians are and I hope bring light to a new understanding of our following. 

It is written differently than most books, but is an informational peice and uses a lot of researched information.  It does focus on the "New Atheists" and is not a book preaching to the masses.  As said, it is from the point of  view of a True Christian.

enjoy, let me know your thoughts.  I would also request, please be respectful in your responses.  I'm here to have mature discussions with people. 

Cap,

I stopped posting in this thread back in August when it was around 100+ posts as it was becoming a pointless exercise. I found the book you reference in this thread and put out $14 to buy it today at a Barnes & Noble. I could not find it for free in any library though my Jesuit alma mater likely has it. I'll let you know what I think of the book and if you owe me a refund.

 

PJTS

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Cap, and all god of abe

Cap, and all god of abe worshipers, I really wish you'd study the far east religious philosophies, where we still find conflicting ideas and silly folklore, but definitely some intuition regarding human g-o-d concepts, and what all religion is.

God, for many in the east is just all reality , with no deity creator, beginning nor end. There is no way to know all "reality" as to form a worship, because we are god waves, as each of us are a unique wave of the same one ocean of all eternal existence of reality. The "saving" thing to do is embrace ourselves. 

When such Hindus / Buddhists speak of gods / goddesses / Divas in their stories, they are talking about those humans more "Awakened and enlightened to what they and we are, as we are g-o-d (Brahma) experiencing itself in our wave of consciousness. There is no one path or worship method to the simple awareness of "oneness / commonality" ....

The West / Mideast, at best, will say god is IN all things, as the East will say god IS 100% all things.

  Generalizing: the East are lumpers, the West are splitters. Story charactor "gnosis / knowing" jesus is accepted, but the pauline faith based jesus is rejected, as faith lives in blindness as to the true nature of our "godly" selves. To be Awake, Enlightened is to "know", and is a place of zero faith. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:Cap,

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Cap, and all god of abe worshipers, I really wish you'd study the far east religious philosophies, where we still find conflicting ideas and silly folklore, but definitely some intuition regarding human g-o-d concepts, and what all religion is.

God, for many in the east is just all reality , with no deity creator, beginning nor end. There is no way to know all "reality" as to form a worship, because we are god waves, as each of us are a unique wave of the same one ocean of all eternal existence of reality. The "saving" thing to do is embrace ourselves. 

When such Hindus / Buddhists speak of gods / goddesses / Divas in their stories, they are talking about those humans more "Awakened and enlightened to what they and we are, as we are g-o-d (Brahma) experiencing itself in our wave of consciousness. There is no one path or worship method to the simple awareness of "oneness / commonality" ....

The West / Mideast, at best, will say god is IN all things, as the East will say god IS 100% all things.

  Generalizing: the East are lumpers, the West are splitters. Story charactor "gnosis / knowing" jesus is accepted, but the pauline faith based jesus is rejected, as faith lives in blindness as to the true nature of our "godly" selves. To be Awake, Enlightened is to "know", and is a place of zero faith. 

I love you man(I seriously do), I know you are trying to help, but YOU are in the same boat with your naked asertions . I don't know if I sould laugh or cry.

There is no need to make up stories or labels and say we are this or that and try to make it sound pretty, just because it sounds good to oneself. You are mangling reality just as badly as Cap.

I am glad you don't buy the authoritarian dictator of the Abrahamic god(s). But we are not a "wave" and saying that we simply "are" and we all have only one rock to live on, doesn't need superflous(sp) language when stating the obvious is sufficient.

"We are all human"

"We all have one planet to live on"

"We all need to learn to get along"

That is all one needs to say.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Nikolaj
Superfan
Nikolaj's picture
Posts: 503
Joined: 2008-04-27
User is offlineOffline
While I understand where you

While I understand where you are comming from Brian, I have to tell you, it is not for you to decide what "needs" to be said. I for one applaud IAGAY's chaotic form of communication. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately, depending on how you look at it) people hear and understand words differently, and while IAGAY's words may be superflous, unintelligable, or even counterproductive to some people's understanding, his way of communicating is likely to go down well with the New Age Hippie crowds for example.

I think IAGAY would be a good ambassador for atheism among New Agey types. And we need ambassadors in many different camps if we hope to make atheism the norm for future generations. Something I proudly admit I do.

Well I was born an original sinner
I was spawned from original sin
And if I had a dollar bill for all the things I've done
There'd be a mountain of money piled up to my chin


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:"Just because

jcgadfly wrote:

"Just because you hear it doesn't mean it's true.  Just because you saw it doesn't mean it happened. just because you felt it doesn't mean it exists."

You saw/heard/felt something - why immediately attribute it to God? Did you look for any other explanations?

of course.  Logic in these cases pointed to God.  It also took an understanding as I explained. I otherwise would have dismissed it as something I didn't understand, but must have a logical explanation. 

jcgadfly wrote:

If you use logic, common sense, understanding and research it seems that faith and superstition go by the boards (unless you limit it to religious sources).

And you didn't manage to answer my questions. Try again?

is it the "like what?" question?  I thought I did.  I guess I don't know what you're looking for.  Could you elaborate. your senses and understanding is what is used in science, this is what I was presenting to you for the "like what?"


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:[Can you

BobSpence1 wrote:

[Can you provide references, verses, whatever, for the assertion

I figured just reading Matthew Ch 24 would be clear enough due to the fact that Jesus makes repetitve suggestions that it's not going to be something that happens soon.  E.g. "in those days" and the phrase "Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away".  Right at the end of that whole thing about how this generation will not pass away before... he mentions that. 
Take into consideration how much stuff he claims to happen and understand that in order for that to happen before "that generation" as you understand it passes away, it would have to happen within the next 50 years due to the fact that this is getting close to the crucifixion of Jesus.  That's a max.  They're all getting close to middle age at that point and most wouldn't survive too long from that generation anyway due to disease at that time along with other issues.

Also, "no one knows the day or time" suggests that for Jesus to say and mean that particular generation of living people would imediately nullify that statement due to the fact that he would have given a hint to roughly when his return would be.  He can't make that statement unless there is no reference to his return timewise.   

I believe you go into either Acts or Romans to find that they were waiting for Him.  I haven't had the time at the moment to look up the exact verse.  When I find it, I'll let you know. 

 

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Why would

butterbattle wrote:

Why would I need to offer excuses for not believing in your imaginary friend? You have no evidence for your little spiritual world, period. If you do, then stop playing logical hide and seek and tell us.

I will, just not on this forum.  I've suggested to all to "start a new forum with a SPECIFIC question in mind" and I'll give you what I understand to be true.  In other words, we can discuss it so as to come to an agreement either or. 

butterbattle wrote:

Quote:
mmm, that sounds good.  If this topic is as you say it is, then why are you here?

Um, I like coffee? 

alright, good excuse.  you can stay... as long as you share.

butterbattle wrote:

Oh really??

Earlier in this thread, I attempted to have a serious discussion with you and ultimately gave up when I discovered that I could conduct a more intellectually stimulating conversation with my cat. Nevertheless, no one is preventing you from posting something meaningful; you can begin whenever you want. This is simply a facade to shift the blame to the intolerant atheists, kind of like the way intelligent design blames their exile on "science dogma." 

er... right.

ok, I've put the ball in your court because I know that it would be specific to your interest and not my own.  Also, if you actually take the time to start a new forum like a few have with me, then I know you're actually serious enough to have a legit conversation about the topic. 

butterbattle wrote:

The truth is that Jesus is the son of FSM. You have no evidence to disprove it; therefore, it must be true! 

...but you have no evidence to prove that, therefore my belief must be true!!! 'cmon

butterbattle wrote:

Okay, I'll start. 

I don't believe in the spiritual world because there's no evidence for it or any objective reason to believe in it.

Your turn. 

Ok, are you willing to start a new forum with me?  If so, then please inform me on what "evidence" you would need to have an "objective reason to believe in it". 

Please be logical and practical in your answer.  If you'd consider farting a porche out your butt as evidence, then please don't bother. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:I

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I stopped posting in this thread back in August when it was around 100+ posts as it was becoming a pointless exercise. I found the book you reference in this thread and put out $14 to buy it today at a Barnes & Noble. I could not find it for free in any library though my Jesuit alma mater likely has it. I'll let you know what I think of the book and if you owe me a refund.

 

PJTS

Thanks.  I'm sorry you had to buy it.  I thought for sure it could be found at least through some inter-library loan or at least a seminary somewhere near by.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:God,

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

God, for many in the east is just all reality , with no deity creator, beginning nor end. There is no way to know all "reality" as to form a worship, because we are god waves, as each of us are a unique wave of the same one ocean of all eternal existence of reality. The "saving" thing to do is embrace ourselves. 

I agree with you that there is no way to know all "reality"  Too many people on here expect me to know the ins and outs of God.  To know God is to understand he's bigger than we can comprehend. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:Cap,

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Cap, just because we all live in "awe" is not a rational reason to worship and dogmatize it. You xains and your jesus interpretations sadden me. The only bit of wisdom regarding story jesus written mostly by understandably ignorant superstitious ancients, was the mostly buried, hidden, destroyed, Gnosis intuition that all is one, or god, or whatever you want to call "the laws that will never change", as now said in thermodynamics.

Awaken from the blinding spell of idol worship separatism. !!!!     How are you friend, you the eyes of g-o-d, doing this joyous and sad day?    

From what I understand of the use of xian on here, I am not one.  It is a new term to me. 

As far as the war between Brian and IGAY.  IGAY if anything makes better conversation.  His point of view intrigues me.  I would not say he's in the same boat as me.  IGAY's intentions and understandings are quite clear.  Brian's... well... it all seems very self satisfying and careless.  Talk about living in awe of your own understanding....


daedalus
daedalus's picture
Posts: 260
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:I AM GOD AS

caposkia wrote:

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Cap, just because we all live in "awe" is not a rational reason to worship and dogmatize it. You xains and your jesus interpretations sadden me. The only bit of wisdom regarding story jesus written mostly by understandably ignorant superstitious ancients, was the mostly buried, hidden, destroyed, Gnosis intuition that all is one, or god, or whatever you want to call "the laws that will never change", as now said in thermodynamics.

Awaken from the blinding spell of idol worship separatism. !!!!     How are you friend, you the eyes of g-o-d, doing this joyous and sad day?    

From what I understand of the use of xian on here, I am not one.  It is a new term to me. 

As far as the war between Brian and IGAY.  IGAY if anything makes better conversation.  His point of view intrigues me.  I would not say he's in the same boat as me.  IGAY's intentions and understandings are quite clear.  Brian's... well... it all seems very self satisfying and careless.  Talk about living in awe of your own understanding....

 

Xian = X'n = xpian = xp'n = Christian

 

These are all abbreviations used by X'ns in history.  So, we can safely say, then, you are not Christian.

 

Are you Pantheist?  hindu?

Imagine the people who believe such things and who are not ashamed to ignore, totally, all the patient findings of thinking minds through all the centuries since the Bible was written. And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us, who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. I personally resent it bitterly.
Isaac Asimov


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5849
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:BobSpence1

caposkia wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

[Can you provide references, verses, whatever, for the assertion

I figured just reading Matthew Ch 24 would be clear enough due to the fact that Jesus makes repetitve suggestions that it's not going to be something that happens soon.  E.g. "in those days" and the phrase "Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away".  Right at the end of that whole thing about how this generation will not pass away before... he mentions that. 
Take into consideration how much stuff he claims to happen and understand that in order for that to happen before "that generation" as you understand it passes away, it would have to happen within the next 50 years due to the fact that this is getting close to the crucifixion of Jesus.  That's a max.  They're all getting close to middle age at that point and most wouldn't survive too long from that generation anyway due to disease at that time along with other issues.

Also, "no one knows the day or time" suggests that for Jesus to say and mean that particular generation of living people would imediately nullify that statement due to the fact that he would have given a hint to roughly when his return would be.  He can't make that statement unless there is no reference to his return timewise.   

I believe you go into either Acts or Romans to find that they were waiting for Him.  I haven't had the time at the moment to look up the exact verse.  When I find it, I'll let you know. 

Ok, so nothing remotely explicit.

"Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away" is not logically relevant to the timing of his return, just that his words will persist past that event, whenever it occurs. That is actually the weakest attempt of all at justifying your conclusion.

"No one knows the day or time" is not inconsistent with some time over a 50 year span.

As I figured, a straw-clutching exercise.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
caposkia

caposkia wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I stopped posting in this thread back in August when it was around 100+ posts as it was becoming a pointless exercise. I found the book you reference in this thread and put out $14 to buy it today at a Barnes & Noble. I could not find it for free in any library though my Jesuit alma mater likely has it. I'll let you know what I think of the book and if you owe me a refund.

 

PJTS

Thanks.  I'm sorry you had to buy it.  I thought for sure it could be found at least through some inter-library loan or at least a seminary somewhere near by.

No problem I usually don't like to contribute to an author's income when I really don't know much about them. I saw it in the bookstore when I was looking through the religious section to see what new books were there. Barnes and Noble mixes this section with non-religious books too. After reading part of it I decided to go ahead and get it to finally address your thread which seems to keep going like the energizer bunny. I'm about 3/4 through it by now and will finish in about another day. After I finish I will write a short review on my impressions and we can discuss your original post.

 

PJTS

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:...but you

caposkia wrote:
...but you have no evidence to prove that, therefore my belief must be true!!! 'cmon

I don't need your "evidence," I know FSM is true because I have faith; he has revealed the truth to me through the power of his noodly appendages. 

By the way, I've started a new thread.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/15981

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
I AM feeling to tired now to

I AM feeling to tired now to write, but here's some quick thoughts.

Brian37, I really dig you too. Great rants you write. ~~~

   "Waves" = the energy always in motion as we are, of the ONE "ocean" which = cosmos, always in transition. Everything is energy .... We are energy, "waves".

   Religion is the delusion drug of luke "warm fuzzy feelings" requiring blind faith, where as Atheism is the faithless, non-fuzzy, much warmer knowing of oneness / connectedness. It's a no-brainer.

    Your "word perfect summary" does not offer what the religious minds in awe  sincerely need and seek. ~~~

    Nik ... your ability to comprehend ironic satire is keen. New Age "woo woo" is also my target. I have nothing to "preach" to my fellow atheists ... I am only sharing my fairly successful communication style of religious faith de-conversion, directed to the fantasy sky daddy idol worshiper separatists .... My religious sounding posts are are written in the style of a speech, to be passionately vocalized. Loud and soft, slow and fast, musical.  AS I read my posts out loud to the crowd here, they become outlines from which I embellish. 

     ... as I will do now, Being GOD is not a choice. Religion is ignorance ... Religion is division ... NO DIVISION IS POSSIBLE.   Wake the fuck up to what we are. There is no god to worship, WE ARE GOD !!! PERIOD. Everything is 100% NATURAL / Material / Energy .... Simple .... humbly,  i a g a y 

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

"Just because you hear it doesn't mean it's true.  Just because you saw it doesn't mean it happened. just because you felt it doesn't mean it exists."

You saw/heard/felt something - why immediately attribute it to God? Did you look for any other explanations?

of course.  Logic in these cases pointed to God.  It also took an understanding as I explained. I otherwise would have dismissed it as something I didn't understand, but must have a logical explanation. 

jcgadfly wrote:

If you use logic, common sense, understanding and research it seems that faith and superstition go by the boards (unless you limit it to religious sources).

And you didn't manage to answer my questions. Try again?

is it the "like what?" question?  I thought I did.  I guess I don't know what you're looking for.  Could you elaborate. your senses and understanding is what is used in science, this is what I was presenting to you for the "like what?"

Logic points to an entity you can't logically define or even describe?

As to the "Like What?" - I love the way you skipped all the questions that came after and chose to stay there.

How can you say logic points to an entity that you can only define/describe in terms of what it is not?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Cap, so I have finished

Cap, so I have finished reading the book you suggested in the OP. I'm working on my thoughts and comments. I'll probably post them later today.

 

PJTS

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Book Review - New Atheist Crusaders

I had never heard of Becky Garrison or the Wittenburg Door prior to this book, as you said in your OP that might be the case.  I didn’t particularly like her method of satire finding little to laugh at in her work other than the unintended. It seemed to be like Amateur Night at a comedy club in Kansas. No insult to Kansas intended. I really didn’t care for her personal revelations she slammed into the book as filler. Some of it was useful and relevant but most was a waste of paper. She devotes more space to her poor satire than completing her thoughts on issues she presents. After a few of these I concluded she wanted to express her dissatisfaction with the general Christian views but didn’t really want to be held accountable for a position.

She details that Christianity would be less of a problem if they in fact lead the life Jesus shows in the Gospels. On this I completely agree. This is where the True Christian idea comes out. She comes out against the radical Christians that will help the poor starving people but only after they accept Jesus. A more caring form of Christianity where help is given and evangelizing is not the main goal would remove much of the irritation Christians generate. To paraphrase the war on drugs, if someone needing help just says no to Jesus they still should help anyway. Their messiah made this very clear in their sacred book. This is not what Christians do today as a general rule. It’s important to get those Bibles in the hands of the non-believers.

Christians seem to be more intent on gaining numbers than on caring about the world they live in. The author touches on this indicating that all should be concerned about this world not the next life alone. If this position were taken it would remove some of the intolerant behavior exhibited by Christians.

She spent a lot of time trash talking New Atheism and the authors behind it. Most of her criticism is they also are intolerant just as radical Christians. I do understand, why Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens come across the way they do, they consider all’s fair in fighting delusional thinking as religion has done so for centuries in repressing rational thought. They are more of a “shock and awe” method to borrow ‘W’s acronym. Perhaps saturation bombing is sometimes required in order to soften the opposition. Afterwards they either see moderate atheists as a better alternative or they want to simply eliminate all of us. Garrison is however no match in intelligence for any of the New Atheist writers she miserably attempted to satirize.

As a supporter of individual rights and freedom I however leave acceptance or rejection to each person to determine. I always try to open the eyes of those who profess belief in God to the real world. If they choose to stay in the world of fantasy and imagination they certainly have the right to do so. I don’t tie them down and attempt to force reason into their minds. They on their part try to show me Jesus has saved me. When I disagree and say no thank you, I like living in reality that should be the end. The problem has been usually its not. If Christians backed off and just lived the way their savior presents there would be less of a problem.

Unfortunately I don’t see enough Christians willing to stay out of the lives of others in this country. When they wish to impose their values on all of society they go over the line. No one stops them from obeying a more rigid set of values. If they don’t want to drink or smoke just don’t. If they don’t want to marry of the same sex then just don’t. Where’s the problem with letting people make their own decisions as to how they conduct their lives? After all God is the judge according to their book not man.

The author being a ”True Christian” does nothing to substantiate the position or her beliefs. She is clear that she is against the hypocritical traditional churches.  As with other Christian writers she just makes the assertion God is and Jesus was his son that came to save all of us from our sins. This position will not gain her any converts from the ranks of non-believers. She appears to have the idea that many who have left Christianity have done so because of the hypocrisy alone and not because of the inability to buy into the fantasies.

I do not see her formula for determination of which parts of the Bible to accept as relevant and which parts are not. I understand her advocacy of following the way of Jesus’ life and living it instead of attempting to control the lives of the rest of the world. Clearly kindness and help for the needy are more important than increasing the ranks of believers as their Jesus showed.

You do not owe me a refund though I would suggest that anyone else interested in reading this book find it at a college library. I found after I bought it that the Jesuit University I attended for my graduate degree did have it. I don’t rate Garrison very highly on either satire or intellectual capability and recommend against buying it. You can get better satire on lame late night TV.

It appears I’m not alone in my opinions of the writer. One has but to read some of the comments on Amazon. Christians take a far different view and see her book as a fantastic defense against the likes of Dawkins and Harris. I searched further and found the Rah Rah reviews from her publisher, Christian groups and then finally this one:

http://www.somareview.com/beckygarrisonsimmodest.cfm

I don’t disagree with much of Mary Beth Crain’s review.

If you aren’t aware of my background Cap, I’m an ex-Christian with an extensive education in Lutheran and Catholic schools. My mother was a Lutheran school teacher and I participated in all of the Church’s activities. When I married I became Catholic and went to a Jesuit University for my graduate degree. This all contributed to my eventual rejection of all religions and the likelihood of any god existing. I understand both Catholicism and Evangelical beliefs having been involved in both.

Comments Cap


 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:I AM

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

I AM feeling to tired now to write, but here's some quick thoughts.

Brian37, I really dig you too. Great rants you write. ~~~

   "Waves" = the energy always in motion as we are, of the ONE "ocean" which = cosmos, always in transition. Everything is energy .... We are energy, "waves".

   Religion is the delusion drug of luke "warm fuzzy feelings" requiring blind faith, where as Atheism is the faithless, non-fuzzy, much warmer knowing of oneness / connectedness. It's a no-brainer.

    Your "word perfect summary" does not offer what the religious minds in awe  sincerely need and seek. ~~~

    Nik ... your ability to comprehend ironic satire is keen. New Age "woo woo" is also my target. I have nothing to "preach" to my fellow atheists ... I am only sharing my fairly successful communication style of religious faith de-conversion, directed to the fantasy sky daddy idol worshiper separatists .... My religious sounding posts are are written in the style of a speech, to be passionately vocalized. Loud and soft, slow and fast, musical.  AS I read my posts out loud to the crowd here, they become outlines from which I embellish. 

     ... as I will do now, Being GOD is not a choice. Religion is ignorance ... Religion is division ... NO DIVISION IS POSSIBLE.   Wake the fuck up to what we are. There is no god to worship, WE ARE GOD !!! PERIOD. Everything is 100% NATURAL / Material / Energy .... Simple .... humbly,  i a g a y 

 

We are not god(s) humans make up god(s). It is a projection of our own failure to accept our own mortality. Our atoms go on to become something else based on energy transfer. The atoms that made up our DNA when we were concieved are not the atoms in us now. BUT that does not make us GODS, that makes us part of an ongoing, uncognative random process.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
daedalus wrote: Xian = X'n

daedalus wrote:

 

Xian = X'n = xpian = xp'n = Christian

 

These are all abbreviations used by X'ns in history.  So, we can safely say, then, you are not Christian.

 

Are you Pantheist?  hindu?

I guess by your definition then I'm not a Christian. 

I will tell you that I am a follower of Christ. 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:daedalus

caposkia wrote:

daedalus wrote:

 

Xian = X'n = xpian = xp'n = Christian

 

These are all abbreviations used by X'ns in history.  So, we can safely say, then, you are not Christian.

 

Are you Pantheist?  hindu?

I guess by your definition then I'm not a Christian. 

I will tell you that I am a follower of Christ. 

Paul's Christ or the Christ of the gospels?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paul's Christ

jcgadfly wrote:

Paul's Christ or the Christ of the gospels?

This again?

If you're really inclined to get into this discussion, let's start a new forum.

To me, they're the same. 

to get beyond this point.  We will need to discuss specific differences.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Ok, so

BobSpence1 wrote:

Ok, so nothing remotely explicit.

"Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away" is not logically relevant to the timing of his return, just that his words will persist past that event, whenever it occurs. That is actually the weakest attempt of all at justifying your conclusion.

"No one knows the day or time" is not inconsistent with some time over a 50 year span.

As I figured, a straw-clutching exercise.

to claim that it even represents a period of time is to suggest knowing a general date or time.  To hold true to that statement you couldn't claim it to happen in 10 years or 1000 or more. 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Paul's Christ or the Christ of the gospels?

This again?

If you're really inclined to get into this discussion, let's start a new forum.

To me, they're the same. 

to get beyond this point.  We will need to discuss specific differences.

PM me for all I care.

You just seem like so many that quote Christ as though he were a real person as in the gospels when it suits you. Then you behave like Christ was merely Paul's quaint mental exercise. 

For me, the Christ of the gospels was based on a real person or persons and they wrote him as a person who did some good things and tried to show God in a positive light.

Paul's Christ was an intellectual construct that, as written, interposed himself between the believer and an aloof God.

Personally, I think that the Gospels were written to make Paul's concept more palatable to a less intellectual audience - wasn't hard for them to do as they had all of Paul's works to go from.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:BobSpence1

caposkia wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

Ok, so nothing remotely explicit.

"Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away" is not logically relevant to the timing of his return, just that his words will persist past that event, whenever it occurs. That is actually the weakest attempt of all at justifying your conclusion.

"No one knows the day or time" is not inconsistent with some time over a 50 year span.

As I figured, a straw-clutching exercise.

to claim that it even represents a period of time is to suggest knowing a general date or time.  To hold true to that statement you couldn't claim it to happen in 10 years or 1000 or more. 

What a steamy pile of pony loaf. One "generation" which is what the bible talks about, IS NOT 1,000 years. Scientists can give a rough estimate of the AVERAGE life span of humans. So not knowing the exact life span of humans does not constitute the absurd gap you are postulating.

There is not one human that has or will live 1,000 years. So even if we pushed the age of humans to your absurd parameter, for argument's sake, THAT WOULD STILL MEAN DADDY'S SKITSOPHRENIC SELF SON MISSED comming back in that generation, even assuming 1,000 years.

What's next? Are you going to try to stretch "generation" to mean history of the universe? It seems to me you are pulling it out of your ass because you have no choice but to ignore reality.

"generation" does not mean infinite and considering the language used in the bible, with no mention of cell phones or computers, and all talk of chariots, and donkeys, it is clear the writers were talking of THEIR contemporary time.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2616
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Logic points

jcgadfly wrote:

Logic points to an entity you can't logically define or even describe?

As to the "Like What?" - I love the way you skipped all the questions that came after and chose to stay there.

How can you say logic points to an entity that you can only define/describe in terms of what it is not?

This is why I asked for specifics.  If you ask me many questions, I can't tell whether you're just being rhetorical or if you actually want me to answer them all individually. 

I can logically describe the wind as efficiently as I can logically describe God.  I can't describe what the wind looks like or where it comes from, but I can see what it does. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13654
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Logic points to an entity you can't logically define or even describe?

As to the "Like What?" - I love the way you skipped all the questions that came after and chose to stay there.

How can you say logic points to an entity that you can only define/describe in terms of what it is not?

This is why I asked for specifics.  If you ask me many questions, I can't tell whether you're just being rhetorical or if you actually want me to answer them all individually. 

I can logically describe the wind as efficiently as I can logically describe God.  I can't describe what the wind looks like or where it comes from, but I can see what it does. 

Ok, so if you smell a fart, which you cant see, but know what it does to your nose, does that mean an evil burreto monster made it? Or could it be the gasses the beans produced through the process of digesting them?

Wind is no more magic than gravity. You can't discribe god logically because no such thing exists. You can't describe wind, because you haven't studied the science of weather or meteorology. Wind is logical and observable. Your god is merely an invention of your mind.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Logic points to an entity you can't logically define or even describe?

As to the "Like What?" - I love the way you skipped all the questions that came after and chose to stay there.

How can you say logic points to an entity that you can only define/describe in terms of what it is not?

This is why I asked for specifics.  If you ask me many questions, I can't tell whether you're just being rhetorical or if you actually want me to answer them all individually. 

I can logically describe the wind as efficiently as I can logically describe God.  I can't describe what the wind looks like or where it comes from, but I can see what it does. 

The wind can be measured and we know it's components - can you say that for God?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I can logically

Quote:
I can logically describe the wind as efficiently as I can logically describe God.  I can't describe what the wind looks like or where it comes from, but I can see what it does.
 

Um, we know what wind is, and we can determine where it came from.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Desdenova
atheist
Desdenova's picture
Posts: 410
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:I can

caposkia wrote:

I can logically describe the wind as efficiently as I can logically describe God.  I can't describe what the wind looks like or where it comes from, but I can see what it does. 

I can propel a boat with wind. Can you jump start a car with a crucifix? Ever powered a radio with a Bible? Hell, have you ever even turned on the television with prayer?

Gotta run now. I need to let those stupid meterologists know that they don't have any idea where wind comes from.

It takes a village to raise an idiot.

Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.

Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.