Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Charismatic Chaos
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 531 (534488)
11-08-2009 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by iano
11-08-2009 6:04 PM


Re: Matters of faith, fact, and fancy
The conscience will either bring a man to his knees so that he can be saved.
And what if you have in true sincerity and nothing comes of it? What then? I'm not talking about a fleeting moment where you decide to follow God. I'm talking years and years of serious study, careful discourse, honest worship, earnest prayer, and nothing comes of it except heartache over and over again? What then?
We're led to believe it is some how a deficiency on part because God could never be faulted for anything. He's perfect.
The conscience saves or the conscience condemns; that strikes me as a pretty effective, not to say remarkable, piece of equipment.
Does it, though? Does it save or is it all quite taken on faith? Because I have a feeling that as deep of a conviction that the Muslim suicide bombers feels in the deepest recess of his soul ultimately means nothing more than cold-blooded murder. All taken on deep conviction and yet amounts to nothing more than murder.
We cannot take everything on faith, though I would certainly agree that a measure of faith is important.
God didn't impart the desire to sin (outside of delivering up the promised goods associated with mans choice). The image behind consumption of the forbidden fruit is accidental; Adam consumed sin into himself in the very act of his choosing to disobey. It was like a persons taking of heroin; sin, like heroin, is a highly addictive 'substance'.
It is pretty much unavoidable if you dissect it. God is the creator of all things, including sin and man's desire for it. You could say that it was man's fault for eating fruit and thus ingesting sin (whatever that means). Even supposing what you say is true, God still planted the seed, still provided it for man, and still ensnared man with it knowing FULL well what he would do because he sees all.
Do you still maintain that God is not culpable for sin and for man's debasement for it? It's like intentionally injecting you with cancer, only to offer to remove it. He becomes your killer and your rescuer, just so he can say he rescued you.
I don't know about you, but that sounds diabolical.
God doesn't force us to be sinners. We are born that way by virtue of being children of an addict. God doesn't have to do a thing in order for us to be that way. Other than deliver up on the promised consequences involved in Adams choice.
No matter how we slice it and dice, there is only one inescapable conclusion - God has done this. This is all part of the plan, and we are manipulated by the puppet master for his musings.
God is omniscient. God could therefore make anything possible, including never allowing for sin to factor in. He could have even avoided making us live in the physical realm when we could have been in the spiritual singing hymns of praise all day long like the Seraphim.
He had a different plan for man. That plan includes suffering.
I think you're making too much a thing out of this.
I think you make light of it as do most people. I think most people neglect to think about the deeper aspects and because of it, they easily fall prey to the cushy, feel-good stuff like "Jesus loves you so much that he died for you."
When was the last sermon you heard on the ugly parts of the bible? We don't hear about that because there is nothing good to say about it. It is difficult to defend. It is much easier to talk about Jesus, who I have great respect for, all things aside.
Either we're born with free will and are given our own balanced choice. Or we are born with an addicted will which is balanced by God's effort (conscience) so as to effectively provide us with a balanced choice.
Freewill is useless when you are coded to perform only several functions. We don't have a choice in not playing his games. Adam, Eve, you, and I never stood a chance against sin because we were never intended to conquer it. It exists, presumably, to keep us in need of him. Because that's what this whole thing is really about. It's about him and his glory.
Or the whole lot of it is fables erected from shreds of truth.
He delivered up consequences of choice.
How can you obey something and fear "consequence" without first knowing what good and evil is? See what I mean? He set up the Fall for his own ends and used Adam and Eve as the bait.
God said don't eat of it, but they had no understanding of what it meant to obey or why. God allows the Serpent unmitigated access to these 100% naive creatures, knowing full well what they would do because of his omniscience and foreknowledge.
Then he punishes Adam and Eve for committing sin, yet before they had the knowledge of good and evil, how could they reasonably be faulted for it? We also are punished on their account. Clear as day.
Offspring frequently suffer as a result of the actions of parents. It's the consequence of the parents choice.
It's not "often" in this case. It is everyone who has ever lived and will ever lived who pay for it. And it's not the parents fault! It is the Parent of Adam and Eve's fault! We are set up to believe it is man's fault or the Serpent's fault for beguiling man. But it is God who set this whole thing up! Is that not glaringly obvious? We have been fed propaganda concerning God from the start. People that question these things are heretics and have burned in the past for daring to use the brain that God supposedly gave.
Great movie.
Isn't it!?!?! A well-deserved Oscar.
But I'm not sure what the relevance of your point is to the discussion.
I was watching it the other day and it occurred to me that under the smoke and mirrors and feigning of his strong faith, Eli's most honest moment was when he admitted his frailties and admitted his anger towards the way God handles things.
I have seen people torn apart on the cusp of losing God and trying to remain faithful.
So it just kind of clicked in my mind and thought it was a great way to kind of summarize what I was talking about concerning cognitive dissonance.
It's one thing determining a mans morality from the comfort of a hypothetical case. It's quite another when a man's own interests are threatened.
And that is what I see from so many Christians. Protecting God not for God's sake, but because of their own selfish reasons. It threatens their very faith and shakes it to the core.
They defend absurdities and atrocities in the bible not for a love of God, but of a fear of disbelieving in him.
What was that turn of phrase from the movie "An Inconvenient Truth"?
I don't know. Gore is a manipulative, sanctimonious weasel and an exploiter.
It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his livelihood depends on his not understanding it'
Agreed.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by iano, posted 11-08-2009 6:04 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by iano, posted 11-09-2009 6:21 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 186 of 531 (534582)
11-09-2009 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by iano
11-09-2009 6:21 AM


Re: Matters of faith, fact, and fancy
Wow, this is a long one.
Heartache? In what sense: from a believers position of being in a relationship with him - yet life remains difficult or unbearable even?
Heartache in the sense of a believer trying to find reasons to stay faithful when prayer is not a dialogue but rather a monologue.
What they don't say is 'how great it would be to be made holy'. And the reason they don't say that is that they don't realise that they are unholy.
They don't know what that means, and I doubt anyone could because there are none that are holy.
THEN all the prayer and worship in the world isn't going to alter anything* for the unholy person.
No one is holy, so then prayer would not work for anyone.
But it will only be those parts of the prayer/worship/study that assist the wheels of the mechanism of salvation in their turning. All the rest will fall on deaf ears. God heareth not sinners.
Then God hears no one for all are sinners, including the saved.
you're being led to believe the opposite by someone else. Someone else whose vested interest you should take note of.
Who? Satan? If so, that's very presumptuous to assume that if I test the spirits, that I'm being led by Satan.
Man sacrifices himself to false gods. God sacrifices himself for us.
How can God sacrifice anything if he's perfectly contained within himself? What does he stand to lose? You can say, "Us," be wrote his own rules. Again this all goes back to how HE chose this all to be, for at any given time he could make us like the angels.
'The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom'. That fear isn't a craven, shrinking fear - it's an awestruck, wonderous fear. The kind fear than runs down your spine in a (not unpleasant) thrill when you realise that to be last is to be first in the Kingdom of God. And humility, rather than being sign of weakness in the Kingdom of God, is a sign of strength.
You'll have to forgive me but I'm beyond banal platitudes. As Paul said, he didn't want us on milk anymore. I want the meat and dime-store apologetics don't do anything to answer my questions.
You might do well to leave your judgement of him until you meet him. That's a prayer God is sure to listen to.
So I'm just supposed to just kind of wing it until death? Why should I not do the same for, say, Islam? Faith alone cannot stand on its own, because if it were we would be expected to simply believe everything for face value.
Lord, I don't know you
I don't want to know you
But I want to want to know you.
You don't think I've said this prayer a billion times? You don't think I've looked at it a hundred different ways?
"He doesn't answer because maybe it's me. He doesn't answer because maybe I'm not faithful enough. It doesn't answer because I'm still in sin. He doesn't answer because he is trying to teach me a valuable lesson, so I will lean not on my own understanding. And then at some point you say, he doesn't answer because he's.... not.... there."
As per above. A person can be sincere, but sincerely wrong. The one who directs a useless 'prayer' to the right God is as misguided as the one who sacrifices himself to the wrong god.
And how do you know it is not you that is sincerely wrong and misguided and sacrificing yourself to a wrong god?
See that's always the problem. You have 8 trillion people giving advice on the same subject with diametrically opposed and contradictory answers. Yet they all speak about "faith." Well, if I were to take everything on faith, I would be in contradiction would I not?
So therefore on a very basic level we all need some sort of definitive evidence.
How does 'the conscience saves' tie in with 'salvation by faith'? Well, faith in this saving context is the same as 'believing what God says'
Useless. Extremist Muslims conscience instructs them, by faith, to martyr themselves and kill the infidels. Platitudes and bible stories aren't going do it, friend. I've heard it all and read it all. I don't want to sound condescending but I'm not exactly a spring chicken here who just sort of came to these conclusions by happenstance.
And having believed God, he has done just as Abraham did.
Jesus said that if we had just a tiny bit of faith that we'd be able to instruct a mountain to throw itself in to the sea. That's never happened. Ever. Are we all then unfaithful? Or is it that it's just complete bullshit?
Saving faith involves an earnest conviction about the state of oneself.
Again, and if you had earnest, saving conviction?
(Here comes the veritable, "I guess you weren't earnest otherwise you would know.")
God didn't create sin.
If not God, then who?
[i]I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and [color=red]create evil[/color=red]; I am God, that doeth all these things.[/i] - Isaiah 45:7
By the creation of holiness and allowing unholiness, God therefore created for himself the contrast of holiness, which is sin. It therefore makes God responsible for sin.
Nothing exists without its counterpart, otherwise they make no sense in relation to one another. It's that yin-yang principle. Light makes no sense without darkness to contrast it. Question this deeply, as nothing can happen outside of the will of God. God has a perfect will (optimal circumstances) and a permissible will (what he allows but doesn't like), but it is still HIS will.
He created freewill and so created the potential for sin.
Same damn thing if he creates beings who are purposely drawn to it, think about it.
A free will without anything to choose from isn't a free will.
And designated choices isn't really making a choice if you are limited to what can be chosen. I cannot choose to remove myself from the sin-infested world without the greater consequence of being eternally tormented.
Just like the computer, I can choose between functions but I can't choose not to play and I cannot choose what functions exist. I can only choose between the lesser of evils.
His knowing what man would choose doesn't necessarily affect the freedom of the choice: we cannot assume God's foreknowledge is determining because we don't know the nature of the mechanism of God's foreknowledge.
Sure we can. If you cannot alter the course of history (iow, he's ALWAYS known what would be) then we cannot escape our ultimate destination. In other words, it is predestined.
promised consequences delivered to Adam, which includes his children being infected.
True or not true: According to Genesis (God's unfailing Word) Adam and Eve had no concept of right and wrong BEFORE eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge and evil?
Adam not to be blamed for doing wrong because he wasn't a moral creature at the time of his choosing the way he chose.
He was blamed. God cursed Adam, Eve, and the Serpent. He blamed everyone but himself.
Failing a mechanism by which blame can be laid at the door of God, I don't see how you can lay the blame there. Rethoric won't do it. Insisting won't do it. Feelings won't do it. You need a mechanism.
The mechanism is God's own omniscience. That God and only God could have created anything makes him directly responsible. That isn't rhetoric, that's simple logic.
God cannot make an object too heavy for him to lift - his omnipotence/omniscience being unaffected by his inability to do so. Nor can God create a being who (effectively) freely wills to come into relationship with him without giving that same being the potential not to come into relationship with him.
Angels didn't have a choice whether or not they'd be in his presence, surrounded by him all day long as irrefutable proof of his existence and love for them. Man on the other hand had no choice in being thrown in to pit of scum and have to fight everyday against sin and temptation and unbelief with a looming fear of eternal damnation.
So lets talk about this awesome freewill and how lucky we are to have it considering our very limited and bleak options from which to choose from.
What dime-store apologetics about "choice" and "freewill" are there for my questions?
God has higher designs for man than he has for angels. Angels serve God and his adopted children. We're to be his adopted children .. or not. That the process by which angels decide for/against God is different than the process whereby potential children decide for/against God is to be expected: horses for courses.
Jesus stated that he was designed to be lower than the angels, insinuating that man is beneath the angels on the pecking order, also something we have no choice in.
It's the nature of God that acting contra-God brings suffering
We suffer no matter what we do, Iano. Your unfettered love for God won't ease the suffering of being tortured. It won't end the suffering of watching a loved one die before your eyes, to see their agony and to have it become your own.
You keep insinuating that we only suffer if we go against God's will (which, again, we cannot remain sin free so its a futile point to make). We suffer because we are trapped in the confines of his will; a will that includes death and misery as part of his master plan.
The most godly person in the universe will still hurt when someone has an anuerysm behind the wheel and careens in to his whole family. And that has jack shit to do with sin.
So, again, we suffer because he wants us to. There's no way of getting around that, otherwise he'd have made it an impossibility.
But you are right that our (effective - not Adamic) free choice is limited to a particular end goal: where we spend eternity. We don't get to choose to exit the game altogether (by opting to become an angel/ existance destroyed).
What then are we left with? Our choices are to follow a silent mystery that may be true or risk perdition for daring to question its reality. That's hardly a choice, and evidently he likes it this way. Or he just doesn't exist and God didn't create man, but rather man created God. Or he exists but man has tried to speak on his behalf, yet his real nature is nothing how we expected it to be like.
It's brilliant really! God can't be morally attached to sin - other than by being responsible for creating the free-willed potential for it. His hands are clean in the creation of sin/evil
Either that is true or the bible is not infallible, which leaves all of the bible open to interpretation. As I've already quoted in Isaiah, he CREATES evil according his own Word.
You therefore cannot occupy both positions. You'll have to reject one or the other.
Consequences positive and consequences negative don't need to have a moral dimension (good/evil) attached to them in order to be decision drivers this way or that. We make decisions every day that have positive and negative consequences but have no moral element attaching.
That is irrelevant since they had no concept of consequence whatsoever. Again, God played against their naive nature (supplied by God) and then blamed them when their curious nature (supplied by God) went against what God didn't explain to them.
They had a sense because they understood language. We can't say what they understood of "surely die" but to suppose they had no understanding of it involving negative consequences is to suppose they had no understanding of language at all - when it is clear they did. Beside, Eve responded to the serpents temptation to eat with a "..but God did say" indicating she understood a prohibition.
All she said was, "but God did say," that in no way means she understands what consequence is. Not that it matters.
What I suspect it all really means is that the author(s) of this really tall tale of talking snakes and naked people eating a fruit from a magical tree that supplies knowledge of good and evil in a garden where God walks around is that he/they didn't think it through all the way, or that the story is totally and completely metaphorical and was in no way intended to be believed in actuality.
Understanding a prohibition means understanding negative consequences attaching to disobedience.
Either way it is a contradiction. Either they did understand good/evil or they didn't. You can't have it both ways.
If Adam and Eve had it, the rest follows: God isn't to blame, Adam and Eve aren't to blame. It is how it is and we get on with it. Now, quite how God can create an undetermined freewill is beyond me
If God is omniscient, nothing just sort of happens without clear deliberation. Think about it.
Make no mistake about the holiness of God, Hyro. God will not be mocked: not by an unbeliever, and certainly not by believers. If it takes the shredding of a believers psyche to wrest a man from the altar of a false God then God will do that.
It's good to be king of the theocracy.
A little regard for the holiness of God, a little appreciation for the sheer distance between us, who are awash with evil - and him, in whom there is no darkness at all - would clear most, if not all of those misapprehensions of yours away.
If it requires me to accept things blindly and not to question things utilizing the brain that he gave to me, why even provide the possibility?
Perhaps there's a little cognitive dissonance going on in your own mind: an inner conviction that there is such a thing as absolute right and wrong, an inner conviction that you fall far short of that ideal. A knowledge (somewhere inside) that God does, or should, exist. A knowledge that (somewhere else inside) demands rejecting.
Yes, of course. I'm just honest enough to speak about the 2 ton elephant sitting in the room and not scared to examine things critically and honestly. Upon examination of what is written compared to what I see and live, I see a clever ruse, a sham, a scam, perpetrated under the guise of love and goodwill towards men.
And so you remain able to stay standing before him - by bringing him down to our level. He's holy Hyro. And the nature of holiness is to be furious wrath against evil. Which explains so much.
Well, maybe he shouldn't have created it then. Heaven forbid he has lie in his own bed.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by iano, posted 11-09-2009 6:21 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by iano, posted 11-13-2009 2:32 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 192 by iano, posted 11-16-2009 10:26 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 383 of 531 (871486)
02-03-2020 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by Phat
02-01-2020 11:15 AM


Re: Tot For tat starring ringo and phat.
Yet you cant label 2 billion Christians, or perhaps 500,000 of them who agree that Jesus is alive today, as a cult.
Why not if the possibility that it formed under cultish pretenses exists? Zoroastrianism, Islam, Hinduism, Scientology.... doesn't matter how many or how few the practitioners might be. The amount of practitioners doesn't legitimize a religion -- lest you think 2 billion Muslims got it right based on an appeal to popularity. The fact remains that the teachings are either accurate or inaccurate and that somewhere along the line a group of people were duped by some cult leader and it continued to spread long after the cult leader died. Sure, the term "cult" gives the allusion that its a small body, but isn't that how every religion was formed in its infancy?
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by Phat, posted 02-01-2020 11:15 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by Phat, posted 02-04-2020 1:20 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 384 of 531 (871487)
02-04-2020 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by Faith
02-03-2020 8:04 AM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
No you are not "aware" that, Phat, it's a big fat lle that you get from hanging around EvC too muich. If you're going to hang out here you need to at least be listening to the other side of it. MAGA has absolutely nothing to do with race. Trump has done more for ALL races than Obama ever did. This is not an administration committed to "white privilege" which is nothing but another Leftist smear. Your mind is going to be poisoned completely if you continue to listen to people here.
I see all the "wokeness" as often counter-productive and divisive, regardless of how well-intentioned it might be. I don't think its helpful or realistic. I don't think one needs to practice self-deprecation or trashing the white race in order to elevate another race. Having said that, it is incontestable that racism is alive and well. Sure, to the degree it has been portrayed is often unfair and we should rejoice in some of the advancements we've made. But you present it as if you're more likely to find Bigfoot riding on the back of the Loch Ness Monster than to find a dyed-in-the-wool racist at a Unite the Right rally. Racism is real, it is alive, and is dangerous. You keep talking about the leftist narrative and while there is some truth to it, you are blind to your own side's misdeeds and how they (pardon the pun) whitewash the actions and words of people who really do harbor some racist ideologies. The Right has knowingly harbored and tolerated closeted racists for decades. That is a fact, Faith. Why pretend like it never happens when it so transparently does? Its one thing to criticize cancel culture for going out on a fault-finding mission and falsely branding people. But it is real and nowhere near vanquished, as you've mentioned. Is racism less prevalent in 2020 than 1920 or 1820? Of course, and that's great. But if you think its as eradicated as Polio, you're sorely mistaken.
And why is it that you have such a difficult time finding moderation? Why can't you find some fault to rightwing ideology without throwing it all out? It doesn't have to be all or none. Fine, you support Trump. But you treat him as if he walks on water. You treat him as if he's the 2nd coming of Christ. You can support someone without supporting absolutely everything about them. You border on Hitler Youth type fervor a lot of the time. You can support conservative values without swallowing all of it wholesale. You can be critical of leftwing ideology without thinking its all a socialist conspiracy foisted upon us by George Soros. Be charitable and cede some ground some of the time, Faith... You might be surprised at what can get accomplished.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by Faith, posted 02-03-2020 8:04 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 385 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 11:04 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 02-04-2020 11:27 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 387 of 531 (871502)
02-04-2020 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by Theodoric
02-04-2020 11:04 AM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
Don't like people getting uppity? People should just accept what is and be happy for the meagre crumbs thrown their way? How is it counter-productive and divisive? Discrimination isn't divisive?
Obviously discrimination its divisive. Its more than divisive, its dangerous. What I said about wokeness is that its not helpful. I guess it comes down to different approaches and different perspectives. Some feel Malcolm X's approach to civil rights was more impactful and others feel that MLK's approach was more helpful.
That is not what people are doing when they are pointing out white privilege. That you make this claim is an example of your white privilege.
That's the net result and it doesn't help the situation it inflames it.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 11:04 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 12:14 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 390 of 531 (871506)
02-04-2020 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 386 by Faith
02-04-2020 11:27 AM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
I'm aware of some reacism, so what? The Left goes around accusing ALL of us on the right of racism, it's in evidence here at EvC, and all the rest of their politically correct arsenal of accusations, that all came out of Cultural Marxism. It's a partisan weapon, it has nothing to do with facts and truth, and all the namecalling isn't going to stop what racism continues anyway. You hate Trump so I'm wary of anything you say. It's the Democratic Party that historically has all the racism to its credit and that never gets noticed. There's probably just as much of it among them now as ever too.
You're looking at things through too extreme a lens. Things aren't as binary as you think they are or want them to be. Of course the Democratic party has blood on their hands, but so does the Republican party. And what difference does it make? People are not the sum of their political affiliations. You are too far in the forest to see the trees.
The right I identify with is conservative, it defends the Constitution, everybody's rights. The Left wants to bring it all crashing down and unfortunately some of them don't even know it. You too most likely.
Over several decades the KGB, masters of disinformation, took the admonishment seriously that America cannot be conquered by an outside force; that the only way to see it falter is by attacking it from within -- getting Americans to view each other with feral suspicion. The Left/Right FALSE dichotomy, the intentional exacerbation of race relations, the erosion of trust within our institutions are possibly the saplings of seeds sowed decades ago... and we are the unwitting pawns of those disinformation campaigns. Like just about everything in else in life, your diagnosis of the problem isn't as simplistic as "everything bad in America is because of leftists." You might share ownership over some of this. Perhaps we should be asking what we can do better to help the situation instead of pointing fingers.
Its funny, because if you watch the reactions Theo trashes anything I wrote that was complimentary to his position and focused narrowly on the things he didn't agree with. You're doing the same thing. Instead of seeing it as charitable or moderate in an attempt to foster constructive dialogue, you choose to excoriate me on the basis that I dared say anything that was unflattering to your position.
There's a word for that kind of psychosis and its called "extremism."

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 02-04-2020 11:27 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by Faith, posted 02-04-2020 1:12 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 391 of 531 (871507)
02-04-2020 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 388 by Theodoric
02-04-2020 12:14 PM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
I guess you missed my point. Why is wokeness unhelpful?
Because its an extreme treatment of the problem that seeks to fight fire with fire instead of water. You don't need to push a race down in order to elevate all others. If equality is the name of the game then we should be focusing on equality not fostering inequality. This isn't the bible... in the real world we don't punish people for the sins of the father, but that's exactly what woke, cancel culture does and it does so based on no other inference except *gasp* race.
How does pointing out institutional racism and racist attitudes inflame racism?
Because its not always accurate and it focuses and directs the problem onto a race of people instead of treating people as individuals. It inherently attacks people on racial lines, not individual qualities. That's perpetuating racist stereotypes. I don't see how that could possibly be beneficial to anyone.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 12:14 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 393 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 1:15 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 399 of 531 (871527)
02-04-2020 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Faith
02-04-2020 1:12 PM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
Is it all right with you if I don't see things your way?
Absolutely. Is it okay that I offer a different perspective?
I have no idea what "blood" Republicans have on their hands but I don't much mention Republicans, I identify as a general conservative which I refer to as the Right. But I also see the racist blood only on the hands of Democrats and you didn't offer any facts to dispute that, just an accusation.
Because I wouldn't disagree that they do. Its funny, people have been saying for years that the Lolita Express was a real thing, liberals laughed and scoffed... until it was proven resoundingly and the ring leader is now dead. I'm just saying that this is an "ism" schism. This isn't pure good versus pure evil. Its complicated and nuanced. Reps and Dems have more in common than they do differences. Conservatives tried to say that Unite the Right was not really about racism and while for some it was not, its incontestable that the main thrust of the event was underscored by literal racist ideology.
I think David Horowitz has written about the Communist movement's work to undermine America and I'm sure it's true, but what I'm personally aware of is the Cultural Marxists since I encountered them in particular back in the sixties. I was in Berkeley at the time, which is also where David Horowitz was, and the Marxists were very loud and that's what has continued through the universities since then. Don't give me "moderate," don't give me anything about my side being the problem, the Rrepublicans have been a bunch of wimps but I don't identify with the Repuiblicans. It is quite right to lay it all at the feet of the Left, whether the old line Communist movement Horowitz was born into, or the Cultural Marxists I'm aware of. That's the ideology that has EvC by the throat as well as the Democrats.
I would obviously agree that most of the members of EvC not only lean left but lean very hard to the left.... and you lean very hard to the right... almost off the page. So what of it?

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by Faith, posted 02-04-2020 1:12 PM Faith has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 400 of 531 (871532)
02-04-2020 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 393 by Theodoric
02-04-2020 1:15 PM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
Show me examples of people pushing whites down.
The narrative that white people are the scum of the earth abounds, so much so that the only way you can be considered an ally is total self-debasement. Let me be clear that history is replete with white doucheyness... I would never contend with something so self-evident, but we should all be careful to make demands of anyone based solely on their race. That is the epitome of racism -- to treat people based solely on their race. If that doesn't strike you as ironic and fundamentally misguided I'd be curious to know why.
So we pretend everything is good and do nothing to help people rise up against generations of inequality? So pointing out institutional racism(which seemingly you do not think exists) is racist? The white privilege is strong in this one.
I do believe generational racism exists, I think institutional racism exists, and I think a white privilege of sorts exists... To the degree it is being portrayed and to the manner in which it is proposed to be eradicated is incorrect, IMO. Its easy to hand-waive everything away through racism. The question is, is it accurate and is it fair? A good example is profiling. Does profiling exist? Yeah, absolutely. And everybody does it to some degree... there's likely evolutionary pressures for it. Do people racially profile? Some do, absolutely. But profiling is not limited to race or gender or sexual orientation or anything else. It extends to how people carry themselves and conduct themselves. If a black man shows up to an interview wearing a suit and a tie and a white guy shows up looking like he just smoked a bowl of meth in the parking, more often than not the black guy is gonna get the position. Were they being profiled? Yep. Was it racially motivated though? No. Did it have more to do with the manner in which they carried themselves? Obviously. But if you reversed those roles, would you be more or less likely to say that the choice was racially motivated? I think you know you would say that the black man didn't get the job on account of his race. So, is that black privilege to be able to hand-waive every negative thing and attribute it to white racism? Is it deserved? Each instance has to be measured on an individual basis, but the point is seldom are things so black and white.... no pun intended.
Now, I do agree that some people are more susceptible to unconscious biases... A lot of people, of every race, have had different experiences. Different experiences can taint one's perspective. Maybe they aren't even trying to be racist but somehow it shines through.
And let me be very clear that racism does not always mean something negative. I see a lot of guilt-laden white people who patronize minorities for no other reason than the fact they are a minority. Sure, you're being complimentary and trying to be accommodating... but if you're only doing that to get accolades in some kind of show to prove just how un-racist you are, you're still treating people based on nothing else but their race. Lets just shoot for actual equality.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 393 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 1:15 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 401 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 8:01 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 402 of 531 (871557)
02-05-2020 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 401 by Theodoric
02-04-2020 8:01 PM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
So even though you claim this is true and rampant you have absolutely no examples. Not even an anecdote.
LOL, aside from maybe Jews there is no one more openly vilified in the present age than white men -- especially if they're American. They are the root cause for the majority of the ills not only in America but the world at large. It is a dominant theme that white people are the cause of colonialism, oppression, and that even if not directly involved that they are the benefactors of a rigged system. And many share the belief that its not some white people, that its ALL white people. Period. End of discussion. That exists.
So now you are going to whitesplain
Thanks for setting the example... imagine the moral outrage had you said "blacksplain." But you won't get any backlash here at EvC for it because its not racist to be critical of white people on account of their whiteness.
I know no one that would think a black guy that looks like he smoked meth in the parking lot should get a job over a well dressed, well put together white applicant.
No, not no one, Theo... Its easier to explain why bad things happen to minorities when you have a scapegoat to explain it all away. Calling out a racist should be reserved for actual racism, not a magic wand to hijack a narrative.
No one would hand wave this and expect some sort of black privilege. You seem so sure people would. That you think blacks and other minority groups would expect treatment like this exposes your racism and white privilege.
See, there you go again... I cannot even have an opinion on a subject without being labelled a racist. You sifted through all the things I said which which affirmed or shared some of your sentiments and extracted only the parts you found unpalatable. And all of it done when I was trying to explain to Faith that racism is still alive and well, by the way.
I am sure there are people that do feel this way. I am sure you can find a black person that thinks a black person should always get the job over a white guy and would always cry racism. That is an anomaly. Black and hispanic people no more want a handout than anyone else.
your post is offensive.
I never mentioned a "handout," so your inclusion of it is erroneous.
Here's the deal for white people at large. If you are white you must totally acquiesce, must self-immolate, admit that you are a racist piece of shit, drive the narrative that minorities are oppressed at all times of the day and unless you take direct action you cannot overcome your sins. Because I dared to go against the pantheon, which is because I think its wrong, it is itself inherently and ironically racist, and because it is dangerous for race relations, I'm now vilified as a racist.
Believe whatever it is you'd like to believe. But I'd like to think you are intelligent enough to see the difference. You and people of your ilk is what either hermetically seals actual racists in their toxic ideology or helps to create them bit by bit. Ask yourself if this is helpful... Does it work with Faith or does it drive her deeper in to her abyss of garbage thinking?

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 401 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2020 8:01 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 405 by Tangle, posted 02-05-2020 4:35 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 409 by Phat, posted 02-05-2020 6:43 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 426 of 531 (871618)
02-06-2020 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 415 by ringo
02-06-2020 10:51 AM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
That's too broad a definition. Racism implies that one group is superior to another group and assumed superiority results in the gathering of power to the "superior" group. You are not racist if you are powerless.
I disagree with that and so does the dictionary. Power makes it easier to manifest one's racism in the form of oppression but its not a requirement to hate someone based upon their race alone. If I'm in a town with only 5% Japanese people in it and the other 95% are white, obviously the locus of power would be in the masses. It would obviously make it much more difficult for me to be truly oppressed by those 5%. But that doesn't mean that I can't the subject of nepotism based solely on race, doesn't mean that I can't be called a blue-eyed devil, doesn't mean that they can't say or do things to me only based on my race. Now, if I'm actually living in Japan and I'm now the 5% minority and I face those ugly things, its easier to call it racism because power makes oppression easier, but stripped down to its purest form it just means either/or the belief that one race is superior to another or the discrimination of people based only on account of race. Anyone, at any time, is capable of that.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by ringo, posted 02-06-2020 10:51 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 431 by ringo, posted 02-07-2020 11:11 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 427 of 531 (871619)
02-06-2020 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 423 by Theodoric
02-06-2020 1:12 PM


Re: Whining for A Free pass
No one has or could claim that people of color and other minorities can not be racially prejudiced. That would be stupid to claim. AS Hyro has done he has found examples of people of color with racial prejudice. That is radically different form racism and institutional racism as Ringo has pointed out, because of the power dynamic.
Well, then perhaps we should clarify our terms. Racism simply means you believe your race is superior to others (whether you act upon it or not) or that you would discriminate against people based only race.
If a random person of color expresses anti-white racist views there is no real effect on society at large, but when people of the dominant group express racism or institutions of society express racist views there is a power dynamic that perpetuates, the racism we see throughout society even to this day.
I agree that the majority has more power to inflict more harm in the form of actual oppression, which is the shifting of a racist BELIEF into an ACTION that harms its victims. But I would disagree that it has no effect at all... in fact it bolsters racists. It legitimizes why they hate another race. Its not helpful, it just adds to the shit storm instead of neutralizing it.
When you strip away what I am saying (and not to put words in his mouth but sounds as if Tangle agrees), that while perhaps understandable to a certain degree, I don't think it is helpful. Its pouring gasoline on an already raging inferno.
Again still stunned by the idea that pointing out racism and white privilege is interpreted as a racist action. Stunning.
Because you've made it racial and therefore IMPOSSIBLE to change. That's the problem. Not a single one of us is capable of changing our race, so you are reducing white people the same as a Nazi reduces Jews and blacks.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 423 by Theodoric, posted 02-06-2020 1:12 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 528 of 531 (872118)
02-20-2020 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 516 by Phat
02-18-2020 7:25 PM


Re: There you go putting limits on God yet again.
Otherwise we may as well throw Him away. Do you seriously think im stupid enough to believe that GOD loves pond scum as much as humans? What an all inclusive heneric form of a Deity that would be.
When I see obscure creatures or organisms, I think of what possible relevance would it be for God to have specifically created it -- assuming that a God exists, of course. And its just one more reason that makes me doubt it -- or that if a God of sorts exists that it be more deistic than theistic.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 516 by Phat, posted 02-18-2020 7:25 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 529 of 531 (872119)
02-20-2020 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 520 by Phat
02-19-2020 3:19 PM


Re: There you go putting limits on God yet again.
I believe that God chose to focus on humans rather than simply all lifeforms on the planet. Jesus did not simply sit around sniffing flowers and relishing in the things His Father created. One can speculate, I suppose.
Yeah, and that doesn't strike you as odd? Why are there millions upon millions of different species if there was not some relevance to them? The bible, written by humans, is notoriously human-centric. Go figure.
quote:
Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?
I dunno, Jesus, because I have no idea how you measure worth. Are we more valuable than the birds of the air? Do they suffer for endless and timeless eternity for daring to ask such a heretical question? Seems to me being a human is both a blessing and a curse.
I look at the simplistic pleasures of my dogs... There is an unmistakable intelligence there. An unmistakable love and joy. They just want to be around me and to express love for me and to have me express it back to them. There's no ulterior motive. Its genuine. Simple. Beautiful. And yet we are taught that when they die, they just die. But when we die we enter on to eternity... or so we're told.
But this kind of human-centric thinking belies credibility that God spent all this time creating all these other things to only focus on us. It really makes you question whether God created man or whether man created God.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 520 by Phat, posted 02-19-2020 3:19 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 531 of 531 (872123)
02-20-2020 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 526 by Phat
02-20-2020 12:04 PM


Re: There you go putting limits on God yet again.
Ultimately it is true but noone expects us to feed and clothe everyone and leaving ourselves with nothing.
Only if you want to be perfect in the eyes of God.
quote:
Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life? Why do you ask me about what is good? Jesus replied. There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments. Which ones? he inquired. Jesus replied, ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.
All these I have kept, the young man said. What do I still lack?
Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.
When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
Then Jesus said to his disciples, Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 526 by Phat, posted 02-20-2020 12:04 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024