Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9046 total)
66 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, dwise1, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo, Tangle, Tanypteryx (7 members, 59 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,250 Year: 4,896/14,102 Month: 494/707 Week: 49/176 Day: 12/37 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Peanut Gallery Comments on Great Debate
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8200
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 166 of 214 (886709)
06-01-2021 4:44 AM


And here we have a repeat of the tired old misunderstanding of what atheism/secularism/humanism is - a variant of the old atheism as a belief routine.

“I think when it comes to ethics, the secularist is often (not always) a theist in disguise. Many who I speak to (and love as friends) care deeply about the modern human sex trafficking epidemic, or female circumcision, or LGBT+ rights, but at the core of secularism there is no real reason to. We might be able to observe some things as in general, negative or positive for the human race, but to claim that we ought to take action to rectify injustice in the world requires for things to be objectively unjust.”

He's saying that because we care about others there must be a god. What utter nonsense. It's a total non sequitur.

We care about others because we know that pain and suffering hurts; we have an emotion called empathy and a conscious mind that feels some of that suffering ourselves. So of course we dislike it and feel like want to do something about it.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19230
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 167 of 214 (886723)
06-01-2021 12:41 PM


Phat writes:

... let the record show that I am in no way obsequious nor worshipful towards Raphael and consider him a brother in Christ and nothing more. Tangle has some rather odd view of me based on my conversations with Pastor ICANT....


The record shows that you have an exaggerated high regard for "pastors" - certainly not justified in the case of ICANT.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2329
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 168 of 214 (886725)
06-02-2021 12:14 AM


Eat My Shorts
The Great Debate between Raphael and Phat appears to be between a 7th and a wannabe 7th. Now if Phat wants to be a 7th, well better than Pentecost, he may not be Christian but he sure will make a great orthodox Jew (but you will still have to learn way more than any "pastor" could begin to conceive of.)

All these calisthenics to avoid what Jesus said in the Gospels, since neither of you will apparently do it on your own, becomes the purview of the scholar. Summer solstice, June 21 or more accurately the day or two after. I will throw everything Jesus ever purportedly said that you hate above all things, right into both you faces.

That is not just a promise, not just a guarantee, for you it will be a reckoning.


The problem with knowing everything is learning nothing.

If you don't know what you're doing, find someone who does, and do what they do.

Republican = death


Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 11:31 AM anglagard has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16978
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 169 of 214 (886859)
06-13-2021 5:21 AM


Addressing Message 10

quote:
He had some unique perspectives on scripture that I had rarely heard elsewhere. One example is the idea that "the God" lied and the snake(serpent) told the truth. No apologist nor teacher had ever taught me that before, and to this day I am uncomfortable with it.

As the story is written the snake told the truth. That cannot be honestly disputed (it can be dishonestly disputed - as you’ve demonstrated). Whether or not God lied (rather than - for instance - changed his mind) relies more on interpretation and ideas about the nature, history and purpose of the story.

But I think it’s telling that you are far more comfortable with misrepresenting the Bible to make it fit with your beliefs than you are with accepting that it says something you don’t like.

quote:
Ringo takes it a step further. He basically believes that the message is more important than the messenger, even if the messenger was (and is) Jesus Christ.

That can be read as saying that Jesus Christ is incapable of carrying a message worth hearing - and that does seem to sum up your actual position. The roots of the disagreement are your insistence that the message is not important. It looks to me like an excuse for idolatry - it’s important to believe that God wrote the Bible because the men you worship say so - it’s not important to believe that Bible because that’s only what God says (far less important).

quote:
He uses only what is written to speak on behalf of Jesus, however

Which would be the way that you get Jesus’ message. You’re not going to find what Jesus said anywhere else. (Personally I doubt that you can get a reliable idea of what Jesus actually said even then - but Christians disagree, and it’s not as if you have any better sources).


Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 11:24 AM PaulK has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15602
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 170 of 214 (886863)
06-13-2021 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by PaulK
06-13-2021 5:21 AM


Better Sources? We Have Rhema
PaulK writes:

I think it’s telling that you are far more comfortable with misrepresenting the Bible to make it fit with your beliefs than you are with accepting that it says something you don’t like

In my belief, the Bible is best represented at conveying what GOD (The One above all others...Jesus Father...the Creator of all seen and unseen) means for us to know rather than us taking the book as a human creation and simply breaking down what humans of a particular period believed. If GOD does not speak through this book, it is as mundane and transitory as any philosophical book from any religion at any time in history. It no longer speaks as authoritative. ringo can claim that the message has value, though it is but humanistic, evolving, subjective value in that case. At the risk of misrepresenting the Bible, we only seek to represent what GOD (later through Jesus) said to humanity. Take that belief away and we would drop the book like it was a chick tract.
That can be read as saying that Jesus Christ is incapable of carrying a message worth hearing - and that does seem to sum up your actual position. The roots of the disagreement are your insistence that the message is not important.
Not at al. My point is that Jesus (Being eternally alive) speaks to us today....we don't simply follow the words of humans who lived two thousand years ago. We may as well write our own book if that were the case. The key belief supporting this position is Rhema Word. If Logos...The written word from 2000 years ago...is the only record of what Jesus said, and if Jesus is believed to be just another human who lived and died...the 2000-year-old words are little more than philosophy and good human advice.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by PaulK, posted 06-13-2021 5:21 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by PaulK, posted 06-13-2021 11:47 AM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15602
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 171 of 214 (886864)
06-13-2021 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by anglagard
06-02-2021 12:14 AM


Channeling Jesus? Or quoting an old book
anglagard writes:

Summer solstice, June 21 or more accurately the day or two after. I will throw everything Jesus ever purportedly said that you hate above all things, right into both your faces.

That is not just a promise, not just a guarantee, for you, it will be a reckoning.

Many people have spoken into my life. Some were from the church and some weren't, but what mattered was the Spirit behind what they said to me. If you simply come at me as a liberal who thinks that an ancient character in an old book speaks the ringing truths of empathetic socialism, I will be unimpressed. If, however, you speak as if that man is living in your heart, you know I will pay attention whether I want to or not. I reckon I need a good reckoning now and then.

The Great Debate between Raphael and Phat appears to be between a 7th and a wannabe 7th.
What makes you think I want to join the 7th-day Adventists? Were i speaking with a Catholic do you imagine me thus wanting to convert to that? Im simply attempting a conversation that will highlight our similarities in belief and our differences...with due respect to Raphael regardless what he believes.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by anglagard, posted 06-02-2021 12:14 AM anglagard has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16978
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 172 of 214 (886866)
06-13-2021 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Phat
06-13-2021 11:24 AM


Re: Better Sources? We Have Rhema
quote:
In my belief, the Bible is best represented at conveying what GOD (The One above all others...Jesus Father...the Creator of all seen and unseen) means for us to know rather than us taking the book as a human creation and simply breaking down what humans of a particular period believed.

That would mean accepting the importance of the message. Which you refuse to do. Even worse you can’t hope to understand the Bible by ripping the various books out of their historical context. If they were messages from God they were messages to the people of the time they were written.

But worse for you, the Bible presents itself as a collection of human creations. And surely the cosmology of Genesis 1 reflects what the people of the time believed, not the actual cosmos. The sky is not a solid dome, there is no water above it, the stars are distant suns - many larger and grander than ours.

quote:
If GOD does not speak through this book, it is as mundane and transitory as any philosophical book from any religion at any time in history. It no longer speaks as authoritative.

And in your view it isn’t authoritative. You don’t accept that the serpent told the truth even though the story clearly says so.

quote:
Not at al. My point is that Jesus (Being eternally alive) speaks to us today....we don't simply follow the words of humans who lived two thousand years ago. We may as well write our own book if that were the case. The key belief supporting this position is Rhema Word. If Logos...The written word from 2000 years ago...is the only record of what Jesus said, and if Jesus is believed to be just another human who lived and died...the 2000-year-old words are little more than philosophy and good human advice.

There are two quite distinct issues here and one - the nature of Jesus - is not really part of this discussion. So, let us assume for the sake of argument that Jesus was God and that the Bible accurately reports his words. In that case using your Rhema theology to set aside his words as recorded in the Gospels is a questionable proposition. If the words you attribute to Jesus are in conflict with his message in the Bible and convenient to you (as is the case) there is a clear possibility that they come from you and not from Jesus at all.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 11:24 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 11:50 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15602
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 173 of 214 (886867)
06-13-2021 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by PaulK
06-13-2021 11:47 AM


Re: Better Sources? We Have Rhema
You do have a good argument. I'll have to think about what you say.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by PaulK, posted 06-13-2021 11:47 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Tangle, posted 06-13-2021 12:52 PM Phat has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8200
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 174 of 214 (886868)
06-13-2021 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Phat
06-13-2021 11:50 AM


Re: Better Sources? We Have Rhema
Phat writes:

You do have a good argument. I'll have to think about what you say.

It's almost like it's the first time you've heard it.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 11:50 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Phat, posted 06-13-2021 2:32 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15602
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 175 of 214 (886871)
06-13-2021 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Tangle
06-13-2021 12:52 PM


Re: Better Sources? We Have Rhema
I've heard your appeals to logic and rejection of myth and fantasy many times. It's just that I don't agree with it. I've seen things that I doubt you have seen. Not that I can objectively prove them. And that's the key you use...thus you are limited to exclude inner feeling and confirmation.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Tangle, posted 06-13-2021 12:52 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19230
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 176 of 214 (886883)
06-13-2021 3:38 PM


Phat writes:

Ringo takes it a step further. He basically believes that the message is more important than the messenger....


And you know that's true. You don't throw your bills away and worship the envelopes.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Phat, posted 06-15-2021 2:49 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15602
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 177 of 214 (886895)
06-15-2021 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by ringo
06-13-2021 3:38 PM


ringo needs John, Paul, and George.
And you know that's true.
No, I don't *know* that at all. God has used you to stir up my inner conscience, however. I recently saw a good article supporting your views even as I was trying to google concepts supporting mine.
The message is more important than the messenger

You don't throw your bills away and worship the envelopes.
I don't worship the bills either. Your analogy is struggling.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by ringo, posted 06-13-2021 3:38 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by dwise1, posted 06-15-2021 5:40 PM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 180 by ringo, posted 06-16-2021 12:22 PM Phat has responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


(2)
Message 178 of 214 (886896)
06-15-2021 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Phat
06-15-2021 2:49 PM


Re: ringo needs John, Paul, and George.
ringo writes:

You don't throw your bills away and worship the envelopes.


I don't worship the bills either. Your analogy is struggling.

You misread that metaphor and took it personally when it wasn't. Such is the ambiguity of English.

Rather, that should have read in the French style: "One does not throw one's bills away and worship the envelopes."

Language note: French makes extensive use of the impersonal pronoun "on", which corresponds to the English use of "one" that I just deployed, even when we would not expect it (eg, when describing the actions of a particular group where we would use "they", French still uses "on") -- that makes watching French content on Netflix more fun, catching where they use "on".

So ringo was not describing what you personally would do, but rather what one should do.

So in determining what is true, which should we do? Examine the "message" and test it in order to determine whether it is true? Or automatically accept everything that a particular authority says?

Here's an example. There was a creation/evolution documentary which was fairly balanced and consisted entirely of interviews with individuals on both sides (eg, scientists and professors and ministers and professional creationists -- thankfully very few of that last group) with a bare minimum of commentary (none, according to my memory) and no conclusions expressed explicitly.

Going back to my notes, that documentary was "Questioning Darwin" on HBO (2014 -- on YouTube at HBO Documentary Full Movie 'Questioning Darwin' Full Documentary 2014). I've posted about it on this forum before, but I don't remember when. From my notes:

DWise1 writes:

unremembered creationist writes:

The main difference between genuine Christian believers and the world in general is that they consider the Bible as the word of God, an authority above man made theories and conclusions.

. . .

The first evidence that the true believer has is the word of God and everything else has to be tested by it.

The world on the other hand puts the opinions and conclusions of man above revelation and God. So there is no harmony there.

It does not mean that science cannot be married to creationism, it just means that the conclusions drawn which contradict the Bible have to be left out.

If I were to talk about global flood dynamics, the Bible would be my first and only reference, which has authority over and above the world. It does not matter if other thoughts and conclusions disagree with it.


On HBO I watched a documentary, "Questioning Darwin". As I recall, there was no narrator, but rather it consisted of several people talking about creation/evolution. Only a few of the people featured were pro-evolution; the majority were young-earth creationists and leaders in fundamentalist ministries.

In one clip, a creationist proclaimed proudly about the strength of his faith being such that if he were to find in the Bible that 2+2 is five, then that is how it is and nothing could possibly shake his belief in 2+2=5 and he would actively oppose the atheist teaching of 2+2=4. OK, I did embellish that last part a bit, but it is absolutely true that he stated that if he were to find in the Bible that 2+2=5, then that is how it is and that is what he would believe absolutely regardless of any amount of non-biblical evidence that it really is 2+2=4.

That is the same position that you are arguing for, that the Bible must take precedence over reality. That may whisper "faithful" in your ear, but it shouts "delusional!" to normal people. And it is a blasphemy to the Creator, since you are placing the Word of Man over the Word of God.

 
[NOTE, DWise1, 2021 Jun 15:
To explain that last sentence, if all of Nature and physical reality was actually created by God, then that is God's Word. The Bible was written by Man and hence is the Word of Man. To quote from a filk song, "Man wrote the Bible, God wrote the World." ]

You can prove that 2 + 2 = 4 and you can trust any source on that question that tells you that true statement, regardless of religion, ideology, or lack thereof.

Or your religion could teach you that 2 + 2 = 5 and the only reason you would ever believe and trust that would be because it is your religion that tells you that.

So we see that what's true is true and what's false is false regardless of the source. Sources which we might never be inclined to trust can provide us with the truth and sources that we trust completely can feed us falsehoods.

"2 + 2 = 4" is the message and its sources are the messengers. A particular messenger can deliver a false message (eg, your religion when it teaches "2 + 2 = 5") and that false message will still be false regardless of how much you trust that messenger. And an untrusted messenger can (and often does) deliver a true message which will continue to be true regardless of how much you distrust that messenger.

Therefore, the message is truly more important than the messenger.

So then tell us, how much is two plus two?

 

Now let's take another tack.

In one lecture, my Rabbinic Literature professor, Rabbi Kalir, explained the difference between two methods of teaching: 1) khalakhah (academic analysis of a teaching -- I'm sure that I got the name wrong after half a century) and 2) aggadah (teaching through the telling of illustrative stories). In that lecture, Rabbi Kalir compared aggadah with telling a joke: any given joke has hundreds of different variations, but despite often widely different build-ups, the punch line is always the same. Similarly, in teaching a given lesson there are a vast number of different stories you can chose from or even concoct your own, but the actual lesson, like the punch line, will always be the same.

So, which is more important? The story or the lesson? Following ringo's metaphor, the story is the messenger but the lesson is the message.

Pick just about any Bible story and it should follow that same aggadah pattern. Each story has lessons that it tries to teach. So which is more important? The story itself (ie, the messenger) or the lesson (ie, the message)?

Now to my mind, that is where biblical literalists go seriously wrong. They are so hung up on all the stories themselves (ie, the messengers) being literally true or else the entire Bible is false and God does not exist. They are worshipping the messenger and losing the message.

Edited by dwise1, : the impersonal pronoun "on"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Phat, posted 06-15-2021 2:49 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 179 of 214 (886897)
06-16-2021 2:48 AM


Pastor just said that Jesus claimed to be God.
When a comment like that is casually thrown out, I think we know we are going to see a lack of integrity with scripture in the discussion. This gripe, of my own, is not to complain about the discussion, but it is just to make sure that we see that the context is squarely within the notions of a modern (or "post modern") 21st century church-goer perspective.

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19230
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 180 of 214 (886898)
06-16-2021 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Phat
06-15-2021 2:49 PM


Re: ringo needs John, Paul, and George.
Phat writes:

ringo writes:

And you know that's true.


No, I don't *know* that at all.

Do you throw your bills away and keep the envelopes?

Phat writes:

I recently saw a good article supporting your views even as I was trying to google concepts supporting mine.


Funny how that works, ain't it?

Phat writes:

I don't worship the bills either.


But you consider them more important than the envelopes.

Phat writes:

Your analogy is struggling.


I don't think there's any problem with the analogy. You're struggling to avoid it. You throw away Jesus' message and worship him as the Envelope that broght it.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Phat, posted 06-15-2021 2:49 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Phat, posted 06-17-2021 7:25 AM ringo has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021