5 of 6
5
Boring
Posted: 23 July 2017 03:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 61 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21
Tanny - 23 July 2017 09:07 AM

So long as you believe, without any evidence at all, that the theist vs. atheist dance is accomplishing something, and that your side is somehow winning, you’ll never have any motivation to look for alternatives, and thus will remain stuck on the theist vs. atheist merry-go-round to nowhere.

If I thought my side was doing as well as you think it is, I would not bother discussing it with the likes of you. The evangelical vote got us Bush II, then Trump. It took a long time to get gay marriage passed, and it is still being fought. The “nones” may be on the rise, but they have a long way to go before they gain any real power. I fight for human rights, I fight for reason. I even fight for your right to have the ridiculous opinions that you do, but I have an equal right to point them out and say you are wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 July 2017 04:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 62 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  249
Joined  2017-06-25

Half of American Catholics voted for Trump, half did not.  Half of American Catholics support gay marriage, half do not.  Half of American Catholics want abortion to be illegal, while half want it to be legal.

So by basing your fight for human rights on the issue of religion you illustrate that you are not the solution, but part of the problem.

And, you post was entirely non-responsive to the words of mine you quoted, as usual.

 Signature 

Countdown To Zero - Nuclear Weapons Documentary

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 July 2017 07:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 63 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21

My post was about evangelicals and you talked about Catholics. I have been trying to respond to your insanity for a week. You have pushed my limits.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 07:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 64 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1337
Joined  2005-01-14
Tanny - 22 July 2017 10:14 AM
JohnH - 22 July 2017 09:37 AM

Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

Ah yes, the good ole “we merely lack belief” dodge.  Seen it at least a million times.  And it’s all completely wrong.

You don’t “merely lack belief in gods”.  You have a faith based belief in a different chosen authority than theists.

Tanny, I think I begin to see why you keep getting banned from forums.  You don’t pay attention to what people say.  Apparently nobody told you that people have minds of their own, and don’t necessarily believe what you’ve decided they’re “supposed to” believe.  You have developed this comfortable theory about “what atheists believe in”, and by God you’ll stick to that come hell or high water, no matter what anybody else tells you.  It’s no wonder that you keep repeating the same nonsense over and over ad nauseam.

What’s obstructing you from seeing this overwhelming obvious fact is that you’ve built a self flattering personal identity out of your faith based beliefs, just as many theists do.  You don’t want to give that self flattering personal identity up, because it’s a pleasing emotional experience for you.

Now this line is incredibly amusing to me, because you seem to be describing yourself to a T.  You flatter yourself that you love to “challenge the group consensus”, and people hate you for it.  Tanny, my sweet.  Why don’t you start by challenging your own consensus, then get back to us?  smile

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 07:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 65 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1337
Joined  2005-01-14
Nihilo - 22 July 2017 11:36 PM
Advocatus - 21 July 2017 09:16 AM

Now this is important—atheists do not claim that we know the answers to these hypothetical “largest questions” (whatever they are).  We only claim that “God” is NOT a good answer.  That’s all.  That’s what “atheist” means—“God” is not a good answer.  How is that “faith”?

“God” isn’t a good answer; you’re right.  The Christian says, the RESURRECTION; He the Lord Jesus is risen from the dead.  “God” is in there, but the leading tip of the arrowhead of the Christian answer, is the RESURRECTION.  That’s the Gospel, that the Christian Church believes.

But doesn’t the resurrection depend upon the existence of God, and upon whether He had the power to resurrect Himself from death?  You yourself said that if the resurrection never happened, then none of the other things that Jesus taught, about God and about Heaven, makes any difference.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 10:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 66 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Advocatus - 24 July 2017 07:46 AM
Nihilo - 22 July 2017 11:36 PM
Advocatus - 21 July 2017 09:16 AM

Now this is important—atheists do not claim that we know the answers to these hypothetical “largest questions” (whatever they are).  We only claim that “God” is NOT a good answer.  That’s all.  That’s what “atheist” means—“God” is not a good answer.  How is that “faith”?

“God” isn’t a good answer; you’re right.  The Christian says, the RESURRECTION; He the Lord Jesus is risen from the dead.  “God” is in there, but the leading tip of the arrowhead of the Christian answer, is the RESURRECTION.  That’s the Gospel, that the Christian Church believes.

But doesn’t the resurrection depend upon the existence of God, and upon whether He had the power to resurrect Himself from death?

Of course there’s a whole lot following the tip of the Christian arrowhead, but the tip remains the RESURRECTION; and it is the RESURRECTION that constitutes both the “central” and “crowning” truth of the Christian faith; and it is the belief in the RESURRECTION that constitutes “saving” Christian faith; and it is the belief in the RESURRECTION, and that only and exclusively, that renders one a Christian.

Advocatus - 24 July 2017 07:46 AM

You yourself said that if the resurrection never happened, then none of the other things that Jesus taught, about God and about Heaven, makes any difference.

Correct, and I said that because that’s what the Christian Bible itself says.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 10:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 67 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21
Tanny - 23 July 2017 04:26 PM

Half of American Catholics voted for Trump, half did not.  Half of American Catholics support gay marriage, half do not.  Half of American Catholics want abortion to be illegal, while half want it to be legal.

So by basing your fight for human rights on the issue of religion you illustrate that you are not the solution, but part of the problem.

And, you post was entirely non-responsive to the words of mine you quoted, as usual.

I know (hope) Tanny is gone, but he makes a point worth commenting on here. Looked at from the Tanny perspective, Catholics are debating these important topics among themselves. I’m sure he knows of some liberal Catholics who led the charge on allowing openly gay people to have a few rights. He adds up all those Catholics ignoring the Pope and taking the pill, and compares it to some sort of democracy in action.

Of course it’s not a democracy though is it? Popes and their buddies in funny hats go into dark rooms and pretend to talk to God and make decisions to preach to poor people in Africa instead of bringing them proper health care and empowering women to take control of their bodies. The half that are ignoring theses edicts live in modern countries and have secular governments protecting them, not Bishops. The other half are exploited for their labor and used to raise money for Catholic Charities, even though it’s the Catholics causing them to have the needs they do.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 10:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 68 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Lausten - 24 July 2017 10:46 AM
Tanny - 23 July 2017 04:26 PM

Half of American Catholics voted for Trump, half did not.  Half of American Catholics support gay marriage, half do not.  Half of American Catholics want abortion to be illegal, while half want it to be legal.

So by basing your fight for human rights on the issue of religion you illustrate that you are not the solution, but part of the problem.

And, you post was entirely non-responsive to the words of mine you quoted, as usual.

I know (hope) Tanny is gone, but he makes a point worth commenting on here. Looked at from the Tanny perspective, Catholics are debating these important topics among themselves. I’m sure he knows of some liberal Catholics who led the charge on allowing openly gay people to have a few rights. He adds up all those Catholics ignoring the Pope and taking the pill, and compares it to some sort of democracy in action.

Of course it’s not a democracy though is it? Popes and their buddies in funny hats go into dark rooms and pretend to talk to God and make decisions to preach to poor people in Africa instead of bringing them proper health care and empowering women to take control of their bodies. The half that are ignoring theses edicts live in modern countries and have secular governments protecting them, not Bishops. The other half are exploited for their labor and used to raise money for Catholic Charities, even though it’s the Catholics causing them to have the needs they do.

There is no democracy when it comes to what is moral and what is immoral, for the Church that Jesus Christ Himself actually built upon St. Peter, that it true.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 12:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 69 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 10:58 AM

There is no democracy when it comes to what is moral and what is immoral, for the Church that Jesus Christ Himself actually built upon St. Peter, that it true.

Yeah. I’m trying to get you to explain how that works in the “Is Murder Wrong” thread.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2017 12:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 70 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Lausten - 24 July 2017 12:01 PM
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 10:58 AM

There is no democracy when it comes to what is moral and what is immoral, for the Church that Jesus Christ Himself actually built upon St. Peter, that it true.

Yeah. I’m trying to get you to explain how that works in the “Is Murder Wrong” thread.

If there is no God, nobody would (nor should, IMO) care what the Catholic Church teaches.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 July 2017 06:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 71 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 12:07 PM
Lausten - 24 July 2017 12:01 PM
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 10:58 AM

There is no democracy when it comes to what is moral and what is immoral, for the Church that Jesus Christ Himself actually built upon St. Peter, that it true.

Yeah. I’m trying to get you to explain how that works in the “Is Murder Wrong” thread.

If there is no God, nobody would (nor should, IMO) care what the Catholic Church teaches.

That’s rather trivially true.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 July 2017 06:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 72 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21

back to the book that is sort of the topic of this thread…

I like the book, although this review covers a lot of what I didn’t like, I think very fairly. https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/the-bonobo-and-the-atheist-basher-part-2/  In the next to last chapter, he takes to bashing “Neo-Atheists” again, without much nuance and seeming to sometimes attempt to miss the point. He mentions “Lord of the Flies” and theorizes about children forming society. He invokes some evidence that shows they use moral language and have a tendency to form hierarchy, more along religious lines. He evaluates science and how difficult it was to develop it to where it is now and maintain it.
He doesn’t say much about our natural ability to desire evidence. He never mentions early attempts to develop science that were thwarted by military dictatorships that partner with religious authority to control their populace. I’m not sure if it occurs to him that nature will demand that we understand it, or we will suffer the consequences. These are real consequences, unlike hell or any other form of smiting.
I agree with him that if our collective memories were wiped out today and we couldn’t read any of our science or religion, some form of religion would quickly develop. But it seems he hasn’t considered that it would look nothing like any religion we have now. Even with the symbols lying around, completely different myth and dogma would surround it. Not unlike the scene in Planet of the Apes II, where they are worshiping the bomb. Facts however, remain facts. No matter what form science took, or how it developed, it could only discover nature as it is.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 July 2017 07:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 73 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2017-07-20
Lausten - 25 July 2017 06:21 AM

That’s rather trivially true.

Then why did I have to say it.

 Signature 

Christian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 July 2017 07:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 74 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4218
Joined  2009-10-21
Nihilo - 25 July 2017 07:12 AM
Lausten - 25 July 2017 06:21 AM

That’s rather trivially true.

Then why did I have to say it.

I don’t know. I already knew it. Why did you think I didn’t know it? I jumped into your part of the conversation when you said “moral relativism”. You said either you have an objective source, i.e. God or the Catholic Church, or you have moral relativism. A) There are other ways to look at morality, B) The Church and Bible change with time and culture. The Church claims its authority stems from the miracle of Christ. You’ve said nothing that explains how that works or why I should accept it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 July 2017 11:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 75 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4335
Joined  2014-06-20
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 12:07 PM
Lausten - 24 July 2017 12:01 PM
Nihilo - 24 July 2017 10:58 AM

There is no democracy when it comes to what is moral and what is immoral, for the Church that Jesus Christ Himself actually built upon St. Peter, that it true.

Yeah. I’m trying to get you to explain how that works in the “Is Murder Wrong” thread.

If there is no God, nobody would (nor should, IMO) care what the Catholic Church teaches.

It has nothing to do with whether there is a god or not. As long as people,believe there is god with no evidence whatsoever they will care what the Catholic Church teaches—and what all other religions teach.

Until people come to their senses regarding the possibility of god they will always be hopelessly entangled in religion and religious authorities. There is no way out except to drop the irrational belief in god(s) and other supernatural entities.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
   
5 of 6
5