What has given Christianity its staying power?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-01-2016, 12:18 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 12:08 PM)kim Wrote:  What has given christianity it's staying power?

Fear.

This here stated so simplyThumbsup

Indoctrination, shaming, and heinous consequences keep the madness hanging on.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
28-01-2016, 12:25 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I believe in God as confidently as believe I have two hands, or the sun is shining outside of my window. I don't even know where to begin to not believe. And it's not out of a lack of trying. I find the suggestion that human life, our level of consciousness, creative and rational abilities, moral dimensions, our desire for meaning and truth, is result of a cosmic accident, absurd. The fact the your run of the mill atheists is unlikely to argue or defend this view, and prefers to say he lacks a belief, seems to speak volumes of this absurdity, that many atheists lack the confidence to declare God doesn't exist, the same way I would say Santa doesn't exist, that inability, that reluctance, that insecurity means something, one that illuminates theism more so than atheism.

This is a very positive way to paint intellectual dishonesty. The whole reason I use leprechauns when talking about nonfalsifiability (Santa would work just as fine) is that I can't prove leprechauns don't exist, so I won't categorically say that I know they don't exist. It's not honest, but that doesn't mean that believing they do exist isn't absurd.

Your committal to saying God exists and that Santa doesn't exist isn't showing some virtue that you can "pick sides"; it shows that you are willing to claim knowledge of things you can't possibly know. This isn't atheists "skillfully avoiding hard questions"; it's intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RobbyPants's post
28-01-2016, 12:33 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 12:25 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  This is a very positive way to paint intellectual dishonesty. The whole reason I use leprechauns when talking about nonfalsifiability (Santa would work just as fine) is that I can't prove leprechauns don't exist, so I won't categorically say that I know they don't exist. It's not honest, but that doesn't mean that believing they do exist isn't absurd.

Your committal to saying God exists and that Santa doesn't exist isn't showing some virtue that you can "pick sides"; it shows that you are willing to claim knowledge of things you can't possibly know. This isn't atheists "skillfully avoiding hard questions"; it's intellectual honesty.

This is the part of your criticism that doesn't really make sense. Atheists routinely draw a distinction between believing and knowing, with the gnostic and agnostic distinction, a point that's readily clear when speaking of the distinction between an agnostic theist, and a gnostic theist.

So why is it when I say I believe Santa does not exist, you're quick to inflate this as knowing Santa doesn't exist?

Can't I believe Santa does not exist, without knowing Santa does not exist? The same way an agnostic theist can believe God exist, but not claim to know God exists?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2016, 12:49 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 12:33 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So why is it when I say I believe Santa does not exist, you're quick to inflate this as knowing Santa doesn't exist?

Can't I believe Santa does not exist, without knowing Santa does not exist? The same way an agnostic theist can believe God exist, but not claim to know God exists?

Looking back on it, I misread you. I thought you were saying flat-out that he didn't exist; not that you lacked a belief in Santa.

That being said, I don't understand how this "illuminates theism more so than atheism". It seems to underscore agnostic atheism; you're endorsing the same reasoning of almost every atheist on this site while railing against "run of the mill atheists". It's super confusing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
28-01-2016, 01:46 PM (This post was last modified: 28-01-2016 01:54 PM by TheInquisition.)
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 08:16 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-01-2016 07:47 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  At best, all you could derive from that, is a generalized deism. If you can't enumerate specific characteristics of a god concept, then it's useless.

So how would you go about determining specific characteristics about something that has no physical basis?

By his work (revelation). Like the relationship between the author and his novel, based on the novel itself. That one can see by reading the The Brother's Karamazov, that it was a labor of love for it's writer. But it always come down to how each of us relate and understand that work.

If you see it all as hostile, you'll like see the authors relationship as hostile, if you see it as indifferent, you likely see the author as indifferent ( or non-existent). Where as if you see an order sustains by something profound, and beautiful, you see it as labor or love. A thing of awe, as much to him, as it is to us.

It's subjective feels all the way down. That is simply insufficient and irrational.

It always seems to come down to the subjective, but never objective evidence free from biased interpretation that is the motive for belief.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2016, 02:03 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The common practices when atheists ask for evidence, is similar to when creationist ask for evidence for Evolution, or anything else for that matter. They're not really looking for evidence, but a way to categorize what others say serves as evidence, is not "evidence".

Then for the umteenth time, if you have so little regard for anything going on here, WHAT THE FUCK are you doing here ? It does make you all warm and fuzzy, and give you a hard-on to feel "superior. We get that. But really .... WTF.

(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The classic example is the historical Jesus debates, where many atheists here suggest there's no evidence of historical Jesus, when presented with accounts in the NT, writing by historians at the time, they'll just categorize all these aspects as "not evidence". They don't believe Jesus did not exist, they skillfully claim to merely lack a belief.

Are you suffering from Dementia ? It all was a total waste of time. We've been ALL THROUGH this. The most pre-eminent scholars do not claim the gospels as history, and there IS NO evidence anywhere that is credible,, and you have none, and you were TOTALLY unable to come up with any, yet here you are, AGAIN, intellectually dishonestly trying to claim the SAME crap that you did before, and have no evidence for.

(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I believe in God as confidently as believe I have two hands, or the sun is shining outside of my window. I don't even know where to begin to not believe. And it's not out of a lack of trying. I find the suggestion that human life, our level of consciousness, creative and rational abilities, moral dimensions, our desire for meaning and truth, is result of a cosmic accident, absurd.

No one claims it was a "cosmic accident". But thanks for the COMPLETE demonstration of your total 100% ignorance of Physics, Chemistry and Choas Theory, Math and Probability. You idiots like to "do" that .... claim it was an "accident", or random. It was neither.

(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The fact the your run of the mill atheists is unlikely to argue or defend this view, and prefers to say he lacks a belief, seems to speak volumes of this absurdity, that many atheists lack the confidence to declare God doesn't exist, the same way I would say Santa doesn't exist, that inability, that reluctance, that insecurity means something, one that illuminates theism more so than atheism.

Let's see your polling data, or STFU, Tommy boy. WHo gave YOU the right to categorize people you don't even know.

(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  But these are only a small part of why I believe. If we were to ask the real question, as to why do I believe, and you don't? That's an interesting question, and the real answer is far more complex and richer than the premature rationalizations we offer. My beliefs and yours are the result of very different lives and experiences, that convey to us certain understandings, and limit us from others. Atheists such as yourself tend to be occupied with questions regarding the external world, were as for me the real question are more personal, questions of self, of who I am. And the relationship between this and the external world, is what serves as the basis of my beliefs, what sustains, and fuels that confidence.

Lovely. It's still all just woo, going on in your woo brain.

BTW, say thanks to your "tragedy causing" impotent deity for his latest atrocity. It was REAL nice of your Jebus to permit the virus that causes microcephaly. How you fools can claim there is a benevolent over-lord, even while EVIDENCE for the contrary is everywhere, is just amazing.


(28-01-2016 07:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  When I look at the totality of existence it appears tragic, but it also appears grounded by a profound beauty, that animates my life and others. I find myself unable to see it as senseless, but a part of a meaningful order that I can't fully comprehend or articulate. You likely won't understand what it is I'm talking about here, it'll just be ripe for a series of misunderstanding. If you did understand I doubt you'd be an atheist.

Tell that to the mom of a microcephalic or anancephalic infant, and see just how "beautiful" she thinks the universe is.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
28-01-2016, 04:24 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
Tomasia, I think it is time you educated yourself. You are looking a little dim.

First this: Evolution by natural selection is one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by evidence from a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including paleontology, geology, genetics and developmental biology.

Just go here to learn the facts.

It is really pathetic to see a human deny such a well founded science that is used every day in industries across the planet.

You have basically fallen well behind modern times. Kind of like those moronic islamic fools who attempt to deny history by destroying ancient treasures.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
28-01-2016, 06:05 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
As Anton LaVey stated:
"Satan is the best friend the church has ever had as he has kept it in business all these years"

What I take this to mean is that while there are people with opinions about how others should or shouldn't behave they will construct deities to validate their own prejudices. So, the prevalence (or perception) of 'evil' is food for the religious in pious aggrandisement. A powerful motivator.

When one sleeps on the floor one need not worry about falling out of bed - Anton Lavey
If god had meant us to believe in him he would've existed - Linda Smith
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Siz's post
28-01-2016, 06:09 PM
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
Learned helplessness. Drinking Beverage

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
29-01-2016, 07:49 AM (This post was last modified: 29-01-2016 07:53 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: What has given Christianity its staying power?
(28-01-2016 02:03 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Are you suffering from Dementia ? It all was a total waste of time. We've been ALL THROUGH this. The most pre-eminent scholars do not claim the gospels as history, and there IS NO evidence anywhere that is credible,, and you have none, and you were TOTALLY unable to come up with any, yet here you are, AGAIN, intellectually dishonestly trying to claim the SAME crap that you did before, and have no evidence for.

Again, for the third time I wasn’t trying to reignite the historical Jesus debate, but just pointing out the tendency to label what others refer to as evidence, as not-evidence by opposing parties. A tendency that extends beyond the question of God’s existence. Ehrman lists a variety of things he refer to as evidence in support of a historical Jesus. While many here seem to suggest that he’s not using the word “evidence” properly.

The common situation is like this:

Person X presents a variety of things he considers evidence.

Person Y claims that’s not evidence.

Creationist claim that what others suggest is evidence of evolution, is “not evidence”. Those who reject a historical Jesus, claim that what others suggest, including atheists historians, is evidence, is “not evidence”. Those who ask for evidence for God, will claim that what is offered to them is “not evidence”. The pathology here is similar, but you likely won’t see that though.

But again this isn’t an attempt to argue about the historical Jesus. But just the term evidence, and it’s semantic disputes, among folks here.

Quote:Then for the umteenth time, if you have so little regard for anything going on here, WHAT THE FUCK are you doing here ? It does make you all warm and fuzzy, and give you a hard-on to feel "superior. We get that. But really .... WTF.

Stop getting so worked up buddy. I’m here partly because I find the question of what leads me to believe what I do, and what led you to believe what you do, an interesting one. It doesn’t seem to be a matter of education, nor a matter of understanding the results of a series of peer reviewed papers. The distinction seems to be more about our own personal trajectories, a lot more to do with our different life histories more so than anything else. So I like digging into that question, peel at it, to try and peel as much of you away until we can see a core. This is always going to rub folks with certain sensibilities the wrong way, but it’s not intentional, it’s just unavoidable.

Quote:No one claims it was a "cosmic accident". But thanks for the COMPLETE demonstration of your total 100% ignorance of Physics, Chemistry and Choas Theory, Math and Probability. You idiots like to "do" that .... claim it was an "accident", or random. It was neither.

Quote:No one claims it was a "cosmic accident". But thanks for the COMPLETE demonstration of your total 100% ignorance of Physics, Chemistry and Choas Theory, Math and Probability. You idiots like to "do" that .... claim it was an "accident", or random. It was neither.

Of course you don’t believe that, because you just lack beliefs, duh.
And I guess, Lawrence Kraus, Richard Feynman, Paul Davies are ignorant of Physics, Chemistry, etc…?

“Out of this radically new image of the universe at large scale have also come new ideas about physics at a small scale. The Large Hadron Collider has given tantalizing hints that the origin of mass, and therefore of all that we can see, is a kind of cosmic accident.” -L. Krauss

“Because we are a product of this cosmic accident, we cannot conclude that Earth is typical.” -Paul Davies



What more interesting is that view life as a “cosmic accident” seems to be so emotionally problematic for you, that you have trouble accepting that, even though you’re an atheists. It was Chas who suggested the term was so emotionally loaded, that euphemisms would better suffice.

Quote:y. WHo gave YOU the right to categorize people you don't even know.


I think being in a predominantly atheist forum has pampered you. Atheists tell me all the time why I believe what I do. I’m constantly a victim of generalizations, and projections. They can sometimes be right, and more often than not be wrong. But I don’t take offense to this. I don’t demand that they stop telling me why I believe. I’m not sensitive about it, so you shouldn’t be either. I don’t expect people to coddle me, so don’t expect to be coddled either. When people tell me why I believe this or that, why I believe in God, why I’m religious, rather then providing them a cease and desist order, if those assessments are wrong I try and correct them. If they’re to some degree on the mark and some parts off, than I revise them.

I’m not interested in wearing kid gloves, or being delicate with you, I also don’t want to intentionally piss you off, but I am interested in the truth here, but it’s unlikely to be cushy ride, and I’m sorry but that’s unavoidable. I’ve at least been participating long enough, interacting with atheists on the internet for several years now, so whatever assessments I’ve drawn, are pulled from these multitude of interactions, even if at the end of the day you find my interpretation inaccurate.

Quote:Tell that to the mom of a microcephalic or anancephalic infant, and see just how "beautiful" she thinks the universe is.
start: postbit_signature

I think beauty lies more so in way people transform tragic events, and suffering, in finding hope and perseverance, in finding community. There’s nothing beautiful about the brutalized body of Emmet Till, but there is something beautiful in how his mother, and his community dealt with in it’s wake. There’s no beauty in the cruelty of slavery, but there is beauty in the slave spirituals it gave rise to, the depths in which they sprung from, the transcendence found in those brief moments of the hymn.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: