cuchulain

Attacking beliefs

189 posts in this topic

4 minutes ago, mererdog said:

This is a variation on the classic argument "Jews were mean to me, so I am justified in being mean to Jews." That argument has always been garbage.

So be it.  They want to get in my face and threaten me with Perdition?  I get to laugh back.  I don't care if it's fair.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Life often is not perceived as fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I have lived my life in a culture dominated by Fundamentalist believers. Life has not been easy.  I have endured a great deal. Making fun of believers is not saintly.  Well, I'm not a saint.  It brings me small joy to laugh at the pious.  Sometimes, it's enough.  

And the innocent get caught in the crossfire, so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeopardBoy said:

And the innocent get caught in the crossfire, so to speak.

I think the innocent will survive my barbed humor.  Real religions have body counts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cuchulain said:

Life often is not perceived as fair.

Christians are commanded to turn the other cheek.  Not that they do, but they are commanded to do so.  When I turn the other cheek, it's taken as an invitation to a screwing.  No more.  If the Godless won't speak up for ourselves, who will speak for us?  Nobody.  We can not be the only ones worried about being fair.  If we let the Godly walk on us, they will.  

The Godly are already running the world -- and running it into the ground.  Does anybody think a few horse laughs at absurdity, are going to bring down the social order?  Please.  A little perspective.  We, the faithless, are not trying to move mountains.  We're just tired of being peed on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

So be it.  They want to get in my face and threaten me with Perdition?  I get to laugh back.  I don't care if it's fair.  

The problem with your reasoning is that you are blaming a group for the actions of individuals, in order to justify mistreatment of the group as a whole. Some mistreat you, so you excuse mistreatment of all. "Some Jews are dishonest businessmen, so all Jews should be punished."  Or perhaps "Israel has blood on its hands, so it's ok to kill a random Jew."

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mererdog said:

The problem with your reasoning is that you are blaming a group for the actions of individuals, in order to justify mistreatment of the group as a whole. Some mistreat you, so you excuse mistreatment of all. "Some Jews are dishonest businessmen, so all Jews should be punished."  Or perhaps "Israel has blood on its hands, so it's ok to kill a random Jew."

You are talking about blood and killing.  I'm talking humor, sarcasm and not taking crap.  Don't you make these distinctions any more?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 11:24 AM, cuchulain said:

I hope you aren't referencing me, but if so could you show where I was?  Because I am not attempting to make fun of believers, though I may be failing as I am not perfect.  I have been pointing out interesting facts relating to the subject of a 6000 year old world, and I understand Pastor Dave's position that dating could very well have been interpreted differently or understood differently.  I really did just think it cool that there is a 9500 year old tree still living :) 

I merely tossed a shoe out. It is up to others to see if it fits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Godly are already running the world -- and running it into the ground.  Does anybody think a few horse laughs at absurdity, are going to bring down the social order?  

It seems to me personally that the fires burn brighter as the world gets more secular not less. Keep playing your fiddle as it burns and then lay the blame at the feet of the Christians and other believers. It's been done before and it'll most likely happen again.

 

Quote

Please.  A little perspective.  We, the faithless, are not trying to move mountains.  We're just tired of being peed on.  

  Honestly, I've been on all sides of the equation and if we form a dichotomy I really only see one of them constantly urinating.

For example on this forum I have seen Dan mocked and ridiculed, at times almost on a daily basis. I can't really with my elephantine memory ever remember him doing the same. Not that it hasn't happened but that it's been so seldom that I can't recall any instances. I've personally debated with him for pages at a time and not once has he ever engaged in ad hominem or ridicule.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, LeopardBoy said:

And the innocent get caught in the crossfire, so to speak.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2017 at 0:25 PM, cuchulain said:

Yeah, I can see how someone might decide to interpret time differently.  I just thought it was interesting as all get out that there is a tree that old still living, and had to share :) 

Yeah, it is very interesting. 9500 years would put it just after the last ice age. Before your post I remember looking at an article about the 10 oldest trees several years ago and a tree called Methuselah was the oldest tree. Methuselah is a 4,848-year-old Great Basin bristlecone pine. Upon looking up Methuselah I noticed that in 2012 they found another one that they say is 5,066 years (germination in 3050 BC)  I find it amazing that YHWH, the god I worship, could create life that could survive that many millennia. :D

On 5/27/2017 at 0:32 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Responding to Pastor Dave:

King James Version

Genesis Chapter One.

 

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

 

"He made the stars also." As an after thought.  Little twinkling things in the firmament.  "To give light upon the Earth."  The entire rest of the Universe.

The Earth took six days.  The rest of the Universe?  "He made the stars also."

I had to read this a couple of times to see what you are getting at. If I get it wrong or miss anything I apologize.

So are you asking why the Bible puts it that way? As if Earth was why the entire universe were created. God created all things for us, at least in my way of seeing things. Does that mean we are the only reason God created the universe. Of course not.

As far as the "to give light upon the Earth" part let me ask you a question or two. Is that not what they do? Of course they do. Is that all that they do? Of course not.

Edited by Pastor Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pastor Dave said:

Yeah, it is very interesting. 9500 years would put it just after the last ice age. Before your post I remember looking at an article about the 10 oldest trees several years ago and a tree called Methuselah was the oldest tree. Methuselah is a 4,848-year-old Great Basin bristlecone pine. Upon looking up Methuselah I noticed that in 2012 they found another one that they say is 5,066 years (germination in 3050 BC)  I find it amazing that YHWH, the god I worship, could create life that could survive that many millennia. :D

I had to read this a couple of times to see what you are getting at. If I get it wrong or miss anything I apologize.

So are you asking why the Bible puts it that way? As if Earth was why the entire universe were created. God created all things for us, at least in my way of seeing things. Does that mean we are the only reason God created the universe. Of course not.

As far as the "to give light upon the Earth" part let me ask you a question or two. Is that not what they do? Of course they do. Is that all that they do? Of course not.

 

The Bible is many things:  Poetry, Metaphysics, Wisdom, etc.  I have no objections.  As science and history?  I have big objections.  Genesis as an alternative to evolution theory?  Alternate Geology?  Alternate Cosmology?

The rest of the world is laughing at American science education.  And rightly so.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stormbringer said:

It seems to me personally that the fires burn brighter as the world gets more secular not less. Keep playing your fiddle as it burns and then lay the blame at the feet of the Christians and other believers. It's been done before and it'll most likely happen again.

 

  Honestly, I've been on all sides of the equation and if we form a dichotomy I really only see one of them constantly urinating.

For example on this forum I have seen Dan mocked and ridiculed, at times almost on a daily basis. I can't really with my elephantine memory ever remember him doing the same. Not that it hasn't happened but that it's been so seldom that I can't recall any instances. I've personally debated with him for pages at a time and not once has he ever engaged in ad hominem or ridicule.

 

You're casting me as Nero?

You don't remember all the times that Dan insisted on defining Atheism?  As the people who believe in nothing?  His observations about "knowin' 'nuthin'" to describe Agnostics?  About science taking more faith than the Bible?  His mocking distortions of Evolution and Cosmology?   Really?  

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You're casting me as Nero?

I like historical references. It was said he would come again ;):D 

My point was that, yes, its on fire but don't be so quick to blame or deflect to "the godly" as you put it. The fiddle part is in comparison to having a "few horse laughs" as things burn.

You can argue that most political figures self identify as Christian or "godly" as you put it but that would be a weak argument.  If we also grant such things we can discuss how countries under the control of atheism fared or their death tolls. It's just not very fair to do so wouldn't you agree?

Quote

You don't remember all the times that Dan insisted on defining Atheism?  As the people who believe in nothing?

So he expressed his opinion of the definition of atheism? This contradicts yours? It doesn't seem very inflammatory to me. I think you and Dan might be using nothing in different contexts with yours being more offensive. I can't speak for him though but I don't really see nothing as insulting. For instance just because you believe in nothing (in regards to "God" and religion) doesn't mean you don't or can't believe in anything. That's just how I see it, not mutually exclusive.  I can understand how it's annoying but I've seen plenty of people express their belief about certain beliefs that ran contrary to others or even the official definition. Don't you yourself define atheism contrary to the accepted definition? So aren't you in fact defining atheism? My point is how is this exactly "attacking beliefs" or people?

Quote

His observations about "knowin' 'nuthin'" to describe Agnostics?

Excuse my bluntness but I fail to see the horror here. I'm not trying to be mean or anything. Please don't read any animosity in my words or misconstrue them. Just trying to discuss things. Technically Agnostic means without knowledge/revelation right? Isn't that technically knowing nothing? It seems like a dad joke to me. Especially compared to the vitriol I have witnessed numerous times towards him and Christianity on this forum. You had one clear example to demonstrate his supposed attacks on others and this was the worst that came to mind?

Quote

 About science taking more faith than the Bible?

I could easily argue this in a debate. Science in of itself for the average person takes faith and reliance upon the word of others. Maybe not all of it but at a certain point yes. The average person has very little knowledge of science and less experience. The two things required for understanding. Are you telling me that some of the claims of science don't require faith? How many times has science claimed things with certainty as fact yet been proven wrong and updated. One of its best features but there have been times people pronounced certain things with absolute confidence only to be declaring things we now know to be false. Were they not doing so on faith and the word of others? I fail to see how this is an "attack on beliefs" or people. I think if you can't admit science takes a certain amount of faith then you're not being very honest with yourself or others.

Quote

His mocking distortions of Evolution and Cosmology?

I wouldn't know how to go about this one. If he is just mocking evolution and cosmology how is he attacking beliefs or people? Are they beliefs to be held sacred? if they are objective facts then what's the offense? 

Quote

Really?

Yes. I would hardly call any of this convincing testimony to his supposed transgressions.

Edited by Stormbringer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now