News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Conviction or Repetition

Started by fencerider, January 07, 2017, 01:14:33 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Baruch

Quote from: Journey_To_Mars on January 11, 2017, 08:05:54 PM
I do like reading the last page first. By the way, your method of reading makes no sense whatsoever, I do not see how that would be beneficial to the reader at all.

You are making an unwarranted assumption .. that I am trying to benefit anyone.  Maybe I am to modest to try to save the world from Lucky Charms cereal.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Journey_To_Mars

Quote from: Baruch on January 11, 2017, 08:10:55 PM
You are making an unwarranted assumption .. that I am trying to benefit anyone.  Maybe I am to modest to try to save the world from Lucky Charms cereal.

What I mean is, how would that be beneficial to you or anyone that would read a book like that?
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." - Voltaire

Maths is a game where you make the rules and play around within them.

Baruch

Quote from: Journey_To_Mars on January 11, 2017, 08:14:03 PM
What I mean is, how would that be beneficial to you or anyone that would read a book like that?

What is the benefit of cheating?  Sometimes the only good part of a book is its conclusion.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Journey_To_Mars

Quote from: Baruch on January 11, 2017, 08:20:55 PM
What is the benefit of cheating?  Sometimes the only good part of a book is its conclusion.

That's true, but it's also sometimes important to know the stuff before the ending, otherwise we wouldn't write the whole book because it would be a waste.
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." - Voltaire

Maths is a game where you make the rules and play around within them.

Mike Cl

Quote from: Baruch on January 11, 2017, 07:43:21 PM
Whoever you think George Washington was ... is just a fiction in your head.  My head holds a different fiction of him.  Only Plato knows the Eternal Forms ... thru his magical Greek organ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp61Yrj5lTA
That should read 'cereal killer'. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Blackleaf

Quote from: Baruch on January 11, 2017, 07:50:07 PM
Yes, and the US statutory code is perfectly consistent too.  The Bible is an anthology of Jewish literature.  Do you try to go read Elie Wiesel's "Night" for legal guidance?  Or are you just indifferent to Jewish literature ... I don't mind if you are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_(book)

The US statutory code and Wiesel's "Night" were not claimed to be divinely inspired works written for the purpose of teaching people about the one, true, unchanging god. The inconsistencies of the Bible are evidence that the writers were making stuff up, that their concepts of God evolved over time to suit their changing standards, and cast serious doubt on its authority to teach on the nature of God. The Bible is already known to be historically false and morally abhorrent. If it can't even give a consistent image of God, what personal use is there for the Bible? The pages don't even make good toilet paper.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville--

Baruch

#51
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 11, 2017, 11:00:18 PM
The US statutory code and Wiesel's "Night" were not claimed to be divinely inspired works written for the purpose of teaching people about the one, true, unchanging god. The inconsistencies of the Bible are evidence that the writers were making stuff up, that their concepts of God evolved over time to suit their changing standards, and cast serious doubt on its authority to teach on the nature of God. The Bible is already known to be historically false and morally abhorrent. If it can't even give a consistent image of God, what personal use is there for the Bible? The pages don't even make good toilet paper.

Well it is OK of course, to hate clergy, laity and church/synagogue/mosque.  But I wouldn't be surprised if "Night" wasn't taught in some synagogues.  BTW - most synagogues wouldn't teach the Bible as anything but traditional, not as divinely inspired.  Liturgy is dominant in synagogue.  Orthodox synagogues would of course claim the Tanakh as divinely inspired, but again liturgy is dominant.  In the case of Islam, since they don't count the Bible as a predecessor (though it is) ... the Quran/Hadith evolved rather quickly over about 100 years ... though they also deny (being orthodox) that it evolved at all.  Islam was the first Abrahamic religion to move to bibliolatry.  It is well known, except to the ignorant, that Judaism evolved over many centuries, and so has Christianity.  Also the Church traditionally doesn't take the Bible as its foundation, that is a recent Protestant invention of only 500 years ago (they borrowed it from Islam).  Orthodox Christianity takes its traditions as authoritative, same as Judaism.

Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds to paraphrase Oscar Wilde.  A consistent painting would be a single color, with no figures.  If it was also SJW neutral, it would have to be all black as well.  MRA would be all white ;-)  Your real beef is hatred of any authority?  I despise authority too ... and I don't take any book as scripture.  Like Pops says ... real religion is having a personal encounter with G-d ala Jacob, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad.  People actually do that all the time, the fictional biographies are illustrative, if confusing.  Encountering G-d is no fun, but can be cathartic, as it was for Pops.  Of course catharsis is woo, just as is everything else about ape men.

History and biography are false too, not just fairy tales.  Why do you accept official biographers and official historians and official journalists as authoritative?  You find things morally abhorrent ... well I do too sometimes ... but then I remember that I am a naked ape, not a child of G-d.  Just another zoo animal, not as attractive as an ibex.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Mike Cl

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2017, 06:43:51 AM
Well it is OK of course, to hate clergy, laity and church/synagogue/mosque. 

Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds to paraphrase Oscar Wilde.  A consistent painting would be a single color, with no figures. 

Like Pops says ... real religion is having a personal encounter with G-d ala Jacob, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad.  People actually do that all the time, the fictional biographies are illustrative, if confusing.  Encountering G-d is no fun, but can be cathartic, as it was for Pops.  Of course catharsis is woo, just as is everything else about ape men.

History and biography are false too, not just fairy tales.  Why do you accept official biographers and official historians and official journalists as authoritative? 
4 things, Baruch.............................

---------------------I don't hate either clergy, laity or church.  I hate---despise--the hierarchy that grows up around religious precepts.  The hierarchy is people with real life people, of course.  But take away that rigid hierarchy and the death and destruction surrounding organized religion would dissipate; at least for the most part. There can be good (and bad) clergy; and good and bad lay people--but that should be determined on an individual basis.  The church I see as only the physical meeting place and is what it is--a building.  For the most part, individual spiritual seeking is not good or bad, but is simply another way to try and explore not only the physical world, but our emotional selves.  It will very seldom lead to violence; but if it did, it would be fairly easy to control.  Throw a hierarchy into the mix and it will eventually lead to death and destruction as the natural result of its growth. 

------I give no authority to Oscar Wilde, and I find consistency to be the cornerstone of logical and rational thought and behavior.  The trick, of course, is to realize that being consistent can be good or bad.  One has to find out what works for oneself and then repeat it.  I find finding a consistent routine helpful in my personal life.  I don't mind being in a 'rut'.  In my past professional life it was all about being consistent--my students knew what to expect from me and therefore had no problems with my classroom rules--because I was consistent in enforcing those rules.  For me, I use my consistent routine as a base that frees my mind for other things rather than reinventing the wheel each day.  And I also find that I can then much more easily change that routine.  Being consistent does not mean being blind.  It simply gives one a base to operate from.  A consistent painting would not be a single color; that would be constant.  Consistent and constant are not the same--at least for me.  Constant is done all the time the very same way.  A constant painting would be one color.  A consistent painting would be one in which the painter followed a certain set of precepts or steps or ideas.  A Monet type painting would be consistent with the methods Monet used, not a single color.

--------------A personal encounter with god.  Since god is a fiction, I suppose an actual encounter with that god would be an episode of mental illness.  Self delusion at best.  Catharsis may be the result, and if so, that would be fortunate for that individual.  But that is all it is--a personal reaction to a psychotic episode.  And I would not label that 'woo' or magic; only that our minds do things we do not understand--some good and some bad.   (and yes, those are just labels, for what is good and bad is problematic and individual)   

------History and biography is not false; or it does not necessarily follow that they are.  What all history and biography is is biased.  As hard as a historian may try and follow the facts, he/she cannot help but insert their own bias into that work.  But, since we understand that, we can factor our, or try to, that bias.  No historical researcher basis their work on just one source.  The diligent researcher evaluates each source to determine what biases are shown and then, in his/her final product blends those together into his own work.  That's why history books come with bibliographies.
Yes, some histories are intentionally false.  But those are fairly easy to detect.  Pretty much the same for a biography.  Just because the person writes about themselves does not mean the selected memories are correct or not invented.  That's the historians job--figure out what is most likely correct and what is not.  So, do I give historians 'authority'?  Yes, in that I give them credit for the fact they researched a topic and is much more familiar with a certain topic or event.  But that recognition is not blind--but consistent with good historical research methods.

It seems to me Baruch that your own personal psychotic event  leads you to believe there is a god.  You have met him/her/it.  I would suggest that that is only valid for you, and you alone.  Yet you use that psychotic event as something that was physically real--and use that as a club to beat the rest of over the head with--after all we are just naked apes so what could we possibly understand??!!  I get a sense of smugness coming from you in that you know the reality of it all; and we poor naked apes (yes, I know you include yourself in that group) just can not possibly (or even refuse to try and see) see or comprehend.  You know, Baruch, that I deeply admire your intellectual insight and the way you can get to the heart of the matter quickly.  I like and appreciate your sense of humor.  But in this area I am befuddled by your thinking.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Blackleaf

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2017, 06:43:51 AM
Well it is OK of course, to hate clergy, laity and church/synagogue/mosque.  But I wouldn't be surprised if "Night" wasn't taught in some synagogues.  BTW - most synagogues wouldn't teach the Bible as anything but traditional, not as divinely inspired.  Liturgy is dominant in synagogue.  Orthodox synagogues would of course claim the Tanakh as divinely inspired, but again liturgy is dominant.  In the case of Islam, since they don't count the Bible as a predecessor (though it is) ... the Quran/Hadith evolved rather quickly over about 100 years ... though they also deny (being orthodox) that it evolved at all.  Islam was the first Abrahamic religion to move to bibliolatry.  It is well known, except to the ignorant, that Judaism evolved over many centuries, and so has Christianity.  Also the Church traditionally doesn't take the Bible as its foundation, that is a recent Protestant invention of only 500 years ago (they borrowed it from Islam).  Orthodox Christianity takes its traditions as authoritative, same as Judaism.

Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds to paraphrase Oscar Wilde.  A consistent painting would be a single color, with no figures.  If it was also SJW neutral, it would have to be all black as well.  MRA would be all white ;-)  Your real beef is hatred of any authority?  I despise authority too ... and I don't take any book as scripture.  Like Pops says ... real religion is having a personal encounter with G-d ala Jacob, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad.  People actually do that all the time, the fictional biographies are illustrative, if confusing.  Encountering G-d is no fun, but can be cathartic, as it was for Pops.  Of course catharsis is woo, just as is everything else about ape men.

History and biography are false too, not just fairy tales.  Why do you accept official biographers and official historians and official journalists as authoritative?  You find things morally abhorrent ... well I do too sometimes ... but then I remember that I am a naked ape, not a child of G-d.  Just another zoo animal, not as attractive as an ibex.

You didn't answer my question. What personal use does the Bible have if it cannot teach us about the nature of God? Or do you think that G-d has multiple personality disorder?

I don't hate authority. I do hate the Christian religions and Islam because they try to keep society stuck in the dark ages in terms of morality, technological and medical development, and science. They promote hate against out-groups by spreading false narratives, such as Hitler being an atheist or homosexuals being child molesters.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville--

Baruch

Quote from: Blackleaf on January 12, 2017, 11:12:25 AM
You didn't answer my question. What personal use does the Bible have if it cannot teach us about the nature of God? Or do you think that G-d has multiple personality disorder?

I don't hate authority. I do hate the Christian religions and Islam because they try to keep society stuck in the dark ages in terms of morality, technological and medical development, and science. They promote hate against out-groups by spreading false narratives, such as Hitler being an atheist or homosexuals being child molesters.

So you are an authoritarian?  I wouldn't have thought so.  Yes, religion can be non-Progressive ... but Marxism will take care of that, or some other more libertarian techno-utopia.  I try not to be a moralist, or I would condemn everyone ;-(

The Bible only teaches some people, the nature of G-d, not everyone.  Some people at least think, they have a personal encounter with a god in a book.  I don't agree with that either.  Most theists have incompetent theology ... one form being bibliolatry.  And no, I won't describe the Bible as some SJW tract.  Nietzsche thought that the Bible was very much a "slave ideology" aka SJW book ... but he might be wrong about that.  In his time, there was a lot of Social Gospel going on vis the poor ... the the secular version was called Socialism.  Some were Christian Socialists, others were Democratic Socialist (aka secular).  He despised all of that, because it held down the creative ubermenschen.

Personally, I am not a strict monotheist ... and that certainly comes up in my past use of Multiple Personality disorder to describe G-d.  The Bible does reflect my POV fairly well, but it is just a book.  The clincher is my observation of myself and other people.  People are infinitely more important than any book, in terms of knowing human reality ... though I am a book lover.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Unbeliever

God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Journey_To_Mars

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2017, 12:47:49 PM
So you are an authoritarian?  I wouldn't have thought so.  Yes, religion can be non-Progressive ... but Marxism will take care of that, or some other more libertarian techno-utopia.  I try not to be a moralist, or I would condemn everyone ;-(

We need some bourgeoisie here, that would be fun.
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." - Voltaire

Maths is a game where you make the rules and play around within them.

Baruch

Quote from: Unbeliever on January 12, 2017, 04:25:41 PM


ummm...because it's there?  :headscratch:

Only if it is a diary about climbing a mountain ;-)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Journey_To_Mars on January 12, 2017, 07:26:27 PM
We need some bourgeoisie here, that would be fun.

Middle class women, as in Madame Bovary ... are the basis for bourgeoisie.  Not many of those here.  Bourgeoisie men are simply men under the thumb of a bourgeoisie wife.  Been there, done that.  Mostly heretics and revolutionaries here.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

fencerider

windershins did you actually sit down to look at the evidence of the Christian god and find it to be credible? you are welcome to share your reasoning even though it isnt part of the original question.

I am not even close to an expert on this subject, but I was told by an Egyptian national that the god of the Bible and the god of the Quran are not the same entity. He did not offer an explanation
"Do you believe in god?", is not a proper English sentence. Unless you believe that, "Do you believe in apple?", is a proper English sentence.