A Baltimore man stabbed his teenage son because he wouldn’t take off his hat at church.
They got into an argument and “the father went to a car and got a knife. He stabbed his son in the left buttock and fled.”
And Christians are afraid of atheists?
(via)
I’m confused; I thought it was only choirboys who had to worry about getting poked in the ass for the greater glory of god ?
My list of fears in order of scariness:
1) Twilight Fangirls
2) Anyone who lives in the south
3) Christians
Ok, guys,
I have an honest question. And, granted I haven’t been around here for that long. But, what’s up with always presenting people of faith, and Christianity in the worse possible light? This is how it feels to me anyway when I read some of these deconversion type blogs.
Sure there are bad apples, and nut jobs in every barrel. But, couldn’t the same be said about some atheists as well, and some cultures where philosophical materialism seems to be the base, such as the former Soviet Union, and communist China.
What’s wrong with focusing on some of the positive things about the church as well, and on people of faith who are really walkin the talk???
Just to share an example, has anyone seen the film, “Amazing Grace,” the story of Wilberforce, and Newton, how the Christian faith, and witness of these two men was so very instrumental in ending the slave trade in Great Britain?
So, am I making sense here?? :)
That sucks. Wasn’t me, I promise.
And no, I’m not scared of you. It’s actually just the opposite with what I’ve found. I can’t get many atheists to have a conversation with me. Whether they’re afraid I’m going to try to convert them (I never try) or they’re afraid they’ll catch on to my “delusion” (surely a true atheist wouldn’t) – either way, they’re afraid.
Maybe someone can help disprove that.
But I love talking to atheists if I get the chance. Talk about expanding the brain, talking to an INTELLIGENT, ARTICULATE, KIND atheist will do that to you. Love it!
GRACE, good question.
I’ve been around here for a while. I’ve had 2 fantastic conversations start from here and that’s it. I have a great atheist friend in Colorado now (I’m in Texas).
Other than that, you’re only going to get Christians in the worst light possible. It’s more fun that way. I’ve asked repeatedly to have an atheist email me and let’s start a conversation. I TRULY want to hear their mind, heart, and logic. I NEVER try to convert someone. I’m not supposed to. I’ve even offered to fly to their location, buy a steak dinner, and hang out and just talk. All I EVER do is ask questions. But I don’t get answers.
I’d love to say I’m being sarcastic or exaggerating, but I’m not.
Whatever you do, don’t be one of those “nut jobs.” If you are, they’ll talk about you. If you’re nice, intelligent, articulate, and thoughtful towards what they have to say, they’ll ignore you altogether. You’re no fun. Sorry to spill it to you.
Stephen Webb,
I don’t mind talking to Christians, generally. However, when people start talking matters of faith, logic and reason flies out the window. Check out the Merriam-Webster definition of “faith.” It includes the statement, “firm belief in something for which there is no proof.”
You might as well be trying to convince me of the details of the landscape of Coruscant or Tatooine. It is fiction, and it’s really kind of disturbing to talk to someone who has so much invested in believing something for which there is no solid evidence, and which is so squirrely that when people try to apply logic, the goalposts keep moving.
It’s the same reason that I don’t talk to conspiracy theorists or people who believe they’ve been abducted by aliens. I’m afraid that anything I say will only exacerbate their delusions.
All that being said, I also don’t try to deconvert them, either. If the topic ever comes up, I change the subject or excuse myself from their company. Their delusions are not my business.
Besides, Grace – I’m sure we are all clever enough to know that there are Good People out there who are also professing Christians. I was one, and I still have friends from my former church who do great things in the community. But that’s not really the point of this blog, right?
It’s kind of like how people from the South aren’t rednecks, but those people never make it to the nightly news when there’s a big story to be reported. It’s more fun to highlight the guy with no front teeth and a mullet or the 300 lb. woman wearing no undergarments with a patch over one eye…
Forgive me if I misspeak, all you regulars, I’m new! :)
I mean’t to say ALL people from the South aren’t rednecks… hehe..
As I said to this story on Friendly Atheist…
I wonder if the son turned the other cheek.
@Stephen Webb
Feel free to email me at s0ck666 at gmail dot com if you want a conversation. I, too, enjoy having discussions with religious folk.
I’ll warn you, though. My conversations do have limitations. :P
For one, I prefer to talk to people about religion who aren’t 100% blind to every other belief. You can believe whatever you want, but if all you ever say is “nope, that’s not right” when it comes to MY beliefs, when we’re discussing something that you CANNOT prove one way or the other, then the conversation will be very short.
I seek understanding. I’ve never been religious, and right now my whole understanding of why people chose to believe in god is because “man, that’d sure be swell”. And I agree. From what I’ve read, it really would be nice to be in Heaven (not so much everything else, I don’t see the overall good in anything tied to religion), but no matter how nice it would be, that doesn’t make it so.
The problem I have with talking to true believers is that I wind up feeling like the scorcerer’s apprentice. So I’ve learned it’s better to completely avoid such discussions. Besides, we really have no basis for communication. It always seems to me sort of like a life-or-death important discussion of what kind of shoes the flying spaghetti monster wears. So you *know* it’s Hush Puppies, and you have ‘proof’ from your holy scriptures? What can I say?
Churchil famously defined a fanatic as someone who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.
Was he on some sort of medication perhaps? Maybe medicinal marijuana?
But it says he went back to the car to get knife, so it must be premeditated. He had time between walking to the car, opening the door, finding the knife, walking back to his son, to think “Hmmm. This might not be such a great idea.” He must have been a Calvinist, and Calvin’s god made him do it.
Thanks Daniel,
Well, I think there are people of faith, and atheists doing great, humanitarian things. That’s for sure. Some atheists could put so-called Christian believers to total shame. But, here’s one difference that I honestly can see.
I think that humanitarianism, feeling that human beings are of priceless, intrinsic worth no matter what, can’t actually come from atheism alone as a philosophical base. I think it comes inspite of it, from somewhere else.
On the other hand, a true relationship with God in Christ, not simply dead religion, can cause murderers, and slave traders like John Newton to a radically new life, even working against what seemed formerly profitable, and in their best interest.
Right now our church is exploring how we can all live more sustainably, supporting the environment, and our local economy. We’re thinking of starting a growers market, some of us raising, and also selling fresh produce. The plan would be to donate part of the surplus to local food banks to help the hungry.
Another project that we’re supporting is helping an orphanage in Africa for children with AIDS. A team from my church has just left to go down there to explore the possibility of starting a fish farm in order to provide a protein rich source of food for the local people, and increased job training opportunites for the young people at the children’s home.
We’re just a small church, but very globally and mission oriented. There is also concern to provide support to a children’s home in Brazil working with street kids who have become addicted to drugs.
I’m really excited to be a part of this faith community, and think that we’re doing some good things together. Of course, this doesn’t mean that we’re perfect, and that there are never issues, and problems to be worked out either. . It seems to me that growing together in community, and in God is a real process. :)
Thats me. You see…”if your eye be single”…what does this mean? Then you will understand.
Sorry if it sounds nuts…but I’m rather content to know what He knows, to no longer wander in the desert of human reasoning, to agree with the Divine.
A divided mind…as opposed to the One, whole (pure, innocent) mind of Christ for…He is of too pure beauty to behold iniquity” Hab 1:13
No such thing as morality…its a product of fallen man and was not in the original matrix.
JC
Important Notice:
DUE TO THE RISING COST OF ELECTRICITY, GAS AND OIL,
RECENT BUDGET CUTS, AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE “SO-CALLED STIMULUS BILL”,
THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL HAS BEEN TURNED OFF.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE.
Sincerely,
The Government
Maryland is really not part of the south. This is more of the problem with America’s most religious ethnic group, blacks.
http://www.infidelguy.com/article55.html
Pingback: Chaz’s Lifestream » Blog Archive » Daily Digest for 2009-03-01
Gaaaahhhhh!
Stephen Webb and Grace do yet another drive-by hit-and-run!
Stephen Webb gets really nasty. He doesn’t like being challenged.
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/02/cyclical-time-and-the-historical-jesus/#comment-19024
Underneath Grace’s “:)” are coming to the wrong site for whining:
muddled thinking based on assumptions of what atheism is and isn’t, upon which are based ridiculous, insulting, negating assumptions about human worth:
and, of course, the hit-and-run drive-bys when it’s someone else’s turn to ask her questions and get answers.
Hey, guys,
I didn’t do a “hit, and run” driveby. This was my first chance to get back to the computer, and spend more time since yesterday. I’ll try to respond. What does happens sometimes is I can actually lose track of the threads, and all the responses.
But, I’m not deliberately wanting to be disrespectful, or brush people off at all.
Claidheamh Mor, and Wintermute, apart from feeling that all humans have instrinsic value, and worth apart from value to the group, or performance, how can people be motivated to see everyone as part of the in group? Why shouldn’t people simply look to their own interest, or the interests of their clan, rather than to be truly altruistic.
And, if this life is all we have, and there’s no justice after death, what prevents someone from just as easily thinking, “I’m going to get mine no matter what.” Who cares about anyone else?
Ok, if anything I”ve said seems offensive, tell me about it, and I’ll do my best to hear you out, and try to understand.
I want to add that I really do feel badly that so many here do have such a low opinion of the Christian faith, and of Christians in general. The church has screwed up pretty badly, and let alot of good people down.
What’s ToE, Question? Off to bed for now. See you in the morning.
Thanks, Question,
It may be that the theory of evolution can account for some morality. I mean I agree we certainly share some traits, and behavoirs with non-human primates.
But, I can’t think evolution alone can account for all morality. What can account for agage, self-less love, altruism that gives no survival benefit at all? To use an example that I’ve read,
What compels someone who can hardly swim, and who might die in the attempt to jump into a river to rescue a total stranger, or even an enemy?
What about the human motivation to perform small acts of conscience that no one else even knows about?
@Grace:
Evolution accounts for moral and altruistic behaviour in a couple of ways.
Moral behaviours tend to be pro-survival-of-the-species. For example: We tend to regard suicide as somewhere between amoral and immoral, but rarely moral.
Yet we all praise the soldiers who die so that a society can pursue its two-car-garge, two-point-four kids, and dog. We laud firepersons who die futilely trying to rescue old ladies who were probably corpses before the rescue effort began. Why? Because defending the tribe is a pro-survival behaviour.
Most real altruistic behaviour is behaviour that costs little or nothing to the individual. But there isn’t a lot of it about. If we consider tossing change to a street kid: Am I doing it to improve that kid’s odds of survival? No. I’m most likely doing it to assuage my own guilt. Not altruistic behaviour then.
But where does the guilt, the awareness, come from? From being able to think beyond my self and my immediate needs, being able to put myself in that kid’s shoes, and think “There but for the grace of chance go I.” And that has a strong evolutionary component–it’s part of the same mechanism that engages in those soldiers and those fire fighters.
Churches practice a lot of charity. They also engage a lot of guilt. It’s one of the things I feel churches do very well.
But we’re increasingly realizing as societies that we can take generous and altruistic action without religious or theistic motivation.
Thanks for your responses, guys.
Pingback: Why Reformed Bloggers Wear Me Out | Fallen and Flawed
I heard about a man who stabbed his wife because she lacked the christian christmas spirit. Wish I could find the article…
That was a bit below the belt …
Well….choirboys and altar boys.
“All I EVER do is ask questions. But I don’t get answers.”
Err no all you have done is ask questions and then ignore the replies. Maybe being honest would be a good starting point.
“All I EVER do is ask questions. But I don’t get answers.”
Show three.
Stephen Webb:
Speak, oh Great White Wonder.
Thou shalt not do drive-by hit-and-run blogs, but shalt thou read the responses to thy questions, and never again speak the falsehood (“lie”) of asking, yet never having received answers.
I think actually you nailed it pretty early; it has to do with the process of de-converting. It’s a deeply personal and existential inversion, changing your basic beliefs like that. Powerful (negative, usually) emotions get attached to that which was previously believed, and now believed by the person to be a lie. It’s much like if you were married to someone for a couple of decades and one day you found they were lying about something essential about their past; I think that might approach the level of emotional betrayal.
There are also other things going on. In American society, certainly, as well as others, people like those made fun of here are taken seriously, and do have an influence over others (even at high levels of government, cultural development, and social policy), and so their beliefs being silly is not a benign curiosity to be studied at leisure. It is, rather, a direct threat to the things that many secular people value, such as evidence-based decision making. Since we are sort of stuck in this society with people who believe these things, confronting those beliefs and the things that flow from them becomes a practical necessity.
Personally in many ways I’ve been lucky, in that I never have been a Christian and so I don’t have the same emotional orientation towards the religion that many who were once tend to. On one level I “get” it (I can explain it, write about it), but on another it does make me feel uncomfortable, because it is not a reaction I personally experience often. I don’t like the notion of gratuitous or frivolous shots being taken on penny-ante matters, such as what a person believes will await them in the afterlife. To paraphrase Jefferson, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg, and so I can’t really understand on a deep personal level why people who don’t believe give a damn about it.
If you have stories of Christians who have made a positive difference outside of telling people about Jebus, feel free to send them in. I do tend to focus on negatives, so if there are positives I’m missing feel free to let me know about them.
Grace, you could, y’know, get your own blog and do just what you’re chastising Daniel for not doing. His blog, his business.
Grace: “Sure there are bad apples, and nut jobs in every barrel. But, couldn’t the same be said about some atheists as well…..”
Yes. A noteworthy difference between Xians and atheists, however, is that the latter don’t claim to have invisible, conscious beings residing inside them, guiding them to live according to a “Godly” standard set-up for them by a particular religious philosophy. The former do. Personally, I think the evailable evidence says “no”—that is, that no one is being guided by any invisible, conscious, “Divine” beings.
Moreover, part of that evidence is the fact that the Xian will maintain such things as they “aren’t perfect”, and that they “fall short” of their “God’s Glory”, etc. Well, to me, this is simply their admission that there is nothing “Supernatural” going on. These people are not “Enlightened”; nor are they “Blessed”; nor are they “Saved”. They simply *believe* they are.
Of course it could be said; and it often is. Just ask any evangelist what he was like before he was “saved”, and you’ll hear such a story, and I don’t think Mr Florian has any desire to strop them from telling such stories. Is there any reason why they shouldn’t be balanced by stories of bad Christians, here? Especially as it’s not uncommon for Christians to claim that it’s impossible for atheists to have any moral compass, and that they only pretend they don’t believe in God so they can rape and murder without consequences?
Christians ask to be held up to a higher moral standard; should they get a free pass when they fail to live up to it?
And in the USSR and the PRC, philosophical materialism may “seem to be” the base, but it doesn’t take much digging to notice that that’s really a cover for enforced fanatical worship of the state and its leaders. Stalinism and Maoism were religions every bit as much as they were economic methodologies. That people did evil in the name of a religion that pretended not to be a religion is no indictment of atheism.
Isn’t it equally one-sided of the documentarians to only show the good side of Christianity? Did they mention how the Southern Baptists split off from the American Baptists because they believed that slavery was a moral good, approved of in the Bible?
Equally, at my wife’s church, it’s not uncommon for people to tell stories of how awful atheists are, or what terrible people they were, before they found Jesus. Should we, in the name of balance, require them to also tell of how Amnesty International was founded by atheists?
Why is it OK for one group of people to tell one side of the story, but not for another group to tell the other? You, as an individual, can choose to consume media from both sides, thus keeping a balanced view, right?
Grace – it’s unreasonablefaith.com. That’s what the blog is about. If you don’t like the tone of it why not try a different blog? The last thing I would want to see is “positive things about the church” lol… A church is nothing more than organized brain washing.
This is an overstatement of the facts. One’s expections are not often over-turned.
NO.
Scroll up, up… up to the sky-god, to the top of the page, to the title of the website.
It’s called “Unreasonable Faith”.
Duh!
I live in the South.
Boo! :)
You’re missing out on a LOT of fun… those of us in the South who are not Christians have some great stories to tell.
Hey! I live in the South. Be careful with those generalizations–someone could get hurt.
I live in the South, too! It is fun to wear my “Atheist” sweatshirt around! I should take a picture of some of the looks I get . . .
I hardly think I am scary–definitely less scary than Christians, surely! :)
Having been born and raised in the South I tend to agree….
Yeah, it’s a gross generalization, but “gross” is a word I frequently associate with my former stomping ground.
Sorry guys, I was just crackin’ a joke. I have friends from the south as well :)
That seems like a strange reaction from the atheists you’ve met. I don’t think it would be fear of any sort that keeps them from holding a conversation with you, but rather a dislike of always being questioned by Christians who won’t listen openly to the answers. That happens a lot. The minute someone who is deeply religious finds out that you aren’t a believer, they tend to start heckling you about why. It is getting fed up rather than getting scared that prevents atheists from having deep theological or scientific discussion with religious people.
Apart from that, I don’t think atheists have a problem talking to believers. Every atheist I know has friends from many different religions, myself included. I just talk with them about other stuff and do the sorts of things I would do with my atheist friends with them. Naturally I won’t be hanging out with them at church or anything, but I can still enjoy their company elsewhere. I don’t avoid talking about religion with them, but I do avoid seriously debating it or having any sort of conversation with them that would seem like me “pushing” atheism.
I personally am always up for a conversation about religion with a religious person so long as they are able to remain civil and actually seem to want to listen to me, not just reject what I’m saying and attempt to impose their beliefs upon me. When I notice the conversation getting out of hand (as it so often does, because neither side is able to convince the other for the most part) it just isn’t worth it anymore.
Jabster, he’s just lying for Jesus–how dare you persecute him!
Indeed. You asked questions in the Ted Haggard blog, ending with, “I’m just curious. Really.”
Apparently you weren’t curious enough to go look at the answers, or answer the questions asked of you.
Happened in some other blog page too. (Spanking?)
Jabster’s right about the dishonesty of your hit-and-run. If you’re missing some respect, you’ve failed to earn it.
NO.
You don’t go back and read the answers.
Let alone respond to them.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Or so I’m told. :)
Daniel…
Stories of Christians making a positive diffference?? Hmm…you could start with the numerous christian based charities that feed, clothe and house the forgotten and cast away’s of society both here and abroad. You know, those “throw away people”?
Then, you could learn about the efforts of the International Justice Mission passionately engaged in the abolition of child sex trafficking and slavery throughout the world often at great risk of personal safety. Then you could talk to some of these children, listen to their stories now.
Then you could investigate the agricultural and clean water resource efforts throughout the African continent that persists despite the onset of war and famine.
Then you could see that He (the hound of heaven) has pursued you (your heart) all over creation for years now, even here. But as usual, Herod (the religious king of Pride) attempted to thwart your coming forth in Him through the dead ways of religion and “church” wherein you see the hypocrisy and futility of religion and naturally and wisely rejected it. But there is so much more to this Christ that you currently despise and associate with the deadness of “religion”.
Love is everywhere…in Him we live and move and have our very being.
JC
Christians ask to be held up to a higher moral standard; should they get a free pass when they fail to live up to it?
This is a crucial point. I guess for me it is more that pointing out the flaws and hypocrisies of others shouldn’t be quite so personally entertaining.
Part of it is also sociological: there is much that proceeds from the institution of Christianity that (rightly) inspires disgust, mockery, disdain, fervent opposition. However, to joyfully take that role means immediately leaping into a stereotype. Somehow, it should be possible to oppose these things without coming off as the jackass who screams “Freebird!” at the organist during the performance of a Bach canon.
Oh very good. Ha!
I live in the South!
In fact I live in Texas. And I’m happy to report that we have amazing art, architecture, and science here. We have plenty of non-believers here. We have the fourth largest city in the nation with plenty of communities from cultures from all over the world. My best friend in junior high was Indian (from India). About 45% of our population voted for Obama.
It’s not fair to stereotype us! :(
Hey…I live in the South too…not that anybody actually cares…but I do!!
Speaking in generalities, and I have lived all over this wonderful country, the people in the south are (generally speaking) friendlier, more hospitable, accomodating. But there are nice people all over, believers and non-believers.
… and yet again Webb doesn’t reply.
Maybe he still hasn’t got other the post where he claimed “I just owned you” for some reason or another.
I think there are about eight to ten of them, unread and unanswered, on the Ted Haggard forum.
Maybe Jesus Juice.
He drove a compact car.
The car was too small to carry around a rod in it, so it became a case of “spare the knife and spoil the child”.
If he’d been less sparing with the knife, it’s the child’s corpse that would have been spoiled.
I’m serious with this question. He clearly didn’t do it out of religious motivation, because if he had done so then rather than fleeing, he would have just strolled on into church like ‘wow I just did a great deed.’ I think the guy must have been on something.
I am fairly certain that if he was on some substance, it would be mentioned in the actual article on it. Assuming that it’s not, I imagine that it was just a crime of passion, a man so angry at two things;
1: Son not respecting God
2: Son not respecting Father
It was likely a culmination of many things in the past, too. Son was probably a dick, had bad grades, or was regularly upsetting father. So, the old man got ticked, and acted without real rational thought.
The violence probably had nothing to do with religion, it’s just that that day, daddy blew his lid and the anger boiled over due to a trivial thing.
MIND YOU! That’s all speculation.
How’ bout he just be an abusive, anger-management-deficient dud unfit to be a parent.
Heard of those?
You’re sure it wasn’t a relgious motive but think it could of been ‘medicinal marijuana’ — you came to this conclusion how exactly?
I love those kinds of projects. I wish churches would focus more on them instead of trying to preach to people. I have no practical problem with liberal churches that focus on really helping people. I don’t see the need for religion to be involved, but if it helps inspire some people to do good, then I think that’s great.
Grace,
I wish, when I was a believer, that the churches I was part of was more like yours. My time would have been spent more constructively.
Could that somewhere else be the evolutionary process? Although this is an open question in the field (as far as I know), Darwin himself speculated that altruism was due to group selection. I’m confounded as to why someone would conclusively know that morality is not emergent.
Also, many of us atheists do not believe that atheism is a system so do not believe that morality can come ‘from atheism’.
Yeah, you’re right. Atheism is not a philosophical base, but a single opinion on a single issue, and you can’t use that as a basis for concluding that people have worth. On the other hand, if you start with the related proposition that this is the only life we get, and there’s no justice after death, then that can easily lead to the necessity of treating people fairly and with decency.
However, at its essence, morality is unrelated to atheism (except in that atheists tend to have thought about their moral standards more, rather than relying on the authority of a holy book). The specific moral standards may come from anywhere, but that is less interesting than the question of the drive to have morals in the first place.
The standard human moral structure is, at its base, very similar to that seen in the great apes: Help those that are weaker than you, aid the ingroup at the expense of the outgroup (the challenge right now is to make people see all humans as part of their ingroup), punish those who take what they don’t deserve, obey those above you in the hierarchy so long as they’re able to defend and lead the group; and similar moral codes are seen in other social animals, such as dogs.
These moral imperatives helped us to survive when we were in small hunter-gatherer bands, and so were selected for. Tribes that didn’t have these traits died out very quickly. Therefore, all modern humans (except for the occasional psychopath) have this basic moral structure ingrained in their psyche.
Ants and other eusocial insects have a very different moral code (though it may be stretching the term somewhat to apply it to them) that stresses working for the benefit of the hive, even at the cost of your own life. Were they to become sentient, they would hold up martyrdom for the queen as the highest moral imperative, and no doubt claim that this proves there’s an ant god who is the source of this morality.
I agree with Question-I-thority.
Atheism a “system” or a “philosophical base”? *snort*
The “a-” in “atheism” means “no” or “without”. Without theism, get it? (Greek “theo” root word for god or deity, which I’m guessing is the Latin form of the Greek word.) Theism is the system!
Complete projection. It is indeed what you think, but that is all, nothing else.
Morality is a myth. It is the residual, latent result of our eating (living from) the tree of the knowledge of good & evil as opposed the the tree of life (Christ within). For by the law (OT good & evil) is the knowledge of sin. Christ does away with this old paradigm…hence “(now) eat of my flesh, drink of my blood”…as opposed to eating of the fruit of the tree of independence which only brings death, separation from Him.
We were never intended to live out of the law but from our innocence, purity in Him. We have darkened minds in need of renewal, washing in truth, in innocence. This is why there is no duality in the spirit, no potential for both good & evil, only good.
Morality is a “religious” issue, not a spiritual matter.
Altruism is Christlikeness, selflessness, putting others ahead of our own needs, wants. Love in action, love is a verb.
Jesus and religion dont mix…just read the gospels, they were always at odds with Him.
“Morality is a myth. It is the residual, latent result of our eating (living from) the tree of the knowledge of good & evil as opposed the the tree of life (Christ within).” (John C)
Is that really you talking John, or are you quoting someone else with whom you disagree? Because that just sounds a little nuts, which is why I can tell it is very Gnostic and not orthodox at all.
“No such thing as morality…its a product of fallen man and was not in the original matrix.”
Prove it.
John C,
What does whether there was morality in the original Matrix movie have to with anything? But this is the problem, your God made man without morality and then said “If you eat that fruit that will give you morality, I’ll kill you.” Then the devil came along and convinced man to seize morality. So, when properly analyzed, your God is evil, and the devil apparently was good. Right? So, to disregard this obvious conclusion, you assert that morality is really immoral so that God can become good once more and the devil evil once again. Right?
“Sorry if it sounds nuts…but I’m rather content to know what He knows, to no longer wander in the desert of human reasoning, to agree with the Divine.” (John C)
Then sell everything you have and give ALL your money to the poor (Luke 18:22) [or to me]. Otherwise, if not willing to go that far in not thinking at all, you still have to use your brain to determine what is right and wrong.
No, you let Christ live His life through you, its His life anyway…we died, went to the cross, were crucified in Christ…it is no longer I that lives, but Christ lives in (and thru) me. He doesnt struggle between right & wrong, good & evil. No division in Him.
No self effort, no striving…live in the eternal realities of the unseen realm wherein Truth resides. Truth is a Person, abide (live) in Him.
No, “For the creature (us) was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope.” Rom.8:20. …
&
“Christ was slain from the foundation (disruption) of the world”. Rev 13:8
We are living the Adamic dream, asleep in this life until we…”awake and Christ will shine on you” Eph 5:14
What is our true identity?
Gee…another great ape reference…I am so edified! lol
I’m just pickin on ya Winter…but now that you mention it…WAKE UP out of the (false) Adamic dream and Christ will SHINE on (and in) you!!
ok…im done.
Unorthodox…maybe but certainly not Gnostic, they believe in a fallible God.
God is…God and Love never…fails, get it? lol
JC
Why do you insist on this sky-God foolishness? I mean if that is some thinly veiled attempt at mocking Christianity He never taught that concept, quite the opposite actually.
The “available” evidence is in the temporal, seen realm and is therefore…not trustworthy.
You can’t see the quantum world and it was there before we could prove it, test it, measure it and so is the eternal realm.
You cant believe everything you see.
“No, you let Christ live His life through you, its His life anyway”
If he wants to live a life on earth, why can’t he just make himself a body in a virgin’s womb and be born? Why does he need to live his life through me? And what does this have to do with you trying in vain to prove your idiotic assertion that “morality doesn’t exist”?
I will stop referring to the sky-god if you stop rambling, stop preaching, stop straying from the point of the discussion, write concisely and to the point, and answer the specific questions that are asked of you, and only after you go back and answer the specific questions that Bill, Teleprompter, Ty and Wintermute, and others, have already asked of you.
Only for the duration that that actually happens, if it does.
I will, however, preach the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, beseeching that he enter our artichoke hearts and cook our al dente spirit, until that glorious day after the thousand years when he shall come again, and we await the SECOND HELPING.
I am his very minor and humble prophet. I know in my artichoke heart that I have a personal relationship with him, and do the glorious work of getting his creation of all life into the science and evolution biology textbooks.
Until the day of his Second Helping,
rAmen.
Whoops!
That was too much for old JC…
Off he went…
to ramble and preach on the newer blogs.
No, “For the creature (us) was made subject to vanity, not willingly,…” (John C)
Paul is saying that God subjected animals to vanity because of Adam’s sin even though the animals didn’t sin so that they too could “hope” for the “glorious liberty of the sons of God” to be manifested some day so they can be free from futility and pain. The creature in that verse is not humanity, but animals. This is made plain in verse 23 “And not only they [i.e. the creature, animals], but ourselves also [human beings], which have the firstfruits of the Spirit [Christians specifically among human beings], even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” Everything else you say goes downhill from there because you are too high on crack to know how to read English anymore.
No, its us…arent you a self-proclaimed Anti-Paulineist?? Yet you are claiming to know such things?
Morality implies a plurality, a division, and either or. Its the loss of innocence. Innocence knows no evil. In the eternal realm (the spirit) there is no duality.
Oneness, thats the offer.
Nah…
He just couldn’t fit a rod into his car. You know, a knife will fit right under the floor mat or in the glove compartment, so he wouldn’t spare the knife to spoil the child –
just the child’s corpse.
(On a warm day, if he does his parenting job thoroughly.)
I asked you this in the Ken Miller thread, and you scurried away without answering, so let’s try again:
Do you accept the evidence for evolution? Why or why not? Is it possible for someone to “live in the indwelling jesus”, or however you phrase it, and also accept that evolution obviously happened?
You seem to believe that god deliberately planted a lot of false evidence in order to make people believe that we’re related to other life forms; is that correct? What is the appeal in such a deceitful god?
Um, the scare quotes should be around “stimulus bill”, not “so-called stimulus bill”.
You don’t even know how to demonise your opponents properly.
I wasnt demonising anyone, just tring to add some levity to our thread, thats all….Gosh Winter, dont be so grumpy this morning dude…smile instead! lol lol
But Grace does hers with such “Aw, shucks, we Good Christians ™ are really NICE!” earnestness, you’re fooled into thinking that she’s sincere. For about a minute. And then you realize that her godbottery is just wearing Laura Ashley, not sackloth and ashes.
Seeing as you’ve obviously visited this thread since I posted it, how about answering the question I asked above?
Thanks.
Your argument relies on the underlying assumption that the human brain is a reasoning machine and that people always do what they do because of conscious predispositions only.
You have not even attempted to address the challenge that morality of whatever stripe emerges out of the process of evolution. Are you prepared to overturn ToE?
Theory of Evolution (biology)… or else Theory of Everything (physics- to unite gravity with the other atomic forces)
I meant Theory of Evolution. Sorry for the confusion.
There is currently a raging debate in primatology over whether or not non-human primates engage in altruism.
Skeptics often refer to this as the God of the Gaps argument.
The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. So overwhelming that it is considered the Theory of Evolution like the Theory of Heliocentrism or the Theory of Gravity. That isn’t to say that there aren’t mysteries to yet be resolved. Related to moral issues for instance, along with the questions you raise one could ask how does murdering one’s own child or suicide harmonize with evo?
It might be helpful to think about evolutionary brain development. New species didn’t get brand new 2.0 brains. What we have in grey matter is the current complex resulting from 2 billion years of ad hoc development. Human brain function is extremely complex, even convoluted. As an example, we now know that when a person thinks about killing from a distance he/she uses a part of the brain that is focussed on rational decisions whereas when thinking about killing up close a different part of the brain is engaged, one that primes emotional reactions.
Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to say something like, ‘I personally don’t understand how evolution might account for all morality and am looking forward to further developments in the field and perhaps my intuition will be proven correct’? Otherwise you are faced with the daunting task of overturning or just rejecting established science, no?
I would like to recommend a book on neuroscience for laymen, ‘On Being Certain: Believing You Are Right Even When You’re Wrong’ by Robert A. Burton, M.D.
I recommend The Moral Animal by Robert Wright. It’s one of the first books on evo-psych, but possibly still one of the best for a layman to start with.
It does have the flaw of making the conclusions he draws seem more certain than they are, but it’s worth reading to get an overview of how human morality compares to that of other animals, and how it might have evolved.
I think the second helping is afoot. There are signs everywhere. For example, I heard a co-worker’s stomach growl. I will be watchful and wait for the rapturous pasta. I hope it comes with the promised xtra cheese (only for us believers though – all non-believers will have to just watch us eat)