Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-02-2007, 06:40 PM   #271
Mog
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Irreligious wrote
This why you get so frustrated here Lily. You are talking around Sterny's point. I'm sure such a brilliant man as he understands metaphor, allusions, poetry and idioms, at least, nearly as well as you do. The problem is, many people do not read the Bible as an artifact of the ancient minds that produced its volumes.

Still, even you believe that a Middle Eastern man who was borne of a teenage virgin some 2,000 ago was brutally murdered roughly 33 years later, and revived himself three days after his ostensible demise because he was, in reality, the supreme deity of the universe, and he did it to save the immaterial essences of individual human beings from an eternity of torment after their own deaths. That is the basis of the whole religion in its many forms. Even as a child, I struggled to understand how people could take this story literally. Surely, it was just meant to be a metaphor for something. Would you agree?
No.

As for Stern, he has asked me and, at least, 4 other theists (well educated ones) to my certain knowledge, the exact same questions and gotten virtually the exact same answers. He is either having fun with us or he can't understand our answers.

I am not talking about believing the Bible's claims about reality. I am talking about comprehending that the Bible is not one book, but many. I am talking about comprehending that those books were written in several different languages over the course of 1400 years (or 1200, depending on how far back you push Abraham) in a variety of genres and that those facts matter. The Bible isn't a science text and it isn't used properly when put to that use. (Please-- just don't. I know that there are people out there who think that it can be. They are mistaken.)

A favorite blogger of mine was ruminating on the constant demand by the scientifically educated for proof. The whole thing was interesting but this part really seemed pertinent to me in our current context:

Now what got me thinking ... is the common demand of the scientific skeptic for "proof" from God that would consist of, say, a description of a transistor in the book of Genesis or a discussion of Martian soil composition in Job. If only God would reveal something to primitive barbarians of the Bronze Age which they could not possibly know, and which correlates to modern discoveries, then, says the skeptic, I would believe.

Let us us suppose that some earlier scientific skeptic had made similiar demands of God. If he *is* God, says the medieval skeptic, then why has he never discussed the four humours of the body and unlocked the key to healing? The 17th Century skeptic might well demand why nowhere, in the length and breadth of Scripture, does God reveal the wonders of Newtonian physics, which is the ultimate truth about the workings of the heavenly bodies? In the early 19th Century, a scientific skeptic might well demand to know why God has never deigned to reveal what all know to be common scientific knowledge: namely that space is pervaded by aether. And, up until a few years ago, the skeptic could also have demanded that God have revealed in Genesis 1, that the universe is 12 billion years old or that the speed of light is constant.

The problem is that it is the glory of science to progress and a great deal of what we "know for certain" turns out to be only partial knowledge, till other facts come in. The purpose of revelation is not to tell us everything about everything. It is to tell us about the important things. ...

The hubris of the scientific skeptic is that he imagines his particular field of interest is the source and summit of wisdom when, in comparison to the matters discussed by Scripture, it is a small hobby--legitimate in its way and certainly important in its proper sphere--but ultimately not the Final Question. God is pleased with science well done as he is pleased with all human things well done. God enlightens the scientific intellect as he enlightens many other forms of intellectual pursuit. But the notion that if God does not answer our trivia questions about the composition of the earth's mantle or the age of the universe to our satisfaction, then he is failing some test--that's just silly. It's not that he's behind the times, it's that he's way ahead of us. Medievals who saw the four humours as the Latest in Human Knowledge eventually discovered that there was a greater knowledge than this. Dittos for devotees of Newtonian physics when Einstein came along.
...
I am going to be amused by Sterny's response. He slices, he dices, he even juliennes! :lol:
I want to know who this blogger is so we can dump comments on him. Its just apologetic tripe. The devotees of Newtonian physics weren't disproved by Einstein, just elaborated upon.

"It's puzzling that Eden is synonymous with paradise when, if you think about it at all, it's more like a maximum-security prison with twenty-four hour surveillance." -Ann Druyan
Mog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 06:54 PM   #272
RenaissanceMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Mog wrote
I want to know who this blogger is so we can dump comments on him. Its just apologetic tripe. The devotees of Newtonian physics weren't disproved by Einstein, just elaborated upon.
Heh! Yeah, I wanted to point that out, but we're already pushing 20 pages. I hate the "Well! Science doesn't know everything! It learns new shit all the time!" My response to that is "At least science learns, bitch!" Or as Choobus would say "Where is my Jesus powered car?"

You know damn well a Jesus powered car would use no gasoline or other oil related products! Who wouldn't want one?
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 07:00 PM   #273
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Mog wrote
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
Quote:
Lily wrote
No.

As for Stern, he has asked me and, at least, 4 other theists (well educated ones) to my certain knowledge, the exact same questions and gotten virtually the exact same answers. He is either having fun with us or he can't understand our answers.

I am not talking about believing the Bible's claims about reality. I am talking about comprehending that the Bible is not one book, but many. I am talking about comprehending that those books were written in several different languages over the course of 1400 years (or 1200, depending on how far back you push Abraham) in a variety of genres and that those facts matter. The Bible isn't a science text and it isn't used properly when put to that use. (Please-- just don't. I know that there are people out there who think that it can be. They are mistaken.)

A favorite blogger of mine was ruminating on the constant demand by the scientifically educated for proof. The whole thing was interesting but this part really seemed pertinent to me in our current context:

Now what got me thinking ... is the common demand of the scientific skeptic for "proof" from God that would consist of, say, a description of a transistor in the book of Genesis or a discussion of Martian soil composition in Job. If only God would reveal something to primitive barbarians of the Bronze Age which they could not possibly know, and which correlates to modern discoveries, then, says the skeptic, I would believe.

Let us us suppose that some earlier scientific skeptic had made similiar demands of God. If he *is* God, says the medieval skeptic, then why has he never discussed the four humours of the body and unlocked the key to healing? The 17th Century skeptic might well demand why nowhere, in the length and breadth of Scripture, does God reveal the wonders of Newtonian physics, which is the ultimate truth about the workings of the heavenly bodies? In the early 19th Century, a scientific skeptic might well demand to know why God has never deigned to reveal what all know to be common scientific knowledge: namely that space is pervaded by aether. And, up until a few years ago, the skeptic could also have demanded that God have revealed in Genesis 1, that the universe is 12 billion years old or that the speed of light is constant.

The problem is that it is the glory of science to progress and a great deal of what we "know for certain" turns out to be only partial knowledge, till other facts come in. The purpose of revelation is not to tell us everything about everything. It is to tell us about the important things. ...

The hubris of the scientific skeptic is that he imagines his particular field of interest is the source and summit of wisdom when, in comparison to the matters discussed by Scripture, it is a small hobby--legitimate in its way and certainly important in its proper sphere--but ultimately not the Final Question. God is pleased with science well done as he is pleased with all human things well done. God enlightens the scientific intellect as he enlightens many other forms of intellectual pursuit. But the notion that if God does not answer our trivia questions about the composition of the earth's mantle or the age of the universe to our satisfaction, then he is failing some test--that's just silly. It's not that he's behind the times, it's that he's way ahead of us. Medievals who saw the four humours as the Latest in Human Knowledge eventually discovered that there was a greater knowledge than this. Dittos for devotees of Newtonian physics when Einstein came along.
...
I am going to be amused by Sterny's response. He slices, he dices, he even juliennes! :lol:
I want to know who this blogger is so we can dump comments on him. Its just apologetic tripe. The devotees of Newtonian physics weren't disproved by Einstein, just elaborated upon.
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him. All the made-up crap is flayed to the bone, and the theistic types just can't face up to it. lily's complaint is that she can't reason with him, essentially. This is the ultimate theistic dodge, the other ones just admit "Ya just gotta believe". I don't buy it for a minute that these people have some different, better, deeper knowledge of anything except an understanding of the human condition, which is invariably used by those expert at it to manipulate the rest of the sheeple unwittingly into some nefarious scheme like converting all the heathens in the Americas to xtianity on the way to attempting world domination. This is the reason the religious fear the atheist, the lack of manipulability. We stand there and say "What the hell is up with the Emperor?", when he strolls by nekkid to the world, when we are supposed to admire the cloth, like everybody else.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 07:05 PM   #274
Mog
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him. All the made-up crap is flayed to the bone, and the theistic types just can't face up to it. lily's complaint is that she can't reason with him, essentially. This is the ultimate theistic dodge, the other ones just admit "Ya just gotta believe". I don't buy it for a minute that these people have some different, better, deeper knowledge of anything except an understanding of the human condition, which is invariably used by those expert at it to manipulate the rest of the sheeple unwittingly into some nefarious scheme like converting all the heathens in the Americas to xtianity on the way to attempting world domination. This is the reason the religious fear the atheist, the lack of manipulability. We stand there and say "What the hell is up with the Emperor?", when he strolls by nekkid to the world, when we are supposed to admire the cloth, like everybody else.
The funny thing is how close this blogger sounds like Ted Haggard when interviewed by Richard Dawkins


So Lily is different from a fundie how?

"It's puzzling that Eden is synonymous with paradise when, if you think about it at all, it's more like a maximum-security prison with twenty-four hour surveillance." -Ann Druyan
Mog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 07:07 PM   #275
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Mog wrote
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him. All the made-up crap is flayed to the bone, and the theistic types just can't face up to it. lily's complaint is that she can't reason with him, essentially. This is the ultimate theistic dodge, the other ones just admit "Ya just gotta believe". I don't buy it for a minute that these people have some different, better, deeper knowledge of anything except an understanding of the human condition, which is invariably used by those expert at it to manipulate the rest of the sheeple unwittingly into some nefarious scheme like converting all the heathens in the Americas to xtianity on the way to attempting world domination. This is the reason the religious fear the atheist, the lack of manipulability. We stand there and say "What the hell is up with the Emperor?", when he strolls by nekkid to the world, when we are supposed to admire the cloth, like everybody else.
The funny thing is how close this blogger sounds like Ted Haggard when interviewed by Richard Dawkins


So Lily is different from a fundie how?
Not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 07:21 PM   #276
calpurnpiso
I Live Here
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chandler- Arizona
Posts: 14,227
Quote:
The Judge wrote
Quote:
Lily wrote
Does not the fact that I put "see" in quotes, suggest to you that I am talking about the brain creating images?
The brain creates images in the visual modality by nervous excitation of the visual cortex. The brain therefore creates images that are then "seen."
This can be a normal, everyday visual process or an aberrant neurophysiological process where things are perceived or "seen" [created by the brain] in the absence of external stimuli. The latter is of course a hallucination.

Either way this semantic hair-splitting must not detract from the fact that christers believe that this “vision” and many others like it in the buybull (e.g. Paul’s probable seizure on the road to Damascus) are somehow the real manifestations of “god” rather than the resultant aberrant perception as a symptom of potentially severe brain pathology that they really are.
Well said, but Christ-psychosis infected Lily is too stupid to understand neurology and realize the brain-R-Us. In her intellectual turpitude I'm certain she'll say you do not know what you are talking about...:lol::lol:...the woman is deliriously dense...:lol:

Christians and other folks infected with delusional beliefs think and reason like schizophrenics or temporal lobe epileptics. Their morality is dictated by an invisible friend called Jesus.
calpurnpiso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 08:19 PM   #277
Lily
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him.
He has you conned with his lengthy messages and his misquotations from scripture. He doesn't dice, slice or go through anything point by point. He makes one irrelevant comment after another based on a reading of an ancient document that would earn him an F in any college literature course. We just get tired of trying to teach him what he either will not or cannot learn and we bail.

What I am positing is that he really can't understand what he is reading. So now I am feeling guilty for cutting him off a few months back. Well, not exactly that. I would have had to stop trying to get through to him no matter what. But I would have been a great deal more gracious about it, if I had understood that literature just isn't his cup of tea and that there wasn't any way he could get what I and the others have been trying to convey.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 08:22 PM   #278
Lily
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Mog wrote
So Lily is different from a fundie how?
If you can define fundie for me, I will tell you where I am like your idea of a fundie and where I am not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 08:42 PM   #279
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him.
He has you conned with his lengthy messages and his misquotations from scripture. He doesn't dice, slice or go through anything point by point. He makes one irrelevant comment after another based on a reading of an ancient document that would earn him an F in any college literature course. We just get tired of trying to teach him what he either will not or cannot learn and we bail.

What I am positing is that he really can't understand what he is reading. So now I am feeling guilty for cutting him off a few months back. Well, not exactly that. I would have had to stop trying to get through to him no matter what. But I would have been a great deal more gracious about it, if I had understood that literature just isn't his cup of tea and that there wasn't any way he could get what I and the others have been trying to convey.
Ye cats, this is high comedy. Wait for the man to respond! He's going to peel your onion on the latter posts, as well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 08:50 PM   #280
RenaissanceMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him.
He has you conned with his lengthy messages and his misquotations from scripture. He doesn't dice, slice or go through anything point by point. He makes one irrelevant comment after another based on a reading of an ancient document that would earn him an F in any college literature course. We just get tired of trying to teach him what he either will not or cannot learn and we bail.

What I am positing is that he really can't understand what he is reading. So now I am feeling guilty for cutting him off a few months back. Well, not exactly that. I would have had to stop trying to get through to him no matter what. But I would have been a great deal more gracious about it, if I had understood that literature just isn't his cup of tea and that there wasn't any way he could get what I and the others have been trying to convey.
That is an absolute load of shit.

What you're saying is (If true) is that the creator of the universe, the knower of all, has encoded his all important message in a format that ONLY the precious few that devote their lives to it's study can decode. And even then, HE, the almighty master of the universe has denied those precious few the proof they would need to make their message heard by the smartest and brightest of all the other disciplines.

That's bullshit. I could do better. And I'm just some unedumacated yoo hoo with a truck.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 08:54 PM   #281
Mog
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Mog wrote
So Lily is different from a fundie how?
If you can define fundie for me, I will tell you where I am like your idea of a fundie and where I am not.
I would say that you are a fundie because you still choose to root your beliefs in nonsensical stories in the bible. No, you may believe most of the old testament is folklore as based on the evidence, but you refuse to give the same credit to the new testament. There is no evidence that the events of the new testament ever happened. Unbroken chain of witnesses? Thats rubbish. Urban legends have unbroken chains of witnesses, and they are a very distorted version of events. How can you trust anecdotal evidence over solid reporting?

Furthermore, it appears that you root your morals wholly on the traditional Christian thinking unless there is overwhelming pressure to adapt. Thus, you exhibit this anti-gay marriage crap, but you aren't pro-slavery.

"It's puzzling that Eden is synonymous with paradise when, if you think about it at all, it's more like a maximum-security prison with twenty-four hour surveillance." -Ann Druyan
Mog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 09:00 PM   #282
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Rat Bastard wrote
The point is, I like to watch Sternwallow dice it up and go through it point by point, and finally pin the poor theist down to the point where they can't squirm anymore. They either leave, or complain they can't reason with him.
He has you conned with his lengthy messages and his misquotations from scripture. He doesn't dice, slice or go through anything point by point. He makes one irrelevant comment after another based on a reading of an ancient document that would earn him an F in any college literature course. We just get tired of trying to teach him what he either will not or cannot learn and we bail.

What I am positing is that he really can't understand what he is reading. So now I am feeling guilty for cutting him off a few months back. Well, not exactly that. I would have had to stop trying to get through to him no matter what. But I would have been a great deal more gracious about it, if I had understood that literature just isn't his cup of tea and that there wasn't any way he could get what I and the others have been trying to convey.
That is an absolute load of shit.

What you're saying is (If true) is that the creator of the universe, the knower of all, has encoded his all important message in a format that ONLY the precious few that devote their lives to it's study can decode. And even then, HE, the almighty master of the universe has denied those precious few the proof they would need to make their message heard by the smartest and brightest of all the other disciplines.

That's bullshit. I could do better. And I'm just some unedumacated yoo hoo with a truck.
Guess I needs to buy me a pick-em-up truck to carry my logic-box in. That "never-to-be-sufficiently-damned"* theistic claptrap is going to require a HUGE bed, though.

*a cookie for finding of that reference- quite esoteric!
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 09:00 PM   #283
Irreligious
I Live Here
 
Irreligious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Around the way
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
Anonymous blogger quoted by Lily wrote
The problem is that it is the glory of science to progress and a great deal of what we "know for certain" turns out to be only partial knowledge, till other facts come in. The purpose of revelation is not to tell us everything about everything. It is to tell us about the important things. ...
What is important to you? Let's see if our priorities match up.
I think that curing cancer, AIDS, and crippling childhood diseases are very important things. These are but a few of the many endeavors that are actively being pursued by scientists. What are the theists offering?

"So many gods, so many creeds! So many paths that wind and wind, when just the art of being kind is all this sad world needs."
--Ella Wheeler Wilcox
Irreligious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 09:06 PM   #284
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Irreligious wrote
Quote:
Anonymous blogger quoted by Lily wrote
The problem is that it is the glory of science to progress and a great deal of what we "know for certain" turns out to be only partial knowledge, till other facts come in. The purpose of revelation is not to tell us everything about everything. It is to tell us about the important things. ...
What is important to you? Let's see if our priorities match up.
I think that curing cancer, AIDS, and crippling childhood diseases are very important things. These are but a few of the many endeavors that are actively being pursued by scientists. What are the theists offering?
They offer:

"If you kiss Hank's Ass, you will get a million dollars in heaven!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2007, 10:51 PM   #285
Evil_Mage_Ra
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Lily,

I think scientific skeptics take less an issue with what isn't written in the Bible (i.e., transistors and Newton's laws) than what actually is. While it may be true that many Christians don't take the Genesis account as literal truth, I'd venture that the vast majority of Christians believe in the reality of Jesus's miracles, or at the very least his resurrection, which if true would violate several time-tested principles of biology, physics, chemistry......basically alter our entire perception of reality. The scientific skeptic does not view the Gospel accounts as sufficient evidence to reject these principles (which is what I think Irreligious was getting at earlier).
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational