PDA

View Full Version : Musings of late...



Manny
December 1st, 2015, 09:19 PM
http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/9DB68F4E-EE01-4723-A220-40CC5A188589.jpg

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/9DB96D3D-9FE0-4D7A-BFE6-DA640475A449.png.jpeg

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/629A0753-F2E2-42FA-903E-5B46E13E8FBD.jpg

VertOlive
December 2nd, 2015, 09:28 PM
I'm with you on this Manny. But after a day like today in a place like San Bernardino, there's some that need a little tangible encouragement, I think.

jar
December 3rd, 2015, 06:55 AM
What's more, why is the proof offered that there is a God always so utterly stupid. That billboard is barely up to the cute kitten standard when it comes to proofs plus it is obvious that the folk posting the billboard are from the proof-texts that take quotes out of context snake oil salesman branch of the Christian Cult of Ignorance.

fqgouvea
December 3rd, 2015, 04:40 PM
Ah, we cultish Christians, it's not like there's a two thousand year intellectual tradition or anything.

Main point: that is NOT the definition of faith.

That said, I certainly agree that "proving that god exists" is a silly exercise. It's a little like making a speech to prove language exists.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Manny
December 3rd, 2015, 10:51 PM
http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Gibberish/921C0842-58DE-4225-AA36-F2AED7A6A63A.png.jpeg

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Gibberish/349F1AE9-1557-40B0-8864-78EAD5E18DA7.jpg

fqgouvea
December 4th, 2015, 04:27 PM
It's arguably the non-believers' definition, sure. But it's certainly not the main meaning in a Christian context: faith is trust in something, it is trusting yourself to whatever it is you have faith in. The crucial element is not lack of proof, but rather trust.

If you're driving down a road, you entrust your wellbeing to the road makers. In that sense, you have put your faith in them. You probably don't have unassailable proof that the road can be trusted, but that hardly matters.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Chuasam
December 4th, 2015, 05:57 PM
I would definitely like to examine that evidence. Of course it would be subjected to scientific methods.

henkm
December 4th, 2015, 07:04 PM
'Firm belief in something for which there IS proof' would not be faith, it would be knowledge, so I think it is an essential element of the definition. It's just that a believer won't think it important to contemplate the (non)existence of evidence. I think this is neatly illustrated by your road example as well.

Manny
December 4th, 2015, 10:25 PM
So, I read referenced Romans 1:20 from the billboard, and honestly, I wasn't "feelin' it". Pointing out all the things someone is doing wrong is a sure way to turn them off. At least that's what I got out of it.

Manny
December 4th, 2015, 11:10 PM
I was gonna call the number on the billboard, but someone saved me the trouble by posting this YouTube vid...


http://youtu.be/j1Gcs5MCD8Q

jar
December 5th, 2015, 08:05 AM
So, I read referenced Romans 1:20 from the billboard, and honestly, I wasn't "feelin' it". Pointing out all the things someone is doing wrong is a sure way to turn them off. At least that's what I got out of it.

The issue is that Romans is a really long letter. In it Paul begins with talking about issues and only during the second half does he go on to talk about what we should do to address the issues; but the Christian Cult of Ignorance quote miners don't read the whole thing, they just take material out of context to suit their own agenda.

But that group doesn't really believe what the Bible says anyway. They claim they do but that is simply lying. Of course they lie to themselves as well as everyone else.

It's funny but they are the very folk Jesus or Paul or Peter or Timothy would have condemned.

Manny
December 7th, 2015, 12:21 PM
I'm with you on this Manny. But after a day like today in a place like San Bernardino, there's some that need a little tangible encouragement, I think.

At Sunday's mass, Father Pat started his homily with a story about a monk and a soldier.
A soldier asks a monk he met to teach him about heaven and hell. The monk replies, "Teach you? You're just a dumb soldier, and not a very good one at that! You're dirty, and a disgrace to that uniform! Get out of my sight!"
Furious, the soldier whips out his pistol, cocks it, and puts it against the monk's head, and says, "Fool of a monk, do you not know who you're talking to? I've killed for less!"
As the soldier's finger quivers on the trigger, the monk calmly looks at the soldier, and quietly says, "That, my friend, is hell."
It takes a moment for the soldier to realize the lesson, and in shame, puts his pistol away-apologizing at the feet of the monk. To which the monk kindly says to him, "And this, is heaven."

This story was originally a Zen parable of a monk and a Samurai warrior, I think; but Father Pat used the soldier adaptation of the parable to illustrate the condition of faith in our world today, which really hasn't changed since Jesus' time.
In his homily, Father Pat, talked about how we are all made in the image of God, and faith teaches us to be in awe of God. And, in light of the horrible events of the past couple of weeks, in Paris and San Bernadino, the debate is really no longer about gun control and/or violence anymore; but about how we as a society seem to be losing the awe of God that is in each of us.

Empty_of_Clouds
December 9th, 2015, 10:17 PM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

penwash
December 25th, 2015, 01:20 PM
I would definitely like to examine that evidence. Of course it would be subjected to scientific methods.

I see that you are also putting your faith, not in God, but in scientific methods.

So some of us put our faith in God, and some of us put our faith in science and our reasoning ability to comprehend things.
One thing is consistent, if we, as a human being were to go through the difficulties of life, we have to have faith / belief in something.

penwash
December 25th, 2015, 01:33 PM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

Christianity is a revelation that there is a God who cares and willing to rescue His creations who have gone wayward.
There is one decision to make, and a lifelong journey of spiritual growth to either endure or enjoy (God supplies the fuel, lodging, fresh air, and beautiful sights).

The hoops are created by ourselves who refused to let go of our self-destruct perspective to be replaced by God's life-giving one.

Chuasam
December 25th, 2015, 05:11 PM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

Christianity is a revelation that there is a God who cares and willing to rescue His creations who have gone wayward.
There is one decision to make, and a lifelong journey of spiritual growth to either endure or enjoy (God supplies the fuel, lodging, fresh air, and beautiful sights).

The hoops are created by ourselves who refused to let go of our self-destruct perspective to be replaced by God's life-giving one.

Christianity is barely 2,000 years old. Humans have been around at least 75,000. Like all religions it will come to pass too.

SeminarianMike
December 26th, 2015, 02:05 PM
Faith is faith, I win converts by sharing experience not skepticism and epistemology! Now I share this
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/26/e1642959d7253e117abcfe7c6e84a9f1.jpg

penwash
December 27th, 2015, 03:09 PM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

Christianity is a revelation that there is a God who cares and willing to rescue His creations who have gone wayward.
There is one decision to make, and a lifelong journey of spiritual growth to either endure or enjoy (God supplies the fuel, lodging, fresh air, and beautiful sights).

The hoops are created by ourselves who refused to let go of our self-destruct perspective to be replaced by God's life-giving one.

Christianity is barely 2,000 years old. Humans have been around at least 75,000. Like all religions it will come to pass too.

What happened 2,000 years ago is the fulfillment of a promise that was made *long* time before that.
Christianity reveals the plan that has been in conception since before the world was created.

I'm not trying to play "my belief is older than yours" -game. That is both silly and useless.
What I am trying to relay is a message that gets more and more consistent the more I put more thoughts (and time) in it.
It's a surprisingly thought-full message, not the blind-faith kind.

Manny
December 28th, 2015, 01:51 AM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

Hey...wait a sec...EoC got so discombobulated by the video he forgot to refer to himself in the third person!

Empty_of_Clouds
December 28th, 2015, 03:16 PM
I only got through about half of that video before I had to submit to a medical intervention.

Anyway ... I tend to see Christians (and this could apply to other 'faiths' as well) as existing on a spectrum of hoops that one has to jump through before being admitted to the alleged après vie. The number of hoops being directly proportional to the number of people telling you that you are doing your religion the wrong way.

Hey...wait a sec...EoC got so discombobulated by the video he forgot to refer to himself in the third person!

Different forum!

Personally I see Christianity as nothing more than one of the many iterations of earlier mythologies.



What happened 2,000 years ago is the fulfillment of a promise that was made *long* time before that.
Christianity reveals the plan that has been in conception since before the world was created.

I'm not trying to play "my belief is older than yours" -game. That is both silly and useless.
What I am trying to relay is a message that gets more and more consistent the more I put more thoughts (and time) in it.
It's a surprisingly thought-full message, not the blind-faith kind.

What you are actually doing is asserting something as a fact - even though it cannot be shown to be so - and then expecting people to accept it as such.

So, what really happened 2000 years ago was that the need for hope was strong and so some person (or people), drawing on the earlier mythologies, created a New Hope Religion tailored to the people of the day and then peddled it to a highly susceptible population.

The more I put thoughts and time into this the more evident it becomes.

There appears to be a pattern of human behaviour with regard to the rise and fall of religions. It is also worth thinking about the expression 'long term' as most people have no real conception of what this should mean in a Universal sense - certainly 2000 years of inconsistent religious application cannot be considered long term. Buddhism has been going longer, Hinduism longer still, and both still have millions of adherents. How would you interpret that?

jar
December 28th, 2015, 07:17 PM
There appears to be a pattern of human behaviour with regard to the rise and fall of religions. It is also worth thinking about the expression 'long term' as most people have no real conception of what this should mean in a Universal sense - certainly 2000 years of inconsistent religious application cannot be considered long term. Buddhism has been going longer, Hinduism longer still, and both still have millions of adherents. How would you interpret that?

Religions are human constructs, maps, guidebooks. The map is not the Territory.

Like all maps, any given religion or sect will have stuff that is right and stuff that is wrong. The longer a map (or religion) remains in stasis the less accurately it will reflect the Territory.

The fact that no religion will be completely right is no more a problem than the fact that no map is completely right. Errors on a map do not make a map worthless; they simply make it wise for you to test the map against reality.

There is no "God of the Bible" just as there is not even a universal "Bible™". Christian Bibles vary from the smallest Canon that includes only those books likely canonized during Jesus lifetime (the first five books) to the largest Canon that includes over 80 books. The description of the "God character" found in Genesis 1 is entire different than the "God character" found in Genesis 2&3 and the various "God characters" evolve and morph throughout the stories just as many of the stories themselves evolve and morph (look at the evolution of the Great Commission or of the evolution of Paul's encounter as the story is told and retold in the Bible).

But religions still serve a purpose, just as an inadequate map can still be a guide.

Chuasam
December 29th, 2015, 09:40 AM
Maybe it's time for humanity to shed religions just as kids no longer believe in Santa and the tooth fairy.

jar
December 29th, 2015, 10:39 AM
Maybe it's time for humanity to shed religions just as kids no longer believe in Santa and the tooth fairy.

But I most definitely believe in Santa. Can't comment on the Tooth Fairy.

Chuasam
December 29th, 2015, 10:57 AM
Maybe it's time for humanity to shed religions just as kids no longer believe in Santa and the tooth fairy.

But I most definitely believe in Santa. Can't comment on the Tooth Fairy.

Santa is a construct invented by Coca Cola and used by retail to peddle crap. Religions are used by humans to fool the idiots and justify horrible behaviour.

A bad map might prevent the traveller from reaching his destination.

jar
December 29th, 2015, 11:48 AM
Maybe it's time for humanity to shed religions just as kids no longer believe in Santa and the tooth fairy.

But I most definitely believe in Santa. Can't comment on the Tooth Fairy.

Santa is a construct invented by Coca Cola and used by retail to peddle crap. Religions are used by humans to fool the idiots and justify horrible behaviour.

A bad map might prevent the traveller from reaching his destination.

While no map leaves one simply wandering.

Santa predates Coca-Cola.

Many things are used by humans to fool idiots and justify horrible behavior.

Morgaine
January 3rd, 2016, 07:54 AM
I'm confused!

Chuasam
January 3rd, 2016, 09:51 AM
I'm confused!

Just remember that Christianity betrayed King Arthur.

moynihan
January 6th, 2016, 08:42 AM
If you're driving down a road, you entrust your wellbeing to the road makers. In that sense, you have put your faith in them. You probably don't have unassailable proof that the road can be trusted, .... fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

The word faith and the word trust are often conflated. But here we have a difference.
I trust the "road maker". But "faith" has nothing to do with that. I can access directly, with my senses, and communicate about in detail, with others, things like highway departments, various road & highway related plans, maps, companies etc. I have also, with my own senses on numerous occasions, observed road construction and repair.

your analogy is essentially the argument made by Paley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy), in 1802, (i.e. the faulty analogy; a watch implies a watchmaker. But since a watchmaker and a watch are observable biogeophysical objects, the analogy fails, This is because most conceptions of god(s) (including those of the Abrahamic Faiths) include its being super-natural (in the dictionary sense: (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. ) Therefore it is to put it simply, trying to compare apples and oranges.

fqgouvea
January 6th, 2016, 04:01 PM
If you're driving down a road, you entrust your wellbeing to the road makers. In that sense, you have put your faith in them. You probably don't have unassailable proof that the road can be trusted, .... fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

The word faith and the word trust are often conflated. But here we have a difference.
I trust the "road maker". But "faith" has nothing to do with that. I can access directly, with my senses, and communicate about in detail, with others, things like highway departments, various road & highway related plans, maps, companies etc. I have also, with my own senses on numerous occasions, observed road construction and repair.

your analogy is essentially the argument made by Paley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy), in 1802, (i.e. the faulty analogy; a watch implies a watchmaker. But since a watchmaker and a watch are observable biogeophysical objects, the analogy fails, This is because most conceptions of god(s) (including those of the Abrahamic Faiths) include its being super-natural (in the dictionary sense: (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. ) Therefore it is to put it simply, trying to compare apples and oranges.

I'm certainly not using Paley's argument, because I'm not trying to prove anything. Certainly not to prove that "God exists", whatever that means. Attempting such a proof strikes me as contradictory, in fact, at least according to a classical Christian understanding of what "God" means.

I was just trying to explain what most Chrisrians mean by the word faith: not blind assent, but reasonable trust.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

moynihan
January 6th, 2016, 05:00 PM
[QUOTE=moynihan;154630][QUOTE=fqgouvea;151493]I was just trying to explain what most Chrisrians mean by the word faith: not blind assent, but reasonable trust.
fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

OK. But faith can include "trust", but that type of trust is not "reasonable" . The concept of "reason" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason) is empirical, analytic, rational. One can trust based on reason or on faith. But trust based on faith is by its very terms not "reasonable". To paraphrase Maye West, reason has nothing to do with it.
The Greco-Romans had a neat way of handling this, prior to the Christian era. They had logos and mythos. Logos meant the understanding the observable world via reason. Mythos, or story, that being stories about the gods, etc. teaching us how to live with each other. The factual truth of those stories was essentially irrelevant, a non sequitur as fact was the concern on the logos way of knowing. In Christianity, Mormonism and the other non-trinitarian variants, and fundamentalist Islam, logos and mythos have been conflated, contributing to the making for the now all too obvious long, troubled voyage, in calm weather. :)

fqgouvea
January 6th, 2016, 05:05 PM
In the end trying to discuss philosophy like this isn't, well, reasonable. But at least we have isolated a real point of disagreement: What do we mean by "reason"? Clearly not the same thing. But I won't elaborate, as this requires more time and space.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Empty_of_Clouds
January 6th, 2016, 07:44 PM
There are always disagreements when personal interpretations of a term deviate from the accepted definition.

Most often the deviation is an exercise in self-support.

Morgaine
January 7th, 2016, 02:58 PM
I'm leaning towards humanism these days...

Chuasam
January 9th, 2016, 02:20 PM
I'm leaning towards humanism these days...

At least humans are real

Bold2013
January 18th, 2016, 06:52 PM
Unlike evolution...

moynihan
January 19th, 2016, 07:57 AM
Unlike evolution...

:deadhorse:

jar
January 19th, 2016, 08:01 AM
I'm leaning towards humanism these days...

At least humans are real

Are there really folk alive today that doubt that evolution is a fact or that the earth is billions of years old or that humans are not just another primate or ...

moynihan
January 19th, 2016, 08:26 AM
I live in the U.S., and here, like in a few of the Fundamentalist Islamic states, there are a lot of folks who do not accept evolution through natural selection. For a humorous video on the subject (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21ph1t1-qe4) of evolution this is my favorite :)

jar
January 19th, 2016, 08:36 AM
I live in the U.S., and here, like in a few of the Fundamentalist Islamic states, there are a lot of folks who do not accept evolution through natural selection. For a humorous video on the subject (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21ph1t1-qe4) of evolution this is my favorite :)

You sure they are not just funnin' us, pulling our collective legs, a long running POE, a carny "freak show", jess a joke?

Chuasam
January 19th, 2016, 09:33 AM
I live in the U.S., and here, like in a few of the Fundamentalist Islamic states, there are a lot of folks who do not accept evolution through natural selection. For a humorous video on the subject (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21ph1t1-qe4) of evolution this is my favorite :)

You sure they are not just funnin' us, pulling our collective legs, a long running POE, a carny "freak show", jess a joke?

Look up the Neuro Surgeon and wannabe Presidential Candidate Ben Carson.

jar
January 19th, 2016, 09:52 AM
I live in the U.S., and here, like in a few of the Fundamentalist Islamic states, there are a lot of folks who do not accept evolution through natural selection. For a humorous video on the subject (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21ph1t1-qe4) of evolution this is my favorite :)

You sure they are not just funnin' us, pulling our collective legs, a long running POE, a carny "freak show", jess a joke?

Look up the Neuro Surgeon and wannabe Presidential Candidate Ben Carson.

A great example. Surely he is jess funning us.

Empty_of_Clouds
January 19th, 2016, 03:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufGlBv8Z3NU

About 1:19 Dr Carson has his moment.

Chuasam
January 23rd, 2016, 01:48 PM
Sarah Palin needs to be someone's running mate.

fqgouvea
January 23rd, 2016, 02:03 PM
Sarah Palin needs to be someone's running mate.

Been there, done that, wasn't much fun the first time.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Chuasam
January 23rd, 2016, 04:05 PM
Sarah Palin needs to be someone's running mate.

Been there, done that, wasn't much fun the first time.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Fun for fans of Tina Fey

Morgaine
March 9th, 2016, 03:45 PM
I should have known better not to have a run in elsewhere with someone about Deuteronomy chapter 22. Those were different times, and the someone seemed to be justifying it.

MarshMargot1
March 15th, 2016, 08:56 AM
Sarah Palin needs to be someone's running mate.

Been there, done that, wasn't much fun the first time.


Fernando Gouvêa -- fqgouvea@roadrunner.com

Fun for fans of Tina Fey

I'd vote for Tina Fey over Salin Palin any election period.

moynihan
March 15th, 2016, 09:44 AM
I wish Cressbeckler (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iqktCdX0hs) would run again
Here he is on his talk show talkin immigrants (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6-pHb4LKT0)
Or, his inciting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pz5NPe7xPU) an attack on a critic

RNHC
March 18th, 2016, 11:48 AM
Are there really folk alive today that doubt that evolution is a fact or that the earth is billions of years old or that humans are not just another primate or ...

I thought you lived in the South. Do you really need to ask?

jar
March 18th, 2016, 12:04 PM
Are there really folk alive today that doubt that evolution is a fact or that the earth is billions of years old or that humans are not just another primate or ...

I thought you lived in the South. Do you really need to ask?

Lived and live in the south but never ran into folk that doubt that evolution is a fact or that the earth is billions of years old or that humans are not just another primate or ...

That nonsense seems to be more a characteristic of the predominantly a product of the avoidance schools of the Christian Cult of Ignorance that grew up beginning in the 70s so little Johnny didn't have to sit next to a monkey. Unfortunately little Johnny learned that those folk weren't monkeys and so the Christian Cult of Ignorance had to find some other way to brainwash the young'uns.

But I was educated before ignorance was fashionable and in one of the Pre-avoidance Christian schools and so did not have the requirement that I check my brain at the door.

RNHC
March 18th, 2016, 12:45 PM
That nonsense seems to be more a characteristic of the predominantly a product of the avoidance schools of the Christian Cult of Ignorance that grew up beginning in the 70s so little Johnny didn't have to sit next to a monkey. Unfortunately little Johnny learned that those folk weren't monkeys and so the Christian Cult of Ignorance had to find some other way to brainwash the young'uns.

Yeah, what you are describing is the South. But then again, that kind of idiocy is not limited to South. Kansas tried to stop teaching about evolution in their schools at point, IIRC.

Isn't Texas considered South? I get differing answers. Some say Texas is Texas, others say certain parts of Texas is South but not other parts.

jar
March 18th, 2016, 02:15 PM
That nonsense seems to be more a characteristic of the predominantly a product of the avoidance schools of the Christian Cult of Ignorance that grew up beginning in the 70s so little Johnny didn't have to sit next to a monkey. Unfortunately little Johnny learned that those folk weren't monkeys and so the Christian Cult of Ignorance had to find some other way to brainwash the young'uns.

Yeah, what you are describing is the South. But then again, that kind of idiocy is not limited to South. Kansas tried to stop teaching about evolution in their schools at point, IIRC.

Isn't Texas considered South? I get differing answers. Some say Texas is Texas, others say certain parts of Texas is South but not other parts.

The avoidance schools were not just a Southern creation but rather common wherever the Christian Cult of Ignorance held sway. The older larger denominations with long established education systems like most Catholic schools and the Creedal Protestant denominations (Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran) as well as the Mennonite/Amish and Quaker schools never seemed to have much of a problem with reality and facts.

Texas is big and varied as most Big things are. Where I live is relatively liberal (Think, "Senator, You are no Jack Kennedy!" Bentsen quote to Senator Dan Quayle) while further north gets increasingly Conservative.