BadChad, a moment of your time, if you can spare it

The BBQ Pit
901

Yup. And most people that beleive in the basis of the Bible would agree. Let’s forget Christianity for a moment (there’s an opening for a childish retort) and include Judaism in this little experiment. Man wanted to make sense of his world and everything in it. There was no genetic testing, microbiology, microscopes, telescopes, advanced mathematics, advanced chemistry, etc. The guys were working with what they had. And love it or hate it, they wove a pretty damn good story together to eventually form what is the Bible.

It isn’t the hand-written Book of God. You’re confusing Fundies with religious folk. Maybe you need to look into whom you hate before blaming the words you hate on all that read them.

Intellectual and objective justification of a beleif? What intellectual and objective justification do you have of your own self worth? Can you quantify it? Can you give us the equation that proves it? No. According to your rules, you cannot in any way prove your worth other than to state that you beleive it to be so. And don’t try stating all the people in your life that think you’re the bestest person ever. I’d take a guess and say Jesus has more references than you. In real numbers.

Ah yes. Philosophy. The art of trying to make sense of life and thought and motivation. Sounds familiar, but I guess the time it’s espoused makes it more important. Of course, all modern philosophy is based on the same questions asked centuries ago. Why is man good? Why is he evil? What motivates him to choose one over the other? Why are we here? Where did we come from? Is there any purpose to us existing?

I can see where philosophers and the Bible take a major divergence on these questions.

I see that you like to attack any Christian (even though pretty much every religion is based on these philosophical questions) as being full of shit because they may utter a word that doesn’t indicate utter submission to never doing anything wrong.

You fucking douchebag. Let me say that again. YOU UTTER FUCKING DOUCHEBAG.

Now, time for a reality check for your stance. Would Jesus have said that to you? Likely not. I can’t say for sure as no philosopher has weighed in, but I’ll bet no.

I can say it with no problem. You see, I may walk in His shadow, and I may walk in His path, but I’m not egotistical enough to ever think I’m His equal. He leads me while I stumble and fall and always waits patiently for me to catch up to Him while I get bogged down with your type. I may talk tough about people burning in Hell, but I have no power over it. It’s not my call, and it’s not my place to question the decision. And He’s always patient when I spout off with an opinion even when I’m wrong. He knows I’m human and will make a shitload of mistakes.

I know it all sounds like pablum to you, but I don’t expect anyone to ever compare me to Him. I don’t do anything in my life that hurts anyone in His name, and don’t intend to. Hell, I’ve turned Pro-Choice just becauseI think a woman has the right to choose. Be it abortion, drugs, alcohol, gut-punching husbands, etc. Choice is wonderful. Choice should be respected.

Give it a try sometime. Respect what others choose to do. You may like it.

[QUOTE]

902

The story the Jews wove was at best no better, and IMO, not as good as the story written by Homer. Certainly it was far inferior to Plato, Aristotle, and the Epicurians, who had every disadvantage you attribute to the Jews. In the story of the Jews I see nothing that requires, nor even hints at, divine inspiration, and as far as humans go the bible is certainly not the best with regards to science or philosophy for the time period. Perhaps you are not well read enough to realize this.

What makes you think your religious beliefs make any more sense than that of the fundamentalists?

First I would ask you to define self worth. For what it’s worth educationally I’m well above average (as was my GPA), financially I’m well above average, I have athletic trophies that say I’m physically above average, the women I sleep with are considerably more attractive than average…

I can cite a few people who have met me at least. Jesus can’t cite a single eye witness.

Modern philosophy sits on the shoulders of philosophers who wrote centuries ago. It also sits on the findings of science.

Man is selfish.

Man is selfish.

Man acts in accordance with his perceived best interest, or in the best interest of that of his genes.

We just are.

We evolved from lower life forms.

As far as we can tell, no.

Since you consider yourself a non-fundamentalist, how about you give your own answers for a comparison and contrast.

I think all religions are irrational. I think Christianity is particularly cruel and intolerant. In as much as Christians today are more tolerant than they have been in the past, should be attributed more to their lack of faith in the original tenants of their belief, than because of it.

Suck my ass. Let me say that again. SUCK MY ASS.

Jesus would just damn me to hell. He would probably say you are sinning for saying that to me though. I’m not exactly sure what you mean my douchebag, by that do you mean I’m a fool?

So you don’t think he cares that you deliberately don’t try to be his equal?

No, you just think he does. Really Jesus is just a false prophet who’s as dead as fried chicken.

You believe in hell, and yet you would still worship the god that created it and sends most of his creation there? You miscreant.

903

I guess that answers my question to you, duffer! That’s pretty straight.

[quote]
badchad: How intellectual and objective do you think you have been, considering you “grew up in the church?”

Growing up in my small town church did not seem to deliver a crushing blow to the objectivity or the intellects of the two members of my Sunday School class who graduated with honors from the Air Force Academy. I scored higher than they did on the Air Force Entrance Exam. Another in our class graduated from West Point. I graduated with honors from Peabody College at Vanderbilt. There were only eight or ten of us in the class.

How objective are you about “growing up in the church”? Must it always be a mind numbing experience?

I agree, I think. Or at least scientific method appears to have disproven a lot of things that the Bible seems to have held true. (I don’t think that the Bible held its account of Creation to be factual, for example.) But I can understand why you might use that as an example.

And if you think about it, the scientific method probably has disproven a lot of things that science once held to be true!

Almost none of it is intellectual, but I do find String Theory spiritually exciting because it seems to be so far removed from the realities that the average Joe observes on a day to day basis. Of course, it may go bust. Objectively, I have about five to fifteen minutes of a personal experience (which I do not asssociate with any “religion”) which convinced me of the existence of a level of reality beyond the rest of my mundane life. It certainly changed my views on what “heaven” is.

It did not happen during a religious service or during meditation or prayer. I wasn’t reading and no one was talking to me.

That word divine intrigues me. I don’t know that I’ve thought about what it means to me in a long time. I don’t know how I relate to it now.

In the kind of heaven that I used to imagine, the first question that I was going to ask “God,” if given the opportunity, was how he could allow the Holocaust, the killing fields of Cambodia and other such atrocities to happen. These things seemed to me to be a certain sign that God did not interfere here on Earth. Now I don’t ask that question in my head anymore. (Not that I have any answers now. I don’t.)

Have you read any Bertrand Russell? I think you might find some of his writing appealing. (I’m not even certain what prompted me to ask that.)

904

If you look back at my quote you are responding to, you will see that I asked how intellectual and objective you had been in relation to the examination of the bible and the existence of god. I ask that question again.

For what objective and intellectual reasons do you decide to hold that the creation story was not intended to be factual but the divinity of Jesus, or the existence of eternal paradise was? Regardless, if you prefer not to scientifically examine the probability of the 6 day creation story, how about we examine the probability of the resurrection of Christ?

One could argue that modern science never holds that anything is absolutely true but rather a hypothesis or theory is provisionally true based on the amount of supporting evidence and its ability to make accurate predictions. As such science self corrects itself and that is sciences strength, not a weakness. Self correction is something faith based systems lack, and I don’t recall religion ever correcting a misconception held in science. Or in other words, what’s your point?

If 5-15 minutes of personal experience qualifies as objective to you, I have to ask what’s you definition of subjective? Even granting your evidence, you yourself admit it does not associate with any religion. Does this mean that you don’t know of any compelling objective or even subjective evidence suggesting the existence of a Christian god?

You might try looking it up.

So you are admitting that you have no comfortable answer for the problem of evil so you just stopped thinking about it? Don’t you think that is the antithesis of being intellectual and objective in your assessments of god?

I’ve read a lot of Russell. I do find him appealing. Better than Jesus in every way I can think of.

905

But if I answered your question directly, I couldn’t impress you with how special I am. I don’t know how objective I’ve been. It’s very difficult for anyone to judge her or his own objectivity.

And intellectually, I fair only a little better. I have read the Bible and studied it in some college courses which I found to be tedious. I much preferred the Bible stories that I learned as a child through Hurlbut’s (?) Hurlburt’s (?) Stories of the Bible.

I was not meant to be a Bible scholar even though I place value on understanding the historical perspective, the translation processes, the Council of Nicea, and so forth. I am in awe of people who have real knowledge of the original languages, but that was never an interest of mine.

I don’t remember at what point I began to doubt intellectually the creation story. But when I was 18, a young ministerial student that I respected told me that he thought that it was okay to accept many of the Old Testament stories as myths that had been used to explain general truths. That was such a relief to me and made much sense. The main ones that I had had trouble with were the creation story and Noah and the flood. Neither sounded very plausible.

Like many people, I have questioned my beliefs about eternal life. I wouldn’t be human if I didn’t. And I certainly don’t believe in a fluffy Never-Neverland of mansions and streets of gold. Since the experience of a shifting reality that I told you about, I have been a lot less afraid of death and I think of the “time” after death as a return to being a part of everything and experiencing bliss. So I’ve had no reason to stop believing in “eternal paradise,” so to speak.

As for the probability of the Resurrection, you can argue it scientifically if you want to. I have no doubt that you can produce good arguments. But even if you changed my faith in the Resurrection, I would still be a Christian. (And my faith doesn’t respond to scientific argument anyway.)

BTW, I don’t put much stock in Revelations. I know…picky, picky, picky.

906

No, of course not. I assume, incidentally, that you’ve no end of respect for those Christians who have renounced their personal possessions - monks and nuns and so on? I expect a lengthy screed from you explaining why you hold them in high regard, listen to what they have to say, and act accordingly.

Back to me: You see, in common with pretty much every Christian I ever heard of, even by reputation, I did not make up Christianity for myself based on my amateur reading of the Bible; I inherited the religious practices and traditions from my forebears and peers. While not going as far as the rector of the village where I was brought up, who once featured on the local TV news for having refused a pay rise when he was offered it, I could hardly be said to be “laying up treasures for myself on Earth” (adjusts £2.99 supermarket reading glasses :wink: ) or doing much other than providing for myself and my household in, by contemporary standards, a pretty modest manner. (I’m depressingly uninterested in career advancement, too.) So far as I am able to judge, I do my duty better by refraining from being a burden on my fellows, and by helping to provide for those less able than myself; though you yourself will know very well why I’m not supposed to make much noise about the latter.

A vow of poverty isn’t customary among run-of-the-mill Christians and hasn’t been in many centuries, whatever the Apostles did. But I’m pretty darned unostentatious, badchad. I don’t believe I am, at this exact moment, wearing a thread of clothing that’s less than four or five years old, and yesterday evening I was getting mileage out of a sweatshirt that dates back to before Easter 1993. I own a computer. I even have some games for it. The last time I bought one was four years ago. You’d think, what with all this frugality, that I’d have an enormous bank balance to show for it - and yet I doubt I’ll be able to afford to retire within the next fifteen years, for all that. So if my wealth is a stumbling block on my road to communion with God, it’s a pretty small one.

And of course, as far as “laying up for myself treasures in Heaven” is concerned, I’ve done something that would be harder for you than renouncing, say, my last-decade Ford Galaxy or budget-shop boots would be for me. I’ve accepted that I am not, and cannot possibly be, good enough in my own person to be pleasing to God. I have cast myself on His mercy and asked for Him to make good the deficiency, and I submit myself in humble trust to His promise. I can say “Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner”, which is something you can’t do and will rationalize away far more vehemently than I rationalize away my adherence to a fairly modest material wealth; and I can apologise wholeheartedly to anyone reading this board to whom I have made a poor witness for Christianity. The last thing I should do as a result is to swell with any personal pride for my virtue, for it’s only God’s grace that enables me to achieve even as little as the above; and the second last thing I should do is to take any pleasure in the realization that you cannot and will not do the same. I wish with all my heart that you would and could, though you are only a bunch of letters on my screen and one that speaks harshly and maliciously of that which I hold dearest. I truly pity you for the hate and pride that is in you. I’ll be sure to include you in my prayers, though God knows, I need them badly enough for myself.

Urendi Maleldil

907

Stop right there. Your post is an attempt to demonstrate that while you haven’t sold your possessions and given the proceeds to the poor, you’re still a good person becuse you don’t have quite as much stuff as others do. Well, that could just as well be (probably is) a result of your being a dumb fuck who could only accumulate a million dollars by starting with two million, and you’re just using your relative poverty as evidence at least of your piety, Christ knows it’s not good for much else.

But here’s the thing: Jesus was IMO commanding the surrender of possessions as a means to an end, not as the end itself. If that’s where you’ve ended up despite a lifetime of avariciousness and miserliness, that wouldn’t mean much to Jesus, would it? No, poverty is a virtue because it illustrates to a Christian that this world, and success in it, is entirely without meaning. If you don’t get that, you don’t get the first concept of what your Lord intended.

But (and here’s my point) Christians do not actually live as if they believe this world is far less important than the next one. If they did, they would all be preaching the Gospel 24/7, walking around in loincloths and mendicants’ bowls, which hardly increases their life expectancy–but so what, because this world is just a place to live a pious life, work ceaselessly to love thy neighbor and succor the poor, and then (even if you die young from overexposure and malnutrition) to sit at your Father’s side in Heaven for all eternity. That’s Jesus Christ’s message, and all you parsers of holy text who pretend that the Bible requires more study than is humanly possible are full of shit if you claim that Jesus Christ wanted people not to follow his simple (but very difficult) commandments for living your daily lives.

The fact that you find all these twisted means of flouting Jesus’s precepts, and still get to drive your Caddys (or even your Yugos) while comforting yourself that you are in any meaningful sense a Christian, is just laughable.

As to monks and nuns who do good work (as opposed to wasteful work, supporting the administrative functions of whatever church they’re a part of), sure I commend them and admire them for helping unfortunate people survive a few more years, at least in the sense that they walk the walk, which Christians outside of the cloistered walls do not do, or even try to do. You just talk about striving, trying, aiming to live a Christian life–but it’s just not that fucking hard to do. Deciding to actually live a Christian life IS fucking hard, the striving part is easy. You could strive to live a Christian life in five easy minutes over your Cheerios every day. BFD. The problem is in DOING the actual renuncation of this world entirely.

I can respect that choice (even if I reject it for myself, not being a Christian). But to blab all day and night about OTHER people becoming Christians, or becoming better Christians, while refusing to follow Jesus’s plain-as-day suggestions for how you might do that for yourself, boggles the mind.

He was great on hypocrisy, motes and beams, and on personal responsiblity but Christians don’t seem to have read those sections of the Bible. Basically what Jesus Christ seems to have said, if he said anything at all, is “This world in nothing, and the only thing a true follower of mine can do here is to renounce it, to spend his days tellling others to renounce it, to be everlastingly kind to people until you die, and then you’ll be in Heaven.” I see all the Christians in this thread (and others) as colossal hypocrites for expressing gleeful and deliberate hostility towards the non-Christians here, for finding fault in how they choose to live and for pretending to be so stupid as not to be able to understand, much less follow, what Jesus plainly says in response to a direct question.

I have to add, the idea that his precept to “sell your possessions” only applies to that particular young man is just hilarious. Yes, HE should sell his possession, because he’s an asshole and if he could get on a messageboard would be a troll, but everyone else, you chould buy as much stock and real estate as you can because those are good investments and the point of Jesus’s philosophy for everyone except that one particular dumb fuck is to get rich quick.

908

A significant (and apparently increasing) number of christians still disagree with that, though. Does God want you to be rich? It’s a popular theme in my area, where there is a strong belief that the Elect of God get material rewards in this world because they are the Elect of God.

909

If anyone’s interested (or even still following this one) I started a GD thread on this question here: Christian Prosperity Theology: Antithetical to or in line with the message of Jesus? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board

910

Well let me tell you; you have not been very objective.

Don’t you think then that you might be a little contemptible to be on a message board trying to convince others to accept your belief system that you admit you have not been very intellectual in adopting it?

But, why doubt the creation story? You admit that your faith does not respond to scientific argument, so 6 day creation should be fair game for you to believe in. I see no consistency in your doubts of creation or the flood, while at the same time accepting the resurrection of Jesus.

One reason to stop believing in eternal paradise is that all objective evidence indicates that our consciousness depends upon your body/brain/neurons, and once they have decomposed there is nothing left to experience bliss or anything else. Your parts may return to be part of everything but there is no reason to think you will be cognizant of the process.

It sounds to me like you just accepting my every criticism and proclaiming you are proud of it. The question then should be why do you think it ok to believe in things without any good reason?

911

Where did you get the idea that I’m trying to convince others to accept my belief system? To the contrary, each person must follow her or his own path – even you atheists. And there’s so much more to the brain than the intellect.

Good, good. I promised no consistency.

You may be right. But I do have a reason to think otherwise. If I am wrong, I think that I am not so afraid of ceasing to be. I can understand now why Buddhists see that as a goal.

We don’t always choose what we believe. Our body chemistry, for example, affects much of what we believe.

And there is always a reason why we believe – even if it is brainwashing. Who determines if it’s a good reason?

BTW, ok with whom? You speak almost as if there is an outside authority for each person. I wouldn’t say to you, “What makes you think it is okay to be so unintuitive?”

(Not that I think you are)

You have asked very thought-provoking questions. Thanks for that.

912

I haven’t been reading all this thread but I loved this post. I went back and read the last few to get the context. Great!!

913

[QUOTE=Zoe]
Where did you get the idea that I’m trying to convince others to accept my belief system?

[quote]

It seemed that in your discussions with Kalhoun and Diogenes that you were trying to advance the idea that your viewpoints had merit, at the very least. That implies that you want them to accept at least some of your beliefs. Regardless, Christ taught that you should be trying to convince others to worship him, thus if you are not doing so, then you are again falling short of his ideals. If Christ were right about the afterlife, then it logically follows that if you care about others you should try, and try real hard, to convince them to accept Jesus as their savior. Anything else would be callous.

Well certainly there lower brain centers that give us urges that go against our cognition. The question then is should we follow those lower brain centers when our intellect and mountains of objective evidence tells us otherwise. I would suggest no. However, I would be interested if you can give reasons to support the contrary, particularly as it relates to religion.

But that is nothing to be proud of. We should believe in things because we have sufficient reason to do so. To do otherwise makes us beasts subject to believe in anything we are trained to do so. To do otherwise would have made you into a very good suicide bomber if only your childhood indoctrination would have been a little different.

What reason?

I don’t think we ever choose what we believe. But that does not change the fact that what you believe in is irrational.

Brainwashing is a very honest admission here. I do think that is the reason, or a large part of the reason, you hold onto some of the beliefs that you do.

Now that brainwashing is on the table, I don’t think it is a good reason to believe something. The bigger question now, is do you think brainwashing is a good reason to believe something?

Ok, with you. If we establish that your religions beliefs have absolutely no rational support and are maintained purely by brainwashing, hope, fear, and want, then I would ask you if you think it is ok. We could keep the conversation a little less personal for a while and talk about if it is ok for a Muslim suicide pilot to maintain his beliefs if supported by nothing more than what I listed above.

You probably wouldn’t say that because you aren’t arguing from the position of strength that I am.

You’re welcome.

914

fixed coding

It seemed that in your discussions with Kalhoun and Diogenes that you were trying to advance the idea that your viewpoints had merit, at the very least. That implies that you want them to accept at least some of your beliefs. Regardless, Christ taught that you should be trying to convince others to worship him, thus if you are not doing so, then you are again falling short of his ideals. If Christ were right about the afterlife, then it logically follows that if you care about others you should try, and try real hard, to convince them to accept Jesus as their savior. Anything else would be callous.

Well certainly there lower brain centers that give us urges that go against our cognition. The question then is should we follow those lower brain centers when our intellect and mountains of objective evidence tells us otherwise. I would suggest no. However, I would be interested if you can give reasons to support the contrary, particularly as it relates to religion.

But that is nothing to be proud of. We should believe in things because we have sufficient reason to do so. To do otherwise makes us beasts subject to believe in anything we are trained to do so. To do otherwise would have made you into a very good suicide bomber if only your childhood indoctrination would have been a little different.

What reason?

I don’t think we ever choose what we believe. But that does not change the fact that what you believe in is irrational.

Brainwashing is a very honest admission here. I do think that is the reason, or a large part of the reason, you hold onto some of the beliefs that you do.

Now that brainwashing is on the table, I don’t think it is a good reason to believe something. The bigger question now, is do you think brainwashing is a good reason to believe something?

Ok, with you. If we establish that your religions beliefs have absolutely no rational support and are maintained purely by brainwashing, hope, fear, and want, then I would ask you if you think it is ok. We could keep the conversation a little less personal for a while and talk about if it is ok for a Muslim suicide pilot to maintain his beliefs if supported by nothing more than what I listed above.

You probably wouldn’t say that because you aren’t arguing from the position of strength that I am.

You’re welcome.

915

Certainly I think my viewpoints have merit or they wouldn’t be my viewpoints. But that doesn’t imply that I want anyone to accept my religious beliefs. You have inferred that. What if I am wrong and the other person did not inquire within themselves for the answers?

Jesus emphasized other things that were more important. Those are the things I have concerned myself with. I don’t believe your interpretation of what Jesus said about the afterlife, remember?

“Lower” brain centers is an assumption that you are making. It is also just a manner of speaking about a primitive part of our brain. But that’s not the part of the brain that I am speaking of anyway, I don’t think.

I’m into territory that I know little about on an intellectual level, but much about on an experiential or empirical level. There I go being “contradictory” again.

I don’t know if theories about right brain/left brain thinking are all that reliable. But when tested, I come out exactly in the middle. 50-50. That is exactly where I would want to be because I can value both rational thought and intuitive/creative thought. One sparks the other.

To me a person without intuitive thinking is a person without a sense. I cannot explain it to you anymore than a sighted person can explain to a person who was born blind how they know that Mom is almost home when she is walking three blocks away.

“Intuitive thinking” is somewhat of a catch-all phrase and perhaps I am misusing it for my own purposes at the moment. Think “spiritual response.” That place which is open to the Holy Spirit.

I think you would be interested in the work of Dr. Michael Persinger. This is just one person’s experience with a machine’s ability to stimulate centers of the brain which respond “spiritually.”

Personal experiences – both mundane and intense.

You do not have enough data.

That’s a very unscientific assumption. (Wait a minute while I suck on my teeth.) OK. I don’t know enough about the difference in brainwashing and conditioning. So I will concede to conditioning. But keep in mind that my overall beliefs are different from my foundations.

Ok, with you. If we establish that your religions beliefs have absolutely no rational support and are maintained purely by brainwashing, hope, fear, and want, then I would ask you if you think it is ok.

Badchad, you seemed to have skipped a few steps in your logic. You are projecting.

We could keep the conversation a little less personal for a while and talk about if it is ok for a Muslim suicide pilot to maintain his beliefs if supported by nothing more than what I listed above.

Is it okay with whom, Badchad? This is the second time I have asked.

916

I don’t see anything wrong with inferring.

So because Jesus said other things are more important that means it’s ok for you to disregard something else Jesus thought important enough to specifically command you to do?

I don’t remember. What do you think Jesus said about the afterlife? Does your “interpretation” differ from what he actually said as per the bible?

What makes you think you are all that intuitive/creative? All I see you posting is pretty much standard “liberal Christian” sewage.

What makes you think your intuition is as good as mine, much less better?

Please elaborate.

I think I do, but you can always provide more.

This is the second time I have answered. You, is it ok with you? Do you think it would be ok for a Muslim suicide pilot pointing his passenger plane at an orphanage that you were occupying, whose beliefs that you and the children around you should die were based on nothing more that brainwashing, hope, and want?

917

People draw inferences all the time. Sometimes they are mistaken and sometimes they are correct. In the specific situation we were discussing, you claimed that something had been implied. The inference you drew was incorrect.

I have no evidence that I was specifically commanded to do that.

Jesus spoke metaphorically. I think what I have experienced was not an interpretation or metaphorical. But it was brief and only a glimpse.

Words are limiting. I have the advantage of knowing who I am.

I have inferred that from your worship of logic as the only touchstone. I would be delighted to be wrong and I hold open that possibility.

The “mundane” you would surely see as “standard liberal Christian sewage.” And I am not interested in provoking you.

The “intense” cannot be adequately described in words. Complete centering. Complete and unlimited expansion into Oneness. Bliss. And even the possibility of the extinguishing of ego although I did not go that far. But this is a very mundane and ordinary description of something that seemed to be much more real than sitting at this desk and typing in these words.

I cannot provide the data that you need. Maybe you don’t need any more information. But then why are you so obsessed with this subject? There must be something about it that won’t let you disbelieve in peace.

I am the Muslim. I am the Jew. I am the pilot. I am the child.

918

[quote=So because Jesus said other things are more important that means it’s ok for you to disregard something else Jesus thought important enough to specifically command you to do? [/quote]

Jesus is the ideal in human action and interaction to Christians. He is a model by which some of us strive to follow. However, we are human and not perfect. We are not expected to live up to His level. We are, however, I believe, expected to do less harm than good in life, and accept responsibility for our failings. Even when we know going into the deal that we’re going to be wrong.

I think your expectation of saintliness among Christians is far more absurd than your expectation of Christians to emulate Christ in all phases of life.

When you can prove Man is capable of living a life with no wrongdoing, that’ll be good enough for me in your assertion that there is no God.

If your problem is sinning religious people, I can see the point. Vaguely. What the hell is wrong with people trying to be better no matter the focus? If you come in here tomorrow and hand us proof there is no God, you know what will happen?

Man will find another thing to believe in. And it will be something that will espouse safety, serenity in times of trouble, and a sense of purpose. Some look to religion, some to work, some to heroin, some to your posts.

Until you show the quantataive proof that you know best and should be listened to, shut the fuck up. Until you have more proof than any other on what is right and true, shut the fuck up. You’re tiresome and fast becoming a joke on this issue. You don’t think there’s a God, and disdain anyone that does. We get it. Shut the fuck up.

Oh, was that not Christlike enough for you? Well, I’m only human. You should check out the club sometime.

919

I don’t think my inference was incorrect, I just think you won’t admit it.

I imagine you get your Jesus commands from the bible. So what makes you think some apply to you and not others?

And I’ll ask you again, what do you think Jesus taught about the afterlife? How, if at all, do your beliefs differ. Be specific please.

I don’t think using my intuition is the best method of argument, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have any. My intuition tells me that you live a sad existence as such that you need to bolster your reality with fairy tales, about invisible beings that love you, to make you feel better. My intuition also tells me that you are weak minded and as such are very prone to believe a combination of that which is told to you and that which you find personally pleasing, rather than having the stones to accept that which is. Now tell me, do you think I should carry on with my intuition for further conversations or stick with more logical modes of argument?

I’m sure.

What you describe as intense, sounds made up. I understand bliss but what do you mean by “complete centering,” or “expansion into oneness,” or the “extinguishing of ego?”

Yeah, believers who think an afterlife being more important than this one, being in control of thermonuclear devices.

Let the record show that Zoe, is afraid of answering questions that will reveal her hypocrisy and as such I seeking to escape into lunacy. That’s a new one.

920

Why not? I was not only raised as a Catholic but actually went to Jesuit schools up to about age 10. IIRC, I was taught that Jesus, while being one part of the Wholy Trinity, was a human being through and through. Beyond the absurdity of the Trinity business, why can’t you, as “just another human being,” be as good as Jesus? Again, he was “just” another human being and made no claims to perfection.

Or did he?

Not sure I follow. Isn’t doing “less harm than good” primarily a survival instinct as per social Darwinism? I mean, I doubt you’d get any sort of preferential treatment from your peers by claiming to be a “Christian” serial killer as opposed to one that’s a heathen. And if you did, wouldn’t that be really screwed-up?

I won’t speak for badchad, but on my end, I don’t have any additional “expectations” of Christians than I do of anyone else. Point being, YOU are the ones placing those expectations upon yourselves. Hardly my fault – or anyone else’s – if we observe that you’re not living up to them and point out as much.

Conversely, when you can do likewise, I’ll believe in god. See, there’s no such thing as a “perfect human,” not even Jesus for as long as he claimed to be one.

Sorry to have to break it to you at this late stage in your life. This is the sort of thing one should learn at about the time one finds out that Santa is just really Mom and Dad following tradition.

Why not just “believe” in yourself and try to be as loving and as peaceful as you can. Jesus-like, you know – just without any fairy tales.

Imagine all the wars that wouldn’t have happened if that was the case.

You clearly have a talent for writing convincing arguments. I think I’ll just shut the fuck up.

Or maybe not.