askeptic? Jesus, as per concept, does love you. And everyone. That’s one of the good things about it. Myself, I know how you feel, I was raised without religion, and dragging me into a church makes me feel highly empathetic to vampires.
But you know, she probably meant it nicely. Just say ‘bless your heart’ back at her. And even mean it.
Wow. You desperately need to get over yourself.
Well, you’ve got the rabid hatred down pretty good, but at least you don’t post in every religion thread. I guess you can stay.
I like Trihs simply because he’s a good writer. I don’t think there’s a more powerful or recognizable writing voice here on the dope.
I’m stealing this.
Thanks. 
Consider, hypothetically, someone who openly believes that Andrew Jackson was the greatest president of all time. To one who doesn’t believe, the hypothetical Jehovah is far nastier than the real Jackson or whoever wantonly killed off a big chunk of one’s group.
Everyone’s aware DT doesn’t attend pittings of himself, yes?
And the number of people who seem to think “He lives in his parent’s basement, Tee Hee!” is the height of wit is just sad.
Well, all righty then.
Oh, here we go…
Maybe someone should divert him here from a thread he’s posting in via a linky-poo.
Those who hold beliefs about the quality of Elton John’s music generally accept that their beliefs are subjective. A diehard fan may scratch his head in bewilderment at the thought that anyone would dislike ‘Goodbye Yellow Brick Road’, but, if pushed, he would likely accept that musical tastes aren’t set in stone and that people who can’t stand Elton John aren’t wrong in any meaningful sense. In other words, people’s beliefs about music are aesthetic beliefs, and aesthetic beliefs are widely recognised as being idiosyncratic.
In this respect they contrast starkly with a great many religious beliefs. The majority of religious beliefs are not spiritual, not metaphysical, but just plain physical. For instance, the belief that Jesus was born of a virgin is, at its heart, a claim about biology. The belief that he bodily ascended into heaven is a claim about the physical laws governing the universe. In other words, their acceptance is not intended to be a matter of opinion.
I don’t think your comparison is a good one because it doesn’t draw a distinction between subjective beliefs (“I like Elton John”, “Green is my favourite colour”) and objective beliefs (“I have two children”, “Jesus rose from the dead”).
And I am well aware of your existence. I am also aware of how vanishingly small a minority you comprise. Like it or not, millions more people agree with Robertson than you. His personal theology is a popular one, and one only need watch the 700 club to learn that it is steeped in scripture. While his views may be ludicrous and morally repugnant, that is simply because the scripture on which they are based is ludicrous and morally repugnant. To be fair, some aspects of his biblical worldview may be quite enlightened, and for that credit should be given to the authors of the Bible. But that has no bearing on the truthfulness of his philosophy.
I do understand that about him, but I think you need to recognise that while the volunteer and the fraudster may differ in a multitude of ways, they most likely share some very, very odd beliefs about the universe. Der Trihs may condemn them both as evil on the basis of their religious affiliation, whereas I certainly wouldn’t. But I would have no problem judging them to be equally irrational, and their beliefs equally baseless.
I have two problems with religious beliefs as they are popularly held. The first is that they are based on nothing but thin air and wishful thinking. That they are irrational. That they are nonsensical, outlandish, and bizarre to the point of being funny. The second problem I have with religious belief is that some of them can motivate good people to do very bad things. The belief that dying on a battlefield in defence of your religion represents the ultimate sacrament is incompatible with 21st century weaponry. I think that nowadays the stakes are simply too high for us to continue tolerating religious irrationality.
I know people who believe that, and I understand why they do. They know why I despise him, and they understand why I do. We respect each other as people.
I must admit that that’s a little hard to grasp — formulating a moral judgment about someone whom I believe to my core has never even existed.
Well then, that eradicates our differences because I am glad to tell you that my experience with God is completely subjective. I’ve said so quite many times, but probably not when you were around to see it.
Fair enough
He won’t come here for this, AFAICR.
You might be interested in a GD discussion I’m hosting about subjective and objective frames. Just look for S5.
Yeah, like everything I post here is supposed to be “the height of wit”. :rolleyes:
You’re on the losing team here, with your buddy. But go ahead and defend him if it makes you feel better.
Cool. I’ll check it out. Thanks for the heads up.
Holy cow!
I can’t believe you wrote these things back-to-back!
So what you’re saying is, your own very real desire to stone someone for being religious is a means to save us from your imagined culture where the *religious *stone people?
Please tell me you wrote this to be funny. Because, if you’re serious, this is the most unintentionally hilarious thing I’ve read all day.
Incidentally, Mr Dibble, I’m surprised to learn that Der Trihs shuns his Pit threads. It is remarkable that he can call people delusional idiots everywhere on the board except for where it’s supposed to be done.