To amplify what Lib and Diogenes are saying, there’s a famous fundamentalist question about “Do you believe in the Devil?” In which, of course, they’re using the “intellectual adherence” meaning.
And, of course, the only proper answer for a Christian is, “No, of course not. No devil ever died for my sins, nor called me into everlasting life.” 
There are two different sets of ideas that fundamentally destroy the value of belief in God.
The first one: If God is actually omnipotent or omniscient and aware of himself as ‘being here’ aware that something else is here, sentient, conscious, etc… then all logic collapses and everything becomes instantly absurd. By believing this, instead of believing in God, one declares that logic, value, purpose and reason are all meaningless, arbitrary and completely relative with no reference frame except for the endless repetition of one concept looping, which ultimately means that Gods words and being are effectively pointless as well: absurd.
The second one: Only one single entity who would have rather not been born than be born, and to not have that choice, shows that God is the epitomy of what is detested in a personality for not killing himself before acting so hurredly to rape and pillage and violate souls encapsulated in oblivion, and brought into being for the sole purpose of eternal suffering and nothing else. It would then become the primary directive of humans to teach God what the word consent means, and the most basic principles of suffering and ego validation which is supported by evidence and peer reveiw consent.
Basically, if God is just one of us, not omnipotent, omniscient or eternal… then why the focus upon God as if this being represents any value or possibility that humans would even remotely desire to embrace?
The second one, why not just kill yourself or not be a jerk before raping people in chaotic torturous suffering for eternity? An infinite amount of people in heaven does not justify one non-consentual being, being brought into being.
Ultimately, God doesn’t give us choices that we would provide God, given the capacity to help and understand reality. God doesn’t give us anything, period. The whole concept is the equivilent of running money laundering through a squared circle: it’s all simply absurd.
Absurdity being denial of looking at the deterministic mechanism you are using to maintain delusion and maliciously violate people who disagree… that’s how rationality veiws absurdity.
It’s like:
“Stop torturing me, my hand is on this hot burner with a pot of water on top of it… unbound my hand.”
“What are you talking about? I’m just boiling water… stop being rediculous.”
That exchange is the epitome of how rationality will invariably encounter any human being who believes in God when integrity is on the line.
-Justhink
Justhink
Before you hijack this thread forty ways from Sunday and send everyone scurrying for cover and pulling out their hair, could you tell us what belief or polarity changes you have experienced as a result of your experiences at Straight Dope?
Thanks, Lib. I was about to make the same request.
Do you understand, Justhink? If you would like to witness about changes in your personal views on these matters, you are welcome to do so. I would ask that you do it in a comprehensible, measured and respectful manner. Please.
Lib’s point about intellectual changes being trivial (while I don’t necessarily agree completely) is why I wanted to focus this thread on witnessing instead of debate. It’s not what belief is, but the ways in which it changes that I’m most interested in. And how those changes affect the way we approach daily life both on and off the boards.
I thank him and Diogenes for explaining pisteuo. Trust is a very significant thing. The idea of giving or having complete trust can be scarier than hell. I do understand its place. It is a foundation. And a brave thing.
Interesting point about the devil in this context, Poly. That makes a lot of sense.
You’re welcome, Fatwater. Incidentally, I wager that a man will be hard-pressed to find anything more trustworthy than perfect love.
My pleasure. Not much really, I just always take all the credit.
I really don’t know how to answer that question without sounding concieted or like an idiot. I learned some user names, I learned what some unseen internet screens look like, I’ve read some trivia. I’ve had errors and mistakes pointed out, but I never thought I was perfect to begin with… none of these have fundamentally shifted my veiw of life which I held before coming here. I do make very short-sighted and vague logical arguments when I’m in a hurry, but I don’t think I would ever post if they had to be perfect; which is its own interesting GD (should I stop posting on SDMB? =). I enjoy the exchanges here and learn quite a bit, but not much of it seems to be on the topic of the actual exchanges taking place… just quirky creative mappings not much different from the process which occurs when I totally isolate. I have a clearer understanding of the vast layers off difference from others that I reasoned to be the case about me. I know more about the communication difficulties which I had already understood existed.
None of this comes a suprize to me though, it would be expected, but then again I don’t have a frame of reference for suprise, no polarity changes. I have become more convinced that people who succeed do the least work in society - no polarity changes though.
I do get tired of individuals who become diverted by an idea that I’m arrogant or megalomaniac when I clearly have the choice to lie and not tell the truth about my experience or thought, or to sugar-coat the subtleties which I feel really need to be addressed for the variety of depth I believe can be found in a topic which is used to determine it. Not to be arrogant 
… but how dumb can you be to take the time to call someone on something so rock-brain obvious to the person making the post and those reading the post? Does it not occur to people that the state of elitism accusation drops on them the instant they state the case, unless they have it bound as a recursive proof with regards to the content and the context of reality as a whole?
At least you (and others) were calling me on it Lib. I appreciated that, and tend to veiw some level of understanding the topic I’m talking about when they point out contradictions to me that the entire argument hinges on. To just make a bald statement of ‘megalomania’ without having the endurance to analyze how to measure it and come to a conclusion, when ‘I’ of all people am willing to actually do just that, can tend to frustrate me for about a fraction of a second… then I detect that I’m frustrated and disengage and solve for the emotion logically.
It’s blatantly clear that I seek some form of human contact and am attention deprived. I can choose abstinence, so I don’t think it’s an addiction anymore than life is; which is something I haven’t fully solved for.
Anyways, something like that.
-Justhink
I have always been influenced by a good argument. It is undenably a part of my nature to see all sides. I have gone from being a quasi-religious superstitious child into a hard core rationalist teen. I’ve tried on many different philosophies and spiritual coats on for size, and none of them seem to fit. What does fit is a little from column a and a little from column x, and that changes quite often, as I work to refine my beleifs.
As one of the best discussion boards going, I have been lurking for ages, listening to people talk about all manner of things. I see the hateful things being said, and years ago, that really bothered me, but know I’ve come to understand the function of that in reasoned discussion. I used to get hot under the collar when someone would challenge a dearly held belief of mine, but I know now where that passion would stem from.
That’s why I only lurk now. It seems I have very little to contribute to any discussion any longer, as there are few too many things to be passionate about: Apathy? Perhaps. But I spent my whole 35 years in a passionate tizzy about my life, and it has led to nothing but pain and sorrow.
Years ago, I would’ve kicked my own ass if I met me today. Perhaps the epiphany over all these years of reading all these discussions was that I’m tired of the same problems being discussed over and over and never solved. That finding some kind of answer in the cacophony of human voices and desires might be nice.
That being said {hyjack/} I just finished the Polycarp thread, and I must say how wonderful you all were.{/hyjack}
Oh yeah… as much as I’d like to deny it; I think I hijack OP’s at times or post off topic even though the line is very thin. I think I made a decision on that fence… so… that would be a concrete change of state on a topic.
-Justhink
May I add a hearty “Amen!” to that last comment!!
Well, for the sake of our souls, why didn’t some god make that commitment a bit clearer?
Lib, for one who intellectually does believe in Christ, how can one move from intellectual belief to this deeper trust and commitment? I understand that it is complete reliance upon love, but how exactly does one go from intellectual belief to this deeper trust and commitment?
You know, I was thinking along those lines as I read your preceding post. Specifically about these lines:
Guess what? This is a sign that you are getting a clue that you’re part of the human race.
And so is what you followed that with:
Guess what? Almost every human I’ve ever met has felt that way about themselves at some point in their lives.
Of course it is. But the fact of satisfactory human contact is that it cannot happen on one person’s terms. We each must make some accomodation for the other side. This can take some effort. Thank you for making that effort here.
saraphin, I’m glad you dropped in.
Man, do I hear you!
Justhink
I nearly understood what you were saying. Well done.
Trust is as trust does. He must lay down his ego and let it die.
Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” (Matthew 16:24)
The new and the old cannot co-exist. The old must die before the new can be born.
“Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” (Matthew 9:17)
Life in Love is a rebirth: a death and a resurrection. Man is first born of water, when the water of his mother breaks. His moral journey begins in a life in the atoms. Then he makes a moral decision to surrender, to lay down his old life for a new life, a life in the spirit.
Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”
“How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!”
Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. (John 3:1-6)
The intellect then reforms and comes to comprehend the new life. It sees in new ways, guided by the Holy Spirit. Old questions are answered or rendered moot. Peace replaces fear.
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. (John 14:26-27)
It is a moral decision like any other. Will a man give up his ego? Will he repudiate his old intellectual understanding and accept a new understanding? Will he shut down his brain and open up his heart? Will he simply believe the way a child does, not through rationalizing but through trust?
And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
It is the emptying of himself that allows a man to be filled with the Holy Spirit. You cannot pour something into a glass that is already full. If a man continues clinging to his thoughts of resistance, he closes his heart to God. But opening his heart, and being willing to die, allows God in and makes him reborn.
“The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life, only to take it up again.” (John 10:17)
A man must take up his cross and follow Jesus, ceasing to control his own life and giving his life over to God’s care. He must mean it with all his heart when he says, “Lord, I am dead. I give my life to you.” He must let go.
Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last." (Luke 23:46)
God is good. And love is the conduit through which His goodness flows. The Body of Christ is a network of Love.
“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” (John 13:34-35)
Jesus said it over and over.
“My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.” (John 15:12)
And just in case it wasn’t clear…
“This is my command: Love each other.” (John 15:17)
So, that is your answer. If a man trusts God with all his heart, then he trusts Him enough to let go, to surrender, to admit his arrogance and humble himself. Those who do not trust are not willing to let their old selves die. Rather than trust, they blame — they blame God for the decision that they freely make themselves. They wallow in intellectual smugness, and cry out, “Damn you, God, for rejecting me!” when it is they who have rejected Him.
He has already invited them. They need only knock.
“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.” (Matthew 7:7-8)
It is very hard for me to even understand what changes have taken place in me as a result of this board. I go through times when I post rather often in religious threads, and then for a time, I actively avoid doing so. I begin to feel hypocritical, because I let my passion get control of my wits. But, my faith is a matter more of passion than of wit, so it seems dishonest not to do so.
How to come to know God better? The best thing, to me seems to be to come to know His children better. Trouble is, some of His children are real assholes. And there seems to be no set of beliefs about which you cannot be a complete asshole! I mean, if you can take the faith of someone who came not for the righteous, but for the sinners, and turn it into a game of “You go to hell, I get saved,” then you can be an asshole about anything.
So, I am left with an uncomfortable suspicion that Heaven is going to be full of assholes. It would be more comforting to believe that the assholes are not going to go to Heaven, except for the recurring suspicion that I, myself, might well be an asshole. It’s not a happy thought, I must tell you. And asking me to forgive these other assholes is a tough thing, too. It’s not like they are going to appreciate it! They’re assholes!
But, just sitting around praying and staying away from everyone is certainly nothing to build a faith upon. So, I just have to keep on getting up, and trying to do the obvious thing. Love each one, one at a time, as well as I can. (And sometimes that’s very hard, let me tell you!) All I can hope is that getting this right doesn’t count much on the final grade. I am just not catching on. All this “Love thy neighbor” stuff sounds good on paper, but spending time with that jerk is a real trial, I’ll tell you.
But, then, he has to spend time with me, ha ha! That ought to put some stars in his crown.
“Of course God loves you. Are you kidding? God loves me, man; loving you is a piece of cake.” ~ Triskadecamus ~
Ain’t that the truth.
In my case, certain folks on the SDMB have taught me that there are deeper (and stronger) currents in Christianity than the overly-visible fundamentalist-veering-towards-literalist formulations, that atonement, as such, takes on other forms than the blood-sacrifice whipping boy “rock”, and so on. That’s helped me become (I think) more grounded, and possibly effective, in my own faith.
I’ve also become better able to accept how people can see the world in a theistic framework, which has also helped matters above.
I find that hard to believe. I see no mention of the use of orgone accumulators, or any other orgonomy-related devices or techniques, in any of those 3 articles. From the articles you’ve cited, Dr. Gonzales appears to be using nothing more than dietary regimens and coffee enemas to try and cure his cancer patients (which is a whole other discussion in and of itself; c.f. http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/kg.html).
And why would Gonzales want to use orgone accumulators in his biochemical tests in the first place? Gonzales is trying to test and prove the effectiveness of a dietary-based cancer cure. What possible benefit could he get from testing his patient’s biochemistry with an orgone accumulator? Are you saying he’s using orgone-accumulator-based biochemical tests to determine what type of dietary-based treatment to give each patient? If so, cite please?
Tracer
He’s not saying anything. He’s just hinking.
Justhink: I just noticed a mention, in the link I just provided in my previous post, of the hair analysis that Dr. Gonzales uses:
Note that footnote [13] in the above quote points to Gonzales’s 1995 deposition to the New York State Supreme Court.
I came to a realization today as to how this board has changed an assumption I held, or, or rather my thinking concerning that assumption.
I know that the thread has moved on to something else, but since it applies to the OP, I am going to post it anyway. I assume it is okay to repost something I said in another thread that I felt applied here also? If not, someone slap me. Not TOO hard please, I bruise easily.
"I think at this point that I will let you know that when I came to this board, almost three years ago, I hadn’t really thought about the issue of homosexuality. I had been told that the Bible says it is a sin, and I hadn’t questioned it. Mostly because I have several friends, some of them CLOSE friends, who are homosexual, and I had no problem with their sexuality…I didn’t feel it was any of my business, and that if it WAS a sin, God would deal with it in His own time and in His own way. Not my place, not my responsibilty, NOT my concern. Now, if I had been gay, I would have had to examine this further, but since I WASN’T, I figured (granted, without thinking about it much) that I would just keep muddling through my OWN Christian life, addressing sins I knew I had…and if I ever got perfect, THEN I would investigate whether or not OTHER “sins” were…well, SINS.
Several threads aroused my curiosity, and I started reading threads, following links both “pro and con” so to speak…reading the Scriptures about this issue…and I came up with the conclusion that homosexuality MAY or MAY NOT be a sin. I am not a theologian, I am not a Biblical scholar, so…I might be missing something…but primarily…I DON’T KNOW!!! (But I "don’t know with a strong leaing toward feeling that since it isn’t clearly stated in the Bible that it IS, it isn’t anything I need to concern myself about any more. Besides which, since it isn’t an issue I am dealing with for ME, it isn’t my place to worry about ANYWAY.)
In other words, since I couldn’t see any CLEAR indication in the Bible, I wasn’t going to take anyone ELSE’S word that homosexuality is a sin. Do I WANT it to NOT be a sin? You BET I do. If the Bible clearly said it WAS a sin, would I ignore it? NO WAY!!!
Having SAID that, even if I HAD been convinced that the people who believe homosexuality is a sin were right, I STILL WOULDN’T FEEL THAT IT WAS MY PLACE TO JUDGE ANYONE…unless he or she was my brother or sister in Christ." **
[/QUOTE]
Now, in practice, this didn’t change anything for me, since I didn’t really change the way I lived my life. BUT, it DID change a vaguely held belief in SOMEONE ELSE’S teaching that I was moved to investigate…and clarify.