Polycarp did you forget to take you pills?

[xenophon41]

Pedro, can you tell me exactly what was Red Fury’s point, since you seem to be confident you know what it was? I think it was a mindless, pointless jab at theism that was totally irrelevant to the comment he seems to have been responding to. But maybe I’m wrong.

I do understand IWLN’s response however, along with his/her clever and pointed allusion to a dialogue earlier in the thread where the probability of posteriorally propelled primates was earnestly explored as an approach to understanding the ineffable. IWLN’s point seems to be that one can choose how one responds to tragedy, and that IWLN prefers a visceral response and positive action to an analytical response which changes nothing about the human condition.

Perhaps an allusion involving angels pirhouetting on the heads of pins might have confused you less.

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by Pedro *
That was really, really stupid. Truly moronic. Astonishingly dumb even. There, I feel better now.

Either RedFury’s point just flew right over your head or you are saying thousands of people died so that a few could become better persons and elicit some kindness and compassion. How warming. Or, exactly what are you saying besides making idiotic slams against scientists? (Scientists?! What the fuck?)

Congratulations on learning how to care. Must be quite an accomplishment for you.

Hmm…forgot I was in the pit. I am glad you feel better though. You did miss the point. Thousands didn’t die for our benefit. That was a dumbass conclusion on your part (there now I feel better). We live in a world where all of the layers are not stable. We have earthquakes. That’s why thousands died. My point was a lot of people form opinion about tragedy and other’s actually help. Scientist could have been filled in with lots of different names. Since in most of the tragic scenarios God seems to be the villain, I suppose I couldn’t resist taking a poke at something Atheists value. It was not a serious slam or at least intended to be serious. I apologize. It was a slam against people who keep score, rather than play the game. Again to all scientists, I’m sorry. I should have filled in the blank with Red Fury. It gets kind of old when God is always the scapegoat, but could never possibly be the creator of anything. There appears to be a profusion of primates making unconventional appearances these days.

[Polycarp]

DJ, actually, none of the above, with just a hint of #4.

I expect him to fill a role, and believe that God intended that (whether or not he’s aware of it). That role will have the kind of significant impact that the historical analogs I’ve given, including Jesus, did. Precisely what that role might be, I don’t know. It may be something we need to invent a term for (cf. Gautama – Buddha was a new role historically with him). I admit fully that I phrased the initial claim (which may be true) with strong controversiality. And he will (if my speculation is borne out) fulfill a role sociologiclaly akin to that of Jesus – please note that soteriologically I’m making no such claim.

As for the ILWN/Red Fury sidelight – we live in a world where natural disasters occur. A part of this is that people choose to live in places where they occur, weighing benefits against the chance of disaster. I spent 48 years in Northern New York, and experienced the dregs of one hurricane in all that time, though we had numerous heavy snowfalls and a few severe cold snaps. As the climate there deteriorated in the Nineties, I chose to move to North Carolina, where I’ve lived through six hurricanes, with the worst problem being having no power for two days. California has earthquakes, Hawaii typhoons and tidal waves, Montana blizzards, Kansas and Oklahoma tornadoes. As ILWN said, it’s people helping people that makes the difference, not expecting miracles from the God of your choice or from science. (Actually He comes through – but He does it through people of good will, many of whom don’t even acknowledge Him, and say they do it out of pure human decency. Check this out.)

[CarnalK]

Well if we are getting into the nitty gritty…

Since this man is to make such an impact and yet seemingly unfulfill the prophesies: can we assume a new religion will be founded? (your Buddha&Jesus parallels seem to make me grok that). I know you want to make no predictions but it seems like the elephant in the room to me.

And please spill, was it truly just those earnest words and the childhood background that sparked this? Your inspirations are your own business of course but I am curious how much came from within vs website.

[Pedro]

*Originally posted by IWLN *
**Hmm…forgot I was in the pit. I am glad you feel better though. You did miss the point. Thousands didn’t die for our benefit. That was a dumbass conclusion on your part (there now I feel better). We live in a world where all of the layers are not stable. We have earthquakes. That’s why thousands died. My point was a lot of people form opinion about tragedy and other’s actually help. Scientist could have been filled in with lots of different names. Since in most of the tragic scenarios God seems to be the villain, I suppose I couldn’t resist taking a poke at something Atheists value. It was not a serious slam or at least intended to be serious. I apologize. It was a slam against people who keep score, rather than play the game. Again to all scientists, I’m sorry. I should have filled in the blank with Red Fury. It gets kind of old when God is always the scapegoat, but could never possibly be the creator of anything. There appears to be a profusion of primates making unconventional appearances these days. **

Damn you for making me use a rolleyes smiley (yuck).

Could you explain why this follows from RedFury’s post? These are not exclusive views. Maybe RedFury is the most gentle and caring human being on the face of the earth.

[Pedro]

*Originally posted by xenophon41 *
Pedro, can you tell me exactly what was Red Fury’s point, since you seem to be confident you know what it was? I think it was a mindless, pointless jab at theism that was totally irrelevant to the comment he seems to have been responding to. But maybe I’m wrong.

I’m quite confident both me and you can, yes. It didn’t strike me as particularly new or relevant, merely obvious. We’ll have to disagree on its value.

I do understand IWLN’s response however, along with his/her clever and pointed allusion to a dialogue earlier in the thread where the probability of posteriorally propelled primates was earnestly explored as an approach to understanding the ineffable. IWLN’s point seems to be that one can choose how one responds to tragedy, and that IWLN prefers a visceral response and positive action to an analytical response which changes nothing about the human condition.

Again, I don’t see the contradiction. Visceraly there isn’t much to be done as an individual but analiticaly one could certainly reject the idea of an omnipotent and benevolent God.

**Perhaps an allusion involving angels pirhouetting on the heads of pins might have confused you less. **

Perhaps.

[SoulFrost]

I expect him to fill a role, and believe that God intended that (whether or not he’s aware of it). That role will have the kind of significant impact that the historical analogs I’ve given, including Jesus, did. Precisely what that role might be, I don’t know. It may be something we need to invent a term for (cf. Gautama – Buddha was a new role historically with him). I admit fully that I phrased the initial claim (which may be true) with strong controversiality. And he will (if my speculation is borne out) fulfill a role sociologiclaly akin to that of Jesus – please note that soteriologically I’m making no such claim.

Having been exposed to your minstry for many years now, Poly, and having seen firsthand some of your struggles, I wonder (and you can choose to answer or not) what the probability is that your expectations are mere hope.

I know that you sometimes get tired, and I know that you are sometimes discouraged. Having some remarkable champion arrive on the scene would be both vindicating and refreshing.

Were you actively searching for someone to fill this role before you ran across this person?

-David

[Zoe]

Kalhoun, your thoughtful post relieved me of the frustration I was feeling in reading some of the comments here. Thanks for that. Happy holidays to you too.

Pax

[RedFury]

*Originally posted by IWLN *
**We’re here to learn and experience. Human response to such tragedies are mixed.

**

Indeed. Although I suspect were we might differ is in how one “learns and experiences,” 'cuase, from where I sit, there’s certainly nothing “supernatural” to be gleaned from either of those two.

**Many of us hear about other people’s pain, step up, send money or find out how we can help. We learn how to care. This make’s better people.

**

Agreed – but it takes all kind. All the pious money in the world won’t help one bit if qualified personnel is not ultimately on the ground – and that has precious little to do with faith, prayer, or deities of any kind. It is ismply people helping people in any way they can and know how – which as far as any has vene been able to prove, is all we’ve got. However the overall point I was making as pertains to this thread is that apparently, people of religious persuation, think that all “good” comes from god/s, while tragedies such as the one I highlighted are often explained away as “god/s works in myterious ways.”

IOW, good=god, bad !=god. Hell of a marketing program.

Perhaps an easier example to illustrate what I mean are the “miracle claims” often attached to the survival of one or two individuals in any kind of disaster – whether natural as in the case of an earthquake, or resulting from man-made mistakes such a plane crash.

I think the rationale used to justify such claims is, quite frankly, theological sophistry at its very worst.

**Other people simply spend time counting the baboons flying out their ass and only learn to count. They make good scientists. **

Actually, I think people “counting baboons flying out of their asses” would make awesome members of The Faithful. Because I seriously doubt you’ll find a scientist worthty of the name (i.e. sane) that would believe such tripe.

OTOH, they are busy working on charting seismographic movements in order to prevent, in as much as they can, tragedies such as the one described in my earlier post from happening again. Personally, I’d much rather trust the overall judgment of the latter than the former.

Think about it, it it wasn’t for them, you’d still might think that thuderbolts were a type of supernatural spear that gods chucked at us from up high. Not to mention that, if you were over fourty as I am, odds are we would have been pushing daisies long ago – no matter how much you prayed to the contrary.

But hey! That’s just me. And as dropzone mentioned, in Western society odds are I’ll still be considered the loony one. At least we’re no longer being burned at the stake – which means our numbers are growing at alarming rates. But you have nothing to fear, we won’t be returning the favor. You see, it just wouldn’t be rational acting that way

In any event, I keep telling myself I’ll stay out of religious threads, as in my rather long experience with them there’s precious little that can be said to influence the thinking of either camp. Or to put it simply, how does one argue against faith? Answer: you can’t.

So you’ll pardon me if I don’t respond to the next piece of dribble you directed at me.

It could get ugly if I did.

[Scotticher]

I would like to know some things, and I am asking publicly rather than privately because I think that sometimes things that are publicly debated need to be clarified.

Polycarp, do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?

Do you believe that He died on the cross in propitiation for our sins…for those who call upon His name? And that He rose again…from the dead…because he was our Saviour…and the ultimate sacrificial lamb?

Or do you believe that Jesus was just a great teacher?

I want to know what you believe about these things. For those of you who think I am going to respect Poly less, or LOVE him less because of his answers, you have never been more wrong in your life. I can guarantee it.

I just want clarification.

[Polycarp]

*Originally posted by Scotticher *
**I would like to know some things, and I am asking publicly rather than privately because I think that sometimes things that are publicly debated need to be clarified.

Polycarp, do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?

Yes.

To get just a bit technical, He is God’s only begotten son. But, as Paul indicates, we are all God’s sons and daughters, by adoption and grace. That takes nothing away fom Him; it was His atonement which made it happen.

How that juxtaposes with His humanity – and remember that orthodox doctrine proclaims Him truly God and truly man – I am not sure. But I suspect that it’s not a case of “one or the other” but rather that they’re complementary attributes in Him in the same way as an apple can be completely round and completely red at the same time.

Do you believe that He died on the cross in propitiation for our sins…for those who call upon His name?

I dislike the “Propitionary Atonement” doctrine because it makes God the Father look like a bloodthirsty tyrant who is bought off by the death of Jesus. And we have His word that the Father is a loving Father, not a despotic megalomaniac.

But I do believe that His death was the mode whereby God and man were brought back into their right relationship, that He atoned for human sin – and not merely for present believers but for the sins of all.

And that He rose again…from the dead…because he was our Saviour…and the ultimate sacrificial lamb?

Affirmed. Look at I Corinthians 15 on the meaning of Resurrection. The “lamb of God” metaphor, which is Scriptural, works and holds precious meaning for many. That it doesn’t happen to speak to me where I am today, because I have problems with the whole sacificial system, is my problem and not theirs.

Or do you believe that Jesus was just a great teacher?

Not just a great teacher. But keep in mind that He was that too – that He spent three years teaching, and that His teachings touch many who don’t buy into the Crucifixon-Resurrection Atonement story. How He reaches whom He reaches is not for us to dispute.

I want to know what you believe about these things. For those of you who think I am going to respect Poly less, or LOVE him less because of his answers, you have never been more wrong in your life. I can guarantee it.

I just want clarification. **

I knew that, Scotti. But in the context of the Pit, I’m glad you said it.

[Triskadecamus]

Suppose God decided to become . . . oh, say, me. Now, It’s obvious to everyone, including me, that I am not God, nor any close order of magnitude an approximation of God. But, God can do what God wills. If He wanted to become me, then Me He would be.

Of course to us (not including Me) it would seem that I had become God. (To the utter exasperation and confoundment of many, I am sure. ) Many would turn from Me, and despise Me, ignoring the fact that all that I did and said after that miraculous moment was in fact Godly, and Righteous. And if I were to gather to Me all the souls that give their hearts to Me, in love, and take them out of the travails of the world, and deliver them into that state men call heaven, then God would have indeed come and become the Son of Man, and the Son of God, and fulfilled the prophecy and promise of the Resurrection. It might piss off a few theologians that God chose some asshole like me. But the fact is that we don’t know the nature of the Second coming, nor its hour. Will you know the Son of God when you meet Him? Don’t take a chance. Treat me better. Yes, even me.

Tris

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by RedFury *
Indeed. Although I suspect were we might differ is in how one “learns and experiences,” 'cuase, from where I sit, there’s certainly nothing “supernatural” to be gleaned from either of those two.

I respect your right not to believe the same as I do. You may have noticed and it hasn’t escaped me that God is not exactly on site during an earthquake. Whether it’s because he doesn’t exist or we’re on our own for now. He isn’t there. I didn’t even say, to learn and experience God. I didn’t even bring up God directly. If there were no God, I would still think caring about each other, learning and experience as much as possible would be a human goal.

Agreed – but it takes all kind. All the pious money in the world won’t help one bit if qualified personnel is not ultimately on the ground – and that has precious little to do with faith, prayer, or deities of any kind. It is ismply people helping people in any way they can and know how – which as far as any has vene been able to prove, is all we’ve got. However the overall point I was making as pertains to this thread is that apparently, people of religious persuation, think that all “good” comes from god/s, while tragedies such as the one I highlighted are often explained away as “god/s works in myterious ways.”

All the pious money is necessary and many of those “pious” people, doctors, nurses, construction workers, ah yes, even scientists are necessary to provide aid. Helping people is not denominational. Your overall point that people who believe in God think that all good comes from him, and bad is just “mysterious” is wrong. It is a boring, tedious weapon that a non-believer uses over and over again. Again, God is not here. The world is random. Whether God intervenes or not, who knows. Can he be here, who knows. I just do my best, just like anyone else.

IOW, good=god, bad !=god. Hell of a marketing program.

I don’t disagree that this happens, but your sweeping generalization is, well too sweeping.

Perhaps an easier example to illustrate what I mean are the “miracle claims” often attached to the survival of one or two individuals in any kind of disaster – whether natural as in the case of an earthquake, or resulting from man-made mistakes such a plane crash.

I agree this happens too. What you need to realize is that the most vocal don’t always represent the most people. If you believe in God, it is reflex to be grateful to him when something good happens. I realize it’s irritating. I find it irritating too. God has never found me a parking space, why is he helping them?

Actually, I think people “counting baboons flying out of their asses” would make awesome members of The Faithful. Because I seriously doubt you’ll find a scientist worthty of the name (i.e. sane) that would believe such tripe.

The Faithful are too polite to have ass emerging creatures or if they did, they would keep it to themselves. Seriously, believing in God does not make you gullible, but it does not mean that you can’t be either. The most vocal can be the most gullible. They are not necessarily God’s appointed spokespeople.

OTOH, they are busy working on charting seismographic movements in order to prevent, in as much as they can, tragedies such as the one described in my earlier post from happening again. Personally, I’d much rather trust the overall judgment of the latter than the former.

So would I when it comes to that type of expertise. I don’t trust anyone’s overall judgement about God, except for my own.

Think about it, it it wasn’t for them, you’d still might think that thuderbolts were a type of supernatural spear that gods chucked at us from up high. Not to mention that, if you were over fourty as I am, odds are we would have been pushing daisies long ago – no matter how much you prayed to the contrary.

I value science, yes I’m over 40 and I would have been dead at age 21 and again at age 44 if it weren’t for science. Science and God are not at odds. Of course I believe that God gave us the gift of an intellegent mind, but only bring that up now because I know it will irritate you and because it’s the truth.

But hey! That’s just me. And as dropzone mentioned, in Western society odds are I’ll still be considered the loony one. At least we’re no longer being burned at the stake – which means our numbers are growing at alarming rates. But you have nothing to fear, we won’t be returning the favor. You see, it just wouldn’t be rational acting that way

I can understand why your numbers are growing. Religion leaves a lot to be desired. I’m sure an Atheist would never do anything irrational, choke…cough.

In any event, I keep telling myself I’ll stay out of religious threads, as in my rather long experience with them there’s precious little that can be said to influence the thinking of either camp. Or to put it simply, how does one argue against faith? Answer: you can’t.

You’re completely wrong there. When I started posting here a couple of months ago, my beliefs were radically different than they are now. I have learned and changed many of my views, especially on religion. I profitted by the open honest discussions here. I had as many preconceived ideas about atheists as you seem to about theists.

So you’ll pardon me if I don’t respond to the next piece of dribble you directed at me.

You’re pardoned. My dribble will not expect a response.

It could get ugly if I did.

If ugly has a point, it’s okay. Ugly just to be ugly? I’ll pass on that.

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by Pedro *
Damn you for making me use a rolleyes smiley (yuck).

My humble apologies. No one should ever have to resort to something so awful. I will try to do better.:rolleyes:

[Kalhoun]

Poly said,

A part of this is that people choose to live in places where they occur, weighing benefits against the chance of disaster.

Tell that to the residents of Bangladesh.

[Kalhoun]

Poly said,

(Actually He comes through – but He does it through people of good will, many of whom don’t even acknowledge Him, and say they do it out of pure human decency. Check this out.)

Sez who? :dubious:

[Kalhoun]

Poly said, “And we have His word that the Father is a loving Father, not a despotic megalomaniac.”

Now see, you’re making me crazy again. Circular reasoning! Circular reasoning! Circular reasoning!!! ARRGGGGHHHHH!!!

[lynn73]

*Originally posted by vanilla *
**I do believe this. And I am one of hundreds of thousands.
We’re not all looney! **

I’m with you vanilla!

[xenophon41]

Poly said, “And we have His word that the Father is a loving Father, not a despotic megalomaniac.”

Now see, you’re making me crazy again. Circular reasoning! Circular reasoning! Circular reasoning!!! ARRGGGGHHHHH!!!

Take a deep breath, Kalhoun. Count to a hundred if you need to…
Feel better? Ok, let’s talk about the circular reasoning you see. The comment regarding a ‘loving father’ was offered not as justification for itself, but rather as a point of faith which seems to contradict the idea that propitiation or appeasement is something God requires. Personally, it makes me feel slightly better about my own evolving appreciation of Christ to know that this point also confounds someone who’s spent so many years thinking hard about his faith.

Poly’s come to believe (on faith, as he must) that Christ’s death did atone for the sins of all of us somehow. Because of the conundrum above, I believe (on faith, as I must) that Christ’s manner of death, in the context of his manner of life, illustrates the ultimate unimportance of atonement, regardless of its temporal human significance. But neither of those beliefs depends on using a conclusion (God is a loving father) as a premise for itself. (And that, I think, was the real necessity for Christ; to be the living human embodiment of God’s love.)

And that’s as preachy as I intend to get (hopefully ever again!).

[Kalhoun]

I realize what he was referring to…the quote annoyed me in and of itself, completely separate of the context in his post.