The all new, totally accepted, bigotry thread - "Blame a Christian"

[ParadigmShifter]

Of course there's something logical about logic.

It's an axiomatic theory of mathematics.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Do you have any comments on the article itself, rather than jabs at the author? I'm not a partisan, I just think he has some interesting things to say.

You mean besides completely disagreeing with his "tiny minds" diatribe?

While there are certainly far more philosophers who are Christians in the history of Western civilization, there are indeed some prominent atheists. Richard Dawkins certainly doesn't have his academic credentials when it comes to religion. But the tables are completely turned when it comes to science, especially evolution.

It seems to me that rjosephhoffmann is using the same basic premise as this thread. He doesn't like people taking "potshots" at his religion, or supposed lack thereof, although even that point isn't clear at all. But instead of explaining why, he is merely attacking them for not having read the same books as he has while not having advanced degrees in theology. I really don't think all that is necessary to support the basic premise that a god likely doesn't exist.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

What is a religion worth unless it is true? Nothing, it would be just another human conceit.

We progress from lesser truth to higher truth. Ignorance and pride are worth something too. I would say they are worth of transformation but you seem to indulge them.
If you sincerely study any of the world religion you can easily come to the conclusion that they are in no way less true then yours. They are only different roads leading to the same Goal. The inner world is so vast and complex that it can easily house what mentaly seems contradictory.

There is but one God and Christ is risen.

Yes but who/what is Christ? It is the universal consciousness and not the physical body which stayed on earth for 33 years...

I certainly support the question, having had control of so much for so long, Christians have largely failed to secure for civilization a reasonable grip of the riff and raff of society. Why?

Its makes me uneasy as a Christian to consider our failure over the last three decades to keep a lid on the bubbling caudron of blasphemy and debauchery now so ubiquitous in our societies.

We are the blame.

Sidetracked in the Church by the comforts of modern living and benumbed by the consequence dodging policys of forward purchasing governments and central banks schemers, we have fallen prey to largely the same lies as the broader commons, by the same ancient liar who should not be named.

Christians must crack the whip. It is time to restore order and ensure that sinners once again feel the consequences of their works.

The sinner cannot be pardoned lest he is convicted, the prisoner can not be freed until he is cast into the pit.

It is our blame. It is our duty. We will do it.

That all Gods job. Not yours or somebody elses. It only shows that you dont have much faith in God...

Nah, God is dead, and we killed him.

God is proud of you the same way mother is proud of her baby son when he unintentionaly strikes her. Very cute.

 

[Traitorfish]

But of course. I've long believed in the patheticness of my own posts in a religious topic.

I applaud your consistency!

You mean besides completely disagreeing with his "tiny minds" diatribe?

While there are certainly far more philosophers who are Christians in the history of Western civilization, there are indeed some prominent atheists. Richard Dawkins certainly doesn't have his academic credentials when it comes to religion. But the tables are completely turned when it comes to science, especially evolution.

It seems to me that rjosephhoffmann is using the same basic premise as this thread. He doesn't like people taking "potshots" at his religion, or supposed lack thereof, although even that point isn't clear at all...

Did you read the article? This doesn't seem to have very much to do with anything he said.

 

[El_Machinae]

that for all things there is a season

Ah, Ecclesiates 3!

"Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return."

 

[Formaldehyde]

Did you read the article? This doesn't seem to have very much to do with anything he said.

Yes, I read it. And once again, it strikes me as a petulant condescending whine, which the exactly same way it struck Laurence Moran whose comments I posted earlier. rjosephhoffman seems to think one must have first believed in a deity and have advanced degrees in theology before one can properly address why they think that god likely doesn't exist. I think that is utter nonsense.

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Nietzsche was a bit of a miserable git though. I bet he'd be a goth if he was alive now.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Well, Christians can't scientifically prove that atheism isn't true

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I already proved that the existence of God is undecidable, years ago. Maybe you missed that.

I just wasn't as arrogant about it as Richard Dawkins is. If the Daily Mail can have a problem with nasal whines a la Millebands, I can have a problem with Richard Dawkins.

 

[Borachio]

Of course there's something logical about logic.

It's an axiomatic theory of mathematics.

Ah, well. You may well be right. But when it came to Godel, my brain was beginning to fry.

Nietzsche was a bit of a miserable git though. I bet he'd be a goth if he was alive now.

A bit of a miserable git?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Godel just used logic to show that maths is inconsistent. There's no controversy.

The controversy comes from picking the axioms.

 

[Core Imposter]

Ah, Ecclesiates 3!

"Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return."

But sir! The next verse:

21Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

God knows. Seek truth and ye shall find it.

 

[Ayn Rand]

I already proved that the existence of God is undecidable, years ago. Maybe you missed that.

Wow! Can't believe the whole scientific community missed your breakthrough there.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

It's philosophy.

 

[jtb1127]

Darwin, even though I can't stand his writings, is not an ant-Christian writer.

Like I asked before, what qualifies as an anti-Christian writer? If you are so selective that it includes only the ones that you find convenient to prove discriminatory then you might have an abusive definition.

You know, I would like to be a Professor when I'm older, but that's not going to be easy unless I give up my faith.

That's definitely not true and you have no way to prove it.

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes, I read it. And once again, it strikes me as a petulant condescending whine, which the exactly same way it struck Laurence Moran whose comments I posted earlier. rjosephhoffman seems to think one must have first believed in a deity and have advanced degrees in theology before one can properly address why they think that god likely doesn't exist. I think that is utter nonsense.

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” Friedrich Nietzsche

I don't think that you understand the article, then, if you think that what Nietzsche says here is closer to Dawkin's vulgar materialism than to Hoffman's criticism of it.

 

[JollyRoger]

That's definitely not true and you have no way to prove it.

He has faith that he won't become a professor.

 

[Leoreth]

Celticempire wasn't cherrypicking his opponents here, there's simply no way of arguing that Darwin was anti-Christian because he was ... um, a Christian. And unlike many of his contemporaries and todays Evangelicals he saw no problem in being one while proposing the Theory of Evolution.

 

[Ayn Rand]

It's philosophy.

So the whole philosophical community should pay attention to the things you write?

Righto then.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

No. Should the whole Village respond to the village idiot?