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

[Flying Pig]

Props to Christianity for having one of the most immoral preachments I've ever heard from a religion: original sin. It takes effort to be that abhorrent.

If you take it as 'there's no such thing as a perfect human', it makes good sense. If nothing else, thinking that you've never slipped up or have no character flaws demonstrates a frankly sinful level of arrogance.

 

[Borachio]

Thomas a Kempis The Imitation of Christ was/is great for nit-picking out sins. (If you're into that sort of thing)

"If thou wilt receive profit, read with humility, simplicity, and faith, and seek not at any time the fame of being learned."

 

[Traitorfish]

So my conversation hook didn't work the first time. What do you think of the idea that Dawkins is exactly the sort of thing Nietzsche was worried about and proposing an alternative to?

I guess can see how it would work. For all his vaunted empiricism (despite being really bad at empiricism, but whatever), Dawkins mostly seems interested in recreating the Cartesian God at a material level, in the sense of constructing capital-S Science as an epistemological guarantor for that which he's already convinced himself that he knows, and what he knows is an unreconstructed bourgeois liberalism.

Is that anything close to what you were getting at? (I get the feeling that I'm missing something- I'm afraid what I've read of/on Nietzsche has mostly been about his critiques of reason, conciousness, morality, etc.; basically the proto-existentialist stuff. Not really read much on the ubermensch/last man stuff.)

 

[kochman]

Maybe we aren't, but we're all we have.

No, "we're" all you have.
We're not all I have...

 

[Akka]

Rather fun to see one of the two main sources of bigotry in the world crying about bigotry.
I wonder how the religious crybabies would feel if they were ACTUALLY discrimined against (and not just whining about being discrimined against).

 

[Mr. Dictator]

No, "we're" all you have.
We're not all I have...

So strange to see such smuggery from a "christian" on this board. Why, I never. I was under the impression your invisible friend frowned upon that sort of behaviour.

Better watch out, or I'm gonna tell your skydad.

Rather fun to see one of the two main sources of bigotry in the world crying about bigotry.
I wonder how the religious crybabies would feel if they were ACTUALLY discrimined against (and not just whining about being discrimined against).

So long as it was persecution in the public eye, and not actual violence, I'd throw my support in quickly.

 

[kochman]

So strange to see such smuggery from a "christian" on this board. Why, I never. I was under the impression your invisible friend frowned upon that sort of behaviour.

Better watch out, or I'm gonna tell your skydad.

It's not smuggery, it's stating a fact. I think you are misinterpreting my smiley face.

In my life, people aren't all I have... and I thank God for that! I'd off myself in a minute if people were all I had... quite depressing, people.

 

[Akka]

It's not smuggery, it's stating a fact. I think you are misinterpreting my smiley face.

In my life, people aren't all I have... and I thank God for that! I'd off myself in a minute if people were all I had... quite depressing, people.

Off yourself ? Isn't that some kind of CAPITAL CRIME in Christian's belief system ?

Well, anyway, thanks for giving another int about how religion is much more about human psyche trying to cope with the hard world (having a big daddy in the sky looking for you is sure much more comforting than the cold hard truth of "you're here just because of events and causes that happened before, and you're no more special to the world than anyone else") and not actual reality.

 

[El_Machinae]

The 5 year old is born into sin and condemned not by his or her actions but rather separated by from God by original sin. Thus, at stake is the child's soul. To fail to lay the foundation for the saving knowledge of Christ would be a more heinous act by a parent than would be an abortion.

There's a fairly pro-abortion argument, eh? Thank goodness for China's "one child" policy ... because that limited their 'heinous acts' to "one child per family"!

 

[Mr. Dictator]

It's not smuggery, it's stating a fact. In my life, people aren't all I have... and I thank God for that! I'd off myself in a minute if people were all I had... quite depressing, people.

Why can't you just accept that you've made a leap of faith by believing in skydad, and leave it personal and stop throwing us into the fantasyland?

"It's not smuggery, its my opinion" is the real fact here.

Though maybe you need god, if you're as abrasive to people in real life as you are here.

 

[Oruc]

So are the 99% really just whiners?

Spoiler :

 

[Traitorfish]

Are the 99% disproportionately over-represented in the House of Representatives, to plough only the most obvious iceberg into that ship?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In my life, people aren't all I have... and I thank God for that! I'd off myself in a minute if people were all I had... quite depressing, people.

Really? What an incredible odd statement, which if it really would be true I would genuinely feel sorry for you. But I suspect it's not.

 

[Oruc]

Are the 99% disproportionately over-represented in the House of Representatives, to plough only the most obvious iceberg into that ship?

The 99% can't even get enough numbers to vote in one of their own?

 

[timtofly]

Off yourself ? Isn't that some kind of CAPITAL CRIME in Christian's belief system ?

Well, anyway, thanks for giving another int about how religion is much more about human psyche trying to cope with the hard world (having a big daddy in the sky looking for you is sure much more comforting than the cold hard truth of "you're here just because of events and causes that happened before, and you're no more special to the world than anyone else") and not actual reality.

It does end one's human existence. Now we can obey God, because we choose so. It is not guaranteed that one has a choice in the hereafter.

 

[Arakhor]

Just to play Devil's Advocate, your comment does rather suppose that there is even a hereafter in the first place.

 

[timtofly]

Just to play Devil's Advocate, your comment does rather suppose that there is even a hereafter in the first place.

If there is not, then it is definitely a guarantee there will be no choice.

 

[Dachs]

Nietzsche? The man who wrote ´God is dead, and we killed Him´? Do elaborate.

I imagine it'd be on account of Dawkins' Sklavenmoral. The reevaluation of all morals was supposed to replace Christianity and master-slave morality with something better, not the same damn thing with a different god.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I guess can see how it would work. For all his vaunted empiricism (despite being really bad at empiricism, but whatever), Dawkins mostly seems interested in recreating the Cartesian God at a material level, in the sense of constructing capital-S Science as an epistemological guarantor for that which he's already convinced himself that he knows, and what he knows is an unreconstructed bourgeois liberalism.

Is that anything close to what you were getting at? (I get the feeling that I'm missing something- I'm afraid what I've read of/on Nietzsche has mostly been about his critiques of reason, conciousness, morality, etc.; basically the proto-existentialist stuff. Not really read much on the ubermensch/last man stuff.)

Well, I guess to explain my reasoning, I should explain my take on the God is Dead bit.

So, I understand that not to be a declarative statement by Nietzsche, but a recognition of an existant fact: That Christianity no longer inspires confidence as a worldview in the west, despite the large number of people who cling to it out of tradition. No one anywhere would be motivated to do something because god wills it.

However, in keeping with the article you linked to. Nietzsche recognized that destroying the philosophical and intellectual basis of the west was a big fracking deal. While he certainly was glad that Christianity was going away, he recognized that nobody was working on anything really to replace it. Hence his need to create a morality system independent of God, or any other absolute arbiter.

He warned that if we didn't do this, we'd fall into Nihilism. The death of god leads to a loss of universal perspective, and reason for anything. Dawkins seems to be the exact thing he's talking about.

He talks about materialism, but isn't very good at it, and doesn't seem to have any profound faith in it. He muddles about with some idealism, and vaguely looks to some capital-S-science to guarantee what he knows, which as you say, is unreformed bourgeois liberalism, complete with unconscious inclusions of the Christian morality Nietzsche disliked so much. He putters along with no meaningful worldview. He is a social commentator with no real social goal. He simply accepts his Bourgeois Liberal world because he lacks the courage to believe in anything else.

 

[aelf]

Well, I guess to explain my reasoning, I should explain my take on the God is Dead bit.

So, I understand that not to be a declarative statement by Nietzsche, but a recognition of an existant fact: That Christianity no longer inspires confidence as a worldview in the west, despite the large number of people who cling to it out of tradition. No one anywhere would be motivated to do something because god wills it.

However, in keeping with the article you linked to. Nietzsche recognized that destroying the philosophical and intellectual basis of the west was a big fracking deal. While he certainly was glad that Christianity was going away, he recognized that nobody was working on anything really to replace it. Hence his need to create a morality system independent of God, or any other absolute arbiter.

From what I studied of Nietzsche, I think you are correct.