Recommended Posts
Marinus 0
QuoteGo to an AA/NA meeting and see for yourself.
No thank you,
I only needed to read the 12 steps to make my Bull Shit Detector smoke and burn out. After I did some reading on it, I decided that AA/AN is some odd variant on the theme of Abrahamic religion which may have a placebo-effect on addiction. In my mind it's between acupuncture and anthroposophic medicine in the category of pseudo-medical nonsense.
RonD1120 62
Attached is the Johari Window. It is a counseling tool. Maybe it will be useful to you and others.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
Marinus 0
Attached is the Occam's Razor. It's a reasoning tool. Maybe it will be useful to you and others.
http://crayfisher.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/occam.jpg
http://crayfisher.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/occam.jpg
RonD1120 62
QuoteAttached is the Occam's Razor. It's a reasoning tool. Maybe it will be useful to you and others.
http://crayfisher.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/occam.jpg
Yes, it can be used in conjunction with the Johari Window.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
winsor 236
QuoteAttached is the Johari Window. It is a counseling tool. Maybe it will be useful to you and others.
Okay, so I was looking for a reference to Credo quia absurdum, but I stumbled across this.
Apropos of nothing it may be, but it struck me as funny as hell.
RonD1120 62
QuoteQuoteAttached is the Johari Window. It is a counseling tool. Maybe it will be useful to you and others.
Okay, so I was looking for a reference to Credo quia absurdum, but I stumbled across this.
Apropos of nothing it may be, but it struck me as funny as hell.
Man, you are hitting bullseyes here lately.
Thank you for this reference. It supports my long held belief, often stated here to the chagrin of most others, that the mind is a very useful tool. However, if one attempts to enthrone it to the master level it falls way short. In fact it is lousy as such.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
rehmwa 2
QuoteYou are assuming there would never be proof. Which is possible and I think most likely. I prefer not to assume.
No it's battling a question that they think they have answered. I am just attempting to show them it's not actually answered.
that's a good answer - nor is it even a real question when you consider the subject of discussion
I agree with that. If they are truly faithful, then they shouldn't feel the need to find proof or even comment on the idea of proof. But I consider that the same for atheists too.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rehmwa 2
QuoteIf you claim that god is unproveable then you are already dismissing all but the vaguest, wishy-washy, new-age versions of god. Most versions of god through the ages (and many current versions that a huge amount of people still believe in) plunge their sticky fingers right into the middle of this reality, wiggle them around a bit and do many tangible, physical things that would leave tangible, physical evidence.Quotehowever, for those asking for "proof" of what's unproveable, maybe if they stopped that strawman, then those insecure about their faith would stop trying to construct something to answer the question
Of course, you aren't stating the 'gods' are interfering, you are noting that the believers do all this stuff or take natural phenomenon and attribute it to their deities. I agree with that. Sometimes the results suck, sometimes they are quite positive. So judging the acts is what matters, the motivation is inconsequential, at least if they are from a faith that espouses cooperation and kindness (most of them).
I claim that existence or not doesn't really matter. The fact that some take one side or the other matters in whether their beliefs make them a more or less decent person - some MUCH more decent and some MUCH less.
I claim that 'faith' should be what it is defined as. Those that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies.
Me? I don't much care as long as the believers and non-believers are good people (based on my subjective standards) and they don't get all stupid trying to shout down the other guys.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rehmwa 2
QuoteProving God exists is a trivial pursuit. God is real to whoever perceives the desolation in their soul and is humble enough to accept the healing God has to offer. This life changing experience will always be a factor in how one constructs reality thereafter..
if religious types could just say what they mean without getting all formal and flowery, they'd likely not turn people off so quickly
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
jakee 1,500
QuoteI claim that 'faith' should be what it is defined as. Those that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies.
So, we shouldn't argue with Ron because he's delusional and it's not fair on him to be pitted against clear minded people capable of rational argument?
You're right, that's far less arrogant
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
kallend 2,027
QuoteI am just pointing out that not everyone who believes in God is as foolish or as shallow as the atheists here seem to think.
Which god? There are thousands to choose from, many of which deny the existence of the others.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteThose that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies.
Oh those poor, persecuted, innocent believers! Give me a break. Religion is extremely harmful to human society and advancement as well as to the individual mind. It's basically child abuse to tell kids they are going to Hell unless they believe in an invisible sky daddy. People that finally want to stand up to the religious are not "bullies." It's usually the religious bullying the non-religious, not the other way around. Let's not get confused. I'm done tip toeing around the arrogantly delusional cultists all around me. Times are a-changin' folks. Get on the trolley or get left behind.
rehmwa 2
QuoteQuoteI claim that 'faith' should be what it is defined as. Those that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies.
So, we shouldn't argue with Ron because he's delusional and it's not fair on him to be pitted against clear minded people capable of rational argument?
You're right, that's far less arrogant
no, argue with Ron all you want - I think it makes you both happy
But I think when the uber-faithful misuse use the word 'proof', they are really just expressing the depth of their belief. (thus misusing the word in terms of true "objective proof" (yes - "objective proof" should be a redundant phrase) - by definition, faith is pretty much subjective, so the term 'proof' is really non-starter)
which means, to me, that the debates are pretty much just Ron talking to himself and you guys talking to yourselves
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
wmw999 2,457
I'm not real big on religious belief that emphasizes fear. That said, I know people who were helped by their belief in some religion or another -- it helped them to find an inner calm and community that they had been unable to find until that time.
They'd tried looking in other ways, and that one worked for them. Sometimes only for awhile, sometimes for longer.
I fail to see why denying an entire box of tools, in a system so complex (human psyche), is a good thing. Relying on only that box is also bad; just think about the kids (like you) who rebelled.
Wendy P.
They'd tried looking in other ways, and that one worked for them. Sometimes only for awhile, sometimes for longer.
I fail to see why denying an entire box of tools, in a system so complex (human psyche), is a good thing. Relying on only that box is also bad; just think about the kids (like you) who rebelled.
Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
jakee 1,500
QuoteBut I think when the uber-faithful misuse use the word 'proof', they are really just expressing the depth of their belief. (thus misusing the word in terms of true "objective proof" (yes - "objective proof" should be a redundant phrase) - by definition, faith is pretty much subjective, so the term 'proof' is really non-starter)
Well that's the thing. Lots of them aren't. Lots of them really do think there is actual objective proof, or believe in a form of God that does things that would leave actual objective proof.
Just think how many expeditions there have been to find Noah's ark.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
rehmwa 2
QuoteQuoteThose that claim proof are delusional, those that dispute claims of proof are just dorks fighting a non-battle just to piss on the delusional. Bullies.
Oh those poor, persecuted, innocent believers! Give me a break. Religion is extremely harmful to human society and advancement as well as to the individual mind. It's basically child abuse to tell kids they are going to Hell unless they believe in an invisible sky daddy. People that finally want to stand up to the religious are not "bullies." It's usually the religious bullying the non-religious, not the other way around. Let's not get confused. I'm done tip toeing around the arrogantly delusional cultists all around me. Times are a-changin' folks. Get on the trolley or get left behind.
my point is you guys talk past each other with zero attempt to agree to disagree, nothing more. then it's just nonsense semantics tantrums
the victim card - apply liberally on any topic, any time, from any perspective. Much easier than understanding others, and quicker. and profitable in some cases. Do not swim for at least one hour after playing. Some oily staining has occurred in test subjects. Headache and nausea shown in 17% of users.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rehmwa 2
QuoteWell that's the thing. Lots of them aren't. Lots of them really do think there is actual objective proof, or believe in a form of God that does things that would leave actual objective proof.
sure, I agree with that and it's not inconsistent with my comment (they need to rationalize by claiming "subjectively defined proof" (a clear misnomer)- my opinion is they have very weak faith if they need to underpin it with subjective rationalization. But, that in itself doesn't make them any better or worse human beings. So I don't much care. though I would prefer they work on underpinning their "faith" rather than fool themselves by trying to prove the unprovable. heck, even question their belief if they like. whatever.
It really would be cool to find an old boat like that - but it would still just prove that there was an old boat at one time.....
I still like Wendy's post. Even if it's a mental response to taking a placebo that cured your wife of a life threatening sickness - why on earth would anyone try to convince her otherwise?
However - whenever someone points to child birth, or a rainbow as "proof" of divinity - I still find it very difficult to not laugh right at their face. It's hard to accept that others are different and even if their coping doesn't work for me, I shouldn't begrudge them what works for them.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Trotting out the few questionable peripheral references to an up and coming cult of the first century doesn't help.
Those texts are even less reliable than the gospels. The earliest gospel (Mark) was written like 50 years after Jesus died. These all came even later and are revisions of the original author's writing anyway...just like the Bible.
Josephus is a popular one. His 2 references to Jesus in that book are generally agreed to be forgeries added later...
Where are the contemporary accounts of Jesus?
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites