Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Switch to Forum Live View Jesus vs. The Atheist
3 years ago  ::  Apr 25, 2011 - 12:34PM #11
Postevental
Posts: 1

It's a shame that what passes for an "atheism" forum is simply an "anti-religion" forum where atheists pretend to have some absolute truth as opposed to fostering conversation about the real world.  Having watched this forum for a while, it seems that there are few atheists and many self-deifiers and individuals who make religion the center of their lives by constantly seeking to provide ill-conceived "refutations" against straw man epistemologies.  Let's see some conversations arise about set theory!  Or self-deification and cognitive psychoanalysis!  Or, if you're really bent on discussing religion, secularized religious epistemologies and their impacts on social movements!  Surely anything is better than this smug, anti-intellectual self-aggrandizement.  

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 25, 2011 - 1:14PM #12
mountain_man
Posts: 38,806

Apr 25, 2011 -- 12:34PM, Postevental wrote:

It's a shame that what passes for an "atheism" forum is simply an "anti-religion" forum .....


And you think that you can improve things by turning this into an anti-Atheist forum?


...Surely anything is better than this smug, anti-intellectual self-aggrandizement.


Yes, your posting was nothing but smug, anti-intellectual self-aggrandizement. You should try better next time.


Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 26, 2011 - 12:07PM #13
JCarlin
Posts: 6,403

'Tis better to light a candle than to curse the darkness.  Any member can start a thread on any forum that complies with the guidelines of the forum.  I await your facinating contribution. 

Apr 25, 2011 -- 12:34PM, Postevental wrote:

It's a shame that what passes for an "atheism" forum is simply an "anti-religion" forum where atheists pretend to have some absolute truth as opposed to fostering conversation about the real world.




J'Carlin
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't cram your foot in it and complain.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 26, 2011 - 11:00PM #14
BillThinks4Himself
Posts: 3,206

Apr 25, 2011 -- 12:34PM, Postevental wrote:

It's a shame that what passes for an "atheism" forum is simply an "anti-religion" forum where atheists pretend to have some absolute truth as opposed to fostering conversation about the real world.


I'm not sure the two are even related.  I think a lot of atheism is "anti-religion," not just in the desire to avoid the various stations of the cross or pilgrimmages across hot sands while en route to Jonestown and that last cup of Kool-Aid, but an honest headache over religious dogma, which not only skates over gaps in logic but punishes those who try to take it seriously.


Does one have to be an atheist to be opposed to religion, not just in the organized sense but in the cerebral sense?  I'm not against religion as a social activity, which I think is where it does its greatest good and greatest harm (depending on the activity) but religion as a set of beliefs one is not only bound to accept but, often, under threats (in this life or the next) has less value, except as a form of entertainment, a puzzle, a tradition with a history to explore, or some other mental game of Jenga.


Does a lack of belief in God or gods - or religious certainty - have anything to do with pretending to "have some absolute truth as opposed to fostering conversation about the real world?"  I don't think so.  As the igtheists point out, lack of belief in "God" is hardly an absolute truth, particularly where "God" is not subject to a universally accepted definition.  If we can't even agree on what "God" means, how can it be an "absolute truth" to say, "There is no God"?  


I'm not even sure this is "an atheist forum."  It's a forum for "Atheism and Secular Philosophies."  Those philosophies include atheism, agnosticism, igtheism, apatheism and even secular humanism.  The latter is filled with people who obsess over all that is wrong with religion. 


Having watched this forum for a while, it seems that there are few atheists and many self-deifiers and individuals who make religion the center of their lives by constantly seeking to provide ill-conceived "refutations" against straw man epistemologies.  Let's see some conversations arise about set theory!  Or self-deification and cognitive psychoanalysis!  Or, if you're really bent on discussing religion, secularized religious epistemologies and their impacts on social movements!  Surely anything is better than this smug, anti-intellectual self-aggrandizement.


Any time you start an online blog to argue any point, you are opening the door to "self-aggrandizement."  This is the online equivalent of a bar counter, where every man (or woman) can start a fight, if only for the sake of holding court.  That's hardly something unique to either atheists or to the folks who inhabit this forum.


As for "ill-conceived 'refutations' against straw man epistemologies," don't choke on the glossary in the back of your Philosophy 101 textbook.  It ruins the resale value.  It's also not good for your throat.  If you want to start a thread on "set theory" or "self-deification" or "cognitive psychoanalysis," nobody is stopping you.  I'll read your thread once you write one.  I brought up Jesus because it's Easter time and because Christianity is still the biggest game in town, whether we're talking about worldwide numbers or the dominant religion locally.  If some of us seem to obsess over Jesus, it's because that's the mumbo jumbo we had to wrestle with on our way to something better.  If my parents had pushed Buddhism down my throat, I suppose I would have had a lot more to say about Siddhartha Gautama.



Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2011 - 11:36PM #15
mountain_man
Posts: 38,806

It appears that Postevental is another in a long line of posters that lurk for a bit then complain there is nothing they like and that we are all bad people because we do not discuss their favorite topic in the way they believe it must be discussed and then leave. Not one of them has ever started a thread that covers a topic they are interested in. It seems they are just interested in excoriating us instead of actually participating.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 9:38PM #16
moyzo1
Posts: 66

Apr 1, 2011 -- 11:08AM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 1, 2011 -- 12:04AM, Silkandsteel wrote:

Mar 27, 2011 -- 3:11AM, Kinky.christian wrote:

Actually I think Jesus likes atheists. In fact I think he likes most atheists a lot more than he likes many people who label themselves Christians.


How do you figure that?


Easy. Just make it up. Since this Jesus character never existed you can make up anything you want and claim that's what he said or feels. That's what the whole christian religion is based on; making up stuff about Jesus and pretending it's true.





actually what was written about him showed him hanging around with the folks that were hated, just plain misfits, and ones that were the ones that needed help and knew it. not the ones that claim him today.


Today he would probably hang around punk rockers, gangster rappers, and anybody else whom society would see as scum.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 28, 2011 - 6:02PM #17
BillThinks4Himself
Posts: 3,206

Jun 23, 2011 -- 9:38PM, moyzo1 wrote:


Apr 1, 2011 -- 11:08AM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 1, 2011 -- 12:04AM, Silkandsteel wrote:

Mar 27, 2011 -- 3:11AM, Kinky.christian wrote:

Actually I think Jesus likes atheists. In fact I think he likes most atheists a lot more than he likes many people who label themselves Christians.


How do you figure that?


Easy. Just make it up. Since this Jesus character never existed you can make up anything you want and claim that's what he said or feels. That's what the whole christian religion is based on; making up stuff about Jesus and pretending it's true.





actually what was written about him showed him hanging around with the folks that were hated, just plain misfits, and ones that were the ones that needed help and knew it. not the ones that claim him today.


Today he would probably hang around punk rockers, gangster rappers, and anybody else whom society would see as scum.



Jesus was a Jewish cynic.  The Gospels show this extensively.


The Greek cynics believed that happiness was had by living in harmony with nature.  They were opposed to the customs and conventions of society, which they saw as artificial and in conflict with human nature.  They were like ascetics, in their rejection of human society, but different in the sense that they preferred to live among people rather than withdraw and isolate themselves.  They were the original cosmopolitans, ignoring borders and tribal loyalties.  They lost no opportunity to take pot shots at class distinctions, social niceties, revered institutions, fashion (and hygiene) and popular conceptions and the peer pressure to conform to societal mandates.


They were the original slackers.  Among the Greeks, they included Socrates (who took philosophical exception to the respected authorities) and Pyrrho (who is remembered for showing up at somebody's garden party and walking all over the plates of food with his dirty feet).  The cynics got their name from cunos/cynos, the Greek word for "dog."  In Greek society, this rabble was considered a pack of dirty bastards with attitudes and little respect for "culture" and "respectability."


Now consider Jesus, a Jewish cynic, applying this Hellenistic philosophy to Jewish life.  He's presented as being born in a barn.  He chooses a fishermen and a grubby tax collector as his disciples.  His disciples don't wash their hands (rejecting the ritual as an add-on).  He criticizes Jewish conventions saying "Thou shalt not kill" should be replaced by a ban on insults.  He criticizes "Thou shalt not commit adultery" by saying you're already doing it in your heart when you lust.  He tells his disciples to give no thought to what they will eat or drink, where they'll live or what they'll put on.  He tells his disciples not to fight back, to turn the other cheek, to lend to those who borrow, to give to those who ask and to even give freely to those who sue them.  He gleans food on the sabbath and heals on the sabbath, saying the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.  He tells his disciples to follow the Law but not the example of those who say they follow the Law.  His first miracle, at the Wedding of Cana, is to turn water into wine - but there's a catch: The water he uses comes from the water used for ritual handwashing.  He forgives the adulteress and questions whether her accusers are without sin.  He calls the respectable elite the sons and daughters of those who stoned the prophets.


He's a major pain in the ass, who gets turned over to the Romans just to get rid of him.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook