Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 55

Thread: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like...

  1. #1
    NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Mountain View, CA
    Posts
    15,317

    The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like...

    ..Debates on a Message Board Will Ever Actually Change Anyone's Opinions, So That It Doesn't Have to Contaminate Other Threads Where a Few People Are Just Trying to Wish Each Other a Happy Holiday.

    Continue.

    You know, I probably see eye to eye with Timothy A on slim to nil on dogma, but it's not like he goes around in political threads yelling at or condemning people or anything like that. He just wants to make an occasional post about something he enjoys, in a purely positive way, and if you don't happen to agree he seems more than happy to let you be. So if he starts a thread that in no way affects you and is just as easy for you to ignore, just let it be. If you wanna get snarky, just post it in a political thread, people will be happy to take up the issue there.

    I think the only thing I would like less than agreeing with Old Pio is getting sodomized by a broomstick, though even that may be a close race (because of the former getting worse, not the latter getting better). So the fact I actually felt the need to actual start a thread over such an issue should tell you how asinine a couple people's posts are getting. Well that, and I figured by making some noise over here it will pull people out of the other thread and let that thread by what the people enjoying it would prefer it to be.

    (**** title length limits.)
    Haymarket Hooligans, V.19 Haymarket Hacks, III.2

    Cornell '04, Stanford '06


    KDR

    Rover Frenchy, Classic! Great post.
    iwh30 I wish I could be as smart as you. I really do you are the man
    gregg729 I just saw your sig, you do love having people revel in your "intelligence."
    Ritt18 you are the perfect representation of your alma mater.
    Shirtless Bob That's it, you win.
    TBA#2 I want to kill you and dance in your blood.
    DisplacedCornellian Hahaha. Thread over. Frenchy wins.

  2. #2
    Yep, still here
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    25,408

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    +1

    Some atheists/agnostics need to be lazier. Save your indignation for when "Christians" try to change laws or schools based on their beliefs. Some people make me wonder if they sit around when they get money and take a permanent marker to cover up "God" anywhere it appears.
    "I went over the facts in my head, and admired how much uglier the situation had just become. Over the years I've learned that ignorance is more than just bliss. It's freaking orgasmic ecstasy".- Harry Dresden, Blood Rites


    Western Michigan Bronco Hockey- 2012 Mason Cup Champions

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    between Scylla and Charybdis
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by bronconick View Post
    +1

    Some atheists/agnostics need to be lazier. Save your indignation for when "Christians" try to change laws or schools based on their beliefs. Some people make me wonder if they sit around when they get money and take a permanent marker to cover up "God" anywhere it appears.
    What strikes me sometimes in discussions with some "atheists" is when you ask them why people should behave in a moral fashion. Most of them mumble something that sounds like it would be religious except they strenuously argue over the term "God" wanting to have something that fills that space but only to insist that it be called something different.
    "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

    "While I thought it was the light at the end of the tunnel, in reality it was the headlight of an oncoming train."

    "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Windy Arm, YU
    Posts
    635

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreshFish View Post
    What strikes me sometimes in discussions with some "atheists" is when you ask them why people should behave in a moral fashion. Most of them mumble something that sounds like it would be religious except they strenuously argue over the term "God" wanting to have something that fills that space but only to insist that it be called something different.
    One of the many strengths of Secular Humanism

  5. #5
    Armed bigblue_dl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    God's Country
    Posts
    28,324

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    ...Also known as the Foxton and Old Pio argue non-stop about stuff that 95% of the rest of the posters on USCHO don't want to hear about thread.
    Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

    RIP - Kirby

  6. #6
    unofan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Omaha, NE, USA
    Posts
    14,809

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreshFish View Post
    What strikes me sometimes in discussions with some "atheists" is when you ask them why people should behave in a moral fashion. Most of them mumble something that sounds like it would be religious except they strenuously argue over the term "God" wanting to have something that fills that space but only to insist that it be called something different.
    are you saying atheists can't have a moral creed?

  7. #7

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by unofan View Post
    are you saying atheists can't have a moral creed?
    It's the old fallacy that my faith tells me A is the only source of B, and you admit you don't have A, therefore you "logically" must not have B.

    OTOH, if you ascribe to a religion that makes itself the only truth, you can't escape the fallacy.

    So while it's tiresome to see it repeated endlessly, it's at least understandable. Nor is it stupid. A lot of very smart folks have, I wouldn't say "fallen for it," but have willingly allowed themselves to be enfolded in it because it gives them satisfaction. C. S. Lewis was a very unhappy guy until he decided to take the plunge; after that, he was a (comparatively) happier guy. Considering that along with a lot of useless and unreadable bunk Lewis also produced some pretty good (though overrated) fiction and also the single best non-fiction book on the Medieval worldview ever written, I'd say anything that kept him from blowing his brains out was a net win for him and us.
    Last edited by Kepler; 04-10-2012 at 08:53 AM.
    Cornell University
    NCAA Champion 1967, 1970
    ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
    Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    between Scylla and Charybdis
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by unofan View Post
    are you saying atheists can't have a moral creed?
    Not at all, I'm saying exactly the opposite. Most atheists have a very strong moral creed, they've seen how ruinous hypocrisy can be in the hands of those who use religion as a club to repress others, and are understandably appalled. I'm quite sympathetic.

    I meant that many atheists have a problem articulating why a moral creed is important and why they have a strong one which they follow. Some have done so; many wind up sounding like they believe strongly in something greater than themselves and are fine with that as long as you don't use the word "god" to describe it.

    Today's "atheist" isn't all that different in substance from Martin Luther. Luther rebelled against the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church in 1517; many atheists today rebel against the perceived hypocrisy of organized religion in general. I humbly suggest they use too broad a brush; while I also understand very well where they are coming from.

    Luther still believed in god, most atheists seem to believe in something "like" god as the basis for morality, just not "exactly" god.
    "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

    "While I thought it was the light at the end of the tunnel, in reality it was the headlight of an oncoming train."

    "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    between Scylla and Charybdis
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kepler View Post
    It's the old fallacy that my faith tells me A is the only source of B, and you admit you don't have A, therefore you "logically" must not have B.

    OTOH, if you ascribe to a religion that makes itself the only truth, you can't escape the fallacy.
    Yes, that pernicious word, "only." As I understand it, Jesus himself never claimed exclusivity; and it makes much more sense to me that he is one of many "children of God."

    When I was younger, I tried to write a science fiction novel based on the Michael Rennie version of The Day the Earth Stood Still in which "god" in the guise of advanced sympathetic aliens sent two emissaries to earth. One was Jesus and the other was the Buddha. These aliens realized that "right brain / left brain" humans needed an exemplar for each to make a complete understanding of the whole. Yin and Yang seem to exist as quantum mechanical principles as well as metaphysical ones.

    I like to think we are all children of God, and however Jesus (or the Buddha) came to be, he is a role model of what human perfection might look like. If he were the "only" son then what chance do the rest of us have? If he was the "older brother" then we all could try to be like him.
    Last edited by FreshFish; 04-10-2012 at 09:40 AM.
    "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

    "While I thought it was the light at the end of the tunnel, in reality it was the headlight of an oncoming train."

    "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    back down in uptown
    Posts
    9,260

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Dangerous thread for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreshFish View Post
    What strikes me sometimes in discussions with some "atheists" is when you ask them why people should behave in a moral fashion. Most of them mumble something that sounds like it would be religious except they strenuously argue over the term "God" wanting to have something that fills that space but only to insist that it be called something different.
    Maybe I"m agreeing with your or disagreeing...not sure.

    But I believe folks can have a moral background independent of Christiainity and God. Many countries have compassionate peoples overseas that have not directly encountered Christianity.

    However, I will say that the progress of human compassion and the human condition in society since the printing and dissemination of the Bible has been absolutely unmistakable. Starting with folks like Luther, abolition of serfdom, slavery, child labor and the arrival of equality has been spearheaded in the west (no big surprise as that's where Christianity occurred) and is now part of global culture. IMO thank you Jesus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kepler View Post
    It's the old fallacy that my faith tells me A is the only source of B, and you admit you don't have A, therefore you "logically" must not have B.

    OTOH, if you ascribe to a religion that makes itself the only truth, you can't escape the fallacy.

    So while it's tiresome to see it repeated endlessly, it's at least understandable. Nor is it stupid. A lot of very smart folks have, I wouldn't say "fallen for it," but have willingly allowed themselves to be enfolded in it because it gives them satisfaction. C. S. Lewis was a very unhappy guy until he decided to take the plunge; after that, he was a (comparatively) happier guy. Considering that along with a lot of useless and unreadable bunk Lewis also produced some pretty good (though overrated) fiction and also the single best non-fiction book on the Medieval worldview ever written, I'd say anything that kept him from blowing his brains out was a net win for him and us.
    Heard a position advanced by CS Lewis yesterday about Jesus=son of God that I thought was pretty powerful.

    He said as Jesus claimed he was the Son of God...he did not leave available the option of great teacher and all around good guy. In fact due to the claim, he was either...insane, evil or in fact as claimed the son of God. Lewis very effectively made the case on Jesus' teaching, compassion and works that Jesus was neither insane nor evil...and I must agree, there is quite a bit of evidence in the Bible on this. That leaves one option open.
    Go Gophers!

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    between Scylla and Charybdis
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by 5mn_Major View Post
    Heard a position advanced by CS Lewis yesterday about Jesus=son of God that I thought was pretty powerful.

    He said as Jesus claimed he was the Son of God...he did not leave available the option of great teacher and all around good guy. In fact due to the claim, he was either...insane, evil or in fact as claimed the son of God. Lewis very effectively made the case on Jesus' teaching, compassion and works that Jesus was neither insane nor evil...and I must agree, there is quite a bit of evidence in the Bible on this. That leaves one option open.
    Yes, that sounds fine....I don't think Jesus himself ever used the word "only" when he described himself as "a" Son of God. It's that word "only" that leads to so much warfare in the name of God, with said warfare being totally antithetical to Jesus' actual teachings.
    "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

    "While I thought it was the light at the end of the tunnel, in reality it was the headlight of an oncoming train."

    "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

  12. #12
    Settled now in:
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    7,032

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by 5mn_Major View Post
    He said as Jesus claimed he was the Son of God...he did not leave available the option of great teacher and all around good guy. In fact due to the claim, he was either...insane, evil or in fact as claimed the son of God. Lewis very effectively made the case on Jesus' teaching, compassion and works that Jesus was neither insane nor evil...and I must agree, there is quite a bit of evidence in the Bible on this. That leaves one option open.
    I've read that (Mere Christianity, right?), and it's a bunch of bunk. It's only effective if you already believe. He's basically asking you to believe that people are pure black or pure white - that EVERYTHING they do is bad or EVERYTHING they do is good. Life is a whole lot more complicated than that.

    I could call myself the Son of God, and I assure you that I am none of those 3 options. If there's a 4th option for me, why isn't there for Jesus?
    "I'm not surprised by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do." (seen on a T-shirt)

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    between Scylla and Charybdis
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by LynahFan View Post
    I could call myself the Son of God, and I assure you that I am none of those 3 options. If there's a 4th option for me, why isn't there for Jesus?
    I thought there was, isn't it called "metaphor"?
    "Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."

    "While I thought it was the light at the end of the tunnel, in reality it was the headlight of an oncoming train."

    "Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

  14. #14
    joecct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    17,914

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Everything you wanted to know (and used to have to memorize) about the Catholic Church: http://www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/

    There!
    CCT '77 & '78
    4 kids
    3 grandsons

  15. #15
    Official Bottom Ten Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Posts
    23,324

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by 5mn_Major View Post
    Heard a position advanced by CS Lewis yesterday about Jesus=son of God that I thought was pretty powerful.
    Can't resist asking where you head C.S. Lewis yesterday? I was sure he wasn't amongst us anymore! He wrote a lot of good, thoughtful stuff.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Edina, MN, USA
    Posts
    17,778

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Gray View Post
    Can't resist asking where you head C.S. Lewis yesterday? I was sure he wasn't amongst us anymore! He wrote a lot of good, thoughtful stuff.
    He said
    Quote Originally Posted by 5mn_Major
    Heard a position advanced by C.S. Lewis
    not that he heard C.S. Lewis. Reading comprehension there Bob.

  17. #17
    Official Bottom Ten Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Posts
    23,324

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by goldy_331 View Post
    He said not that he heard C.S. Lewis. Reading comprehension there Bob.
    Somebody's a little too serious today.

  18. #18
    Settled now in:
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    7,032

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Mmmmmm......CSLewis....

    Best steak & ale pie in a pub in Oxford (I went to all 110 that I could find when I lived there). Best pie overall is at The Pieminister, though.
    "I'm not surprised by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do." (seen on a T-shirt)

  19. #19

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by LynahFan View Post
    I've read that (Mere Christianity, right?), and it's a bunch of bunk. It's only effective if you already believe. He's basically asking you to believe that people are pure black or pure white - that EVERYTHING they do is bad or EVERYTHING they do is good. Life is a whole lot more complicated than that.

    I could call myself the Son of God, and I assure you that I am none of those 3 options. If there's a 4th option for me, why isn't there for Jesus?
    Lewis' apologetics are among the most ridiculous things ever written by a smart person. They are right up there with Anselm's Ontological Argument. I'm sure if Aquinas had read Mere Christianity he'd have eviscerated it. I had a priest in CCD (basically Sunday School for Catholics) tell me once that he detested Lewis' aggressive attacks on atheism because anybody with half a brain reading them would choose atheism.

    But I take the main point of his selective blindness to be a great moral lesson in humility. Nobody reading (and certainly not writing) this post will ever produce anything remotely as interesting or wonderful as Lewis' historical analysis of art and literature. If somebody that smart and deep in some ways can be that dumb and superficial in other ways, it's a lesson to all of us to tread lightly.
    Last edited by Kepler; 04-10-2012 at 02:53 PM.
    Cornell University
    NCAA Champion 1967, 1970
    ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
    Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014

  20. #20
    Settled now in:
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    7,032

    Re: The Offcial Thread to Debate Various Aspects of Various Religious Doctrine, Like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kepler View Post
    Lewis' apologetics are among the most ridiculous things ever written by a smart person. They are right up there with Anselm's Ontological Argument. I'm sure if Aquinas had read Mere Christianity he'd have eviscerated it.

    But I take the main point of his selective blindness to be a great moral lesson in humility. Nobody reading (and certainly not writing) this post will ever produce anything remotely as interesting or wonderful as Lewis' historical analysis. If somebody that smart and deep in some ways can be that dumb and superficial in other ways, it's a lesson to all of us to tread lightly.
    ...and an ironic example of exactly what Lewis was trying to argue against: that Jesus could't be so "smart and deep" as a moral teacher and yet so "dumb" as to believe he was the Son of God.
    "I'm not surprised by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do." (seen on a T-shirt)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •