Greatest love and peace to you as well, Shelby. I did and do not doubt your love and affection for me, even if I had hurt you... because I know you. And thank you.
Your sister in Christ,
Tammy
An Old Argument.... does it hold water?
by AK - Jeff 1495 Replies latest jw experiences
-
-
N.drew
Sayswho I want to say Hi!
-
Qcmbr
Tec - you missed the apology. For all the peace and love you two blather about you continually show yourselves as no different when push comes to shove. When I post a mocking comment or a harsh rebuttal I'm rude and arrogant but when you 'lot' post judgemental, condescending, implied eternal doom threats back it's 'spirit' filled bravery. Do you see the hypocrisy or do you genuinely think you are not rude and arrogant? For all the peace be with you stuff it seems the most Xians who actually promote peace and reconciliation are the ones who feel a need to say it least.
These discussions are difficult precisely because the common ground is so difficult to find. God acts as the invisible elephant in the room. Any attempt to discuss a metaphysical concept be it a supposed god or a supernatural effect becomes the equivalent of insulting someone's grandma for the staunch believers. The entire worldview rests squarely upon the mental constructs:
- My god cannot be wrong.
- I believe in the god-who-cannot-be-wrong ergo I cannot be wrong on any metaphysical point relating to him.
- Any fact that does not support the above premises must be incorrect, misapplied or subject to a super fact that will explain it but is not scientifically knowable.
- Where there are no facts to support a position, personal opinion ( first or second hand) will suffice , indeed will carry more weight as they will be imbued with the magic seal of 'respect ' and will be defended vociferously.
- The final stonewall that cannot be breached is my personal communication with my god. This single subjective knowledge trumps all other forms of knowledge or logic. It does not matter that I alone can verify this, it is more important and relevant in the discussion than anything else and I will allude to it regularly as an undefeatable point since only an argument of insanity would be a rational attack and I can simply deflect that as name calling.
This means that we have discussed the problem of suffering in a logical, rational, scientific way for maybe two pages worth of this thread but had to wade back and forth through the worldviews of people for whom reference to fact is uncomfortable and who see the scientific method as a loaded gun trained on their version of the elephant. This is the main reason for me why it becomes an exercise in frustration and misunderstanding ( when someone is presenting themselves as the main evidence for the case it can only get personal when someone wishes to critique that evidence.) The requirements of understanding cost too much for either side ( I would need to believe in god to allow faith talk , it's peculiar use of words and it's lack of hard meaning while believers would need to accept that their stonewall , personal communication with their own god, isn't a valid argument and not in the least persuasive to others .)
Dawkins was right.
-
AK - Jeff
OK Jeff if God doesn't matter to ya, then then who really cares if your right or wrong?
When did I ever state that, Nancy?
This discussion, or any that I have entered in recent history about the reality/non-reality of God, has nothing whatsoever to do with it not mattering to me. What clearly matters to me - the point that has caused me to use so much energy trying to discuss the matter is the matter posited in the OP. All the touchy-feely, fuzzy, love of god makes it ok no matter if he is real or not belongs in another discussion, not this one. It has been demonstrated by the theists in this thread that it may not matter to them one way or the other - facts are not of much concern to them - that was my allusion in my brief post - that to theists it would not seem to matter much what the facts were - only that they wish to believe in spite of the facts.
Honestly, it has been like trying to tell a child who is determined that Santa is real to examine the FACTS. Children caught in a fantasy don't wish to know the facts - they just look forward to the REWARDS they envision as a result of the fantasy, and ignore all else.
Q has summed it up well when he said:
God acts as the invisible elephant in the room. Any attempt to discuss a metaphysical concept be it a supposed god or a supernatural effect becomes the equivalent of insulting someone's grandma for the staunch believers.
Your 5 bullet points are spot on as to the method that has been used [almost without exception] in over 60 pages of discussion by the theists in a vain attempt to defend the indefensible positions they have taken.
Jeff
-
cantleave
"It is a remarkable coincidence that almost everyone has the same religion as their parents and it always just so happens they’re the right religion."
— Richard Dawkins
-
cantleave
"It is a remarkable coincidence that almost everyone has the same religion as their parents and it always just so happens they’re the right religion."
— Richard Dawkins
-
N.drew
The treasure that I found is that there is ONE earth ONE time ONE future ONE set of, lets call it TRUTH (like the sands of the sea). Might we all agree, pretty please, that earth, time, future, and truth might be nurtured by what you may call wisdom, and we will may call god.
-
OnTheWayOut
Qcmbr, while your bullet points and whole last comment were excellent, unless you are doing research for a book, I suggest you walk away from this thread. You made excellent points that will be addressed in the manner suggested by your bullet points. It'll get you too worked up to continue to bother.
If you continue to debate, you will hear not that you are wrong, but that you have attacked. The focus will be on the "rude and arrogant" part of your opening statement in that last post.
-
N.drew
OTWO you have broke one rule of wisdom. Wisdom allows GROWTH and CHANGE, but some people, after they have drawn their conclusion, will not imagine that someone else might have grown wiser by their paying attention. So, then some other people who have been trying to pay attention, will start believing "why bother?". Try to imagine that there are more than two camps. There are camps as numerous as the stars. OK?
-
PSacramento
- IF there is a God, not He can;t be wrong BUT MINE/OUR view of him certainly can.
- Unless a human being IS god then YES, they can be wrong ( even IF they are right about there being a God they cna be wrong about HOW God is).
- Not sure what you mean.
- Personal opinion SHOULD still be based on some reason or rational.
- I can't speak for others of course, but for me, what I learn from My Lord MUST conincide with what can be KNOWN to be true, in some form.
My god cannot be wrong.
I believe in the god-who-cannot-be-wrong ergo I cannot be wrong on any metaphysical point relating to him.
Any fact that does not support the above premises must be incorrect, misapplied or subject to a super fact that will explain it but is not scientifically knowable.
Where there are no facts to support a position, personal opinion ( first or second hand) will suffice , indeed will carry more weight as they will be imbued with the magic seal of 'respect ' and will be defended vociferously.
The final stonewall that cannot be breached is my personal communication with my god. This single subjective knowledge trumps all other forms of knowledge or logic. It does not matter that I alone can verify this, it is more important and relevant in the discussion than anything else and I will allude to it regularly as an undefeatable point since only an argument of insanity would be a rational attack and I can simply deflect that as name calling.