If it's on youtube - in a cartoon - it must be true. Please don't question it.
The Real God: An Epiphany (YouTube)
by leavingwt 47 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
00DAD
Just n, thanks for setting me straight. What was I thinking!?!
-
wallsofjericho
"i'll answer this once you answer "by what method are you aware of when you'e doing something 'morally correct and/or incorrect?' "
morality is based on the social mores of the time.
for example, look at this ad from way back when (not sure of the year)
obviously this was not frowned upon at the time, but if a company were to run an ad like this today?? I would say this is just a bit too "child porny" for today's social mores.
Its like anything else. Morality is defined by what is acceptable to the majority. If you are raised to believe it, you likely will.
-
ziddina
"Atheists also react in frustration, anger, depression, etc, when they cannot get a theist to let go their faith. ..." tec
The behavior mentioned in that comment is far more typical of followers of the three Middle-Eastern religions, which have a LONG history of "conversion by the sword"....
In fact, it is an edict within two out of three of those religions, that the followers are COMPELLED to go out and make disciples!!!
So, it is the THEIST, not the atheist, who is ORDERED to make converts BY THEIR MIDDLE-EASTERN GODS...
And is more likely to react in "frustration, anger, depression, etc...", when they fail their Middle-Eastern "god" by failing to convert atheists...
Or react with blind stubbornness, when confronted with solid evidence and irrefutable facts that undercut the existence of their 3,500-year-old "gods"...
Er, I mean, an "eternal god" based on 3,500-year-old Middle-Eastern male mentality...
-
Qcmbr
Good god angle. liked the vid
-
tec
Well that's obvious - it's a nice way of saying "I know you are but what am I" - except it doesn't apply with unbelievers.
E x cept that it does. Do you know how many 'unbelievers on this thread' get angry and frustrated with believers? And it does not just have to do with a believer rejecting science. Because I do not. But that is not enough for some. I must accept science and reject God. I cannot accept both.
Thiests, more specifically, those of the Christian nature, have a faith that compells them to "share" their faith with others. What they don't want to admit, like the video points out, is that its just a way of convincing themselves, that their unfounded and unproven ideas regarding the supernatural are real.
Well, if this is what you are set on believing, then nothing I say will change your mind. But I do not share as a way of convincing myself. I share with those who want to hear. I rarely, if ever, initiate a conversation about God or Christ unless someone else is interested or asks or shares their own thoughts on God. (which is basically the same as interested) I am passionate about faith in Christ and God... that compels me to WANT to share. (as with anyone who is passionate about anything)
On a side note, there are also atheists out there who want to share their views and their position on believers as well. To the point of pushing them on a believer as soon as they find out someone IS a believer. Are they also trying to convince themselves?
Nonetheless, the point is - that it is quite different in how nonbelievers behave and react - thus making the statement above about athiests reacting similarly to believers incorrect.
But they do react similarly and passionately, when a theist does not believe or accept what they are sharing.
Obviously this statement conflicts with the fact that you admit there is a difference to begin with - either there is or there is not. You admit there is in one statement and say there is not in another .. that makes no sense. It sounds like you're trying to convince not
anyone reading, but yourself perhaps?
Obviously there are differences between two groups of people, because not everyone in each group is the same either. But what is the difference between a believer reacting in anger and/or frustration... and an atheist reacting in anger and/or frustration... when their views or beliefs are rejected by the other?
The guy in the video thinks the reaction says something about one group, but does not apply to the second group. How is that possible when the reaction is so alike?
I'm not trying to convince myself. I already see it. Just pointing out my observatin, and discussing, which was the purpose of the thread.
And is more likely to react in "frustration, anger, depression, etc...", when they fail their Middle-Eastern "god" by failing to convert atheists...
This seems funny coming from you, because I would have pointed you out as one of those atheists (or pagan - I can't remember what other term you put in there, sorry, lol) who reacts in frustration at a believer who refuses to accept her views. But I didn't want to name names. Peace, Tammy -
N.drew
or pagan - I can't remember
I think it's called "whack a mole" which sounds good but I can't imagine it wouldn't hurt!
-
ziddina
"who reacts in frustration at a believer who refuses to accept her views..." tec
I react negatively when you obstinately refuse to look at the logical viewpoint that those deities who came first, should be considered as the FIRST deities...
Instead, you arrogantly co-opt all deities worshipped in the time prior to the existence of the bible, as being part of your special version of that 3,500-year-old Middle-Eastern males' volcano "god"....
Which is just plain nuts....
To make a comparison, that's like saying that the United States' culture is far, far older than China's culture, because China's culture was part of the "progressive development" of the American "culture"....
And that's laughable, to put it mildly...
-
tec
I react negatively when you obstinately refuse to look at the logical viewpoint that those deities who came first, should be considered as the FIRST deities...
My point was that atheists react negatively, just as theists do. A rule cannot apply to one group, but not the other. (that comment is more for JNFB, so he gets my point)
The deity who actually came first should be considered the first deity, sure. But the first "known" "act" of worship does not mean that a) it was the first (only the first known), and b) that the deity being worshipped is true.
Oldest known form of worship does not mean that this deity must be the true deity. Too many variables. Progressive understanding is another option. Just like in science, we learn as we grow in our ability to understand the world around us. Some learn as they grow in their ability to understand God. A primitive people might have a very limited understanding as to what a creator could be... so female makes sense at the start, because females give birth. So a creator who gave birth to the world must be female, to their way of thinking. Realizing that men are as involved in that creation brings male deities into the picture. Neither of them knows for certain... their understanding is based on their own limitations, and their concepts get spread around the globe.
Then one day a man comes along and says... God is Spirit. I know, because I have and I do see God. I have been WITH God. This man speaks truth in everything he says, and in everything He does... and how can a man speak such truth to people, and yet be a liar at the same time?
To make a comparison, that's like saying that the United States' culture is far, far older than China's culture, because China's culture was part of the "progressive development" of the American "culture"....
That is a comparison to something you THINK I have said. But you are not understanding what I am saying.
Peace,
Tammy
-
Voices
ALRIGHT! i'm back. I havn't read anything past the whole 'you're beating around the bush' statement stuff. Sorry. I got off work at 3:15pm (something came up with my patient.) and I had to rush to get my girlfriend's half of the rent (she was having a college meeting at 4pm) and i needed to grab it before she went into the meeting and it takes 30 mins to get to her college from my work. Then I had to run to the apartment complex's office and give them both checks and run back to pick her up after her meeting immediately after i dropped off the check and then drop her off at our apartment, and finish up the paperwork that my work had told me to rewrite the entire M.A.R. (Found sheep knows what that means). Which took FOREVER and then I had to drive BACK 30 mins to work to drop it off (by this point itw as 6pm) and then I had to fix the work stuff into the right folders and pick up dinner on the way home (30 mins back) from quizno's (yum). Then eat the food WITH my girlfriend out of respect and now i'm back, tired, but I will respond now. So.....i'm typing, i'll review the posts...and respond accordingly cause I do see that there are other posts that have yet to be read by me.
Me
(who is typing up a response)
