Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Walker »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:05 am
Proverbs 11:29
“He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart.”

Commentary: Oh yes. Life is the witness and the troubling is a chain to be broken. For example, any place you are is your house, and if you trouble that in any way … your body, your mind, your property, your family, your acquaintances, every stranger you meet, your very existence, you will inherent only the empty wind of that house. In principle each is your house, but the effects of troubling any of them, is to inherent the wind. Some of the houses are more significant than others. For example, I know I have troubled this house of acquaintances. I know that for this, I shall inherent the wind of this house, like a ghost who only hears the whistling of a cold wind. I did it with full consciousness and I must tell you, nothing was planned. It followed from a sense of … irritation of the disrespect shown to Christianity, God, religion, decency, common sense. I figure by the measure of life, no harm was done by inheriting the wind, and maybe some good. Optimism is not a choice. So I’m done with that necessity. I mention this to you, because you don't sneer at Christianity, but rather see the goodness and the truth of it.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

tillingborn wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 4:37 pm I have given you multiple opportunities to clarify your position,
Well, let's leave it there. I'm not able to make my position evident to you, apparently. So that's fine...be well.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Walker »

attofishpi wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:13 pm
Walker wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:39 pm ??
Mr Walker, are you a Christian or some other form of theist, or, are you an atheist?
None of that matters.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Christianity

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

attofishpi wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:13 pm
Walker wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:39 pm ??
Mr Walker, are you a Christian or some other form of theist, or, are you an atheist?
How naive. His 'answer' is going to be fun :lol:

Here are some clues. He's rabidly anti-choice. Hates women. Detests any show of 'disrespect' at church, to the point of assaulting parishioners for wearing hats. Whines about the 'persecution of christians' on this forum. Is friends with IC and Henry, the 'tight trio of kristian Trump-worshippers'. How many more 'clues' do you need?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Walker wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:04 pm

Now, just a imagine a pretty young rose. Then, imagine the owner of that rose abuses it many times a day with artificial, man-made devices
You mean a Dildo?

Why not just say what you mean, it’s your favourite word at the minute.

How or even why is using a Dildo abusive?
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by attofishpi »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:28 pm
attofishpi wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:13 pm
Walker wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:39 pm ??
Mr Walker, are you a Christian or some other form of theist, or, are you an atheist?
How naive. His 'answer' is going to be fun :lol:

Here are some clues. He's rabidly anti-choice. Hates women. Detests any show of 'disrespect' at church, to the point of assaulting parishioners for wearing hats. Whines about the 'persecution of christians' on this forum. Is friends with IC and Henry, the 'tight trio of kristian Trump-worshippers'. How many more 'clues' do you need?
What?? I already knew he was a closet gay, I was wondering wether he is a Christian! :mrgreen:
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gary Childress wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 8:13 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Nov 22, 2022 6:38 am
Gary Childress wrote: Tue Nov 22, 2022 4:14 am

By disagreeing. How else does one disagree?
By having a reason or logic behind one's disagreement. In other words, by not disagreeing merely gratuitously. By having some explanation of why one disagrees.
Apparently, gods aren't bound by considerations of decency toward their creations.
There are no "rules of decency" in a universe without God. There are, in fact, no moral "rules" at all.

It's pretty simple, Gary: if God exists, there's no point in you getting angry with Him, since He's God. If he does not, there's even less point -- because no objective moral scheme exists by which you can ground your complaint against God. And you can't express your anger at God by declaring He doesn't exist, because that is self-contradicting.

quote]Life in and of itself is sacred [/quote]
Who told you it is? Who told you it's not just another accidental collocation of random atoms?
...if some being brings life into the world that is capable of experiencing joy and suffering, then that being becomes responsible for the life it created
Perhaps. At least in some ways. Not, perhaps, in others.

But what kind of life is it? What does "being responsible" for it entail? Does it mean preventing it from making any decisions of its own, because some of them might be bad? But if one does that, then what kind of freedom, identity, personhood, volition, will and so forth are you allowing your creation to actually have?

Are you going to let that life mature, become its own "thing," make its own choices, and perhaps freely love you, or are you going to treat protecting it from its own decisions as the highest good for it, and thus make it a highly safe robot?

But if you give it freedom, it will certainly do some things that are bad. What's to be done about that?
Certain rules of decency apply.
Whose rules are they? They aren't yours...because you and I have no authority to impose rules on each other, let alone to set the terms of the rules of reality. It's not our society's rules of decency, because those vary between societies...and even between a single society at any two different points in time. So who has the authority to say what the "rules of decency" for the universe are?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5153
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

“The desert approaches. Woe to him whose desert is within.”
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Harbal wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:24 pm
Walker wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 9:10 pm And you fucking better be polite, or expect the same in return.
Yes, Gary, he'll knock your fucking hat off if you don't show respect.
It’s a bit thuggish knocking ladies bonnets off. Thanks be to God women are exempt from thuggery.


Ladies have worn hats in church for centuries and still do so without it being considered disrespectful.

Genesis 24:65 records the veil as a feminine emblem of modesty. Manuals of early Christianity, including the Didascalia Apostolorum and Pædagogus instructed that a headcovering must be worn by women during prayer and worship, as well as when outside the home.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:43 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 8:13 pm
Apparently, gods aren't bound by considerations of decency toward their creations.
There are no "rules of decency" in a universe without God. There are, in fact, no moral "rules" at all.

It's pretty simple, Gary: if God exists, there's no point in you getting angry with Him, since He's God. If he does not, there's even less point -- because no objective moral scheme exists by which you can ground your complaint against God. And you can't express your anger at God by declaring He doesn't exist, because that is self-contradicting.

quote]Life in and of itself is sacred
Who told you it is? Who told you it's not just another accidental collocation of random atoms?
...if some being brings life into the world that is capable of experiencing joy and suffering, then that being becomes responsible for the life it created
Perhaps. At least in some ways. Not, perhaps, in others.

But what kind of life is it? What does "being responsible" for it entail? Does it mean preventing it from making any decisions of its own, because some of them might be bad? But if one does that, then what kind of freedom, identity, personhood, volition, will and so forth are you allowing your creation to actually have?

Are you going to let that life mature, become its own "thing," make its own choices, and perhaps freely love you, or are you going to treat protecting it from its own decisions as the highest good for it, and thus make it a highly safe robot?

But if you give it freedom, it will certainly do some things that are bad. What's to be done about that?
Certain rules of decency apply.
Whose rules are they? They aren't yours...because you and I have no authority to impose rules on each other, let alone to set the terms of the rules of reality. It's not our society's rules of decency, because those vary between societies...and even between a single society at any two different points in time. So who has the authority to say what the "rules of decency" for the universe are?
You don't make the rules either IC. So why don't you just shut up and stop siding with our tormentor?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

Or to put it better, IC, stop being an ass toward your fellow humans and start holding God accountable for this shit show.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

Or perhaps ask not what you would do if you were the "God" of death but what would you do if you were the "devil" of life. How could the world be made a better place? And since it is only God who is the architect who makes the world what it is, then how might God make the world better so that there is less suffering and less pain for everyone in it?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

1. The world is currently a shit show.
2. God created everything in the world.
3. God is omniscient and knows the world is a shit show.
4. God is benevolent and does not wish for the world to be a shit show
5. God is omnipotent and has the power to make the world a NON-shit show.

So when is God going to fix this shit show?
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Christianity

Post by Gary Childress »

That's all I want to know, IC. When is God going to fix this shit show that is the world? If you can't answer that question, then your knowledge of God is idol crap.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by tillingborn »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:25 pm
tillingborn wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 4:37 pmI have given you multiple opportunities to clarify your position,
Well, let's leave it there.
I would but for this:
tillingborn wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 4:37 pmI accepted that you might have made a mistake, gave you the opportunity to correct and in return you tell me:
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 5:07 amYou pretend to misread, I see.
I read what you write. Now you accuse me of "deliberate misinterpretation".
That's twice you have accused me of being a liar.
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 10:25 pmI'm not able to make my position evident to you, apparently. So that's fine...be well.
You have made your position abundantly clear: you will call someone else a liar rather than admit you made a trivial mistake.
Post Reply