Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:58 pm According to IC, God doesn't care about manipulation,
Again, this is simply nothing I ever said or ever would say.

A more competent "straw manning," is what you're looking for, atto.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by attofishpi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 pm
attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:58 pm According to IC, God doesn't care about manipulation,
Again, this is simply nothing I ever said or ever would say.

A more competent "straw manning," is what you're looking for, atto.
What? You did not state as a good Christian that you are in fact a manipulator of debates?

Of course you didn't ...silly billy. You are not that honest.


Moron - it is WHO you are, a manipulator by the words you choose to deny other posters that are challenging you.


As Vitruvius wrote:
I hate how you leave your argument in full, reduce mine to one line - often missing the salient point, and then bang on afterward, again at great length. Further, you stick a label on my argument then attack the label.



You are a cunning Evangelist fox.



And, then there is this...
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 pmBut if I knew I was wrong, and thus, if I were an Atheist, I would know that no moral constraints remain upon we at all, and would very likely take full advantage of that fact, I think. Like Nietzsche, I suppose I would despise those who held back, and continued to believe in morality. I might regard it as a badge of courage, and certainly as opportunistically necessary, to get myself ahead at all costs.
So you truly would be scum if you didn't think there was someone watching over you.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:01 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 pmBut if I knew I was wrong, and thus, if I were an Atheist, I would know that no moral constraints remain upon we at all, and would very likely take full advantage of that fact, I think. Like Nietzsche, I suppose I would despise those who held back, and continued to believe in morality. I might regard it as a badge of courage, and certainly as opportunistically necessary, to get myself ahead at all costs.
So you truly would be scum if you didn't think there was someone watching over you.
Not at all. If there were no God, none of us would be "scum," no matter what we did. There'd be no grounds for such a condemnation at all.

Or alternately, you could say that since Evolutionism claims we all arose from the primordial ooze, we're all literally "pond scum." :wink:

But the point is that if there's no God, it's not "wrong" for anybody to steal, or murder or rape, or do anything at all. And it's not "right" for them to feed orphans, give handouts to beggars, or invent a cure for cancer. They're under no obligation to goodness, nor under any debt not to do evil; what they dare, that they may do.

In that case, nothing at all can ever be objectively "right" or "wrong." And the person who truly believes that is quite free to act on whatever impulses he wishes to act on. If he is courageous enough to steal, or cheat, or rape, and skillful enough to get away with it, what is there to prove to him he has been "wrong" at all? Having been successful at what he intended, he is neither good nor evil...he's simply successful as a survivor...and perhaps, as Nietzsche claimed, a sort of "superman," because he dares what others fear to do.

Good thing, though, that even most Atheists are afraid to live in a world like that. As one social critic has put it, "They continue to believe in conclusions the premises of which they have denied." They tend to act in generally sociable and conventionally moral ways, even though Atheism itself has no credible place for morality, or for any explanation or justification thereof. They prefer happy illusions to the dread reality to which their own suppositions would compel them, if they followed them consistently. So they aren't consistent.

But I'm rather glad about that.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by attofishpi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:02 pm
attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:01 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 pmBut if I knew I was wrong, and thus, if I were an Atheist, I would know that no moral constraints remain upon we at all, and would very likely take full advantage of that fact, I think. Like Nietzsche, I suppose I would despise those who held back, and continued to believe in morality. I might regard it as a badge of courage, and certainly as opportunistically necessary, to get myself ahead at all costs.
So you truly would be scum if you didn't think there was someone watching over you.
Not at all.
Oh. You thought I meant scum in the literal sense, ok.

But you admit that you would likely take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost (had you believe there was no God watching over your actions) - as per your above statement?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm But you admit that you would likely take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost (had you believe there was no God watching over your actions) - as per your above statement?
Any thinking Atheist would. (But I'm no Atheist, of course.)

He would know that no moral constraints hang over his head, and he could not possibly miss the simple logic of, "I want it, I can get it, and when my life is over there is no more -- so what is there to prevent me from getting it, save my own cowardice?"

Nietsche saw that logic. And while even he lacked the courage to follow it through completely, he knew full well that's what logic required. It required us all to be "beyond good and evil."
User avatar
Janoah
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:26 pm
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Janoah »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:30 am
Janoah wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:52 pm The point is that God cannot "do" anything, for the One is not material.
, if we posit that God is the Creator.
To take literally parables on faith, or not to take on faith that which contradicts scientific evidence, is a philosophical question.
Maimonides talks about this in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed"

For example, Rambam (Maimonides) argues that the eternity of the world has not been proven, but the eternity of the world does not contradict the Torah.
And the proof of the existence of the One, he writes that he brings it precisely on the basis of the eternity of the world, in his halachic works.
That is, the premise that there was no creation of the world, and the world is co-eternal to the One, does not contradict the Torah (Pentateuch), in the vision of the greatest religious authority.

Maimonides writes that the preachers of a literal understanding of the Bible contrary to scientific evidence are the most vicious opponents of the Bible, degrading its glory.

The premise of a material god is absurd, which means belief in a material god is sever belief in absurdity.
And from a theological point of view, a material deity is an idol by definition of an idol.
And the "omnipotence" of the material god is that he can potentially fall under a tram, God forbid.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Janoah wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:41 pm ...not to take on faith that which contradicts scientific evidence...
What is this thing that, as you say, "contradicts scientific evidence"?

Which "evidence," and what does it "contradict"?
For example, Rambam (Maimonides) argues that the eternity of the world has not been proven, but the eternity of the world does not contradict the Torah.
It does, actually. The first verse of Torah proves him wrong. It speaks of the "beginning" of the world. That which is itself eternal has, by definition, no "beginning."
...the preachers of a literal understanding of the Bible contrary to scientific evidence...
What are they "preaching" that is "contrary to scientific evidence"? It's certainly not the non-eternality of the world, because even just pure mathenatics shows that Maimonides was wrong about that.

A past-eternal regress of causes is actually impossible. That's simple maths. And the Earth being the product of causes, it's impossible for it to have been past eternal. It's not even reasonable as a guess, so we can rule that out.
The premise of a material god is absurd
But as the Bible says, God the Father is not "material." In fact, Torah holds that it is God who created the material world, not He who was created by it. The Creator obviously has to be greater than the created, or He could not be its Creator.

So it's hard to see who you're actually disproving here. It's certainly not Christians or Jews...
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by attofishpi »

Janoah wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:41 pm To take literally parables on faith, or not to take on faith that which contradicts scientific evidence, is a philosophical question.
Maimonides talks about this in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed"

For example, Rambam (Maimonides) argues that the eternity of the world has not been proven, but the eternity of the world does not contradict the Torah.
And the proof of the existence of the One, he writes that he brings it precisely on the basis of the eternity of the world, in his halachic works.
That is, the premise that there was no creation of the world, and the world is co-eternal to the One, does not contradict the Torah (Pentateuch), in the vision of the greatest religious authority.

Maimonides writes that the preachers of a literal understanding of the Bible contrary to scientific evidence are the most vicious opponents of the Bible, degrading its glory.

The premise of a material god is absurd, which means belief in a material god is sever belief in absurdity.
And from a theological point of view, a material deity is an idol by definition of an idol.
And the "omnipotence" of the material god is that he can potentially fall under a tram, God forbid.
Oi! Are you a Jew - from that mob that dobbed my mate in to the Romans?

Je_wish my messiah would turn up!! Where is he?

He's not coming back for a second time!!
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by attofishpi »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm
attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm But you admit that you would likely take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost (had you believe there was no God watching over your actions) - as per your above statement?
Any thinking Atheist would. (But I'm no Atheist, of course.)
As a Christian myself, I rate you pretty shit as a Christian. I would go as far as to say unethical and showing a degree of cowardice by the way you debate with Atheists, most of whom appear to have mastered "thinking".

Certainly, most of my friends are "thinking" atheists and they would not stoop to take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost, as you have clearly shown, you would.

That then proves to me that you are only into the Christian thing in an attempt to benefit from it. You are not a Christian for the right reason; altruism and show little to no bravery, and fairness as demonstrated by the way you debate on this forum, hence you are unethical. (thus a hypocrite)

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmHe would know that no moral constraints hang over his head, and he could not possibly miss the simple logic of, "I want it, I can get it, and when my life is over there is no more -- so what is there to prevent me from getting it, save my own cowardice?"
..oh, that is so you (deep down it's who you are, not you fault, blame God, he made you) , except you think you are going to get some great reward and these mere atheists are going to be punished, oh the irony if you actually knew.


Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmNietsche saw that logic. And while even he lacked the courage to follow it through completely, he knew full well that's what logic required. It required us all to be "beyond good and evil."
Y do you think i care wot some other tosser thinks - atheist or other_wise. Why does everyone around here keep quoting other people, I don't give a shit what their opinions were - I'm dealing with you, not Nietsche.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm It required us all to be "beyond good and evil."
And yet when I put that idea to you - you mocked it.

You tripping again?
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Belinda »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:41 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm It required us all to be "beyond good and evil."
And yet when I put that idea to you - you mocked it.

You tripping again?
Join the club DAM.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Belinda wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:13 am
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:41 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm It required us all to be "beyond good and evil."
And yet when I put that idea to you - you mocked it.

You tripping again?
Join the club DAM.
:lol:

''I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member..''Groucho Marx

Now that is the funniest thing I evvor hoid. :wink:
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Belinda »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:44 am
Belinda wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:13 am
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:41 am

And yet when I put that idea to you - you mocked it.

You tripping again?
Join the club DAM.
:lol:

''I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member..''Groucho Marx

Now that is the funniest thing I evvor hoid. :wink:
:lol:
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by owl of Minerva »

Christianity which arrived in the Dark Age, just before the return of the light, is a religion which is pertinent to human evolution and will survive in some form into the next Age. After the original Revelation and its participants were gone what was left were attempts to understand what the Revelation had been and translate it for humanity. In the process it increasingly became a religion of the head rather than of the heart and the head.

Mistakes were made along the way by the church fathers, who were only human, as they struggled to convey to the masses what was beyond even their capacity to understand, no matter how learned they were. Some of what belonged to original Christianity was lost. For example the doctrine of reincarnation that existed and was part of church doctrine until it was declared a heresy in A.D. 553 by the Second Council of Constantinople. A council at which the then Pope was absent.

This has presented Christianity with a dilemma, Christians being compelled to see Christ as a special creation who came to save them, if they believed on his name, and not as someone who made it up through the ranks to liberation as eastern avatars had done.
Last edited by owl of Minerva on Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:52 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by RCSaunders »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm
attofishpi wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm But you admit that you would likely take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost (had you believe there was no God watching over your actions) - as per your above statement?
Any thinking Atheist would. (But I'm no Atheist, of course.)

He would know that no moral constraints hang over his head, and he could not possibly miss the simple logic of, "I want it, I can get it, and when my life is over there is no more -- so what is there to prevent me from getting it, save my own cowardice?"
This is how a mind works that has been totally corrupted by superstition and is unable to reason or think correctly.

To believe that one can actually gain anything of real value at the expense of another rational being is only possible to the kind of corrupt mind that does not understand that human beings' only value to each other is in what they can provide one another as producers. That human psychological nature makes it impossible for any individual to be fulfilled as a human being without knowing that all he is and has are his because he has produced or earned it by his own effort. No matter how much one has or how much pleasure one experiences, if it is at the cost of anyone else's loss or suffering, one can never escape the consciousness of their own worthlessness as something less than a human being--a parasite or predator, and the fact that he is not worthy of association with other rational beings--a pariah. It is not possible for a rational human being to enjoy life without knowing the life he lives and all he is and enjoys are his because he has earned them because anything else is regret and despair and that he is free to enjoy all his associations with others, because they are all benevolent.

Anyone who admits that his own reasoning, without some kind of mystical influence, would convince him to, "take full advantage of others," is a subhuman, incapable of rational relationships with other human beings whom he views as nothing more than potential victims and prey. He admits all his virtue is, "fake," an act produced by following some dictated rules which he would, left to his own devices, defy at every turn. He cannot be trusted.
Post Reply