|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
 Posted - 12/26/2008 : 12:44:12 [Permalink]
|
posted by Halfmooner
There are all kinds of definitions of "insane": Legal, psychological, in everyday expression, etc. I would only say that for certain I think Cheung's ideology is insane, as he entirely throws out rational thought. Whether that makes him insane as well is a good issue for debate, but I will observe that insane asylums are full of "religious" people who make just about as much sense as Cheung. |
Man, you're probably right. But, if I start thinking of this guy as insane, then I'm going to have to start believing that everyone I know is as crazy as a loon. I haven't even spoken to an agnostic face to face in years. A real live conversation with someone that thinks rational thinking is anything more than having to recite their multiplication tables is idle fantasy. |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
 |
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/26/2008 : 16:35:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Tim
I don't really want to be the party pooper in the bunch, but do y'all think that this comes as any surprise? These folks have taken Kierkegaard's leap. God is all-powerful. All the contradictions and the paradoxes be damned, blind faith covers it all.
Really now, if someone can believe that donkeys talk, or a man can survive in the belly of a whale, or that the earth is flat and stands upon four pillars, then where's the shocker when it comes to a non-sensible scheme of morality? Moakley's illustration of free will in christianity is a great example.
Anyway, I guess we all realize this. So, carry on and have fun…
But, I certainly wouldn't want to use words as strong as insane. Historically, the vast majority of people have followed belief systems practically as irrational. I'd opt for a more benign word like naïve, gullible or even ignorant. But, that's just me. Maybe I'm a little too tolerant.
|
I am not sure. Most people in history were not believing in an all powerful deity, it is a relatively recent development of monotheism.
In fact, most Christian side-step the issues connected to it. Either never thinking about it enough to reach the conclusions or avoiding the answer by saying that God's nature is ultimately a mystery to us. And, of course, there are some Religious people that entered a crisis of faith when they confronted these issues.
All in all, it's only a minority that, when confronted to the absolute irrationality of an all powerful/all good divinity tolerating evil decide to answer the riddle by just breaking the rationality to force it into fitting their own vision of what God should be... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 12/27/2008 : 00:44:22 [Permalink]
|
You know Simon, I may be from down the bayou, and never was the smartest fish in the school, but I still believe most people have historically “followed belief systems practically as irrational” as any monotheistic tradition. I really don't think that monotheists have cornered the historic market on absurdity. I think we've all bought into that market at one time or another.
However, I agree completely with your second paragraph. Unfortunately, I've seen very few folks give up their monotheistic beliefs after being confronted with the ridiculousness inherent in their theology. Actually, I've personally met none. What I've found is that a person possessing a strong religious faith only renounces it after a period of ‘spiritual' neglect, or by a replacement supernatural belief. I know others exist, but down here they're the rare exception to the rule.
I guess, my initial point was that folks with a belief system based in the submission to an omnipotent being simply have no reason to see not only the absurdity of divine morality, but also fail to see the intrinsic immorality of it. They don't have to. Honestly, why should an all powerful creator (and destroyer) need to submit to the moral sensibilities of it's inferior creation? Isn't it absurd (and probably quite risky) to question the veracity of the knowledge of a being which possesses all knowledge?
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/27/2008 : 15:25:50 [Permalink]
|
The point I was awkwardly trying to make is that there is an inherent rational problem to explain evil in a system dominated with an all powerful/all good deity.
On the other hand, most earlier Religions did not have this inherent problem, because most of them did not have such an all powerful/all good divinity.
Essentially, these concepts only appear in monotheism and, really, when you, for example read the Bible, the God it describes in many passages does not seem all powerful/ all knowing... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 05:57:32 [Permalink]
|
You know what really scares me? This:
| EDIT: Quote removed, read instead the first full paragraph on page 10 where he says that anyone who thinks that "god's glory" is NOT worth the death and suffering of billions of people has to high an opinion of the worth of humanity |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 01/03/2009 08:56:15 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 07:21:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by the_ignored
You know what really scares me? This:
| Although the evil we are speaking of is indeed negative, the ultimate end, which is the glory of God, is positive. God is the only one who possesses intrinsic worth, and if he decides that the existence of evil will ultimately serve to glorify him, then the decree is by definition good and justified. One who thinks that God's glory is not worth the death and suffering of billions of people has too high an opinion of himself and humanity. |
|
Indeed scary as hell. This guy is intellectually prepared to commit mass murder, if he ever gets it into his head that god wants him to do so. He's by-passed all cultural and instinctive morality and has decided the very lives of billions of humans are all worthless. Only the "glory" of his mythical apparently megalomaniacal sky-god matters. This is dangerous thinking, and this man is dangerous.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 12/30/2008 07:23:03 |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 13:54:23 [Permalink]
|
It is, indeed, scary.
The way to Hell is paved with good attentions and the worst murderers are often serving a 'greater purpose'... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 17:20:37 [Permalink]
|
Ironically, it's Dan who's found a xian response to that guy in general.
Though of course, there are so many christian denominations out there that one wonders how an "eneeerant" god could have made a book that leads to so many viewpoints. Doesn't the bible say that "god is not the author" of confusion?
Oh that right...it's "mans fault" I guess.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2008 : 17:42:31 [Permalink]
|
Well, it seems Javier is brave enough to insult us on his own blog, to which I've replied. Anyone wonder if that little pissant will come over here? He certainly spends time reading here, and here.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
|
Abdul Alhazred
Skeptic Friend
USA
58 Posts |
Posted - 01/01/2009 : 07:39:48 [Permalink]
|
Hey there the_ignored. Thanks for reminding me of this place. 
If the existence of God is an axiom, what are the logical conclusions?
To clarify -- By "God" I mean a good old fashioned Jehovah, not a vague "gotta be something".
First of all, God has to be somehow consistent with the universe that actually exists. Which means explaining evil in the world of humanity, with evil defined non-theologically in terms of what is harmful. The classic "problem of evil".
Javier is nothing if not logically consistent, more so than "nice" Christians. But he does not prove that God exists. Rather that is the starting point of his reasoning.
|
The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation. |
| Edited by - Abdul Alhazred on 01/01/2009 07:40:53 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 01/01/2009 : 07:54:48 [Permalink]
|
| Hey there the_ignored. Thanks for reminding me of this place |
No problem.
In that way, he'd be like Sye TenB, kind of, only Sye is amusing, and not apparently sociopathic like Javier and his Calvinist friends are, as can be seen here.
I remember thinking that really, people like Pastor Fred Phelps is actually more biblically consistent than the "nice" christians to.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 01/01/2009 08:00:40 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 01/03/2009 : 15:17:47 [Permalink]
|
The Copyright statement in the beginning of the PDF-file in the opening posts says that nothing in the PDF may be reproduced. But can such a claim really legally be made?
Secondly, is it moral to place such a strict copyright on a document that should be publically available? I mean, to spread the Good Word (tm) and profit from it? |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 01/03/2009 : 15:53:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
The Copyright statement in the beginning of the PDF-file in the opening posts says that nothing in the PDF may be reproduced. But can such a claim really legally be made?
Secondly, is it moral to place such a strict copyright on a document that should be publically available? I mean, to spread the Good Word (tm) and profit from it?
|
As far as I know, you can always reproduce at least a tiny bit of a document under the 'fair use' conditions, for example to quote it for research/news purposes.
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2009 : 08:48:35 [Permalink]
|
I'm not taking any chances; those people are self-righteous as hell and will take any reason to censor or attack a person: I've just been called to the carpet for using "profanity" in my last post to him. Better read it quick before he erases it, because I've let him know that I've no intention of modifying what I say. Of course, he's going all self-righeous about it, and criticizing my "filthy" mouth.
He's obviously not from the prairies. Even xians where I'm from say a lot worse than that!
Here then, is the last reply I will likely be sending to that guy:
<b>Edited to catch spelling error</b>:
"Filthy" mouth? For saying "bullshit", "damn" or "bitch"? Please. I know many xians who themselves talk like that. Isn't it the "lords name in vain" that's frowned upon by the bible? Nothing wrong with the words I used according to your own holy book.
I caught you misrepresenting what atheists think and what their position is. I called you on it.
Tough.
If you don't like it, then don't bullshit. Simple as that. For someone who constantly name-calls and insults like you do, you're acting all "mature" all of a sudden. You've shown more hostility than I did when this started. So, quit whining. I'm trying to reach you on your own level of discourse here.
I've been responding to <b>you</b> despite your constant juvenile actions, so you really don't have a right to bitch about my "filthy" mouth. For someone who's been dishing out a lot, you sure can't take it.
Besides, retraction or not, from what I've seen of you, you'll use that post as fodder anyhow and go on to distort how atheists act and think. That's the action I caught you out on in the first place.
If you don't like the fact that I'm not some "atheist hippy" then just stay here with your own little "support group", such as it is.
If you ever screw up the courage to deal with me or other members of my "support group", you'll know where to find me. I'm sure I can convince the mods to make sure that no bad language offends your virgin eyes.
If you want something real offensive, I'd say that your friend Cheung's idea that: anyone who protests the death of billions of people to promote "gods' glory" is someone who thinks too highly of humans, <b>that</b> is offensive, and anti-human to boot.
Deaths of billions of people, no problem: Someone saying "damn" "bullshit" and "bitch" on a blog: Holy fuck, that's unforgiveable.
As for "anonymous", I don't deal with cowards. Besides, what he said is, well, bullshit. |
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 01/05/2009 09:12:47 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2009 : 21:09:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
The Copyright statement in the beginning of the PDF-file in the opening posts says that nothing in the PDF may be reproduced. But can such a claim really legally be made?
Secondly, is it moral to place such a strict copyright on a document that should be publically available? I mean, to spread the Good Word (tm) and profit from it?
|
As far as I know, you can always reproduce at least a tiny bit of a document under the 'fair use' conditions, for example to quote it for research/news purposes.
|
copyright law allows any document to be quoted in smallish sections for the purpose of commentary, parody, or discussion. While I appreciate ig's voluntary removal of sections of the original post, I do not believe (per my understanding of US copyright law aka USC Title 17), that it was necessary as ig was providing analysis and commentary. Just quoting it outright without trying to add anything to the discussion would be a questionable usage.
Thanks, |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
From Javier, the xian concept of "morality"
