It makes no sense

Discussion in 'Religion' started by fess, Feb 19, 2020.

  1. fess Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    97
    I've yet to hear a reasonable argument. What I hear is " we don't have any other explanation" and " It says so in this book".

    Atheism may not have been normal 1000 years ago, but holding a 1st century worldview now is not reasonable.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,515
    Straw man.

    And let's be honest, here: This is an example of what disappoints about atheistic advocacy.

    First, if the point that we're addressing questions of religion is at all relevant, then, no, fallacy is not appropriate.

    Also, it's just so gutterborne in its simplifying prejudice.

    Let me, please, compare two ideas for you:

    • The only time, as I see it, that "atheism" should "be a religion" is actually an inadequate expression of accounting for the belief in no deity, or participation in no religion, as a protected circumstance and staus according to the proposition of "religious freedom".

    • While superstition is not in and of itself creed, it is an easy gateway to subsequent code and cult.​

    The mix of fallacy and projection in order to postulate a projection attends the superstition not quite bound by creed, while implying internalized standard such as those composing communal code, as well as behavioral expectations not dissimilar from communal behavioral cult. Even as an independent atheist who might claim no group affiliations, you still manage to present your evangelism in a protoreligious context.

    And while nothing is an absolute guarantee in human experience, the more it looks like a factional fight between religious zealots, the more people will accept that is what it is.

    To wit:

    Actually, the "loving God" is a more recent innovation attending human insecurity. For instance, do you even know where it comes from? And do you know the story of the rainbow wig?

    No, really. It sounds great, doesn't it? That God so loved the world He sent his only Son? That God so loved the world that He had His Son killed in order to tell the world how much He loved it? The trick is to pay attention to what "love" means. Okay, I take it back; it's not much of a trick.

    How about 1741:

    The observation from the words that I would now insist upon is this.—"There is nothing that keeps wicked men at any one moment out of hell, but the mere pleasure of God."—By the mere pleasure of God, I mean his sovereign pleasure, his arbitrary will, restrained by no obligation, hindered by no manner of difficulty, any more than if nothing else but God’s mere will had in the least degree, or in any respect whatsoever, any hand in the preservation of wicked men one moment.—The truth of this observation may appear by the following considerations ....

    (Edwards↱)

    And what does the good preacher have to say about love?

    The subject that very much enrages an arbitrary prince, is liable to suffer the most extreme torments that human art can invent, or human power can inflict. But the greatest earthly potentates in their greatest majesty and strength, and when clothed in their greatest terrors, are but feeble, despicable worms of the dust, in comparison of the great and almighty Creator and King of heaven and earth. It is but little that they can do, when most enraged, and when they have exerted the utmost of their fury. All the kings of the earth, before God, are as grasshoppers; they are nothing, and less than nothing: both their love and their hatred is to be despised. The wrath of the great King of kings, is as much more terrible than theirs, as his majesty is greater.

    †​

    The misery you are exposed to is that which God will inflict to that end, that he might show what that wrath of Jehovah is. God hath had it on his heart to show to angels and men, both how excellent his love is, and also how terrible his wrath is. Sometimes earthly kings have a mind to show how terrible their wrath is, by the extreme punishments they would execute on those that would provoke them. Nebuchadnezzar, that mighty and haughty monarch of the Chaldean empire, was willing to show his wrath when enraged with Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego; and accordingly gave orders that the burning fiery furnace should be heated seven times hotter than it was before; doubtless, it was raised to the utmost degree of fierceness that human art could raise it. But the great God is also willing to show his wrath, and magnify his awful majesty and mighty power in the extreme sufferings of his enemies.

    †​

    Many are daily coming from the east, west, north and south; many that were very lately in the same miserable condition that you are in, are now in a happy state, with their hearts filled with love to him who has loved them, and washed them from their sins in his own blood, and rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. How awful is it to be left behind at such a day! To see so many others feasting, while you are pining and perishing!

    If we skip 1487, or 1095, we aren't passing over mere blithe repetition. Try psychoanalyzing what happened at Nicaea in 325 CE; it's kind of hard. But one of the differences 'twixt then and, say, the first century CE,would have to be consolidation of orthodoxy including the alienation of gnosticism. If we gloss over any number of milestones, none of the historical exempla are quite like each other, which in turn is part of the point.

    I have a note set aside, a tale of two headlines↱ for the same story through two different outlets. The original, from Raw Story↱, runs, "Americans are manipulated by fake news because religion has infected our politics: Peabody-winning journalist". Over at AlterNet↱, the headline asks, "Can Religion Explain Why Americans Are So Easily Duped by Fake News?"

    And that's actually not irrelevant to the other reason I set it aside; there was also this:

    "America has always been a Christian nation," [Kurt] Andersen quoted. "That had always meant a different thing 100 years ago or even 50 years ago than it means today… Christian Protestant religion became extreme. It became more magical and supernatural in its beliefs in America than it has for hundreds of years or for any other place in the world."

    This point, circa 2018, recalls to mind Mark Noll↱, circa 2002:

    Western Protestantism in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was moving from establishment forms of religion, embedded in traditional, organic, premodern political economies, to individualized and affectional forms adapted to modernizing, rational, and market-oriented societies. Theological manifestations of these changes can be described in several ways. They first reoriented specific beliefs: God was perceived less often as transcendent and self-contained, more often as immanent and relational. Divine revelation was equated more simply with the Bible alone than Scripture embedded in a self-conscious ecclesiastical tradition. The physical world created by God was more likely to be regarded as understandable, progressing, and malleable, than as mysterious, inimical, and fixed. Theological method came to rely less on instinctive deference to inherited confessions and more on self-evident propositions organized by scientific method.

    Theological changes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries also involved a shift in meaning for key concepts that operated in both religious and political life, for example, “freedom”, “justice”, “virtue”, and “vice”. For theology, the process at work was the same as Gordon Wood once described for intellectual developments more generally: “Although words and concepts may remain outwardly the same for centuries, their particular functions and meanings do not and could not remain static—not as long as individuals attempt to use them to explain new social circumstances and make meaningful new social behavior.” In America as much was happening in theology from new meanings given to old words as from the introduction of new vocabularies.

    We shouldn't overlook the point that some of the currents feeding our neighbor's well are older than the first century, though I haven't ever attempted a full survey of his range, but the larger point is that the first century is your own box. While you are not necessarily wrong that, "There is no good reason to believe an intelligent, caring being created this vast universe", the limits of what it means are entirely your own.

    Try it this way:

    In truth, it depends on what you mean in particular. Looking to the question of, "so many obviously intelligent people believe something that seems so obviously unfounded and .....actually silly", well, how much of what sounds so silly is your own invention or insistence or belief?

    You're hardly original in that.

    Oh, hey, 1746. Diderot: Whether God exists or does not exist, He has come to rank among the most sublime and useless truths.
     
    davewhite04 likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,515
    Notes on #22↑ above

    Burris, Sarah K. "Americans are manipulated by fake news because religion has infected our politics: Peabody-winning journalist". Raw Story. 6 February 2019. RawStory.com. 27 February 2020. http://bit.ly/2nUZGVo

    Diderot, Denis. Pensées philosophiques. 1746.

    —————. "Can Religion Explain Why Americans Are So Easily Duped by Fake News?". AlterNet. 6 February 2018. AlterNet.org. 27 February 2020. http://bit.ly/2shPiw5

    Edwards, Jonathan. "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God". 8 July 1741. BlueletterBible.org. 27 February 2020. http://bit.ly/2wcq70i

    Noll, Mark. America's God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
     
    davewhite04 likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,598
    Do you mean does a man dressed in Santa suit at Christmas time exist? Sure. Don’t you?

    Or are you talking about the character who lives at the North Pole, with industrious beings known as Elves, who make toys for the children on the good list.

    Who flies through the sky at night, by flying reindeer, headed by a reindeer named Rudolph.

    Who comes down the chimney to drop presents of to the good children?

    Mmmm!!!! Not sure.
    How could he fit down those little chimneys, with his trademark fat gut, and a bag full of presents.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Any ideas?
     
  8. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,827
    Yes, I believe in Santa.

    What of it?
     
  9. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,120
    Now there's hypocrisy. Jan, mocking somebody else's belief in their magical being.

    Santa is.
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  10. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,598
    No.
    God Is.
     
  11. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,799
    No, it didn't. It's never made sense, and was never required to. Magical thinking isn't about sense or reason: it's about imagination and hubris.
    Consider evolution: how everything that's alive today, including humans, grew up in the same world, the same reality. None of the other species enlist magical outside help: they simply solve their problems as best they can.
    Religion has nothing to with knowledge or understanding.
    Religion is about control. Gods are tools - cat's paws; waldos - to extend a human's power beyond a human's capability. The bigger our universe grows, the bigger we make the god we bribe to control it for us.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2020
  12. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    Simple, Santa and his reindeer move at near light speeds, that's how they can deliver all those toys all over the world in one night; time dilation. He can get down any chimney because he's moving a near light speeds; length contraction.
     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  13. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,799
    ...erm... wouldn't that make him even fatter?
     
  14. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    Not sure if fatter, but there would be much less of him length wise to go down the chimney.
     
  15. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,799
    I get it. You've solved the problem which wasn't. Now, about the big wide belly plus big wide bag? What happens to the mass? How does he get back into his jolly old shape in time for the next photo-op? Oh, so many questions! Where is that famous Science when the Faith of little children needs bolstering? Eh?
     
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Just like this...

     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  17. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,799
    Aha! He didn't get any shorter or faster - he got long and skinny ans slow.
    Heeey...! Is this one of those theist misdirections?
     
  18. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    Actually, it only looks slow in our rest frame. Time dilation.
     
  19. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,827
    I get presents though.

    People give them courtesy of Santa.
     
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,794
    An Octopus can squeeze through any opening that allows his cranium to pass. He tests that with a tentacle before attempting to go through. This is why they never get stuck. Octopi are "smart" and they never get a "big head" about their capabilities.
     
  21. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,799
    They're not "smart" - they're smart. Now, how to make that relate to some aspect of the thread?
    Ah!
    We should get Santa Squid to deliver the presents. He could bypass the whole chimney problem and just squeeze them in through the time dilation.
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,794
    Atheism is not the opposite of religion, it is the opposite of Theism.
    Atheism does not oppose any theist religion in particular, it opposes Theism in general.

    Religions can teach totally opposed views to each . Religious wars are witness to that.
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,794
    Why not not the FSM, it already looks like an Octopus.

    p.s. I did not introduce the subject of Octopi to the conversation. "Q" did in response to your rant about reindeer climbing down chimneys without checking if they might get stuck. A line of logic which you are apparently more than willing to continue.
    OK, reindeer are "stupid" their horns alone will never fit.......they would't even fit through a basketball hoop.

     

Share This Page