Bede

This is feedback on another thread here.

After the rather odd (but all too common) experience of atheists trying to convince me about a literal Hell, I was pleased that Rich posted a link to this site and suggest that the people who feel I have not replied to their points will find some interesting reading here:
http://www.what-the-hell-is-hell.com/HellSiteIntro.htm

Koy has already found it too subtle for him to deal with and I'll be interested in the reaction from other minds who were upset when I called them thus.

The Eternal Punishment thread was extremely depressing as it revealed a very uncompromising side to people I hoped were more into that most Secular of virtues - tolerance. Ultimately there seems very little difference between you average hard atheist and your average conservative evangelical. They really are welcome to each other.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Vibr8gKiwi

I really don't see what your point is... so you don't believe in a literal hell of eternal torture--good for you. It's not like you're the first theist to pick and choose interpretations to avoid having to believe in a literal hell of eternal torture and the moral questions raised by such a place. Mormons and JW's don't believe in hell either. However the majority of Christians do believe... perhaps you should be posting to their message boards, not to an atheist board where we don't even believe in your god let alone the torture chamber he runs in his basement.

Vorkosigan

We hard atheists are fortunate to have Bede to tell us how we think.

Michael

PleaseWorkAlready

I'm still wondering why Bede doesn't respond to Carrier on the fine tuning topic, which has rested comfortably at 4 responses for a while now.

Family Man

Yes, but when you're such a subtle thinker like Bede you have the right not only to tell everyone else what they think, but to entirely negate a concept (hell) that millions of Christians do believe in (apparently, because he doesn't). Thus, any comment on the subject by atheists are invalid because Bede, in his wisdom, has deemed it wrong. My cup overfloweth with gratitude for his benevolence.

-DM-

Which thread?

Why was your "feedback" not posted in that thread (as is the usual procedure)?

Are you certain that they were trying to convince YOU or rather do you think that it might be that they were providing argument which might perhaps serve to convince OTHERS that your interpretation is both nontraditional and possibly incorrect?

Yes, it is an interesting. It is an interesting attempt to exorcise from Christianity its "two-faced god who says he is love but plans to torture most people endlessly," a two-faced god who is a major stumbling block to many thoughtful and caring individuals. [Of course, even without its hell of eternal torture, there is a sufficient quantity of Old Testament material which makes the two-faced nature of the god of the Bible obvious.]

[Another example of the rudeness which is typical of so-called Christians.]

You might have a point. But so far as I am concerned, you liberal Christians who seem to think that YOUR personal interpretations prevail over more-traditional interpretations--even though they are often mutually exclusive with the personal interpretations of other liberal Christians--are welcome to each other, too.

-----------

Now, was there some point to starting this new thread other than to let us know how depressed you are?

Bede's Library - REASON MODIFIED BY FAITH

--Don--

Bede

Hi,

Sorry but Richard and I have agreed to disagree. The debate went on as long as it needs to and I doubt we'll be making much more progress. As you will already have seen things quickly turn into a pissing contest around here and I am haapy to leave Richard with the last word. When he gets around to amending his reply to my essay then I might say a bit more.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Bede

Suppose that you think the death penalty is very wrong. Further suppose that you are a member of a political party that you think is right about many things but wrong in supporting the death penalty.

Members of another party are all against the death penalty and also many of the things you support in your own party.

When you meet the other party members and say you support their campaign against capital punishment, you are surprised to find that instead of warmly welcoming you and offering help in how to persuade other members of your party they instead pull out your party's rule book and insist that under section 6(2)b you are not a proper member.

It appears that they are happy to keep the death penalty and the culture of fear and power it entails simply to have another stick with which to beat your party. Despite their rhetoric on tolerance and reason they sound exactly the same as the lunatic fringe of your own party.

Would this depress you?

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - losing faith in atheists

ex-preacher

Suppose that you think exterminating Gypsies is very wrong. Further suppose that you are a member of a political party (the Nazis) that you think is right about many things but wrong in exterminating Gypsies.

Members of another party are all against exterminating Gypsies and also many of the things you support in your own party.

When you meet the other party members and say you support their campaign against exterminating Gypsies, you are surprised to find that instead of warmly welcoming you and offering help in how to persuade other members of your party they instead pull out your party's rule book and insist that under section 6(2)b you are not a proper member.


Would this depress you?

-DM-

Bede:

Your post points up the danger in declaring oneself a member of any political party--or of a believer of a religion which is allegedly based on revealed truths from an immutable "God."

--Don--

Bede's Library - Reason bows to faith

[ August 18, 2001: Message edited by: Donald Morgan ]