Haran

I admit it that the "point of absurdity" is about as grey as many other areas in life, but somehow we mostly all seem to come to the same conclusion about her work. You agreed with Layman at first. Why? I think you were also able to see that Acharya had passed that "point of absurdity", at least originally. There seem to be varying degrees of "wackyness" (for lack of a better term), but critical thinkers mostly seem to be pretty good at weeding out the more extreme views like those held by Acharya.

Oh well... On to more intelligent subjects, eh?

Haran

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Haran ]</p>

Layman

What a hypocrite. This website is the ultimate abuser of the theist, yet you get all quesy when I call someone a moron.

My peace with Christ doesn't mean there are not any morons out there. I really don't see all that much difference between "flake" and "moron," but if it comforts you to think such please feel free.

Actually, I didn't say I defeated one of her disciples on another board. I said I debated one of her disciples on another board.

I have read many of her writings on her website. I was quite clear that it was upon that experience I called her a moron.

Are you suggesting that I have to read everything someone writes before I can come to some sort of determination as to their reasoning skills?

Toto

I didn't get queasy - I was just pointing out that you did not provide any problems with her arguments, you just resorted to name-calling. If she is so awful, I'm sure that you could have found a few examples.

I would hope that finding peace with Christ would have given you more sympathy with human frailty and less of a need to build yourself up by being so judgmental about others. But what do I know.

Layman

Ahh, but I did provide several examples of her whacko ideas.

Since I was not building myself up by being so judgmental about others, I'm not sure what your point is.

Toto

You are here as a representative of what most of us consider an irrational cult, that requires belief in improbable or impossible events (virgin birth, resurrection, at a minimum.) But what sends you ballistic is a woman who denies your irrational beliefs but has some irrational beliefs of her own.

And you aren't content to just point out how irrational she is (and I think everything you mentioned involved her new age beliefs, nothing touched on her arguments reguarding Christianity.) You aren't content to say her book is foolish. You have to brand her a moron.

I think there's some underlying psychological dynamic going on here. You can't face up to the non-rationality of your own belief system. So you take it out on Acharya S., who has no great pretentions to scholarship, but seems to be a very astute new age entrepreneur.

Well, enough fun for now. I am not going to add anything more. You can have the last word.

Tharmas

Layman, is it possible you could provide a link to this debate? Based on the discussions here I’ve been led to her site and I find myself rapidly falling under her spell. Perhaps referencing a debate that stays more focused on substance could help me regain perspective. Thanks.

Layman

Actually, she doesn't bother me at all. She is mostly irrelevant. What I was pointing out is the immense hypocrisy of those who claim to be the enemies of irrationality clinging to her work because she doesn't like Christians. As you continue to illustrate here.

I didn't brand her anything, I posted some of her whacko ideas and called her a moron. The hypocrisy is not with me. I'm not relying on someone who is so involved in ideas that I consider to be an "irrational cult".

Funny how you are so offended by me calling someone you brand as flaky a moron, but seem to delight in describing my church an "irrational cult." Well, it's not funny. But it does show how disengenous you are. Which is the problem with this site. It's devolved into little more than an intimidation forum for believers.

Toto, considering how little respect I have for your historical knowledge or ability to be fair, I just think this evaluation of your is funny.

I'm not taking anything "out" on Acharya S. I didn't even bring her up. Some "criticalthinkers" did. She is a very astute entreprenuer. As Doherty is an asute skeptical entrepreneur. That's hardly a ringing endorsement of their "scholarship."

How obliging of you.

Layman

Tharmus,

I would glad to. But it was on the historycannel.com's boards. They routinely wipe them and do not maintain an archive.

When you say you are falling under her spell, do you mean that you also believe that AIDS does not exist? Or that she's on a mission from space aliens?

Kosh

Would this evidence be admissable in a court
of law?

Let's hear it. Start another thread.

lpetrich

The likes of Layman and J.P. Holding criticizing Acharya S. for holding irrational beliefs reminds me of Matthew 7:3, Luke 6:41: "Why do you see the speck in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?"

Source: the nice collection of comparisons at <a href="http://religion.rutgers.edu/nt/primer/Q/speck.html" target="_blank">http://religion.rutgers.edu/nt/primer/Q/speck.html</a>