Freethought & Rationalism Archive

AJ113 · 07-24-2003, 03:46 PM

RBAC
You use your reason through rational thought to eliminate the bible and most of its contents, to dismiss the idea of other gods, and even to challenge people like Magus for their wacky fundamentalist christian beliefs.

Don't you think it inconsistent to inexplicably throw away your reasoned thoughts when it comes to your god?

It seems to me that you are aware that christian beliefs can be ripped to shreds in a reasoned debate, so you have stripped your own beliefs down to the absolute bare minimum and declared them to based on nothing other than a gut feeling in an attempt to make your position unassailable.

I think that you are desparately trying to justify belief in god to yourself and possibly to others, too. Your rationanality is telling you that your beliefs are bollocks and yet you cling to the last vestiges of your severly self-depleted beliefs in the forlorn hope that you can justify them to yourself.

If you are not scared of death, why do you stubbornly refuse to apply your reason to everything but your almost-non-existant religeous beliefs?

Rational BAC · 07-24-2003, 08:01 PM

Almost non-existant religious beliefs?

Quantity does not make quality you know.

My "almost non-existant" beliefs are at the core of my essence and should not be belittled. -------"Fluff" is not necessarily good.

"Occam's razor" (spelling?) is a two edged sword.

Rational BAC · 07-24-2003, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by brettc
You bet they do. He was right on the mark about you trying to rationalize your irrational core beliefs and why you do it. He was right on the mark about the irrationality of all your arguments in favor of your positive beliefs in Christianity.

Here's what you said:

What I heard you say was I "let you win" to make you feel good about yourself, which isn't the same as you win, you're right, I was wrong. You haven't given up either. You're still trying to rationalize your irrational core beliefs. You're convinced they are irrational, yet you're convinced you can rationalize them. I don't think we have much to worry about the big trouble you're promising. Religion hopelessly irrational.

You use reason to rule out what you don't believe. You don't use reason to determine what you do believe. You're trying to see through the blue lense of reason, but until you close the red lense of faith, you never will. The eye of faith and emotion is dominate for you. Try as you may to see through the blue lense of reason, most things with respect to religion look red or purple to you. This was the debate with BBT. This was the debate with me. You haven't answered to any of our arguments, and you haven't admitted defeat. The discussion has been very enjoyable and enlightening, however.

You are picking and choosing too much of my posts. I haven't gone back through the whole thread, but I remember very well getting dumped on by the mods for not being polite enough to BBT and being somewhat overly aggressive and mean spirited towards BBT in my so-called "giving in" I think I even apologized for that and then---could be wrong about this part but---

I seem to remember apologizing for my apology. -----

---Hey I realize I am in an atheist forum and I don't want to push things too far. So I do tend to give in sometimes when it is not that serious anyway.

Hey Mods----not being disrespectful to anyone here. But sometimes you have to be somewhat pragmatic to get along.

(Plus ---I admit even today that I was being a bit of a sarcastic poop in my original "gave it up" to BBT.)

I was a little pissed at the time because I knew I was losing the argument. (You know you are losing the argument when even you think you haven't a good case)

What the hell, I do push the envelope sometimes.

Rational BAC · 07-24-2003, 08:41 PM

One of these days I will come up with a very rational and unassailable argument to justify my core beliefs-----

----Jesus lived, was half God, half man, was resurrected to show us all that there is an afterlife----

--plus of course a very unusual and seemingly divine way of looking at life and its importance (or lack thereof) and a very practical, but very unusual way to treat your fellow man (thinking of the Sermon on the Mount).

So far all I have to justify that is my unshakeable and admittedly irrational faith. But like the French say -------"On ne sait jamais" -------- "Il y a toujours l'avenir."

And boy will you all be in big trouble on that day when I come up with the rational argument to end all rational arguments on this subject.

Rational BAC · 07-24-2003, 09:55 PM

I know I am going to be in deep doo doo for this one and should let it rest since I am seriously outclassed when it comes to math --------But

BBT kind of blew me away on the "numbers" thing. Now I barely passed Algebra 1 in Junior High and never went any higher in math, unless plane geometry counts for anything except for being some kind of mental exercise.---sort of like a crossword puzzle.

(amazingly enough I got a BA in French Lit at FSU without learning any more math than I knew in the 9th grade) I think they have tightened things up on the University level since 1964 and jolly good for them for that part of it. It would be absolutely horrendous to let us mathematically challenged types to be let loose on society in the world of today.

OK -------so here I go stating to BBT that there must have been something to Christianity because so damned many people took it so seriously 2000 years ago. I mean the least you might consider seriously is that Jesus actually lived. More than that ---you might consider that what He said in 4--- fairly much so in agreement-- Gospels (read oral traditions eventually written down) was probably at least semi-accurate. I mean given the odds and all.

And BBT comes back at me about the numbers thing and obviously I have no comprehension about numbers. (I admit he was definitely correct about that part------I am so happy to be able to count up to 100 and beyond and be able to add, subtract and divide (on a good day) but I do leave it up to others for the more serious part of mathematics.)

So I gave up on the whole project because I knew I was numerically outclassed by BBT.

And I know I shouldn't have started this one again, because I know I going to be outclassed again by all the brilliant atheist mathemeticians on this forum.

AJ113 · 07-25-2003, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
......OK -------so here I go stating to BBT that there must have been something to Christianity because so damned many people took it so seriously 2000 years ago. I mean the least you might consider seriously is that Jesus actually lived. More than that ---you might consider that what He said in 4--- fairly much so in agreement-- Gospels (read oral traditions eventually written down) was probably at least semi-accurate. I mean given the odds and all. ....

Ok, so there was a guy called Jesus who lived 2000 years ago. There were hundreds of guys called Jesus who lived 2000 years ago. Now what?

Oh, you mean the guy about whom those stories were written? Like water in to wine, walking on water, raising people from the dead, raising himself from the dead, etc?

But I thought that you didn't believe in the bible?

BadBadBad · 07-25-2003, 07:54 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rational BAC

Quote:

I was a little pissed at the time because I knew I was losing the argument. (You know you are losing the argument when even you think you haven't a good case)

Now that is a gracious and honest admission. Obviously more than what I saw in your original post. Very reasonable. However, what are you admitting to? Your core beliefs are irrational? For the moment. You still believe there is a rational basis, you just haven't come up with it. That's the topic of the thread and that's the argument.

Quote:

What the hell, I do push the envelope sometimes

We're grownups here. If some are not mature enough to take and expect some honest and frank reactions to their ideas on religion, they shouldn't discuss them in a public forum.

BadBadBad · 07-25-2003, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
I know I am going to be in deep doo doo for this one and should let it rest since I am seriously outclassed when it comes to math --------But

Math RBAC? Your problem isn't math, and your problem isn't that you just haven't come up with a rational basis. You won't ever come up with a rational basis for the Gospel stories. Not if there were 500 witnesses with names/addresses/certified testamonies. Not if it happened last week and was covered by CNN. They are inherently unreasonable stories. They scream out untruth on their own with or with out corroboration.

Corroboration? We don't have it, and you know that. 500 witnesses? Who are they? Diciples as witnesses to the physical resurrection? Where is that part of the story in the oldest Gospel in the oldest manuscript? It's doesn't exist in the oldest manuscript. No, all we have is the irrational stories we see today. That plus the legacy of the fools that believed it.

Suicidal demon possed pigs (you know I like that one!)? Curing the dead? Walking zombies from the grave? Physically resurrected man/gods? Zapped fig trees? Demon possessed deaf people? Walking on water? Feeding the whords with a few fish? You can't separate or delete these ridiculous aspects of the story from the main story. Try as you may.

The whole story start to finish in the Gospels is hopelessly tainted by the incredulous and mixed up nature of the story itself and all it's elements. It's tainted both by the incredulous nature of the story as I've mentioned above, and even the doctrine is hopelessly mixed up, including the precious statements by Jesus that you hold so tightly in your tiny hand of cards. It's tainted by the history of the transmission of the stories themselves.

Even you readily admit that you don't have any confidence in that transmission. Is the pig story true? Did it happen? What, did the author lie about it and just make it up? Who was the author? Was he a liar? Did he just right down some oral story? Did he believe the story, and if so what does that say about the author? If not inserted by the original author, was it a fraudulent insertion? Is that possible? Is that likely? Do we have an accurate transmission of the original story? Which parts can we be sure were transmitted accurately? You see, the fundy has a simple answer to these questions. You as a rational person MUST analyze these questions in a rational way.

You can't separate the pig story from the resurrection story, the Jesus story, or even the God story. You've said yourself you believe the OT is myth. RBAC, that story is the definition of God! If it's myth, God is myth! It's not reasonable to believe that God just showed up one day to say "oh, by the way, part of that OT myth crap you guys got right, and here I am." Oh, and we don't even get God showing up. Just some guy claiming to be a prophet from God just like every other dime a dozen prophet lining every street corner at the time. It's all part of the same sorted story. It has an incredulous nature throughout the story. It's all the "same author," and it's transmitted to us today as a unit of four stories. The content is inseparable. You cannot rationally rule out any portion without condemning the rest to the same fate.

Big trouble some day in the future? It's been 2000 years already. It ain't never gonna' happen.

AJ113 · 07-25-2003, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
Almost non-existant religious beliefs?

Quantity does not make quality you know.

My "almost non-existant" beliefs are at the core of my essence and should not be belittled. -------"Fluff" is not necessarily good.

"Occam's razor" (spelling?) is a two edged sword.

For the sake of discussion,"almost non-existant" is retracted.

I realise that my question was worded incorrectly, so I will re-phrase it, because I would like an answer:

If you are not scared of death, why do you apply your reason to everything in your life, yet leave your reason far behind when it comes to consideration of religeous beliefs?

Rational BAC · 07-25-2003, 10:32 AM

I am not afraid of death. As an agnostic I was not afraid of death. As a believer I still am not afraid of death.

I can understand that if I was the type who actually believed in a fire and brimstone hell, then I would be terribly afraid that somehow I would not measure up (eye of a needle and the camel thing and the part about doing to the least of man equals doing to Christ) and find myself in such a God awful place.

It is so difficult, if not unattainable to be a "good" Christian. I mean if you look at all the things we are supposed to do Biblically to get there---there is probably only one or two people in heaven right now.

(But then again, there is always the hope that God grades on a curve. )

The worst, in my opinion, that would happen is non-existence. Not really afraid of that. Never have been. Why would I be afraid of non-existence? Wouldn't know when it happened anyway in order to have anything to be afraid of.

You really need to get off this "fear is the basis for all Christianity" thing. I am sure that is true for some Christians-- Certainly is not true for me.

Not that I would not prefer an eternal heaven with the best nookie, the best food and drink and the best entertainment imaginable along with all the wonderful spiritual percs available-----------to an eternity of non-existence.

But that just has to do with preference---not fear.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-24-2003, 03:46 PM	#261
AJ113 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Hull UK Posts: 854	RBAC You use your reason through rational thought to eliminate the bible and most of its contents, to dismiss the idea of other gods, and even to challenge people like Magus for their wacky fundamentalist christian beliefs. Don't you think it inconsistent to inexplicably throw away your reasoned thoughts when it comes to your god? It seems to me that you are aware that christian beliefs can be ripped to shreds in a reasoned debate, so you have stripped your own beliefs down to the absolute bare minimum and declared them to based on nothing other than a gut feeling in an attempt to make your position unassailable. I think that you are desparately trying to justify belief in god to yourself and possibly to others, too. Your rationanality is telling you that your beliefs are bollocks and yet you cling to the last vestiges of your severly self-depleted beliefs in the forlorn hope that you can justify them to yourself. If you are not scared of death, why do you stubbornly refuse to apply your reason to everything but your almost-non-existant religeous beliefs?

07-24-2003, 08:01 PM	#262
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	Almost non-existant religious beliefs? Quantity does not make quality you know. My "almost non-existant" beliefs are at the core of my essence and should not be belittled. -------"Fluff" is not necessarily good. "Occam's razor" (spelling?) is a two edged sword.

07-24-2003, 08:41 PM	#264
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	One of these days I will come up with a very rational and unassailable argument to justify my core beliefs----- ----Jesus lived, was half God, half man, was resurrected to show us all that there is an afterlife---- --plus of course a very unusual and seemingly divine way of looking at life and its importance (or lack thereof) and a very practical, but very unusual way to treat your fellow man (thinking of the Sermon on the Mount). So far all I have to justify that is my unshakeable and admittedly irrational faith. But like the French say -------"On ne sait jamais" -------- "Il y a toujours l'avenir." And boy will you all be in big trouble on that day when I come up with the rational argument to end all rational arguments on this subject.

07-24-2003, 09:55 PM	#265
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	I know I am going to be in deep doo doo for this one and should let it rest since I am seriously outclassed when it comes to math --------But BBT kind of blew me away on the "numbers" thing. Now I barely passed Algebra 1 in Junior High and never went any higher in math, unless plane geometry counts for anything except for being some kind of mental exercise.---sort of like a crossword puzzle. (amazingly enough I got a BA in French Lit at FSU without learning any more math than I knew in the 9th grade) I think they have tightened things up on the University level since 1964 and jolly good for them for that part of it. It would be absolutely horrendous to let us mathematically challenged types to be let loose on society in the world of today. OK -------so here I go stating to BBT that there must have been something to Christianity because so damned many people took it so seriously 2000 years ago. I mean the least you might consider seriously is that Jesus actually lived. More than that ---you might consider that what He said in 4--- fairly much so in agreement-- Gospels (read oral traditions eventually written down) was probably at least semi-accurate. I mean given the odds and all. And BBT comes back at me about the numbers thing and obviously I have no comprehension about numbers. (I admit he was definitely correct about that part------I am so happy to be able to count up to 100 and beyond and be able to add, subtract and divide (on a good day) but I do leave it up to others for the more serious part of mathematics.) So I gave up on the whole project because I knew I was numerically outclassed by BBT. And I know I shouldn't have started this one again, because I know I going to be outclassed again by all the brilliant atheist mathemeticians on this forum.

07-25-2003, 10:32 AM	#270
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	I am not afraid of death. As an agnostic I was not afraid of death. As a believer I still am not afraid of death. I can understand that if I was the type who actually believed in a fire and brimstone hell, then I would be terribly afraid that somehow I would not measure up (eye of a needle and the camel thing and the part about doing to the least of man equals doing to Christ) and find myself in such a God awful place. It is so difficult, if not unattainable to be a "good" Christian. I mean if you look at all the things we are supposed to do Biblically to get there---there is probably only one or two people in heaven right now. (But then again, there is always the hope that God grades on a curve. ) The worst, in my opinion, that would happen is non-existence. Not really afraid of that. Never have been. Why would I be afraid of non-existence? Wouldn't know when it happened anyway in order to have anything to be afraid of. You really need to get off this "fear is the basis for all Christianity" thing. I am sure that is true for some Christians-- Certainly is not true for me. Not that I would not prefer an eternal heaven with the best nookie, the best food and drink and the best entertainment imaginable along with all the wonderful spiritual percs available-----------to an eternity of non-existence. But that just has to do with preference---not fear.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.