‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›
 
   
 

Is there a place for a Christian in Project Reason?

 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
26 February 2015 23:23
 
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:18 PM

Many of the atheists or agnostics on this forum are very well-versed in the Bible.  The majority used to be Christians.  I Bible-studied my way into and then out of faith over the course of a decade as an adult.  It was reading the Bible, plus commentaries from various perspectives, that did it.

The majority of Christians are not very well versed in the Bible, so that’s really not saying much. 

If you are well versed in the Bible, the scripture project doesn’t show it.  Unless perhaps I have misunderstood your purpose.  If your purpose is to promote secularization of society, it seems to me rather than preaching to the choir, you might emphasize the strong scriptural basis for secularization and pluralism.  To show that Christians who mangle church and state are betraying not only humanist ideals, but Jesus’ teachings.  And you don’t need to see Jesus as divine to recognize the rationality of his arguments for religious emphasis on spiritual improvement and charity, rather than on force and government.

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
26 February 2015 23:47
 
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 10:23 PM
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:18 PM

Many of the atheists or agnostics on this forum are very well-versed in the Bible.  The majority used to be Christians.  I Bible-studied my way into and then out of faith over the course of a decade as an adult.  It was reading the Bible, plus commentaries from various perspectives, that did it.

The majority of Christians are not very well versed in the Bible, so that’s really not saying much. 

If you are well versed in the Bible, the scripture project doesn’t show it.  Unless perhaps I have misunderstood your purpose.  If your purpose is to promote secularization of society, it seems to me rather than preaching to the choir, you might emphasize the strong scriptural basis for secularization and pluralism.  To show that Christians who mangle church and state are betraying not only humanist ideals, but Jesus’ teachings.  And you don’t need to see Jesus as divine to recognize the rationality of his arguments for religious emphasis on spiritual improvement and charity, rather than on force and government.

I am not involved in “the scripture project.” 

You will find that people come to this forum for different reasons.  I live in a very Christian town, and it is a relief for me to talk with people without religion being interjected into the reasoning.  Religion is fine for other people, but I long for deep secular conversations.  Many former believers come to the forum for similar reasons.  Family, friends, community may be heavily infused with the religious perspective.  We’re looking for respite. 

When a religious person does enter the forum, since they do it of their own choice, there is the option of discussing/arguing about the validity of beliefs.  This is socially unacceptable outside the forum.  I feel I’ve learned to disagree without slinging insults.  This is something I am grateful to the forum for helping to teach me.

As for the Pledge of Allegiance, it has always bothered me for multiple reasons.  Not just the “under God” part, but the basic concept of having to stand up and pledge allegiance like robots every day.  I don’t see Washington or Jefferson or Franklin, or any of the founding fathers, thinking that is a good policy.  However, I know a lot of people absolutely love that pledge.  It is recited daily by all the children at the school where I work.  Fortunately, I have no students in my room during the start of school, so I can ignore the whole ritual.

 
Gregoryhhh
 
Avatar
 
 
Gregoryhhh
Total Posts:  2008
Joined  31-08-2014
 
 
 
26 February 2015 23:54
 
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 10:23 PM
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:18 PM

Many of the atheists or agnostics on this forum are very well-versed in the Bible.  The majority used to be Christians.  I Bible-studied my way into and then out of faith over the course of a decade as an adult.  It was reading the Bible, plus commentaries from various perspectives, that did it.

The majority of Christians are not very well versed in the Bible, so that’s really not saying much. 

If you are well versed in the Bible, the scripture project doesn’t show it.  Unless perhaps I have misunderstood your purpose.  If your purpose is to promote secularization of society, it seems to me rather than preaching to the choir, you might emphasize the strong scriptural basis for secularization and pluralism.  To show that Christians who mangle church and state are betraying not only humanist ideals, but Jesus’ teachings.  And you don’t need to see Jesus as divine to recognize the rationality of his arguments for religious emphasis on spiritual improvement and charity, rather than on force and government.

Excuse the interruption Hannah2, i’ve been here less than a year and read your stuff, but i didn’t know of your Christian background. I too bible studied my way for twelve years as a young adult, I read the bible every day, and i studied it in the Hebrew and Greek, plus i read many commentaries from different perspectives, from Charismatic to Calvinistic. Mormons were not Christians to the millions of Christians like me at that time (74-86); we were taught they were a cult. Catholics were also not Christians, and they too were going to hell. And unlike Pete here who claims Mormonhood about all his life (dont you Pete?) the majority of the millions of Christians in my part of Christianity were to varying degrees versed, and really really versed in the bible. They have Joe Smith and here’s what he had to say about Christianity:
  (Regarding Joseph Smith’s alleged first vision where celestial personages appeared to him) . . . “My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right — and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt . . .” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol. 1, p. 5-6).

  “What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, compiled by Joseph Fielding Smith, p. 270).

  (In questions directed to Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism . . . ).
  First—“Do you believe the Bible?”
  If we do, we are the only people under heaven that do, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do.”
  Third—“Will everybody be damned, but Mormons?”
  Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness.” (Teachings, page 119).

gregory

 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  10767
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
27 February 2015 00:02
 
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:47 PM

As for the Pledge of Allegiance, it has always bothered me for multiple reasons.  Not just the “under God” part, but the basic concept of having to stand up and pledge allegiance like robots every day.

Do you know the US Supreme Court decided that reciting the Pledge is optional?  Yep, the Jehovah’s Witnesses won that case in 1943.

Consequently, since reciting the Pledge is optional, so is reciting it correctly.  Feel free to make up your own version.

 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 00:02
 

” there is the option of discussing/arguing about the validity of beliefs.”

I’ve rebutted mistaken descriptions of LDS doctrine (e.g. folks citing 120 year old sermons that were rejected as doctrine), and I’ve offered some scant evidence to try to answer the question, implicit and implied, that I must either be a fool, dishonest, or insane to believe what I believe.

I’ll not argue on this forum to make someone a believer, but hope to increase the number of people who are willing to deal with Mormons as friends, neighbors, co-workers, and even political leaders.  Don’t mind if you hate Romney as a prez candidate, but hating him because of his religion is just shallow.  And this country would have been a better place today if his father George Romney had won the presidency.  (Knew the guy when I lived in Detroit. Awesome governor of Michigan, the Republicans dropped him as a 1968 prez candidate when he said publicly that “the generals” had “brainwashed” America into the Vietnam war).

If I ever fall into arguing for the VALIDITY of my beliefs, please let me know.

I respect what you said about wanting respite.  I personally prefer to talk religion with people that don’t believe than with people who pretend to believe.

 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 00:10
 
Skipshot - 26 February 2015 11:02 PM
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:47 PM

As for the Pledge of Allegiance, it has always bothered me for multiple reasons.  Not just the “under God” part, but the basic concept of having to stand up and pledge allegiance like robots every day.

Do you know the US Supreme Court decided that reciting the Pledge is optional?  Yep, the Jehovah’s Witnesses won that case in 1943.

Consequently, since reciting the Pledge is optional, so is reciting it correctly.  Feel free to make up your own version.

I think it’s still unacceptable to create a situation where Atheists have to either pretend and blend in, or have their loyalty and patriotism questioned.

That’s not a problem for Jehovah’s witnesses since they actually believe that patriotism and national loyalty is idolatry, and they WANT to stand out, or at least, their leaders want to make them feel alienated.

Alienation goes on with Jews and Mormons too, but it’s much less pronounced, and not associated with national loyalty.  Jewish and Mormon rules simply keep us from blending in at major social events.  Tea, coffee, and alcohol are social beverages, and it’s always a little awkward to say no, a continuing reminder that sets you apart.  Jewish dietary restrictions can have the same effect.  But our restrictions turn us into geeks at worst; the JW restrictions against birthdays, Christmas, and national loyalty would be much harder to deal with, I think.

OTOH, Jews (and to a MUCH lesser extent Mormons) also have an exterior alienation factor, i.e. outside groups that dedicate energy to hating on them.

With atheists it’s probably harder to figure out which of your alienating factors are self-imposed vs. imposed intentionally by others.  I see the Pledge of Allegiance as an external alienating factor imposed by society, not self-imposed by atheists themselves.  OTOH, if you sue the city of who-ville because the mayor personally carved the roast beast, and because there was singing beastly singing at twelve noon on Christmas day in town square, then I’d say that you’ve got a self-imposed alienation issue going.

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 00:15 by Pattertwig]
 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 00:41
 

I’d rather reply to Gregory on another thread, http://www.project-reason.org/forum/viewthread/31905/
since it’s irrelevant here, and since Hannah has just said that she comes here to get AWAY from that sort of religious blathering.

Remember the three classic blunders: never get involved in a land war in Asia, never ask a Bulgarian to give you head, and never try to engage a mormon in a short religious discussion.

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 00:49 by Pattertwig]
 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 00:46
 

Incidentally, do Christian fundamentalists ever come on this site pretending to be atheists, and then talking about their conversions?  They do that all the time in mormon circles ... it’s a tactic they used before the internet.  Ran into a couple at the open house for the Mexico City Temple back in the early 1980s.  They’d stand in line for the open house, saying they were members and talking about their growing “doubts” about the church.  My dad asked them what their stake and ward were, and they didn’t know what stake and ward meant (they denote congregations).  I wanted to follow them around and call them on their crap before others, but my dad said leave them and we went into the open house.

 
 
Gregoryhhh
 
Avatar
 
 
Gregoryhhh
Total Posts:  2008
Joined  31-08-2014
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:06
 
Gregoryhhh - 26 February 2015 10:54 PM
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 10:23 PM
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:18 PM

Many of the atheists or agnostics on this forum are very well-versed in the Bible.  The majority used to be Christians.  I Bible-studied my way into and then out of faith over the course of a decade as an adult.  It was reading the Bible, plus commentaries from various perspectives, that did it.

The majority of Christians are not very well versed in the Bible, so that’s really not saying much. 

If you are well versed in the Bible, the scripture project doesn’t show it.  Unless perhaps I have misunderstood your purpose.  If your purpose is to promote secularization of society, it seems to me rather than preaching to the choir, you might emphasize the strong scriptural basis for secularization and pluralism.  To show that Christians who mangle church and state are betraying not only humanist ideals, but Jesus’ teachings.  And you don’t need to see Jesus as divine to recognize the rationality of his arguments for religious emphasis on spiritual improvement and charity, rather than on force and government.

Excuse the interruption Hannah2, i’ve been here less than a year and read your stuff, but i didn’t know of your Christian background. I too bible studied my way for twelve years as a young adult, I read the bible every day, and i studied it in the Hebrew and Greek, plus i read many commentaries from different perspectives, from Charismatic to Calvinistic. Mormons were not Christians to the millions of Christians like me at that time (74-86); we were taught they were a cult. Catholics were also not Christians, and they too were going to hell. And unlike Pete here who claims Mormonhood about all his life (dont you Pete?) the majority of the millions of Christians in my part of Christianity were to varying degrees versed, and really really versed in the bible. They have Joe Smith and here’s what he had to say about Christianity:
  (Regarding Joseph Smith’s alleged first vision where celestial personages appeared to him) . . . “My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right — and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt . . .” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol. 1, p. 5-6).

  “What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, compiled by Joseph Fielding Smith, p. 270).

  (In questions directed to Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism . . . ).
  First—“Do you believe the Bible?”
  If we do, we are the only people under heaven that do, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do.”
  Third—“Will everybody be damned, but Mormons?”
  Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness.” (Teachings, page 119).

gregory

Religious apologists are always having to apologize for the changes in their doctrines and teachings - from thunder is not “god” bowling, to the sun not revolving around the earth anymore - uh, sorry. Millions of Christians believers believe that all Mormons are going to hell, and certainly all of Islam believe all the infidels are going to hell. The Mormon’s believe the same thing, (And my parents and relatives voted for the other guy-Governor Swainson in 1962).
gregory

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 01:14 by Gregoryhhh]
 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:28
 
Gregoryhhh - 27 February 2015 12:06 AM

Millions of Christians believers believe that all Mormons are going to hell, and certainly all of Islam believe all the infidels are going to hell. The Mormon’s believe the same thing,

Bullshit, Gregory.  Mormons believe the only folks who go to outer darkness (the unending hell) are folks who know the truth but murder God’s messengers messengers anyway.  The only one we can say for sure did that is Cain.  Don’t even think Judas qualifies.  It’s possible that your old friend Calvin might qualify, if that guy that Calvin had burnt to death for “heresy” was a messenger from God; I can’t say there.  I can say that the poor fellow had saved Calvin’s life previously and deserved better than to be burnt alive.

In actual LDS belief, as opposed to the cartoonish shit you’ve been told, [eople who lie and love their lie will “go to hell” in a sense, but it’s more accurate that they are already in hell while alive, and they make life hell for those around them, too.  I suspect most Atheists could identify a few people that fit that description.  In LDS theology, such persons at judgment day will find God’s judgment to be far more merciful than what they put themselves and their loved ones through.

At the end of the day, the Terrestrial Kingdom is golf, beaches, disco and cocktails with Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, while the Tellestial Kingdom is golf, beaches, disco and cocktails with Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot.  You’re in a nicer place than Earth and the activities are pleasant regardless, but you end up with the company that you’ve merited.  Because to send anyone else to live with you would be to punish them

Now do you mind showing Hannah some consideration and taking your Calvinist theological baggage with Mormons over to the other thread that I specifically created, http://www.project-reason.org/forum/viewthread/31905/#sthash.H73OfKzA.dpuf to give Hannah some respite from this theology shit?

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 01:32 by Pattertwig]
 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  18127
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:37
 
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 10:14 PM

GAD explained something?  You made sense of this?

The second unwritten law here is that assholes who really have nothing to say resort to being grammar Nazi’s to try and look smart and important and distract people the from bullshit that they spew. 

I have to admit that yours is one the most extensive rebukes I’m seen making you one of the biggest assholes here in quite a while. And I am honored that you are so threaten by me to spend so much time on such defenses.

Word count doesn’t mean shit, and only assholes who post lots of bullshit count them like they do, so no surprise there.

 
 
Gregoryhhh
 
Avatar
 
 
Gregoryhhh
Total Posts:  2008
Joined  31-08-2014
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:41
 
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 11:41 PM

I’d rather reply to Gregory on another thread, http://www.project-reason.org/forum/viewthread/31905/
since it’s irrelevant here, and since Hannah has just said that she comes here to get AWAY from that sort of religious blathering.

Remember the three classic blunders: never get involved in a land war in Asia, never ask a Bulgarian to give you head, and never try to engage a mormon in a short religious discussion.

Yeah, and an argument (layman’s definition) on the internet, is like a race at the special olympics, even if you win, you’re still retarded.
gregory

 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:45
 
Gregoryhhh - 27 February 2015 12:41 AM

Yeah, and an argument (layman’s definition) on the internet, is like a race at the special olympics, even if you win, you’re still retarded.
gregory

My second son was left severely retarded at age 4 by encephalitis.  His limbic region was totally demylelinated in both hemispheres.  I wish to God he was well enough to play in a Special Olympics.  We tried to take him, and it was a catastrophe.

I’m touched by your sensitivity and love of children.  Once a fundy, always a fundy, I guess.

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 01:51 by Pattertwig]
 
 
Gregoryhhh
 
Avatar
 
 
Gregoryhhh
Total Posts:  2008
Joined  31-08-2014
 
 
 
27 February 2015 01:45
 
Hannah2 - 26 February 2015 10:47 PM

As for the Pledge of Allegiance, it has always bothered me for multiple reasons.  Not just the “under God” part, but the basic concept of having to stand up and pledge allegiance like robots every day.  I don’t see Washington or Jefferson or Franklin, or any of the founding fathers, thinking that is a good policy.  However, I know a lot of people absolutely love that pledge.  It is recited daily by all the children at the school where I work.  Fortunately, I have no students in my room during the start of school, so I can ignore the whole ritual.

I did it in Catholic grade school - one guy in 6th grade did the pledge, but he refused to sing “we shall overcome” Terry Leonard - he ended up being a psychiatrist.
gregory

 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
27 February 2015 02:06
 
GAD - 27 February 2015 12:37 AM
Pattertwig - 26 February 2015 10:14 PM

GAD explained something?  You made sense of this?

The second unwritten law here is that assholes who really have nothing to say resort to being grammar Nazi’s to try and look smart and important

Honestly, I didn’t correct your grammar for the mere sake of showing how bad your grammar was.  I thought that once I corrected your grammar that I could poke fun of the idiocy of your LOGIC.  Because I am a logic nazi, not a grammar nazi.  I was a little disappointed when I went through all that trouble and peeled off the lard and pretentious blathering, that what you meant to say wasn’t entirely stupid. :(  It was simply inapplicable.  It accurately describes a type of person.  It’s useful to know what sort of person that you’re projecting me to be.

From my analysis, if you learned to be articulate, and paid more attention to what you responded to, you wouldn’t come off like a complete nimrod.  Your underlying logic was surprisingly sound.

So back to your clever albeit misapplied and ill-articulated meta-bullshit argument

(Pete’s revised translation through the Gift of interpretation of GAD, (c) 2015 CE):

“You theists insist your religious bullshit deserves special status. That it’s unfair/unreasonable to call your bullshit bullshit. When we reject your bullshit special pleading, you complain we didn’t properly review your bullshit status plea.”

Please provide QUOTES, from things that I have written here, that demonstrate:

1. My insistence that my religious bullshit deserves “special status”

2. That it’s unfair/unreasonable for you to call any of my religious beliefs “bullshit”

If you cannot show both 1 or 2, then you cannot, ipso-facto, show #3.

You’re fucking a straw man, GAD.

[ Edited: 27 February 2015 05:03 by Pattertwig]
 
 
‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›