Author Topic: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)  (Read 10476 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #116 on: December 28, 2011, 07:26:43 PM »
Quote

Well here's an idea.

Why don't you total up the number of people who have replied to your posts in agreement, excitement and enthusiastic praise, then do the same for those who have politely (or not so politely) answered saying, not really impressed, heard it all before, jesus the man is polluted by his distorted legacy, etc etc etc etc.

Then you subtract the second figure from the first, and if the resulting number is zero or negative, you should be able to interpret what that means in regards to the efficacy of your message here (no matter how self evidently correct and empowering it seems to you).
It should also give you clear notice as to how many people you are failing to spark any positive response with.
The number is way negative :-)
Quote
You should not take it personally, it is not you, it is your message.
Will not  :-)
Quote
The lesson that may be worth learning in this, is to stand back from your passionate (self-empowering) convictions, and occasionally  gauge just what reception you are getting.
Ask yourself, are you making any headway?
Some times you need to wait for digestion to occur. Patience is a virtue.
Quote
Choosing a more receptive audience in the first place might prove to be more gratifying for you.

Deleted lazarus hobby horse reference

Lazarus - more woo from the trouble maker John perhaps. 

I think I need an audience that can be more specific and critical to the points raised. Peace and Joy it's a choice away :-) 

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5379
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #117 on: December 28, 2011, 07:32:10 PM »
ees

......perhaps it is worth re-stating what you hope to achieve here (in the simplest terms).



"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6461
  • Darwins +768/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #118 on: December 28, 2011, 07:42:23 PM »

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 

As I've said before, we don't give a rats ass about the history of the bible. It demonstrates daily that it is in error, and that's all we care about.

You may share something internal, but I don't think I do.

John Lennon also said insightful things about humanity. As did Carl Sagan and, currently, Isaac Asimov. All belong in philosophy classes, one way or another. But not in religions.

Dissing some kinds of woo and the promoting yet other woos (we share something internal = woo) does not impress around here.

Bye bye...
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Samothec

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Darwins +49/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #119 on: December 28, 2011, 07:51:54 PM »
Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 


1. I don't have an immediate argument against this ("Rome inspired") because you are the only one who has ever proposed this in my experience – I would like to know how this idea is even remotely supportable. The Xians had yet to infest Rome when the gospels were written (decades after Jesus' death). And why would Rome support in any way an annoying (to them and us) new religion?
2. This is not wrong. There is no god. We have something internal guiding us: instincts and knowledge. But it is only 'shared' in the genetic sense, not some mystical sense.
3. Insightful – not so much. A handful of somewhat inspiring things, yes, and a lot of confused and confusing things. Although I do like #114 that guarantees heaven for female-to-male transsexuals (my preferred reading for that one).    ;D
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #120 on: December 28, 2011, 07:56:01 PM »
ees

......perhaps it is worth re-stating what you hope to achieve here (in the simplest terms).

“If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it” Albert Einstein

1. I am interested in exploring the theory that the Bible was contrived by Rome  ( See Mark 1 and the reference to Theophilus. ) 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_%28biblical%29.

I think there is precedence  for this strategy in Rome through the Pagan times.

If you assume this theory is correct we can strike out the woo from the Bible and any scripture that relates to woo.

2. In my opinion all the sayings in the Gospel of Thomas  are valid. The Romans chose to include some (at least 64) to validate their claim over the "new wisdom". Adding the woo gave Rome (Roman Catholics) that special relationship with God that they enjoyed in Pagan times.

3. The GOT validates, not replaces, bhuddism, mandela, ghanda, parts of islam and judaism in the only ("Big Fish") things that are important. A chance for unity of purpose in spirituality. That being the healthy maturity of humanity on a single path od authentic personal selflessness.

4. The Bible brings servitude and blind obedience. Humanity should be personally responsible and free. The GOT challenge the inclusion of law in the Bible, in my view another contrivance.

Review the opening post :-)   



Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #121 on: December 28, 2011, 08:01:06 PM »

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 

As I've said before, we don't give a rats ass about the history of the bible. It demonstrates daily that it is in error, and that's all we care about.

You may share something internal, but I don't think I do.

John Lennon also said insightful things about humanity. As did Carl Sagan and, currently, Isaac Asimov. All belong in philosophy classes, one way or another. But not in religions.

Dissing some kinds of woo and the promoting yet other woos (we share something internal = woo) does not impress around here.

Bye bye...

That internal woo is not woo. The words fail again. Think about a shared tear of joy or sorrow. Why is the large groups can share a common enjoyment. You can call it what you will, but that's not woo, we just choose to use different words to describe the reality we admire. No woo at all intended.

Bye Bye   

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #122 on: December 28, 2011, 08:08:31 PM »
Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 


1. I don't have an immediate argument against this ("Rome inspired") because you are the only one who has ever proposed this in my experience – I would like to know how this idea is even remotely supportable. The Xians had yet to infest Rome when the gospels were written (decades after Jesus' death). And why would Rome support in any way an annoying (to them and us) new religion?
2. This is not wrong. There is no god. We have something internal guiding us: instincts and knowledge. But it is only 'shared' in the genetic sense, not some mystical sense.
3. Insightful – not so much. A handful of somewhat inspiring things, yes, and a lot of confused and confusing things. Although I do like #114 that guarantees heaven for female-to-male transsexuals (my preferred reading for that one).    ;D

1. The emperors  did it pre Jesus in relation to the Greek Gods.
2. Agree just words again.
3.  If we assume that in Jesus days woman were rated second class by the male population and Jesus as tactful. #114 makes more sense. Also consider compassion, caring and selflessness  as the signatures to soiritual maturity. Are women better examples than men collectively speaking?

My take, Jesus was just saying in potential these women are your equal in spirit. Again simple and obvious if you look around even today 

Thanks for considering :-)

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7276
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #123 on: December 28, 2011, 09:15:36 PM »
ees - you don't have to continue replying, as you've stated, no one so far has refuted your premise to your satisfaction.  It appears that you have clearly laid waste to the minds of the poor atheists who just don't get it.  Your idea is that we have all we need with the GoT, and no one has refuted that, according to you.  So, now what is your purpose in continuing?

Clearly, you are not really here to discuss, or to have your ideas challenged.  People who are honest in their approach do not dismiss all of the replies that you have collectively done with everyone in this thread.  Rather, they consider what is being said, and either strengthen their case, or perhaps clarify it.  But you had your mind made up before you started, and when no one agrees with you, just declare that you have succeeded.

If you truly feel good about your OP, and you honestly believe that all of the dissenting replies are wrong, then you really don't need to continue, correct?

Offline Chronos

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 2405
  • Darwins +130/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Born without religion
    • Marking Time
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #124 on: December 28, 2011, 09:26:25 PM »
again, one more theist all sure that their version is the only right one.  It always comes down to "their faith and mysticism" is wrong and "my faith and mysticism" is right.  All with no evidence, no verifiable anything, just the "feeling" by some wannabee that they are right, suprise suprise.

No theism, faith or mysticism in my assertions. Just a challenge to the validity of the bible on these points :-)


I reject the bible outright. The bible is no more acceptable as fact than Harry Potter. It's just an set of tales told by primitive men. To debate something in the bible is to accept that the god proposed by it can exist. I accept neither.

I don't bark up trees. I bark at people.


John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4613
  • Darwins +105/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #125 on: December 29, 2011, 12:28:39 AM »
mix all the crap you have been saying and add 50 cents......I would have 50 cents EES just go away

Isn't that a cop out. Try adding at least 50 cents of intelligent criticism that addresses your conclusion :-)
Give me something Worthy of criticism. Wow how about the Gospels of Jesus as a young little bastard,should I take those seriously as well?

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 
Christopher Hitchens,Noam Chompsky,Darwin hell even Denis Leary have insightful things to say about humanity.......the only difference is ANYTHING they have ever said can be looked up on the internet.  Jesus not so much,just a bunch of ignorant goat herders writing fables about him LONG after his death.

 Ever notice how the story about the fish you caught gets better and better each time you tell it? There are no stories about Jesus from his miraculous birth to his underwhealming death,just fish stories told over and over again,getting bigger and better as they get retold.
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #126 on: December 29, 2011, 09:28:35 AM »
2. In my opinion all the sayings in the Gospel of Thomas  are valid. The Romans chose to include some (at least 64) to validate their claim over the "new wisdom". Adding the woo gave Rome (Roman Catholics) that special relationship with God that they enjoyed in Pagan times.
oh yeah, this is valid  :o  &) ;D

Quote
Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

love the excuse
Quote
If we assume that in Jesus days woman were rated second class by the male population and Jesus as tactful. #114 makes more sense. Also consider compassion, caring and selflessness  as the signatures to soiritual maturity. Are women better examples than men collectively speaking?

funny as hell that your god and magic man are restricted by a human folly.  Nothing new here, just the usual excuses used by other theists.  For being so "enlightened" you'd think EES would come up with something new.  But of course, he can't.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2011, 09:30:27 AM by velkyn »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Samothec

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Darwins +49/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #127 on: December 29, 2011, 03:28:59 PM »
In response to kin hell (snipped for focus):
1. I am interested in exploring the theory that the Bible was contrived by Rome  ( See Mark 1 and the reference to Theophilus. ) 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_%28biblical%29.
I think there is precedence  for this strategy in Rome through the Pagan times.
If you assume this theory is correct we can strike out the woo from the Bible and any scripture that relates to woo.
 

But the link you provide does not support your contention. It references a single Roman as possibly having a limited influence on part of the Bible. That is hugely different from Rome influencing the writing of the whole Bible - or the NT.

(snipped for focus)
1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.


1. I don't have an immediate argument against this ("Rome inspired") because you are the only one who has ever proposed this in my experience – I would like to know how this idea is even remotely supportable. The Xians had yet to infest Rome when the gospels were written (decades after Jesus' death). And why would Rome support in any way an annoying (to them and us) new religion?
 

1. The emperors  did it pre Jesus in relation to the Greek Gods.
 [/quote]

They did the opposite: they adopted the Greek gods as their own, just renaming them. Rome actively resisted Xianity for centuries.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #128 on: December 29, 2011, 06:12:34 PM »
In response to kin hell (snipped for focus):
1. I am interested in exploring the theory that the Bible was contrived by Rome  ( See Mark 1 and the reference to Theophilus. ) 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_%28biblical%29.
I think there is precedence  for this strategy in Rome through the Pagan times.
If you assume this theory is correct we can strike out the woo from the Bible and any scripture that relates to woo.


But the link you provide does not support your contention. It references a single Roman as possibly having a limited influence on part of the Bible. That is hugely different from Rome influencing the writing of the whole Bible - or the NT.


(snipped for focus)
1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.


1. I don't have an immediate argument against this ("Rome inspired") because you are the only one who has ever proposed this in my experience – I would like to know how this idea is even remotely supportable. The Xians had yet to infest Rome when the gospels were written (decades after Jesus' death). And why would Rome support in any way an annoying (to them and us) new religion?
 

1. The emperors  did it pre Jesus in relation to the Greek Gods.
 [/quote]

They did the opposite: they adopted the Greek gods as their own, just renaming them. Rome actively resisted Xianity for centuries.
[/quote]

Perhaps add these notes, I found online.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_ancient_Rome

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1989/who-wrote-the-bible-part-5

My theory. Is that Rome carried on it's tradition of owning religions for political purposes. They found that people could be duped by magic and therefore easily influenced. The woo is not in the GOT only in the Bible. In the article "Who wrote the bible - Part 5 - it's a short one:-)"  we see that the battle between the knowing and believing philosophies actually preceded the final structure of the Bible. More weight to theory, perhaps.

Worthwhile  experience, thank you all. And Lucretius is in accord with the GOT in my view :-)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4613
  • Darwins +105/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #129 on: December 29, 2011, 06:26:37 PM »
Give it up already WOOF EES nobody here really thinks the bible or any other religous writings hold ANY water.
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline grant

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
  • Darwins +4/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #130 on: December 30, 2011, 03:56:47 AM »
ees, do you really really believe you're onto something here? Do you?

If you do, I feel sorry for you.

You can't even
Quote
quote
an internet forum post properly.

You're just an idiot :-)

And an annoying one at that :-) :-) :-)
What if the hokey pokey is what its all about?

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #131 on: December 30, 2011, 06:26:48 AM »
Quote from: Anfauglir
US: I like what Jesus said.... 
WORLD: You're a Christian!  Hallelujah!  Praise God!
US: No - because the GoT blah blah blah not the Bible blah blah blah no mysticism blah blah blah
(several hours later)
US: ....so do you see?
WORLD: Sort of.  <thinks: He IS a Christian and god-believer really.>>

No I'm not a supporter of the Bible nor a Christian. I just like the integrity and simplicity of the GOT and peace as an ideal.

I know.  I get it.  Shame you can't be bothered to try and understand what my point is.

You're not a Christian.  Great.  Shame you seem to want to debate like them:

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

I'll try one more time to see if you can grasp my point.

YOU MAY BE RIGHT, in everything you say.
And we may well agree with your points.

But the vast, vast majority of the Christian population of the world, you must remember, have never even read their OWN Holy book or done any research into it - let alone read the "non-canon" documents, or want to understand the difference between "woo-Jeebus" and "no-woo-Jeebus". 

BECAUSE of that, it is strongly likely that ANY mention we make of how super the GoT Jeebus is will be read as validation of the Bible to the vast majority of people.

Sure - maybe the 0.01% who have the inclination and brainpower to understand the difference will get something out of it.  But for the vast majority who ain't, agreeing with or supporting the GoT will only strangthen Christianity's hold on the world.

For me, that is enough reason not to bother with the GoT, despite any other merit it may have.  The downside just ain't worth the upside.


<edit - fixed quotes>>
« Last Edit: December 31, 2011, 02:34:25 AM by Anfauglir »
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #132 on: December 30, 2011, 07:02:45 PM »
ees, do you really really believe you're onto something here? Do you?

If you do, I feel sorry for you.

You can't even
Quote
quote
an internet forum post properly.

You're just an idiot :-)

And an annoying one at that :-) :-) :-)

Hi Grant,

Yes I do. Got a better explanation for why real people would chose to present miracles as truths.   

And because you may have not read the post because off my error. Here's an extract for you.

"The chief competitor to what would become mainstream Christianity was Gnosticism. The Gnostics believed that one did not need the intermediary of the church to experience God; that one could and should experience him firsthand if one knew the "secret tradition." One can easily see how this would threaten the orthodox church.

But the Gnostics did give one important idea to the church. A second century Gnostic named Marcion gave us the first list of books he felt appropriate for a New Testament. It was very short, including only an edited Gospel of Luke and some of Paul's letters. Marcion was also extremely anti-semitic and thought that Christianity should be completely divorced from Judaism, going so far as to say that Jesus was not born of Jewish parents but sprang full-grown from the mind of God.

None of Marcion's writings survived, having been expunged by the orthodox church. The only record we have of his activities are the church's attacks on him. But in setting out a canon he had planted an important seed. A literary fragment known as the Muratorian canon (named after Lodovico Muratori, who first recognized its importance) gave a list of possibly four Gospels and a major part of the rest of the New Testament. Other early Christian writers compiled other lists. Eventually church councils were held to determine a single set of books.

The first officially sanctioned canon of the New Testament was attempted by Irenaeus of Lyon. Irenaeus saw the effect Gnosticism was having on Christianity and feared that the church was splintering into factions. Formalizing doctrinal authority seemed to be the answer. He felt there were two sources of authority: Scripture and the apostles. A work could be accepted as canonical if the early church fathers used it. He never really compiled a list of books, but he did establish the basis for subsequent determinations of orthodoxy.

The work of Irenaeus was solidified by Bishop Eusebius some 150 years later, early in the 4th century AD. Eusebius was a prolific church historian who gave us most of what we know of early church history. He also gave us the first surviving list of New Testament books that matches what we have today, putting them in thematic order as well. Relying on the tradition of the church, Eusebius created what was probably the first Christian Bible as we know it today.

In 367 AD, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria under Constantine the Great, set forth what proved to be the final canon of New Testament books in a letter listing 27 works. In 382 AD, at a synod held at Rome under Pope Damasus, church leaders influenced by Jerome adopted this list. The list was affirmed in councils at Hippo in 393 and 419 AD under Augustine and was officially ratified at a council in Rome around 473 AD. However, that council added no books that had not already been included in most earlier lists, and excluded no books that had not already been excluded by most lists.

The Greek Orthodox Church did not finalize its canon until the tenth century (primarily in doubt was inclusion of the book of Revelation). The Syrian Church had an even more complicated debate, and today recognizes only 22 books in its New Testament (excluding 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation). The Copts and Ethiopians have a few additional books included in their New Testament."

Appears I am not the first :-) 

An here's  a saying that I think relates to your current level of maturity. You and others know whether it's true or not.

14 Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will bring sin upon yourselves, and if you pray, you will be condemned, and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits. When you go into any region and walk about in the countryside, when people take you in, eat what they serve you and heal the sick among them.

After all, what goes into your mouth will not defile you; rather, it's what comes out of your mouth that will defile you."

Fortunately, it's fixable. Peace and Joy :-) :-) :-) 

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #133 on: December 30, 2011, 07:11:10 PM »
Quote from: Anfauglir
US: I like what Jesus said.... 
WORLD: You're a Christian!  Hallelujah!  Praise God!
US: No - because the GoT blah blah blah not the Bible blah blah blah no mysticism blah blah blah
(several hours later)
US: ....so do you see?
WORLD: Sort of.  <thinks: He IS a Christian and god-believer really.>>

No I'm not a supporter of the Bible nor a Christian. I just like the integrity and simplicity of the GOT and peace as an ideal.

I know.  I get it.  Shame you can't be bothered to try and understand what my point is.

You're not a Christian.  Great.  Shame you seem to want to debate like them:

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

I'll try one more time to see if you can grasp my point.

YOU MAY BE RIGHT, in everything you say.
And we may well agree with your points.

But the vast, vast majority of the Christian population of the world, you must remember, have never even read their OWN Holy book or done any research into it - let alone read the "non-canon" documents, or want to understand the difference between "woo-Jeebus" and "no-woo-Jeebus". 

BECAUSE of that, it is strongly likely that ANY mention we make of how super the GoT Jeebus is will be read as validation of the Bible to the vast majority of people.

Sure - maybe the 0.01% who have the inclination and brainpower to understand the difference will get something out of it.  But for the vast majority who ain't, agreeing with or supporting the GoT will only strangthen Christianity's hold on the world.

For me, that is enough reason not to bother with the GoT, despite any other merit it may have.  The downside just ain't worth the upside.

I understand your point well. It's a dilemma and a significant risk both personally and communally.  But truth is truth and miracles are not. Faith and membership add to both ego and identity not an appreciation of equality and potential or YOUnity, in my opinion.


<<edit by Anfaulir to fix the quote from my original>>
« Last Edit: December 31, 2011, 02:35:38 AM by Anfauglir »

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #134 on: December 30, 2011, 07:21:51 PM »
Give it up already WOOF EES nobody here really thinks the bible or any other religous writings hold ANY water.

Perhaps it's just about spirituality. Have a read of the GOT with this definition in mind.  Like I said we are all possibly "Barking up the wrong Tree"

If woo is proven not to exist, what does that do to this sites function. Could it be that atheism is just another pointless "religion" adding nothing to authentic spirituality, compassion, selflessness et al. Certainly I see some compassion but not in the main. Many seem offended that their position (identity) is challenged. The word inquisition comes to mind  :-) 


Wikipedias definition of spirituality.


Traditionally, many religions have regarded spirituality as an integral aspect of religious experience. Among other factors, declining membership of organized religions and the growth of secularism in the western world have given rise to a broader view of spirituality. The term "spiritual" is now frequently used in contexts in which the term "religious" was formally employed; compare James' 1902 lectures on the "Varieties of Religious Experience".
Secular spirituality emphasizes humanistic qualities such as love, compassion, patience, tolerance, forgiveness, contentment, responsibility, harmony, and a concern for others, aspects of life and human experience which go beyond a purely materialist view of the world, without necessarily accepting belief in a supernatural reality or divine being. Spiritual practices such as mindfulness and meditation can be experienced as beneficial or even necessary for human fulfillment without any supernatural interpretation or explanation. Spirituality in this context may be a matter of nurturing thoughts, emotions, words and actions that are in harmony with a belief that everything in the universe is mutually dependent; this stance has much in common with some versions of Buddhist spirituality. A modern secular definition is as follows:
"Spirituality exists wherever we struggle with the issues of how our lives fit into the greater scheme of things. This is true when our questions never give way to specific answers or give rise to specific practices such as prayer or meditation. we encounter spiritual issues every time we wonder where the universe comes from, why we are here, or what happens when we die. We also become spiritual when we become moved by values such as beauty, love, or creativity that seem to reveal a meaning or power beyond our visible world. An idea or practice is "spiritual" when it reveals our personal desire to establish a felt-relationship with the deepest meanings or powers governing life."
The psychology of religion uses a variety of metrics to measure spirituality.

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #135 on: December 30, 2011, 07:44:50 PM »
And here's a couple of quotes from Einstein for the group to reflect on

http://thinkexist.com/quotation/if_at_first-the_idea_is_not_absurd-then_there_is/180160.html

Hey mum, I worked out how to insert a link.

“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”

(some will say me , I say you)

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

“Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death”

“There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle.”

(I think he means the living kind)

“In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.”

“Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.”

“The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it.”

“The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.”

WOO--F W--OOF :-)
« Last Edit: December 30, 2011, 07:46:30 PM by eartheconomyspirit »

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #136 on: December 30, 2011, 08:01:24 PM »
mix all the crap you have been saying and add 50 cents......I would have 50 cents EES just go away

Isn't that a cop out. Try adding at least 50 cents of intelligent criticism that addresses your conclusion :-)
Give me something Worthy of criticism. Wow how about the Gospels of Jesus as a young little bastard,should I take those seriously as well?

Ok. Here's my parting Gesture. A theory if you will. Your task is to prove why each are wrong supposition. I may stay around if you put up something worth considering :-)

1. Rome inspired the creation of the Bible and is responsible for every piece of woo in it. Woo is not real.
2. There is no such thing as an independent being God but we have some access to something internal (perhaps wisdom/human condition) that we share. 
3. Jesus (at least) in the GOT has said something insightful about humanity.
 
Christopher Hitchens,Noam Chompsky,Darwin hell even Denis Leary have insightful things to say about humanity.......the only difference is ANYTHING they have ever said can be looked up on the internet.  Jesus not so much,just a bunch of ignorant goat herders writing fables about him LONG after his death.

 Ever notice how the story about the fish you caught gets better and better each time you tell it? There are no stories about Jesus from his miraculous birth to his underwhealming death,just fish stories told over and over again,getting bigger and better as they get retold.

The GOT remains unchanged since written as far as I can tell. Your supposition is based on something else or a per-disposition perhaps :-)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4613
  • Darwins +105/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #137 on: December 31, 2011, 12:41:02 AM »
^^^ and if my Aunt had balls she would be my Uncle. Are you suggesting GoT should not be ignored but the other writings should?

 The stories of The Raven have remained unchanged for about 8000 years are you suggesting they should not be taken seriously as real but your GoT should?
« Last Edit: December 31, 2011, 12:43:38 AM by 12 Monkeys »
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #138 on: December 31, 2011, 02:38:32 AM »
BECAUSE of that, it is strongly likely that ANY mention we make of how super the GoT Jeebus is will be read as validation of the Bible to the vast majority of people.

Sure - maybe the 0.01% who have the inclination and brainpower to understand the difference will get something out of it.  But for the vast majority who ain't, agreeing with or supporting the GoT will only strangthen Christianity's hold on the world.

For me, that is enough reason not to bother with the GoT, despite any other merit it may have.  The downside just ain't worth the upside.

I understand your point well. It's a dilemma and a significant risk both personally and communally.  But truth is truth and miracles are not. Faith and membership add to both ego and identity not an appreciation of equality and potential or YOUnity, in my opinion.

Exactly.  And so, because we are agreed that there was nothing divine or miraculous about Jeebus, and because all the good stuff in his writing can be found elsewhere, it is better overall to ignore the GoT - because the masses will never be able to divorce truth from miracles.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2720
  • Darwins +221/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #139 on: December 31, 2011, 10:25:31 AM »
I think ees has been slightly misunderstood.

His main thrust is the same as that of ALL GoT believers: that GoT is the original Jesus and undermines orthodox Christianity. He thinks we should be on-board with that, because it's such a knockdown argument of Christianity.

The reason I am not on-board with this idea is (1) as noted, it accidentally legitimises Jesus, (2) Christians can exploit that, or argue the reverse: GoT is consistent with the NT, or derived from it.

While GoT has quotes like this:

44)  Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the Father will be
forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the Son will be
forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not
be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."


There is clearly some kind of problem with believing that GoT pre-dates Paul and the NT, and has not been contaminated by Christians.

This is your standard Christian, arguing that the GoT is not reliable, and if it is, it only serves to validate Christianity
http://www.answers.org/bible/gospelofthomas.html

As I have said in another thread, I think that the GoT is derived from more primitive Matthean gospels, and has also been steadily redacted until the 4th century Coptic version. The above author points out one redaction from the Greek version.

Another problem I have is that if the Jesus of GoT is some kind of materialist, who doesn't believe in afterlife and judgement, then he sure is coy about expressing this new idea, and saying something that is different from the crap in the NT.

« Last Edit: December 31, 2011, 10:27:11 AM by Add Homonym »
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #140 on: January 03, 2012, 06:28:58 AM »
I think ees has been slightly misunderstood.

His main thrust is the same as that of ALL GoT believers: that GoT is the original Jesus and undermines orthodox Christianity. He thinks we should be on-board with that, because it's such a knockdown argument of Christianity.

The reason I am not on-board w
I think ees has been slightly misunderstood.

His main thrust is the same as that of ALL GoT believers: that GoT is the original Jesus and undermines orthodox Christianity. He thinks we should be on-board with that, because it's such a knockdown argument of Christianity.

The reason I am not on-board with this idea is (1) as noted, it accidentally legitimises Jesus, (2) Christians can exploit that, or argue the reverse: GoT is consistent with the NT, or derived from it.

While GoT has quotes like this:

44)  Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the Father will be
forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the Son will be
forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not
be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."
ith this idea is (1) as noted, it accidentally legitimises Jesus, (2) Christians can exploit that, or argue the reverse: GoT is consistent with the NT, or derived from it.

While GoT has quotes like this:

44)  Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the Father will be
forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the Son will be
forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not
be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."


There is clearly some kind of problem with believing that GoT pre-dates Paul and the NT, and has not been contaminated by Christians.

This is your standard Christian, arguing that the GoT is not reliable, and if it is, it only serves to validate Christianity
http://www.answers.org/bible/gospelofthomas.html

As I have said in another thread, I think that the GoT is derived from more primitive Matthean gospels, and has also been steadily redacted until the 4th century Coptic version. The above author points out one redaction from the Greek version.

Another problem I have is that if the Jesus of GoT is some kind of materialist, who doesn't believe in afterlife and judgement, then he sure is coy about expressing this new idea, and saying something that is different from the crap in the NT.

But if the Holy Spirit is just another way of saying conscience, what then? Or Consciences never forgive the discretion's until we confront them personally perhaps.

I've been reading Paul and he reminds me of a person that has recently given up smoking. An evangelist, I's say. Haven't yet come across anything pithy and he states himself that he got his inspiration direct from a vision. I'll stay with the gospels and agree that the NT is full of misinformation the obvious ones being the healings and miracles.

I don't see the materialist. Care to offer a quote.:-)   

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #141 on: January 03, 2012, 06:35:04 AM »
^^^ and if my Aunt had balls she would be my Uncle. Are you suggesting GoT should not be ignored but the other writings should?

 The stories of The Raven have remained unchanged for about 8000 years are you suggesting they should not be taken seriously as real but your GoT should?

Truth is what it is. All I'm saying is test each reading with your own personal experience and observations and see which one is closer to a modern description of spirituality. My money's on the GOT.

I don't think that miracles are a truth. I do think humanity has a side that benefits from the actions of meditation and authentic selflessness. If in antiquity the GOT has been chosen as the correct rendering of Jesus message things could not have been worse. Knowledge cannot be abused as faith has been.

Offline Brakeman

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +47/-3
  • Gender: Male
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #142 on: January 03, 2012, 07:00:14 AM »

Truth is what it is. All I'm saying is test each reading with your own personal experience and observations ..

Great Idea.. only, if you do that.. God doesn't show up in real life. Yell out as loud as you like, god never answers back if you don't answer for him. God is absent.

Using that measuring stick, All of the scriptures are made by mankind and fictional.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2012, 07:03:27 AM by Brakeman »
Help find the cure for FUNDAMENTIA !

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #143 on: January 03, 2012, 07:29:12 AM »
There is clearly some kind of problem with believing that GoT pre-dates Paul and the NT, and has not been contaminated by Christians.

Both GOT and the NT share 65 of the same Jesus sayings meaning their origin (jesus said, not authorship) precedes both. Oh and guess which of the GOT and NT has more Jesus Parables.

Offline eartheconomyspirit

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • Darwins +2/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: You're all barking up the wrong tree - possibly :-)
« Reply #144 on: January 03, 2012, 07:38:43 AM »

Truth is what it is. All I'm saying is test each reading with your own personal experience and observations ..

Great Idea.. only, if you do that.. God doesn't show up in real life. Yell out as loud as you like, god never answers back if you don't answer for him. God is absent.

Using that measuring stick, All of the scriptures are made by mankind and fictional.

Consider god as a concept for something unseen, say your conscience. Then ask yourself why do so many people (at least the good ones) share a similar sense of right and wrong regardless of  nationality, race or creed. Now i know that you'll say natural selection or something else. Whatever name or rationale  let's also call that God.

What is it that you suppose inspires Common Law. Logic? What is Logic. Let's accept logic but call it God. Then we can agree that God's not important however our ability to draw the same sense of fairness is valuable. When we chase God we are possibly barking up the wrong tree. Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to discuss the sense of good that is shared in humanity and it's source . BTW what is it's source and why is it shared?