Author Topic: Why do atheists refer to the Laws of Moses, or the Torah Law to try to prove Ch  (Read 4572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2443
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
As far as I now the better translation is not 'fulfil' but 'complete'. that's the clear meaning of the Greek  as mean's something rather different from that which 'fulfil' means.

That said, we only have the word of an anonymous author for this word was used by Jesus. However, it certainly leaves us with the idea that Matthew may have been writing for converted Jews who valued the Torah and thus the completion allowed it to continue. For Paul, on the other hand, getting rid of the constraints of the Torah was very much his purpose when he came to Jerusalem for 'discussions' (see Acts 15). We see different factions in the earlish church and maybe translators or old wanted to make their translations consistent even when the underlying text was not.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline biggribblymonster

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Darwins +4/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
@magicmiles
Are you serious about the bible smuggling or was that a bit of hyperbole? I'm impressed either way.

So would it be correct to say that Christianity more  filled an emotional need in your life than you recognised in your heart that you were a sinner separated from God the creator of the world, and in need of the salvation Jesus offers?
[/b] [/i]

Totally incorrect - you don't get to suggest or intimate that my faith wasn't 'real'. You might, as many Christians do, find it uncomfortable to think a true believer could walk away from the faith but whether you accept it or not I was a born again believer. And now I'm not.


You came to the conclusion God wasn't real based on more than some questions of biblical context and relevance, I assume?
You assume  correctly. It took 7 years of anguish & doubting until I cam to the conclusion that I could no longer call I myself a christian and that I was in fact now an atheist. Research & reading in the fields of history, anthropology, archeaology, biology, physics/cosmology, pyschology, neurology just left me no room to move. All of my arguments, beliefs and assertions melted like chocolate soldiers in the cold, clear light of logic & reason.

But enough about me & back on topic (although yes I did smuggle a suitcase full of NKJ bibles across the border).

@ wheels5894 - it really doesn't matter if the law was "completed' or 'fulfilled' (certain degree of semantics). God obviously thought they were valid and worthwhile enough to get himself nailed to a crucifix for them which is a big thumbs from the sky daddy for slavery, the execution of children and so forth
« Last Edit: May 31, 2013, 01:15:37 AM by biggribblymonster »
Your mind is like a parachute. It only works if its open

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7275
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
biggribblymonster - take a few minutes to learn our quoting system.  It is pretty simple, and will make your posts and quotes from others much easier to follow!  Guides and tutorial links in my signature below.

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

Offline Jag

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1696
  • Darwins +180/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
So would it be correct to say that Christianity more  filled an emotional need in your life than you recognised in your heart that you were a sinner separated from God the creator of the world, and in need of the salvation Jesus offers?

That. That part right there. That was kind of the deal breaker for me. I had been a practicing christian for most of my life (and a lapsed one for several years but still thought I believed in God) when I was first hit up with the born again spiel. Thanks bunches folks but really, I'm pretty sure I was born just fine the first time. It all seemed so ... overwrought and theatrical. And then my teenaged son dragged me to an Assembly of God church and that was the most eye-opening (and not in a good way) experience of my "you mind your own and I'll mind mine" theist life.

A few years later, I had a conversation in a coffee shop with a former member of that same church and she told me that her family had left for a different congregation. Apparently the minister got a bit carried away and began "dispensing the gift of tongues" and she decided that this might be getting a little hysterical. She wrapped up with "if the Holy Spirit wants to give me the Gift of Tongues then I'll accept it. But that man was going too far."  :o

Ok, good to know where you draw the line.

My tolerance for BS is limited, and I use up most of it IRL.

Offline edensxkiss01

  • Novice
  • Posts: 2
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Its not all bad ... The Knights Templar`s foundation as law of god is the Ten Commandments and I myself am  member of Hereditary Knights Templar of Britannia and of Gnostic faith .. I think atheists have no place to judge what they believe is non existent .. and atheist word mean that of no religous faith.. so who or why they decide to believe they are educated and spiritually blessed when they wish to dismantle parts of the bible, example being : If im a chemistry teacher, am i likely to judge the laws of physics and doubt the physics teacher?.. no.. being a Gnostic is enlightening and comforting in so many ways and reading so many of the gospels not in the Bible but authenticated and translated (48 or more) its enlightened me and inspired me to do as jesus says: all of us ..our bodies are the temples of god/heaven his kingdom dwells within those temples and his kingdom surrounds us down to every leaf or stone, and not so as we are told to believe in churches chapels.. " Even if a few gather in my name" and that can be on top of a mountain or sitting by a river.. it qualifies as sacred as any church etc..

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4560
  • Darwins +103/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Eden....its all fine in your mind even the evil stuff God promotes or even himself does in the Bible?


 Sounds almost like you have been playing too much assassins creed
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6557
  • Darwins +503/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
I think atheists have no place to judge what they believe is non existent ..

1. Maybe you misunderstand - it is the concept of god, in the same way you believe in the concept of Salvation as you cannot know that it exists.
2. Why would you deny someone their opinion?
3. What other repressive measures do you think are acceptable?
4. Can religious people judge things that are non-existent?
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable. Ambrose Bierce

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
I myself am  member of Hereditary Knights Templar of Britannia.....

....which only costs £79 to join!  £395 if you want to be a Knight, though.

It's a confused order.  "Anyone from any faith can join and you do not have to be religious. Nobody will force any religious believes upon you", BUT one of the obligations of the order is to "expand & advance the Order’s Membership & following of Christ".  SO a little bit of bait-and-switch there (or downright lies, possibly). 

You can buy a Knight Templar wallet, tie, and car sticker though.  That's pretty cool.
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 Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2963
  • Darwins +256/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
I think atheists have no place to judge what they believe is non existent...

I disagree.  This world is entangled in many unwholesome ideas which derived from various religions, and whether or not we believe these things, we are most certainly affected by them.

The god of the Bible is one of the very worst of the worst, IMO, and hopelessly inconsistent even as a fictional character.  I believe that this is because the god of the Bible is actually not one character but multiple gods from Canaanite and earlier traditions, and no one attempted to reconcile the contradictions until it was too late.  The problem with making something "holy" is that it becomes set in stone, unassailable, and unchangeable even when it makes no fucking sense.

"God is love" -- Therefore, the torture of non-compliant entities in Hell must be declared to be "justice" to make it sound less barbaric.

Human sacrifice is wrong -- Unless it's Jesus taking the fall, in which case it's a jolly good thing indeed, or unless Biblegod tells you to do it.

Murder, stealing and rape are wrong -- Unless the tribe next door has been declared to be An Abomination In Teh Eyes of Da Lawd, in which case you'd better snap to it, burn their village to the ground, and kill everything except the virgin females.

Durned tootin' we're going to judge crap like that.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 02:28:13 AM by Astreja »
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
So would it be correct to say that Christianity more  filled an emotional need in your life than you recognised in your heart that you were a sinner separated from God the creator of the world, and in need of the salvation Jesus offers?

I'm curious to know how you feel the former to ultimately be distinct from the latter. If he didn't feel Christianity to hold relevance to his life then what emotional need do you suggest he would've sought to fill through becoming a believer?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 04:37:15 AM by Aspie »

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
So would it be correct to say that Christianity more  filled an emotional need in your life than you recognised in your heart that you were a sinner separated from God the creator of the world, and in need of the salvation Jesus offers?

I'm curious to know how you feel the former to ultimately be distinct from the latter. If he didn't feel Christianity to hold relevance to his life then what emotional need do you suggest he would've sought to fill through becoming a believer?

Thanks for asking.

I've known plenty of people to feel comforted by the thought that God loves them and cares for them, or feel comforted by the thought that they will go to a 'better place', but on a very superficial basis without ever actually considering all of what we know of God from the bible. Many churches seem to really focus on that sort of emotional connection, without ever teaching that we are sinners who Jesus came to die for. Many people, once that is taught to them, start to lose the emotional connection they felt, because an emotional connection with nothing else to support it is very thin.

Nobody likes hearing that they are a sinner deserving of God's judgement, and a God who judges you is nowhere near as attractive as a God who just 'loves you'.

God loves you, allright, but God also is compelled by His nature to punish sin and injustice. The cross is where God's love and righteous anger at sin and injustice met.

It's the same with someone who has only ever had a ritualistic experience of God - they got to church because they always have, say the creeds, sing the songs...but never actually believed that they themselves were in need of salvation.
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4731
  • Darwins +535/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Its not all bad ... The Knights Templar`s foundation as law of god is the Ten Commandments and I myself am  member of Hereditary Knights Templar of Britannia and of Gnostic faith .. I think atheists have no place to judge what they believe is non existent .. and atheist word mean that of no religous faith.. so who or why they decide to believe they are educated and spiritually blessed when they wish to dismantle parts of the bible, example being : If im a chemistry teacher, am i likely to judge the laws of physics and doubt the physics teacher?.. no.. being a Gnostic is enlightening and comforting in so many ways and reading so many of the gospels not in the Bible but authenticated and translated (48 or more) its enlightened me and inspired me to do as jesus says: all of us ..our bodies are the temples of god/heaven his kingdom dwells within those temples and his kingdom surrounds us down to every leaf or stone, and not so as we are told to believe in churches chapels.. " Even if a few gather in my name" and that can be on top of a mountain or sitting by a river.. it qualifies as sacred as any church etc..
So, should I stop judging fictional characters, because I don't believe they exist outside the movie (or book, or video game) that they were created for?  I think not.  That's why atheists judge your god - because they believe it's a fictional god, and thus doesn't get exempted from criticism.

I think you would find that the belief that (insert specific religion) "is enlightening and comforting in so many ways" is pretty common.  It's not even all that surprising.  Believing that you have some big, powerful spiritual being whispering in your ear and watching your back probably would be enlightening and comforting.  For that matter, believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are probably pretty "enlightening and comforting" for children (see Rise of the Guardians).  But if that being doesn't actually exist, then it's a false enlightenment, a false comfort.  Which is the whole point of atheism, I think, to help people understand that they don't need to believe in fictional stuff to get that feeling enlightenment and comfort.

By the way, we can independently demonstrate the existence of the laws of physics (which were not invented by the physics teacher).  Furthermore, we can demonstrate the relationship between physics and chemistry, so a chemistry teacher going after physics would be undercutting his own discipline.  Your analogy needs a lot of work.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7275
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog

Nobody likes hearing that they are a sinner deserving of God's judgement, and a God who judges you is nowhere near as attractive as a God who just 'loves you'.

God loves you, allright, but God also is compelled by His nature to punish sin and injustice. The cross is where God's love and righteous anger at sin and injustice met.

It's the same with someone who has only ever had a ritualistic experience of God - they got to church because they always have, say the creeds, sing the songs...but never actually believed that they themselves were in need of salvation.

This is precisely where it all breaks down into meaningless opinions.  I cannot even begin to imagine why this message that we are all sinners, or that we require salvation is so important to some people.  We are nothing of the sort, unless one buys into the historical myths of ancient people who knew very little compared to modern humans.

What we need across humanity is compassion and empathy, kindness and caring, and a genuine combined concern for the resources we have on this planet (and perhaps beyond). 

Looking at the OT is nothing more than the absolute best example of how awful things were back when it was considered the right thing to do to commit genocide upon a city that had the resources that the "chosen" people did not have.  Just take it by force, because YHWH commands it.  Nasty...and has no place in modern human culture.  Sadly, it still lingers...but that is precisely because the modern Christian is completely unwilling to consider that everything they base their fundamental belief system upon springs from a time and a people who lacked the knowledge of things we take for granted today.

The modern Christian, it seems, either keeps their true opinion hidden, or truly accepts that the genocides of the past, glorified in the OT, are a good thing.  Truly amazing, sad, and disgusting.

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
But why become Christian at all if its doctrine is anathema as you suggest? I find this line of reasoning rather bewildering; if one has a circle-shaped hole to fill the immediate response of many is to reach for a cross-shaped block and pretend that it fits like a glove? If Christianity is so antithetical to such an emotional need why get involved in order to pretend Christianity isn't Christianity? If the need is only met as long as one averts their eyes to the elephant in the room then what makes being a Christian essential to this equation?

Moreover, you don't seem to think God's love to be mutually exclusive with the concept of sin, but you consider it inherently problematic in respect to such people you are describing. Why is it such a game breaker for them if that emotional connection never left the picture?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 04:09:00 PM by Aspie »

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
But why become Christian at all if its doctrine is anathema as you suggest?

Sorry, can you clarify what you mean by that?
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
Certainly. If I understood you correctly such people who you've observed to fail to properly integrate into the faith only accepted the concept of God's love without consideration for its core teachings, and that their emotional connections would wane as they learned of his judgment for sin. What I'm having trouble with here is why some nebulous "emotional need" is driving them into this situation where they feel they must convert to Christianity while hunkering down into a state of abject ignorance over what Christianity actually is in order to maintain an emotional connection. If it's so important to them emotionally to be Christian then why do you feel Christianity's teachings to be so threatening to their connection? Why is this "superficial basis" of Christianity specifically their priority if they can't accept Christianity for what it is? Why can't they, for example, just subscribe to personal belief in a loving god without all of the baggage Christianity comes with that you suggest is inherently problematic for them? Or subscribe to another religion? Or just engage in some activity that fills the emotional void without the need for rivers from Egypt?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 05:44:55 PM by Aspie »

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male

Thanks.

If I understood you correctly such people who you've observed to fail to properly integrate into the faith only accepted the concept of God's love without consideration for its core teachings, and that their emotional connections would wane as they learned of his judgment for sin.

Correct, although it's not so much failure to integrate into the faith as no real faith at all.


What I'm having trouble with here is why some nebulous "emotional need" is driving them into this situation where they feel they must convert to Christianity while hunkering down into a state of abject ignorance over what Christianity actually is in order to maintain an emotional connection. If it's so important to them emotionally to be Christian then why do you feel Christianity's teachings to be so threatening to their connection?

Because it doesn't necessarily need to be Christianity that fills the emotional need -  Christinaity just happens to be the right emotional fit at the time. The emotional fix might just as easily have been any number of other things. The reason why that connection is snapped so easily is that an emotional attachment exists only to make someone feel better about themselves, fulfilling a desire to be told "you're OK, everything is fine". The message of Christinaity is that we are not OK...sort of the opposite to what you're hoping to hear. The shock, anger,indignation and often rejection of that message often means that we then don't bother paying attention to what God offers us, which is in fact the only solution to our ultimate problem. Rather, we move on to a an emotional connection which soothes, but will ultimately disappoint as well.

The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
Well that's what doesn't make sense to me here - if your immediate emotional response is to seek out something that confirms that "everything is fine" why would you go with the most "everything is NOT fine" thing you could possibly find? This makes about as much sense as rushing into a burning building because you're afraid of fire. You'd think this would be a rare once-in-a-lifetime case only worth posing facetiously, but you invoke this as a serious explanation. How is this any less nonsensical and arbitrary than, say:

So would it be correct to say that Christianity more gave you a chance to use rubber chickens than you recognised in your heart that you were a sinner separated from God the creator of the world, and in need of the salvation Jesus offers?

Is it possible that what you're interpreting as people being in Christianity on a "superficial basis" just to "fill an emotional need" is in actuality a rationalization for why genuine believers leave the faith? How do we distinguish between one losing faith and one faking the faith to reap some nebulous baseline emotional rewards?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 06:26:12 PM by Aspie »

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
Well that's what doesn't make sense to me here - if your immediate emotional response is to seek out something that confirms that "everything is fine" why would you go with the most "everything is NOT fine" thing you could possibly find?

My point is that, initially, they aren't going with the 'everything is not fine' teaching. They go for a message about God and Jesus they want to hear and which people are willing to give them. When they hear what the bible really teaches it all goes pear shaped.

What about you? What did you believe about God and Jesus?
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1992
  • Darwins +194/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
The reason why that connection is snapped so easily is that an emotional attachment exists only to make someone feel better about themselves, fulfilling a desire to be told "you're OK, everything is fine". The message of Christinaity is that we are not OK...sort of the opposite to what you're hoping to hear.
I don't see it that way at all.  The reason the Christian message is so appealing to so many is because it preys on the emotions of those who already feel they are sick, and says 'We know you're sick.  Do this and you will be OK'.  Its the ultimate snake oil sales pitch. 

I can see the commercial now...  Enter the fat, white guy in the suit and tie... Do you feel depressed?  Are you having a difficult time with your life?  Things getting out of control?  Guess what?? We know whats wrong with you... You don't have God in your life!  Believe in God and you'll be alright again!  Just come to church and donate 10% of your income and God will make you well again!     

A few hundred years ago, they'd give you a magic elixir and take your money instead. 

But here's the kicker... For those who buy into it; if God belief doesn't fix things right off, then you just need MORE God belief.  So they stay with it and stay with it until... lo' and behold, their life begins to turn around.  God belief might have had nothing to do with that, but it sure gets all the credit.  Just like the elixir you keep taking for the common cold that goes away anyway in a week. 
 
You've got to be skeptical of something that tells you you're sick and then sells you the cure.  How many Christians have we seen come here saying how awful their lives were and how bad they were and how their belief in God suddenly turned that around? It happens all the time.  Why?  Because they had nowhere else to go but up, and they have convinced themselves that they're finally on the right path.  An actual God had nothing to do with it.  It's a massive mind job.   

Sucker born every minute. 



Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
The reason why that connection is snapped so easily is that an emotional attachment exists only to make someone feel better about themselves, fulfilling a desire to be told "you're OK, everything is fine". The message of Christinaity is that we are not OK...sort of the opposite to what you're hoping to hear.
I don't see it that way at all.  The reason the Christian message is so appealing to so many is because it preys on the emotions of those who already feel they are sick, and says 'We know you're sick.  Do this and you will be OK'.  Its the ultimate snake oil sales pitch. 

Are you immune to the tactic of "take this, do this, eat this, drink this, drive this, and things will be better"?

I suspect not.

The difference between someone who knows the truth and someone who's been sold snake oil is that the truth convinces people to stick with something even when it becomes unpleasant.


Sucker born every minute.

Absolutely, Jeff.
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
In which case, how do these people stay Christian for more than 5 minutes?  It would take a level of cognitive dissonance and self-imposed ignorance on a scale of legendary proportions to deftly avoid learning a thing about it when they're waist deep in it. Not to mention the fact that the steps of these churches must be filled with Nigerian princes lining up to cash in on all those desperate irrational people just scrolling to the bottom and hitting "I Accept". I can only imagine how you consider such churches' services to run.

"Let us not open our Bibles. Let us not sing hymns that might give us more information than we're uncomfortable with. Let us not examine anything or discuss anything today. Instead, let us sit in silent contemplation for the next three hours and meditate on how groovy God is for loving us so much."

"Amen."

You're not just proposing a simple "emotional response" - you're proposing an impenetrable force-field of self-delusion with the power to screen out all facts, distort reality entirely and turn dog shit into Disneyland at the drop of a hat. With such superpowers, why would anyone even bother leaving their home to solve their emotional problems?  What's stopping them from diving into Imagination Land at the first sign of emotional turmoil?

I'm not sure what I knew about Christianity back then versus what I know now as I've taken such knowledge for granted for the longest time, but I do know that living in the US, a culture saturated with Christianity, it was difficult to avoid learning about it despite my non-religious upbringing.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12217
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
The difference between someone who knows the truth and someone who's been sold snake oil is that the truth convinces people to stick with something even when it becomes unpleasant.

Not so.  Someone who's convinced that they are at fault when things get unpleasant will not blame the false cure.  They will blame themselves.

This is sort of what Jeff had just finished describing.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
The difference between someone who knows the truth and someone who's been sold snake oil is that the truth convinces people to stick with something even when it becomes unpleasant.

Not so.  Someone who's convinced that they are at fault when things get unpleasant will not blame the false cure.  They will blame themselves.

This is sort of what Jeff had just finished describing.

I'm not denying people can be brain-washed by false cures. Far from it. We're all brain-washed by false cures of some type or other.

But doesn't the cure only exist to meet a need? Do you really think, from your experience of the world, that people are just itching to be told that they're broken? Isn't the opposite true?

The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
It would take a level of cognitive dissonance and self-imposed ignorance on a scale of legendary proportions

Just read through some of the threads addressing the issue of objective morality if you want to see just how much cognitive dissonance is possible. Read those threads, then spend some time reading through all the accusations of 'evil' levelled at God on this website. Read those threads, then spend some time honestly asking yourself if a theoretical conclusion about morality matching your belief in a godless world measures up in any way shape or form to what you feel, see and experience every day.

Cognitive dissoance my arse.
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12217
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
I'm not denying people can be brain-washed by false cures. Far from it. We're all brain-washed by false cures of some type or other.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it takes genuine brain-washing.  Just a little manipulation.  Some people practically do it to themselves.

But doesn't the cure only exist to meet a need? Do you really think, from your experience of the world, that people are just itching to be told that they're broken? Isn't the opposite true?

To be told "you're broken, but so is everyone else, we're all in the same boat together" is less depressing than you might think.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
To be told "you're broken, but so is everyone else, we're all in the same boat together" is less depressing than you might think.

Perhaps, but that doesn't equate to truly believing it to be the case.
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1992
  • Darwins +194/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Are you immune to the tactic of "take this, do this, eat this, drink this, drive this, and things will be better"?

I suspect not.
Immune?  No.  More guarded than you?  Absolutely. 

The difference between someone who knows the truth and someone who's been sold snake oil is that the truth convinces people to stick with something even when it becomes unpleasant.
Not always, MM. Quite often its just the belief that they have the truth that convinces them.  In other words; someone who really, really, really believes the snake oil works will keep drinking it even when it becomes unpleasant.  In that instance, it's not the truth that convinces them... it's faith. 

Florida preacher Todd Bentley says he can heal the sick with kicks and punches.  Do you think it's truth that convinces those people to go up on stage and let this guy kick their ass, or is it just the belief that he can heal them?  You tell me. 

Show me the evidence that the snake oil works.  Show me the peer reviewed articles.  Show me the results of the studies.  Show me the experts and their patients who've used it.  Then I'll drink the snake oil.  Until then, I pass.  I can be swayed, but it takes a lot. 

One thing is for sure though... A guy wearing a black dress, standing on a stage with an old book in one hand and a dead guy tacked to a couple pieces of wood in the other screams 'snake oil' to me.  Why doesn't it do that for you?  Is it perhaps because you have faith in the snake oil he's peddling?   

But doesn't the cure only exist to meet a need? Do you really think, from your experience of the world, that people are just itching to be told that they're broken? Isn't the opposite true?
More than anything else, I think people are itching to be told that they are just like everyone else.  Especially those who feel broken.  Again, the Christian message is 'We know you're sick.  Do this and you will be OK'.  So it appeals to the people who feel sick.  In another thread, didn't you even say you had more bad qualities than good?  I think I remember seeing you write that.  That's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about.  I don't know you at all, but I highly doubt you have more bad qualities than good.  But Christianity must surely be appealing to someone who thinks that way.  Perhaps if you realized you were a good person to begin with, the religion would have less pull on you. 

The whole 'everyone is a sinner' thing is disgusting if you ask me.  No.  People are generally good.  And they try hard to be good, every day.  And if we kept that in mind when dealing with each other, life would be a whole lot better. 

On the flip side, I think that's also why it doesn't fly well when someone doesn't feel broken.  Like me.  I don't feel sick.  I don't think I'm sick.  I don't need saving from anything.  I'm happy the way I am.  I look at myself in the mirror every morning and am happy with the person I've made of myself.  A person who feels broken may look at themselves and say the complete opposite.  But once they start believing in God, they may look at themselves and say 'I am sick, but God is saving me'.  They may need that to get through their day.  I don't. 

If they just kept that to themselves, and didn't try to push it on others in the great many ways they do, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. 

Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline Aspie

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
  • Darwins +34/-0
Wow, that totally showed me. Well, the fact that you don't even understand what cognitive dissonance is anyway...    :?

I have yet to even be presented with an argument as to how a world with God would be distinguishable from one without; all I've seen are intricate rationalizations as to why it's unreasonable to expect otherwise. *shrugs*