Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Thread Closed  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
29-03-2020, 19:48   #151
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
I'm not here to convince you of my beliefs in God. I think that it's a personal journey everyone goes through in their lifetime. Even the Atheists will still say Öh My God, when something tragic occurs. We all know of him, whether you believe in him or not, is a different matter.
I fear you read too much into that though. A knee jerk cultural turn of phrase does not hold any implication for what such people "know" in your mind. I am about as far from holding a belief in any god as anyone you are likely to meet. Yet the word "god" is also in my lexicon during expletives or sex or times of surprise or shock.

Such use of the word holds no implications about my belief or knowledge of a god than the fact you call Thursday Thursday means you believe in Thor. Linguistic cultural memetics are not an implication about personal beliefs about the universe.

As for my own personal journey with gods.... it has generally been made up of me asking people and books for any actual arguments, evidence, data and reasoning they might have to offer that even lends a modicum of credence to the idea there is such an entity. Only to find consistently that the answer is no. They have nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
I am disgusted with all the tele-evangelists we now have.
Televangelists are indeed the extreme example of people openly profiting from religious nonsense. Or their faith healer on stage equivalents. However they are just the extreme. The Churches themselves are quite often essentially a business model too.

And they turn a tidy profit at times too. The wealth in the Vatican alone is a testament to that. At best the Catholic Church appears to be in the business of being a charity broker. And they do quite well skimming off the top.

They also appear to be in the profitable business of taking perfectly good ideas, ideas that hold utility and truth without any metaphysical or supernatural nonsense, and merely repackaging those ideas for re-sale.

I have yet to come across any religious idea of any actual use, that loses a SHRED of it's utility when divested of the divisive and unsubstantiated nonsense the particular religion packaged it in.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
Advertisement
29-03-2020, 19:50   #152
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A._Baracus View Post
Sorry. But I got a right smart arse vibe from your post. Like your entire point of your post was to blow yourself up.
There for, I really don't care to be perfectly honest
Or, just as likely, you imagined for yourself whatever "vibe" you could to attack the poster and ignore the post/point. Which I fear says a lot more about you than it does about me.

But to repeat, the statement you employed is a known one and is often used in many subjects. Often by BOTH sides of the discussion. Which just shows how empty and useless a phrase it is. A phrase that says everything in fact effectively says nothing. And the fact that any side of pretty much any topic can employ the exact same phrase (and often do) is demonstration of this fact.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
29-03-2020, 19:56   #153
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by nozzferrahhtoo View Post
I fear you read too much into that though. A knee jerk cultural turn of phrase does not hold any implication for what such people "know" in your mind. I am about as far from holding a belief in any god as anyone you are likely to meet. Yet the word "god" is also in my lexicon during expletives or sex or times of surprise or shock.

Such use of the word holds no implications about my belief or knowledge of a god than the fact you call Thursday Thursday means you believe in Thor. Linguistic cultural memetics are not an implication about personal beliefs about the universe.

As for my own personal journey with gods.... it has generally been made up of me asking people and books for any actual arguments, evidence, data and reasoning they might have to offer that even lends a modicum of credence to the idea there is such an entity. Only to find consistently that the answer is no. They have nothing.



Televangelists are indeed the extreme example of people openly profiting from religious nonsense. Or their faith healer on stage equivalents. However they are just the extreme. The Churches themselves are quite often essentially a business model too.

And they turn a tidy profit at times too. The wealth in the Vatican alone is a testament to that. At best the Catholic Church appears to be in the business of being a charity broker. And they do quite well skimming off the top.

They also appear to be in the profitable business of taking perfectly good ideas, ideas that hold utility and truth without any metaphysical or supernatural nonsense, and merely repackaging those ideas for re-sale.

I have yet to come across any religious idea of any actual use, that loses a SHRED of it's utility when divested of the divisive and unsubstantiated nonsense the particular religion packaged it in.
I didn't read too much in the post nor have a knee-jerk reaction as you say. My point is every person will at some point in their lives reach that crossroads of what they believe and hold true.

Whether it is accepting God or denying him. That is the gift of free will.
Shady Grady is offline  
29-03-2020, 20:00   #154
Zebra3
Registered User
 
Zebra3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
No sir, your cherry-picking with the extremes and every religion has them. From Christianity, Islam ,and Judaism. And it is those groups of extremes that the actual faith is painted.

Your going by one extreme to another argument which seems to be the norm in society. And I do agree with you that some have made a business of religion in this day. But it is far from the teachings. I am disgusted with all the tele-evangelists we now have.

But They don't speak for God, not even your Pope who is elected by man, and not by God. And I am not trying to sway your own beliefs in anyway. Your own journey is just that, your own.
What I pointed out was extremism but it held a grip on this country, endorsed by FFFG and Labour and so many suffered because of it.

Thankfully from that extreme hold religion had on the people here, most people see through the lies and the hatred of women.

Yet for some reason there's plenty of BCCs that are happy to throw money at the scum in the Roman church in return for the odd big day.
Zebra3 is offline  
29-03-2020, 20:10   #155
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
I didn't read too much in the post nor have a knee-jerk reaction as you say.
And yet you do. When you wrote "Atheists will still say Öh My God, when something tragic occurs" you claimed off the back of this fact that "We all know of him, whether you believe in him or not, is a different matter."

That is very much reading too much into it. You are taking a general turn of phrase people often use, and trying to suggest it's use implies something about their innate knowledge of god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
Whether it is accepting God or denying him. That is the gift of free will.
It is not even clear we HAVE "free will" and the subject is quite divisive. So I fear you are appealing to something unsubstantiated in order to sustain something else also unsubstantiated. Which makes it quite circular.

However even the phrase "accepting or denying" assumes more than you have a basis for assuming. I can neither accept NOR deny something I have no reason to think is actually there. It is a false dichotomy you offer there.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
Advertisement
29-03-2020, 20:42   #156
B.A._Baracus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 8,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by nozzferrahhtoo View Post
Or, just as likely, you imagined for yourself whatever "vibe" you could to attack the poster and ignore the post/point. Which I fear says a lot more about you than it does about me.

But to repeat, the statement you employed is a known one and is often used in many subjects. Often by BOTH sides of the discussion. Which just shows how empty and useless a phrase it is. A phrase that says everything in fact effectively says nothing. And the fact that any side of pretty much any topic can employ the exact same phrase (and often do) is demonstration of this fact.
You took the time to write all that and I didn't even read it. Told you I don't care

Friendly bit of advice and that's just don't waste your time dude.
B.A._Baracus is offline  
29-03-2020, 20:46   #157
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by nozzferrahhtoo View Post
And yet you do. When you wrote "Atheists will still say Öh My God, when something tragic occurs" you claimed off the back of this fact that "We all know of him, whether you believe in him or not, is a different matter."

That is very much reading too much into it. You are taking a general turn of phrase people often use, and trying to suggest it's use implies something about their innate knowledge of god.



It is not even clear we HAVE "free will" and the subject is quite divisive. So I fear you are appealing to something unsubstantiated in order to sustain something else also unsubstantiated. Which makes it quite circular.

However even the phrase "accepting or denying" assumes more than you have a basis for assuming. I can neither accept NOR deny something I have no reason to think is actually there. It is a false dichotomy you offer there.
Sorry but your engaging in smoke and mirror tactics to prove your point, Regardless of the failings of man in the name of God or Christian. Either you believe or don't, why would you inflict your belief on ones who differ?

Would that not be along the lines of the extremists of religion? What makes you so different?
Shady Grady is offline  
29-03-2020, 21:02   #158
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A._Baracus View Post
You took the time to write all that and I didn't even read it. Told you I don't care
You care enough to keep replying. You will probably do it again

However your error is in assuming that I require you to care. When I reply to someone like yourself, it is rarely for YOUR benefit I am doing it. Otherwise I would just message you privately

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
Sorry but your engaging in smoke and mirror tactics to prove your point
Except there is no smoke or mirrors there. In both cases I am directly replying to your statements and explaining how statement two does not follow from statement one in each case. That is the exact opposite of smoke and mirror.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
Regardless of the failings of man in the name of God or Christian. Either you believe or don't, why would you inflict your belief on ones who differ?

Would that not be along the lines of the extremists of religion? What makes you so different?
Errrr how am I inflicting anything on anyone? Least of all on you? You are gone full hyperbole here for some reason.

No one is "inflicting" anything on anyone here. It is in fact quite a testament to your privilege and the joys of modern society that you can even make such a bull statement. I hope you never EVER experience what it ACTUALLY means to have the beliefs of others "inflicted" on you because you seem to have no idea what it actually means. And I think in some ways that is a GOOD Thing. I hope you never do.

Right now you are CHOOSING to come to a discussion and debate forum and CHOOSING to read my posts and CHOOSING to reply to them. To my knowledge no one BUT you is compelling you to do any of these things. The only one inflicting anything on anyone therefore.... is you. What I am doing is nothing remotely contained in the verb "to inflict". Pocket the persecution complex, it is not a pretty look.

However I believe us to be a social species and the free exchange of ideas and the critique of each others positions and beliefs is pretty much all we have to ensure we continue to survive our differences into our hopefully long future as a species. I do not "inflict" beliefs. I discuss them. No one is forcing you to engage.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
29-03-2020, 21:09   #159
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by nozzferrahhtoo View Post
You care enough to keep replying. You will probably do it again

However your error is in assuming that I require you to care. When I reply to someone like yourself, it is rarely for YOUR benefit I am doing it. Otherwise I would just message you privately



Except there is no smoke or mirrors there. In both cases I am directly replying to your statements and explaining how statement two does not follow from statement one in each case. That is the exact opposite of smoke and mirror.



Errrr how am I inflicting anything on anyone? Least of all on you? You are gone full hyperbole here for some reason.

No one is "inflicting" anything on anyone here. It is in fact quite a testament to your privilege and the joys of modern society that you can even make such a bull statement. I hope you never EVER experience what it ACTUALLY means to have the beliefs of others "inflicted" on you because you seem to have no idea what it actually means. And I think in some ways that is a GOOD Thing. I hope you never do.

Right now you are CHOOSING to come to a discussion and debate forum and CHOOSING to read my posts and CHOOSING to reply to them. To my knowledge no one BUT you is compelling you to do any of these things. The only one inflicting anything on anyone therefore.... is you. What I am doing is nothing remotely contained in the verb "to inflict". Pocket the persecution complex, it is not a pretty look.

However I believe us to be a social species and the free exchange of ideas and the critique of each others positions and beliefs is pretty much all we have to ensure we continue to survive our differences into our hopefully long future as a species. I do not "inflict" beliefs. I discuss them. No one is forcing you to engage.
At this point we should agree to disagree. Like I said before, I've no desire to inflict my beliefs on anyone. That is a personal journey everyone must take. So I wish you well and you find solace in your life.
Shady Grady is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
29-03-2020, 21:19   #160
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
You can't inflict them on anyone, nor can I, that's the good thing. I mean it that I find it in SOME ways a genuinely good thing that you seemingly have no idea what "inflicting beliefs" actually means or looks like. I hope you never do. Because I can tell you from direct AND indirect experience that it is not at all pretty.

There are abortion clinics blown up and doctors murdered. That is beliefs being inflicted. There are children who die because their parents deny them simple medical intervention as they think it an affront to their god to use it. That is beliefs being inflicted. There are creationists campaigning to have actual science removed from school curriculums so other kids but their own can not learn it. That is beliefs being inflicted.

Being "talked" at on a friendly but robust internet forum? That ain't it. We live a privileged existence to even think it might be.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
29-03-2020, 21:32   #161
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by nozzferrahhtoo View Post
You can't inflict them on anyone, nor can I, that's the good thing. I mean it that I find it in SOME ways a genuinely good thing that you seemingly have no idea what "inflicting beliefs" actually means or looks like. I hope you never do. Because I can tell you from direct AND indirect experience that it is not at all pretty.

There are abortion clinics blown up and doctors murdered. That is beliefs being inflicted. There are children who die because their parents deny them simple medical intervention as they think it an affront to their god to use it. That is beliefs being inflicted. There are creationists campaigning to have actual science removed from school curriculums so other kids but their own can not learn it. That is beliefs being inflicted.

Being "talked" at on a friendly but robust internet forum? That ain't it. We live a privileged existence to even think it might be.
But those are man made beliefs that they interpret from the scriptures. Which a lot get wrong, IMO.I don't agree with abortion, but I realize society does. For me it's about personal belief and salvation.

That is the difference to me.I don't seek to convert anyone. Because I believe it is a personal journey for each and everyone one. I don't condemn those who don't believe as I do but I do pray for them.

And to be honest, we could go on and on about what we each believe. We both won't change the other, nor do I want to. So I will end this debate in wishing you and your family good health and happiness.
Shady Grady is offline  
29-03-2020, 21:42   #162
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
But those are man made beliefs that they interpret from the scriptures. Which a lot get wrong, IMO.
Hard to say. Since there is no reason on offer to think there even is a god, it is difficult to clarify it's opinions on any matter. That the interpretation of scripture is "right" or "wrong" is therefore both entirely subjective, and is likely irreconcilable between people who disagree as there is no forthcoming data to help mediate matters. Especially as there is no reason to think the scriptures themselves, let alone beliefs based on them, are anything but man made either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
That is the difference to me.I don't seek to convert anyone.
Nor do I as such. You do not find me on pulpits or going door to door with my "good news". However if people openly enter a discussion on the topic on what is a discussion forum.... I happily engage. It would be an error to mistake a motivation towards robust discourse, with a motivation to convert.

For me I rarely care what people believe in the privacy of their own head. Least of all enough to convert them. In fact the only theists I ever converted to being atheist I did so not by arguing religion with them, but actually making them sit down and read their Bible which, despite being believers they never bothered to. And they came out of the experience saying "I was meant to believe WHAT?" and never looked back.

It is only how their beliefs manifest in word and deed that causes issue with me. At which point their beliefs become fair game.

That said though....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Grady View Post
And to be honest, we could go on and on about what we each believe. We both won't change the other, nor do I want to.
.... while you above essentially openly admit to being close minded and not open to change.... I do not identify with that position. If I thought myself unchangeable by open and honest discourse...... I would not bother with discourse.

It is BECAUSE conversations with others can, and often have changed me that I continue to do it. The description above of what to me is hopeless pessimism is just a dark void I am glad I am not part of and an outlook on life I do not share.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
29-03-2020, 21:49   #163
B.A._Baracus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 8,136
You clearly have some Hardon for this thread nozz
B.A._Baracus is offline  
30-03-2020, 06:26   #164
nozzferrahhtoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 8,424
If you say so.. I do not post often on boards any more. But if a thread I used to be part of comes alive again, I am happy to engage with it again.
nozzferrahhtoo is offline  
31-03-2020, 21:17   #165
iamstop
Moderator
 
iamstop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,259
An interesting recant of the 'Lost books of the Bible'

https://www.straightdope.com/columns...-of-the-bible/

No question, the kid portrayed in the “lost books” isn’t exactly the Prince of Peace. After recounting three murders in two pages, one passage concludes, “Then said Joseph to St. Mary, henceforth we will not allow him to go out of the house; for everyone who displeases him is killed.”

The “lost books” are part of the apocrypha, quasibiblical works not included in the official Bible. There are several dozen of these, dating from both Old and New Testament eras and exhibiting considerable variety in length, completeness, and credibility. A few of these were considered inspired in some corners of the early church but were ultimately excluded from the formal canon for one reason or another; the remainder, which account for the bulk of the material, have always been regarded as spurious by the mainstream church and include works condemned as heretical or fraudulent.

In 1820 a number of the apocryphal books were compiled into a sort of alternative Bible called the Apocryphal New Testament. This was republished in 1926 as The Lost Books of the Bible and reprinted in 1979; the last version is what you saw. The 1820 book in turn was an aggregation of two English translations published in 1736 and 1737. The original works were a serious attempt to advance bible study, but the subsequent publications, arguably in 1820 and certainly from 1926 onward, were an attempt to sell books by creating scandal.

The homicidal-Jesus stories come from something known as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. (This is to be distinguished from the better-known but equally apocryphal Gospel According to Thomas, about which more below.) Several versions of the Infancy Gospel have come to light, dating back to about the sixth century AD; all are copies of earlier texts.

As near as scholars can make out, the Thomas story originated in the mid-second century AD, subsequent to the four canonical gospels (that is, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). Some say it was based in part on Luke; the two books share the story of Jesus scourging the money lenders at the Temple. It is one of the few portrayals, spurious or not, of Jesus’s early life, which no doubt accounts for its continued circulation after eighteen hundred years.

The Infancy Gospel has never been proposed for inclusion in the official Bible. Many of the early Christian writers who were influential in deciding what books belonged in the canon regarded it as heretical. In it the young Jesus is fully aware that he is a god and performs miracles for sport, which is at odds with the usual Christian emphasis on Jesus’s humanity.

The book is not a literal account of Jesus’s early life. All of the gospels, including the canonical ones, were based on oral traditions collected after Jesus’s death and to a greater or lesser extent were intended to support a doctrinal point of view. The Infancy Gospel in antiquity was linked to sects that held that Jesus was God disguised as a man, rather than God become a man. Many of the stories have parallels in tales of the Buddha and other religious figures.

I mentioned there is another Gospel According to Thomas, a collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus discovered in Egypt in 1945. It is taken more seriously than the Infancy Gospel and while not as outrageous is equally troubling in its way. It ends, “Simon Peter said to them, ‘Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.’ Jesus said, ‘I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.'” The best one can say is that it may represent the view of the compiler rather than the maker of heaven and earth.
iamstop is offline  
Thread Closed

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search