52
   

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

 
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 05:53 am
@knaivete,
Quote:
Voltaire inadvertently put it better when he noted that if god didn't exist man would have had to invent him.
Yeah, but it’s just the inverse of the story told in the Bible - If man didn’t exist, God would have had to invent him.

So no points for Voltaire's originality.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 06:10 am
@Leadfoot,
Christianity is hardly original, the sacrificed god is a common theme in Paganism. Thor, Marduk and Osiris all died for various reasons only to rise again.

Jesus was more of a tribute act than anything else.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 07:01 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Jesus was more of a tribute act than anything else.

That was his claim all along.

Although we may disagree as to who the tribute was to.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 07:19 am
@Leadfoot,
I prefer Wotan.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 07:24 am
@izzythepush,
Ahh.. You’re start'n to sound like Solomon now. But he gave more than just an eye.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 07:50 am
@Leadfoot,
Born on Monday.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 09:25 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

LoL I grow up when religion was shove down our throats even to the point of daily bible readings in school.

An atheists was next to devil worshipers and the most hated woman in the US was the famous atheist was Madalyn O'Hair.

Now some of those on this thread have the nerve to pretend that anyone is fearful to not be an atheist at the college level or anywhere else.

Why do you think your experience with having religion 'shoved down your throat' has any bearing on someone else who is afraid to question/reject atheism for fear of being rejected by their professor(s) and/or employer(s)?

The reality is that people avoid different kinds of questioning in different social situations based on what social effects they are afraid of.

You can't say that because atheism was taboo at some point for some people, religion isn't just a taboo for some other people now.

The reality is that a student can go through college today and listen to professors scoffing at religion and universalism and internalize it on an emotional level, which then leads them to resist any consideration of universalism and/or religious belief having any possible legitimacy.

If you are deeply afraid of legitimating something, you will resist doing so until you reach a point where you can think independently of that fear you have internalized.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 10:42 am
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:


So no points for Voltaire's originality.


Have you read Candide?

It’s a far better read than the Bible, that’s for bloody sure.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 12:52 pm
@livinglava,
Nonsense as the same or at least the same type of people who had a long history of cheerfully forcing men an women who was atheists underground is trying to sell the very phony story that the poor poor and still vast majority of the population of religion men and women suffer under the hands of the evil an powerful atheists professors lobby.

In other word you wish to ban atheists for daring to be open in their views once more as you do not wish to be on an equal footing in the market place of ideas that should be part of any college education.

Such people are amazing hypocrites.
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 01:19 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Nonsense as the same or at least the same type of people who had a long history of cheerfully forcing men an women who was atheists underground is trying to sell the very phony story that the poor poor and still vast majority of the population of religion men and women suffer under the hands of the evil an powerful atheists professors lobby.

Your talking about some kind of collective level. Different individuals have different experiences in the social situations they are in.

Quote:
In other word you wish to ban atheists for daring to be open in their views once more as you do not wish to be on an equal footing in the market place of ideas that should be part of any college education.

Such people are amazing hypocrites.

I never said anything about any kind of regulations at any collective/institutional level.

What I said was that my hypothesis is that certain people, such as Vikorr, attend university classes and listen to professors scoff at things like religion and universalism, and then they internalize such scoffing at a deep emotional level, so they are simply not open to thinking independently, i.e. because they are afraid how they will be regarded socially if they would question the scoffing and defend religion and/or universalism.

Face it, we all know professors who are absolutely in rejection of certain ideas/philosophies/etc. and they simply won't respect students or colleagues or anyone else who isn't in agreement with them. They simply won't entertain any arguments in favor of religion or universalism except in order to condescendingly say, "the best argument in favor of X is Y, but it's still silly to defend such ideas."

These people are totally biased against religion, universalism, etc. and anyone who sides with these views just bought themselves a ticket to being completely dismissed and shunned as irrelevant.

The fear of shunning in higher education prevents many people from thinking independently. They simply won't risk being ostracized academically or professionally. The wicked irony in it is that the same professors are preaching that people who believe in religion and universalism do so because they aren't capable of critical independent thought, so they are tricking students into submission by making 'critical independent thinking' into an identity category that gains you status when you close your mind to religion and universalism.

It's intellectual authoritarianism because they simply won't accept anyone who actually does think for themselves and comes up with conclusions that academicians have rejected, i.e. that there is relevance in religion and universalism.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 02:19 pm
@livinglava,
Once more atheists are in the minority both in the general population and at the college staff level an to claim otherwise in order to complain falsely that this minority is forcing atheism onto college students is very dishonest.

Sorry but both students and professors have the right to openly view religion in a favorable light or as complete nonsense an then expect those views.

Atheists do not control any aspect of society anymore then Jews once control Germany in the 1920s.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 02:29 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Have you read Candide?

It’s a far better read than the Bible, that’s for bloody sure.

Yeah, required reading. Much like Flaubert. Not my cup of tea.
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 02:35 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Once more atheists are in the minority both in the general population and at the college staff level an to claim otherwise in order to complain falsely that this minority is forcing atheism onto college students is very dishonest.

Why do you keep bringing back the collective level?

Were you unable to read what I wrote? I said that I suspected an individual, like Vikorr, may resist independent thinking regarding topics like religion and universalism due to emotional fear of displeasing certain professors and/or losing favor with them in academic and/or professional life.

It doesn't matter whether it is a minority or majority of professors who scoff at religion and atheism because students don't interact with all professors, only the ones they work with. If you are implying that students who think independently enough to give credence and/or fair consideration to religion and/or universalism can and should go find other professors who respect those things, you are ignoring my point which is that some students simply won't take the chance of thinking independently because they are afraid of social consequences of doing so.

It is a personal thing that goes on inside you as an individual. Someone you care about or want to please rejects/scoffs at something, so you argue against it and block your mind from giving fair consideration to it. You become a front-line soldier against things like religion, universalism, or any other ideology your professors ridicule instead of thinking about them independently in a way that actually considers arguments in their favor.

Do you understand what I am saying? It is about how bias works at the indiviudal level and the social level between individual students and the individual professors they respect and want to appease. It is not about majorities and minorities or anything else at the collective level.

Quote:
Sorry but both students and professors have the right to openly view religion in a favorable light or as complete nonsense an then expect those views.

I think you mean to say 'express' rather than 'expect,' but ironically professors do expect their students to reject religion and/or universalism because they simply will not accept that anyone can legitimately defend certain views. They will politely agree to disagree and then you will have to go find another professor/study because they simply can't accept that it is possible to critically think about religion and/or universalism and find virtue/truth in them.

Quote:
Atheists do not control any aspect of society anymore then Jews once control Germany in the 1920s.

People control each others' hearts at the individual level in various ways. It isn't a collective/political thing but rather a subtle cognitive-emotional thing between individuals, their minds and hearts.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 02:57 pm
@Leadfoot,
I take that’s a no. It’s very funny, well worth the effort.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 03:01 pm
@BillRM,
It’s anti intellectualism, dimwits like Ll will never understand the science so they condemn it.

It’s the rich that run the country, always has been.

Simple minded fascists like Ll have never been interested in the truth just a narrative that confirms their bigotry.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 03:34 pm
@livinglava,
Quote:
Why do you keep bringing back the collective level?

I said that I suspected an individual, like Vikorr, may resist independent thinking regarding topics like religion and universalism due to emotional fear of displeasing certain professors and/or losing favor with them in academic and/or professional life.


Bill brings it to the collective level, because he is saying that there is no fear of professors, or atheist lobbies (is there such a thing) etc. He's implying (if not almost outright stating) that your 'accusation' is all in your head.

And of course your allegation doesn't stand up to scrutiny...this being an anonymous forum. So any bogeyman professors (and whatever other similar bogeyman you would like to invent to serve your need to avoid) don't have any weight here.

All that aside - the facts I presented have nothing at all to do with either religion or atheism, and everything to do with just plain fact. You asked for the difference between God and Maths, but can't face the factual differences. Why you can't, is anyone's guess.

It seems that a person who states such simple, plain, obvious facts, and doesn't put up with your nonsense behaviour of avoidance...must of course be <insert negative motivation invented by Livinglava to serve/justify his need to avoid>
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 04:13 pm
@vikorr,
There is such a thing as an atheist lobby--the atheists who are so-called "strong" atheists, or explicit atheists. Personally, I'm explicit about my lack of belief, but I'm a so-called "weak" atheist, an implicit atheist. The strong atheists deny that there is/are a god/gods. There definitely is an atheist lobby among them, very small and very loud. For my own part, I don't know if there is/are a god/gods, I don't believe there is/are a god/gods, but more importantly, I don't care.
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 04:51 pm
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:

Quote:
Why do you keep bringing back the collective level?

I said that I suspected an individual, like Vikorr, may resist independent thinking regarding topics like religion and universalism due to emotional fear of displeasing certain professors and/or losing favor with them in academic and/or professional life.


Bill brings it to the collective level, because he is saying that there is no fear of professors, or atheist lobbies (is there such a thing) etc. He's implying (if not almost outright stating) that your 'accusation' is all in your head.

Well, that's a lie. You complain about dishonesty so you of all people should be honesty in recognizing that people avoid exhibiting characteristics that their professors/colleagues/etc. scoff at. You should acknowledge that it causes people to avoid independent thinking in favor of making sure they always argue against the things that respected-others scoff at.

Quote:
And of course your allegation doesn't stand up to scrutiny...this being an anonymous forum. So any bogeyman professors (and whatever other similar bogeyman you would like to invent to serve your need to avoid) don't have any weight here.

All I said was that I think you are biased against thinking independently about religion and/or universalism. I think you've been indoctrinated by professors/colleagues who embrace atheism and relativism at a very fundamental level, and you would not risk differing from them and losing their respect. In short, I think you are a slave to bias, so when you are arguing against my explanations of universalism and religious belief, it is not because you are really thinking about them in an independent way but because you've already decided they are necessarily false in comparison with atheism and relativism, which are your religious tenets.

Quote:
All that aside - the facts I presented have nothing at all to do with either religion or atheism, and everything to do with just plain fact. You asked for the difference between God and Maths, but can't face the factual differences. Why you can't, is anyone's guess.

You never bothered to understand what I explained before arguing against it, which is why I think you're just biased.

Quote:
It seems that a person who states such simple, plain, obvious facts, and doesn't put up with your nonsense behaviour of avoidance...must of course be <insert negative motivation invented by Livinglava to serve/justify his need to avoid>

Most of what you say is posturing. You must work in academia.
glitterbag
 
  5  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 05:05 pm
@livinglava,
Yikes!!!!!! the dreaded 'academia'.
livinglava
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 5 May, 2020 05:56 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

Yikes!!!!!! the dreaded 'academia'.

Do you like all the posturing in academic writing/speaking?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 09/23/2021 at 01:58:02