Well I have to say I am enjoying the Atheist Forums. At least folk here have a point of view that they have considered, and that is more than I can say for many of the Christians that I come across on another forum. Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years. Some of the Christians I meet doubt that I qualify as a Christian at all, and strangely, I've also encountered atheists who question my Christian beliefs, but none who question my atheism.
[hrline:31oc4524][/hrline:31oc4524]
But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions. But the New Atheists, they have the answers - they know the precise solution to the questions that have been troubling mankind since the first human 'woke up' and began to wonder. All we have ever really wanted to know is the answer to two simple questions, 'Where do we come from?' and 'Where do we go to?' The single answer is, of course, 'nowhere'. And if that answer isn't satisfying to you, that's because you don't believe in miracles. Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
[center:31oc4524](//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/HAL3_zps8446acbc.jpg)[/center:31oc4524]
:-s
[youtube:2rlfiq4f]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnd-hdmgfk[/youtube:2rlfiq4f]
Quote from: "Crump"But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions.
You're assuming that there ARE answers to ALL questions. There's no evidence that there are - or even that there "should be".
You're also assuming all sorts of things about consciousness, but not presenting any evidence, and we're all about evidence. Anyone can assert anything at all - that doesn't make it true. (And "how else could it have happened?" is only evidence that you don't know how else it could have happened.)
So do you have any actual evidence for any of your assertions?
Crump wrote in part:
QuoteOh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
My definition of miracle:
QuoteMIRACLE
1
: an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs
2
: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment
3
Christian Science : a divinely natural phenomenon experienced humanly as the fulfillment of spiritual law
//http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/miracle
I see no divine intervention in birth. Just biological processes. With 360,000 births a day, being born is not an unusual event. No Divinity on spiritual law.
It seems Crump is putting words into the "new atheists" mouths. As I don't recall any atheists of note, who have said they had all of the answers. Mostly I hear them saying, "I don't know. And neither do you." I come from the union of my daddy and mommy. I going to be worm food, or some equivalent place. And I am okay with that. My faith is in my own ability to reason. The truths Crumb talks about are subjective and I find no comfort, no reliability, nor any objective truth in his assertions.
Sorry if this seems harsh. It is not meant to be. Just my take on things.
:-s :-k :-?
Quote from: "Crump"But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions.
QuoteOh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it.
Substantiate or retract. The assertion that consciousness is somehow separate from matter is particularly galling.
Wait. Whut?
Quote from: "Crump"Well I have to say I am enjoying the Atheist Forums. At least folk here have a point of view that they have considered, and that is more than I can say for many of the Christians that I come across on another forum. Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years. Some of the Christians I meet doubt that I qualify as a Christian at all, and strangely, I've also encountered atheists who question my Christian beliefs, but none who question my atheism.
[hrline:1z06ts0r][/hrline:1z06ts0r]
But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions. But the New Atheists, they have the answers - they know the precise solution to the questions that have been troubling mankind since the first human 'woke up' and began to wonder. All we have ever really wanted to know is the answer to two simple questions, 'Where do we come from?' and 'Where do we go to?' The single answer is, of course, 'nowhere'. And if that answer isn't satisfying to you, that's because you don't believe in miracles. Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
[center:1z06ts0r][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/HAL3_zps8446acbc.jpg) ][/center:1z06ts0r]
Okay I stopped reading when you stated that you are a christian AND an Atheist. That is absurd.
So heres the deal. If you can't decide then thats fine but you cannot be both. I and no Atheist I know of will recruit you to become an Atheist. Every single christian I know will recruit you to not only be a christian, but it won't count with them unless you are their particular type of christain.
So you have your work cut out for you. You say that you are an intellect, so lets see some of that brain power. Decide don't decide, I really don't care. If you do decide I don't really care which side you choose, but you can't be both.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Crump"But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions.
You're assuming that there ARE answers to ALL questions. There's no evidence that there are - or even that there "should be".
You're also assuming all sorts of things about consciousness, but not presenting any evidence, and we're all about evidence. Anyone can assert anything at all - that doesn't make it true. (And "how else could it have happened?" is only evidence that you don't know how else it could have happened.)
So do you have any actual evidence for any of your assertions?
Now you see, you've misunderstood me completely. I'm writing about my feelings, and for those I don't need any evidence. But although you call them assertions they are really more like suggestions, aren't they? And where are these assumptions of which you speak? I have assumed nothing except that I seem to be conscious. Without being too presumptuous I might assume that you also are conscious, although I remain acutely aware of the possibility that I could be mistaken. Certainly every question that it is possible to ask, it is also possible to answer, although not every answer may be satisfactory to every questioner; for if I was to ask you, "Does this question have an answer?" you would, of course, be able to provide one, even though that answer may be 'no'.
[center:2l2o27kf](//http://d38zt8ehae1tnt.cloudfront.net/David_Icke_The_Power_of_Human_Consciousness__115521.jpg?v=1358869639)[/center:2l2o27kf]
"A feeling for the forum" then?
Quote from: "mykcob4"Okay I stopped reading when you stated that you are a christian AND an Atheist. That is absurd.
So heres the deal. If you can't decide then thats fine but you cannot be both. I and no Atheist I know of will recruit you to become an Atheist. Every single christian I know will recruit you to not only be a christian, but it won't count with them unless you are their particular type of christain.
So you have your work cut out for you. You say that you are an intellect, so lets see some of that brain power. Decide don't decide, I really don't care. If you do decide I don't really care which side you choose, but you can't be both.
Can you recruit an atheist? I don't believe you can. An atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason. Above all an atheist must doubt, because without doubt reason cannot function. So it ill behoves a true atheist to declare what another person can or can't think, especially if that other person has been an atheist for fifty years and has probably thought about these things much longer and much deeper than those who say, "You cant be that." Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that. The problem is yours, my friend, not mine.
[center:2z3jb45t](//http://www.intrinxec.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/unclesamwantyou.jpeg)[/center:2z3jb45t]
Quote from: "Crump"Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that. The problem is yours, my friend, not mine.
[center:zcpsbhpx][ Image (//http://www.intrinxec.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/unclesamwantyou.jpeg) ][/center:zcpsbhpx]
Being christian means believing in the christian faith, mythology, and god, in either part or full. Being atheist means no belief in any part of any religion. That's what atheism is. No belief in that stuff. None, zero, zilch, nada, 0, naught, (how many other ways can I say none?)
You are going to have to tell us what you mean by you being christian, as well as you being atheist. that way we can be on the same page. Otherwise I don't understand what your saying. And that is because of a communication discrepancy on your part.
Quote from: "PickelledEggs"Quote from: "Crump"Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that. The problem is yours, my friend, not mine.
[center:2mepsqe7][ Image (//http://www.intrinxec.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/unclesamwantyou.jpeg) ][/center:2mepsqe7]
Being christian means believing in the christian faith, mythology, and god, in either part or full. Being atheist means no belief in any part of any religion. That's what atheism is. No belief in that stuff. None, zero, zilch, nada, 0, naught, (how many other ways can I say none?)
You are going to have to tell us what you mean by you being christian, as well as you being atheist. that way we can be on the same page. Otherwise I don't understand what your saying. And that is because of a communication discrepancy on your part.
An atheist can be religious. e.g. Buddhists
Here's a listing: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Secular_re ... _Religions (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Secular_religions#Atheistic_Religions)
An atheist can believe in ghosts, karma, and witchcraft... all sorts of faith-based reasoning.
The only thing about the atheist is that they do not have a god belief.
As for who's a Christian, it can be loosely interpreted.
Between what kilo said and what Crump pm-ed me (//http://www.christianhumanist.net/christianity-without-religion.html) I have a bit more of an idea of what he is talking about.
I think I'm on the same page now...
Interesting reading. Thanks for the links. Who's the walrus now? We know who the egg man is. :wink:
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "mykcob4"Okay I stopped reading when you stated that you are a christian AND an Atheist. That is absurd.
So heres the deal. If you can't decide then thats fine but you cannot be both. I and no Atheist I know of will recruit you to become an Atheist. Every single christian I know will recruit you to not only be a christian, but it won't count with them unless you are their particular type of christain.
So you have your work cut out for you. You say that you are an intellect, so lets see some of that brain power. Decide don't decide, I really don't care. If you do decide I don't really care which side you choose, but you can't be both.
Can you recruit an atheist? I don't believe you can. An atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason. Above all an atheist must doubt, because without doubt reason cannot function. So it ill behoves a true atheist to declare what another person can or can't think, especially if that other person has been an atheist for fifty years and has probably thought about these things much longer and much deeper than those who say, "You cant be that." Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that. The problem is yours, my friend, not mine.
[center:2781nj83][ Image (//http://www.intrinxec.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/unclesamwantyou.jpeg) ][/center:2781nj83]
Nope Atheist and I don't declare what person can or can't think. Pointing out that you are WRONG isn't telling you what to think. Therefore YOUR problem. And pointing out that you are wrong is NOT an opinion, it's a fact. You can't be a christian AND an Atheist. Wether you think it or not is ilrelevant. You're wrong. Just plain fact. Noone is both an atheist and a christian by definition. Now you can be undecided, and or confussed, but you are NOT both an Atheist and a christian. I don't give a rat's ass HOW long you've thought about it. Being wrong for a long long time is still wrong. And you sir/madam are wrong!
Quote from: "kilodelta"Quote from: "PickelledEggs"Quote from: "Crump"Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that. The problem is yours, my friend, not mine.
[center:2t5ihm1j][ Image (//http://www.intrinxec.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/unclesamwantyou.jpeg) ][/center:2t5ihm1j]
Being christian means believing in the christian faith, mythology, and god, in either part or full. Being atheist means no belief in any part of any religion. That's what atheism is. No belief in that stuff. None, zero, zilch, nada, 0, naught, (how many other ways can I say none?)
You are going to have to tell us what you mean by you being christian, as well as you being atheist. that way we can be on the same page. Otherwise I don't understand what your saying. And that is because of a communication discrepancy on your part.
An atheist can be religious. e.g. Buddhists
Here's a listing: //http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Secular_religions#Atheistic_Religions
An atheist can believe in ghosts, karma, and witchcraft... all sorts of faith-based reasoning.
The only thing about the atheist is that they do not have a god belief.
As for who's a Christian, it can be loosely interpreted.
he said he was "christian" and Atheist, and that is an impossibility. I don't care how you spin it. It is a fcat that an Atheist is not, cannot be a christian or vise versa by definition!
mykcob4.. Anyone can define anything they want. If I want to define you as a 1932 Plymouth I can and there's not a damned thing you can do about it except to say, "DAMMIT! I'M NOT A PLYMOUTH!" to which I can say, "You are now and I suggest an oil change at least every 5000 miles."
See how that works?
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"mykcob4.. Anyone can define anything they want.
That's somewhat true. Words do change meanings over time. And yet, water is still wet and fire is still hot.
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"mykcob4.. Anyone can define anything they want. If I want to define you as a 1932 Plymouth I can and there's not a damned thing you can do about it except to say, "DAMMIT! I'M NOT A PLYMOUTH!" to which I can say, "You are now and I suggest an oil change at least every 5000 miles."
See how that works?
It still doesn't change the fact that they are wrong.
Quote from: "Hydra009"water is still wet and fire is still hot.
Well... that is relative...
Quote from: "Crump"Now you see, you've misunderstood me completely. I'm writing about my feelings
Oh, okay. Do you know what you'll get here for posting your feelings? "That's nice, who cares?"
QuoteBut although you call them assertions they are really more like suggestions, aren't they?
No, you said they're feelings, not suggestions. Or did you forget what you posted?
QuoteAnd where are these assumptions of which you speak?
You're Christian so you make at least 2 assumptions - that God exists and that Jesus is anything other than a myth. No evidence for either.
QuoteCertainly every question that it is possible to ask, it is also possible to answer
Not really. You can ask what our purpose for existing (as a species) is, but if there is no purpose (and there's no evidence that there is any), the question can't be answered. (You might say that the answer is "there isn't any purpose", but that's an explanation of why there's no answer to the question, it's not an answer to the question.)
Quotefor if I was to ask you, "Does this question have an answer?" you would, of course, be able to provide one, even though that answer may be 'no'.
I might not be able to answer either yes or no. I could respond "I don't know", but that's a response, not an answer.
QuoteAn atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason.
Not at all. A newborn infant is an atheist (it has no belief in any god). A chair is trivially an atheist, since it has no belief in any god. (The ability to hold a belief isn't a requirement of not holding a belief.) I think you're misusing the word "atheist" - it's not a decision, it's lack of belief in any god. Period. Nothing more. Lack of theism. (Theism is belief in one or more gods.) Chairs, trees and stars have no belief in any gods, as far as we know, so they're all atheistic (lacking belief in any god). Since one of the characteristics of a Christian is belief in the Christian god, one can't be both an atheist and a Christian. A thing can't be what it's not (the law of identity), and one can't both believe in a god and not believe in any gods.
But one CAN be confused.
Quote from: "PickelledEggs"Between what kilo said and what Crump pm-ed me (//http://www.christianhumanist.net/christianity-without-religion.html) I have a bit more of an idea of what he is talking about.
1) The very first sentence of that page is wrong - there's considerable disagreement among
historians. (There's no disagreement among Christian apologists, but that's like saying that there's no dry liquid water - it's a tautology that Christians all agree that Jesus was a real person. Anyone who questions that is, by definition, not a Christian.)
2) Christianity holds that there's a supernatural creator. Religion is belief in a supernatural creator. Holding either belief while rejecting the other is irrational, illogical and not completely sane.
The page is just one more example of a Christian who doesn't understand his own words.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "PickelledEggs"Between what kilo said and what Crump pm-ed me (//http://www.christianhumanist.net/christianity-without-religion.html) I have a bit more of an idea of what he is talking about.
1) The very first sentence of that page is wrong - there's considerable disagreement among historians. (There's no disagreement among Christian apologists, but that's like saying that there's no dry liquid water - it's a tautology that Christians all agree that Jesus was a real person. Anyone who questions that is, by definition, not a Christian.)
2) Christianity holds that there's a supernatural creator. Religion is belief in a supernatural creator. Holding either belief while rejecting the other is irrational, illogical and not completely sane.
The page is just one more example of a Christian who doesn't understand his own words.
haha i didn't say i agreed with him. just that i had a better idea of what he was talking about. or rather a better idea that he doesn't know what he is talking about / doesn't know how to communicate what he is trying to talk about.
Maybe he means he is culturally christian? I guess I would be slightly culturally christian... I mean, I do get a christmas tree and put the lights up for the holidays... but the fact that I don't believe in any of the theology whatsoever puts me in the atheist category.
Quote from: "PickelledEggs"Quote from: "Hydra009"water is still wet and fire is still hot.
Well... that is relative...
Water is still wetter than my pants and fire is still hotter than my pants.
Being a Christian atheist is like being a virgin prostitute. In either case you're gonna get fucked.
Quote from: "Crump"Yes I can be both atheist and Christian and the only difficulty is that you cannot understand that.
I get it! :D You're an atheist, and your name is Christian!
Do I win a prize for solving the riddle?
Yes we are all lost in a great wreckage surrounded by deep waters, but many, unable or unwilling to swim, are clinging to a rock they call 'religion'. Others, recognizing the rock for what it truly is – merely another piece of flotsam – are saying, "Come away from there; forget faith, just use your reason and you will be able to swim like us." Some of these have been collecting floating debris and building it into a raft of knowledge known as science; and the raft has grown until it is now quite as big as the 'false rock' of religion. Growing numbers, abandoning their faith, have mustered just enough reason to allow them to splash across to the raft of science, and they are now clinging to that quite as desperately as they ever clung to the rock of religion. All of them hoping that it will, in the end, give the answer they seek - the answer to the burning question that everyone is asking, "What the f**k are we doing here anyway?"
[center:t5qgkmr2](//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/raftofthemedusa_zps73a61541.jpg)[/center:t5qgkmr2]
The whole christian humanist things sounds to me like it's written by someone who's too smart to be religious and too scared to be himself.
Quote from: "Crump"Yes we are all lost in a great wreckage surrounded by deep waters, but many, unable or unwilling to swim, are clinging to a rock they call 'religion'. Others, recognizing the rock for what it truly is – merely another piece of flotsam – are saying, "Come away from there; forget faith, just use your reason and you will be able to swim like us." Some of these have been collecting floating debris and building it into a raft of knowledge known as science; and the raft has grown until it is now quite as big as the 'false rock' of religion. Growing numbers, abandoning their faith, have mustered just enough reason to allow them to splash across to the raft of science, and they are now clinging to that quite as desperately as they ever clung to the rock of religion. All of them hoping that it will, in the end, give the answer they seek - the answer to the burning question that everyone is asking, "What the f**k are we doing here anyway?"
Whatever we want? I wake up in the morning happy that I will have another day to find answers I seek and after I get to enjoy my hobbies. What more do you want? Your analogy is good but I'd have to tweak it a bit, because by saying religion is a rock is suggesting it has something concrete about it, which I disagree with. Religion would be the sweet release from life by drowning, they believe something much better is on the other side so why live. Atheists don't want to die so they try to swim to the raft instead of accepting death.
Quote from: "Crump"Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years.
I'm sorry, what? :-s
I read your post and I can't get past this.
You folks need to get out more. Can I really be the first Christian Humanist you've come across? There are a lot more atheist Christians than any of you seem to think.
Try Jack Shelby Spong for starters.
http://johnshelbyspong.com/ (http://johnshelbyspong.com/)
Quote from: "Crump"Yes we are all lost in a great wreckage surrounded by deep waters, but many, unable or unwilling to swim, are clinging to a rock they call 'religion'. Others, recognizing the rock for what it truly is – merely another piece of flotsam – are saying, "Come away from there; forget faith, just use your reason and you will be able to swim like us." Some of these have been collecting floating debris and building it into a raft of knowledge known as science; and the raft has grown until it is now quite as big as the 'false rock' of religion. Growing numbers, abandoning their faith, have mustered just enough reason to allow them to splash across to the raft of science, and they are now clinging to that quite as desperately as they ever clung to the rock of religion. All of them hoping that it will, in the end, give the answer they seek - the answer to the burning question that everyone is asking, "What the f**k are we doing here anyway?"
[center:2n6tsj9t][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/raftofthemedusa_zps73a61541.jpg) ][/center:2n6tsj9t]
<wordsalad>
<veiled accusation of scientism>
<random jpg>
(//http://media.tumblr.com/4e35658e9a0c8a98a347f8a70a0ce598/tumblr_inline_mh3s4xGAqe1qzozj1.gif)
I just consider the concept of "christian humanist" too silly to spend any time on it, so even if I'd meet a bunch of them, I'd never remember. It just seems like a huge waste of time for someone who isn't scared to just be himself.
Quote from: "Crump"You folks need to get out more. Can I really be the first Christian Humanist you've come across? There are a lot more atheist Christians than any of you seem to think.
Try Jack Shelby Spong for starters.
http://johnshelbyspong.com/ (http://johnshelbyspong.com/)
Most people don't label themselves with oxymoron titles. You're the first I've ever met in that regard. Example: I'm a young earth creationist and an evolutionary biologist (not actually). Doesn't make sense.
Quote from: "Colanth"QuoteAn atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason.
Not at all. A newborn infant is an atheist (it has no belief in any god). A chair is trivially an atheist, since it has no belief in any god. (The ability to hold a belief isn't a requirement of not holding a belief.) I think you're misusing the word "atheist" - it's not a decision, it's lack of belief in any god. Period. Nothing more. Lack of theism. (Theism is belief in one or more gods.) Chairs, trees and stars have no belief in any gods, as far as we know, so they're all atheistic (lacking belief in any god). Since one of the characteristics of a Christian is belief in the Christian god, one can't be both an atheist and a Christian. A thing can't be what it's not (the law of identity), and one can't both believe in a god and not believe in any gods.
But one CAN be confused.
Well if you're saying that an atheist is an unthinking entity such as a newborn child or a chair then I guess there's no real point in having discussions with atheists at all. The kind of atheists I had hoped to meet on this forum were those who, like myself, had thought about their beliefs and had come to a reasoned view that rejects the notion of God or gods. But if what I'm encountering is those for whom the idea of God is simply unthinkable, and since of course what cannot be thought of cannot be rejected, then it must be true that some at least of the contributors to this forum are the type of unthinking atheists you describe.
An atheist can be both. People incorrectly assume that atheist required someone who thought about it and rejected god. Most people here still belong in that latter category, though.
But it's important to understand what words mean. Otherwise you end up with calling yourself a "christian atheist", which basically means you're pointlessly redefining words and making life really complicated for everyone for pretty much no reason at all.
Quote from: "Plu"An atheist can be both. People incorrectly assume that atheist required someone who thought about it and rejected god. Most people here still belong in that latter category, though.
But it's important to understand what words mean. Otherwise you end up with calling yourself a "christian atheist", which basically means you're pointlessly redefining words and making life really complicated for everyone for pretty much no reason at all.
Many religious people are also atheist, this includes Jains, most Buddhists, significant numbers of Jews, many Spiritualists, Wicca of course, and increasingly Christians. Is this a forum for all atheists, or only for those who suit your particular prejudice?
Quote from: "Crump"Well if you're saying that an atheist is an unthinking entity such as a newborn child or a chair then I guess there's no real point in having discussions with atheists at all.
#-o That's not what he's saying. Try again.
QuoteThe kind of atheists I had hoped to meet on this forum were those who, like myself, had thought about their beliefs and had come to a reasoned view that rejects the notion of God or gods. But if what I'm encountering is those for whom the idea of God is simply unthinkable
Not unthinkable, just unbelievable.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Not unthinkable, just unbelievable.
Now I agree with that entirely, God is unbelievable, but Jesus isn't.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Plu"An atheist can be both. People incorrectly assume that atheist required someone who thought about it and rejected god. Most people here still belong in that latter category, though.
But it's important to understand what words mean. Otherwise you end up with calling yourself a "christian atheist", which basically means you're pointlessly redefining words and making life really complicated for everyone for pretty much no reason at all.
Many religious people are also atheist, this includes Jains, most Buddhists, significant numbers of Jews, many Spiritualists, Wicca of course, and increasingly Christians. Is this a forum for all atheists, or only for those who suit your particular prejudice?
You cannot be both a christian and an atheist unless you mangle one of the two definitions to the point where the word becomes meaningless. "A christian who does not believe in God" makes no sense, and neither does "An atheist who believes in God".
That means you are now in the land of word salad, and people here generally don't care for that kind of crap. Speak clearly, speak cleanly, and don't make writers of dictionaries spin in their graves.
Also, I never said anything about "religious atheists" being an issue. Only "christian atheist" is problematic, because one of the core ideas of christianity is believing in the divinity of jesus. What you are is not a christian atheist, it's an atheist who likes clinging to some of the tales from the bible for whatever reason.
Once you can accept that, or explain the other 2 billion christians that believing in god and jesus is not required to be a christian, we can continue with the actual discussion. Until then, it's pointless because you are wasting our time by using words without using their common definition.
Quote from: "Crump"Many religious people are also atheist, this includes Jains, most Buddhists, significant numbers of Jews, many Spiritualists, Wicca of course, and increasingly Christians.
All of those except Judaism are not necessarily theistic religion. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are theistic religions, so Christian atheist (or Muslim atheist) is a contradiction of terms similar to colorless pink. The only reason Jewish atheist get a pass is because Jewish identity is also understood as an ethnic/cultural identity, so Jewish in the cultural/ethnic sense but not the religious sense is possible.
Quote from: "Crump"Now I agree with that entirely, God is unbelievable, but Jesus isn't.
Here we have to entirely disagree. The miraculous Jesus commonly believed in is almost certainly a fabrication centuries in the making.
And the non-miraculous Jesus is just a guy of which we've seen millions and that really doesn't deserve all the special consideration he's given; if you want a good role-model to follow, we have thousands walking around right now that you can find and follow. Much more modern ones, even, that have their words backed with far more experience and understanding.
Quote from: "Plu"The whole christian humanist things sounds to me like it's written by someone who's too smart to be religious and too scared to be himself.
:wink:
Quote from: "Crump"You folks need to get out more. Can I really be the first Christian Humanist you've come across? There are a lot more atheist Christians than any of you seem to think.
All the Christian Atheist has done is to take one particular philosopher out of millions and choose to venerate him. We deal with too many other moronic beliefs to be bothered with your particular fringe group.
Quote from: "Crump"Well if you're saying that an atheist is an unthinking entity such as a newborn child or a chair then I guess there's no real point in having discussions with atheists at all. The kind of atheists I had hoped to meet on this forum was those who, like myself, had thought about their beliefs and had come to a reasoned view that rejects the notion of God or gods. But if what I'm encountering is those for whom the idea of God is simply unthinkable, and since of course what cannot be thought of cannot be rejected, then it must be true that some at least of the contributors to this forum are the type of unthinking atheists you describe.
What's wrong with being an unthinking atheist?
If most of us are anything at all, we're secular humanists; freethinkers, if you prefer. Most theists don't respond to "secular humanist," though. Society at large is too uneducated to know us by any name besides "atheist." As some even on this forum have pointed out, technically speaking it's a bit silly to identify yourself with a negative term. Unfortunately, much like the term "Hispanic," the technically-incorrect term is the one in common use, and even if we don't use "atheist" ourselves the term will eventually come up in the conversation and will be used from that point forward. The term stems from theistic chauvinism, and is something we'll just have to live with unless and until we can get most of the planet to see some degree of reason.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"Many religious people are also atheist, this includes Jains, most Buddhists, significant numbers of Jews, many Spiritualists, Wicca of course, and increasingly Christians.
All of those except Judaism are not necessarily theistic religion. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are theistic religions, so Christian atheist (or Muslim atheist) is a contradiction of terms similar to colorless pink. The only reason Jewish atheist get a pass is because Jewish identity is also understood as an ethnic/cultural identity, so Jewish in the cultural/ethnic sense but not the religious sense is possible.
No, religious Jews can also be atheist. Here is the blog of an atheist Rabbi to add to the atheist Bishop I posted earlier.
Why do you, an atheist, insist that Christians must believe in God? You are just trying to satisfy your own preconception of what a Christian is, or can be. It is you that is in denial, not I.
http://www.theatheistrabbi.com/ (http://www.theatheistrabbi.com/)
Quote from: "Crump"Why do you, an atheist, insist that Christians must believe in God?
Because that is the definition of what a Christian is.
Are we on the same page now?
So define the word "christian" in exact terms that leave no gray area, include almost all those that call themselves christians, culls most of those that don't, isn't multiple pages long, and doesn't have at least one billion christians or one billion non christians disagreeing with you?
I mean; if you have a good and sensical definition we'll work with you. But you'd better share it. But for the time being, the word simply makes no sense and reeks of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.
It is a most depressing thing that so many folk who say they are atheist are no less dogmatic and prescriptive than those whose claim it is to be the elect of God. Why wouldn't an atheist have an open mind? If you are as certain in your views as the creationists are in their potty beliefs then you are quite as bad as them. Worse actually, because having escaped from ignorance and prejudice you have allowed yourself to fall into it again. Is human knowledge complete? No, we still have so much to learn, but everything that we have learned has been learned because we have been open to new ideas, to new ways of thinking. There is scarcely a thought in your heads that has not been thought before and by no means all, or even the majority, of those to whom you owe that intellectual debt were atheists. Do not become arrogant about atheism, as if it represents the acme of intellectual development. You can bet it's not the last word in human thought and you can also be certain that atheists do not have a monopoly on knowledge or wisdom. And for all those who do not believe that atheism is a product of human thought at all, who suppose they sprang into being with intellect intact, atheists from the womb. You are kidding yourselves. When you were small children you were ready to believe anything, and if you did not come to atheism as a reasoned choice then it is only through chance that you are not raving creationists yourselves, so a little humility would become you now.
[center:29thkewd](//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/shark_zps2286b0f1.jpg)[/center:29thkewd]
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"Many religious people are also atheist, this includes Jains, most Buddhists, significant numbers of Jews, many Spiritualists, Wicca of course, and increasingly Christians.
All of those except Judaism are not necessarily theistic religion. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are theistic religions, so Christian atheist (or Muslim atheist) is a contradiction of terms similar to colorless pink. The only reason Jewish atheist get a pass is because Jewish identity is also understood as an ethnic/cultural identity, so Jewish in the cultural/ethnic sense but not the religious sense is possible.
No, religious Jews can also be atheist. Here is the blog of an atheist Rabbi to add to the atheist Bishop I posted earlier.
Why do you, an atheist, insist that Christians must believe in God? You are just trying to satisfy your own preconception of what a Christian is, or can be. It is you that is in denial, not I.
http://www.theatheistrabbi.com/ (http://www.theatheistrabbi.com/)
Because a Christian, by definition, is someone who follows the tenets of the Christian religion, the very first one being the existence of a supernatural, infallible god and Jesus having a divine nature.
In a discussion the meaning of the words is important and it's always a good practice to stick to the official definitions; and before you say that language is in constant evolution, I would suggest you to check in a good dictionary if the official definition of the word "Christian" has been changed.
Do not think our rejection of your claims come from closed-mindedness. It is simply the reasoned conclusion that your claims are false.
Still waiting for your definition, by the way. I'd like to continue the discussion, but it cannot be done until all the terms are understood by those involved.
Quote from: "Crump"It is a most depressing thing that so many folk who say they are atheist are no less dogmatic and prescriptive than those whose claim it is to be the elect of God. Why wouldn't an atheist have an open mind? If you are as certain in your views as the creationists are in their potty beliefs then you are quite as bad as them. Worse actually, because having escaped from ignorance and prejudice you have allowed yourself to fall into it again. Is human knowledge complete? No, we still have so much to learn, but everything that we have learned has been learned because we have been open to new ideas, to new ways of thinking. There is scarcely a thought in your heads that has not been thought before and by no means all, or even the majority, of those to whom you owe that intellectual debt were atheists. Do not become arrogant about atheism, as if it represents the acme of intellectual development. You can bet it's not the last word in human thought and you can also be certain that atheists do not have a monopoly on knowledge or wisdom. And for all those who do not believe that atheism is a product of human thought at all, who suppose they sprang into being with intellect intact, atheists from the womb. You are kidding yourselves. When you were small children you were ready to believe anything, and if you did not come to atheism as a reasoned choice then it is only through chance that you are not raving creationists yourselves, so a little humility would become you now.
[center:uvcd3rdb][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/shark_zps2286b0f1.jpg) ][/center:uvcd3rdb]
Spoken like a true preacher.
I start thinking that you're, in fact, another one of those christards who come on atheist forums to proselityse and "save those lost souls". I must give it to you, though: your approach, albeit fruitless, is quite novel. Still, no cigar.
Quote from: "Crump"No, religious Jews can also be atheist.
Not any more than vegans can be meat-eaters.
QuoteWhy do you, an atheist, insist that Christians must believe in God? You are just trying to satisfy your own preconception of what a Christian is, or can be.
Christianity entails belief in God and the divinity of Jesus. Those are the defining features of Christianity. So yeah, that's why I insist that Christians must believe in a God.
(Btw, I'm going off a really loose definition of Christian, too. Others would insist in a belief in the authority in New Testament and/or adherence to the Nicene Creed in addition to what I've stated.)
QuoteIt is you that is in denial, not I.
Unless you're in denial about that, too.
Alright, I've about had it with the other atheists being as much idiots as Crump here.
QuoteChris·tian
?krisCH?n/
adjective
1. of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings.
"the Christian Church"
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
Nothing to do with God or the supernatural.
If you want to argue from there, fine. If you want to argue that Jesus' sacrifice etc. are unnecessary due to the lack of original sin, fine. If you want to argue that Jesus' message is not original, fine. If you want to argue that Crump is cherry-picking only the good parts of the Bible (meaning he had a moral compass long before he ever read it), fine. Quit arguing about the definition of Christianity, though. If you're going to argue with someone's position, attack their actual argument, not a strawman. This is just embarrassing to be associated with.
Quote1. a person who has received Christian baptism
Sweet! I'm a christian for life.
This makes the word totally useful in describing things, or something.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Alright, I've about had it with the other atheists being as much idiots as Crump here.
QuoteChris·tian
?krisCH?n/
adjective
1. of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings.
"the Christian Church"
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
Nothing to do with God or the supernatural.
Given that God is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it has everything to do with a supernatural god.
Quote from: "Plu"Quote1. a person who has received Christian baptism
Sweet! I'm a christian for life.
No, you just have to write a letter to your former church saying that you "unbaptise" yourself.
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"I start thinking that you're, in fact, another one of those christards who come on atheist forums to proselityse and "save those lost souls". I must give it to you, though: your approach, albeit fruitless, is quite novel. Still, no cigar.
That's what I thought at first, too. Now I just think it's someone skeptical of the supernatural aspects of Christianity yet enamored with it anyway and trying to have it both ways and desperately trying to justify their position as legitimate, if not praiseworthy. It's sorta sad, actually.
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Quote from: "Plu"Quote1. a person who has received Christian baptism
Sweet! I'm a christian for life.
No, you just have to write a letter to your former church saying that you "unbaptise" yourself.
That would require me to exert effort, which seems really pointless. :P
(Also technically by the definition posted I'd still be a christian because it doesn't mention unbaptised people, but that's really being anal. Regardless, I would consider the definition to be stupid and the first part should be scrapped from it as it makes no sense.)
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Alright, I've about had it with the other atheists being as much idiots as Crump here.
QuoteChris·tian
?krisCH?n/
adjective
1. of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings.
"the Christian Church"
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
a·the·ist (th-st)
n.
1
archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity
ev·o·lu·tion (v-lshn, v-)
n.
1. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.
Dictionaries aren't always correct.
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Given that God is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it has everything to do with a supernatural god.
Jesus was a man of his time. He understood the World as most understood it in those days, as a product of creation, he accepted God because that is how he made sense of his own being. For Christian Humanists it is Jesus' humanity and his ethics that are important not his belief in God. Belief in the supernatural is nothing but superstition, we are foolish if we reject all of the teaching of our ancestors, all of the traditions handed down to us by generations, just because they were also superstitious. In rejecting the notion of God, Christian Humanists are doing nothing that Christians have not been doing for two thousand years. It is not, and has never been, a static religion - despite what some atheists may believe about it.
But we are also foolish if we, at any time, maintain a tradition only because it is a tradition. We even have a logical fallacy for that.
Also, we have thousands of philosophers like jesus. Many preach the same message. Many preach a better message. What makes him stand out so much, that we should venerate him as you do?
Quote from: "Crump"It is a most depressing thing that so many folk who say they are atheist are no less dogmatic and prescriptive than those whose claim it is to be the elect of God. Why wouldn't an atheist have an open mind? If you are as certain in your views as the creationists are in their potty beliefs then you are quite as bad as them. Worse actually, because having escaped from ignorance and prejudice you have allowed yourself to fall into it again. Is human knowledge complete? No, we still have so much to learn, but everything that we have learned has been learned because we have been open to new ideas, to new ways of thinking. There is scarcely a thought in your heads that has not been thought before and by no means all, or even the majority, of those to whom you owe that intellectual debt were atheists. Do not become arrogant about atheism, as if it represents the acme of intellectual development. You can bet it's not the last word in human thought and you can also be certain that atheists do not have a monopoly on knowledge or wisdom. And for all those who do not believe that atheism is a product of human thought at all, who suppose they sprang into being with intellect intact, atheists from the womb. You are kidding yourselves. When you were small children you were ready to believe anything, and if you did not come to atheism as a reasoned choice then it is only through chance that you are not raving creationists yourselves, so a little humility would become you now.
[center:3vpbz0du][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/shark_zps2286b0f1.jpg) ][/center:3vpbz0du]
So are you like a Jefferson Bible Christian (if there were such a thing)? You want to have the good bits of Christianity, like loving your neighbour and so on and so on, but with out all the bad bits like killing children, sadistic supernatural gods, and Paul.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Given that God is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it has everything to do with a supernatural god.
Jesus was a man of his time.
Noone can prove the existence of Jesus Christ the man.
QuoteHe understood the World as most understood it in those days, as a product of creation, he accepted God because that is how he made sense of his own being.
If he ever existed, that is.
QuoteFor Christian Humanists it is Jesus' humanity and his ethics that are important not his belief in God.
"Jesus' humanity and ethics" do not exist. All the basic moral teachings described in the new testament are taken from previous cultures and/or religions.
QuoteBelief in the supernatural is nothing but superstition, we are foolish if we reject all of the teaching of our ancestors, all of the traditions handed down to us by generations, just because they were also superstitious.
Superstition was an integral part of those teachings, that's why today certain actions are considered immoral or unethical, while at the time were perfectly acceptable.
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Alright, I've about had it with the other atheists being as much idiots as Crump here.
QuoteChris·tian
?krisCH?n/
adjective
1. of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings.
"the Christian Church"
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
Nothing to do with God or the supernatural.
Given that God is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it has everything to do with a supernatural god.
Given what Crump claims to be, apparently he is not as integral as you believe. The point is moot: if you can convince yourself to follow Jesus and leave out God, you are still a Christian. Stop arguing over silly semantics; there are plenty of
real reasons why Crump's beliefs are complete horse-hockey.
If atheists Christians don't exist, this must be me driving my bus.
[center:1fth4kut](//http://www.netanimations.net/invisibleman2.gif)[/center:1fth4kut]
You keep dodging questions and bringing back up points that we're trying to leave behind us (even though they still make little sense)
This is usually a sign of someone who doesn't have any answers.
Quote from: "Jason78"So are you like a Jefferson Bible Christian (if there were such a thing)? You want to have the good bits of Christianity, like loving your neighbour and so on and so on, but with out all the bad bits like killing children, sadistic supernatural gods, and Paul.
You're getting close, in a jokey sort of way.
So if I'm getting this correctly, you have taken what used to be christianity and then:
Removed:
- All references to the supernatural, god, miracles, etc
- Everything you disagree with personally
Kept:
- Everything you agree with personally
- The name
And that's where you're at now?
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Jason78"So are you like a Jefferson Bible Christian (if there were such a thing)? You want to have the good bits of Christianity, like loving your neighbour and so on and so on, but with out all the bad bits like killing children, sadistic supernatural gods, and Paul.
You're getting close, in a jokey sort of way.
No. I'm not joking. You are not communicating with the effectiveness that you believe you are.
Quote from: "Crump"Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act
Your difficulty stems from the fact that you believe in the Christian God, while at the same time believe in no gods at all. Yes, I can see why that would be a problem. Perhaps your solution would be to either JUST believe in the Christian God, or JUST believe in no gods at all. Then you no longer would be confused, and your life would be a lot simpler.
Quote from: "Crump"You folks need to get out more. Can I really be the first Christian Humanist you've come across? There are a lot more atheist Christians than any of you seem to think.
A Christian HUMANIST is possible. A Christian ATHEIST is not. You are confusing two different terms and assuming they mean the same thing, when they do not.
Quote<random jpg>
Image (//http://media.tumblr.com/4e35658e9a0c8a98a347f8a70a0ce598/tumblr_inline_mh3s4xGAqe1qzozj1.gif)
Seems to be a pretty accurate description of what must be going on inside poor Crump's head right now.
Quote from: "Plu"You keep dodging questions and bringing back up points that we're trying to leave behind us (even though they still make little sense)
This is usually a sign of someone who doesn't have any answers.
I'm dodging nothing. I seem though to be something that, in your philosophy, can't exist. So you have the unanswered question, 'If this guy doesn't exist, how come I seem to be communicating with him?'
Not only that but I've told you that others of my kind exist too, so you've now got more unanswered questions. I don't see why I should justify my existence to you anyway. I've been an atheist for nearly fifty years and an atheist Christian for over twenty five now.
My Christian views are the result of reasoned thought, just as my atheist views are.
QuoteOh yes, life is a miracle by any definition.
No it isn't!
Life definition: 1. the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environmental through changes originating internally. I see no mention of it being an affect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural causes and is ascribed to a supernatural cause. I think the definition of life also fits fire because metabolism is a form of slow burning fire.
I quit reading after seeing that because it is obviously Judeo-Christian-Islamic dogma without a shred of reliable evidence to support the assertion, but just the opinion of ancient sheep herders that had no knowledge of modern science but only superstitious nonsense thinking they had knowledge and only had ignorance about the world they lived in like a lot of people still that have no knowledge of modern science and what it knows. :roll: :wink: Solitary
(//http://i.imgur.com/JDItmpI.jpg)
By that definition, the universe is a miracle, and that includes a Big Mac... :lol:
Quote from: "ApostateLois"A Christian HUMANIST is possible. A Christian ATHEIST is not. You are confusing two different terms and assuming they mean the same thing, when they do not.
Most Christian Humanists are atheists these days, or, if they acknowledge the notion of God at all, accept it as an abstract concept.
(//http://i.imgur.com/SxW84Km.jpg)
(//http://i.imgur.com/SYqy1qI.jpg) :roll: :rolleyes: #-o Solitary
Quote from: "Plu"So if I'm getting this correctly, you have taken what used to be christianity and then:
Removed:
- All references to the supernatural, god, miracles, etc
- Everything you disagree with personally
Kept:
- Everything you agree with personally
- The name
And that's where you're at now?
So does this about describe your position then?
Crump you, like most people that fancy themselves as intelects (that are infact not at all), AND have decided that they have discovered a new way to be christian are all full of shit.
We had a moron that came onto the forum and claimed that he was part of a "think tank" filled with intellectuals. He called them SMURFS. He made a wild assertion like you that made no sense whatsoever. He just like decided to REDEFINE established terms just like do and have done. He would get in a debate whereby we on the forum gave him leeway to explain himself and he would just REDEFINE more terms.
THAT IS NOT THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS!!!!!
You can't just redefine terms.
A) a christian is someone that accepts jesus as the son of a supernatural being. A person that accepts that jesus was both human and spirit and is part of a supernatural world as well as the secular world simotaneously. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Christian (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Christian)
A person that believes that life was CREATED by a god and that god rules over all things.
B) An Atheist doesn't accept a god, any gods, doesn't accept "creationism" in any form.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/atheist (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/atheist)
Therefore you either accept a god, a christian god which defines you as a christian or you don't which is a requirement for Atheism.
You can actually be a Buddhist and an Atheist, because Buddha wasn't a god.
Your little redefining and symantic trick doesn't work. Not even a little bit.
D) A humanist can be EITHER a christian or an Atheist. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/humanist (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/humanist)
I would venture to guess that you are a christian and a humanist which is nothing even remotely like an christian/Atheist(which doesn't exist by definition) or like an Atheist/humanist.
So quit this childiesh crap about christian/Atheist! It's utter nonsense. You can't just decide what a term means to fit YOUR agenda. All terms are defined by ACCEPTED definition. That is where the dynamic of terms lies. Over time terms do take on more meaning, other meanings, and may loose the original meaning. But that is an overall acceptance of the term by society not redefinition by one or even a small group of people nor matter what their agenda is.
No matter what you say, how long you have thought about it, how many other screwballs that are part of your dedefinition crap, you and noone else is an Atheist/christian!
After six pages, Crump still thinks he can believe in the Christian god, AND in no gods at all. If he doesn't believe in Christianity's God, then why would he call himself by their name? That's stupid. He could just as easily say, "I am a Hindu, but I don't believe in any of the Hindu deities except as vague, abstract concepts." Now, if he is pretending to be a Christian in order to avoid family arguments, getting kicked out of his parents' house, and other social repercussions, but is really an atheist, that's different. But he seems to be saying that he can be a Christian yet not be a Christian at the same time. There is no point to this. Take away Christianity's main god, and Jesus goes out the window, too. So does 9/10 or more of the Bible, and the 1/10 that's left is mundane stuff like "Do unto others as you want them to do unto you," and "Thou shalt not steal." Why would he need Christianity for that?
Quote from: "Crump"Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
mir·a·cle
noun: 1. a surprising and welcome event that is
not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.
Hey crump how often do you crap and fart ?
Quote from: "Crump"Well I have to say I am enjoying the Atheist Forums. At least folk here have a point of view that they have considered, and that is more than I can say for many of the Christians that I come across on another forum. Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years. Some of the Christians I meet doubt that I qualify as a Christian at all, and strangely, I've also encountered atheists who question my Christian beliefs, but none who question my atheism.
[hrline:uo8iitl9][/hrline:uo8iitl9]
But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions. But the New Atheists, they have the answers - they know the precise solution to the questions that have been troubling mankind since the first human 'woke up' and began to wonder. All we have ever really wanted to know is the answer to two simple questions, 'Where do we come from?' and 'Where do we go to?' The single answer is, of course, 'nowhere'. And if that answer isn't satisfying to you, that's because you don't believe in miracles. Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
[center:uo8iitl9][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/HAL3_zps8446acbc.jpg) ][/center:uo8iitl9]
No we don't need "faith". People who think they need it are fooling themselves. Do you have "faith" that the sun is a god? People once did. Do you have "faith" that the earth is flat? People once did. Do you have "faith" that thor makes lightening?
Quote from: "Crump"I seem though to be something that, in your philosophy, can't exist.
I logical impossibility, yes. Like a square circle or vegan meateater. And it's not so much a lack of acceptance on our part as a lack of thought on yours.
And apparently, all the patient explanations in the world just aren't getting through. So I'm going to just cut to the chase.
Care to take a guess as to why Christianity is referred to as a monotheistic religion?
(hint: mono means one)
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"I seem though to be something that, in your philosophy, can't exist.
I logical impossibility, yes. Like a square circle or vegan meateater. And it's not so much a lack of acceptance on our part as a lack of thought on yours.
And apparently, all the patient explanations in the world just aren't getting through. So I'm going to just cut to the chase.
Care to take a guess as to why Christianity is referred to as a monotheistic religion?
(hint: mono means one)
I thought "mono" meant sick, if it doesn't it should, that entire book is sick and gives everyone mono.
Quote from: "ApostateLois"He could just as easily say, "I am a Hindu, but I don't believe in any of the Hindu deities except as vague, abstract concepts."
Yes, he could, and many Hindus do say that. It's not like there's not room for variety of thought in a religion with hundreds of millions of members.
LaVey Satanists don't believe in Satan as a being, but as an abstract concept: they're atheists.
I'm not seeing why we draw the line at atheists being Christians when they can be Hindus and Satanists. One definition of Christian is 'follower of Christ who believes Jesus is the son of God'. Another is 'a person who had a Christian baptism and follows the teachings of Jesus'. There's wiggle room.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Well if you're saying that an atheist is an unthinking entity such as a newborn child or a chair then I guess there's no real point in having discussions with atheists at all. The kind of atheists I had hoped to meet on this forum were those who, like myself, had thought about their beliefs and had come to a reasoned view that rejects the notion of God or gods. But if what I'm encountering is those for whom the idea of God is simply unthinkable, and since of course what cannot be thought of cannot be rejected, then it must be true that some at least of the contributors to this forum are the type of unthinking atheists you describe.
The kind of Christian humanists I hoped to meet wouldn't generalize about all atheists from a few they 'met' on a discussion board as soon as their feelings got hurt (because of that whole 'turn the other cheek thing'). Life is full of disappointments.
Quote from: "mykcob4"he said he was "christian" and Atheist, and that is an impossibility. I don't care how you spin it. It is a fcat that an Atheist is not, cannot be a christian or vise versa by definition!
I suppose it depends on the definition, but it IS a fact that the word 'atheist' is not a proper noun and shouldn't be capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence. 'Christian' IS a proper noun and should always be capitalized.
Quote from: "Crump"Yes we are all lost in a great wreckage surrounded by deep waters, but many, unable or unwilling to swim, are clinging to a rock they call 'religion'. Others, recognizing the rock for what it truly is – merely another piece of flotsam – are saying, "Come away from there; forget faith, just use your reason and you will be able to swim like us." Some of these have been collecting floating debris and building it into a raft of knowledge known as science; and the raft has grown until it is now quite as big as the 'false rock' of religion. Growing numbers, abandoning their faith, have mustered just enough reason to allow them to splash across to the raft of science, and they are now clinging to that quite as desperately as they ever clung to the rock of religion. All of them hoping that it will, in the end, give the answer they seek - the answer to the burning question that everyone is asking, "What the f**k are we doing here anyway?"
[center:mwdob6m8][ Image (//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/raftofthemedusa_zps73a61541.jpg) ][/center:mwdob6m8]
Outside relgious circles, speaking in a direct fashion is considered a virtue.
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"I'm not seeing why we draw the line at atheists being Christians when they can be Hindus and Satanists. One definition of Christian is 'follower of Christ who believes Jesus is the son of God'. Another is 'a person who had a Christian baptism and follows the teachings of Jesus'. There's wiggle room.
None of the other religions are necessarily theistic. (Although Hinduism is by and large theistic, it has a very long history of atheistic schools)
On the other hand, Christianity, like other religions that place incredibly heavy emphasis on theism, tend to be considered inherently theistic. And it's not too difficult to figure out why. They're classified as mono
theistic for a reason.
Quote from: "ApostateLois"After six pages, Crump still thinks he can believe in the Christian god, AND in no gods at all. If he doesn't believe in Christianity's God, then why would he call himself by their name? That's stupid. He could just as easily say, "I am a Hindu, but I don't believe in any of the Hindu deities except as vague, abstract concepts." Now, if he is pretending to be a Christian in order to avoid family arguments, getting kicked out of his parents' house, and other social repercussions, but is really an atheist, that's different. But he seems to be saying that he can be a Christian yet not be a Christian at the same time. There is no point to this. Take away Christianity's main god, and Jesus goes out the window, too. So does 9/10 or more of the Bible, and the 1/10 that's left is mundane stuff like "Do unto others as you want them to do unto you," and "Thou shalt not steal." Why would he need Christianity for that?
Christianity, as I already showed earlier, does not require belief in God, only being a follower of Jesus. Yes, there are problems with that, but technically cherry-picking his teachings is still loosely following them. If you want to attack that, do it. This bit that Christianity=belief in God is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard an atheist pursue.
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Quote from: "mykcob4"he said he was "christian" and Atheist, and that is an impossibility. I don't care how you spin it. It is a fcat that an Atheist is not, cannot be a christian or vise versa by definition!
I suppose it depends on the definition, but it IS a fact that the word 'atheist' is not a proper noun and shouldn't be capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence. 'Christian' IS a proper noun and should always be capitalized.
Fuck THAT! I capitalize Atheist and specifically DON'T capitalize christian for a reason. TO emphasize and deemphasize to two terms respectfully. Respectfully meaning in order not as in reverence.
And another thing you don't have to "suppose" on the definition because the fact is the definition of a christian is to believe that jesus christ is the son of a god and is a god himself. That is the antithesis of Atheist. BY FUCKING DEFINITION!
Oh dear, looks like I need to repeat myself.
Quote from: "mykcob4"And another thing you don't have to "suppose" on the definition because the fact is the definition of a christian is to believe that jesus christ is the son of a god and is a god himself.
[youtube:3m525dv6]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-yHDBHxAfI[/youtube:3m525dv6]
Chris·tian
?krisCH?n/
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
There is no mention of God or the supernatural, and as I said literally one post before that:
Quotetechnically cherry-picking his teachings is still loosely following them.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Given that God is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it has everything to do with a supernatural god.
Given what Crump claims to be, apparently he is not as integral as you believe. The point is moot: if you can convince yourself to follow Jesus and leave out God, you are still a Christian. Stop arguing over silly semantics; there are plenty of real reasons why Crump's beliefs are complete horse-hockey.
First of all, you've no business to tell me what to do or not to do and if you don't agree you can go have multiple sexual encounters with a cactus. Wrapped in barbed wire. Dipped in Tabasco sauce.
Secondly, it's not semantics. The first and fundamentamental tenet of Christianity is the existence of a supernatural god and Jesus' divine nature. Everything else is based on this basic assumption, so much so that it's almost the only thing the several thousands of Christian denominations and sects have in common. Take away the Christian god and you're not a Christian any more, regardless of how Crump likes to call himself. The fact that, in addition to that, he calls himself an "atheist Christian" is even more ridiculous.
I call myself a penguin. I mean, I'm not black and white, I don't lay eggs and who needs a fucking beak anyway? But I'm still a penguin. In fact, I call myself a "human penguin". It makes just as much sense as "atheist Christian".
On a side note: I'm more and more convinced that Crump is, in fact, a Christian. Not an "atheist Christian", but a run-off-the-mill, Bible-bashing, proselytising christurd on a mission to "convert those heathens" using a slightly different version of the old "you really believe in gawd, you just don't want to admit it but if you open your heart to Jeebus you'll believe! Praise the Lard yeaaahhhhh!" tripe.
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"First of all, you've no business to tell me what to do or not to do and if you don't agree you can go have multiple sexual encounters with a cactus. Wrapped in barbed wire. Dipped in Tabasco sauce.
Oh get over yourself. :roll:
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"Secondly, it's not semantics.
Yes. Yes it is. The definition of a Christian has nothing to do with the supernatural. I posted it up twice, it's there if you care to read it. Deny it all you like, you will be as wrong tomorrow as you are today. End of story.
QuoteThe definition of a Christian has nothing to do with the supernatural.
In all fairness, the definition of a Christian you present is the dumbest definition of a word I've ever seen.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Chris·tian
?krisCH?n/
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
So by this definition most muslims are also christian. hmm.
Can a mod check Crump's IP address? I'm pretty sure he's mediumaevum.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"The definition of a Christian has nothing to do with the supernatural.
I thought I'd seen tortured logic before, but damn, this takes the cake. I'd certainly love to hear it spoken aloud at a church. Would make for some interesting reactions.
Yanno, dictionaries just track usage. They're not always accurate. And they're often too brief to do the concept justice. I mean, we've had fundietards come here and say that atheists "deny" the existence of God based on the dictionary definition. As if that somehow settles it. They usually get response after response admonishing their stupidity.
And here you are, doing very much the same thing, just in the other direction, harping on a definition of Christianity that's so vague that almost everyone here would qualify (//http://www.atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=963074#p963074), completely oblivious to the fact that Christianity is a monotheistic religion where belief in and worship of God is a fundamental tenet amongst believers (//http://www.creeds.net/ancient/nicene.htm) and so essential to one's status as a Christian that people who come to doubt the existence of a God (i.e. most of us) no longer consider ourselves Christian.
tl;dr:
[spoil:205qf20p](//http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1334672613812_8797636.png)[/spoil:205qf20p]
Now, lively debate is what I expected of this forum and I have not been disappointed, not in that respect at least. The company is - how might I say this delicately? – stimulating. Yes, stimulating is an apt term for the range of opinion that is manifest on this thread – everything from thoughtful to mindless. And yes I do crap and fart, as do all whose misfortune it is to share genetic material with whoever asked such an inane question. The element of disappointment for me is not however the discovery of some oafish behaviour, something one has to deal with everywhere these days, it is the more surprising discovery that the atheists on this forum are universally hostile to Christians. So hostile it seems that when a Christian appears who offers no argument against their viewpoint, they must deny his Christianity. This, I have to say, is not the atheism I am familiar with.
Around 30% of the UK population is atheist, and in some cities that proportion increases to more than 40%. In the UK however atheists are not strident or aggressive, but tolerant and respectful of people of faith. In London, not too far from where I live, we have seen the establishment of what has been hailed as the first atheist church (//http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/21/sunday-assembly-is-the-hot-new-atheist-church.html). But in fact atheism is more widespread in Christian churches than is often understood, and many Christians of my acquaintance regard God, if they acknowledge that term at all, as a metaphor for human compassion and love. I have even met ordained priests who utterly reject the supernatural aspects of what might be regarded as conventional Christianity. Why would any educated person in this day and age believe in virgin births, holy ghosts, and resurrections of the body? But a more relevant question for this forum is why atheists would seek to deny progressive Christians the right to reform their beliefs, as if atheism is some exclusive club that they would keep to themselves alone?
[center:vrfspajf](//http://www.therag.co.uk/snip/uploads/50746ca322651.jpg)[/center:vrfspajf]
Quote from: "Crump"Why would any educated person in this day and age believe in virgin births, holy ghosts, and resurrections of the body?
Yeah, no kidding. And miracles, souls, and the afterlife? Pssh!
QuoteBut a more relevant question for this forum is why atheists would seek to deny progressive Christians the right to reform their beliefs, as if atheism is some exclusive club that they would keep to themselves alone?
Hey, reform away. And don't just stop there. Scrap the whole damn thing and build your beliefs from scratch. And hey, if you want to be religious, be religious. By all means, build that enlightened, modern religion you keep telling us about.
(but never quite materializes) Just don't call it something it ain't.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"Why would any educated person in this day and age believe in virgin births, holy ghosts, and resurrections of the body?
Yeah, no kidding. And miracles, souls, and the afterlife? Pssh!
Quite right!
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"But a more relevant question for this forum is why atheists would seek to deny progressive Christians the right to reform their beliefs, as if atheism is some exclusive club that they would keep to themselves alone?
Hey, reform away. And don't just stop there. Scrap the whole damn thing and build your beliefs from scratch. And hey, if you want to be religious, be religious. By all means, build that enlightened, modern religion you keep telling us about. (but never quite materializes) Just don't call it something it ain't.
Why does it bother you exactly?
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"QuoteAn atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason.
Not at all. A newborn infant is an atheist (it has no belief in any god). A chair is trivially an atheist, since it has no belief in any god. (The ability to hold a belief isn't a requirement of not holding a belief.) I think you're misusing the word "atheist" - it's not a decision, it's lack of belief in any god. Period. Nothing more. Lack of theism. (Theism is belief in one or more gods.) Chairs, trees and stars have no belief in any gods, as far as we know, so they're all atheistic (lacking belief in any god). Since one of the characteristics of a Christian is belief in the Christian god, one can't be both an atheist and a Christian. A thing can't be what it's not (the law of identity), and one can't both believe in a god and not believe in any gods.
But one CAN be confused.
Well if you're saying that an atheist is an unthinking entity
No, but lacking reading comprehension skill is definitely a cause of confusion.
I said that the ability to believe is not a requirement of lack of belief. Where you get that an atheist is an unthinking entity from that is something I can't comprehend, because I read well enough by the age of 7 to have understood what you misunderstood.
QuoteThe kind of atheists I had hoped to meet on this forum were those who, like myself, had thought about their beliefs and had come to a reasoned view that rejects the notion of God or gods.
I never rejected the notion of God or gods, I just never believed in any god.
Is English your 5th or 6 language? You seem to be having a problem with it.
Quote from: "Crump"Why does it bother you exactly?
Because dishonesty bothers me. Either self-inflicted or passed on to others.
That is after all, why I'm an atheist in the first place.
Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:2xdab17a](//http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/ag121/commandercrump/godinus_zps63a712e9.jpg) (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html)[/center:2xdab17a][center:2xdab17a][Click-the-pic][/center:2xdab17a]
Quote from: "Crump"Many religious people are also atheist
re·li·gion
noun
1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power
So no, one can't be religious and atheist. Buddhism, as practiced by the Buddha, was a philosophy, not a religion. As practiced today? Which sect of Christianity is the real Christianity? Christian Science? LDS? Jehovah's Witnesses? Church of God? They're each VERY different, yet they all call themselves "Christian". So someone can call himself a Buddhist, even if he's not someone who follows the philosophy of Gautama.
QuoteIs this a forum for all atheists, or only for those who suit your particular prejudice?
It's a forum for all, atheists and theists alike. It's not a forum for those who are here only to win arguments by redefining words (also known as trolls).
Quote from: "DunkleSeele"On a side note: I'm more and more convinced that Crump is, in fact, a Christian. Not an "atheist Christian", but a run-off-the-mill, Bible-bashing, proselytising christurd on a mission to "convert those heathens" using a slightly different version of the old "you really believe in gawd, you just don't want to admit it but if you open your heart to Jeebus you'll believe! Praise the Lard yeaaahhhhh!" tripe.
I owe you a tenner.
Quote from: "Crump"Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:382phyg8][ Image (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html) ][/center:382phyg8][center:382phyg8][Click-the-pic][/center:382phyg8]
uhm. Sorry. But :-|
Quote from: "Crump"It is a most depressing thing that so many folk who say they are atheist are no less dogmatic and prescriptive than those whose claim it is to be the elect of God. Why wouldn't an atheist have an open mind?
We do - but not to the point that our brains fall out. We're dogmatic about the fact that language was invented to convey intelligence, and it wasn't invented to use words to mean whatever you want them to mean, even if almost no one agrees with your meaning.
Calling yourself a Christian atheist is like speaking a foreign language that uses English words. It conveys no intelligence, and serves no actual purpose.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"Why does it bother you exactly?
Because dishonesty bothers me. Either self-inflicted or passed on to others.
That is after all, why I'm an atheist in the first place.
So creationists, some of whom even deny the evidence of their own eyes in favour of their mad beliefs, are honest, while Christians who reject all that mumbo-jumbo are dishonest. What sort of topsy turvy world are you living in?
You know what strikes me most about this thread? Crump starts out by complimenting the people of this forum for being thinking people. Later he says we seem more open minded and thoughtful than other groups of people he has met.
Then most of you had to go and prove him wrong.
(//http://www.innkeepingblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/frustrated.jpg)
If he doesn't believe in god, he's an atheist. If he wants to follow the teachings of Jesus and call himself a Christian, WTF do you people care, to be such a load of jerks? (Note, some of you have not been jerks, and I compliment you on being the few reasonable voices in this mob).
Every religion is allowed to have an atheist version except, apparently, Islam and Xtian. Atheist Jew? No Problem! It's cultural! Atheist Christian? Moronic liar! #-o
Don't you guys remember that we HAVE had atheist Christians on this forum before, some really nice guys, too. This is not news to most of us, that these people exist.
Crump, I'd like to welcome you to the forums and ask you to enjoy your stay, but I can see you already got the typical cactus up the ass welcome we tend to give around here lately. Sorry.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Crump"Many religious people are also atheist
re·li·gion
noun
1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power
So no, one can't be religious and atheist. Buddhism, as practiced by the Buddha, was a philosophy, not a religion. As practiced today? Which sect of Christianity is the real Christianity? Christian Science? LDS? Jehovah's Witnesses? Church of God? They're each VERY different, yet they all call themselves "Christian". So someone can call himself a Buddhist, even if he's not someone who follows the philosophy of Gautama.
QuoteIs this a forum for all atheists, or only for those who suit your particular prejudice?
It's a forum for all, atheists and theists alike. It's not a forum for those who are here only to win arguments by redefining words (also known as trolls).
Hey, you missed the second definition.
[center:chlskwkz]re·li·gion
noun
2. Details of belief as taught or discussed[/center:chlskwkz]
Now is that honest debate? Religion and atheism are not antonyms.
well since we get to invent our own as we go along, I would like to say I believe in the teachings of Plato, but lets be honest Socrates never existed.
Quote from: "Crump"Now is that honest debate? Religion and atheism are not antonyms.
Why didn't you just
say that you don't know how to use a dictionary? We didn't need proof. Having and lacking aren't antonyms?
QuoteIn the UK however atheists are not strident or aggressive, but tolerant and respectful of people of faith.
Because in the UK, theists aren't trying to force all of society to live theistically, as they do in many parts of the US. If theists were just people who believed, there wouldn't be any need for atheism - we just wouldn't be believers. There are no "spherical Earthers", there are no "anti-fat-burgerers" - because those people don't bother people who don't share their beliefs.
But Hillary Clinton was excoriated for not explicitly claiming that she's religious. She didn't claim to be an atheist, she just failed to affirmatively claim membership in one or another Christian sect, and that's not considered "right" by many people here.
That's why atheists here are "strident" - because we live in a nation full of militant theists.
Quote from: "Crump"Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:1dgmswq1][ Image (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html) ][/center:1dgmswq1][center:1dgmswq1][Click-the-pic][/center:1dgmswq1]
That's Christian Humanism, not Christian Atheism. Or do you think "atheism" means "humanism"?
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Crump"Why does it bother you exactly?
Because dishonesty bothers me. Either self-inflicted or passed on to others.
That is after all, why I'm an atheist in the first place.
So creationists, some of whom even deny the evidence of their own eyes in favour of their mad beliefs, are honest, while Christians who reject all that mumbo-jumbo are dishonest. What sort of topsy turvy world are you living in?
One where a certain holy book is chock full of mumbo-jumbo. And people have the gall to call themselves ardent believers in it yet don't believe it. The creationists are certainly more honest in that respect.
And yes, come to think of it, this actually is a very topsy turvy world. One of incredible scientific and technological achievement and simultaneously, one of age-old superstition. Where dogma trumps knowledge. One of immense information yet boundless disinformation and ardent denialism. An entire world improving by leaps and bounds and yet not improving much at all. It is quite odd. I suppose that's simply how it is. Lives, lived, will live. Dies, died, will die.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Crump"Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:temct37h][ Image (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html) ][/center:temct37h][center:temct37h][Click-the-pic][/center:temct37h]
That's Christian Humanism, not Christian Atheism. Or do you think "atheism" means "humanism"?
You're getting there slowly. Christian Humanists represent a long tradition of increasing emphasis on Christ's humanity and lessened emphasis on his divinity. These days most Christian Humanists are atheist although there are still exceptions.
Quote from: "Icarus"Can a mod check Crump's IP address? I'm pretty sure he's mediumaevum.
mediumaevum 87.56.87.174 Denmark
crump 86.161.176.245 London
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Crump"Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:29xq9v70][ Image (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html) ][/center:29xq9v70][center:29xq9v70][Click-the-pic][/center:29xq9v70]
That's Christian Humanism, not Christian Atheism. Or do you think "atheism" means "humanism"?
You're getting there slowly. Christian Humanists represent a long tradition of increasing emphasis on Christ's humanity and lessened emphasis on his divinity. These days most Christian Humanists are atheist although there are still exceptions.
So either you do think that "atheist" means "humanist", or you posted that link to troll. Either way you're not as smart as some of us think you are (and you wouldn't believe what a low opinion we have of your intelligence).
To misquote Alf, "I'm thinking of a rawhide bone".
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Icarus"Can a mod check Crump's IP address? I'm pretty sure he's mediumaevum.
mediumaevum 87.56.87.174 Denmark
crump 86.161.176.245 London
:-k
damn.....too much collateral I suppose... 8-)
Quote from: "Aroura33"You know what strikes me most about this thread? Crump starts out by complimenting the people of this forum for being thinking people. Later he says we seem more open minded and thoughtful than other groups of people he has met.
Then most of you had to go and prove him wrong.
[ Image (//http://www.innkeepingblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/frustrated.jpg) ]
If he doesn't believe in god, he's an atheist. If he wants to follow the teachings of Jesus and call himself a Christian, WTF do you people care, to be such a load of jerks? (Note, some of you have not been jerks, and I compliment you on being the few reasonable voices in this mob).
Every religion is allowed to have an atheist version except, apparently, Islam and Xtian. Atheist Jew? No Problem! It's cultural! Atheist Christian? Moronic liar! #-o
Don't you guys remember that we HAVE had atheist Christians on this forum before, some really nice guys, too. This is not news to most of us, that these people exist.
Crump, I'd like to welcome you to the forums and ask you to enjoy your stay, but I can see you already got the typical cactus up the ass welcome we tend to give around here lately. Sorry.
Yeah. I second that.
I can tell Crump isn't being an asshole. Maybe he is christian maybe he isn't. I STILL don't know because I don't understand what he is trying to say. Who cares? It's not like he's being hostile. He's just trying to answer the questions he is being asked the best he can, as far as I can see.
I think this fuss over something he categorized himself went a little out of hand.
QuoteMaybe he is christian maybe he isn't.
well I think it would work better if he said, " I am a follower of some of the parts of what Paul said the guy named jesus said" rather than the pretty well understood understanding of the christian which normally implies someone who follows the teachings of christ insomuch as they also demand belief in the god of abraham or salvation is not possible. Can you find me a verse where belief in jesus over-rides the denial of his fathers existence? I doubt it. The whole essence of jesus is that he is the son/prophet/man-god whatever of a very specific deity, a VERY specific deity. One whose definition and being is well described in the torah and through the talmud which jebus claims is still the law and therefore by default belief in said god is paramount. So calling oneself a christian while denying 95% of the definition of said term seems just a little bull-shittery to me.
Quote from: "aitm"QuoteMaybe he is christian maybe he isn't.
well I think it would work better if he said, " I am a follower of some of the parts of what Paul said the guy named jesus said" rather than the pretty well understood understanding of the christian which normally implies someone who follows the teachings of christ insomuch as they also demand belief in the god of abraham or salvation is not possible. Can you find me a verse where belief in jesus over-rides the denial of his fathers existence? I doubt it. The whole essence of jesus is that he is the son/prophet/man-god whatever of a very specific deity, a VERY specific deity. One whose definition and being is well described in the torah and through the talmud which jebus claims is still the law and therefore by default belief in said god is paramount. So calling oneself a christian while denying 95% of the definition of said term seems just a little bull-shittery to me.
Yeah, I don't get what he is saying with that either. But I think we're getting hung up on something that, if it truly is a problem it will present it's self. All I'm saying is he isn't being an ass. Do I get what he is saying? Fuck no, but I don't even think he knows what he is saying. And I'm not even saying that in a "he believes/does not believe blank, therefore he doesn't know what he is talking about" I mean it in more of a "he isn't using very good communication skills to get his message across"
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"The definition of a Christian has nothing to do with the supernatural.
I thought I'd seen tortured logic before, but damn, this takes the cake. I'd certainly love to hear it spoken aloud at a church. Would make for some interesting reactions.
It certainly would.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Yanno, dictionaries just track usage. They're not always accurate. And they're often too brief to do the concept justice. I mean, we've had fundietards come here and say that atheists "deny" the existence of God based on the dictionary definition. As if that somehow settles it. They usually get response after response admonishing their stupidity.
They should use Google's dictionary, then. Same dictionary that gave me the Christianity definition also gives me "a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods" for atheists, a definition I'm sure you would agree to. Said definitions also exist on Urban Dictionary. According to you, though, a dictionary is wrong unless you personally approve of every single definition. "Dictionaries just track usage." Yes, they
just track how people use the words of a language. Not important at all. :roll:
Quote from: "Hydra009"And here you are, doing very much the same thing, just in the other direction, harping on a definition of Christianity that's so vague that almost everyone here would qualify (//http://www.atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=963074#p963074), completely oblivious to the fact that Christianity is a monotheistic religion where belief in and worship of God is a fundamental tenet amongst believers (//http://www.creeds.net/ancient/nicene.htm) and so essential to one's status as a Christian that people who come to doubt the existence of a God (i.e. most of us) no longer consider ourselves Christian.
This only speaks to a gap in your knowledge, as Christian Atheists have been around long enough to have had spats with C.S. Lewis during his time, and can trace their roots to the Jefferson Bible. In other words, they are actually one of the oldest outspoken groups of atheists around. Regardless of what
you think, they've been around long enough to bend the definition of what constitutes a Christian.
Quote from: "Hydra009"tl;dr:
[spoil:27sykk67][ Image (//http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1334672613812_8797636.png) ][/spoil:27sykk67]
[youtube:27sykk67]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-E9Hv6fJtgQ[/youtube:27sykk67]
Continue insulting me all you like. It'll get you about as far as everyone else. For you see, I actually have these things called
facts backing me up. Maybe you should consider researching them. :-D
Quote from: "Aroura33"Every religion is allowed to have an atheist version except, apparently, Islam and Xtian. Atheist Jew? No Problem! It's cultural! Atheist Christian? Moronic liar! #-o
I can't help but feel like this was directed at me. And while it may seem like an arbitrary judgement call, it actually isn't. Theism is more central to some religions than others, most notably the Abrahamic religions. Pretty much all their other religious beliefs stem from that one foundational belief, unlike Buddhism or Jainism. Judaism is an odd anomaly in that jewish identity is independent of religious adherence, unlike Christianity or Islam (or Bah'ai Faith or deism). Nonetheless, I would still argue that Jews who believe in the existence of Yahweh are not atheists on the basis that theists are not atheists.
And it's not like I'm the first person to come across this issue. Christians and Muslims have long fussed over who's who for generations, and have laid out what their religion's fundamental tenets are (it goes without saying that the God concept features prominently there). Atheism has historically gotten you kicked out of the club (or worse).
The way Crump phrased it certainly didn't help, the whole "I don't believe in a god" and "I'm a Christian" thing through a lot of people for a loop. Obviously, Crump's use of it runs counter to the how the term is commonly understood, hence its rejection. (A short description of beliefs rather than labels would've helped clear up the confusion, as AITM pointed out) And the subsequent disagreement was mostly due to the warring tendencies of allowing people to self-identify any way they please and the understanding of Christianity as a firmly theistic religion centered around belief in a very specific sort of God. I, for one, still contend the latter.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Continue insulting me all you like. It'll get you about as far as everyone else. For you see, I actually have these things called facts backing me up. Maybe you should consider researching them. :-D
Oh the irony. A single dictionary entry that later goes on to define Christianity as "Christian quality or character. 'his Christianity sustained him'". :rolleyes: Truly, primo research on your part.
Btw, you might want to consider cracking open an encyclopedia for a change. Seriously. Might save you some face.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Oh the irony. A single dictionary entry that later goes on to define Christianity as "Christian quality or character. 'his Christianity sustained him'". :rolleyes: Truly, primo research on your part.
I fail to see how this in any way invalidates what I said. I also like how the only thing you have any answer to is my snarky little remark at the end, completely avoiding the real argument. Your ability to ignore inconvenient facts is truly astounding; your ability to drag out a pointless argument that should have ended at my first post on this subject even more so.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Btw, you might want to consider cracking open an encyclopedia for a change. Seriously. Might save you some face.
More insults. How quaint. You do realize you are outnumbered by the people who either agree with me or just don't care enough to argue, yes? Perhaps someone is losing face here, but it is not me, I assure you. In any case, this argument, like many others, will be forgotten by the time the thread is over. I'm not really worried about how others view it.
*sigh* Perhaps I should clarify that I find Christian Atheists to be as ridiculous as you do. The only difference is that you seem to think that because it's a stupid idea, it therefore doesn't exist. There are plenty of stupid ideas that get taken seriously in scholarly discourse (or Theology would not still be taught in accredited universities). The only thing I'm really arguing here is that just because an idea is stupid doesn't mean it does not exist. I mean, every religion is stupid, and they quite plainly exist and get taken seriously.
I just don't see the point in tearing down Christian Atheism by saying "it's neither," when you can probably get much further by pointing out that "it's stupid."
Just to lighten the mood:
Quote8-) It's the second resurrection of Christ. Before the world ends he wants
to take in some fishing. So he gets his friend Moses and they head up
to Minnesota to fish.
They are about to rent a canoe when Moses says:
"Jesus, can't you still walk on water? Why not just walk out there?"
So Jesus takes his reel and tackle and steps onto the lake....and falls
knee deep in water.
Moses says, "Well....maybe you need a head start or something, why not
go to the end of the dock and try."
So Jesus takes his reel and tackle and steps off the end of the dock and
falls up to his waist.
Moses says, " Well why not rent the boat, go out to the center of the
lake and try there."
So they rent the boat and go to the middle of the lake, Jesus is about
to step off and try again when...
Moses says, "Wait. Just to be safe, why not get yourself into the state
of mind you were in the first time you did it."
So Jesus sets down, meditates for a few minutes, and finally he's all
psyched up, and steps out of the canoe.... ..and precedes to drown.
So Moses does the water parting thing, and pulls Jesus up into the boat.
Jesus is just beating himself up over this.
He just doesn't see what's going wrong here. Moses just stares down at the bottom of the boat.
Suddenly, Moses says, "I got it! I know what's wrong! Did you have those
holes in your feet last time?!?!"
Solitary
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Hydra009"Oh the irony. A single dictionary entry that later goes on to define Christianity as "Christian quality or character. 'his Christianity sustained him'". :rolleyes: Truly, primo research on your part.
I fail to see how this in any way invalidates what I said. I also like how the only thing you have any answer to is my snarky little remark at the end, completely avoiding the real argument.
I fervently wish you had one. It would make for a much less boring conversation and feel less like talking to a wall.
You argue against my point that dictionary definitions aren't always accurate with dual strawman arguments that the dictionary definition is only wrong when I personally disagree with it and that I think that dictionary definitions are not important.
And yes, I'm also aware of C.S. Lewis tangling with "Christian atheists" in his infamous trilemma. Obviously, I do not recognize the validity of the term (the term Christian necessitates the belief in the divinity of Jesus, obviously), so it doesn't appear to actually have a point.
QuoteMore insults. How quaint. You do realize you are outnumbered by the people who either agree with me or just don't care enough to argue, yes?
Appeal to the people. Another winner.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"*sigh* Perhaps I should clarify that I find Christian Atheists to be as ridiculous as you do. The only difference is that you seem to think that because it's a stupid idea, it therefore doesn't exist.
Another mistake. I do not think that because it's a stupid idea, it doesn't exist. Rather, I consider it a logical contradiction akin to vegan meateater or square circle, as I have argued for quite a few pages now. Next time, please understand my argument before you argue against it. I'd really appreciate it.
QuoteI just don't see the point in tearing down Christian Atheism by saying "it's neither," when you can probably get much further by pointing out that "it's stupid."
Probably, but who needs to? It's people who claim to be following the teachings of Jesus who don't believe in God or apparently, almost all of the Bible, including much of Jesus' alleged own words. What could I possibly say about it that could top that?!
(Though in all seriousness, it does seem like a bit of a predicament. Religious people who know better than to accept more obviously superstitious Christian beliefs, but apparently can't quite seem to extricate themselves from it entirely.)
So what is this thought? I don't see one anywhere.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Another mistake. I do not think that because it's a stupid idea, it doesn't exist. Rather, I consider it a logical contradiction akin to vegan meateater or square circle, as I have argued for quite a few pages now. Next time, please understand my argument before you argue against it. I'd really appreciate it.
It was actually DunkleSeele I was arguing with before you engaged in the conversation, but whatever. In any case, I did try to understand your argument: it came across as you saying, "It's stupid, therefore it doesn't exist." Contrary to appearances, I
do put a lot of thought into my replies. Even the snarky posts are usually a 2nd or 3rd draft as I read and re-read what I'm responding to. It's very rarely the case that I misinterpret a post as a result of "not reading it right." The reason I double-posted that clarification is also the advice I'm going to give you right now: If you think someone is misinterpreting your words then step back, think about it for a moment, and start from the beginning again. It will get you a lot farther than continuing to argue.
Quote from: "Hydra009"(Though in all seriousness,
Wait, you weren't being serious before? :P
I kid, I kid...Quote from: "Hydra009"it does seem like a bit of a predicament. Religious people who know better than to accept more obviously superstitious Christian beliefs, but apparently can't quite seem to extricate themselves from it entirely.)
That's true even of people who don't call themselves "Christian Atheists." How often have we heard an atheist or agnostic say, "I don't believe in religion, but I believe it can serve a good purpose"?
Hydra, my comment was not aimed at you, specifically, but more at the general attitude of this thread.
Although I agree that the idea of an xtian atheist is a bit odd, and not something I grasp entirely, Crump has been polite and patient, and the negativity of some responses to him are way out of proportion, imo.
As an atheist Taoist, who also happens to attend occasional on-line temple meetings, nothing supernatural just philosophical stuff, I sometimes get a similar treatment from other atheists. That I have bastardized and redefined Taoism, often accused of doing just because it is cool, and since I technically sort of identify with a religion, I am not a "real" atheist.
So perhaps I understand what he means better than some. Although personally I think Jesus taught nothing all that fantastic or revolutionary, hey, if someone else want to follow his teaching in the real world, minus the supernatural, more power to them! Hell I would take 1,000 Crump style Christians over a single evangelical yec.
I'm still not seeing the added advantage of adding in all the extra work of "following jesus" over simply following the golden rule, which really seems to be the only thing you're really doing. Unless you have some specific ideas of jesus' rules you're following other than simply "being compassionate to others", which has nothing to do with christianity.
You still come across as someone who desperately wants to belong to a group and have someone tell you how to think and what to do.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Icarus"Can a mod check Crump's IP address? I'm pretty sure he's mediumaevum.
mediumaevum 87.56.87.174 Denmark
crump 86.161.176.245 London
Dam, they were both going on about this christian/atheist combination so I thought they might be the same person. I've never heard of anyone trying to do this and suddenly we have 2 at once.
Quote from: "Icarus"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Icarus"Can a mod check Crump's IP address? I'm pretty sure he's mediumaevum.
mediumaevum 87.56.87.174 Denmark
crump 86.161.176.245 London
Dam, they were both going on about this christian/atheist combination so I thought they might be the same person. I've never heard of anyone trying to do this and suddenly we have 2 at once.
Wow, I'm just wondering what planet you're inhabiting. In London you can hardly fall over without hitting an atheist Christian, and you're telling us there's also one in Denmark. Have you travelled at all?
I think the problem is you can't tell the difference between an atheist christian and any random other person unless you ask, and nobody cares enough to ask, because there doesn't appear to be any noticable difference between an atheist christian and a regular atheist.
You're kinda coming across as a stamp-collector acting all insulted that people are saying they've never met a stamp collector before and saying "But there's so many of us walking around every day! How can you not randomly going around asking people if they collect stamps since that's the only way to know if they do and it's clearly very important!".
Quote from: "Plu"I think the problem is you can't tell the difference between an atheist christian and any random other person unless you ask, and nobody cares enough to ask, because there doesn't appear to be any noticable difference between an atheist christian and a regular atheist.
You're kinda coming across as a stamp-collector acting all insulted that people are saying they've never met a stamp collector before and saying "But there's so many of us walking around every day! How can you not randomly going around asking people if they collect stamps since that's the only way to know if they do and it's clearly very important!".
Hey I'm not insulted, just sort of amazed that's all. Frankly seeking to demonstrate that atheism and Christianity can, and do, coexist is just tiresome. You only have to Google this to find hundreds of references to atheism within Christianity and dozens of books on, or at least touching on, this idea. If you're still convinced that all this is some fundamentalist Christian conspiracy aimed at undermining 'true atheism', whatever that is, then you really are 'madder than a box of frogs' yourselves. As a very last gasp on this, try reading 'Taking Leave of God' by Don Cupitt.
I'm not going to read anything until you can explain to me what the added advantage of combining christianity and atheism is. So far, I've got nothing, and that means any more research put into the topic is just me wasting my time.
Unless you can at least give me a tangible way in which this would improve my life, I see no reason to invest time in it.
Quote from: "Plu"I'm not going to read anything until you can explain to me what the added advantage of combining christianity and atheism is. So far, I've got nothing, and that means any more research put into the topic is just me wasting my time.
Unless you can at least give me a tangible way in which this would improve my life, I see no reason to invest time in it.
Well how about this? I'm also a bus driver. Now that information isn't going to improve your life either, is it? You don't have to invest time in anything, in fact you can get on and do your own thing if you want to. You guys are questioning me and I'm doing my best to answer those questions. Understanding there's atheist Christians in the World wont improve your lives at all I imagine, but it sure will improve your knowledge of the World. It's entirely up to you whether you want to know that or not.
So you're basically asking me to invest time in reading something you yourself are already admitting is a complete waste of my time?
And also when we're questioning you, instead of actually answering questions asked, you just keep pointing at books written by other people to answer for you?
And you can't point out one worthwhile difference between an atheist christian and a regular atheist?
It really makes me wonder why you're investing all this time in being an atheist christian if it basically does nothing for you that being an ordinary atheist would also do.
Quote from: "Plu"And you can't point out one worthwhile difference between an atheist christian and a regular atheist?
What is a regular atheist exactly? In addition to atheist Christians, I've met atheist Communists, atheist Buddhists, atheist Jews, atheist Wicca and atheist Spiritualists. I never asked them to give me reasons why my life would change before I accepted them as atheists. I've told you why I'm an atheist and why I'm also a Christian - now my beliefs suit me just fine, and if they don't suit you, well that's just fine too. It's not my job to improve your life, mate. As to pointing you towards books and other references the only purpose was to demonstrate that atheist Christians aren't the 'hens' teeth' folks here seem to think - I'm not trying to change anything for you.
So what I can surmise is that you are a christian in the cultural sense, but an atheist in terms of belief in God.
Is that it?
QuoteWhat is a regular atheist exactly?
A regular atheist in this context is the exact same atheist christian, minus the christian part.
AKA: if you stopped being an "atheist christian" today and became "just an atheist", what would have changed?
What is the
actual change that occurs when you become a christian atheist.
Quote from: "Plu"It really makes me wonder why you're investing all this time in being an atheist christian if it basically does nothing for you that being an ordinary atheist would also do.
I doubt that he's ever referenced himself as a "Christian Atheist" before this thread rather he's done so because he thinks he's yanking our chain and that apparently feeds he's ego. Truth be told, he's just another idiot who thinks he's clever.
Quote from: "Aroura33"Hydra, my comment was not aimed at you, specifically, but more at the general attitude of this thread.
Huh. Well, your example seems to perfectly fit a post of mine about Jains and Buddhists and Jews and no one else's. One heck of a coincidence, then.
QuoteAlthough I agree that the idea of an xtian atheist is a bit odd, and not something I grasp entirely, Crump has been polite and patient, and the negativity of some responses to him are way out of proportion, imo.
Here are the sorts of posts that Crump has made so far:
"Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith."
"Growing numbers, abandoning their faith, have mustered just enough reason to allow them to splash across to the raft of science, and they are now clinging to that quite as desperately as they ever clung to the rock of religion."
"It is a most depressing thing that so many folk who say they are atheist are no less dogmatic and prescriptive than those whose claim it is to be the elect of God."
"Can you recruit an atheist? I don't believe you can. An atheist must make up his or her own mind and come to a decision based on reason. Above all an atheist must doubt, because without doubt reason cannot function. So it ill behoves a true atheist to declare what another person can or can't think"
For a supposedly different breed, it sure seems suspiciously like standard Christian godspam with a decidedly anti-atheist bent. And I treat it in much the same way. Perhaps I am in error here. Perhaps not. (For a false positive, one would think that Crump's posts would be less concerned with passing out promotional literature)
QuoteAs an atheist Taoist, who also happens to attend occasional on-line temple meetings, nothing supernatural just philosophical stuff, I sometimes get a similar treatment from other atheists. That I have bastardized and redefined Taoism, often accused of doing just because it is cool, and since I technically sort of identify with a religion, I am not a "real" atheist.
Yes, I think I understand the reaction now. Hell, I've been on the receiving end of "you were never a real Christian" myself. Although my argument seems superficially similar, I assure you, that's not what I'm trying to do. I am simply countering attempts to redefine the concept to such an extent that almost all of us qualify as Christians.
I've used this example before, but I'll try it again. I self-identity as a jedi. I don't believe in the Force, I don't use the Force, and I don't wield a lightsaber. Would you accept my claim that I'm a jedi? What if I tried to define Jedi as simply a person trying to do good? Would you accept it then?
QuoteAlthough personally I think Jesus taught nothing all that fantastic or revolutionary, hey, if someone else want to follow his teaching in the real world, minus the supernatural, more power to them! Hell I would take 1,000 Crump style Christians over a single evangelical yec.
I feel the same way, although I am iffy on exactly what a Crump style Christian actually is (Crump seems similarly confused, declaring miracles in one breath and then agreeing with me that miracles are malarkey in the next). From what I've seen so far, it wouldn't be much of an improvement.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"So what I can surmise is that you are a christian in the cultural sense, but an atheist in terms of belief in God.
Is that it?
Well at least the question is moving on now, but 'Cultural Christian' seems to be a pejorative used manly by other Christians to describe those who pay 'lip service' to Christian belief while actually not believing in anything at all. In that sense, no, I'm not a Cultural Christian, but I do value Christian culture and that's quite different. I have firm beliefs which I can give you a potted summary of, if you're interested.
I believe that Christ's essential message and teaching is about how mankind should live, not about how we can get to Heaven.
I believe that Christ delivered his message in terms that people of his time could relate to and that this accounts for the supernatural aspects of traditional Christian belief.
I believe that Christ's message is as valid today as it ever was.
I believe in the psychological and spiritual power of prayer.
I believe in the value of worship and ritual for communities and individuals.
I believe that Christianity has been, and continues to be, a civilizing influence in the World.
I believe that the past, and present, evils associated with Christianity are the result of superstition and bigotry and are counter to Christ's message of love and fraternity.
And, just for the record,
I do not believe in God, although I don't argue against the use of the term as a metaphor for human compassion - and I do not believe in Heaven, or Hell, or the life hereafter.
Now those are my beliefs, to which I am entitled. What I'd really like to know is, why anyone here should have a problem with that?
Perhaps it is cultural, I am from the UK and don't really have a problem with anyone identifying as a Christian atheist.
Christianity isn't quite so in your face in the UK (because it is ingrained in society and politics it doesn't have to be?), perhaps because it is an institution historically it was accepted you had to pay lip service to it despite your true beliefs, Christians who are not believers in the supernatural also became acceptable.
Maybe in countries without this institution you might only go to church if you were motivated to by belief and would use that as part of the definition of a Christian. So I suggest it might well be a cultural thing that some of you are not aware of, you might argue that is is daft, but hey each to their own.
Quote from: "Hydra009"I feel the same way, although I am iffy on exactly what a Crump style Christian actually is (Crump seems similarly confused, declaring miracles in one breath and then agreeing with me that miracles are malarkey in the next). From what I've seen so far, it wouldn't be much of an improvement.
I simply used the term miracle as metaphor for the unexplained, the mystery of life. There can be miracles without there having to be gods.
Quote from: "bericks999"Quote from: "Plu"It really makes me wonder why you're investing all this time in being an atheist christian if it basically does nothing for you that being an ordinary atheist would also do.
I doubt that he's ever referenced himself as a "Christian Atheist" before this thread rather he's done so because he thinks he's yanking our chain and that apparently feeds he's ego. Truth be told, he's just another idiot who thinks he's clever.
And that is just crass and insulting.
Life is pretty well understood. It's not all that mysterious or miraculous anymore.
Also I've seen a few researches posted here that actually showed praying could be bad for you. And worship in general is a bad idea. So is following rituals for rituals' sake. Also, christianity typically lags behind the civilization influence on society by quite a number of years.
So I guess the answer to "why should anyone have a problem with that", I'm going to go with "because your beliefs are dubious or meaningless at best and simply wrong at worst".
Quote from: "Plu"Life is pretty well understood. It's not all that mysterious or miraculous anymore.
Also I've seen a few researches posted here that actually showed praying could be bad for you. And worship in general is a bad idea. So is following rituals for rituals' sake. Also, christianity typically lags behind the civilization influence on society by quite a number of years.
So I guess the answer to "why should anyone have a problem with that", I'm going to go with "because your beliefs are dubious or meaningless at best and simply wrong at worst".
OK, so we've moved again. You're no longer arguing that I can't be an atheist and a Christian at all, or that I can only be an atheist and a Christian if my being those things improves yours life somehow. Now it's simply that my beliefs are either meaningless or wrong.
Well I've got news for you fella - my beliefs have meaning for me, and if they don't have meaning for you I don't give a toss.
So what meaning do they have for you? I've only asked like 5 times what your beliefs do for you.
You shouldn't be surprised that my responses call your belief system meaningless if you refuse to share any meaning they might have by constantly ignoring any questions for clarification about what you're actually talking about.
Quote from: "Plu"So what meaning do they have for you? I've only asked like 5 times what your beliefs do for you.
You shouldn't be surprised that my responses call your belief system meaningless if you refuse to share any meaning they might have by constantly ignoring any questions for clarification about what you're actually talking about.
Yes, well that isn't actually the question you've been asking all this time but I will explain in very practical terms what my beliefs mean for me.
They mean that I can, in my very small way, participate in the progression of Christianity from superstition to enlightenment.
They mean that I can be in the fellowship of Christ without experiencing feelings of hypocrisy. So I can attend baptisms and weddings and funerals and join in worship.
They mean that I can visit the graves of my ancestors and feel 'in tune' with their beliefs.
They mean that the entirety of Christian culture in art and literature and philosphy is my inheritance.
They mean that I am connected with my roots.
See, now we're getting somewhere. These are things you mention that I can see being useful to some people (though not myself). How useful when people answer questions :)
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"So what I can surmise is that you are a christian in the cultural sense, but an atheist in terms of belief in God.
Is that it?
Well at least the question is moving on now, but 'Cultural Christian' seems to be a pejorative used manly by other Christians to describe those who pay 'lip service' to Christian belief while actually not believing in anything at all. In that sense, no, I'm not a Cultural Christian, but I do value Christian culture and that's quite different. I have firm beliefs which I can give you a potted summary of, if you're interested.
I believe that Christ's essential message and teaching is about how mankind should live, not about how we can get to Heaven.
I believe that Christ delivered his message in terms that people of his time could relate to and that this accounts for the supernatural aspects of traditional Christian belief.
I believe that Christ's message is as valid today as it ever was.
I believe in the psychological and spiritual power of prayer.
I believe in the value of worship and ritual for communities and individuals.
I believe that Christianity has been, and continues to be, a civilizing influence in the World.
I believe that the past, and present, evils associated with Christianity are the result of superstition and bigotry and are counter to Christ's message of love and fraternity.
And, just for the record,
I do not believe in God, although I don't argue against the use of the term as a metaphor for human compassion - and I do not believe in Heaven, or Hell, or the life hereafter.
Now those are my beliefs, to which I am entitled. What I'd really like to know is, why anyone here should have a problem with that?
Well, it seems that you are a christian in the cutural sense as close as it can be, except you don't like the term as it is used by some in a pejorative sense.
One question is your use of the word "spiritual". What do you have in mind?
I dont understand this position. Why bother with Jesus if the monster old testament warlord god doesnt exist? Christianity without resurrection , heaven and hell ? Pretty pointless . Christianity without the superstition mumbo jumbo isn't christianity.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"One question is your use of the word "spiritual". What do you have in mind?
I am referring to the human spirit in the non-supernatural sense of that term, not to ghostly entities.
Quote from: "leo"I dont understand this position. Why bother with Jesus if the monster old testament warlord god doesnt exist? Christianity without resurrection , heaven and hell ? Pretty pointless . Christianity without the superstition mumbo jumbo isn't christianity.
So Christianity is whatever suits you then, is that right?
Oh, and by the way, the 'monster old testament warlord god' never did exist.
Christian Atheist is just a new way to push Christianity done our throats: [youtube:319bxcl9]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_QtYIlntOA[/youtube:319bxcl9] #-o :evil: [-X Solitary
This is an excellent example of using Slick Maneuvers that are frequently used to garner support for statements or actions that inflate the person's ego at the long-term expense of others. They often exhibit characteristics of neurotics who do not have a clue about sound reasoning is. They have an unrealistic desire to control and manipulate others. It's maddening to listen to people like this because what they say doesn't make any sense and make you feel liker you are stupid because you don't understand what they are saying because they use every fallacy in logic. "You can only know God with your heart." What the hell does that mean? :roll: :rollin: Solitary
Do you honestly consider yourself a christian atheist? Are you fukn nuts? The people i have met in churches are evil.
Quote from: "Solitary"Christian Atheist is just a new way to push Christianity done our throats: Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_QtYIlntOA) #-o :evil: [-X Solitary
That's very interesting but what this guy is talking about isn't atheism. All he's saying is that God exists but some folk behave as if he doesn't. The use of the term Christian Atheist as a proper noun is a definite warning sign here, no atheist Christian that I have met has ever claimed to be a Christian Atheist, they simply state they are Christian.
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"Do you honestly consider yourself a christian atheist? Are you fukn nuts? The people i have met in churches are evil.
Can I just ask what you were doing in those churches?
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"Do you honestly consider yourself a christian atheist? Are you fukn nuts? The people i have met in churches are evil.
Can I just ask what you were doing in those churches?
Usually they are forced by their parents for fear of punishment or fear of being ostracized from their community.
Quote from: "Crump"I am referring to the human spirit in the non-supernatural sense of that term, not to ghostly entities.
Is that like school spirit? If so then I have no time for it.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Solitary"Christian Atheist is just a new way to push Christianity done our throats: Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_QtYIlntOA) #-o :evil: [-X Solitary
That's very interesting but what this guy is talking about isn't atheism. All he's saying is that God exists but some folk behave as if he doesn't. The use of the term Christian Atheist as a proper noun is a definite warning sign here, no atheist Christian that I have met has ever claimed to be a Christian Atheist, they simply state they are Christian.
"Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years." You are correct, and your quote at the introduction and this quote: "The use of the term Christian Atheist as a proper noun is a definite warning sign here." And I have been warned by you from the very beginning that you are trying to push Christianity down our throats. The guy in the video said Christian Atheist, how is he not talking about atheism? :roll: By the man in the video's definition of a Christian Atheist you fit the bill, as well as using Slick Maneuvers like he does. :rolleyes: :popcorn: Solitary
Quote from: "Crump"I simply used the term miracle as metaphor for the unexplained, the mystery of life. There can be miracles without there having to be gods.
Okay... :-s
You see, by miracle most people a miracle is an event inexplicable by the workings of nature and is thus considered work of a God or other supernatural being. For example, a person walking on water or a statue weeping blood.
I'd love to hear how something like that is supposed to work absent a belief in a god or other supernatural being.
QuoteI believe that Christ delivered his message in terms that people of his time could relate to and that this accounts for the supernatural aspects of traditional Christian belief.
So, let me get this straight. When Jesus was (allegedly) talking to people about God and hell and stuff, that was just sort of the layman's version. What he really meant to talk about was all this modern religious stuff you're advancing, but the people at the time were just too [s:3gowc5it]dumb[/s:3gowc5it] simple to understand?
QuoteI believe that Christ's message is as valid today as it ever was.
Which message?
Love thy neighbor? Certainly.
"But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart" Ehhh...
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." :shock:
QuoteI believe in the psychological and spiritual power of prayer.
Spiritual power. Now there's a term that sounds impressive but means nothing.
QuoteI believe in the value of worship and ritual for communities and individuals.
Worship of whom, exactly? :-k
And by all means, what is the value of it? Please explain.
QuoteI believe that Christianity has been, and continues to be, a civilizing influence in the World.
At the time of its conception, probably. Nowadays... *shakes head*
Let me put it another way, where do you think this skepticism of God and miracles and faith is coming from? Or the primacy of reason and knowledge over faith and tradition? From the congregation or from outside it?
QuoteI believe that the past, and present, evils associated with Christianity are the result of superstition and bigotry and are counter to Christ's message of love and fraternity.
Heh. Spoken like a true Christian.
*shows boat sinking and captain adamantly claiming that the iceberg ran right into him*
QuoteThey mean that I can visit the graves of my ancestors and feel 'in tune' with their beliefs.
Me, too. Course, they were mostly peasants and the occasional heretic. What's the range of your spirit-o-tunement? I get reception within 5 meters most of the time, 6 meters when it's not cloudy.
Quote from: "Solitary"Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Solitary"Christian Atheist is just a new way to push Christianity done our throats: Writer posted a YouTube video (//http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_QtYIlntOA) #-o :evil: [-X Solitary
That's very interesting but what this guy is talking about isn't atheism. All he's saying is that God exists but some folk behave as if he doesn't. The use of the term Christian Atheist as a proper noun is a definite warning sign here, no atheist Christian that I have met has ever claimed to be a Christian Atheist, they simply state they are Christian.
"Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years." You are correct, and your quote at the introduction and this quote: "The use of the term Christian Atheist as a proper noun is a definite warning sign here." And I have been warned by you from the very beginning that you are trying to push Christianity down our throats. The guy in the video said Christian Atheist, how is he not talking about atheism? :roll: By the man in the video's definition of a Christian Atheist you fit the bill, as well as using Slick Maneuvers like he does. :rolleyes: :popcorn: Solitary
OK, I'll spend some time on this.
The guy in the video is starting from the premise that God exists, and then says that some folk ignore that - these are the people he's calling Christian Atheists.
From where I sit, an atheist is a person that does not accept the possibility of God's existence, not a person who simply ignores the supposed fact that God exists.
Think about what an atheist is from your perspective and I'm sure you'll agree that whatever that fella's describing, it isn't an atheist.
Quote from: "TrueStory"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Chris·tian
?krisCH?n/
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
So by this definition most muslims are also christian. hmm.
No a christian has to accept jesus as the son of a god. Muslims don't accept jesus as the son of a god. They accept mohamed as the supreme profit of a god.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Quote from: "mykcob4"he said he was "christian" and Atheist, and that is an impossibility. I don't care how you spin it. It is a fcat that an Atheist is not, cannot be a christian or vise versa by definition!
I suppose it depends on the definition, but it IS a fact that the word 'atheist' is not a proper noun and shouldn't be capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence. 'Christian' IS a proper noun and should always be capitalized.
Fuck THAT! I capitalize Atheist and specifically DON'T capitalize christian for a reason. TO emphasize and deemphasize to two terms respectfully. Respectfully meaning in order not as in reverence.
And another thing you don't have to "suppose" on the definition because the fact is the definition of a christian is to believe that jesus christ is the son of a god and is a god himself. That is the antithesis of Atheist. BY FUCKING DEFINITION!
I don't care enough about Christianity to abandon correct capitalization for its sake. But as long as you're breaking the rules on purpose, I don't have a beef with it. I DO have a terrible memory though, so I can't promise I won't bring it up again.
The definition of Christian you prefer is not the only one. Why should someone use yours instead of this one?:
noun: Christian 1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"The definition of a Christian has nothing to do with the supernatural.
I thought I'd seen tortured logic before, but damn, this takes the cake. I'd certainly love to hear it spoken aloud at a church. Would make for some interesting reactions.
Yanno, dictionaries just track usage. They're not always accurate. And they're often too brief to do the concept justice. I mean, we've had fundietards come here and say that atheists "deny" the existence of God based on the dictionary definition. As if that somehow settles it. They usually get response after response admonishing their stupidity.
And here you are, doing very much the same thing, just in the other direction, harping on a definition of Christianity that's so vague that almost everyone here would qualify (//http://www.atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=963074#p963074), completely oblivious to the fact that Christianity is a monotheistic religion where belief in and worship of God is a fundamental tenet amongst believers (//http://www.creeds.net/ancient/nicene.htm) and so essential to one's status as a Christian that people who come to doubt the existence of a God (i.e. most of us) no longer consider ourselves Christian.
tl;dr:
[spoil:u5bqyhqx][ Image (//http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1334672613812_8797636.png) ][/spoil:u5bqyhqx]
Monotheistic? I count four gods, minimum. Members of a religion claiming it's monotheistic and it actually being monotheistic are two different things.
Quote from: "Crump"Now, lively debate is what I expected of this forum and I have not been disappointed, not in that respect at least. The company is - how might I say this delicately? – stimulating. Yes, stimulating is an apt term for the range of opinion that is manifest on this thread – everything from thoughtful to mindless. And yes I do crap and fart, as do all whose misfortune it is to share genetic material with whoever asked such an inane question. The element of disappointment for me is not however the discovery of some oafish behaviour, something one has to deal with everywhere these days, it is the more surprising discovery that the atheists on this forum are universally hostile to Christians. So hostile it seems that when a Christian appears who offers no argument against their viewpoint, they must deny his Christianity. This, I have to say, is not the atheism I am familiar with.
Around 30% of the UK population is atheist, and in some cities that proportion increases to more than 40%. In the UK however atheists are not strident or aggressive, but tolerant and respectful of people of faith. In London, not too far from where I live, we have seen the establishment of what has been hailed as the first atheist church (//http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/21/sunday-assembly-is-the-hot-new-atheist-church.html). But in fact atheism is more widespread in Christian churches than is often understood, and many Christians of my acquaintance regard God, if they acknowledge that term at all, as a metaphor for human compassion and love. I have even met ordained priests who utterly reject the supernatural aspects of what might be regarded as conventional Christianity. Why would any educated person in this day and age believe in virgin births, holy ghosts, and resurrections of the body? But a more relevant question for this forum is why atheists would seek to deny progressive Christians the right to reform their beliefs, as if atheism is some exclusive club that they would keep to themselves alone?
[center:18bxk8do][ Image (//http://www.therag.co.uk/snip/uploads/50746ca322651.jpg) ][/center:18bxk8do]
You can tell a lot about a poster by what posts on which they choose to focus.
Of for cryin' out loud
Christians believe in jesus christ ergo "christ-ians". The believe jesus to be the immortal son of a supernatural being. Thus they believe in a supernatural being.
Atheist don't believe in a supernatural being whatsoever.
Therefore one cannot be both a christian and an Atheist.
I don't care how you spin it, if some nut cased wrote and published a book about it(Sarah Palin wrote a book), if you've spent decades on it, if you change the meanings of terms to fit your agenda, that doesn't matter.
The fact is one cannot and is not a christian and an Atheist at the same time!
Interjecting Buddhism, Siekism, Islam, Judeism, White Buffalo Ghostism, Kabulism, Hinduism, Scientogogy, Humanism, spiritualism, or any variant into the confersation means absolutely nothing.
The thread is about a claim that one is christian and Atheist simotaneously which just isn't correct. They can claim it all they want. They can print "T" shirts and have parades whateverthefuck they care to do, but they are still dead wrong. As wrong as they can be. Theres no debate. There is only the facts.
Quote from: Mister AgendaIt's not MY definition, it's THE definition.
Some have shown a definition that claims that christian means following the teaching of christ. So they further claim that that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to believe in a supernatural being. Well they're wrong. If you believe in the teachings of christ you HAVE to believe in a god. You have to believe that christ was and is a god. You have to believe that his spirit exist and is still alive. They cherrypicked but failed the test.
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"The definition of Christian you prefer is not the only one. Why should someone use yours instead of this one?:
noun: Christian 1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
We've already been over this, but I'll go over this one last time for those not following the thread very closely:
Because it's overly broad. A lot of people could conceivably meet the dictionary definition that don't consider themselves Christians. That's not the sign of a great definition.
What's missing from the dictionary definition is belief in the divinity of Jesus (though it's implied in the "believe in Jesus" part, that's typically what people mean when they ask if you believe in Jesus), which is a central Christian tenet and would prevent this entire debacle from ever taking place.
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Monotheistic? I count four gods, minimum. Members of a religion claiming it's monotheistic and it actually being monotheistic are two different things.
Good point. And arguably, a unique conception of God for every believer. But the whole point of that was simply to point out that Christianity is sort of big on the whole theism thing.
I actually think we have already pretty well covered the fact that, even though Crump does not like the term because he views it as used perjoritively, he's a cultural Christian.
He's from the UK, and has explained pretty well why most people over there do not have a problem with him being both an atheist and a Christian.
Obviously, in countries like the USA, where Christianity is currently being shoved down our throats, where evangelicals have successfully put it back into public school, where you cannot even hold public office (with a few exceptions), and where a large group of Christians are ACTIVELY trying to turn our country into a theocracy, we re going to have a different view of Christians of any stripe.
I've defended Crump, but I'd also like him to try and look at this from OUR side of the pond...if you will. Don't assume everyone here is being intentionally obtuse. In your country atheistic Christians are common, fine and dandy. Unlike others, I'm going to understand and accept that and move on. I hope that you, Crump, can try and understand why some people here are a bit more strident, and nitpicky in their definitions of a Christian. I've met atheistic Christians on the internet before, and they have all been European, (never in person, I d not even know if they exist in the US). In America, the loudest Christians right now only accept other biblical literalists (I.E Creationists) as TRUE Christians. People who believe in evolution are from the devil, over here, even if they call themselves Christians. So I hope you might see where some people are having a hard time understanding where you are coming from.
At my kids school the other day out on the playground, they were talking about one of those groups of extreme Christians who don't believe in medicine, one was in the news as their baby had died. When I mentioned "Oh, that extreme Christian group", the teachers about bit my head off. "They are NOT Christian" I was told in near unison by 3 ladies. When I innocently pointed out they believed in Jesus, and that made them Christian, they, again like little records in unison, sternly told me those people were NOT CHRISTIANS!
So, over here, people seem to have stricter definitions of what a "real" Christian is. Even though it obviously varies from group to group, it is very EXclusinve, and not INclusive. I guess that is my point.
Aroura
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"Do you honestly consider yourself a christian atheist? Are you fukn nuts? The people i have met in churches are evil.
I've met people in churches who weren't evil. Maybe your personal experience isn't universal.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Of for cryin' out loud
Christians believe in jesus christ ergo "christ-ians". The believe jesus to be the immortal son of a supernatural being. Thus they believe in a supernatural being.
Atheist don't believe in a supernatural being whatsoever.
Therefore one cannot be both a christian and an Atheist.
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any God or gods. They can believe in any supernatural entity that's not a god. There are atheists who believe in ghosts, for instance. Perhaps you're thinking of naturalism.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I don't care how you spin it, if some nut cased wrote and published a book about it(Sarah Palin wrote a book), if you've spent decades on it, if you change the meanings of terms to fit your agenda, that doesn't matter.
The fact is one cannot and is not a christian and an Atheist at the same time!
Interjecting Buddhism, Siekism, Islam, Judeism, White Buffalo Ghostism, Kabulism, Hinduism, Scientogogy, Humanism, spiritualism, or any variant into the confersation means absolutely nothing.
The thread is about a claim that one is christian and Atheist simotaneously which just isn't correct. They can claim it all they want. They can print "T" shirts and have parades whateverthefuck they care to do, but they are still dead wrong. As wrong as they can be. Theres no debate. There is only the facts.
Why should everyone restrict themselves only to the definition of which you approve? You choose a narrow definition of Christian and someone else chooses a more inclusive one. We choose a more inclusive definition of atheist and get drive-by hits from theists all the time claiming we're not atheists unless we insist there absolutely is no God. Where do we get off telling Christians they have to use the most exclusive definition of Christianity?
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Mister Agenda"The definition of Christian you prefer is not the only one. Why should someone use yours instead of this one?:
noun: Christian 1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
We've already been over this, but I'll go over this one last time for those not following the thread very closely:
Because it's overly broad. A lot of people could conceivably meet the dictionary definition that don't consider themselves Christians. That's not the sign of a great definition.
We get into arguments with agnostics often for our definition of atheist being so broad that it includes them when they don't want to be included. Perhaps we should go to the 'great definition' of atheist, and change the name of the forum to 'agnosticforums.com', since few of us are atheists by the narrow definition.
Quote from: "Hydra009"What's missing from the dictionary definition is belief in the divinity of Jesus (though it's implied in the "believe in Jesus" part, that's typically what people mean when they ask if you believe in Jesus), which is a central Christian tenet and would prevent this entire debacle from ever taking place.
So, since you consider it 'missing', you insert it 'back' in.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Quote from: "TrueStory"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Chris·tian
?krisCH?n/
noun
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
So by this definition most muslims are also christian. hmm.
No a christian has to accept jesus as the son of a god. Muslims don't accept jesus as the son of a god. They accept mohamed as the supreme profit of a god.
I don't disagree but just illistrating how picking one line from a dictionary is pointless. Muslims do believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings, just happens to be in the Quran.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Quote from: "Mister Agenda"It's not MY definition, it's THE definition.
Some have shown a definition that claims that christian means following the teaching of christ. So they further claim that that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to believe in a supernatural being. Well they're wrong. If you believe in the teachings of christ you HAVE to believe in a god. You have to believe that christ was and is a god. You have to believe that his spirit exist and is still alive. They cherrypicked but failed the test.
Cherry-picking is the very essence of Christianity.
So where are we with this now? Some are claiming I can't be an atheist, others that I can't be a Christian. I've shown that atheist Christians are more numerous than anyone here had guessed, and we've even had other members confirming that, so what is the problem with accepting that they actually exist? After all, no-one's asking you to agree with their beliefs or anything like that.
It's just word salad. By your definition of christian they can exist, by other's definitions they cannot. Since it's language there's no definitive ruling on which definition anyone must use.
But at least we have a basic understanding for what you are, as well as a word that most of us understand in the form of 'cultural christian'.
Quote from: "Plu"But at least we have a basic understanding for what you are,
well, many of us pretty much have a good understanding of what he is.......now....whats next on the play list?
Quote from: "aitm"Quote from: "Plu"But at least we have a basic understanding for what you are,
well, many of us pretty much have a good understanding of what he is.......now....whats next on the play list?
[youtube:2of86rje]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZcmTl_1ER8[/youtube:2of86rje]
Quote from: "aitm"Quote from: "Plu"But at least we have a basic understanding for what you are,
well, many of us pretty much have a good understanding of what he is.......now....whats next on the play list?
Yup . He is a funny troll .
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Quote from: "mykcob4"Of for cryin' out loud
Christians believe in jesus christ ergo "christ-ians". The believe jesus to be the immortal son of a supernatural being. Thus they believe in a supernatural being.
Atheist don't believe in a supernatural being whatsoever.
Therefore one cannot be both a christian and an Atheist.
An atheists is someone who doesn't believe in any God or gods. They can believe in any supernatural entity that's not a god. There are atheists who believe in ghosts, for instance. Perhaps you're thinking of naturalism.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I don't care how you spin it, if some nut cased wrote and published a book about it(Sarah Palin wrote a book), if you've spent decades on it, if you change the meanings of terms to fit your agenda, that doesn't matter.
The fact is one cannot and is not a christian and an Atheist at the same time!
Interjecting Buddhism, Siekism, Islam, Judeism, White Buffalo Ghostism, Kabulism, Hinduism, Scientogogy, Humanism, spiritualism, or any variant into the confersation means absolutely nothing.
The thread is about a claim that one is christian and Atheist simotaneously which just isn't correct. They can claim it all they want. They can print "T" shirts and have parades whateverthefuck they care to do, but they are still dead wrong. As wrong as they can be. Theres no debate. There is only the facts.
Why should everyone restrict themselves only to the definition of which you approve? You choose a narrow definition of Christian and someone else chooses a more inclusive one. We choose a more inclusive definition of atheist and get drive-by hits from theists all the time claiming we're not atheists unless we insist there absolutely is no God. Where do we get off telling Christians they have to use the most exclusive definition of Christianity?
Again, defending with spin I might add, the idea that a christian can simotaneously be christian is just plain stupid. And it's not MY definition, it's THE definition. I didn't chose it, I didn't define it. I resourced it from a well respected and accepted dictionary.
No matter HOW you spin it, a christian is someone that beliefs in christ ergo a christian. To believe in christ you MUST believe in a god.
Atheist is not someone that believes in a god, especially a god that created all things. To be a christian you must believe a god created all things. That is a fact. It's not my "narrow definition."
If you think that you can just redefine things to fit YOUR idea then you are fooling yourself. Ofcourse you're going to get flack, and well deserved at that. You're wrong. It isn't a narrow minded position that doesn't accept your redefinition. We may as well call water tree bark if we use your illogic.
Well folks I've been somewhat worried by those of you who think I might be some fundamentalist Christian masquerading as an atheist in order to infiltrate this forum. Hopefully what I'm posting here should scotch the mole theory and put some minds at rest.
Sorry folks but I meant to post this on a new thread, not on one which already has 193 posts. I've moved it here viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2548 (http://atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2548)
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Crump"Here's a link that may help doubters understand how Christians can also be atheists.
[center:2p2vwuek][ Image (//http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/Godinus.html) ][/center:2p2vwuek][center:2p2vwuek][Click-the-pic][/center:2p2vwuek]
That's Christian Humanism, not Christian Atheism. Or do you think "atheism" means "humanism"?
You're getting there slowly. Christian Humanists represent a long tradition of increasing emphasis on Christ's humanity and lessened emphasis on his divinity. These days most Christian Humanists are atheist although there are still exceptions.
Not sure what the point is of emphasizing any aspect of Jesus Christ. If you break it all down to just some nice guy teaching nice things to people 2000 years ago....well, that's nice, but not terribly impressive or interesting.
Quote from: "ApostateLois"Not sure what the point is of emphasizing any aspect of Jesus Christ. If you break it all down to just some nice guy teaching nice things to people 2000 years ago....well, that's nice, but not terribly impressive or interesting.
Well that's not really the point, is it? If I discovered today that some nice guy was teaching some nice things 2000 years ago I don't suppose I would be more than slightly interested in that, let alone want to join a religion about it. However I was born into this religion, I was baptized and confirmed as a Christian, then I rejected Christianity and became an atheist because I could not accept the supernatural elements of the version of Christianity I had been raised in. Only 20 years later did I come to appreciate that I didn't have to utterly reject Christianity in order to be an atheist, in fact I could be an atheist and a Christian, and I met a lot of other people who were, and are, exactly that. They called themselves Christian Humanists and their take on Christ was to do with his humanity not his divinity. And so I rediscovered Christianity, but a Christianity that has no God, no Heaven, no Hell, no Holy Ghosts, no virgin births, no resurrections - it just has love, and compassion and fraternity. In fact all the important things that Christ was teaching us without the supernatural wrapper.
So now I have my cake and I am eating it - I've got the penny and the bun.
Quote from: "Crump"I was born into this religion, I was baptized and confirmed as a Christian, then I rejected Christianity and became an atheist because I could not accept the supernatural elements of the version of Christianity I had been raised in. Only 20 years later did I come to appreciate that I didn't have to utterly reject Christianity in order to be an atheist
No, you can accept that a few of the things mentioned in the New Testament are pretty good ideas. That doesn't make you a Christian, it makes you a very typical atheist. We don't reject things based solely on the fact that they're mentioned in the Bible. (Of course, almost none of the "good ideas" in the Bible originated in Christianity, or Judaism - they came from much earlier civilizations - so you're not really accepting anything Christian, you're accepting things that Christians - as well as many non-Christians - accept.)
Quote'Cultural Christian' seems to be a pejorative used manly by other Christians to describe those who pay 'lip service' to Christian belief while actually not believing in anything at all.
It means someone who was born Christian, who was baptized and confirmed in the Church, goes to church, but doesn't accept the woo as being real.
Sounds just like someone who's been posting in this thread.
QuoteI believe that Christ's essential message and teaching is about how mankind should live, not about how we can get to Heaven.
That would be Judaism - since (if the story is anything more than pure myth) he was a Jewish teacher (that's what a rabbi was back then, they weren't religious leaders) teaching Jewish beliefs. The religion called Christianity just adds Jesus as the Son of God and subtracts the onerous parts of Judaism (like not eating shellfish, not eating meat and milk together, etc.) Oh, and changes the "day of rest" from Sabbath to the Sun's day, so as to be different than Judaism.
QuoteI believe in the psychological and spiritual power of prayer.
IOW, if you pray, you'll feel better. (It's been proved scientifically that there's absolutely zero positive value to intercessory prayer.)
QuoteI believe in the value of worship and ritual for communities and individuals.
We had that at least 12,000 years ago. It didn't need Christianity to do it.
QuoteI believe that Christianity has been, and continues to be, a civilizing influence in the World.
Absolutely. It brought us such "civilized" things as the Crusades, the Inquisitions, European Imperialization, the forced Christianization of Africa, the Americas and Austrailasia, the Holocaust, Black slavery in the US ...
Very civilizing. (If you were on the winning side. For others, not so much.)
QuoteI simply used the term miracle as metaphor for the unexplained
Again using language to obfuscate, not to illuminate. Everyone else uses it to mean something which can't happen according to natural law. "The unexplained" is just something you don't understand. Giving it a special name is the height of hubris.
QuoteI can be in the fellowship of Christ
If, by that, you mean be part of a group who feels the same way, big deal. That doesn't merit a name. If you mean have some special relationship with Jesus, that means that you DO believe in divinity. Human beings can't live for 2,000 years without the agency of something way beyond the human (or anything known about by humans).
QuoteI can visit the graves of my ancestors and feel 'in tune' with their beliefs.
Since many of your ancestors lived when everyone believed in the supernatural as a matter of course, either you do too, or you don't share their beliefs.
Quotethe entirety of Christian culture in art and literature and philosphy
There's precious little of culture or philosophy that's strictly Christian. (The fact that Christianity accepts [read: steals] something from some other group doesn't make the thing Christian.) Literature? Aside from the Bible and writings about it, there's not much of any value. Art, yes, but Michaelangelo would have been a great artist if he had been a Jew, a Satanist or an atheist. He just would have painted different things in different places.
QuoteThey mean that I am connected with my roots.
Your Christian, woo-believing roots. Maybe not your parents. Maybe not even your grandparents. But if that's how short your view of history is, you have very shallow roots. Mine go back to some creature wondering what it would be like to climb down from the tree he was sitting in and put his feet on the ground.
QuoteQuote from: "josephpalazzo"One question is your use of the word "spiritual". What do you have in mind?
I am referring to the human spirit
The word "spirit" is the anglicization of the Latin "spiritus" which comes from the Hebrew "neshama" which means "breath". It originates in the Genesis claim that God breathed something into the dust he formed into what can only be called a golem, to transform it into a person. (The writers of the OT believed that the only difference between a living thing and a non-living thing was breathing.) It was later corrupted to mean some mysterious thing that only people have, and which marks us as special in some way. (And which transcends death and which, therefore, allows "us" to "go to" heaven after we die.)
"Spirit" meaning anything other than breath isn't Biblical in any way. It's merely another religious myth.
If you mean something like "elan" or "joie-de-vivre" or anything like that, it's not confined to human beings, and it has nothing at all to do with Christianity.
QuoteFrom where I sit, an atheist is a person that does not accept the possibility of God's existence
You're sitting behind a distorted lens, since it refers SOLELY to belief in a god or gods. Atheists are those who lack such belief. Period. Of course we (most of us) accept the possibility of some god. (Not the Christian one, though, since Christianity defines God in ways that are logically self-exclusive - IOW, God has characteristics that can't coexist.) Just not a god that created everything. (Where would it have been when it was doing this creation, since it hadn't created any "where" yet?) Not one that can do things that are logically impossible. Not one not bound by logic. Etc.
But is some trivial god possible? Sure. (Although why one would call it a god is another matter.)
Bottom line - if you don't accept the existence of any god, but accept some of the things in the Bible as being good ways to live, you're an atheist. Accepting that not unnecessarily harming others is a good thing doesn't mean that you're a Christian. If it did, many people born millennia before Christianity existed would have to be called Christians, and that's just redefining the word.
Quote from: "Colanth"Bottom line - if you don't accept the existence of any god, but accept some of the things in the Bible as being good ways to live, you're an atheist. Accepting that not unnecessarily harming others is a good thing doesn't mean that you're a Christian. If it did, many people born millennia before Christianity existed would have to be called Christians, and that's just redefining the word.
A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ. Anyone who lived before the time of Christ could not have been a Christian any more than they could have been a Marxist. I follow the teaching of Christ but since I don't have an immortal soul I cannot experience life after death. Never mind - there is enough in Jesus' teaching that I can experience to satisfy me.
Quote from: "Colanth"Of course we (most of us) accept the possibility of some god.
Now that is an eye opener, Colanth. You accept the possibility of 'some god', but not the Christian one.
Surely there are either gods or there aren't? I don't see how anyone can possibly entertain the notion of some gods but not others, because if gods exist then you cannot determine the nature of them. And who are 'we' that you speak of, is there anyone else on this thread who thinks as you do?
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist. I'm not sure that you, by your own definition, are an atheist at all.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Bottom line - if you don't accept the existence of any god, but accept some of the things in the Bible as being good ways to live, you're an atheist. Accepting that not unnecessarily harming others is a good thing doesn't mean that you're a Christian. If it did, many people born millennia before Christianity existed would have to be called Christians, and that's just redefining the word.
A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ. Anyone who lived before the time of Christ could not have been a Christian any more than they could have been a Marxist. I follow the teaching of Christ but since I don't have an immortal soul I cannot experience life after death. Never mind - there is enough in Jesus' teaching that I can experience to satisfy me.
Quote from: "Colanth"Of course we (most of us) accept the possibility of some god.
Now that is an eye opener, Colanth. You accept the possibility of 'some god', but not the Christian one.
Surely there are either gods or there aren't? I don't see how anyone can possibly entertain the notion of some gods but not others, because if gods exist then you cannot determine the nature of them. And who are 'we' that you speak of, is there anyone else on this thread who thinks as you do?
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist. I'm not sure that you, by your own definition, are an atheist at all.
Might I suggest that instead of wasting your time redefining term's you learn the basic ones such as Agnostic!
Quote from: "bericks999"Might I suggest that instead of wasting your time redefining term's you learn the basic ones such as Agnostic!
And why wouldn't I know what an agnostic is, having once been one myself? But an agnostic is not an atheist and, what is more, having accepted the possibility that gods may exist, the agnostic isn't really in any position to say what gods then do exist, because that would require knowledge of those gods which is something that the agnostic does not have.
Quote from: "Crump"But an agnostic is not an atheist and, what is more, having accepted the possibility that gods may exist, the agnostic isn't really in any position to say what gods then do exist, because that would require knowledge of those gods which is something that the agnostic does not have.
:-s
:-k
:rolleyes:
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "ApostateLois"Not sure what the point is of emphasizing any aspect of Jesus Christ. If you break it all down to just some nice guy teaching nice things to people 2000 years ago....well, that's nice, but not terribly impressive or interesting.
Well that's not really the point, is it? If I discovered today that some nice guy was teaching some nice things 2000 years ago I don't suppose I would be more than slightly interested in that, let alone want to join a religion about it. However I was born into this religion, I was baptized and confirmed as a Christian, then I rejected Christianity and became an atheist because I could not accept the supernatural elements of the version of Christianity I had been raised in. Only 20 years later did I come to appreciate that I didn't have to utterly reject Christianity in order to be an atheist, in fact I could be an atheist and a Christian, and I met a lot of other people who were, and are, exactly that. They called themselves Christian Humanists and their take on Christ was to do with his humanity not his divinity. And so I rediscovered Christianity, but a Christianity that has no God, no Heaven, no Hell, no Holy Ghosts, no virgin births, no resurrections - it just has love, and compassion and fraternity. In fact all the important things that Christ was teaching us without the supernatural wrapper.
So now I have my cake and I am eating it - I've got the penny and the bun.
Hitler had a few (very few) good ideas too. So maybe you';ve been a NAZI as well. Let's see Christian/Humanist/Nazi is that what you mean? I mean if we can just apply any old definition to any term that is hanging around you might be a sado-masicist also. Let's take inventory shall we.
Christian-Humanist-Nazi-Sado-Masicist.
Should we go further? Hey why not call alcoholics something else? Maybe they drink large quantities of booze but really aren't raging drunks. I mean we can take any term and just disregard the REAL meaning of the term, apply any positive spin on it and say it is completly different. We'll write a book and that will make it all okay. We'll kill a bunch of people and just say that we like the good aspects of it and ignore whats wrong about it and therefore REDEFINE MASS MURDER as something warm and fuzzy.
Why stop there? Lets just renouce all of science altogether. Let's throw out the lexicon and just randomly redefine everything, ignoring social responsibility, logic and common sense. Nothing can stop us. We'll start a movement. And to think it all started because we got a wild hair and chose two terms that are complete opposites and redefined them to mean the same thing, all because we said so and for no other reason.
Thats you in a nutshell Crump. It's stupid, it's wrong. I don't care how you spin it. I don't give a rats ass that there are more of you, that just makes it worse. Stupidity runs in numbers and so far you're number one on that list.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Bottom line - if you don't accept the existence of any god, but accept some of the things in the Bible as being good ways to live, you're an atheist. Accepting that not unnecessarily harming others is a good thing doesn't mean that you're a Christian. If it did, many people born millennia before Christianity existed would have to be called Christians, and that's just redefining the word.
A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ. Anyone who lived before the time of Christ could not have been a Christian any more than they could have been a Marxist. I follow the teaching of Christ but since I don't have an immortal soul I cannot experience life after death. Never mind - there is enough in Jesus' teaching that I can experience to satisfy me.
Quote from: "Colanth"Of course we (most of us) accept the possibility of some god.
Now that is an eye opener, Colanth. You accept the possibility of 'some god', but not the Christian one.
Surely there are either gods or there aren't? I don't see how anyone can possibly entertain the notion of some gods but not others, because if gods exist then you cannot determine the nature of them. And who are 'we' that you speak of, is there anyone else on this thread who thinks as you do?
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist. I'm not sure that you, by your own definition, are an atheist at all.
You aren't a follower of jesus christ if you don't accept god as your creator.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "bericks999"Might I suggest that instead of wasting your time redefining term's you learn the basic ones such as Agnostic!
And why wouldn't I know what an agnostic is, having once been one myself? But an agnostic is not an atheist and, what is more, having accepted the possibility that gods may exist, the agnostic isn't really in any position to say what gods then do exist, because that would require knowledge of those gods which is something that the agnostic does not have.
"Agnostic" and "atheist" are not mutually exclusive terms.
(//http://www.noforbiddenquestions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/agnostic-diagram11.png)
Most folks here would identify as an agnostic atheist if you asked for the long form. Few people do ask, so we just say "atheist."
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Colanth"Bottom line - if you don't accept the existence of any god, but accept some of the things in the Bible as being good ways to live, you're an atheist. Accepting that not unnecessarily harming others is a good thing doesn't mean that you're a Christian. If it did, many people born millennia before Christianity existed would have to be called Christians, and that's just redefining the word.
A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ.
If you follow the things he taught, and just that, you're following Judaism because, being a teacher of Jewish tradition (that's what a rabbi was), that's all he taught. So your definition of "Christian" would make Christians Jews too.
Again - obfuscation isn't illumination.
QuoteAnyone who lived before the time of Christ could not have been a Christian
All Jews were since, by your definition, all being a Christian means is following the teachings of a Jewish teacher.
Quoteany more than they could have been a Marxist.
Marx wasn't teaching someone else's ideas, as Jesus was
QuoteI follow the teaching of Christ
Which, one more time, are nothing more than the teachings of any other rabbi of the early first century. (He wouldn't have been a rabbi if he taught some other religion.)
QuoteQuote from: "Colanth"Of course we (most of us) accept the possibility of some god.
Now that is an eye opener, Colanth. You accept the possibility of 'some god', but not the Christian one.
Nor any other one that's defined as being self-contradictory. A god that created the universe? "Where" was he when he was doing this, there not yet being any "where" to be in? A god that knows everything that we'll ever do, but "grants" us free will?
No, we can accept that there might be something, but not something that's self-contradictory, like the Christian god.
QuoteSurely there are either gods or there aren't?
Sure, but that doesn't make the existence of a god a 50/50 proposition.
QuoteI don't see how anyone can possibly entertain the notion of some gods but not others
I can entertain the notion of a unicorn, but I can't entertain the notion of an invisible pink one. (Because "invisible" and "pink" are mutually exclusive, so if it's one it can't be the other.)
Quotebecause if gods exist then you cannot determine the nature of them.
Why not? You can't entertain the notion of a god whose nature you can determine? I can.
QuoteAnd who are 'we' that you speak of, is there anyone else on this thread who thinks as you do?
Many on this forum have already expressed this view.
QuoteI do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist.
That's fine, but accepting the notion of gods doesn't make one a theist. (And it IS a binary thing.)
QuoteI'm not sure that you, by your own definition, are an atheist at all.
Since I don't believe in any gods, I am - since that's ALL it means. If you want to make up your own definition, fell free - but don't demand that anyone else accept yours. You'll get VERY short shrift here if you do.
Quote from: "Aroura33"I actually think we have already pretty well covered the fact that, even though Crump does not like the term because he views it as used perjoritively, he's a cultural Christian.
YES! Finally, something I can agree with in this thread! =D>
QuoteSo, over here, people seem to have stricter definitions of what a "real" Christian is. Even though it obviously varies from group to group, it is very EXclusinve, and not INclusive. I guess that is my point.
Yeah, no kidding. Hell, it's up for grabs as to whether or not Mormons are Christians, let alone atheists.
Allahu Akbar! You are all infidels and sin before Allah: "Off with your heathen heads and crucify Christian Atheist first so the atheist can watch." If atheist want to convert to Islam you will be foregiven and if you die for our cause you will receive 72 virgins also. :twisted: :evil: Ali Baba Husain
Quote from: "Solitary"you will receive 72 virgins
(//http://global3.memecdn.com/72-Virgins_o_47285.jpg)
Quote from: "Crump"A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ.
...Snip...
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist.
Quote from: "John 14:6"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Who's the Father?
Quote from: "mykcob4"Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "ApostateLois"Not sure what the point is of emphasizing any aspect of Jesus Christ. If you break it all down to just some nice guy teaching nice things to people 2000 years ago....well, that's nice, but not terribly impressive or interesting.
Well that's not really the point, is it? If I discovered today that some nice guy was teaching some nice things 2000 years ago I don't suppose I would be more than slightly interested in that, let alone want to join a religion about it. However I was born into this religion, I was baptized and confirmed as a Christian, then I rejected Christianity and became an atheist because I could not accept the supernatural elements of the version of Christianity I had been raised in. Only 20 years later did I come to appreciate that I didn't have to utterly reject Christianity in order to be an atheist, in fact I could be an atheist and a Christian, and I met a lot of other people who were, and are, exactly that. They called themselves Christian Humanists and their take on Christ was to do with his humanity not his divinity. And so I rediscovered Christianity, but a Christianity that has no God, no Heaven, no Hell, no Holy Ghosts, no virgin births, no resurrections - it just has love, and compassion and fraternity. In fact all the important things that Christ was teaching us without the supernatural wrapper.
So now I have my cake and I am eating it - I've got the penny and the bun.
Hitler had a few (very few) good ideas too. So maybe you';ve been a NAZI as well. Let's see Christian/Humanist/Nazi is that what you mean? I mean if we can just apply any old definition to any term that is hanging around you might be a sado-masicist also. Let's take inventory shall we.
Christian-Humanist-Nazi-Sado-Masicist.
Should we go further? Hey why not call alcoholics something else? Maybe they drink large quantities of booze but really aren't raging drunks. I mean we can take any term and just disregard the REAL meaning of the term, apply any positive spin on it and say it is completly different. We'll write a book and that will make it all okay. We'll kill a bunch of people and just say that we like the good aspects of it and ignore whats wrong about it and therefore REDEFINE MASS MURDER as something warm and fuzzy.
Why stop there? Lets just renouce all of science altogether. Let's throw out the lexicon and just randomly redefine everything, ignoring social responsibility, logic and common sense. Nothing can stop us. We'll start a movement. And to think it all started because we got a wild hair and chose two terms that are complete opposites and redefined them to mean the same thing, all because we said so and for no other reason.
Thats you in a nutshell Crump. It's stupid, it's wrong. I don't care how you spin it. I don't give a rats ass that there are more of you, that just makes it worse. Stupidity runs in numbers and so far you're number one on that list.
The thing that interests me here is that you are seeking to put limits on what Christians can think. Here is John Shelby Spong, an Episcopalian minister who is now retired but was the Bishop of Newark - that's Newark, New Jersey, not the other Newark.[center:2usz9ctq](//http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Bishop_John_Shelby_Spong_portrait_2006.png/220px-Bishop_John_Shelby_Spong_portrait_2006.png) (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong)[/center:2usz9ctq]If you can be bothered to click on the image and read a little you will discover that atheist Christians are in the USA too, and that Bishop Spong is one. Now you may call that 'stupid' or 'wrong', but it is nevertheless a fact, and if atheists are about anything they are about recognizing facts, not about simply imagining things the way they want them to be.
I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.
Quote from: "Crump"I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.
You need to realize that the word "christian" in the US carries a different connotation than what you are accustomed to. And for many here, that word spells revulsion.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "bericks999"Might I suggest that instead of wasting your time redefining term's you learn the basic ones such as Agnostic!
And why wouldn't I know what an agnostic is, having once been one myself? But an agnostic is not an atheist and, what is more, having accepted the possibility that gods may exist, the agnostic isn't really in any position to say what gods then do exist, because that would require knowledge of those gods which is something that the agnostic does not have.
"Agnostic" and "atheist" are not mutually exclusive terms.
[ Image (//http://www.noforbiddenquestions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/agnostic-diagram11.png) ]
Most folks here would identify as an agnostic atheist if you asked for the long form. Few people do ask, so we just say "atheist."
Well that's really interesting, Hijiri. Agnosticism is about knowledge. An agnostic adopts the position that it is not possible to know whether there are gods. Explicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
On this thread though we have a thoroughgoing confusion about agnosticism and we even have a contributor who claims at one to be an agnostic and to have knowledge that would determine the nature of whatever gods may exist.
This 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic, is deduced as follows
men have free-will - therefore the future cannot be known - therefore any god that exists cannot know the future
Now it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will, but it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Quote from: "Crump"I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.
You need to realize that the word "christian" in the US carries a different connotation than what you are accustomed to. And for many here, that word spells revulsion.
Well now we seem to be coming down to it, don't we? On this forum the word 'atheist' is assumed to mean a person for whom Christians are revolting - therefore no-one can be an atheist and a Christian.
That is not atheism, it is just prejudice.
Quote from: "Crump"This 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic, is deduced as follows
men have free-will - therefore the future cannot be known - therefore any god that exists cannot know the future
Now it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will, but it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
That deduction relies on the premise that free will renders the future unknowable. Since it can be demonstrated that valid predictions can be made when interacting with men (Derren Brown makes a living out of it), it suggests that your argument is faulty.
Quote from: "Crump"This 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic, is deduced as follows
men have free-will - therefore the future cannot be known - therefore any god that exists cannot know the future
Now it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will, but it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
That's not quite correct. As an atheist, I might use a theist's definition of God just to show that this definition leads to a contradiction. It doesn't mean that I claim to know God.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Crump"This 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic, is deduced as follows
men have free-will - therefore the future cannot be known - therefore any god that exists cannot know the future
Now it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will, but it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
That deduction relies on the premise that free will renders the future unknowable. Since it can be demonstrated that valid predictions can be made when interacting with men (Derren Brown makes a living out of it), it suggests that your argument is faulty.
Yes of course the argument is faulty, but it is not my argument. Have you actually read the post, or just that bit of it?
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Quote from: "Crump"I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.
You need to realize that the word "christian" in the US carries a different connotation than what you are accustomed to. And for many here, that word spells revulsion.
Well now we seem to be coming down to it, don't we? On this forum the word 'atheist' is assumed to mean a person for whom Christians are revolting - therefore no-one can be an atheist and a Christian.
That is not atheism, it is just prejudice.
Atheism is not defined in terms of what one might feel towards christians. You might feel comfortable with christians, other atheists aren't. That's a fact of life. In some parts of the US, as an atheists, you would be ostracized. Your job would be in peril. You would be denied to run for elections. You would be villified to the point you would want to leave everything including your family and friends. You haven't lived that, so you are in no position to judge.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Atheism is not defined in terms of what one might feel towards christians. You might feel comfortable with christians, other atheists aren't. That's a fact of life. In some parts of the US, as an atheists, you would be ostracized. Your job would be in peril. You would be denied to run for elections. You would be villified to the point you would want to leave everything including your family and friends. You haven't lived that, so you are in no position to judge.
You're right I have not lived like that, but I have lived with prejudice of another sort so I do know what it's like. Freedom of belief is such an ingrained concept in the UK that hardly anyone would bat an eyelid if you said you were a Witch or a Satanist, let alone an atheist. In the last census it was discovered that we have more Jedi than we have Moslems, and we even have quite a number who claim to be time lords and want to be recognized as a religious body. (//https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lets-make-timelord-an-offical-religion/118016774881763) Now this may come across as crazy but to us it's just freedom. No-one would turn someone down for a job because they were a Jedi - if they did their arse would be sued in very short order, and the newspapers would give them hell (if you know what I mean). So being an atheist Christian is pretty close to being normal and it really is quite alarming to find a place where someone is even capable of saying you must be stupid or a liar to be both an atheist and a Christian. What you folks need over there is not more dogmatism, whether it's from atheists or whoever, but more religious freedom.
You should be campaigning to allow folk to believe whatever they want, not to make them think like you.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Mahatma Gandhi,
Quote from: "Crump"Yes of course the argument is faulty, but it is not my argument. Have you actually read the post, or just that bit of it?
I read the entire post. I quoted the pertinent bit for context. I must have missed the bit where you attributed that argument to someone else. Re-reading the post there's nothing there to suggest that the words were not your own.
Do you actually read the posts that you write?
Also, you've claimed many times to be a "Christian Atheist". A follower of Christ (The main protagonist from the Bible) that does not believe in God. Yet you conveniently fail to answer questions about the references that the Jesus character makes to God and the supernatural. Furthermore, if you're using Jesus Christ as a model for your behaviour, how do you pick what is right to follow? Do you follow all of the teachings of Jesus, or just those that you agree with?
Quote from: "Crump"You should be campaigning to allow folk to believe whatever they want, not to make them think like you.
But I don't like folk that don't take their kids to the doctor because they believe that God will divinely heal their sick children.
I don't like folk that believe that they shouldn't get vaccinated, because it's my life they are playing with as well as their own.
I don't like folk that believe that mental illness is caused by demons and that the only way to cure them is to exorcise them.
I don't like folk that believe they are the superior favoured race.
I don't like folk that believe they are still good to drive after 20 beers.
Beliefs are ultimately translated into actions. Actions that can help or harm. I'm against beliefs that end up harming people.
Quote from: "Jason78"Also, you've claimed many times to be a "Christian Atheist".
I'm sure you just don't read stuff, Jason. Please find a quote where I've claimed that, if you can.
What I am is a "Christian Humanist" and I am also an atheist, which makes me an atheist Christian, not a "Christian Atheist", whatever that is. I have gone to great lengths to explain to everyone here what my beliefs are, why I have those beliefs, and what those beliefs mean to me. Do not try to put words in my mouth, Jason, or try to make me fit your own limited preconceptions of what a Christian aught to be, just read what I have written and you will understand.
QuoteExplicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
Nonsense, to suggest one needs to know imaginary beings in order to understand the mythology associated with them is pure arrogant stupidity. One does not need any special intelligence or knowledge of anything to recognize superstitious bull-shit. To suggest otherwise is to admit that premises must be accepted as truths simply because they are uttered by a human. That's plain stupid.
Quote from: "aitm"QuoteExplicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
Nonsense, to suggest one needs to know imaginary beings in order to understand the mythology associated with them is pure arrogant stupidity. One does not need any special intelligence or knowledge of anything to recognize superstitious bull-shit. To suggest otherwise is to admit that premises must be accepted as truths simply because they are uttered by a human. That's plain stupid.
You're just confusing agnosticism and rationalism.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Crump"A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ.
...Snip...
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist.
Quote from: "John 14:6"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Who's the Father?
This deserves an answer.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Crump"You should be campaigning to allow folk to believe whatever they want, not to make them think like you.
But I don't like folk that don't take their kids to the doctor because they believe that God will divinely heal their sick children.
I don't like folk that believe that they shouldn't get vaccinated, because it's my life they are playing with as well as their own.
I don't like folk that believe that mental illness is caused by demons and that the only way to cure them is to exorcise them.
I don't like folk that believe they are the superior favoured race.
I don't like folk that believe they are still good to drive after 20 beers.
Beliefs are ultimately translated into actions. Actions that can help or harm. I'm against beliefs that end up harming people.
You can't limit folks' actions by telling them what to think, this is done with laws.
Quote from: "Hydra009"Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Crump"A Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ.
...Snip...
I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist.
Quote from: "John 14:6"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Who's the Father?
This deserves an answer.
The Bible, if taken literally, is over 90% bullshit. It doesn't take much nouse to realize that if the Bible is going to be understood at all, it must be understood as being allegorical. But you can pick one bullshit verse out of the entire bullshit bible and present it here as if it proves something. And you say, 'This deserves an answer'.
You deserve a medal.
Quote from: "Crump"You deserve a medal.
...and there goes any lingering doubts regarding you being a troll.
Sorry guys, but you're wasting your time here.
(//http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m951ugIaxK1r4hm32o1_250.gif)
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "Jason78"Also, you've claimed many times to be a "Christian Atheist".
I'm sure you just don't read stuff, Jason. Please find a quote where I've claimed that, if you can.
What I am is a "Christian Humanist" and I am also an atheist, which makes me an atheist Christian, not a "Christian Atheist", whatever that is. I have gone to great lengths to explain to everyone here what my beliefs are, why I have those beliefs, and what those beliefs mean to me. Do not try to put words in my mouth, Jason, or try to make me fit your own limited preconceptions of what a Christian aught to be, just read what I have written and you will understand.
So you're an atheist Christian, not a Christian atheist.
That makes all the difference then.
Edit: I'm guessing that there is a reason you ignored the other questions in my other posts. I'm thinking that you can't answer them.
QuoteA Christian, my friend, is nothing more or less than a follower of Jesus Christ.
He's been dead for quite awhile. What, exactly, are you following? What does it mean, to follow Jesus? The very word "christ" means "anointed," implying a divinely inspired priesthood and other such religious frippery. Maybe you should leave the "Christ" off and just follow a guy named "Jesus." And I guess you simply believe in all the good stuff that his spin doctors claim he said (after all, Jesus, himself, IF he existed, never wrote a single word of his own). But in this context, I really have no idea what it means to "follow" Jesus. I can be nice to people, give money to a homeless guy, help my neighbors, etc. without ever once thinking "Jesus would have done that." It just seems an unnecessary consideration, a waste of mental effort.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Atheism is not defined in terms of what one might feel towards christians. You might feel comfortable with christians, other atheists aren't. That's a fact of life. In some parts of the US, as an atheists, you would be ostracized. Your job would be in peril. You would be denied to run for elections. You would be villified to the point you would want to leave everything including your family and friends. You haven't lived that, so you are in no position to judge.
You're right I have not lived like that, but I have lived with prejudice of another sort so I do know what it's like. Freedom of belief is such an ingrained concept in the UK that hardly anyone would bat an eyelid if you said you were a Witch or a Satanist, let alone an atheist. In the last census it was discovered that we have more Jedi than we have Moslems, and we even have quite a number who claim to be time lords and want to be recognized as a religious body. (//https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lets-make-timelord-an-offical-religion/118016774881763) Now this may come across as crazy but to us it's just freedom. No-one would turn someone down for a job because they were a Jedi - if they did their arse would be sued in very short order, and the newspapers would give them hell (if you know what I mean). So being an atheist Christian is pretty close to being normal and it really is quite alarming to find a place where someone is even capable of saying you must be stupid or a liar to be both an atheist and a Christian. What you folks need over there is not more dogmatism, whether it's from atheists or whoever, but more religious freedom.
You should be campaigning to allow folk to believe whatever they want, not to make them think like you.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Mahatma Gandhi,
Well, I don't think you have any idea of what's involved. Here's one article to open your eyes:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... in_nc.html (http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2009/12/atheist_swears_affirms_oath_in_nc.html)
Quote from: "Crump"The Bible, if taken literally, is over 90% bullshit. It doesn't take much nouse to realize that if the Bible is going to be understood at all, it must be understood as being allegorical. But you can pick one bullshit verse out of the entire bullshit bible and present it here as if it proves something.
I didn't present the verse here as if it proved something. You stated that a Christian is a follower of Christ. You've also stated that you are an atheist. I then presented that particular verse, and then I asked you a very specific question.
Who is the Father?
It's a very simple question. I think that you are evading the question because it requires you to make a specific statement regarding your beliefs in this area. I didn't pick that verse at random, the chapter that it comes from is all about following Jesus. Read your bible.
Quote from: "Crump"Well that's really interesting, Hijiri. Agnosticism is about knowledge. An agnostic adopts the position that it is not possible to know whether there are gods. Explicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
I did read the full post, but for the sake of saving space I am not quoting it in full.What you have described is known as "hard agnosticism," the belief that we
cannot know. The word agnostic, in and of itself, only indicates a lack of knowledge. A hard agnostic's position is logically unsound, though. The only way to know that we "cannot know," you'd have to have enough knowledge of the universe (possibly total) to come to that conclusion. We do not possess such knowledge, so it's a bit silly to suggest there's no way to determine the existence or non-existence of deities when we are, as yet, in no position to prove such a thing. In other words the hard agnostic has, ironically, taken a gnostic stance on the issue.
QuoteThe Bible, if taken literally, is over 90% bullshit. It doesn't take much nouse to realize that if the Bible is going to be understood at all, it must be understood as being allegorical. But you can pick one bullshit verse out of the entire bullshit bible and present it here as if it proves something.
And just exactly does it mean allegorically? If you are pissed off at humanity destroy every human being but one that is chosen because they kiss your ass? And yet you claim to understand it by being allegorical. Explain what the passages say that are allegorical! I bet you can't. :popcorn: Solitary
Sixteen fucking pages.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Well, I don't think you have any idea of what's involved. Here's one article to open your eyes:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... in_nc.html (http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2009/12/atheist_swears_affirms_oath_in_nc.html)
That was interesting and little bit worrying that NC law demands that sort of thing. Happily though the US Constitution, which seems to have been written by folk with more sense, takes precedence, as the columnist points out. I can understand that religious prejudice exists but it isn't just the religious who are guilty of it. 'Live and let live' is a maxim the writers of the Constitution had in mind, and which we should all remember.
Didn't OJ say that? Hmmm! :roll: Solitary
Quote from: "mykcob4"Again, defending with spin I might add, the idea that a christian can simotaneously be christian is just plain stupid. And it's not MY definition, it's THE definition. I didn't chose it, I didn't define it. I resourced it from a well respected and accepted dictionary.
And mine came from a different dictionary. You don't have THE definition, you have A definition.
Quote from: "mykcob4"No matter HOW you spin it, a christian is someone that beliefs in christ ergo a christian. To believe in christ you MUST believe in a god.
To believe Jesus is the son of God you must believe in God. To believe Jesus was a great moral teacher worthy of emulating, you don't (still requires some garden-variety cherry-picking, no more so than for anything else Christians believe).
Quote from: "mykcob4"Atheist is not someone that believes in a god, especially a god that created all things. To be a christian you must believe a god created all things. That is a fact. It's not my "narrow definition."
I didn't mean to imply you owned the definiton. It's A narrow defintion.
Quote from: "mykcob4"If you think that you can just redefine things to fit YOUR idea then you are fooling yourself.
I'm not redefining anything. I'm just looking at the defintions lying around and noting that they fall in a range that runs from 'agrees totally with the Apostle's creed' to 'follower of the teachings of Jesus'.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Ofcourse you're going to get flack, and well deserved at that. You're wrong. It isn't a narrow minded position that doesn't accept your redefinition. We may as well call water tree bark if we use your illogic.
The only one getting apoplectic about it is you, but I'm not here to avoid flack. You are not your position. Saying the definition you used is narrow does not imply that it or you are narrow-minded. Me using a different definition than you isn't redefining, it's merely using a different definition. That it doesn't agree with the one you think is most cogent isn't the standard by which it's determined that a meaning has been redefined for convenience. Although the definitions vary, they don't vary so much that a similar range of definitions for tree bark would include water.
Christian humanists don't exclude atheists. Maybe you would prefer the more precise but longer term: 'Christian humanist atheist' to 'Christian atheist' as a term for a Christian humanist who doesn't believe God is real?
They should be called something, they're a 'thing', and I would need a very good reason to call them something besides what they want to be called.
Quote from: "Crump"Now that is an eye opener, Colanth. You accept the possibility of 'some god', but not the Christian one.
The Abrahamic God is a pile of mutually contradictory omni-attributes that are clearly the result of generations of 'my god is more powerful than your god' iterations. It's a married bachelor, it can't exist
Quote from: "Crump"Surely there are either gods or there aren't?
Surely.
Quote from: "Crump"I don't see how anyone can possibly entertain the notion of some gods but not others, because if gods exist then you cannot determine the nature of them.
The nature of a god being unknown is not an argument against its existence.
Quote from: "Crump"And who are 'we' that you speak of, is there anyone else on this thread who thinks as you do?
Likely, most of us. If you can grasp the difference between the statements 'I don't believe in any God or gods' and 'I believe there are no gods or God', you can understand the difference between agnostic/negative atheism and gnostic/positive atheism.
Quote from: "Crump"I do not accept any notions of gods, which makes me an atheist.
That is correct.
Quote from: "Crump"I'm not sure that you, by your own definition, are an atheist at all.
Accepting the possibility that a concept of a god that is not self-contradictory and therefore logically impossible
might exist doesn't imply acceptance of one
actually existing. In my case, I am a gnostic atheist towards the Abrahamic and other logically impossible gods and an agnostic atheist towards all other gods: one or more might exist, but there's no good reason to think any of them actually do.
Quote from: "Colanth"All Jews were since, by your definition, all being a Christian means is following the teachings of a Jewish teacher.
It's the other way around. Christianity is a branch of Judaism that emphasizes the teachings of one particular rabbi and elevates him above all the prophets.
Quote from: "Crump"Well that's really interesting, Hijiri. Agnosticism is about knowledge. An agnostic adopts the position that it is not possible to know whether there are gods. Explicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
So far, so good, except mere agnosticism doesn't require a verdict of 'can't know' only 'doesn't know'.
Quote from: "Crump"On this thread though we have a thoroughgoing confusion about agnosticism and we even have a contributor who claims at one to be an agnostic and to have knowledge that would determine the nature of whatever gods may exist.
No one has posted anything on this thread that would reasonably lead you to that conclusion.
Quote from: "Crump"This 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic, is deduced as follows
men have free-will - therefore the future cannot be known - therefore any god that exists cannot know the future
That's an argument against any proposed god that is claimed to possess omniscience and also grant free will, not a claim of knowledge about a 'real' god. It is an attempt to refute a concept. It doesn't 'break' agnosticism to be able to apply logic to various conceptions of gods.
Quote from: "Crump"Now it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will, but it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
There was no claim to have deduced the nature of any god, only an attempted refutation of a particular idea about god concepts that combine certain ideas. Agnostics can talk about ideas, can't they?
I would like to see a sound refutation of the problem of the apparent contradiction between having free will and not being able to choose any course of action than the one foretold. So far, all the ones I've heard amount to 'it must be possible because my definition of God is that he is omniscient and grants free will'.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Quote from: "Crump"I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.
You need to realize that the word "christian" in the US carries a different connotation than what you are accustomed to. And for many here, that word spells revulsion.
Well now we seem to be coming down to it, don't we? On this forum the word 'atheist' is assumed to mean a person for whom Christians are revolting - therefore no-one can be an atheist and a Christian.
That is not atheism, it is just prejudice.
And bigotry is drawing broad conclusions about a group of people when you've only interacted with a fraction of them. It seems to be a pattern with you, to make comments about all the atheists who are members of this forum because a few have offended your delicate sensibilities.
Quote from: "Crump"The Bible, if taken literally, is over 90% bullshit. It doesn't take much nouse to realize that if the Bible is going to be understood at all, it must be understood as being allegorical. But you can pick one bullshit verse out of the entire bullshit bible and present it here as if it proves something. And you say, 'This deserves an answer'.
You deserve a medal.
Hm. A simple honest answer from a Christian humanist might have looked something like 'Very likely Jesus believed in God, but I don't. I don't believe I have to agree with Jesus on matters of the supernatural to consider myself a follower of his moral teachings.'
But you went with evasion and snark. Not that that sort of thing has anything to do with your reception around here, which is enitirely due to the prejudice of every single atheist who frequents this board but you, eh?
Crump said:
I'm seriously beginning to wonder if you are atheists on this forum, or whether you're just folk who live in your own little dreams.[/quote]
Oh for cryin' out loud. Shelby is a fraud that was thrown out of the church. There is no such thing a christian-Atheist PERIOD. That isn't me dictating what you can think. Thats me stating a clear fact!
So you're seriously wondering if we're Atheist? Well it's YOU in your own little world. Like I said before I don't care if there is more than you that profess this utter stupidity. It just means theres a group of morons and not just only you. YOU CAN'T BE BOTH AN ATHEIST AND A cHRISTIAN AT THE SAME TIME!!!!!!! That's a fact!
You know what misteragenda? You need to seriously THINK and stop defending this nonsense. NOONE is dictating what anyone can or cannot think. You can't think all you want but it doesn't change the fact that you are WRONG.
christians are NOT also Atheist. Not by any stretch of the imagination or by any definition.
christian is a believer in jesus christ. To believe in jesus christ you therefore believe he is the son of a god. Therefore you believe in a god.
To say that you are a christian and don't believe in a god is the stupidest thing I have ever heard or have read.
Quote from: "mykcob4"You know what misteragenda? You need to seriously THINK and stop defending this nonsense. NOONE is dictating what anyone can or cannot think. You can't think all you want but it doesn't change the fact that you are WRONG.
christians are NOT also Atheist. Not by any stretch of the imagination or by any definition.
christian is a believer in jesus christ. To believe in jesus christ you therefore believe he is the son of a god. Therefore you believe in a god.
To say that you are a christian and don't believe in a god is the stupidest thing I have ever heard or have read.
Do you ever post anything that doesn't come off as you being so excited your spittle was hitting the screen as you typed it?
Do you think I'll agree that I'm wrong if you put in all-caps enough?
Certainly, the vast majority of Christians aren't atheists, but the vast majority aren't snake handlers, either.
If the idea of an atheist being a Christian is the stupidist thing you have ever heard or read, you've lived an extremely sheltered life, which might account for so many caps over the idea that someone who attends Christian services, sings Christian hymns, and thinks Jesus is a good example to follow might still call themselves a Christian even if they don't believe in God. Refusing to accept the term Crump and people like him prefer for themselves begs the question of what to call such a person if we're going to insist on not calling them by their own name for themselves.
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Quote from: "mykcob4"You know what misteragenda? You need to seriously THINK and stop defending this nonsense. NOONE is dictating what anyone can or cannot think. You can't think all you want but it doesn't change the fact that you are WRONG.
christians are NOT also Atheist. Not by any stretch of the imagination or by any definition.
christian is a believer in jesus christ. To believe in jesus christ you therefore believe he is the son of a god. Therefore you believe in a god.
To say that you are a christian and don't believe in a god is the stupidest thing I have ever heard or have read.
Do you ever post anything that doesn't come off as you being so excited your spittle was hitting the screen as you typed it?
Do you think I'll agree that I'm wrong if you put in all-caps enough?
Certainly, the vast majority of Christians aren't atheists, but the vast majority aren't snake handlers, either.
If the idea of an atheist being a Christian is the stupidist thing you have ever heard or read, you've lived an extremely sheltered life, which might account for so many caps over the idea that someone who attends Christian services, sings Christian hymns, and thinks Jesus is a good example to follow might still call themselves a Christian even if they don't believe in God. Refusing to accept the term Crump and people like him prefer for themselves begs the question of what to call such a person if we're going to insist on not calling them by their own name for themselves.
Caps are emphasis. There is no excited spittle. I have led a very wide open life full of experiences that you couldn't begin to imagine.
The fact is that what they choose to call themselves is irrelevant. They could call themselves tigers and they would no more be tigers than you or I. You can attend christian cerimonies and not be a christian. A christian is someone that believes in a god...the christian god. I play basketball in a christian league, does that make me a christian? NO it does not. I was baptized and went to Episcapol schools, was confirmed, I am still not a christian, because I don't believe in god.
You're wrong and you are just stuborn and won't admit it.
I seriously don't understand why this is still going on. Crump's position, now that he's finally explained it, is so simple as to not really be worth talking about at all. He's just a guy who doesn't believe in god but for whatever reason enjoys the community and rulings of a church and the tales of a long dead rabbi over thinking for himself about what is right and wrong.
It doesn't seem to merit all this arguing. He's basically just like millions of other christian sheeples, except more open about not believing in fairy tales.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Caps are emphasis.
Used occasionally, yes. Used frequently, they're also considered a sign of the internet equivalent of shouting or ranting.
Quote from: "mykcob4"There is no excited spittle.
I'm very glad to hear it.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I have led a very wide open life full of experiences that you couldn't begin to imagine.
You can't possibly know that I couldn't begin to imagine your experiences.
Quote from: "mykcob4"The fact is that what they choose to call themselves is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant to them. Although a person's right to identify the way they want is not unlimited, it is charitable to give them some leeway.
Quote from: "mykcob4"They could call themselves tigers and they would no more be tigers than you or I. You can attend christian cerimonies and not be a christian.
Sure.
Quote from: "mykcob4"A christian is someone that believes in a god...the christian god.
It's your contention that this is the only acceptable definition of the several available.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I play basketball in a christian league, does that make me a christian? NO it does not.
Correct.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I was baptized and went to Episcapol schools, was confirmed, I am still not a christian, because I don't believe in god.
Not believing in God makes you an atheist. A Christian humanist would say that what makes you not a Christian is a combination of not identifying as a Christian, not wanting to participate in specifically Christian activities, and not considering Jesus a good moral guide.
Quote from: "mykcob4"You're wrong and you are just stuborn and won't admit it.
I could say the same of you, but I've been around long enough that I don't assume people who disagree with me secretly know they're wrong but are too stubborn to admit it. I think you're
sincerely wrong. Or it could be me that's wrong, but if so, I assure you that I'm unaware of it. I consider admitting I'm wrong to be a chance to display intellectual integrity and virtue, and I'm a little disappointed that I don't get to do it as much as I used to.
This case in particular doesn't seem to be a 'one answer only' dilemma. It's about drawing the line of how much of a hardcase to be about what people call themselves in a different place.
I'd just ignore him, Agenda. This thread's pretty badly derailed as it is, which is pretty much why I stopped posting in it. I don't think anything you say is ever going to convince him that the concept of double-think exists.
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "bericks999"Might I suggest that instead of wasting your time redefining term's you learn the basic ones such as Agnostic!
And why wouldn't I know what an agnostic is, having once been one myself? But an agnostic is not an atheist and, what is more, having accepted the possibility that gods may exist, the agnostic isn't really in any position to say what gods then do exist, because that would require knowledge of those gods which is something that the agnostic does not have.
Where do you get this shit? It's ridiculous to say one must have actual knowledge of a "god" to postulate ones existence. That's just stupid!
Quote from: "Crump"The thing that interests me here is that you are seeking to put limits on what Christians can think.
No, we're just telling you what
Christians claim are the limits to Christian thinking. Your form of "Christianity" isn't what other Christians claim Christianity is. Fight it out among yourselves, we're not really interested.
Quote from: "Crump"Well that's really interesting, Hijiri. Agnosticism is about knowledge. An agnostic adopts the position that it is not possible to know whether there are gods.
Not according to the man who invented the word. "In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable." Nothing about whether any particular thing is possible, or about gods.
QuoteExplicitly then an agnostic cannot know the nature of any god because to do so would require knowledge of that god.
Of course one can have knowledge about a god. An agnostic just doesn't pretend to have that knowledge if he doesn't.
QuoteOn this thread though we have a thoroughgoing confusion about agnosticism
You do, we don't.
Quoteand we even have a contributor who claims at one to be an agnostic and to have knowledge that would determine the nature of whatever gods may exist.
And an agnostic could have such knowledge. (Unless you're redefining "agnostic" the way you redefined "Christian".)
QuoteThis 'knowledge', which renders that person gnostic rather than agnostic
Bzzt! Sorry, wrong. Try again next time.
Quotemen have free-will
That's a gnostic statement, since you can't demonstrate that to be true.
Quotetherefore the future cannot be known
According to Christianity, God does (must, even) know the future.
Quotetherefore any god that exists cannot know the future
Not according to Christianity.
QuoteNow it is certainly possible to construct a counter argument, whereby god has knowledge of the future that does not violate man's free will
No it's not. In fact, that's one of the atheistic arguments against the Christian god.
Quotebut it is hardly possible to argue that anyone who claims to have deduced the nature of god is an agnostic.
Why would deducing something mean making a claim that's not demonstrable? (Having knowledge, even claiming to have knowledge, has nothing to do with agnosticism - unless you're claiming knowledge that you really don't have, which is anti-agnostic. Agnosticism isn't the antonym of gnosticism.)
Quote from: "Crump"'Live and let live' is a maxim the writers of the Constitution had in mind
Only if you were white, male, owned land and were a Protestant, Jew or Deist. Most colonists were anti-Papist, blacks weren't citizens (or even fully people - a slave was counted as 60% of a person) and women weren't allowed to vote. And since your slave was your property, you didn't have to allow a slave to live. You could kill him for any offense, or even just because you wanted to.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"I'd just ignore him, Agenda. This thread's pretty badly derailed as it is, which is pretty much why I stopped posting in it. I don't think anything you say is ever going to convince him that the concept of double-think exists.
Double think? Really? How about double speak? The fact is that christians by definition HAVE to believe in a god or by definition they are not christians. That is just a fact.
Why don't you ignore yourself. I haven't seen anything very enlightening from you lately!
Quote from: "Mister Agenda"Quote from: "mykcob4"Caps are emphasis.
Used occasionally, yes. Used frequently, they're also considered a sign of the internet equivalent of shouting or ranting.
Quote from: "mykcob4"There is no excited spittle.
I'm very glad to hear it.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I have led a very wide open life full of experiences that you couldn't begin to imagine.
You can't possibly know that I couldn't begin to imagine your experiences.
Quote from: "mykcob4"The fact is that what they choose to call themselves is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant to them. Although a person's right to identify the way they want is not unlimited, it is charitable to give them some leeway.
Quote from: "mykcob4"They could call themselves tigers and they would no more be tigers than you or I. You can attend christian cerimonies and not be a christian.
Sure.
Quote from: "mykcob4"A christian is someone that believes in a god...the christian god.
It's your contention that this is the only acceptable definition of the several available.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I play basketball in a christian league, does that make me a christian? NO it does not.
Correct.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I was baptized and went to Episcapol schools, was confirmed, I am still not a christian, because I don't believe in god.
Not believing in God makes you an atheist. A Christian humanist would say that what makes you not a Christian is a combination of not identifying as a Christian, not wanting to participate in specifically Christian activities, and not considering Jesus a good moral guide.
Quote from: "mykcob4"You're wrong and you are just stuborn and won't admit it.
I could say the same of you, but I've been around long enough that I don't assume people who disagree with me secretly know they're wrong but are too stubborn to admit it. I think you're sincerely wrong. Or it could be me that's wrong, but if so, I assure you that I'm unaware of it. I consider admitting I'm wrong to be a chance to display intellectual integrity and virtue, and I'm a little disappointed that I don't get to do it as much as I used to.
This case in particular doesn't seem to be a 'one answer only' dilemma. It's about drawing the line of how much of a hardcase to be about what people call themselves in a different place.
When I'm wrong I have no problem admitting it. In this case I'm not wrong. I even called the Harvard School of Divinity to make sure. I just didn't accept that. Since I live in the Dallas area, I went to the Dean of Theology at TCU in Ft.Worth to confirm my thoughts. I showed him the Forum thread. He told me that people can and will call themselves anything but there is no authority anywhere that will accept that one is a christian without the fundemental belief in god. Incidently he wasn't particularly happy that there was an Atheist Forum but as he put it he isn't particularly happy that Woodhaven Baptist Church keeps embarrassing christianity either.
QuoteIncidently he wasn't particularly happy that there was an Atheist Forum
Why would that make him unhappy? :-s
Quote from: "Crump"Well I have to say I am enjoying the Atheist Forums. At least folk here have a point of view that they have considered, and that is more than I can say for many of the Christians that I come across on another forum.
Christians I have encountered have often been less inclined to open-mindedness, but then again, their beliefs are often dogmatic and their social circles are often reinforcing of a limited view (especially in the southern states, where I currently reside). However, human beings in general have a tendency to be "clannish," regardless of the reasons.
Quote from: "Crump"Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years. Some of the Christians I meet doubt that I qualify as a Christian at all, and strangely, I've also encountered atheists who question my Christian beliefs, but none who question my atheism.
Luckily, I've encountered the term "Christian Atheist" before, and wasn't as shocked as some of the others upon hearing such a claim. I wouldn't be surprised if Christians had a tendency to lump their religion with centering around a belief in a deity, and not necessarily focusing on "Christ" despite this being a convenient reason for Christianity's namesake. You focus on Christ, and your lack of a deity follows your tendency to strip Christ of his godhood and revert him to a normal man. It's a stretch, but not a tough one to follow.
It is also possible to subscribe to a belief in one deity but be atheistic toward the beliefs in other deities. I think that bit of triviality was lost in the arguments as well.
Quote from: "Crump"[hrline:2dk7iit9][/hrline:2dk7iit9]
But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions.
As time goes by, it seems the questions we ask simply do not have answers at all. We do not have a "creator" and therefore cannot expect answers to questions referring to who/what created us. Life is an inevitability of complex chemistry focused on the interesting nature of carbon, water, and a few other chance molecules on a rather mundane planet around a mundane star with just the right amount of turmoil and time. Our current feeling of loneliness as a species obscures the idea that such conditions are possible elsewhere in the universe and probably are or have occurred again and again.
Quote from: "Crump"But the New Atheists, they have the answers - they know the precise solution to the questions that have been troubling mankind since the first human 'woke up' and began to wonder. All we have ever really wanted to know is the answer to two simple questions, 'Where do we come from?' and 'Where do we go to?' The single answer is, of course, 'nowhere'.
"Where do we come from?" is not answered with "nowhere." From an abiogenesis perspective, we can trace our origins from some rather intriguing chemistry. From an evolutionary standpoint, we trace our origins from a seriously tested group of apes who had to think or die. Even going back to the origins of the universe itself, we still cannot answer its origins with "nowhere," but must wait, as the jury is still out with the obligatory "I don't know."
"Where do we go to?" is also not answered with "nowhere." Our consciousness is a byproduct of our brains, an "illusion" of sorts, and it ceases when the electrical pathways cease within our brains. The molecules that made it all happen to still linger, but in a less organized manner.
I sense you make the assumption that our consciousness is an entity separate from our physical form - a duality of sorts. None exists. Consciousness is based purely in the realm of the physical, and it ceases in the same realm from whence it came. No magic, no miracle - only a minor triviality considered unique by one species on a relatively unremarkable planet.
Quote from: "Crump"And if that answer isn't satisfying to you, that's because you don't believe in miracles. Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
This, although it paints a pretty picture, is purely subjective heartwarming drivel with no basis in factual evidence. You attribute grandeur to a naturally occurring process, nothing more. The same sort of awe can be felt when seeing the mountains for the first time, appreciating the expanse of the ocean, or looking at a newborn child. However, for all the power of these emotions, they do not change the fact that mountains are trivial geological formations, the ocean is merely a liquid in great abundance, and a newborn child is yet another ape decendant.
What truth are you hoping to have explained from this? Why do you need faith at all? I see the vestiges of your forsaken yearning for a deity as you struggle to fill the void with reverance toward life, as though that were to actually matter. Respect life or don't. Have awe and wonder or don't. Life will continue on and the pursuit of science will uncover far more useful knowledge than these "truths" and "faith" ever could.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Double think? Really? How about double speak? The fact is that christians by definition HAVE to believe in a god or by definition they are not christians. That is just a fact.
The fact is that quite a large number of self-professed Christians do not believe in a god. That's just a fact.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Why don't you ignore yourself. I haven't seen anything very enlightening from you lately!
Why don't you shut your damn gob until you learn how to string together a point that isn't so malformed it makes YECs cringe.
Quote from: "mycob4"Incidently he wasn't particularly happy that there was an Atheist Forum
Please tell him to kiss my ass!
Quote from: "Crump"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"Well, I don't think you have any idea of what's involved. Here's one article to open your eyes:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... in_nc.html (http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2009/12/atheist_swears_affirms_oath_in_nc.html)
That was interesting and little bit worrying that NC law demands that sort of thing. Happily though the US Constitution, which seems to have been written by folk with more sense, takes precedence, as the columnist points out. I can understand that religious prejudice exists but it isn't just the religious who are guilty of it. 'Live and let live' is a maxim the writers of the Constitution had in mind, and which we should all remember.
You've missed the point. Yes, the federal constitution does give protection, but the people in NC wrote into
their own state constitution, that atheists can't run for election,
IN SPITE of the federal constitution. How much hate do you need to do such a despicable act? And even with the election of this atheist, they will nevertheless contest it, hoping that election is declared invalid. Do you begin to understand why many atheists on this forum resent your use of the word ''christian'' juxtaposed with the word ''atheist''?
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "mykcob4"Double think? Really? How about double speak? The fact is that christians by definition HAVE to believe in a god or by definition they are not christians. That is just a fact.
The fact is that quite a large number of self-professed Christians do not believe in a god. That's just a fact.
Quote from: "mykcob4"Why don't you ignore yourself. I haven't seen anything very enlightening from you lately!
Why don't you shut your damn gob until you learn how to string together a point that isn't so malformed it makes YECs cringe.
I don't think I'm obliged to even consider any hairbrain dumbass insulting demand by you child. My points have been well constructed, have merit and credibility. What YOU have on this thread is the defense of a stupid oxymoron that has no merit or validity. So suck it youngster!
Quote from: "mykcob4"I don't think I'm obliged to even consider any hairbrain dumbass insulting demand by you child.
Oh yes, calling a grown man a child will
definitely get you places in life. How is it that you have not yet swayed the entire crowd with your charismatic ways? :roll:
Quote from: "mykcob4"My points have been well constructed, have merit and credibility.
Your "points" consist of mindless drivel and the insistence that Christians are something other than, well, what they're defined as. You're like that guy a couple months ago who seemed to think science was something other than, well, science.
Quote from: "mykcob4"What YOU have on this thread is the defense of a stupid oxymoron that has no merit or validity.
All I have done is point out that contrary to what you believe, Crump's position not only exists but has been in intellectual discourse for at least 200 years. I fail to see how this is a defense of any sort.
Quote from: "mykcob4"So suck it youngster!
I
sincerely doubt you are old enough to be calling me "youngster." Quite the contrary, I'd honestly be surprised if you are older than 15.
Come back when you have an argument.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "mykcob4"I don't think I'm obliged to even consider any hairbrain dumbass insulting demand by you child.
Oh yes, calling a grown man a child will definitely get you places in life. How is it that you have not yet swayed the entire crowd with your charismatic ways? :roll:
Quote from: "mykcob4"My points have been well constructed, have merit and credibility.
Your "points" consist of mindless drivel and the insistence that Christians are something other than, well, what they're defined as. You're like that guy a couple months ago who seemed to think science was something other than, well, science.
Quote from: "mykcob4"What YOU have on this thread is the defense of a stupid oxymoron that has no merit or validity.
All I have done is point out that contrary to what you believe, Crump's position not only exists but has been in intellectual discourse for at least 200 years. I fail to see how this is a defense of any sort.
Quote from: "mykcob4"So suck it youngster!
I sincerely doubt you are old enough to be calling me "youngster." Quite the contrary, I'd honestly be surprised if you are older than 15.
Come back when you have an argument.
Blah blah blah blah say old shit.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "mykcob4"I don't think I'm obliged to even consider any hairbrain dumbass insulting demand by you child.
Oh yes, calling a grown man a child will definitely get you places in life. How is it that you have not yet swayed the entire crowd with your charismatic ways? :roll:
Quote from: "mykcob4"My points have been well constructed, have merit and credibility.
Your "points" consist of mindless drivel and the insistence that Christians are something other than, well, what they're defined as. You're like that guy a couple months ago who seemed to think science was something other than, well, science.
Quote from: "mykcob4"What YOU have on this thread is the defense of a stupid oxymoron that has no merit or validity.
All I have done is point out that contrary to what you believe, Crump's position not only exists but has been in intellectual discourse for at least 200 years. I fail to see how this is a defense of any sort.
Quote from: "mykcob4"So suck it youngster!
I sincerely doubt you are old enough to be calling me "youngster." Quite the contrary, I'd honestly be surprised if you are older than 15.
Come back when you have an argument.
What a bunch of lies. I never thought science was anything other than science. Don't know where the hell you got that lie from....maybe your ass.
This isn't a popularity contest. I am not politicing to "sway" the crowd. The facts are the facts and you and crump are ignoring them. It doesn't matter that maybe over 200 years ago some fools decided that they wer christians and Atheist. Wrong is wrong. Slavery was wrong and it lasted centuries.
I'm 56 but that's beside the point. I came back at you because you decided to be childish an insult me as if you have any right to do so. So if you want to act like a child I shall treat you like a child.
:-P
Quote from: "mykcob4"What a bunch of lies. I never thought science was anything other than science. Don't know where the hell you got that lie from....maybe your ass.
What part of, "you're like that guy (//http://atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1632)" made you think I was talking about you, oh ye of little reading comprehension?
Quote from: "mykcob4"This isn't a popularity contest. I am not politicing to "sway" the crowd. The facts are the facts and you and crump are ignoring them. It doesn't matter that maybe over 200 years ago some fools decided that they wer christians and Atheist. Wrong is wrong. Slavery was wrong and it lasted centuries.
I didn't say it wasn't stupid, I said he
technically fits the definition of a Christian. You really must improve your reading comprehension, mate.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I'm 56 but that's beside the point. I came back at you because you decided to be childish an insult me as if you have any right to do so. So if you want to act like a child I shall treat you like a child.
Of course I will treat you with all the civility I feel you deserve. The problem is that you're being an asshole to quite a few people who are, in fact, on your side in this discussion. You're a smart guy, I'm sure, so I'll let you put the pieces together from there.
Call me childish all you like, but I'm not the one who jumped down someone's throat for posting the dictionary definition of a Christian.
Holy 18 pages, Batman. If this isn't derailed I don't know what is.
[youtube:3s6gywe6]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRwvXJEdUWA[/youtube:3s6gywe6]
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "mykcob4"What a bunch of lies. I never thought science was anything other than science. Don't know where the hell you got that lie from....maybe your ass.
What part of, "you're like that guy (//http://atheistforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1632)" made you think I was talking about you, oh ye of little reading comprehension?
Quote from: "mykcob4"This isn't a popularity contest. I am not politicing to "sway" the crowd. The facts are the facts and you and crump are ignoring them. It doesn't matter that maybe over 200 years ago some fools decided that they wer christians and Atheist. Wrong is wrong. Slavery was wrong and it lasted centuries.
I didn't say it wasn't stupid, I said he technically fits the definition of a Christian. You really must improve your reading comprehension, mate.
Quote from: "mykcob4"I'm 56 but that's beside the point. I came back at you because you decided to be childish an insult me as if you have any right to do so. So if you want to act like a child I shall treat you like a child.
Of course I will treat you with all the civility I feel you deserve. The problem is that you're being an asshole to quite a few people who are, in fact, on your side in this discussion. You're a smart guy, I'm sure, so I'll let you put the pieces together from there.
Call me childish all you like, but I'm not the one who jumped down someone's throat for posting the dictionary definition of a Christian.
Alright now we are to a point that we can converse. I am appreciative that we could get to this point.
My point is, backed up by the Dean of TCU Theology and an advisory professor at Harvard Divinity College, is that one is not a christian unless they have a fundemental belief in god, the christian god. Jesus' main objective above all things was to save humanity and the only way to do that is to accept god as your creator lord and master and accept jesus as your savior. So technically, by definition, or any other credible method, one cannot be an Atheist and a christian simotaneously.
Quote from: "Crump"Well I have to say I am enjoying the Atheist Forums. At least folk here have a point of view that they have considered, and that is more than I can say for many of the Christians that I come across on another forum. Being a Christian and an atheist is a difficult balancing act but I have managed it now for some twenty five years. Some of the Christians I meet doubt that I qualify as a Christian at all, and strangely, I've also encountered atheists who question my Christian beliefs, but none who question my atheism.
[hrline:cbzdx2a2][/hrline:cbzdx2a2]
But it seems to me that I am some 'intellect' that is inhabiting this decaying shell, whereas they say that it is just the decaying shell that is really thinking, fooling itself that it is something other than a quirk of nature: a bunch of organic matter that has become somehow sentient. And so, like Clarke's HAL, our consciousness gets turned on and turned off in its time, but unlike HAL, who knew where he had come from, we have no answers to our questions. But the New Atheists, they have the answers - they know the precise solution to the questions that have been troubling mankind since the first human 'woke up' and began to wonder. All we have ever really wanted to know is the answer to two simple questions, 'Where do we come from?' and 'Where do we go to?' The single answer is, of course, 'nowhere'. And if that answer isn't satisfying to you, that's because you don't believe in miracles. Oh yes, life is a miracle by any definition; but you are that miracle and you don't even know it. You want a Great Spirit, a Great Architect, a God Creator to perform the miracle for you, but you have done it yourself while you were asleep, and you will do it once more when you fall asleep again. To understand these truths all you need to have is faith.
:rolleyes: