Just got banned from Christian Forums

[Baruch]

Hi Baruch,

I hope you don't mind my saying this. Your post has 7 numbered paragraphs and for a while i thought you were giving me a comprehensive answer until i read your post and realised that you offered ZERO answer.

I can't help observing that people in CF did the same thing when I merely asked for a simple reason as to what led them to believe in God. The only difference is they are positively hostile to me while you are perfectly civil and for that I thank you.

Or is that a preliminary to an answer that is forthcoming?

It can be.  You want more personal data?  What does "answer" mean to you, besides anecdote?

[Baruch]

That's standard Baruch.

I am much better organized than Ibn, and better speller too.

[St Truth]

Like Baruch himself says, as a theist, he is tolerated here, but it would probably be the same if he were something else.  Don't spend an inordinate amount of time agonizing over what he might be saying.  No one knows what he's saying.  Some people argue with him.  I don't know why.  No one could possibly understand what the argument is about.  Baruch places a high value on being misunderstood.  It's his thing.  You just have to accept that and move on.

Thanks, SGOS.

I am familiar with such non-answers that Baruch gives. I have encountered this repeatedly in CF. And I have a fair idea why they do this.

There is a class of people who are enamoured of anything that sounds mystical and profound. Hindu mystics are famous for this. They will say something that sounds paradoxical, contradictory and meaningless. When it comes to religion and other hocus-pocus nonsense, the more paradoxical you sound, the more contradictory and the more meaningless you can be, the more you will be believed and the more the people will collapse in humble adoration. But I don't belong to that class. But Baruch is not being dishonest. Far from it. I understand people like him.

I have asked him how he came to accept God. I told him I didn't want to listen to his defence of God. That can come later. I want him to talk about how he came to accept God in the first place. And I know what his answer will be. It's always a personal reason. Something emotional. Here's one example I can think of: The person undergoes some grief and in the state of depression, as he sits by his fireplace with his dinner on his lap (and let's say it's my favourite food - steak and kidney pie with a side of bubble and squeak) when suddenly, a thought came to his mind. It's a thought that might have been planted in his head because he used to go to church. Nothing miraculous about that. The thought was 'Take comfort for I died for you.'  And then he felt a sense of peace that notwithstanding his grief, he went into to a psychological state that is almost akin to ecstasy. Again this is nothing momentous. It's a state of mind people go into quite naturally.

But to this person, he has had an encounter with God or more specifically, Jesus. Can you imagine that? Something as banal as a common thought can convince him of the truth of God.

Now, supposing this person is an intellectual person. Chances are he's not going to say that he was led to God by that non-incident. But because he is an intellectual, he goes on to read extensively to try to justify the existence of this God he has just created. He realises quite quickly that nothing in science will allow him to turn the figment of his imagination into a reality. Science  brooks no such nonsense. If you want to give respectability to nonsense and some semblance of fake reality, philosophy is where you turn to. Never mind the fact that most philosophers are atheists. The fact is philosophy is wide enough and the parameters extensive enough to accommodate even sheer nonsense.

As I said in CF before they banned me quite unjustly, most believers put the cart before the horse. Something happened and made them turn to God first. That part is totally unintellectual, mindless and dumb. Once they have accepted God, they then set out to show he is real and the only arena that affords them the framework to turn garbage into something divine is philosophy.

So, when you hear someone making obfuscatory remarks that are convoluted and seemingly difficult, it's NOT difficult or esoteric or erudite in any way. It's just plain nonsense that any madman can spin. But that's not because the guy is a bad guy or a dishonest chap. He's actually honest - he's fooling himself without his knowing it. Think of a drowning man who will clutch at straws.

But what really irritated me in CF is the dotards there will sing the fulsome praise of people who make nonsensical statements. Hindu priests do this a lot. I remember seeing a Hindu book written by a priest and at the preface, it says 'The book you are about to read is neither fact nor fiction'. I put it down instantly. What's neither fact nor fiction is nonsensical garbage.

What I like about atheists is most of you are not so stupid as to be charmed by nonsensical garbage. Christians can be incredibly dumb. I know that. I've served in the church since I was 5. These are the people who will go 'WOW!!!" over nonsensical garbage especially when it's couched in a cryptic language that makes occasional references to the philosophers of old. I assure you this is what people in CF do all the time. They love to mention names of people without elaborating. One of them, for example, when asked by me why she believed in God in the first place, replied that her belief had 'Thomistic roots'. She stopped there. She probably thought a boy like me would just go 'Wow! What brilliance!'. I told her she had not answered the question and can she please not make subtle hints? I ventured further to suggest that if someone has no good reason for something, he might not want to state the 'reason' clearly because it would most certainly be demolished by any intelligent person. He might instead merely drop hints and I asked how honest such an approach was. I didn't even say she was dishonest but about 20 people reported my post to the moderators. I really am amazed how I could go into that den of vipers and survived for so long.

Finally, someone who is one of their smartest chaps (and honestly, it's hard to find anyone with even basic intelligence in CF) gave me his 3 reasons for his belief. One of them had something to do with his wife and my mum has told me before never to make any remark about a person's spouse. So I didn't say anything in reply but let me just say that it was the dumbest three reasons I have ever heard in all my born days.

I speak only the truth for I am...

St Truth

[Baruch]

Young man ... you are very inexperienced in the world.  But you will learn eventually what it is all about.  Typical cock-sure youth.  This is why your elders use your type as cannon fodder.  Unless you have been married, you are as smart as the Pope.

In short, until I was married, I didn't know love of a person my own age, apart from the love of my parents (who are not my own age).  That is decisive.  And no, it isn't about the sex.  Even if you are gay, your lover will teach you the nature of reality.

So religion is emotional, not intellectual.  This is why brainiacs don't get it.  It is precognition, but without precognition, there is no cognition to rationalize what has already been decided by the unconscious mind.  The conscious mind is just the superficial you cleaning up your bedroom after a pizza party by the deep unconscious you.

Party on, but clean up your bedroom afterward.  And thanks, I am honest, except when I am joking around.

[St Truth]

Young man ... you are very inexperienced in the world.  But you will learn eventually what it is all about.  Typical cock-sure youth.  This is why your elders use your type as cannon fodder.  Unless you have been married, you are as smart as the Pope.

In short, until I was married, I didn't know love of a person my own age, apart from the love of my parents (who are not my own age).  That is decisive.  And no, it isn't about the sex.  Even if you are gay, your lover will teach you the nature of reality.

So religion is emotional, not intellectual.  This is why brainiacs don't get it.  It is precognition, but without precognition, there is no cognition to rationalize what has already been decided by the unconscious mind.  The conscious mind is just the superficial you cleaning up your bedroom after a pizza party by the deep unconscious you.

Party on, but clean up your bedroom afterward.  And thanks, I am honest, except when I am joking around.

Obviously, you agree with my analysis of how theists come to believe in God and how they scramble for some justification of the belief by looking to philosophy which has the capacity to justify even a belief in leprechauns? I don't think my analysis can be faulted in any way. If it can, someone is sure to point it out to me. They couldn't fault what I said in CF either. All they did was to ban me and to remove my posts. I must say it makes me feel quite proud when grown men and women have to ban me and remove my posts because they know I'm right. One delirious woman messaged me to ask if I was aware that there were many people who will lose their faith because of my postings. She said the Bible promises that people who stumble others will be tied to a millstone and drowned. I told her to read her Bible carefully. It says those who stumble 'little ones'. It doesn't say little ones who stumble dumb adults. She said she would show the moderators that I called the Christians on CF 'dumb'. But it's true. They really are dumb.

I told you about the guy who gave 3 reasons for his belief in God. His 2nd reason was the Bible was correct. Ho Ho Ho!!! That can easily be shown to be the worst reason. The Bible is as erroneous as CS Lewis' Narnia. His 3rd reason was something about his wife - he was sure that God led the two of them together. I really had to hold back my contempt for that kind of answer. I had to stop myself from saying something rude. How can an adult say that he believes in God because he believes God brought him and his wife together? This must be the dumbest reason I've ever heard in my entire life. Oh and his first reason for believing in God is another dumb reason - He says he is not satisfied that the atheist position is correct.

I told him politely that that is the typical theist's dishonest trick in turning the onus of proof on the atheist. It's always for the person who asserts the existence of something to show evidence and reason for its existence. A person should only believe in God if there is a valid reason for it. He cannot say he thinks the atheist's position is weak. That's the wrong approach. I gave him an example. Supposing a boy believes in fairies. He goes to the Bishop and tells the Bishop that he believes in fairies because the Bishop's a-fairyist position is not convincing. But the bishop will protest that he has not argued against fairies. The boy insists that since the bishop is an a-fairyist, he has an a-fairyist position and the boy is convinced it's not a persuasive position. I told the man in CF that his approach was just like the boy's. And it's the wrong approach. It's a subtle way of turning the burden of proof on the atheist and to say that unless the atheist can come up with a good atheist argument, he will believe in God. The default is not to believe in God, fairies, pixies, etc.

And then a really stupid woman suggested that atheists should have the burden of proof because they assert the existence of the non-god. Can you imagine the kind of people I contended with in CF and what imbeciles they really are? After talking to the people in CF, I can see why Christians always accuse atheists of arrogance. Compared with the Christian morons, atheists have the right to be arrogant.

I was so contemptuous of them that when one of them said that she had the Holy Spirit in her which was why she believed in God and I should examine myself to see if I really had the spirit in me, I was so tempted to her that what she needed was not the non-existent spirit but a functioning brain. But I didn't say it or that would have given them the opportunity to ban me earlier.

I really felt as if CF was filled with young children. I thought the stupid woman (who said atheists had the onus of proof because they were asserting the existence of the non-god) was a young child pretending to be older. But later she recounted the story of her life and she did something 50 years ago!!! She's got to be at least in her 60s and yet she spoke like a child of 3!!!

Intelligent people who believe in God like Baruch are the most unfortunate. They have tied themselves to the beliefs of fools and the only way out is to go into the realm of humour and nonsense. I've met priests who are just like that. Humour shows people around them that they are really quite intelligent and it helps to divert searching questions from people. On another thread in Atheist Forums, someone said that God was imaginary. Baruch replied that reality is actually imaginary and so if God is imaginary, God must be real. I felt so sorry for Baruch when I read that. That is why I asked him why he bothered to believe in God. He's not like me. I live with my parents and I go to church with my parents and I've been an altar boy all my life and I'm in a church where my priests are liberal and accept my stand. There's no need for me to rock the boat. My dad isn't really a believer but he believes in the church and he always reminds me that my great great grandfather was an important churchman in the time of Henry VIII as if that meant anything. So, I make my stand clear that God probably doesn't exist but I continue to serve the church as a part of my culture. I don't know if I will continue to be in church when I'm older. But Baruch is different. He can choose to be an atheist quite easily. I feel sorry for him because he's an intelligent man who has chosen to put on a dunce cap by calling himself a theist when he should throw it away and put on a scholar's hat. It's a self-inflicted humiliation. That is why I'm so curious why he believed in God in the first place but obviously, he doesn't like to talk about it, and as my mum has said, I must always be sensitive to know when people don't want to talk about something and I should stay away from the topic.

I may be insensitive but I'm truthful, for I am none other than...

St Truth

[SGOS]

When it comes to religion and other hocus-pocus nonsense, the more paradoxical you sound, the more contradictory and the more meaningless you can be, the more you will be believed and the more the people will collapse in humble adoration.

Paradoxes are fun, and there is something alluring about them.  People love paradoxes and love to introduce them in discussion.  Some paradoxes are true, others are just contrary explanations that survive on surprise value alone.  When someone introduces a paradox, humans pay attention to what follows because the brain has been startled.  If what follows is gibberish, most people will dismiss it quickly and retire back into their default mental state.  Other people remain stimulated by the gibberish because it's fun to puzzle, and it's fun to entertain the paradox.  It takes one into a fantasy state, and if the paradox is supported by nonsense, better still to sustain the fantasy.  But whether the explanation of the paradox makes sense or not, the person introducing the paradox has commanded the attention of the group, sometimes only momentarily, but nearly everyone has actually listened for a least a brief time.

Paradoxes are useful devices in and out of religion, mostly to get attention, but some are also helpful explanations, which lends a bit of power to the rest of the fake paradoxes.  Propagandists intersperse lies with truth.  On the other hand, was it Hitler that said, "Tell a lie big enough, and everyone will believe it."  The big lie is a major paradox, but so astounding it can survive simply on the strength of its shock value.  Religion and spirituality thrive on this.  The Bible is a book of paradoxes.  Politics and economics build philosophies on paradoxes. 

The thought was 'Take comfort for I died for you.'  And then he felt a sense of peace that notwithstanding his grief, he went into to a psychological state that is almost akin to ecstasy. Again this is nothing momentous. It's a state of mind people go into quite naturally.
But to this person, he has had an encounter with God or more specifically, Jesus. Can you imagine that? Something as banal as a common thought can convince him of the truth of God.

And imagine the power of a banal peak experience multiplied by a factor of 300.  They are rare, but I have experienced them.  They are overwhelming and if one is a mystic or inclined toward mysticism, they can be interpreted as beyond the emotional capabilities that reside in your own body.  They carry both the starling element of surprise, and a rarity that can only be explained as beyond yourself.  Alternatively, you can just say, "Wow!!  That was a rush," and move forward with your life.

I can identify with the rest of your thoughts too.  I won't respond to them right now, because I want to avoid putting up a wall of text, which I tend to do on my own more than is necessary.

[St Truth]

Paradoxes are fun, and there is something alluring about them.  People love paradoxes and love to introduce them in discussion.  Some paradoxes are true, others are just contrary explanations that survive on surprise value alone.  When someone introduces a paradox, humans pay attention to what follows because the brain has been startled.  If what follows is gibberish, most people will dismiss it quickly and retire back into their default mental state.  Other people remain stimulated by the gibberish because it's fun to puzzle, and it's fun to entertain the paradox.  It takes one into a fantasy state, and if the paradox is supported by nonsense, better still to sustain the fantasy.  But whether the explanation of the paradox makes sense or not, the person introducing the paradox has commanded the attention of the group, sometimes only momentarily, but nearly everyone has actually listened for a least a brief time.

Paradoxes are useful devices in and out of religion, mostly to get attention, but some are also helpful explanations, which lends a bit of power to the rest of the fake paradoxes.  Propagandists intersperse lies with truth.  On the other hand, was it Hitler that said, "Tell a lie big enough, and everyone will believe it."  The big lie is a major paradox, but so astounding it can survive simply on the strength of its shock value.  Religion and spirituality thrive on this.  The Bible is a book of paradoxes.  Politics and economics build philosophies on paradoxes. 
And imagine the power of a banal peak experience multiplied by a factor of 300.  They are rare, but I have experienced them.  They are overwhelming and if one is a mystic or inclined toward mysticism, they can be interpreted as beyond the emotional capabilities that reside in your own body.  They carry both the starling element of surprise, and a rarity that can only be explained as beyond yourself.  Alternatively, you can just say, "Wow!!  That was a rush," and move forward with your life.

I can identify with the rest of your thoughts too.  I won't respond to them right now, because I want to avoid putting up a wall of text, which I tend to do on my own more than is necessary.

I've not experienced anything extraordinary like that. I'm not given to strong emotions.

[Baruch]

I have experienced paranormal stuff, and know other people who do, but that is not why I know G-d.  I don't suppose G-d, I don't believe G-d.  I know G-d, but I don't understand G-d ... and don't think I ever will.  Knowing G-d doesn't make me comfortable or satisfied.  Philosophy is where you deal with ambiguity and paradox, but St Truth isn't interested.  There are other pre-cognitive experiences, other than peak experiences (like a runner high, or a mountain climber high), some rather adult.  Sometimes peak experiences are like catharsis ... and that is something very close to religious experience (see Aristotle on Poetics or William James).  My last catharsis was almost a year ago ... a temporary psychotic break.  My last peak experience was just a few weeks ago, attending a theatric comedy for the first time in many years.  Knowing G-d is like reading the Rhyme Of The Ancient Mariner ... and getting it.  The poem didn't have a happy ending.

Besides, St Truth, emotional health is better than cognitive brilliance, anyway.  It is people who are important, more important than any god, more important than any other idea we might have.  Eh what?  You don't like Narnia?  How can you claim to be English then.  Do you also hate Robin and Maid Marian?  Perhaps you are a dopple-ganger left on your parent's front porch by overpopulating aliens.  Where you rejected from acting in the last Harry Potter movie?  Expelioso!

[SGOS]

I've not experienced anything extraordinary like that. I'm not given to strong emotions.

To clarify, when I said: 

And imagine the power of a banal peak experience multiplied by a factor of 300.  They are rare, but I have experienced them.  They are overwhelming and if one is a mystic or inclined toward mysticism, they can be interpreted as beyond the emotional capabilities that reside in your own body.  They carry both the starling element of surprise, and a rarity that can only be explained as beyond yourself.

I didn't literally mean "can only be explained as beyond yourself."  I was speaking from the perspective of a theist who would attribute biochemical sensations as spiritual, supernatural, or sent by a god, rather than as a sudden influx of hormonal activity.  I would hope everyone should experience that sensation during a lifetime whether they are atheist or theist.  God is not required.  I was ten years older than you when I had my first and it wasn't anything I was expecting or even looking for.  So never say never.

[Baruch]

"a sudden influx of hormonal activity" ... exactly.  More important that any idea or theory anyone can come up with.  Though love is a more gradual influx of hormonal activity ... sex can be the sudden kind.  Love puts you into a profound personal relationship.  And it is that relationship in where lies divinity.  A relationship of one is mere egomania.  Reminds me of that old movie, with an older man and a younger man assisting him ... "Scent of a Woman".  But really, I wouldn't want to go thru "growing up" again.

[Mike Cl]

" And it is that relationship in where lies divinity. 

I find that my relationship with my wife leads me to become more 'human', not divine. 

[Sorginak]

One would think St. Truth would have gotten over being banned from that Christian forum already. 


Sheesh.

[Mike Cl]

One would think St. Truth would have gotten over being banned from that Christian forum already. 


Sheesh.

The world tends to look different to a 15 yr. old.

[Sorginak]

The world tends to look different to a 15 yr. old.

That doesn't mean one coddles a fifteen year old.

When I was fifteen, my mind was already twice that age.

[Unbeliever]

Hell, by the time I was 15 years old, I'd already lived a decade and a half!