News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Catholic Church "Miracles"

Started by Paolo, December 07, 2020, 12:58:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mike Cl

Quote from: Hydra009 on March 01, 2021, 06:34:20 PM
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
See--if Darwin were a racist, then he wouldn't buy tea from China, and the price of tea would fall and the Chinese would go into bankruptcy.  Or, something like that......................
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Hydra009

Generally speaking, creationists are most likely to bring that up and only as a way to discredit evolution (only the truly morally pure can discover great truths about the natural world, lol) and thereby "prove" Christianity and "disprove" atheism.  Guilt by association by association combined with a truly bizarre false dilemma.

SGOS

Quote from: Hydra009 on March 01, 2021, 06:34:20 PM
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
I'm thinking that if Darwin was racist, the Theory of Evolution would be invalid, and all that money spent on tracking the human genome would have been wasted.

Oops.  You basically posted that seconds before me.

Mike Cl

Twisted Darwin theory (note theory here means it has been tested and found to be factual) is used by racists to justify their racists views.  Survival of the fittest has a long history of being misunderstood and misused.  It does not mean biggest, baddest, strongest, most viscous--nothing like that.  It simply means that a species will thrive in a particular time and place by fitting in the best with that particular time and place.  Maybe the smallest works best or gives that species an edge of some sort.  Or the biggest or hardest to see or can see the best or has a beak that can feed off the most nuts/seeds...........or.......one can go on and on.  And it's the entire species we are talking about, and not just an individual.  Theists cannot or will not, see the factual flaws in their beliefs, so how can they be expected to understand anything about scientific theories????
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Cassia

Quote from: Mike Cl on March 01, 2021, 07:09:20 PM
....Theists cannot or will not, see the factual flaws in their beliefs, so how can they be expected to understand anything about scientific theories????
I think science reveals truths (e.g. the weak and unadaptable will perish) that often seem like harsh cruelty to us sentient beings. This is a such a human thing to do...this assigning morality to the realities of the material universe. A universe that promises nothing like justice.

To explain this apparent cruelty, the architects of the various religions had to make their gods (and devils) cruel...however then they also typically promise the week and meek will inherit the world. How convenient, comforting and untrue.



Paolo

#335
Quote from: Hydra009 on March 01, 2021, 06:34:20 PM
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Well, the thread has strained off course so many times, I figured one more off-topic question I was curious about would not do much harm.

As for those who claim that I am a theist, or even Christian (!), if there are any left, I leave you all with Kyle Gerkin's words: ''It is supremely arrogant to reclassify people's religious belief against their own claims[...]''. https://infidels.org/library/modern/kyle_gerkin/failing.html

Regardless, thank you all for the (sometimes even very detailed) answers.
Oh noes...I think I’m dead....

Hydra009

Quote from: Paolo on March 02, 2021, 12:15:45 AMAs for those who claim that I am a theist, or even Christian (!)
What did you say that gave people that impression?

Paolo

#337
Quote from: Hydra009 on March 02, 2021, 01:29:27 AM
What did you say that gave people that impression?

Apparently, I made some very mild claims that a historical Jesus existed, something websites as ''secular'' and ''atheistic'' as Wikipedia claim it's an academic consensus (mind you, these are not Christians who are claiming this). I think this Mike guy in particular has insulted me several times over this (to the point of ridiculously calling Jesus ''my favorite god'' or some shit along those lines).

*awaiting anxiously for pedantic comments about how I used the word atheism wrong YET AGAIN*
Oh noes...I think I’m dead....

drunkenshoe

#338
Paolo. You are making certain mistakes which will ensure you to wallow in your current position. They are not unique to you. They are very common, actually that is the deal for everyone in general.

Your new found status doesn't make you feel good. The old one did. You are looking for a guarantee, some sort of absolutism if you will, at least something equivalent to those feelings familiar to you. Because belief offers that. Maybe in theory, you know this can't be the case with rationality, but knowing something and feeling the absence of something you are used to while living through that is two very different things.

You probably miss the feeling of being a part of some eternal, warm, safe, bigger than oneself and bigger than sum of humanity idea. The evil will be punished, the good will be rewarded, everything happens for a reason. What's there not to like? But at some point it's not enough for this and that reason, you realise it is not what's happening. But something happened. It's not really important what or when it was, but it just doesn't work anymore. Frankly, it's very unlikely that this is the story of the existence, isn't it?

You know what people start to do generally at that point? They first start looking into other belief systems, religions then certain kind of 'philosophies', ideas and maybe find something expressed differently, but in short time eventually they find out they are all the same, and that intial feeling of lack of bliss and depression which drove them from belief to belief, creeps back in. Because doesn't matter what kind of bliss belief systems offer, doesn't matter how successful they are, you need to believe in them to work. (That's why religous beliefs are often regarded as drugs.)

After that, this time people generally start to carve another path -an  individual one- dismiss all the virtual representations of belief systems,  institutions, traditional practices of worship, ritual, ceremonies or even the scripture, but try to dig into the relgious acummulation to find something forgottten, a real essence hidden deep somewhere beyond everyone's reach. There must be something. It can't be all 'meaningless'. As far as I understand you are making circles around this zone.

You probably love doing this. Finding conversations of the sort on the net, poking here and there, is it this or that, see but there is this here...etc. According to the descripton of your current position this would be  the best way to give yourself a respite. You are neither there nor here, you don't feel like you have any 'responsibility' in this zone, you are 'out', and at the same time it feels like you are doing something about both. And probably you will want to do it over and over again. First of all, if you really need this, if this is about some sort of a depression, go on.

But if it is not, again according to your own explanation of your position, it sucks and you want to go out. It sucks for any sentient, intelligent being in this position. But the reality is you are just beating air, so you can comfortably go on stalling because it feels safe. It's not. It's nothing. It's a delusion.

You should stop reading about religious history, religions...anything about belief systems. You need to do something? Read popular science books. And by that I mean science books. NOT self-help. Not what passes for evolutionary science in reddit. NOT some 'we are all one with the universe and science totally agrees with it, lets group hug' books. Read about physics, cosmology, biology...evolution. Don't tell me you do. If you are refering to Darwin's personality traits (?) and 'Darwinism' in relation to evolution, you are at the wrong address. And next stop from there is trying to hate Darwin because 'what the fuck happend back then with Wallace, man' without even coming close to the real material.

You need to accumulate knowledge for yourself and spend time with it, so you could have an experience of it. That's what learning is. You don't google, watch a video or read pages with names of historical figures and then learn something. Learning is a hard process. The fact that you understand what the sentences are telling you, does not mean you are learning them. Ideally, buy the book, take it in your hand and read it.

(I'm not a 'book vs e-material freak', I love my kindle very much and I read online all the time. But I know what I am saying when I say read certain material the traditional, hard way. You need a natural 'distance' between this kind of knowledge and your self. Get a pencil. Not a pen. Take notes on your book or on some notebook, underline...use an eraser when necessary. Try to write it down when it gets difficult. Have a physical relationship with the material. This is very important.)

Heads up. If you have passed the threshold, you'll never feel that safe, warm, bliss ever again. Because it is fake. Little children feel that sort of bliss while playing pirates in the backyard. And the lucky ones at that. Life does not have any meaning lived that way. 
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

SGOS

What did you say that gave people that impression?
Quote from: Paolo on March 02, 2021, 02:13:45 AM
Apparently, I made some very mild claims that a historical Jesus existed, something websites as ''secular'' and ''atheistic'' as Wikipedia claim it's an academic consensus (mind you, these are not Christians who are claiming this). I think this Mike guy in particular has insulted me several times over this (to the point of ridiculously calling Jesus ''my favorite god'' or some shit along those lines).
No, historical Jesus was not it.  That was just a topic which Mike knows a lot about, and where you had a lot of knowledge gaps.  It's an area that Mike likes to talk about, while for you, it's just one of those, "Yeah, but..." philosophical responses.

What happened when you came here was that you caused a lot of suspicion, because you acted like a Christian.  You did not lay your cards on the table, and I could not count the times, Christians (and Muslims) have shown up here acting like they were seeking knowledge, and then feigning a fake epiphany that you found God while listening to atheists.  When you act all enigmatic, it mimics a common ploy theists use when they come here to poke the hornets nest, get stung, and then play the Christian persecution card; "Atheists are so mean.  They picked on me."  Maybe it's old baggage left over from your pre-conversion days.  And I know from my own experience, that divesting one's self from that bullshit is not an easy task.  The brainwashing we got from our parents, schools, and churches haunted some of us for years, and many of us no longer have the patience for it.

This is an atheist forum, not an "I dunno, maybe there could be a god" forum.  This is an "If you have proof, put it on the table" forum.

Paolo

Quote from: SGOS on March 02, 2021, 07:03:15 AM
What did you say that gave people that impression?No, historical Jesus was not it.  That was just a topic which Mike knows a lot about, and where you had a lot of knowledge gaps.

I had no gaps in my knowledge. If I had, I would have asked questions. I was (and I am) pretty sure of what I said. Mike was the one who made errors, such as identifying ALL FOUR Gospels as ''Synoptics'' -- when in fact only three of them are. So, if anything, he was the one who had gaps in knowledge, or at least got basic stuff wrong.
Oh noes...I think I’m dead....

Paolo

Quote from: SGOS on March 02, 2021, 07:03:15 AMYou did not lay your cards on the table

What part of ''direct question'' from the OP you had a hard time understanding?
Oh noes...I think I’m dead....

drunkenshoe

Quote from: Paolo on March 07, 2021, 12:33:05 AM
What part of ''direct question'' from the OP you had a hard time understanding?

You point out that you are questioning and want to learn, but you are trying to catch fundamental things out through trivial nonsense without even trying to learn. That's an attitude we know very well, we have seen it countless times.

It could be the language barrier, your emotional position, some depression you say you are in...but most of the time you don't sound like someone with a genuine curiosity to learn. Yeah, it is hard. It's actually harder than you think right now. But if you ever get the hang of this some day, you'll see why 'atheists are assholes' and at the same time with why is that da pinnacle of bullshit of labels as they come. Then you won't be able to unsee that ever again.

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

SGOS

#343
Quote from: Paolo on March 07, 2021, 12:33:05 AM
What part of ''direct question'' from the OP you had a hard time understanding?
You mean this?
Quote from: Paolo on March 07, 2021, 12:33:05 AM
Paolo:  "Direct question: among others, has anybody ever 'disproved' the intact tongue of St. Anthony back in Italy? Has any atheist/skeptic ever tried to?"
I assume you think this is a direct question because it has the structure of a question; i.e. it begins with "Has, and ends with a question mark. "?"  OK, it's a question, but it is not a direct question because it reeks of hidden agenda.  It's more than a question and implies so much more.  It seems to be hiding something.

The reason I pick this up as "not laying your cards on the table" is because no one here can prove a negative. As a skeptic, you should already know you cannot prove a negative.  What you call a question here is actually an invitation to engage in nonsense.

But if you still think I should answer that question, my response would be:  Why would I care about some preserved tongue in a Catholic Church that may or may not belong to some ancient saint?  Why would I care about saints in the first place?  And if it does belong to St. Anthony, why would I care about that?  And finally what idiocy would compel the clergy to keep it around?  Widows and widowers don't keep the tongues of their dead marriage partners around the house, or the tongues of their favorite dog.  The whole thing rings of religious stupidity.  Why would I see such a discussion as worthy of a response when the question can't even be answered?

It's not important to me, and if it is to you, let the Catholic Church prove its authenticity.  And if they could do that, my response would be, "Yeah, OK.  So what?"

Paolo

#344
Quote from: SGOS on March 07, 2021, 05:12:26 AM
You mean this?I assume you think this is a direct question because it has the structure of a question; i.e. it begins with "Has, and ends with a question mark. "?"  OK, it's a question, but it is not a direct question because it reeks of hidden agenda.  It's more than a question and implies so much more.  It seems to be hiding something.

It's ''direct'' in the sense that is pretty straightforward. And it should, therefore, be easy to answer.

Quote from: SGOS on March 07, 2021, 05:12:26 AMThe reason I pick this up as "not laying your cards on the table" is because no one here can prove a negative. As a skeptic, you should already know you cannot prove a negative.

But wouldn't the ''miracle'' be positive evidence? Not that I am saying it's true, but let's just assume it is.

Anyway, I meant not for this question to be some sort of ''challenge to skeptics'', I simply meant something like: has this been ''debunked'', like say, in a MythBusters episode kind of way? I genuinely just wanted to know.

Oh noes...I think I’m dead....