Scorned for positive image...?

[moshe_levy]

When a thief breaks into your home and steals what you earned, it's not wrong. He needed it. He has a different opinion than yours on the matter of property rights and ownership. His shade of what defines a thief is lighter. Your is darker.

 

No, Dave, here you are kind of confusing the definition of what "black and white" means. B&W refers to the standards of behavior people employ. I.e., it's wrong to kill other men - period. The idea there is any intermingling between a good standard and an evil one dilutes good and ultimately benefits evil - so the standards you use may be absolute. B&W cannot to the choices men make which are ultimately rarely so simple as purely good or purely evil. History is full of such choices, from the man who is unfairly starved and turns to stealing to feed his hungry infant, to larger scale choices (like, say, teaming up with the Soviet Empire to defeat Nazism, or propping up brutal dictators that are pro-America, and so on.)

 

It's so easy to come up with an example where you have no wiggle room and only absolutes apply, like your example above. And surely some parts of society have made silly excuses for inexcusable behavior. But look just a little deeper, and you will find a breathtaking level of complexity with which people make choices that are rarely, if ever, black and white. That means wiggle room in some cases, and actual applying your brain's critical thinking capabilities in others.

 

-MKL

 

PS A good and funny movie that illustrates this is "Trading Places" with Eddie Murphy, which should be required watching for every philosophy and sociology 101 class in this country.

[Polo]

Well... I took a chance making the connection with "faith". Soooo... since I'm the OP, let me give another close to home example.

 

Snip

 

In reference to the rest of this post. I see criticism to self-imposed modeeration as a defense mechanism.

 

"If you're not guilty like me, then you have grounds to criticize me, thus you must be found in the wrong".

 

Someone who doesn't speed, who doesn't drink, or who doesn't philander, just to mention a few; is a potential censor of my speeding, drinking or philandering, thus a threat.

 

It is difficult to live and let live. My life will not change because of the death of anybody outside my immediate circle. It is easy to speak with disdain about the sins of others, so one can feel OK about one's own.

 

It is a shame that she died at such a young age. How lamentable that she succumbed to the pressures her type of profession often brings, and a great talent is lost.

 

 

[Paul Mihalka]

"I'd say this very phenomenon is where referring to people as "sheep" ultimately derives from"

Comes to mind that so often in the context of religion the words "pastor" and "flock" come up.

[moshe_levy]

Comes to mind that so often in the context of religion the words "pastor" and "flock" come up.

 

Paul, there are two sides to the coin.

 

On one side is the historical power grab by religious institutions which seek to shroud themselves in secrecy in order to retain their position. A good example of this is the Catholic Church's ban on layman's bible possession. Yes, that's right, long ago, if you were "only" in the flock, you could not own a Bible of your own under severe punishment, since only the annointed priests could read and translate the scripture, even to those literate laypeople who wanted to read for themselves. Books have been filled with many such similar example of raw power grabs at the expense of the common good (this one didn't happen to include any violence or killing, and unfortunately there are plenty of those examples as well).

 

On the other side are reformers within the flock, who refuse to put up with such nonsense, but risk their lives to fight for and successfully change policy from within. People like John Wycliffe, who translated the latin Bible into English around 1400AD, making it possible for more laypeople to get their hands on it and understand it for themselves, if only in secret! You can imagine the internal organizational revolution that resulted from this.

 

In short, even the generalization of pastor and flock is not always true. Within the flock may be the next Wycliffe or the next reformer who changes the organization he's part of rather than abandoning it. The sheep as it were leapfroggs the pastor in his historical importance. Rare - but it happens!

 

What I can say as a generalization, if I may paint with a broad bush, is that in general I have found that people who are extremely religious are usually completely ignorant of the past injustices and outright criminal war crimes committed by their faiths, with the full knowledge of the leaders of said faith. I guess they don't want to risk any cognitive dissonance to the faithful with sermons by introducing actual history, if only to say "Sorry for all that, but we're better than that, now." That would comfort some of us who are weary - a little!

 

To me, love means "warts and all." Meaning, if I love something, I accept its flaws as well as its benefits, and love it anyway. Like, say, loving Whitney Houston's tremendous talent, in spite of her personal flaws. I say this in opposition to an artifical rosy picture of what some relgious leaders present their faiths as representing, while history, money flows (to settle lawsuits? to influence politics? and so on) and what they do when they think nobody's looking tell a very different tale indeed. A person I respect as a non-sheep - as a critical thinker - would know this history, ackowledge it, and love his church anyway based on sound reasoning.

 

-MKL

[BerndM]

Personally, I think we've turned to talking about religion because of the ban on politics!

 

-MKL

I strongly disagree!

 

I think it's winter, and no one has the guts to start an oil thread.

 

 

I use Walmart's store brand exclusively!

 

In actuality though, I personally don't give a rip whether someone believes in God, Dog or the Easter Bunny. Whatever floats your boat!

Just DO NOT try to impose your beliefs on me (aka..STFU)

Live & let live sort of thing.

 

LOL

[Matts_12GS]

You must live in an exclusive neighborhood where no one knocks on your doors. You must never go out in public and have strangers walk up to you to hand you a watchtower booklet. You must never go into department stores and have strangers walk up to you asking you about Jesus or if you have been saved.....in other words, you must not get out much.

Hmmmm....CT doesn't seem so bad after all (even with this whole winter thing) if that's what happens to folks where you live. I too haven't had the people at my door (I'm on a main road, no gated community or anything). I've friends who are Mormons but they haven't shown up proselytizing either. I've seen a Watchtower booklet in gas stations when I travel but haven't seen whoever it is that puts them out. And I would be shocked if strangers walked up to me while shopping asking anything (except maybe the time or directions) - it's just not done here. I thought I got out a lot (I do 100K air miles and half that with cars/bikes/boats) but maybe that's not so much after all. Or maybe there's some pheromone that repels those folks - kind of like the one that attracts cats to people who dislike them or mosquitoes to the bitten ones

 

Bottom line is that YMMV vis a vis religious folks who come visiting. Now if I could get those little people who have the cookies to come around I wouldn't need to get out much I love the chocolate mint ones!

 

Same here in the red neck religious south....

 

I like the coconut/chocolate cookies best!

[Nice n Easy Rider]

You must live in an exclusive neighborhood where no one knocks on your doors. You must never go out in public and have strangers walk up to you to hand you a watchtower booklet. You must never go into department stores and have strangers walk up to you asking you about Jesus or if you have been saved.....in other words, you must not get out much.

OTOH, there is an alternative explanation. Some of us might look like we're salvageable and others might look like we're beyond redemption. I'm guessing I'm probably in the latter category.

[moshe_levy]

OTOH, there is an alternative explanation. Some of us might look like we're salvageable and others might look like we're beyond redemption. I'm guessing I'm probably in the latter category.

 

I've wondered the same - but when an ethnic looking bloke with a name like "Moshe Levy" is approached en masse as he works on his lawnmower in the garage with Iron Maiden blasting away at top volume on the boombox (I kid you not)... Well, how much more beyond redemption do I have to get to be left alone??

 

-MKL

[Nice n Easy Rider]

OTOH, there is an alternative explanation. Some of us might look like we're salvageable and others might look like we're beyond redemption. I'm guessing I'm probably in the latter category.

 

I've wondered the same - but when an ethnic looking bloke with a name like "Moshe Levy" is approached en masse as he works on his lawnmower in the garage with Iron Maiden blasting away at top volume on the boombox (I kid you not)... Well, how much more beyond redemption do I have to get to be left alone??

 

-MKL

The over-achievers are always looking for that really big score!

[Rougarou]

OTOH, there is an alternative explanation. Some of us might look like we're salvageable and others might look like we're beyond redemption. I'm guessing I'm probably in the latter category.

 

I've wondered the same - but when an ethnic looking bloke with a name like "Moshe Levy" is approached en masse as he works on his lawnmower in the garage with Iron Maiden blasting away at top volume on the boombox (I kid you not)... Well, how much more beyond redemption do I have to get to be left alone??

 

-MKL

 

Haha, when the vehicle pulls into the cul-de-sac, and a group gets out, I immediately put on Slayer's "Reign in Blood" and the Rottie is let out to the front yard(underground fence).

 

Our neighborhood gets the religion sellers. The only places that I have not had the knock on the door were when I was living in base housing. Other than that, in every town/city I've lived in from California to here in North Carolina, I have either opened the door to a seller or found a door hanger once I got home.

[Rougarou]

 

I've wondered the same - but when an ethnic looking bloke with a name like "Moshe Levy" is approached en masse as he works on his lawnmower in the garage with Iron Maiden blasting away at top volume on the boombox (I kid you not)... Well, how much more beyond redemption do I have to get to be left alone??

 

-MKL

 

Also, you do know that Maiden is coming back to the States this year to an Arena near you

[MT Wallet]

No wonder!! Stop playing that stuff in public. You're drawing them in like bees to honey.

[moshe_levy]

Also, you do know that Maiden is coming back to the States this year to an Arena near you

 

Of course! Already making plans for the Newark show July 2. And they're playing the "7th Son" setlist, no less! Wild horses couldn't drag me away, as it were. Now what REALLY would be funny is an arena full of Maiden fans in "666" t-shirts giving the sign of the devil, being approach by two guys in white press shirts, thin black ties, and some pamphlets with a really important message.....

 

-MKL

[beemerman2k]

I have thoroughly enjoyed my reading excursions through the Bible. Fascinating writing, ideas, concepts, and situations that alone argue the case for an origin beyond that of the human mind. Great stuff, indeed.

 

Probably the writings of the prophet Habbakkuk have stayed with me more than anyone else, if I had to choose one. That book enthralls me every time I read it, from the questions the prophet poses (which I think are excellent questions) to the answers given by his God. And then, chapter 3, is the home run expression of faith even though all looks bleak in the world around him.

 

But, as this very book illustrates, and countless other accounts (the flood of Noah's time, the demise of Sodom and Gomorrah, the conquest of Joshua, the penalties of death as recorded in the book of Leviticus), there is no way in all good conscience I could ever argue that this book presents a black and white, unambiguous picture or morality! Ask Job if the lessons are black and white. Or Habakkuk, or Abraham, who pleaded for Sodom and Gomorrah against a God who would act in a manner that Abraham, himself, saw as morally questionable.

 

And the collections of questions and doubts even Jesus closest followers had of him suggest yet more morally and intellectually challenging ideas and concepts to comprehend. For instance, Jesus spared the life of the woman caught in adultery in John 8. While we might choose to applaud his kindness, let's not overlook the fact that in doing so, he flat out chose to violate a command in the Law of Moses as recorded in the book of Leviticus! So which was the "moral" act? Obeying the Law of Moses or sparing the woman's life? Jesus felt it was the latter, but one could easily, without even trying, argue that it should have been the former :smirk:

 

To call the Bible a set of "morally questionable" teachings is not to insult the book, it is to simply call it as it is in my view. It's the reader that might desire something that's black and white, but the Bible presents anything but such a picture.

[Rougarou]

Also, you do know that Maiden is coming back to the States this year to an Arena near you

 

Of course! Already making plans for the Newark show July 2. And they're playing the "7th Son" setlist, no less! Wild horses couldn't drag me away, as it were. Now what REALLY would be funny is an arena full of Maiden fans in "666" t-shirts giving the sign of the devil, being approach by two guys in white press shirts, thin black ties, and some pamphlets with a really important message.....

 

-MKL

 

21 June, Charlotte Up the Irons!!

[Couchrocket]

I think that since there is no consensus on anything, anymore, in this country, or in western thought in general, no one has a right to complain about any behavior by anyone that isn't demonstrably illegal. Public expressions of thank you, or FU, seem about equivalent these days.

 

Bums me out, but that's what we've come to.

[beemerman2k]

I think that since there is no consensus on anything, anymore, in this country, or in western thought in general, no one has a right to complain about any behavior by anyone that isn't demonstrably illegal. Public expressions of thank you, or FU, seem about equivalent these days.

 

Bums me out, but that's what we've come to.

 

OK, time for me and Scott to go a few rounds

 

No, I couldn't disagree more, Scott. The issue at hand is one of from where do you feel morality derives from?

 

The Christian world view believes that some time around 6000 years ago, God created the heavens and the earth. Adam and Eve were created in the Garden of Eden as perfect beings who mirrored God's personality. Sadly, they were deceived and because of their fall, death and sin were introduced into the world. The call of mankind, as traced through the Bible, is one of us finding our way back to the moral life we were created to live in.

 

But what we all must clearly understand is that this is only 1 world view among countless others! Who get's to decide which world view is the "proper" or "right" world view? That is a decision each person must come to on their own as a natural part of growing up. Religions and philosophers are more than welcome to espouse their world views, but at the end of the day, each of us must walk our own walk and talk our own talk.

 

I believe those who decide to allow themselves to be bothered by the Tim Tebows of the world do so because there is an attitude in this country that the Christian world view is the ONLY right world view, and that all others are at best -- in error. People obviously are going to find that attitude to be offensive indeed. Some argue that we don't need religion to tell us what is right and what is wrong, that even these ethics are something each society has to decide for itself.

 

If one argues that unless one derives their morals from the Judeo-Christian sacred texts, then from that person's point of view, anyone who does not hold to that perspective has chosen to live a live that is practically devoid of morality. But that is a very narrow and ideologically based perspective.

 

Look around the world today. Where is the one area known by all to be consistently, over time, the most violent and dangerous? The so-called, "Holy Land". You had better believe that in the eyes of many, that obvious fact deals a severe blow to the credibility of any arguments that suggest morality was born over there.

 

Personally, I think one would be very hard pressed to demonstrate that morality in any Christian nation is palpably better than that of atheist nations. In fact, compare per-capita crime statistics in Japan with the United States. Or Norway with the USA. Or Finland with the USA. Or any developed nation with the USA :smirk:

 

Good luck with substantiating your argument on the moral superiority of Christian nations using any hard data. Murder, imprisonment, wealth gaps, military spending compared to spending on education or science or public assistance (BTW, Jesus NEVER put stipulations on feeding the poor. He simply said do it, period.)

 

This is the problem right here.

[casticus]

Moshe,

 

At my previous house the Jehova's Witnesses were always coming by and presenting me with their material until I answered the door just before going into work in my tactical gear (Police Tactical team)...they stopped bothering me after that...I think they realized that violence was part of my life....

[moshe_levy]

Wow... Very well said!

 

-MKL

[moshe_levy]

I aimed that at BM2K, by the way.

 

David, I have my own way of dealing with them now. When they approach, I start screaming curses in Hebrew (the few I know) at my Catholic wife, who runs to my side like a wounded fawn and, playing along, starts nodding uncontrollably. It's been a successful repellent where Iron Maiden failed, and it's funny to laugh about later.

 

-MKL

[beemerman2k]

Just this very moment: Sitting in a Walmart parking lot checking my email when a Latina woman with a car full of kids pulls up to my door. I thought she was parking her car and I wondered why she chose to park so close to me. Then the windows came down and the kids started waving "Watch Tower" magazines at me. "Oh, I get it now, she isnt parking, she's proselytizing!".

 

Even Jehovah Witnesses have a world view to sell us. Is it the right world view? It is to some, and that's fine with me. Glad they found a place where they can be happy.

[Ken H.]

The Christian Bible is, IMHO, such a convoluted mess of contradictions, parables, metaphors, and just plain old lack of clarity, that it can (and is) used to support just about any position on just about anything.

 

And in keeping with that theme , when I see the Tim Tebow thing; Matthew 6:6 comes to mind.

 

That being said, I don’t really give a rat’s ___ one way or the other. For one thing I don’t watch football. But in a bigger scope, I’m quite capable of slamming the door (actually or figuratively) in the face of anyone trying to push their religion on me, regardless of flavor, without a second thought. I have much better, and more interesting things, to burn brain cycles on!

 

I don’t resent it or get all worked up about it, I just dismiss it out of hand. An approach that I think would serve more people well that starting yet another war (of any size). “There’s nothing to see here, move on.”

 

[beemerman2k]

A huge problem with human thinking is that we approach various issues as though they are completely one sided without any other legitimate perspectives. We like to learn point, but we are not so hot on learning counterpoint.. I find this to be true of both religion and of political issues, and that's why these issues are so toxic to discuss.

 

Ideologies serve us in that they enable us to deeply explore a subject with all of its finer points and nuances. But ideologies have their problems as well: 1) they divorce us from reality (we only see life through the lens of the ideology), and they divorce us from ourselves (we lose touch with our own deeply held convictions that differ from that which we are taught).

 

Everyday I see in the news radical acts prompted by ideologies: suicide bombings, wars, oppression of anothers freedoms and/or rights, dehumanization, even acts and behaviors that contradict the precepts of the ideology done in the name of the ideology!

 

Humans seem completely blind, and seem incapable of, recognizing when an ideology is at work in our thinking.

 

For me personally, I often ask myself this question: why am I resistant to exposing myself to any given information out there? What do I fear, learnig something that might question my world view? If so, I take it as an indicator that I am livIng with an ideology.

 

To me, all knowledge is good knowledge! Also, all knowledge must continually be questioned and held to the light of public scrutiny. If I cannot defend my position before critics, then I have to consider their objections and use them to challenge/refine my thinking. In short, I reserve the right to learn from everyone, regardless of their world view.

[Ken H.]

Hey James, isn’t this a hijack? (Sorry couldn’t resist, reference your comment re. hijacking in the RIP thread. )

 

I know, I often lament the apparent decline in critical thinking skills in our current society. We seem to be loosing our ability for observational analysis, the ability to indentify pros and cons of a subject, and to if not understand, then at least recognize, various perspectives.

 

Early in his career Stephen Colbert coined the term, “Truthiness – The quality of stating concepts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than the facts.” I think that mindset drives more and more people these days; facts just get in the way of the truth.

 

[Rougarou]

Just this very moment: Sitting in a Walmart parking lot checking my email when a Latina woman with a car full of kids pulls up to my door. I thought she was parking her car and I wondered why she chose to park so close to me. Then the windows came down and the kids started waving "Watch Tower" magazines at me. "Oh, I get it now, she isnt parking, she's proselytizing!".

 

Even Jehovah Witnesses have a world view to sell us. Is it the right world view? It is to some, and that's fine with me. Glad they found a place where they can be happy.

 

Hehe, look at the Bourbon Street Webcam and notice the redshirts. They ain't selling booze!

[Huzband]

Interesting how this thread has moved from how we decide on & hold icons to a Bible bashing/questioning rant, mostly based on a total misunderstanding of the text.

[moshe_levy]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

[MT Wallet]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

Uh, No it's not. I know you'd like to think it is but it's bashing the bible and by extension Christians and Jews who beleive in it. No ifs, ands or buts.

[Huzband]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

Uh, No it's not. I know you'd like to think it is but it's bashing the bible and by extension Christians and Jews who beleive in it. No ifs, ands or buts.

 

Thank you. Yours & texasaggie97 have been the only educated responses I've seen in this thread.

[KDeline]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

Uh, No it's not. I know you'd like to think it is but it's bashing the bible and by extension Christians and Jews who beleive in it. No ifs, ands or buts.

 

I call it asking hard hitting questions that are not being answered. Wonder why?

[Huzband]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

Uh, No it's not. I know you'd like to think it is but it's bashing the bible and by extension Christians and Jews who beleive in it. No ifs, ands or buts.

 

I call it asking hard hitting questions that are not being answered. Wonder why?

 

Most of the answers lie within, you just have to study a bit. Quite a bit. The answers that aren't laid out in black, white, or red, are where faith comes in.

[moshe_levy]

Danny, I can't speak for anyone but myself. I have no problem with anyone's faith so long as it is not imposed on me and so long as a (very) healthy separation between church and state is maintained. That's my personal view shaped by my experiences, as one who has had more than his share of discrimination growing up. I'm not bashing anything - actually, all I asked of people of any thought regardless of faith is to accept all of it - warts and all. There are warts. That's history - it's fact. The OP asked why some people are weary of religious displays. I answered for myself, simply: history.

 

It's important to understand, the OP is obviously a faithful person who believes in his religion. I respect that. He is trying to reach out to those who think differently than he does, presumably to better understand why those people think how they do. I respect that even more. By sharing our opinions with him, we are not "bashing" him or his faith. We are explaining why we feel as we do. By definition, our opinions will run counter to his. They should remain respectful, but they will not be sugarcoated if honesty is what he seeks from us.

 

You will recall, months ago, I solicited opinions from this board about why there is a hatred of hybrid vehicles. Meaning: I was not looking for cheerleaders of my cause, but trying earnestly to figure out why people held such diametically opposed opinions to my own. Your opinion was one of the harshest. I learned a thing or two from everyone who posted. Some of the opinions were subjective. Some were good points. Some were total, utter nonsense without a shred of evidence or objective fact behind them. So I took what I could learn from the good opinions and broadened my view of why people think as they do. And I ignored the really stupid opinions because they don't matter in the larger scheme of things.

 

This thread is the same. It pays to have a thick skin and the will to separate the wheat from the chaff, if one is to seek to learn why people think differently about things we hold dear to our hearts. It accomplishes less than nothing to be overly sensitive and all too ready to play victim. Echo chambers are safe, but to me incredibly boring places to be. Give me a room full of people who disagree with me, let's have at it, and maybe I'll learn a thing or two. That's the spirit with which I argue - nothing meanspirited behind it.

 

-MKL

[Huzband]

Maybe now we're on to something. I haven't used this forum to cram my beliefs down others throats. I felt you have with your constant hybrid/green/eco-friendly posts.

 

But maybe that's just Whip & I.

[moshe_levy]

It's all perspective. As I told Larry when he passionately argues against me and my "agenda" (as he lovingly puts it,) by arguing against me so vehemently, he by definition has an agenda too. So do you. So does anyone else who expresses an opinion. Nothing wrong with that.

 

We're on a motorcycle-based forum where vehicles and the politics of transportation comes up, alot. I view conservation as a matter of national security - not "eco-friendliness" - and I consistently state my arguments from that position. As you likely have read recently on this very board, some other guys here are also of this mindset (either were there, or are coming around to it based on their research) and are starting to make purchasing decisions based on it, like the guy that just ditched his SUV for a diesel Passat. If I had a scintilla of influence in that regard, if I moved even one person one millimeter closer to buying a more efficient car, or furnace, or truck, or whatever takes that individual's money out of the hands of unstable theocracies, I'm damn proud of it.

 

-MKL

[Ken H.]

Or, perhaps, on a lucid understanding of it!

 

-MKL

Uh, No it's not. I know you'd like to think it is but it's bashing the bible and by extension Christians and Jews who beleive in it. No ifs, ands or buts.

 

I call it asking hard hitting questions that are not being answered. Wonder why?

Why, because when there are no answers the standard retort is "to have faith." It’s the perfect catch-all.

 

This thread started out about for what was perceived by the OP as scorn of a positive image. He see’s a positive image, fine, he’s entitled. I see an over the top display of egotistical self-righteousness that seems to permeate many many high-visibly religious types (of any creed) that seen to think they have all the answers to the right way and things to believe in. And even beyond that, don’t seem to think anyone who disagrees is entitled to their opinion.

 

[moshe_levy]

test?

[moshe_levy]

Strange, I just typed up a whole reply, hit submit, and got the board rules instead. A premonition from God? Nahh, just the mods getting sick of my crap, more likely.

 

Ken, I'm not as anti-religion as I take it you are. I think it has its place. For example, my wife is a pediatric oncology nurse, and she's told me stories of parents who lost their kids holding it together because of their faith, or their temples or churches rallying 'round them to help in their time of need.

 

She's also told me stories of crazy religious kooks who put their own kids in the hospital. With machetes. Yes, here in New Jersey. God told them to, you see. She comes home upset, and I hear these stories. Plenty of them.

 

There must be balance. But above all there must be critical thinking, which in many cases is the opposite of faith. Faith is the belief in the absence of fact. Sometimes that is a powerful force - a force for good as well as not so good. Where people get into conflict with the faithful is when they have faith in fantasy despite fact. Like, say, ignoring science. Facts are there to be seen, but are ignored as faith is more convenient in certain cases than the cold, hard reality of a situation. So you see, faith can be a virtue or a vice - depends on whether facts are present and digested, or ignored.

 

Again, live and let live. History has shown us so many times, there is no monopoly on truth, and there is certainly more than one line around this racetrack, isn't there?

 

-MKL

[StuGotz]

Same thing here Moshe...my reply was political in nature. Except I never had the opportunity to post it. As soon as I hit "preview" I was bounced.

 

I had to agree to "USER AGREEMENT" again. HUH?

 

At first, I thought the site was down, then thought....no couldn't be "big brother mod" watching me.

 

Hope this isn't the case. If so, it might spell the end of my time here.

 

Any one else had issues?

 

 

I'll take them PM so as to not hijack the thread.

 

MB>

[Shaman97]

Same here.

[beemerman2k]

There must be balance. But above all there must be critical thinking, which in many cases is the opposite of faith. Faith is the belief in the absence of fact.

-MKL

 

I love this quote, Moshe.

 

Today we have at our disposal a great online resource that facilitates critical thinking: YouTube. While working by day, sitting in my cubicle writing software, I will often listen to religious debates on YouTube. I have enjoyed debates:

 

- Between various Christian denominations

- Between Jews and Christians

- Between Jews, Christians, and Muslims

- Between Theists and Atheists

- Lectures on evolution, the Big Bang Theory, and the Cosmos

 

This has never been a greater time to educate oneself on both point, and counterpoint.

 

Here's my question for Christians: have you ever listened to a learned Jew explain why so few of them accept Jesus as the Messiah? I would strongly encourage you to do so. You may not be convinced either way, but you will walk away humbled, and not so quick to write off their criticisms. The average Christian mind is very poorly equipped to understand ancient Jewish culture and viewpoints. Reading the Gospels is often like being a kindergartener listen to Ph.D.'s debate a matter; we kinda get the general idea, but we miss so much of significance in the process.

 

My suggestion? Expose yourself to both point, and counterpoint.

[Huzband]

When I logged on this morning, I too had to agree to the user agreement.

 

Seeing as many in this thread think they are smarter than God, I'll bow out.

[moshe_levy]

That's one of the earliest lessons I remember my dad teaching me: Don't listen too much to people who agree with you. You'll get lazy and you'll stop thinking.

 

We've covered the subject of cognitive dissonance on this board a few times. It really feels all warm and fuzzy to be surrounded by people who cheerlead your opinions, where everyone speaks and sounds the same, nobody disagrees in the Echo Chamber you're in. Slowly, over time, two things happen. First, you begin to earnestly believe that anyone who does not believe as you do is either crazy, stupid, or a combination of both. Second, you yourself indeed become intellectually incapable of defending your argument or debating a counterpoint without become extremely frustrated. The end result is polarization and it is entirely the fault of people who do not take the time to listen to counterpoints.

 

One can, in a different forum where such subjects is allowed to be discussed, make an excellent case that this is at the root of our polarization as a society. However, someone who takes my dad's advice to heart would not fall prey to this. He does not listen to commentators with whom he generally agrees. He does not read newspapers with editorial boards that he generally agree with. Instead, he immerses himself in exactly the opposite opinions, whenever he can. Two things happen: First, he can often see the other side has some validity in their point - they are not stupid, or crazy. He learn things are usually complicated, not simple, especially in the realm of politics and socioeconomics. (No, sorry, a valid solution does not fit on a bumper sticker.) Second, in a subject he's interested in, he can hold his own without a problem. He does not curl up in a ball and cry or slam doors and walk out when an argument gets heavy, because he's taken the time to study the other side, not just his own. So he debates their point of view with facts, reason, and logic. Such is the nature of a thinking person I would respect and enjoy having discussions with. And believe me, I've met many religious people who are capable of holding their own in such debates. So I do not make the mistake of discounting them all as mindless sheep. That's just not my experience with them, whatever my views on religion are.

 

-MKL

 

[moshe_levy]

Seeing as many in this thread think they are smarter than God, I'll bow out.

 

Case in point...

 

-MKL

[Paul Mihalka]

Kathy posted this morning at 12.30 am about the user agreement:

 

Folks:

 

The User Agreement reset that you've all noticed was the result of a technological problem on my end known as - TDSPM*

 

There is nothing wrong with your monitor

 

Please resume normal viewing and posting

 

PEACE

 

*The Dreaded Smart Phone Malfunction

 

 

 

Now guys (no gals involved) don't get all your underwear bunched up

[beemerman2k]

I've met many religious people who are capable of holding their own in such debates. So I do not make the mistake of discounting them all as mindless sheep. That's just not my experience with them, whatever my views on religion are.

 

-MKL

 

One such personality is a man by the name of Douglas Jacoby. I have come to enjoy is YouTube presentations quite a bit. He is actually an old friend of mine from our college days. I knew him when he was a student at the Harvard Divinity School.

 

In any case, what I admire most about him, aside from his incredible intellectual mastery over every single paragraph in the Judeo-Christian Bible and countless other books surrounding the topic, is his willingness to travel the world to host many of the debates I referenced on YouTube.

 

No one would ever accuse Douglas Jacoby of surrounding himself in an echo chamber. Those debates I mentioned above? That's Doug Jacoby debating Jewish, Muslim, and Evolutionary Scientists on YouTube. Big time hats off to the man for rolling up his sleeves and getting in there, traveling the world to engage in debate/discussion with great thinkers (these men he debates are not schmucks, they are leading thinkers in their respective disciplines).

 

Sometimes I am astonished to see Douglas concede certain points that are somewhat sacred in certain Christian circles. What else can he do? The evidence suggests that the historically Christian belief is simply not supportable by evidence, and since the point of the debates center around evidence and intellectual consistency, all such teachings that are not defensible using either evidence or intellectual consistency must be tossed out! It's both surprising and nice to see to be honest; nobody is trying to defend dogma here, this is a flat out intellectual fight, so all the extra fat has to go!

 

Check him out on YouTube. Listen to the debates. Oftentimes I feel that his opponent makes huge points that he doesn't adequately address, but I thoroughly enjoy the debates nonetheless.

[beemerman2k]

Seeing as many in this thread think they are smarter than God, I'll bow out.

 

Speaking for myself here, the question is NOT am I smarter than God. The questions are:

 

- since I have never personally had an encounter with God -- aside from fortuitous events that can be attributable to the involvement of a Deity (although curiously, such "luck" seems to happen to people at random, so how do I know my luck is the cause of a God?), I have only learned of God from the testimony of others. People, in far away places who lived a long time ago testify about a God, and their stories were written by others and preserved for me to read today. The only problem is this: there are countless religions and philosophies where this kind of thing is true, how do I know which of them, if any of them, are true? Intellectual scrutiny, examination, critical review, critical thinking, debate and discussion -- that's the only method I have available to me to examine the veracity of any such ancient claims.

 

- since the Bible IS a rather puzzling book to read (and I can provide countless, COUNTLESS, examples of what seem to me to be puzzling and contradictory teachings -- I already referenced the story in John 8 for instance -- did the Law of Moses ever stipulate that the one without sin be the one who throws the first stone? Does it sternly warn of ever tampering with or changing that law? Why, then, did Jesus do so when he let the adulterous woman go?). The only way I can ever hope to truly understand what it says is to subject my learning to public scrutiny! Maybe someone will come along and explain John 8 in a way that makes sense, is intellectually consistent with how the Bible works, and is true to Christian belief. Maybe. As of now, however, "faith" cannot fix what I see as an apparent contradiction in Biblical teaching between the sanctity of the Law of Moses and the breaking of that law to let a woman free -- I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing it.

 

No, the solution to "what we know in part", aside from waiting who knows how long until we "know in full", is to engage with one another in discussion, debate, critical review, critical thought, and in posing questions. This is exactly the kind of behavior you see people engaging in when you read the New Testament Book of the Acts of the Apostles. People, both believers and non-believers, are engaged in debate. I don't recall a single instance where someone took their ball and went home (although I do recall reading of Stephen, in Acts 7, being sent home!).

[philbytx]

BTW - This is a most excellent and enjoyable topic/thread....

[Mike]

BTW - This is a most excellent and enjoyable topic/thread....

 

Except for the stuff I don't agree with.

[KDeline]

Seeing as many in this thread think they are smarter than God, I'll bow out.

 

Case in point...

 

-MKL

 

 

 

I see an over the top display of egotistical self-righteousness that seems to permeate many many high-visibly religious types (of any creed) that seen to think they have all the answers to the right way and things to believe in. And even beyond that, don’t seem to think anyone who disagrees is entitled to their opinion.

 

 

Yup. And when they don't like you disagreeing they walk away. Case in point plus one. Happens all the time when I debate facts with the knuckleheads that try to save me. They all get that glassy eyed smile and walk away. Ever wonder why religious leaders are called Pastors? Or why flocks and sheep are referred to so much?

[beemerman2k]

For the record, we don't know why Huzband decided to bow out of the discussions. It may appear to us that he's following a pattern we think we see out there, but if we are to hold to the kind of rational thinking we embrace, then we must also allow for the fact that there might be facts and information that we simply do not know, that explains Danny's decision.

 

After all, has Danny ever been known by anyone here to shy away from controversy? No, I don't know him to be that way either. So let's allow for an unknown factor that might explain his decision to leave this be.