If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Man hit by lightning, finds God. Starts fundamentalist church   (mytown.co.nz) divider line 156
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

78 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Nov 2002 at 3:11 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-11-16 05:15:49 PM
Farking nut.
 
2002-11-16 05:16:55 PM
Actually this was just an assassination attempt on the man by the First Church of Zeus.
 
2002-11-16 05:39:10 PM
Sannyasin
And the critique that Christianity is only for the mindless weak masses (describing the "masses" as weak and mindless, I won't even get into) totally neglects the fact that nearly all of the great geniuses of Western culture were either deeply commited Christians (Messianic Jews) or Jews (Einstein, Pascal, Newton, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Leibniz, Descartes, ...).

So the majority of a western culture's great minds subscribe to the culture's predominant religion? Hardly shocking, but as generations pass, I think we'll see fewer religious folks at the top of fields such as philosophy, science, medicine, etc, as agnosticism/atheism becomes more culturally acceptable.
 
2002-11-16 05:50:41 PM
The Christian god logically cannot exist, based on Christian doctrine. See http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/library/cd_impossible.html
 
2002-11-16 05:51:18 PM
wholly crap
 
2002-11-16 05:58:03 PM
I'd expect that religious people will continue to be represented beyond their statistical likelihood in every productive field with the exception of those fields which contravene the religion. The simple reason being: Whatever motivation an atheist or agnostic might have to lead a productive life, a religious person has all of those reasons in addition to the fact that they are doing "God's work".
 
2002-11-16 06:03:11 PM
 
2002-11-16 06:04:47 PM
 
2002-11-16 06:08:57 PM
OsirisOTheDead:
Christianity has been around for 2000 years and Judaism (from which it is an off-shoot or extension) for at least another 1000. During that time the greatest philosophical minds of the western world have grappled with the question of the nature of God, do you really think that these supposed contradictions never occured to anyone. All of these points have been addressed throughout the history of Christian theology...
 
2002-11-16 06:27:06 PM
Sannyasin:

I do not doubt that in the least. However, it is a convenient "package" of logic for those who hang on to their faith. If you have references to counters of this logical reasoning, please let me know.
 
2002-11-16 06:30:13 PM
Why are people so offended by church leaders making money. For most churches being a preacher is a full time job and they have to support their families.
 
2002-11-16 06:30:38 PM
Just because I'm bored and feel like playing Devil's Advocate, I'll propose the following:

A being which is truly infinite is, by its nature, inherantly contradictory. Only a finite being can be totally consistant. Therefore it is a fallacy to expect an infinite, yet consistant deity. Pick one or the other, not both.
 
2002-11-16 06:35:27 PM
Unless you are God then you can be whatever you want.
 
2002-11-16 06:40:57 PM
First, theologists have a vested interest in categorically ignoring logical proof that their faith is erroneous. If they didn't, they'd no longer need to be theologians.

Second, the fact that a tradition has been believed in for a couple thousand years does not make it true. If that were so, then not only would all other religions and myths be true, but things like cannibalism, flat earth notions, and all superstitions would also be true.

The longevity or popularity of a myth only proves how easily convinced (to put it nicely) the majority of people have been for thousands of years, nothing else.
 
2002-11-16 06:44:52 PM
Osiris > I have to pass on anything anyone named "Chad Docterman" claims.
 
2002-11-16 06:47:15 PM
Dylanspurgin:

And why would that be, hmm?
 
2002-11-16 06:48:00 PM
WizardX

That brings me to a saying I have:

"Two things can be polar opposites yet both be true"

Which isn't so much of a saying as an observation. Opinions are not facts. They simply the way to express what you wished was true, or a genesis to a theory or hypothesis. Yet two people can move past it to the common truth, or two opposite truths.

I can break this down into one word that is so perfect: interrelationship...meaning, there is an interrelationship between infinite finiteness, or finite infitity...as you alluded to: can god create a rock so large that he himslef cannot move it?

If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?

Yes, things make sounds. Trees that fall make a sound.
No, because if you are not there to witness it, you cannot prove that it makes a sound.

Both have basis in truth. Both answers are right. But that of course does not mean either is mutually exclusive of the other.

So, Zen Master, what is the answer? It's the meditation, not the answer...or..."Life is about the journey, not the destination." The shortcut to koans isn't the answer, it's expanding your mind of possibilities not concieved of.

You use the word 'fallacy'...a friend of mine came up with a good formula for words like that. He started off with:

"The only perfect thing is chaos" to which you could extrapolate "The only fallacy is truth" or "real truth is a fallacy"...yet both sayings, even your saying all have one thing in common: the interrelationship, which is the universal, unifying truth.
 
2002-11-16 06:54:22 PM
...that is a good article though.

Notable Quote:
"A perfectly compassionate being who creates beings which he knows are doomed to suffer is impossible."
 
2002-11-16 06:55:35 PM
Well it's hard to be sure of what Jesus really said since it was common practice at the time (of translation and mass production) to insert certain noble and rich people and their quotes into the stories. I believe there were a few people inserted to Golgotha. It is supposedly even worse with paintings done by contract with someone who wanted to feel all tingly.
 
2002-11-16 06:56:35 PM
but the apostals really betrayed what Jesus wanted. He stated for there to be no church made in his name, nor an organized religion. Guess what they did immediately after his death (and ressurection, if one believes that)?
 
2002-11-16 06:57:51 PM
Dylanspurgin:

It is indeed a good article. However, I don't think because someone isn't famous, etc, that they're incapable of logical thought. If someone wants to rip apart his ideas, I'd like to hear what they have to say too. Whenever I present a Christian with this article, they have not been able to counter it. I've asked them to research and get back to me. None so far have. I wish they would.
 
2002-11-16 07:00:45 PM
its a good article but i still cant believe it because the dudes name is Docterman. Obviously everything he says is made up and unfounded.
 
2002-11-16 07:01:56 PM
Peter_Hook

I agree with you on pretty much all points. The older I get, the fewer absolutes I find. And I have no problem with that. I can't imagine how BORING life would be if I actually had all the answers. (and, in fact, if I did I'd have no reason not to forcibly go explore other planes)

What I don't get is why so many cling to this idea of a perfectly consistant, unified, mechanistic universe. One would think the mere presence of quantum theory and the uncertainty principle would cast doubt on the very idea.

But then, I'm funny. I don't WANT a perfectly predictable universe. Without chaos, order is undefined.
 
2002-11-16 07:02:21 PM
Armandeus:
Nobody is saying that just because a belief has been around for X (200, 3000, 60000) number of years it is true (I'm not even making a truth claim). I am saying that the brightest minds in the world over the past 2000-3000 years have made dealing with supposed logical inconsistencies of that belief a priority. Unless you come up with something totally mind-blowing, someone has already thought about your logical inconsistency and reconciled it.
 
2002-11-16 07:04:38 PM
Sannyasin:

They have?
 
2002-11-16 07:17:39 PM
WizardX

Boo-ya...without chaos...you can't be right unless something is wrong...heh heh heh....

As far as having all the answers goes, a great analogy was unwittingly given to me by an old Aikido sensei. He lamented that after he finally achieved 1st degree black belt, his sensei made him go back and learn all of the basics again...to an excruciatingly mundane level.

To me, I saw the buddhistness in it...coming from nothing, living, dying, reborn. In martial arts, the point of achievment is becoming automatic. There's a quote often associated with Bruce Lee "I cannot be held responsible for what happens to someone who attacks me", which was his way of saying "being lethal is automatic, and if you attack me, all bets are off."

So, you can achieve all the anwers. It's easy because it's simple. If it's complex, it's wrong. There is so much Zen on these message boards, and people never realise it. They come out with poigniant one-liners, whereas others make really uninformed statements that outline their not-knowing. But the people who just blurt it out...it's natural, from the subconscious. It's like taking an exam. They say "your 1st instinct is usually right." which is usually is. There's a certain discipline of life that comes thru living which is unconscious. When you get all the answers, you just realise you need better questions.

Ultimately, I find that everything always boils down to simplicity. One of my favourite sayings:

"Only a fool claims he is wise"

There are of course, two sides to that. The 1st would be, if you think you know it all, you probably don't. Then again, the other side...who is happier than a fool? A child? When you're in "automatic mode"...many people are happier dreaming than in reality, etc. so on and so forth. So maybe the point of being wise is to be a fool.

Maybe the point of becoming a black belt is to learn from scratch as a clean slate.

Birth, death, reborn...reincarnation. We see it every day in our lives, our personality, relationships, everything. It's real if you choose to accept it.
 
2002-11-16 07:25:22 PM
Sannyasin:

"I'd expect that religious people will continue to be represented beyond their statistical likelihood in every productive field with the exception of those fields which contravene the religion. The simple reason being: Whatever motivation an atheist or agnostic might have to lead a productive life, a religious person has all of those reasons in addition to the fact that they are doing "God's work"."

As an atheist, I have to disagree. The only immortality that I see anyone having is what they leave behind here on earth, which I have to imagine is a greater motivation to paint (one of my leisure activities) than any motivation a Christian has for the same activity.
 
2002-11-16 07:27:40 PM
Sannyasin:

"Unless you come up with something totally mind-blowing, someone has already thought about your logical inconsistency and reconciled it."

Yes, by beheading, the iron maiden, etc. The Church wasn't all that forgiving about ideas that contradicted their rules.
 
2002-11-16 07:27:43 PM
Rally_monkey_must_die

No wonder you hate the Angels
 
2002-11-16 07:31:58 PM
Picturescrazy,
The people of that preachers church should know exactly where there money is going. Most churches have a monthly business meeting that shows all the bills the church has to pay as well as the salaries of all the church employees. The salaries of the employess are voted on by the church members, at least in my church anyway. Our preacher does live in a very nice home now, but he and his family struggled very hard for a long time to get where they are now. Being a preacher is like a lot of other jobs in that the better you are at your job the better the benefits are going to be. I know when our preachers house was built all he had to pay for was materials because we have contractors in our church who did not make him pay for labor. We also have mechanics, landscapers, and home interiors shop owners who do not charge for their services. I guess what I am saying is just because a church leader is successful does not mean he is stealing from the church members.
 
2002-11-16 07:34:36 PM
Damn! Evidently God hasn't finished the job yet.
 
2002-11-16 07:50:49 PM
Peter

But at the same time, being forced to relearn everything from scratch is very metaphorical for one life. Anyone who seeks enlightenment cycles through being wise and being a fool many times. Perhaps there is no difference.

Moreover, in anyone, it is these cycles which create growth. It's easy to close your mind in self-satisfaction and let it slowly atrophy. Only through intentionally seeking internal conflict can you grow as a person. This applies equally to a Christian who blindly parrots the bible without spiritual thought, and to an athiest who refuses to see the slightest bit of magic and wonder in the cosmos.

The human condition is one of uncertainty. Only by embracing uncertainty, can one become sure of himself. I don't have all the answers, and in all likelihood I never will. But knowing this lets me enjoy the effort.
 
2002-11-16 08:01:21 PM
I think I *saw* god when I pissed on a electric fence.

After the shock, I shiat in my pants.

I had to walk three miles. My ass hurt so bad the next day.

God is no good.

He's up to tricks.
 
2002-11-16 08:01:41 PM
As far as that Chad article goes, I only made it about a third of the way down but there were a whole host of weak logical points. The most comdeming is his entire approach: every argument he made is built around a contrast of the infinite and perfect God with the finite and imperfect nature of the universe. This quandry is the object of Christian polemics from St. Augustine onward. The central flaw in this whole line of argumentation is that we (as finite human beings, living in a finite universe, and never experiencing infinity in any activity we encounter) are absolutely incapable of reaching an understanding of the full nature of the infinite (understanding in either the Grecian sense: meaning to grasp that which lies under something (its essence) or in the Heideggerean sense: to grasp something's meaning as an object of our own agency) which makes the basis for his argumentation of contradiction untenable (yes I am aware of Cantor's work). Now, the fact that God is proposed to be infinite, complete, perfect, all-powerful, etc. cannot lead to a logical inconsistency by relation to the structure of this finite world because in order to form a logical inconsistency we must have a grasp of both concepts we are proposing to make inconsistent (and we never have a true grasp of the concept of God's infinitude; or a full understanding of the nature of our own finite existence for that matter).

Now as for some of the specific points: 1) The whole "God creating the universe reveals his incomplete nature" argument rests on the fact that God "needed" or "wanted" something which then required the creation of the universe. Christianity doesn't maintain that God needed or wanted to create the universe, rather it immanated from him (the concept of an all-powerful and all-knowing being "willing" is unmeaningful in an absolute sense, this is a mere inability to express God's perceived action through human linguistic concepts). 2) His whole imperfection cannot procede from perfection argument is weak. There is no logical reason that imperfection cannot procede from imperfection; the fact that my clay pot dissolves in water (is "imperfect" in the presence of water) does not mean that I am. The only argument that might lead one to think so is if a "more perfect" option were available (then the selection of the "less perfect" option could conceivably be regarded as "imperfect"). We have no reason to believe that this is not the "most perfect" option for the universe (see Leibniz on this point). 3) The argument that God cannot create suffering is also dealt with by Leibniz. 4) The question of infinite punishment for finite sins is dealt with by Dostoyevsky (Brothers Karamazov). 5) The "argument" that "no just God would ever judge a person by his beliefs and not his actions" is an opinion, not a logical argument; the ultimate fate of those that have not heard the Gospel is not definitively addressed in the New Testament. 6) The argument about the imperfect nature of God's revelation in the Bible to man is almost exclusively opinion and contains no argument approaching a logical disproof of God's existence. 7) The fact that God is stated to show surprise or emotions is merely a "simplification" of God's nature as a means of expressing an infinite truth to the finite human mind. Nearly every statement in the Bible about God is inherently a distortion of the true matter of God by way of the limitation of language. Due to the ultimate unknowability of the true nature of the infinite God by finite human minds that nature is expressed to people by way of associated human aspects.

Finally, "No reasonable and free thinking individual can accept the existence of a being whose nature is as contradictory as that of Yahweh, the "perfect" creator of our imperfect universe. The existence of Yahweh is as impossible as the existence of cubic spheres or invisible pink unicorns." To which, I can only say: those who lean only upon their own finite and fallacious understanding of that which they cannot possible understand are simply cavemen staring at the paucity of the fire in their little cave, disbelieving the existence of the sun.
 
2002-11-16 08:03:37 PM
Is it just me, or did Sannyasin just take two pages to say basically the same thing I did in four lines?
 
2002-11-16 08:18:41 PM
Can he be beyond nature? If so, how can a supernatural entity ever influence the natural universe? How does one who does not follow the laws of physics interact with a world ruled by the laws of physics?
 
2002-11-16 08:20:02 PM
i just lost an hour in time and i have no idea what happened t me ohhhhhh sppooookkyy....or maybe i just didnt account for daylight saving time, psshhh whatever
 
2002-11-16 08:25:29 PM
I don't think Samuel Clemens would have approved... :( tsk,tsk...
 
2002-11-16 08:49:32 PM
The gobble-d-goop persists. I can't believe that to believe in God you must master some hi-falooted philosophy and understanding of people, times and the universe. Some of us are not capable of that. That doesn't rule us out of his love, does it? Actually, I don't believe in god or religion, anyway. I wish he did exist.
 
2002-11-16 08:51:13 PM
WizardX:

It's Not Just You.
 
2002-11-16 08:55:12 PM
"Can you imagine a people worshipping a creature that created the very world that plagues them?"

/Duckman
 
2002-11-16 08:55:52 PM
How about we start worshipping Duckman?
 
2002-11-16 08:56:07 PM
Jjj1952I can't believe that to believe in God you must master some hi-falooted philosophy and understanding of people, times and the universe. Some of us are not capable of that.

Number one, no it's not, and number two, yes you can. Clinging to desperately to your own ignorance is the quickest way to ensure failure.
 
2002-11-16 08:59:35 PM
Sannyasin

The central flaw in this whole line of argumentation is that we (as finite human beings, living in a finite universe, and never experiencing infinity in any activity we encounter) are absolutely incapable of reaching an understanding of the full nature of the infinite (understanding in either the Grecian sense: meaning to grasp that which lies under something (its essence) or in the Heideggerean sense: to grasp something's meaning as an object of our own agency) which makes the basis for his argumentation of contradiction untenable (yes I am aware of Cantor's work).

Hmm, if we are absolutely incapable of grasping the infinite, how can we assign any infinite attributes to God? The concept of infinite or perfect attributes is inherently flawed, so we cannot use these to describe anything. As you say, we have had no contact with any infinite phenomenon, so why should we even believe that there should be any infinite phenomena?
 
2002-11-16 09:12:29 PM
My cat's breath smells like cat food.
 
2002-11-16 09:13:45 PM
People believe that man is descended from apes then wonder why their kids act like monkeys when they grow up.

Common ancestor. 'Nuff said.
 
2002-11-16 09:16:49 PM
Christians believe they are inherantly evil and sinful, then wonder why they feel so bad about themselves when they grow up.


Embrace your inner divinity.
 
2002-11-16 09:27:13 PM
I've always wondered, being the infallable, perfect, all-knowing deity, why did god create his nemesis, which will one day destroy his creations, according to the bible?
 
2002-11-16 09:32:42 PM


White Lighting and proselytizing , born to be together.
 
2002-11-16 09:39:33 PM


You want it, You got it
 
Displayed 50 of 156 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report