While most atheists are, in the words of Chesterton, “Mere brute beasts,” some are intelligent. Those that have been blessed in that manner admire and worship their intelligence as though the gift instead of the Giver of that gift had the power to save.
A month or two back I was describing how Jesus used parables to reveal truth to hearts that were receptive, and to conceal truth from those who were not receptive.
An atheist who fancies himself to be a member of the intelligent subset responded that he found the parables extremely easy to understand.
Does irony make you sigh? Or perhaps bring a tear to the eye?
This man had read / heard the parables, perhaps several dozen times over the years:
He learned nothing
He heard nothing
He saw nothing
He got nothing
He walked away empty in mind and soul saying,
“That was easy!”
Nothing revealed -
Nothing received -
“That was easy!”
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."”
1st Corinthians 1:18-20
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Back to discriminating a group of people? Interesting... but it's sad that you need to lie and denigrate others to justify your faith. I still think that "finding Jesus" made you a better person but it also makes you critical of people you simply don't agree with. Instead of just not agreeing, you classify their whole worldview as absurd and worthless.
ReplyDeleteAlso, didn't I mention that parables were a good way to teach things, that as a kid I got something from them? why are you saying that I got nothing? Do you really need to lie or you just misunderstood what I had said?
His agenda is all about hatred towards people who do not believe in an ancient idiotic philosophy as he does.
ReplyDeleteAtheism IS absurd, illogical, incoherent and worse than worthless. If it was just worthless you'd gain nothing of value. Instead, you're going to gain and eternity in torment. I want better than that for you Hugo.
ReplyDeleteThere was no need for you to identify yourself Hugo. Nevertheless, you didn't learn anything of eternal value. Time is wasting Hugo. I wouldn't leave it another day.
Thx for wishing me the best, but since you used the word eternal twice, I perceive that as discussing ideas, concepts, imaginary constructs, and I don't see why I would believe that what you are talking about is real, existent, part of our shared reality.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, how can you keep saying that Atheism is "something", when it is simply a disbelief? No wonder why you did not reply to my explanations on why I am NOT a naturalist and NOT a materialist... You prefer to keep lying about what Atheism is...
I don't understand why... why do you need to lie? or perhaps you still misunderstand something? I really don't get it, that after 4 years, as you like to remind people, you still do not understand what Atheism means.
You clearly disagree with that Purell seeking dude, but you still say 'you can believe what you want' to him, while you say that "most atheists are, in the words of Chesterton, “Mere brute beasts,” " and that I will spend eternity, whatever that means, in torment, whatever that means for a dead person.
Eternal - without time / outside of time
ReplyDeleteAtheist - the denying that God exists
Functional atheist - living as though God doesn't exist.
"Shared reality" - Reality isn't dependent on whether you or I agree with it.
"Atheism = disbelief" - What we believe about God has implications for every other area of our lives. Whole systems of thought / politics eugenics / killing children up to one month old etc. have begun with the belief that God does not exist.
As to lying, like I said before
Ego Numquam Pronunciare Mendacium, Sed Ego Sum Homo Indomitus!
Both you and Purell are free to believe whatever you want. What's the problem with that?
"a dead person" - You are a spirit inhabiting a body. Your earthly body will end but YOU will not end.
Eternal - without time / outside of time
ReplyDeleteExactly, so it's CONCEPTUAL, THOUGHTS, IDEAS that can/are eternal, not people/consciousness. You mentioned for example that we'll find out 1 millisecond after we die, but that does mean anything in the context of an eternal existence. How long is that 1 millisecond compared to what's to come?
Atheist - the denying that God exists
ReplyDeleteLie; that's a definition supported by people who already believe, as it had been the case for centuries, since it has always been considered normal to believe in gods.
Functional atheist - living as though God doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteThat's your personal definition, it should be defined as: living differently than Rod, because of different values/opinions, living as though Rod's God does not exist. It could be ANYBODY else, including ANY person who believed in other gods. You attribute a lot of importance to your own god but it does not change the reality that you are one person among millions with other different gods, including other Christians who supposedly share the same god.
"Shared reality" - Reality isn't dependent on whether you or I agree with it.
ReplyDeleteExactly; that’s why we can discuss the common knowledge that humans have acquired along the years and then discuss ideas like gods. You do the other way around, starting by saying that your preferred god is the real one, and then constructing a worldview out of that. You are not able to start from facts from our shared reality to construct that belief.
"Atheism = disbelief" - What we believe about God has implications for every other area of our lives. Whole systems of thought / politics eugenics / killing children up to one month old etc. have begun with the belief that God does not exist.
ReplyDeleteLie, at least concerning myself, and many other people. Lie especially since you already got explanations concerning that. I DON'T base ANY beliefs or actions on the non-belief in gods. Plus, someone could share exactly the same values/actions of you and have a belief in another god, or no belief at all, and you would still call them Functional Atheists, which shows that your definition of Atheism is meaningless.
Both you and Purell are free to believe whatever you want. What's the problem with that?
ReplyDeleteYour perception is the problem. Unlike my non-belief in gods, YOUR belief in the Christian Rod God makes you act differently and judge people. Since we live in the same civilization, at the same time, the problem is that you want to influence society to be your way, and consider that justice would be done if people like me go to hell, that place you consider to be the worst thing ever. You wish me the best, but clearly believe in the opposite.
In the process, you denigrate people and that is unfortunately a terrible thing to do. It makes sense however, since the scripture you use to form your beliefs was clearly written by people who share that view that some people are chosen, and others are not. That's called discrimination. You have no incentive to make the society better as a whole. Your good intentions that you project to others, like helping kids, are only meaningful in the light of a god that, according to you, does not care about them if they are not chosen beforehand.
"a dead person" - You are a spirit inhabiting a body. Your earthly body will end but YOU will not end.
ReplyDeleteCute, but 'me' is a consequence of my body. You have no way to explain what a spirit is beside saying that it is my consciousness without a body. But scientific observations tell us that consciousness IS a product of the body. It's very complex, not completely understood, but we know for sure that the "spirit" is influenced by the body. Therefore, you have the burden of proof when making claims like you just made. Care to do that? Why would a "spirit" survive the physical body? Is a spirit something else than consciousness? What is it caused by? What are the mechanisms? What does your god have to do with it?
As to lying, like I said before
ReplyDeleteEgo Numquam Pronunciare Mendacium, Sed Ego Sum Homo Indomitus!
Found that explanation, was that movie your source?
***
Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus
Supposed to mean "I never tell a lie, but I am a savage."
I have seen Braveheart only once a long time ago, so I have no idea at what point in the movie this phrase comes up and in what context. It does, however, seem to be not so good Latin. Which is a shame, because there is no doubt that some people found this quote appealing and as a result chose to feature it on their skin (off all places!).
Some reasons that should make it clear why the Latin is substandard.
1. Pronunciare is an infinitive. Why the infinitive was chosen is beyond me, especially because a standard form found in Latin dictionaries (pronuncio, 1st sing, Present Active) would have looked a lot more plausible. There is no reason here for Historic Infinitive and I just cannot think of any other explanation other that someone's attempt to translate into Latin something like "I am not to tell lies."
2. Nowhere in Latin literature, both Classical and Medieval, the words pronuncio mendacium can be found. This expression simply was never used by anyone, even though it is quite understandable to anyone who spent some time learning Latin.
3. Nowhere in Latin literature the words "homo indomitus" can be found. This is clearly a made-up way of locution that has no precedents.
4. The word order in the second half of the quote seems unnatural. The "Ego" is also quite redundant.
***
How long is that 1 millisecond compared to what's to come?
ReplyDeleteWhy do you pretend to not know what I mean?
=========
Atheist - noun: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Dictionary.com
========
Ego Numquam Pronunciare Mendacium, Sed Ego Sum Homo Indomitus!
Good grief Hugo you are intense. You could have just said where’s it from and what does it mean?
As to the rest of what you wrote - whatever! We each have our own path.
How long is that 1 millisecond compared to what's to come?
ReplyDeleteWhy do you pretend to not know what I mean?
Sorry, I don't want to give the impression that I am being a jackass, I am being very honest here… Eternity means nothing to me. Infinitely back in time is the same as infinitely far in the future; both are imaginary quantities. Hence my question…
Let me phrase it in mathematical term because that's how I see a lot of things:
What is the ratio of 1 millisecond on infinity?
X / infinity = ?
(where X is some finite time)
Why isn't 0?
Atheist - noun: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
ReplyDeleteDictionary.com
Ya, don't you see the 'or' ? I don't deny anything concerning gods, I just don't believe people who claim they exist; because when I ask why they believe, they either say that they have faith, or that they have some books/testimonies "proving" the existence of the gods.
Plus, since you talk about Atheism as a worldview, a dictionary definition is not worth much since you obviously talk about a set of ideas, and my worldview is NOT Atheism in that case. I told you that already.
Especially, I do not adhere according to the definition of Atheism that you give, which is synonym to Naturalism, or Materialism, which you also define in weird ways, with beliefs in claims I do not make or support. Why do you keep lying about that? Is it just misunderstandings?
Ego Numquam Pronunciare Mendacium, Sed Ego Sum Homo Indomitus!
ReplyDeleteGood grief Hugo you are intense. You could have just said where’s it from and what does it mean?
That's what I did, I copy/paste a definition, hence the 'Found that explanation' and the stars before and after.
Sorry for the confusion!
As to the rest of what you wrote - whatever! We each have our own path.
ReplyDeleteYou really want me to think that you don't care about 'big' questions ;)
Especially since you ignored the part in bold, purposely emphasized to let you know, not subtely, that if you were to reply to my comment, you should at least reply to that... too bad!
I know you don't even read all that I write anyway, it becamse obvious, even more, after noticing that I had forgotten a part of my text recently. That made a question meaningless, a question I had written twice, and you did not even write a word about it...
It's more for the fun of expressing ideas and read the partial replies you make. I like to insist that I do learn a lot and like to see that religion had a positive impact on you... even if it makes you discriminate certain groups of people.
However, I guess the discrimination is not terrible since it's only words and not actions! Thank God you are not a country leader ;)
"you discriminate certain groups of people."
ReplyDeleteDiscriminate! Discriminate!! How do I discriminate? You know what Hugo?
I would hide you.
If you were in danger and needed a place to hide I would take you in a make you as safe as I could. I would put my own life in danger to protect you.
If the topic came up I'd tell you that you're a dumb-ass mouth breathing atheist who actually believes that the changes in my life came about because I chose to believe in a fantasy but I would take care of you if that is what you needed.
I have worked with every kind of deviant self-destructive (to self and others) individual you can imagine with courtesy and respect. But if you think that disagreeing with someone as to what they believe is discrimination then that is another definition that you don't understand.
Tolerance - Hugo - implies that disagreeing.
I can't think of anyone's lifestyle or belief system that has led me to somehow limit them in what they should be allowed to do. I don't believe you could find a single client that didn't feel repsected whether they are paedophiles or murderers or anything and I find your charge ridiculous.
You said, and constantly show that kind of thoughts process:
ReplyDeleteWhile most atheists are, in the words of Chesterton, “Mere brute beasts,” some are intelligent.
I call that discriminating, judging a group of people based on one of their belief, actually, non-belief here.
My point is that I personnaly never judge an entire group of people like that; individuals act/think too differently to categorize them as "mere brute" because of belief "X". Mere brutes are... mere brutes, that's it.
But I also completely understand that it could be the wrong word as you would not act differently towards them, and I had mentionned that in my comment so there was no need for you to specified what you wrote. I am glad you did though, good way to present it.
Sorry if that's the wrong word, let me know if you have a better one to describe your... terrible judgin behavior :-P
Intelligence is not the same as wisdom.
ReplyDelete"The heavens declare the work of Creator God."
Anyone who denies the existence of a Creator is profoundly lacking in wisdom.
Was that comment suppose to be related to anything that was written on this page before?
ReplyDeleteThe existence of a Creator with a big C assumes the existence of such Creator, as if it was self-evident... but it's not. There is no reason to ASSUME that there is someone, a mind, behind everything.
Some people reach that conclusion, fine, but it is a belief, not the default position.
Therefore, you cannot call a disbelief in that mind/creator/god a denial... unless you have a theory based on facts that explain why this god must be the creator until proven otherwise? what hypothesis can be generated/tested using that theory? how can you falsify it?
In other words... are you making a case for Intelligent Design again?
"Atheist - noun: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
ReplyDeleteDictionary.com
You're assuming Daniel Webster or his wife who wrote most of the dictionary as an ultimate authority on every English word described in a book written how many years ago?
First, one must prove the existence that a god exists, before you can declare a person is not a believer in a god.
Your ignorance is showing through again as usual.