All Activity

Your last sentence deserves a and made me each of the dozen times I reread it. Okay, I knew about Saturn but had to google the diamonds raining on Jupiter part - very cool. Among all the endings though that could have made your point, your choice is an entertainingly creative one.

I do like that, much I don't know.....yet.....

Doctrinally, I'm inclined to agree. That Jesus is quoting a Psalm seems far more likely [and in keeping with his character] than the notion that he cried out a similar but not identical phrase with no scriptural foundation.

wow raf! lol, no problems with that thinking you know the old saying “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes "

"I don't know" is a solid humanist response. I would say that we, as humanists, have no basis for knowing how the earth, the universe and matter came to be. There are multiple explanations that could be compatible with humanism. I'm partial to "Who ever said the universe was ever in a state of nothing?" On another note, I think the realization that we are one species among millions living one one planet among trillions circling one star among trillions and that there is nothing cosmically special about us... I don't know about you, but I would consider that position as far from "arrogant" as can be conceived. It's certainly less arrogant than "the creator who shaped the rings of Saturn and makes it rain diamonds on Jupiter has a deep interest in where I put my penis."

Interesting.... I don't know is as good as it gets as stated there....

Here are a couple of quotes from the website Raf shared in an earlier post from the American Humanist Association called What is Humanism. - Humanists seek to understand the universe by using science and its methods of critical inquiry-logical reasoning, empirical evidence, and skeptical evaluation of conjectures and conclusions-to obtain reliable knowledge. (Steven Schafersman) - Humanism considers the universe to be the result of an extremely long and complex evolution under immutable laws of nature...Because science cannot now and probably never will be able to explain the ultimate origin or destiny of the universe, I think Humanism can include more than atheists and agnostics. The lack of definite answers to these ultimate questions leaves room for reasonable people to hypothesize about the origin of the natural universe, and even to hope for some form of life beyond this one...Thus, in my opinion, people holding such views can be Humanists if they believe that humanity is on its own in this world, and the lack of any evidence for an afterlife means this life should be lived as though it’s the only one we have. (Joseph C. Sommer)

Deconversion isn't about walking away from a cult. After leaving twi, people began analyzing what they were taught and deciding which doctrines to discard and which to keep all the while retaining their Christian beliefs. That is called deconstructing. Deconversion is walking away from that belief along with believing in the entire book it is based on. Regarding your "dog in the manger" idiom and connecting it with egotistical viewpoints you say have been shown on this thread, I don't think that is an accurate statement. I have disagreed with your position on scripture and your explanations of some verses, but I don't think I have criticized you personally for sharing them. If I have, I apologize. But simply having disagreements doesn't mean someone is being egotistical or disrespectful. Oldskool, by the way, was not referring to comments made on the "Atheism, nontheism, skepticism: Questioning Faith" forum.

Chockfull, If any of your posts you think are missing were to me, I have quoted the ones I have received above. Do you find one or more of these ones are missing?

On the substance of that portion of the discussion, I don't see why it would be so strange to have an unbeliever ask a believer to take a deeper look at scripture. Why wouldn't we? It's from a deeper look at scripture that we realize the evolution of Yahweh as a character (we would add "fictional" to character, but that would be presumptuous). It's from a deeper look at scripture that you realize the cosmology of Genesis is incompatible with what we know to be true. There is no firmament (big solid wall) holding back water from the sky. I personally WELCOME in depth analyses of scripture. What I don't accept is ad hoc explanations that force scripture to say things it doesn't say. The firmament is not "the expanse" or "the universe." The Exodus from Egypt was not a secret prediction that Jesus would spend a couple of years as a baby in Egypt. The "virgin shall conceive and be with child" has nothing to do with the messiah. When you take a deeper look at the verses that are supposedly fulfilments of old testament prophecies, you will find more often than not that the prophecies are not talking about the messiah at all. Oh but they're types. Nope, that's made up.

This appears to be the post you are saying is gone. It is not. You mentioned others. I see no evidence of missing posts (the only evidence I would be able to detect are quotes that don't link back to posts).

A few years back I learned not to moderate threads when I'm posting on them. You of all people should remember why. That rule has been modified slightly because there are just two active moderators left, not counting Paw (so three, but he's been pretty hands off). So now I will moderate a thread I'm on, but only under very specific circumstances. One non-negotiable circumstance is I WILL ANNOUNCE LOUDLY AND CLEARLY WHENEVER I MODERATE A THREAD IN WHICH I AM A PARTICIPANT. This has NOT happened on this thread. I am unaware of any moderation action on this thread at all. There were no reported posts and no removed posts. Please let me know if I can help identify and locate any missing posts. There has to be some explanation. Censorship is not one.

I can't explain how electrons move from the light switch to the bulb. What should I surmise?

I hope posts aren't being censored here.. all comments welcome far as I am concerned. Thx.

How do humanist account for creation? Certainly there is some explaining about how earth came to be.

"A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away..." (good pun) Well if anyone does, I hope they don't displace whoever might be there already. Or if they're the first, I hope they share.

Actually, it's Kevin Costner talking TO Susan Sarandon. George

Is a humanist one that removes all controversial posts from a thread yet leaves the ones up that present the same point they embrace? I notice about 4 of my posts were removed one of which noting the illogical nature of an atheist doing detailed word studies on scripture and lecturing others on “going deeper” into those same scriptures. Believe what you want. Do not censor logic. Censorship is not “accepting reality on its own terms” but re defining your own reality by restricting what is presented. These tactics are identical to TWI. The viewpoint is opposite. Why is a “deconversion “ necessary? It seems like those are folks that still need to break the bonds of the fundamentalist cult before building their lives in a constructive fashion. I certainly don’t need that. The Christianity I accepted in my youth is still sound and solid and nothing like the bondage of TWI. I can and do point out their doctrinal and practical errors. What I dislike is the ego shown in viewpoints. It seems like a “dog in the manger” approach. We can’t eat any of the hay but we are going to bark at all the cows to keep them away from the hay. I am growing to understand OldSkools perspective on sharing from a perspective that will not be respected. And one more note. Raf if this post is censored it will be my last on this site. Not trying to be mean or controversial but if conversation is going to happen there need to be fair boundaries. Peace outta this thread for the fifth time.

Dunno, Charity. There were wars before and wars after the promise of specific land. Wars, famine, water access/rights, minerals... Greed, and refusal to share, is what runs the world as we know it. And such will continue until our planet is exhausted. (What worries me is that this is continuing into space, with people now wanting to mine the moon and asteroids - as if someone has rights to those, hahahaha.) (But that thought is way off topic.) A good question we can't know the answer to. Maybe ask it when Christ returns? According to VPW, that's what Eve thought ("I have gotten a man from the Lord."). But I don 't believe that interpretation. Sometimes people have to hit rock bottom before they can accept help - they "come to the end of themselves." Maybe that's where society was then?

Thanks, Socks. The root Sbq is shared between Hebrew and Aramaic. It could mean kept/spared/permit/forgive/leave/abandon... Hebrew and Aramaic are very close siblings in the Semitic family. The transliterated Aramaic phrase in the gospels is identical to the transliterated Hebrew of the exact same phrase in the OT. Psalm 22 is the reference. Jesus' cry in Aramaic is a direct quote of the of Psalm 22:1. Virtually every detail described in Mark's passion narrative is found in the following verses. It's as if the evangelist had on his lap while composing his gospel an unfurled scroll of the psalm. (Candidate for Fourth Man sermon?) The "why...?" is rhetorical. It's not a declaration of God's abandonment. The cry is urging the crowd to continue singing the rest of the hymn, which is vindicating and triumphant at the end. Really, a beautiful and powerful psalm! So it seems to me. And others. I didn't come up with it on my own. It seems so simple - like a well-tailored glove. TWI seems to be solving a problem that doesn't exist for the sake of novelty. A real stretch. But, hey, I didn't write the book. There's more, but for now, that's it. Thanks for clarifying TWI's position, Socks. I'm sure others have a take on this...

Geez, I thought it was a decent guess and nothing more. I had no idea. Who may I ask then was the character? I pictured it coming from Susan Sarandon.

That explains more, thx Raf.

What I like about the Humanist label is that it places the emphasis on what we believe while merely implying what we don't. That someone is an atheist only tells you what he doesn't believe. A humanist is to be distinguished from a nihilist, who believes life is ultimately meaningless. I personally believe nihilism = humanism + time. I'll agree with nihilists a billion years from now, but not today.

Spider-Man Homecoming Michael Keaton The Flash George

Yes. George