Not at all.
Its just a humorous exercise in futility when critics of religious institutions can't conceive their susceptibility to the same weakness.
The historical origins of the Christian notion of the Trinity
- Thread starter billvon
- Start date
Its just a humorous exercise in futility when critics of religious institutions can't conceive their susceptibility to the same weakness.
It became audacious when he extrapolated that beyond his own experience.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
And what am I to look for that you disagree with? You haven't told me yet, except for a vague assertion that Dawkins is ignorant of semiotics, really?
And who gave you the expertise to judge Dawkins and his knowledge of any subject? Your hubris is astounding.
p.s. That list of unanswered question is becoming frighteningly large....
Your credibility continues to fade into "blowing smoke".
Get back on topic and stop attacking victims of child abuse.
Well, actually Dawkins comments were perceived as attacking victims of child abuse. If you had to characterize a moment when the New Atheist movement lost its shit, that would probably stand out as a memorable moment.
Probably better to look at experts in the field of semiotics, unless one feels excelling in the field of, say, biology permits one to go around pretending they can take credit for stuff like a mad artist .... which is why I suggested google.And what am I to look for that you disagree with? You haven't told me yet, except for a vague assertion that Dawkins is ignorant of semiotics, really?
And who gave you the expertise to judge Dawkins and his knowledge of any subject? Your hubris is astounding.
p.s. That list of unanswered question is becoming frighteningly large....
Your credibility continues to fade into "blowing smoke".
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
By whom? New Atheist movement? As a life long atheist why have I never heard of this "influential" group? A circle of five or six who have founded a movement? And are very vocal?
Moreover what does child abuse have to do with God or memes?
Ah, I see;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
And further;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
So Gary Wolf invented that term, ok. Bartrant Russell
I see no difference between the non-existent books of the OA and NA (Old Atheism and New Atheism)
You know what the difference is? Really?
Today Atheists are no longer afraid of speaking up for fear of being beaten by a Theist mob.
For speaking up in defense of freedom of thought and against the constant proselytisation of the three most prominent western religions.
As previously posted, I have been victim to such treatment for suggesting that "people are made of atoms" . Today theists know people are made of atoms, but they still don't know that all humans are great apes. And still today, how many people are psychologically beaten by the "monkey" word? Read the newspaper.
Theism is a dangerous belief, because it does not rest on true fact but on imagination, in all ways. It's a mass delusion. An uncontrolled mass mirror hallucination.
Please stop spreading like a virus. Respect is earned, in all moral value systems.
Theism does not have a very good track record to date. Not all bad, but not enough good...
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Father, Son, or Holy Ghost?
I see a mirrored symmetrical fractal object, very often found in nature........
Musika, for someone so eager to put a stop to certain lines of (legitimate) discussion in favour of others on the subject matter at hand, you are showing a troll-like ability in avoiding discussion even in those lines you approve of, and preferring instead to engage in irrelevancies when you have had every opportunity to do otherwise.
I'll ask again, in an effort to bring the thread back on topic:
How do you think knowledge of Tertullian helps with understanding the origin of triunes within ancient religion?
Do you think the Trinity in Christian doctrine is a wholly new idea?
I'll ask again, in an effort to bring the thread back on topic:
How do you think knowledge of Tertullian helps with understanding the origin of triunes within ancient religion?
Do you think the Trinity in Christian doctrine is a wholly new idea?
Because if you come to something conclusive about triunes and ancient Egypt (which is doubtful) you still have to bring it to what was the contemporary landscape of the early Jesus movement. In short, being blithely unaware of Tertullian (which, btw, was only introduced as to provide an introductory figure into unlocking what was the contemporary political, cultural and philosophical landscape of the time) is just like waving your arms about Gordon Ramsey's cottage pie but never getting around to discerning its distinction from George's, John's, Jack's or even Ramanuja's or Ramesess the Great's.
Last edited:
Practically everyone.
If a rising tide raises all ships, a low tide beaches them.
At a guess, probably because you are not well informed or widely read.
The subject arose from discussing the upper stratospheric limits of strangers posting.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Not me.
Not mine.
So it was a minor verbal faux pas or misunderstanding, or rejection. Did not seem to shake my world and I spend about 8 hr /day on-line, researching the topics I participate in. Must have just missed it.
Can you refer me to the actual verbatim recording so that I can make up my own mind? I'd be happy to share my impressions.
Ah, missed that one....
, very abstract.....
I guess one could start along the lines of "Does a world view establish a framework of reason?" or is it that "Reason establishes a world view?"?
If it's the former, would it be possible to objectively determine some world views to be superior or inferior to others?
And if it's the latter, what would reason have to make or break in order to establish a different world view?
Surely you are but talking of the estimations of your ability ... but that detail aside, is there a limit to your ability? Is there a limit to human ability?
By your own admission, you only get a heartbreakingly brief glimpse of a retinal after image of the universe, and that is after many painstaking hours of investment in time and money. Yet here you are, talking with confidence about what is and is not in the universe, your powers of reason as an ultimate barometer for discerning fact from fiction. Sure, we have a certain intelligence that helps us negate our worlds of buying potatoes and negotiating coffee table corners, but if you think these sorts of things can be brought to solve a certain scale of problem, you are either pulling our leg ("con man") or have had your leg pulled by someone else ("conned").
Or to put the same problem differently, do you think empiricism can ever hope to come to a day where they discover everything, and there is no more need to peer down a telescope or micriscope (or anything in between)? Or do you think ignorance is the perennial companion of consciousness?
So if ignorance "laughs last", how do you propose one goes about pursuing this precision?
I take issue with his posting style. To be fair, he is just taking advantage of a bias of the admins. Pretty sure that someone who just endlessly spammed memes and vids with zero commentary on any other sub forum or topic would get shut down pretty quickly.
If illusion/ignorance is perennial, so is superstition. Even if you somehow manage to wrestle religion out of the minds of people, you will still be left with an army of Justin Beibers and Kim Kardashians to contend with.
The best one could hope for is responsible leadership. The problem with political jokes is they get elected. Somewhere on the path from here to sanity must be places that drastically remodel our political and economic systems. I can't say exactly where or what they are, because I don't see a (painless) path to sanity from here. It will probably be a case of things getting a lot worse before they get better.
Its inevitable.
You've already done so with your talk of Shaun the Sheep.
Equality is a spiritual pursuit. Division is a material pursuit. Ideal society is superimposed by both models. Unfortunately this doesn't have a wonderful track record in western history, so it is a bit difficult to discuss.
Regardless of your opinions, you still have the problems and if you advocate you have the means to solve them, you are just conning people into a version of superstition
Kind of like letting go of the steering wheel.
Kind of difficult, because the moment you give someone 200 dollars is the moment they expect 400 dollars more.
The notion that there is one existence tends to drive a lot of what goes on in the name of arrogance etc.
Ohhh ... quit pulling my leg!
Hate to break it to you, but science arises from humans .. . and furthermore, and if power structures of dominion automatically translate into disrespect, you might as well tell everyone to get stuffed and the planet they came on.
Then you will just make a mess and no one will invite you over for dinner. Philosophy is what makes ideas transmissable.
.
Ok
God appears.
What happens next?
Not really.
Every place on the face of Gods green earth has some recourse to tradition that improves one's lot spiritually. Especially China.
The fact that you brought it up made me question whether its simply about their recent attempts to try one better.
Last edited:
Let me guess, when the "elevatorgate" et al controversy went down, media sources around the world also didn't deign to seek your opinion?
The staring gun went off seven pages ago, and here you are still in the blocks. You keep insisting that there is a case to be made against an Egyptian influence on the foundations of the Trinity, but you refuse to put any effort into making it. Why do expect others do what you won’t do yourself?
Here, I’m leading you by the nose.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_comparative_mythology
FFS!
There is nothing in that link that discusses the trinity.
Its like you are prepared to discuss anything and everything except events prior, during and after the appearance of Jesus.
It's foundational, read and learn. You have to start with baby Jesus steps before you can walk.