Comments on: Ray on Occasional Days: 8:5

By: Ziztur

Ziztur — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:25 +0000

I don’t know that you should give up – persistent but gentle seems to help.

On another note, I had to look up psionics. :)

By: Ing

Ing — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:24 +0000

Yeah on the undermining science, I got into arguments with psionic proponents on a few blogs. Can’t seem to get them to get why science does not support their position. I guess I should give up since they’re mostly just wasting money.

By: BathTub

BathTub — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:21 +0000

Cameron I take it you don’t read his blog, he had a post sort of predestination a couple of days ago, I say sort of it, because as always it’s very hard to pin down exactly what he believes.

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2009/06/toast-or-eggs.html

By: Thumper

Thumper — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:20 +0000

Well of course he doesn’t think logically. He is specifically stating that someone pointing out a logical folicy is somehow “dismissing common sense”. And I believe he has been over the people who said that they were once athiest and converted and said it was something along the lines of them realizing the truth. So no he doesn’t apply the no true Scottsman both ways… Just when it is convenient for his arguement.

By: Cameron

Cameron — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:20 +0000

Number 6 makes me wonder if Ray believes in predestination. If anyone who deconverts from Christianity was never really a Christian, does that mean anyone who converts was never really an atheist or member of another religion?

I’m guessing his response would be that it doesn’t work both ways; that when you become a True Christian, you learn the True Truth, that atheism and all other religions are false, and deconversion would be like trying to make yourself believe that fire isn’t hot. I would, however, be interested to see if he already has that response prepared, or if perhaps (and this would be shocking) he doesn’t consider the logical consequences of his arguments before spewing them out.

By: malimar

malimar — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:20 +0000

I was going to make a hypothesis to the effect of “sophisticated, educated theologians are of course going to have less blatantly counterfactual ideas about divinity than the average high-school dropout off the street”. But I don’t think that necessarily holds true; I’ve definitely heard of otherwise sophisticated theologians advocating a Biblical literalist view, and what the average schlub off the street believes sadly depends largely on which one he was exposed to first, so they’re almost as likely to have a moderately less insane belief system simply through chance.

By: Ziztur

Ziztur — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:19 +0000

Yay! THUMPER I MISSED YOU!!!

**hug hug hug**

**sappy sappy reunion**

Joy! No, I am not cross, but I am glad you're back!

By: Thumper

Thumper — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:19 +0000

Hmmm… new system on how to post… Okay. I’m back after a long period of absence.

Anyway, the thing I have noticed about Cracken that he still appears to be doing is that he fails to either comprehend, or believe that there are people who do read the bible at take it very literally, and that these are the people you are talking about when you make posts like these.

That being said… I’m amazed you guys are still on Ray… (also I’d like to make a public appology for not comming through with my Guest Ray A Day post, my computer got a nasty virus and had to be nuked… Plus I’ve had some personal issues that have had to be delt with. I’m sorry for the sudden disappearance and hope you aren’t cross with me over it.)

By: malimar

malimar — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:19 +0000

I’m sorely tempted to attempt to create a “christianist starter kit”, but the attempt would probably make my me hurt.

By: the Cracken

the Cracken — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:07:19 +0000

Back again...

I think perhaps that atheists are missing the point of some religious observances and beliefs.

The way I see it, and the way I hear many theologians describe it, God is not sitting on a throne in some celestial perch.

He is among us, he is us. He is the combined we. We are him or it.

We succeed together or we die together. Our common humanity and service is the same thing.

It is a thread that weaves us together.

You can say that we have the same thing through atheism or a shared understanding of divinity. We're probably agreeing on the terms, just not the name of the thing.

Meanwhile, we spend lots of time trying to prove one side right or the other.