Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I had coffee with phetaroi last month at Panara's...I liked him very much, don't know
if y'all knew that...and he smelled very good. I like that in a man, pressed, crisp clothes.
Hands like a 20 year old...that part I don't get. I was jealous.
I do believe he said at the end he expected more of a grandmother looking person...
that would not be me, btw. Not one gray hair.
A gentleman.
Last edited by Miss Hepburn; 09-30-2018 at 07:40 AM..
I had coffee with phetaroi last month at Panara's...I liked him very much, don't know
if y'all knew that...and he smelled very good. I like that in a man, pressed, crisp clothes.
Hands like a 20 year old...that part I don't get. I was jealous.
I do believe he said at the end he expected more of a grandmother looking person...
that would not be me, btw.
A gentleman.
I should like to Meet Phet myself (maybe talk Thai history). I only had the chance to meet Raffs at a gastropub. Lively and smart guy who looks younger than I did 20 years ago.
Phetori is clearly a … I'm not allowed to say it on this website. But basically Phetori is a fraud and only wants to make trouble. He is not even worth responding to. I'm surprised two intelligent people have done so already and haven't seen through it yet.
My brief experience with Phetaroi is that he sometimes gets an idea in his head about what another poster thinks/believes which may be inaccurate, or not altogether accurate, and then reads everything they write through that filter, causing him to misconstrue what they say. I don’t think it’s intentional so I wouldn’t take it personal Oz. And, I’d venture to say most of us are guilty of the same thing, to some degree.
As to your question, I think nocapo’s response makes sense. Jehova isn’t a relatable character. That’s why Christianity claimed the Jesus character as part of the Jehovah “Godhead”. It makes their version of God more relatable.
My brief experience with Phetaroi is that he sometimes gets an idea in his head about what another poster thinks/believes which may be inaccurate, or not altogether accurate, and then reads everything they write through that filter, causing him to misconstrue what they say. I don’t think it’s intentional so I wouldn’t take it personal Oz. And, I’d venture to say most of us are guilty of the same thing, to some degree.
As to your question, I think nocapo’s response makes sense. Jehova isn’t a relatable character. That’s why Christianity claimed the Jesus character as part of the Jehovah “Godhead”. It makes their version of God more relatable.
I think it is simpler than that: they simply recreate God in their own image - making sure that the Image conforms to what the religious authorities teach - if they don't persecute them: Schism and heresy is built into religion, just as it is to politics to which it is joined at the hip, as soon as it stops being the heresy itself.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-30-2018 at 08:21 AM..
Wherever it is, you are welcome to defend anything you like. And we are welcome to question that.
I haven't seen them up to now. Perhaps they did. He may not be the soundest apologists there ever was. But I have seen a few discussions on the subject and what fell flat every time were arguments why the Bible should be relevant to anyone today. Unless they do it for a living.
The church is the backbone of community for many MANY people. So anyone who criticizes the church or religion should expect a justifiable negative reaction or treatment. In other words, the atheist's statements are essentially seen as an effort to break down society, or to cause harm against people in some way.
The church is the backbone of community for many MANY people. So anyone who criticizes the church or religion should expect a justifiable negative reaction or treatment. In other words, the atheist's statements are essentially seen as an effort to break down society, or to cause harm against people in some way.
Yes. That is of course one function of religion - not to misrepresent atheism...well not Only that...but to produce social cohesion, a feeling of Purpose and even destiny and a respect for authority.
There is only one way to counter this: to believe that people are smarter than the leaders think they are, and do want to BE right rather than just believe they're right. And, bit by bit, if we keep winning the arguments, making the case and correcting the misunderstandings and misrepresentations, they will come to see that humanist is what they have been for a long time, and religion has only been Pretending that society is Christian.
I'll save the images of a huge fat leech sucking on the Body Politic, to say nothing of the individual parasites buzzing off in their Learjets, bloated with the blood of the common people, until later, because i don't want to Offend anybody, do i?
Yes. That is of course one function of religion - not to misrepresent atheism...well not Only that...but to produce social cohesion, a feeling of Purpose and even destiny and a respect for authority.
There is only one way to counter this: to believe that people are smarter than the leaders think they are, and do want to BE right rather than just believe they're right. And, bit by bit, if we keep winning the arguments, making the case and correcting the misunderstandings and misrepresentations, they will come to see that humanist is what they have been for a long time, and religion has only been Pretending that society is Christian.
I'll save the images of a huge fat leech sucking on the Body Politic, to say nothing of the individual parasites buzzing off in their Learjets, bloated with the blood of the common people, until later, because i don't want to Offend anybody, do i?
The problem with "humanist" that some don't see, is that it is essentially another word for Atheist. Most people in the world from now until as long as humanity exists will believe in the higher power which controls the universe. Therefore, any attempt to break down the church, the only existing community for most people, is basically seen as an attempt to cause harm.
The church is the backbone of community for many MANY people. So anyone who criticizes the church or religion should expect a justifiable negative reaction or treatment. In other words, the atheist's statements are essentially seen as an effort to break down society, or to cause harm against people in some way.
That is just one conclusion.
It is possible that atheists criticize the church or religion because they are tired of that specific faith being imposed on them which could be the breakdown of their family structure and beliefs.
It is possible that atheists criticize the church or religion because they are tired of that specific faith being imposed on them which could be the breakdown of their family structure and beliefs.
Then they need to find a way to teach their own family about what the church is. It is NOT the most extreme little detail, out of context, found in one of the church's many religious texts. Which makes the atheist a liar whenever he misrepresents what the church really is, even if it is done out of his own misunderstanding.
The problem with "humanist" that some don't see, is that it is essentially another word for Atheist. Most people in the world from now until as long as humanity exists will believe in the higher power which controls the universe. Therefore, any attempt to break down the church, the only existing community for most people, is basically seen as an attempt to cause harm.
No it isn't - no more than 'Rationalist' is another word for Atheist, or Scientist is another word for atheist.
Humanists and scientists can be God-believers and even practice a religion. Maybe even rationalists, too, though maybe not. But an atheist by definition does not believe in a god. Or more nitpickingly accurately, does not accept any god -claim. They don't even need to be humanist, rationalist or scientist. They can simply not know or care about it. They can be incapable of thinking about it, as in the mentally impaired (1) and - of course - babies. Indeed I argue that rabbits, rocks and road -rollers are technically atheist, because they have no god -belief. Though 'atheist' is usually associated with people who are capable of comprehending the god -claim. Which is why atheism claims babies as atheists by default (2).
What this means is that, atheism is a subset of rationalism/rationality (specifically addressing the god -claim), and it is likely to have a default mindset to humanism (just as losing godfaith will imply a default to hum,an morality) and the data or evidence we will base atheist conclusions on will be what science hath validated or at least seem to make plausible as a hypothesis, and faith -claims are worthless.
Humanism is, I might say, the 'camp' we all ought to be in as part of the secularist campaign - atheists, sortagod -agnostics, pantheists, animists and irreligious theists, and maybe even the the religions who doubt that theirs would be the ones dishing out the orders if America became a theocracy. We diabolicalist ditchscum and they have one thing or aim in common - to see that no one religion gets all the power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Then they need to find a way to teach their own family about what the church is. It is NOT the most extreme little detail, out of context, found in one of the church's many religious texts. Which makes the atheist a liar whenever he misrepresents what the church really is, even if it is done out of his own misunderstanding.
This is a horrible misrepresentation of the atheist rationale, criticism of Religion, Bible or Church, and methodology. What, Ozzy, what in the world hath poisoned your mind against atheism so much that you will dismiss humanism in its' entirety on the (false) suspicion that it is a synonym for 'atheist' As though that was the ultimate discredit that would make it forever something to be shunned by all decent people.
Was it some bad Experience you had in the Atheist Church? Did you get your ass reamed by a Dawkinsian acolyte in the Temple of Darwin, or did your little sister top herself when a neighbour told her that "Lucy" was Only a Chimp"?
You don't seem to have a particular rejection of the general Tenets of the Darwinist Rel... I mean... atheist rational arguments... Just What has infected you with this loathing of the very IDEA of atheism What? I should really like to know.
(1) that's all the PC you'll get out of me, folks.
(2) I had a furious row with an atheist on a former forum (AN) when i outraged him by saying that was good tactics. It got me no slack when I assured him that, thought it was good tactics, it was also true.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-30-2018 at 09:49 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I like that in a man, pressed, crisp clothes.
I was jealous.
not Only that...but to produce social cohesion, a feeling of Purpose and even destiny and a respect for authority. 
