An Intellectual's Christian Narrative: A Non-Magical Alternative (Buddhist, souls, Harry Potter)
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.
the point MPD consistently makes is it is "superstitious magical thinking primitive" if it is not verified by modern science. or verified by reliable historical records. ergo both his own "visit from Jesus" and the "myth invented 2,000 years ago" are both "primitive superstitious magical thinking"
I don't care what his speculative science and mythical religious beliefs are. my point is simply that the logic he uses and the words he uses are inconsistent resulting in flawed logic. it's a double standard. all I am doing is pointing that out.
This thread decries anything magical or superstitious, period. To claim that it does otherwise is just stupid denial of the obvious. What you call a "visit from Jesus" is an encounter with a consciousness other than my own that happens to match exactly the descriptions of the Holy Spirit in the Bible (1st Cor 13, etc.). I find the Jesus narrative as modified by me to present a cogent alternative to the barbaric blood sacrifice nonsense our ancestors considered valid and it tracks with the spiritual template embedded in the spiritual fossil record.
This thread decries anything magical or superstitious, period. To claim that it does otherwise is just stupid denial of the obvious. What you call a "visit from Jesus" is an encounter with a consciousness other than my own that happens to match exactly the descriptions of the Holy Spirit in the Bible (1st Cor 13, etc.). I find the Jesus narrative as modified by me to present a cogent alternative to the barbaric blood sacrifice nonsense our ancestors considered valid and it tracks with the spiritual template embedded in the spiritual fossil record.
So if you "decry anything magical or superstitious" then you certainly won't mind identifying which of the following listed fall into that category. Because you are being utterly inconsistent and waffling in your use of "primitive magical thinking superstition"
which of these are "magical thinking and superstition"
"visit from Jesus"
"visit by angels"
"visit by any dead person"
"heard a message from God"
God
God created the universe and everything in it
every human has an eternal soul
reincarnation
prayer
placebo
miracle healing
Divine intervention
acupuncture
chi
there is an unseen energy that gives life and animates life
there is an unseen energy that flows through everything in the universe
So if you "decry anything magical or superstitious" then you certainly won't mind identifying which of the following listed fall into that category. Because you are being utterly inconsistent in your use of "primitive magical thinking superstition"
which of these are "magical thinking and superstition"
"visit from Jesus"
"visit by angels"
"visit by any dead person"
"heard a message from God"
God
God created the universe and everything in it
every human has an eternal soul
reincarnation
prayer
placebo
miracle healing
Divine intervention
acupuncture
chi
there is an unseen energy that gives life and animates life
Those would be off topic in this thread about the Christian Alternative Narrative. Create your own thread with that question if you wish.
The idea that such early writings were fiction during a time when writing was such a rare and difficult task is preposterous. Writing was a serious business reserved for serious things.
Then we would have to disagree about for example the Sumerian legends or the Egyptian religious texts of the Old kingdom. After all, they wouldn't have troubled to write them down unless they knew they were true, would they.
Then we would have to disagree about for example the Sumerian legends or the Egyptian religious texts of the Old kingdom. After all, they wouldn't have troubled to write them down unless they knew they were true, would they.
Think it through. Take all the time you need.
They believed they were true, Arq. Shouldn't be too surprising given the primitive level of ignorance and mindsets at the time of the writing.
Those would be off topic in this thread about the Christian Alternative Narrative. Create your own thread with that question if you wish.
within your own thread, within your own posts you are not being consistent in how you use the phrase, and you decline to clarify or define what you even mean by "primitive magical thinking superstition."
if you can't define or clarify what you mean by a phrase that you use frequently in your own posts and in your own thread, then it points to a lack of clarity in your thinking. it points to a lack of critical thinking and it points to flawed logic. it points to a lack of rational thought.
the basics of any posting online is to be able to clarify "when I use this word or phrase, this is what it means to me"
you decline to do that. duly noted.
the point MPD consistently makes is it is "superstitious magical thinking primitive" if it is not verified by modern science. or verified by reliable historical records. ergo both his own "visit from Jesus" and the "myth invented 2,000 years ago" are both "primitive superstitious magical thinking"
I don't care what his speculative science and mythical religious beliefs are. my point is simply that the logic he uses and the words he uses are inconsistent resulting in flawed logic. it's a double standard. all I am doing is pointing that out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
Is it that you are that stupid or that you think the rest of us are?
No, but it would show that if Tzaph isn't a lawyer, she missed her mark in life.
aside that it isn't to do with my post about the assessment of historical records really as we assess archaeology, the terms while somewhat mocking are not without a point.
If it is untrue, AND is related to entities outside of human experience of the world and how it works (1) it is supernatural, and 'magic' in respect to a claim that something was done without anything more in the way of technology than wishing for it to happen and 'magic' is a term that seems perfectly applicable, no matter how thiose who believe in divine miracles may be offended. And if it is unverified by science and is a claim related to a culture between teo and three thousand years old, then 'primitive' is a valid term to use, no matter how modern -day believers in these old beliefs may be miffed by it.
Whether this is a double standard because Mystic gets put out about when it is applied to beliefs of his, I will leave to the pair of them to fight out. Popcorn, peanuts? humming bird's tongues? Ocelot spleens anyone?
(1) thus Bigfoot is on the edge othe supernatural because it has no known scientific context in which to exist. This would not apply to new species that were simply unknown. Thus, if Yet does indeed turn out out to be an unknown species of bear, it would have a scientific context and become natural - as 'supernatural' that becomes Known inevitable does. The religious and fantasists complain bitterly about this, but we refuse to alter these rules of the universe.
Is it that you are that stupid or that you think the rest of us are?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
No, but it would show that if Tzaph isn't a lawyer, she missed her mark in life.
Isn't that the truth!!!
Quote:
If it is untrue, AND is related to entities outside of human experience of the world and how it works (1) it is supernatural, and 'magic' in respect to a claim that something was done without anything more in the way of technology than wishing for it to happen and 'magic' is a term that seems perfectly applicable, no matter how those who believe in divine miracles may be offended. And if it is unverified by science and is a claim related to a culture between two and three thousand years old, then 'primitive' is a valid term to use, no matter how modern -day believers in these old beliefs may be miffed by it.
I could try but doubt it could be said any clearer in a way that would satisfy Tzaph.
lack of clarity in a post = lack of clarity in thought
it has nothing to do with a person or an individual posting.
it is about critical thinking, rational thinking, consistent logic, flawed logic
for someone who claims to be superior in intelligence, that is not reflected in clarity of thought or clarity of posts
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, you can't seem to resist attacking me. My measured IQ establishes my intellectual status. I claim nothing.
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.
