The Beast Revelation

[steve_bank]

On the contrary Lessans we are well aware of emotions.

Emotions like resistance to a mythical often harmful religious authoritarian conformity.

Need I say more?

A conformity that dare I say it is Un - American.

The Pope looks pathetic demanding an end to the war.

I'd say we very much get that religion is an emotional experience, not a logical reasoned experience.

 

[Learner]

human emotions are important to biblical understanding!!

Human emotions are provably a barrier to any genuine understanding.

This demonstrates what I was saying, when atheists dismiss (being oblivious) of the importance of human emotions - the key element to reading 'the bible and noting the psychology of it's truth claims'.

I don't dismiss the importance of human emotions; I dismiss those emotions as a means to knowlegde.

It escapes atheists simply because it would seem so simple. Ancient writings therefore are viewed as being so outdated that they don't realise, human psychology of people from back then still hasn't changed today!!

Human emotions interpreting biblical texts must seem to the atheist, "lacking (the illusion of) scientific sophistication" and may seem methodically boring to take as serious, I suppose in a manner of speaking.

No, they are just not a way to know anything. Nothing to do with sophistication, just epistemology.

Therefore if what you say is true, biblical understanding cannot be genuine.

Thanks for playing.

As irony would have it. Emotions are used in the technological modern world to determine if someone is telling the truth in a lie-detector test!

Lie detector tests are almost completely valueless, and are not permitted as evidence pretty much anywhere outside the USA. They don't work, except insofar as they scare the subject into telling the truth.

So, an example of the biblical concept from the viewpoint:
Jesus communicates in a language expressed as compassion.As its written, children naturally in their innocence understand and sense this (truthfulness)

Wait, is it compassion, or truthfulness?

These are NOT synonymous.

I mean children feel compassion as in trust.

They can differentiate between that and being abused.

better than a lot of the adults lost in worldly distractions, etc. We are to be 'be like children, to understand, and so on and so forth.

Children don't understand. Children are gullible, naïve, and easily fooled.

Ask Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Epstein, or Donald Trump.

Children feel uncomfortable and do not like being abused!

Distrust sets in, and these victims see their abusers as liars and deceivers.

 

[bilby]

So, an example of the biblical concept from the viewpoint:
Jesus communicates in a language expressed as compassion.As its written, children naturally in their innocence understand and sense this (truthfulness)

Wait, is it compassion, or truthfulness?

These are NOT synonymous.

I mean children feel compassion as in trust.

Wait, is it compassion, or truthfulness, or trust?

None of these are synonyms.

They can differentiate between that and being abused.

Sometimes.

better than a lot of the adults lost in worldly distractions, etc. We are to be 'be like children, to understand, and so on and so forth.

Children don't understand. Children are gullible, naïve, and easily fooled.

Ask Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Epstein, or Donald Trump.

Children feel uncomfortable

Sometimes.

and do not like being abused!

Indeed. But they often trust their abusers nonetheless, at least until it is too late.

Distrust sets in, and these victims see their abusers as liars and deceivers.

Eventually.

But their childish innocence and trust is not helpful to them in this; These traits are a hindrance to their discovering the truth.

Trust, faith, and innocence are not means to knowledge; They are, however, toe-holds for scammers, frauds, and abusers.

 

[DBT]

Human emotions have no bearing on what is true or false. Something is true or false regardless of how we may feel about it.

Human emotions have bearing significance in contrast to testimonies of individuals. The context is: determining the claims of people who witnessed events by what 'their' feelings were!

Belief has no bearing on whatever happens to be true or false.
Something is either true or false regardless of what we believe.

The same as the above.

If the claims are determined to be true by the analysis of the individual psyche then that counts as leading to evidence that they are telling the truth. Now the best case then you could come up with in this regard is to say these individuals were delusional, believing the events were real in their minds, in which case we'd have to argue further, and you'd have to demonstrate this as your counter argument of course.

Another argument direction would be to determine the conclusion these writers were con men or liars why you'd have to explain why.

As irony would have it. Psychological profiling is used to build a character profile of criminals which can lead to good results of predicting next moves.

Feelings, such as hope, fear, desire, tend to skew one's perspective, forming biases that are more likely to effect results than an objective, dispassionate study.

The world cares nothing about what we believe or feel.

The same as above

What do you mean by world?.

The physical world, the cosmos, the sun, moon, earth, geology, plants, animals, etc.

 

[Learner]

So, an example of the biblical concept from the viewpoint:
Jesus communicates in a language expressed as compassion.As its written, children naturally in their innocence understand and sense this (truthfulness)

Wait, is it compassion, or truthfulness?

These are NOT synonymous.

I mean children feel compassion as in trust.

Wait, is it compassion, or truthfulness, or trust?

None of these are synonyms.

It could contextually be all of them. The emphasis made was only concentrating on the idea that understanding Jesus and his preaching should be quite simple for minds that were not influenced or corrupted (yet). This is the theist paradigm, not yours. Nice try.

They can differentiate between that and being abused.

Sometimes.

The bible verse initially highlighted, was only concerned with using the mention of children synonymous to compassion was for a specific context description, used for a particular teaching. Again, it's a theist's paradigm which you'll not get into.

better than a lot of the adults lost in worldly distractions, etc. We are to be 'be like children, to understand, and so on and so forth.

Children don't understand. Children are gullible, naïve, and easily fooled.

Ask Jimmy Saville, Jeffrey Epstein, or Donald Trump.

Children feel uncomfortable

Sometimes.

Yes, but this is not meant for describing understanding. Nice try.

and do not like being abused!

Indeed. But they often trust their abusers nonetheless, at least until it is too late.

Which is beside the point again . This does not relate to understanding as initially mentioned.

Distrust sets in, and these victims see their abusers as liars and deceivers.

Eventually.

But their childish innocence and trust is not helpful to them in this; These traits are a hindrance to their discovering the truth.

See the above. The only mentioned part of children relating to a verse that it was concerned with was for understanding.

Children being abused was
NOT a demonstration for understanding. Nice try

Trust, faith, and innocence are not means to knowledge; They are, however, toe-holds for scammers, frauds, and abusers.

The previous response above , I also place here.

 

[steve_bank]

Matthew 18:3

To enter the kingdom of heaven be like children obeying god.

Unquestioning, obedient, devoted, and innocent.

All the interpretations of just one small passage.

Matthew 18:3 - The Greatest in the Kingdom

Truly I tell you, He said, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

biblehub.com

 

[Jarhyn]

Knowledge in it's entirety is NOT solely "calculated" through formulations in science

No, this is true. Much of it happens in engineering and (often random) combinitorics, and this is constructive math, not science.

scriptural meanings 'meant by the authors' seems to escape the atheists view for an argument

No, and this is where you also have a problem: by forming beliefs about what the authors meant by things, you again bias yourself.

You have no grounds to say that your belief about what they meant establishes that you know what they meant.

Then, I don't care entirely if I get it exactly as they meant it, because they meant it with the understanding of people 2000 years ago with language 2000 years less "useful".

"Knowledge" in it's entirety is to them, an argument that "consists entirely of formulated calculations of science".

No, it's more that knowledge is vulnerable to exposure as sophistry or ignorance or misplaced belief when it falls victim to logic in the presence of brute facts.

This is far wider than "formulated calculations of science".

human emotions is required as a key to understand Truth

Not as you seem to intend the idea to mean, no.

Human emotions often cloud the seeking of the truth as much as they do the other thing. I am a human and the fine structure of all my emotional impulses are aligned so as to seek understanding the truth, I still miss it almost as often as I reach for it, and I understand that many of my human emotions are only contained by learned skills and that seeking the truth involves understanding and realigning those emotions as much as anything else.

The problem with this is that you don't seem to understand the first thing about that.

Love makes everyone feel good

Spoken in a way that reveals someone who has never known true love.

Love does NOT make everyone feel good. It can feel good for brief moments, and those moments are worth all the rest, but the rest is still there.

Sometimes it makes us feel completelj miserable as much as it makes us cum, and it makes us complete.

Love is a lot of things. Suffering is one of those things that it is far more often than it is joyous.

Even the love I feel for everyone sometimes makes me cry. Typing that last sentence made me cry a bit, because I think about all the people I can't do anything for, and all the other people doing even less than even merely worrying how to do more and hoping they are in my path when I have the power to do more.

 

[Learner]

On the contrary Lessans we are well aware of emotions.

Emotions like resistance to a mythical often harmful religious authoritarian conformity.

Need I say more?

Emotions is an everyday thing that influences everyday decisions.

What more back then when God commanded people to 'control those emotions' that could cause harm by implementing laws against this? Or... encouraging to be willingly joyful in doing good for others?

A conformity that dare I say it is Un - American.

The Pope looks pathetic demanding an end to the war.

I'd say we very much get that religion is an emotional experience, not a logical reasoned experience.

As my previous response above implies, plus the 'emotional experience' you mention...
... that is everyday human life!

The bible describes this very well, portrayed with universal recognised emotion.(at least for those who care to notice).

Stating what should be obvious- acting on emotions can be either logically reasoned, or be quite illogically unreasonable. It can be beneficial to your well-being and tio others, or tit can be the total opposite!

So, what's your feeling on this notion steve old friend?

 

[pood]

On the contrary Lessans we are well aware of emotions.

Emotions like resistance to a mythical often harmful religious authoritarian conformity.

Need I say more?

Emotions is an everyday thing that influences everyday decisions.

What more back then when God commanded people to 'control those emotions' that could cause harm by implementing laws against this? Or... encouraging to be willingly joyful in doing good for others?

A conformity that dare I say it is Un - American.

The Pope looks pathetic demanding an end to the war.

I'd say we very much get that religion is an emotional experience, not a logical reasoned experience.

As my previous response above implies, plus the 'emotional experience' you mention...
... that is everyday human life!

The bible describes this very well, portrayed with universal recognised emotion.(at least for those who care to notice).

Stating what should be obvious- acting on emotions can be either logically reasoned, or be quite illogically unreasonable. It can be beneficial to your well-being and tio others, or tit can be the total opposite!

So, what's your feeling on this notion steve old friend?

And what does any of this have to do with whether the Jesus story in the bible is true?

 

[Jarhyn]

Emotions is an everyday thing that influences everyday decisions

Emotions are a "good enough" thing that influence snap decisions to hat have low impact and which are evolved just-so. They are there as a backup for thought when we don't have time to do the thinking, a runners-up prize for when all we have is ignorance.

They're better than "nothing" as a "decent first swing" but they don't yield anything like "truth".

 

[ideologyhunter]

At about age 20 I learned not to act on moods or give in to what was then depression. The terms for those who act predominately on emotion are mostly pejorative: impetuous, unreflecting, knee-jerk, impulsive, rash, irrational.
When it comes to this supposed deity Jehovah + son + a ghost, there's no amount of emotional creep that could make me read what "his" book has to say about genocide and slavery and death by stoning without understanding that it comes straight out of primitive imaginations.

 

[steve_bank]

And back to the fact Christians believe the gospels are a journalistic eyewitness recording of the words, actions, and events surrounding the alleged gospel Jesus.

And back to all the past debate and commentary.

 

[Learner]

I see, so you can see parallels between both beliefs? Are you aware of the differences? One faith for example emphasizes strongly the importance of witnesses.

Like Harry Potter, there is is only one writer, i.e. a lone witness. Which faith would that apply to?

Got any witnesses for Christ’s time on earth? No, thought not. That’s because there aren’t any.

"No, you thought not"?

Ok, I like your method. ...at least from a humorous stand point, that is. You ask a question, and then prematurely responds to a non-existent response that I've not yet posted.

The Gospels of several coinciding authors is what leads us to Christ's time on earth. A better bet than a single author. like those for Harry Potter and similar lonesome authors.

These are all fairy tales.

Your surety has no evidence for this. What is your explanation that is immune to refutation?

One does not first believe — or believe at all. One follows where the evidence goes.

Theres no issue here with the theists perspective..

The initial discussion to clarify... was about believers asking and getting understanding from God - the unbelieving atheists wouldn't be privy to that understanding....hence, you've got to first believe in God in order to receive guidance, etc..& etc.

Having said that...once you get some biblical context and some understanding, this then leads us to follow where the evidence goes. i.e. leading us to Christ's time on earth.

Faith is the opposite of rationality.

Biblical Faith is a wide spectrum.

Trust, Allegiance, Reliability, Reliance on honest individuals, or on righteous rules for the common good,....and of course..
...the Belief 'without seeing'... that stems from all the above;

 

[pood]

I see, so you can see parallels between both beliefs? Are you aware of the differences? One faith for example emphasizes strongly the importance of witnesses.

Like Harry Potter, there is is only one writer, i.e. a lone witness. Which faith would that apply to?

Got any witnesses for Christ’s time on earth? No, thought not. That’s because there aren’t any.

"No, you thought not"?

Ok, I like your method. ...at least from a humorous stand point, that is. You ask a question, and then prematurely responds to a non-existent response that I've not yet posted.

Are there, or are there not, eyewitness, contemporaneous accounts of Jesus’s life?

No, there aren’t.

Hence my “No, thought not.”

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

I see, so you can see parallels between both beliefs? Are you aware of the differences? One faith for example emphasizes strongly the importance of witnesses.

Like Harry Potter, there is is only one writer, i.e. a lone witness. Which faith would that apply to?

Got any witnesses for Christ’s time on earth? No, thought not. That’s because there aren’t any.

"No, you thought not"?

Ok, I like your method. ...at least from a humorous stand point, that is. You ask a question, and then prematurely responds to a non-existent response that I've not yet posted.

The Gospels of several coinciding authors is what leads us to Christ's time on earth. A better bet than a single author. like those for Harry Potter and similar lonesome authors.

These are all fairy tales.

Your surety has no evidence for this. What is your explanation that is immune to refutation?

One does not first believe — or believe at all. One follows where the evidence goes.

Theres no issue here with the theists perspective..

The initial discussion to clarify... was about believers asking and getting understanding from God - the unbelieving atheists wouldn't be privy to that understanding....hence, you've got to first believe in God in order to receive guidance, etc..& etc.

Having said that...once you get some biblical context and some understanding, this then leads us to follow where the evidence goes. i.e. leading us to Christ's time on earth.

Faith is the opposite of rationality.

Biblical Faith is a wide spectrum.

Trust, Allegiance, Reliability, Reliance on honest individuals, or on righteous rules for the common good,....and of course..
...the Belief 'without seeing'... that stems from all the above;

Those Gospel authors are not independent of each other. Some of them based their books on that of some of the earlier ones. In addition, some parts contradict other parts, and there are some outright errors.

 

[Learner]

Human emotions have no bearing on what is true or false. Something is true or false regardless of how we may feel about it.

Human emotions have bearing significance in contrast to testimonies of individuals. The context is: determining the claims of people who witnessed events by what 'their' feelings were!

Belief has no bearing on whatever happens to be true or false.
Something is either true or false regardless of what we believe.

The same as the above.

If the claims are determined to be true by the analysis of the individual psyche then that counts as leading to evidence that they are telling the truth. Now the best case then you could come up with in this regard is to say these individuals were delusional, believing the events were real in their minds, in which case we'd have to argue further, and you'd have to demonstrate this as your counter argument of course.

Another argument direction would be to determine the conclusion these writers were con men or liars why you'd have to explain why.

As irony would have it. Psychological profiling is used to build a character profile of criminals which can lead to good results of predicting next moves.

Feelings, such as hope, fear, desire, tend to skew one's perspective, forming biases that are more likely to effect results than an objective, dispassionate study.

Ok.
Feelings are a major effect to your life! Almost every moment!

I'm sorry to say, I think you and our think-like-you-do friends on this thread are perhaps..a little shy to admit those feelings... or um.. are in denial.

Now come DBT. from down-under..You must rethink (language use) and realise.... having emotional biases can have quite positive results...It always has a say and is involved with our communities.

For example: how do you feel about poor people being hungry? I believe you would personally want to see this disappear, driven by your emotional feelings towards this, and thus forming your opinionated biases against people who are not willing to help solve these situations who just don't care.

The world cares nothing about what we believe or feel.

The same as above

What do you mean by world?.

The physical world, the cosmos, the sun, moon, earth, geology, plants, animals, etc.

I see.

. The world in that case is neutral to either side of our arguments.

 

[DBT]

Human emotions have no bearing on what is true or false. Something is true or false regardless of how we may feel about it.

Human emotions have bearing significance in contrast to testimonies of individuals. The context is: determining the claims of people who witnessed events by what 'their' feelings were!

Belief has no bearing on whatever happens to be true or false.
Something is either true or false regardless of what we believe.

The same as the above.

If the claims are determined to be true by the analysis of the individual psyche then that counts as leading to evidence that they are telling the truth. Now the best case then you could come up with in this regard is to say these individuals were delusional, believing the events were real in their minds, in which case we'd have to argue further, and you'd have to demonstrate this as your counter argument of course.

Another argument direction would be to determine the conclusion these writers were con men or liars why you'd have to explain why.

As irony would have it. Psychological profiling is used to build a character profile of criminals which can lead to good results of predicting next moves.

Feelings, such as hope, fear, desire, tend to skew one's perspective, forming biases that are more likely to effect results than an objective, dispassionate study.

Ok.
Feelings are a major effect to your life! Almost every moment!

I'm sorry to say, I think you and our think-like-you-do friends on this thread are perhaps..a little shy to admit those feelings... or um.. are in denial.

Now come DBT. from down-under..You must rethink (language use) and realise.... having emotional biases can have quite positive results...It always has a say and is involved with our communities.

For example: how do you feel about poor people being hungry? I believe you would personally want to see this disappear, driven by your emotional feelings towards this, and thus forming your opinionated biases against people who are not willing to help solve these situations who just don't care.

The world cares nothing about what we believe or feel.

The same as above

What do you mean by world?.

The physical world, the cosmos, the sun, moon, earth, geology, plants, animals, etc.

I see.

. The world in that case is neutral to either side of our arguments.

It's not that we don't feel, or that we don't have biases, of course we we do....but the point is that our feelings, biases, preferences, etc, have nothing to do with determining what is true or factual. Where our feelings and biases are as likely as not to prevent us from seeing things as they are, rather than how we would like them to be.

 

[steve_bank]

It was much more interesting when there were more than one theist posting.

Watching reruns when you know the dialog is not very entertaining.

 

[Learner]

It was much more interesting when there were more than one theist posting.

Watching reruns when you know the dialog is not very entertaining.

Apologies I misunderstood, and realise the intention..deleted previous post.

You could invite a few to come over Steve
(People who are decent enough and who are not trolls).

 

[steve_bank]

As I said before my reason for participation was understanding Christians who have political power and seek to enact laws based on their religion ad force religion into the public space, like schools..

Out in the world I could care less what you believe and would not seek to dissuade anyone form religious belief.

The old saying goes your right to extend your elbow ends at my nose. Extend your religion to infringer with my rights especially to be non religious and free of religious morality I will then resound.

I will tell you to take your religion and shove it.

From the start Christians have been violent, intolerant, and intrusive. They turned on Jews who spawned their religion.

We see the pope today presuming to dictate to the world as the representative of a god on Earth.

And it is all based on the inconsistent mythical gospels for which there are no source documents.