Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on April 04, 2018, 08:48:48 PM
-
Struggling to think this can be anything more than a Poe. No one can be that dumb?
http://deadstate.org/anti-vaxxer-warrior-mom-if-vaccines-are-so-great-why-arent-they-mentioned-in-the-bible/
-
The woman's obviously a complete and utter flapdoddle, but I'm not surprised. There's no belief so bizarre or fuck-witted that no-one will hold it.
-
The woman's obviously a complete and utter flapdoddle, but I'm not surprised. There's no belief so bizarre or fuck-witted that no-one will hold it.
you deserve a Jura for that, as it made me laugh and I would buy you one for that.
-
you deserve a Jura for that, as it made me laugh and I would buy you one for that.
Mines a double! (as Jo Brand said when they were handing out chins, and she thought they said gins.)
-
Mines a double! (as Jo Brand said when they were handing out chins, and she thought they said gins.)
Only right that you have it in the right size. I feel sort of cheated now that Jo Brand is quite slim.
-
I don’t think she’s dumb, I think she knows her audience. This is the kind of thing that plays well to Evangelical America. If she’s using NLP alongside it, even more so.
As an aside, I’ve heard quite a few people on MBs comment on how relatives and friends have turned into woo-believing, dump-the-chemo nutters after going on training courses for a certain supplement brand that’s actually a pyramid selling scheme. The effects on some salespeople have been described as ‘cult-like’ and I have wondered if NLP is used at the sales conferences.
-
No suprise that she's also a food-faddist, in the mould of that ghastly McKeith woman, with the usual anti-scientific bollocks about de-toxing. Utterly irresponsible.
-
I don’t think she’s dumb, I think she knows her audience. This is the kind of thing that plays well to Evangelical America. If she’s using NLP alongside it, even more so.
As an aside, I’ve heard quite a few people on MBs comment on how relatives and friends have turned into woo-believing, dump-the-chemo nutters after going on training courses for a certain supplement brand that’s actually a pyramid selling scheme. The effects on some salespeople have been described as ‘cult-like’ and I have wondered if NLP is used at the sales conferences.
Yep, I was, for once, not being cynical enough about the intentions. And the idea that NLP might be being used in such training courses is interesting. I've not known anyone who has 'converted' to such beliefs
-
Struggling to think this can be anything more than a Poe. No one can be that dumb?
http://deadstate.org/anti-vaxxer-warrior-mom-if-vaccines-are-so-great-why-arent-they-mentioned-in-the-bible/
What the hell is she doing on the internet then, silly mare.
-
What the hell is she doing on the internet then, silly mare.
Making money
-
Yep, I was, for once, not being cynical enough about the intentions. And the idea that NLP might be being used in such training courses is interesting. I've not known anyone who has 'converted' to such beliefs
NLP courses have two target audiences - life coaches and the like, and those involved in marketing. You could argue that the former is a form of the latter to some extent. Anyway, I don’t know anyone who has been converted by salespeople but I’ve heard of it happening often enough to make me a bit ???. I've also come across people personally who have attended ‘personal growth’ seminars, the main purpose of which seems to be a) to get you to sign up for more and b) to sign up as many other people that you know as you can. Pretty sure NLP features at those.
Another thing about focusing on the Bible us that she’s negating any charges of being into unbiblical new age not-the-right-god stuff beloved of crystal-hugging goopshitters.
He
-
What's this NLP people keep banging on about? Guess - National Libertarian Party?
-
Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
There is a comprehensive Wikipedia entry on the subject.
-
Neuro-Linguistic Programming.
There is a comprehensive Wikipedia entry on the subject.
Ta.
-
I knew someone who was a NLP practitioner quite a while back, it was fashionable maybe twenty years ago. Dodgy in my view.
The Amish don't vaccinate, there are probably other religious groups who live as communities who don't.
-
I mustn't have anymore vaccinations, if they aren't to be found in the Bible!!!!!! ::)
Internet forums aren't to be found in the Bible.
Neither are Apple earphones, video blogs,, Google and cameras and yet, there she is using them.
-
Struggling to think this can be anything more than a Poe. No one can be that dumb?
http://deadstate.org/anti-vaxxer-warrior-mom-if-vaccines-are-so-great-why-arent-they-mentioned-in-the-bible/
They had Jesus Christ and the men of God to bring Gods healing power in the bible.
Now he has given us Vaccines too. Is there really a discussion here?
Sorry but I feel this is a "Look at me! situation and we are all capable of making our own decisions. :o
-
Humans have created vaccines, NOT god! ::)
The question should be, why wait til now?
-
The question should be, why wait til now?
Or indeed why invent things that need vaccines?
-
Or indeed why invent things that need vaccines?
The sin of Adam and all that.
-
The sin of Adam and all that.
God hurt! Adam not nice to God! God hurt babies! God make babies die in pain! God happy!
-
I like your idea of living in a cave and wearing animal skins, LR, but where would I get the animal skins (being as I have no concept of hunting and skinning), what security would I have in a cave and what would I do for heating and hot water? Also I am allergic to some animal skins or at least wool.
Other than that, sounds good - but I've had all my vaccs, some more than once, so maybe not necessary.
-
Life in a cave? Where do I sign up?
-
I like your idea of living in a cave and wearing animal skins, LR, but where would I get the animal skins (being as I have no concept of hunting and skinning), what security would I have in a cave and what would I do for heating and hot water? Also I am allergic to some animal skins or at least wool.
Other than that, sounds good - but I've had all my vaccs, some more than once, so maybe not necessary.
Wee point.
Not a lot of evidence of humans evetr living in caves - except as an emergency shelter.
The damp and ammonia from the bat droppings are killers.....
-
Thanks for that, Anchor, I can just imagine it!
Didn't people live in caves during the winter and only venture out for necessities? They dried lots of food to sustain them throughout the cold season and didn't burn up much energy.
Must say I like the idea of semi-hibernating - with mod cons.
-
Thanks for that, Anchor, I can just imagine it! Didn't people live in caves during the winter and only venture out for necessities? They dried lots of food to sustain them throughout the cold season and didn't burn up much energy. Must say I like the idea of semi-hibernating - with mod cons.
Nope...unless there name was Flintstone, and even he had a house! They used cabes for storage, for painting and stuf, but if they were hunter-gatherers, they wouldn't have stayed long in any one place - thy'd have run out of prey for starters. When they started farming,they built shelters of grass, wood and in places like Skara Brae, stone....stone insulated with tons of muck on the outside, which provided heat in the Orkney climate (and possibly immunity from certain common diseas...hence no need for vaccine, even if they HAD 'em....seewotIdidthere? ;) )
-
I think hunter gatherers did their camps and got to live in caves during the winter, venturing out to hunt deer and fetch water but largely subsisting on dried food.
-
Humans have created vaccines, NOT god! ::)
God gave man the medicine and the knowledge for both. So God still creator.
-
God gave man the medicine and the knowledge for both. So God still creator.
Rubbish.
If you look at the history of vaccines, you'll see we had to work out every little detail for ourselves.
-
Didn't you come across this verse, 'The Lord your God giveth you the technology to create vaccines'? How remiss of you. :o ;D
Yet you are the first one to blame God for evil in the world! Double-standards, as usual!!
-
Yet you are the first one to blame God for evil in the world! Double-standards, as usual!!
This is you showing your continued inability to understand a hypothetical.
-
Yet you are the first one to blame God for evil in the world! Double-standards, as usual!!
As someone said of someone else, LR doesn't so much disbelieve in God, as have a personal grudge against him.
However, she does have a point: if there is a God, and God is all-powerful and all-loving, why is there evil?
-
How can I have a grudge against a god in which I don't believe? I do have a grudge against those who force their faith down the throats of others with threats if they don't convert.
"The god of the bible is an evil psycho". Sounds like a grudge to me! You are, as so often, treating a bit of wit with wooden literality.
-
Funny, last night I looked at this thread, was up late and had telly on for a while; there was a court case (in the USA) involving someone who hadn't had their child vaccinated against measles, child got measles &infected others (who all recovered). It was far more complex than I'd ever imagined, never heard of such a case here. There are people exempt from vaccinations for religious reasons which didn't apply to this person. Anyway she got off despite people having misgivings about her anti-vacc stance.
-
"The god of the bible is an evil psycho". Sounds like a grudge to me! You are, as so often, treating a bit of wit with wooden literality.
Lord Voldemort is an evil psycho.
Do I have a grudge against him or have I just described a fictional literary character?
-
Lord Voldemort is an evil psycho.
Do I have a grudge against him or have I just described a fictional literary character?
If you repeatedly banged on about how evil he was, however irrelevant to the discussion, it'd begin to look like a grudge.
-
God gave man the medicine and the knowledge for both. So God still creator.
You can't know for certain this god idea of yours does actually exist, there is no evidence that would or could support that it's even worth looking for this god idea of yours.
As for this vaccination woman in the OP it's quite obvious that there's a vacant space between her ears.
Regards Sass, ippy
-
If you repeatedly banged on about how evil he was, however irrelevant to the discussion, it'd begin to look like a grudge.
The Biblical god would get on well with Voldemort, and may even outshine him where evil is concerned.
See what I mean?
-
As someone said of someone else, LR doesn't so much disbelieve in God, as have a personal grudge against him.
However, she does have a point: if there is a God, and God is all-powerful and all-loving, why is there evil?
Does she have a point though?
The truth (or otherwise) of the statement, "There is a God" is not affected by the existence of evil.
Reconciling the existence of evil with an all-powerful and all-loving God may be harder, but there is a solution for those for whom it is a problem: Ask Him!!
Here's the rub then: Is LittleRoses prepared to ask God why is there evil in the world? Would her faith in/relationship with God dependent on the answer? If it did, it would show that her faith is not in God Himself but arguments for Him. The relationship with God is based on trust and in terms of the modern philosophical arguments, Abraham is a good one to study because there are incidents in his life where he had to trust God, not only when he didn't have the answers at the time, but circumstances seem to indicate the opposite.
-
Does she have a point though?
She does.
The truth (or otherwise) of the statement, "There is a God" is not affected by the existence of evil.
Try looking up the 'problem of evil' and get back to us.
Reconciling the existence of evil with an all-powerful and all-loving God may be harder, but there is a solution for those for whom it is a problem: Ask Him!!
No doubt you won't see the problem(s) in this approach.
Here's the rub then: Is LittleRoses prepared to ask God why is there evil in the world? Would her faith in/relationship with God dependent on the answer? If it did, it would show that her faith is not in God Himself but arguments for Him. The relationship with God is based on trust and in terms of the modern philosophical arguments, Abraham is a good one to study because there are incidents in his life where he had to trust God, not only when he didn't have the answers at the time, but circumstances seem to indicate the opposite.
Since if you did you wouldn't have posted the above drivel.
-
The truth (or otherwise) of the statement, "There is a God" is not affected by the existence of evil.
You really do post the most complete and utter tosh. The existence of evil and suffering is a major argument against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly loving God. Vast libraries of books have been written trying to reconcile the two, some more convincing than others (yes, I know it's called "theodicy"), but you think you can dismiss it in a single sentence. You should try reading less cod-philosophy, and do more original thinking.
-
The truth (or otherwise) of the statement, "There is a God" is not affected by the existence of evil.
You really do post the most complete and utter tosh. The existence of evil and suffering is a major argument against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly loving God. Vast libraries of books have been written trying to reconcile the two, some more convincing than others (yes, I know it's called "theodicy"), but you think you can dismiss it in a single sentence. You should try reading less cod-philosophy, and do more original thinking.
And like all postmodernists, you dismiss an argument not by showing where it is right or wrong, but by making pejorative statements about it. The truth (or otherwise) of what i wrote is not affected by calling it complete and utter tosh The trouble with postmodernism is that it does not recognize truth as absolute, therefore argue from a position of truth, so cannot appeal to an external frame of reference to verify its conclusions.
The so-called problem of evil argument is only a problem for those who take an intellectual-only approach to their faith. Their faith is not in the person of God, only in arguments either for His existence or against His existence. As such those in the former camp are in danger of believing in a 'god' of their own creation (the modern equivalent of creating an idol and bowing down to it).
For those who are in a relationship with God, the problem of evil may be a concern, but if they are really that bothered by it, they are more than welcome to seek God for a solution that satisfies them. They won't, because in reality, it isn't so much that it is a problem, it is more of an excuse to justify disbelief!
There is an incident in Abraham's life that illustrates not only the problem, but the solution. It's the one where God tells him to sacrifice his son Issac (Genesis 22). Now, if 21st century thinking was applied to that incident, they would conclude that Abraham was mistaken about what he heard, or that God was lying about his earlier promises (Genesis 15:4-5). If one stopped here, there is no way to resolve the problem, a bit like your so-called problem of evil.
Abraham showed that there is another way. He trusted God. He was not to know how things would play out. The verses below from Hebrews shed more light on the matter (emphasis mine):
17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.
So, what's the solution to the so-called problem of evil. To trust God! Some aren't prepared to do this because they want to be the final arbiter of truth. Like Eve, who fell for the lie of the serpent in the Garden of Eden (in essence, she was being told that she could decide for herself what truth is) and ended up being deceived, because the truth in question was defined by God, some human beings end up being deceived because in a matter they cannot answer, they are not prepared to look beyond themselves and either trust God or seek Him for an answer.
-
If you repeatedly banged on about how evil he was, however irrelevant to the discussion, it'd begin to look like a grudge.
When my nephew was young, he used to bang on about how cool a Star Wars character called General Grievous was all the time. Was my nephew a Sith lord?
-
Reconciling the existence of evil with an all-powerful and all-loving God may be harder
No it's impossible. An all powerful god would be able to eradicate evil. An all loving god would have the desire to eradicate evil. Evil exists in the world so either God is not all powerful or he is not all loving.
, but there is a solution for those for whom it is a problem: Ask Him!!
There is no solution for a logical contradiction.
There's also the problem that an evil god might lie to you and pretend to be good so that when he asks you to do evil things, you do them without question because you falsely believe your god would only ask you to do something if the ultimate outcome were good.
Is LittleRoses prepared to ask God why is there evil in the world?
As we have seen, you can't trust what a god would say, so LR judges your god by the actions he is reported (by his supporters) to have done. The reports are in, and they are not good.
-
And like all postmodernists, you dismiss an argument not by showing where it is right or wrong, but by making pejorative statements about it. The truth (or otherwise) of what i wrote is not affected by calling it complete and utter tosh The trouble with postmodernism is that it does not recognize truth as absolute, therefore argue from a position of truth, so cannot appeal to an external frame of reference to verify its conclusions.
The so-called problem of evil argument is only a problem for those who take an intellectual-only approach to their faith. Their faith is not in the person of God, only in arguments either for His existence or against His existence. As such those in the former camp are in danger of believing in a 'god' of their own creation (the modern equivalent of creating an idol and bowing down to it).
For those who are in a relationship with God, the problem of evil may be a concern, but if they are really that bothered by it, they are more than welcome to seek God for a solution that satisfies them. They won't, because in reality, it isn't so much that it is a problem, it is more of an excuse to justify disbelief!
There is an incident in Abraham's life that illustrates not only the problem, but the solution. It's the one where God tells him to sacrifice his son Issac (Genesis 22). Now, if 21st century thinking was applied to that incident, they would conclude that Abraham was mistaken about what he heard, or that God was lying about his earlier promises (Genesis 15:4-5). If one stopped here, there is no way to resolve the problem, a bit like your so-called problem of evil.
Abraham showed that there is another way. He trusted God. He was not to know how things would play out. The verses below from Hebrews shed more light on the matter (emphasis mine):
17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.
So, what's the solution to the so-called problem of evil. To trust God! Some aren't prepared to do this because they want to be the final arbiter of truth. Like Eve, who fell for the lie of the serpent in the Garden of Eden (in essence, she was being told that she could decide for herself what truth is) and ended up being deceived, because the truth in question was defined by God, some human beings end up being deceived because in a matter they cannot answer, they are not prepared to look beyond themselves and either trust God or seek Him for an answer.
I am emphatically not a post-modernist - I think post-modernism leads to an inability to say anything meaningful about anything. I also believe that a meaningful relationship with God involves the emotions as well as (but certainly not instead of) the intellect.
-
#55
Reconciling the existence of evil with an all-powerful and all-loving God may be harder
No it's impossible. An all powerful god would be able to eradicate evil. An all loving god would have the desire to eradicate evil. Evil exists in the world so either God is not all powerful or he is not all loving.
It is only impossible because that is how you choose to define the situation. Someone who trusts to the nature of God might instead ask questions such as.
• What is evil?
• Where did it come from (assuming it did come from somewhere)?
• Why does God allow it to exist?
• What has God done about its influence in the world?
• etc, etc.
If God is all-loving, how has He demonstrated this? According to e.g. Romans 5 v 8:
But God demonstrated His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us
Or John 3 v 16: For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son; ...
, but there is a solution for those for whom it is a problem: Ask Him!!
There is no solution for a logical contradiction.
And as the incident with Abraham shows, the charge of logical contradiction can easily be applied incorrectly. If Abraham had trusted to his own reasoning, he would have concluded logical contradiction about his circumstances.
There's also the problem that an evil god might lie to you and pretend to be good so that when he asks you to do evil things, you do them without question because you falsely believe your god would only ask you to do something if the ultimate outcome were good.
That sounds more like a good description of how the devil works!
Is LittleRoses prepared to ask God why is there evil in the world?
As we have seen, you can't trust what a god would say, so LR judges your god by the actions he is reported (by his supporters) to have done. The reports are in, and they are not good.
It should be evident why this approach can’t work. LittleRoses only focuses on the bad things done by Christians, so therefore has to ignore all the good things done by Christians. She has decided in advance what conclusion she wants and selects the things that would appear to back it up.
-
#55
It is only impossible because that is how you choose to define the situation. Someone who trusts to the nature of God might instead ask questions such as.
• What is evil?
• Where did it come from (assuming it did come from somewhere)?
• Why does God allow it to exist?
• What has God done about its influence in the world?
• etc, etc.
Stephen Law observed, regarding the 'problem of evil' in his interview in the Philosophy Bites podcast, that even if you accepted that God allowed suffering in order to create situations for 'good' to be done then there should be no more suffering that was required to provide for all the 'good' there could be: and not a smidgen more, and yet suffering (such as the prey/predator situation) has been ubiquitous for as long as makes no difference, and long before humans too, and of course us humans inflict suffering for reasons other that survival! He regards the 'problem of evil' expressed in this way as a compelling argument against a god that allows evil so as to allow good: too much suffering has, and is, going on you see. I think he makes a good point - would you agree?
If God is all-loving, how has He demonstrated this? According to e.g. Romans 5 v 8:
But God demonstrated His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us
Or John 3 v 16: For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son; ...
So the story goes: how do you know this isn't fiction?
And as the incident with Abraham shows, the charge of logical contradiction can easily be applied incorrectly. If Abraham had trusted to his own reasoning, he would have concluded logical contradiction about his circumstances.
That sounds more like a good description of how the devil works!
So the story goes: how do you know this isn't fiction?
-
Any modern parent who behaved as Abraham did, even if they stopped at the last moment and didn't murder their son at the behest of the voice in their head, would have their children taken into care in short order, and quite rightly.
-
#55
It is only impossible because that is how you choose to define the situation. Someone who trusts to the nature of God might instead ask questions such as.
Since the nature of God is what we are trying to understand here, coming in to the conversation already trusting the nature of your version of God counts as circular reasoning.
If God is all-loving, how has He demonstrated this? According to e.g. Romans 5 v 8:
But God demonstrated His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us
Or John 3 v 16: For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son; ...
God so hated the World that he required a blood sacrifice to avoid everybody being subject to eternal torment.
And as the incident with Abraham shows, the charge of logical contradiction can easily be applied incorrectly. If Abraham had trusted to his own reasoning, he would have concluded logical contradiction about his circumstances.
He also wouldn’t have tried to murder his own son.
Not that it matters, what happened in Abraham’s case has no bearing on the logical contradiction of an all-loving god, an all powerful god and there being evil in the World.
That sounds more like a good description of how the devil works!
How do you know that the Devil isn’t in charge and is not fooling you?
It should be evident why this approach can’t work. LittleRoses only focuses on the bad things done by Christians, so therefore has to ignore all the good things done by Christians. She has decided in advance what conclusion she wants and selects the things that would appear to back it up.
If God was all loving and all powerfiul, Christians wouldn’t do any bad things.
Oh, and you are just as guilty of of deciding in advance what conclusion you want. You condemn yourself out of your own mouth assuming you refer to yourself when you say “Someone trusting the nature of God”.
-
And like all postmodernists, you dismiss an argument not by showing where it is right or wrong, but by making pejorative statements about it. The truth (or otherwise) of what i wrote is not affected by calling it complete and utter tosh The trouble with postmodernism is that it does not recognize truth as absolute, therefore argue from a position of truth, so cannot appeal to an external frame of reference to verify its conclusions.
The so-called problem of evil argument is only a problem for those who take an intellectual-only approach to their faith. Their faith is not in the person of God, only in arguments either for His existence or against His existence. As such those in the former camp are in danger of believing in a 'god' of their own creation (the modern equivalent of creating an idol and bowing down to it).
For those who are in a relationship with God, the problem of evil may be a concern, but if they are really that bothered by it, they are more than welcome to seek God for a solution that satisfies them. They won't, because in reality, it isn't so much that it is a problem, it is more of an excuse to justify disbelief!
There is an incident in Abraham's life that illustrates not only the problem, but the solution. It's the one where God tells him to sacrifice his son Issac (Genesis 22). Now, if 21st century thinking was applied to that incident, they would conclude that Abraham was mistaken about what he heard, or that God was lying about his earlier promises (Genesis 15:4-5). If one stopped here, there is no way to resolve the problem, a bit like your so-called problem of evil.
Abraham showed that there is another way. He trusted God. He was not to know how things would play out. The verses below from Hebrews shed more light on the matter (emphasis mine):
17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.
So, what's the solution to the so-called problem of evil. To trust God! Some aren't prepared to do this because they want to be the final arbiter of truth. Like Eve, who fell for the lie of the serpent in the Garden of Eden (in essence, she was being told that she could decide for herself what truth is) and ended up being deceived, because the truth in question was defined by God, some human beings end up being deceived because in a matter they cannot answer, they are not prepared to look beyond themselves and either trust God or seek Him for an answer.
'For those who are in a relationship with God', oh dear?
Commiserations Sword, ippy
-
And like all postmodernists, you dismiss an argument not by showing where it is right or wrong, but by making pejorative statements about it. The truth (or otherwise) of what i wrote is not affected by calling it complete and utter tosh The trouble with postmodernism is that it does not recognize truth as absolute, therefore argue from a position of truth, so cannot appeal to an external frame of reference to verify its conclusions.
The so-called problem of evil argument is only a problem for those who take an intellectual-only approach to their faith. Their faith is not in the person of God, only in arguments either for His existence or against His existence. As such those in the former camp are in danger of believing in a 'god' of their own creation (the modern equivalent of creating an idol and bowing down to it).
[Continues]
Wordy gobbledgook, which leaves entirely unexplained how an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator is consistent with a world of terrible, undeserved suffering. I have my own answer, but when, on another thread, I tried explaining it, reasonably enough, I thought, I got so much laboured sarcasm, dribs and drabs of philosophy-for-dummies, and complete lack of understanding from one other poster that I lost my temper, swore st him, and got banned for three months, so I'm not doing that again. How do you reconcile them, intellectually? I agree that a faith worth having is more than intellectual, but it isn't other than intellectual, so please avoid telling us all to just trust God.