My 'Truth' or 'YOUR 'truth'?

[Rhiannon]

Not good enough. Amazon tells me that it's a book of 512 pages - simply waving your hands airily and saying "It's in his book" doesn't cut it. What's the exact quote wherein he says, as you have claimed, there will be billions of humans who are useless? Where in his book does he say what you think he has said? Provide the quote, with particular reference to the word 'useless.'
Indeed. I'm eagerly awaiting SD's report to see if it tallies with what you, for goodness only knows what reason, imagine he's said.

I won't be putting money on it, though.

I think Vlad's distorting the truth. Again.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/20/silicon-assassins-condemn-humans-life-useless-artificial-intelligence

[Gonnagle]

Dear Susan,

That brought a smile to my face, when I was contemplating recommending a book to old Blue, I thought, this is like me reading Dawkins Delusion, Blue would be filling the air with expletives, shouts of "oh you bloody well think so" but one of the reasons I like Armstrong's writing is her background, Roman Catholic up bringing, becoming a Nun, walking away from her faith, finding it shallow, becoming an atheist, but being left with the thought there must be more to it than this, then her journey through all faiths and for me she found the core of what it is all about.

Gonnagle.

[Brownie]

You've told me something I didn't know Gonnagle.  That she is an atheist.  I read books written by her but that was years ago;  though she walked away from the convent and left the Catholic faith behind I had no idea she had completely lost faith, I just thought her faith had changed, evolved if you like.  Something which happens to a lot of us.

[Shaker]

She's not an atheist - she calls herself a "freelance monotheist."

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rhiannon,

Thanks for the link, and I think I should go out and buy this book, our rush to become small gods, yep!! that's us, we are all doomed, doomed I tell you

Gonnagle.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Shaker,

She's not an atheist - she calls herself a "freelance theist."

Correct but from what I have read she did lose her faith and did admit to one time being an atheist, but what do I know about being an atheist, what is a real atheist, you are a atheist, but I read some of your posts and think, atheist my erky

Gonnagle.

[BeRational]

Gonnagle

What makes you think she is a scholar?

I just read an article from the American thinker and they say she is not a scholar.
They say

Armstrong does not perform original research in original languages.  She does not publish with university presses.  Armstrong is a popularizer, that is, she reads original research by real scholars, digests it, and presents her digested version to the public. 

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/11/karen_armstrong_is_wrong_wrong_wrong_on_bill_maher.html#ixzz49I7U32u5
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

[Sassy]

I haven't 'tried' Islam either, I am merely pointing up that the claims you make about 'trying' christianity sound similar to the claims made by muslims; I often hear it said that its truth is revealed through practice - daily prayers, prostrations, recitations of Qur'an, going on haaj, it is by making these things part of the ongoing fabric of your life that one can come to know the mind of god.  Neither faith- christianity or islam - is really about empirical enquiry or epistemic truth, they are really more about immersion in a god centered way of life that works for individuals within their broader social and cultural context.

I think you are misrepresenting what you believe about Muslim with what Christ actually says:

There is no connection and it cannot be deemed the same thing.

Christ says " If you obey my commandments and keep my words you will know the truth and if the words he speaks comes from himself or God. In fact God will with Christ reveal themselves to the individual.
Islam makes NO SUCH PROMISE.

So you are deliberately misrepresenting something else to mean the same as Christ and God revealing themselves.
NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL. So you cannot use what you have said as any kind of comparison.

[SusanDoris]

You've told me something I didn't know Gonnagle.  That she is an atheist.  I read books written by her but that was years ago;  though she walked away from the convent and left the Catholic faith behind I had no idea she had completely lost faith, I just thought her faith had changed, evolved if you like.  Something which happens to a lot of us.

Agreed. I've just looked her up on wikipedia. If there is a citation which states her atheism, I would like to see it. Seems to me she wriggles out of being clear on that.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Berational,

Ouch!! Please never send me to that sort of stuff again, American thinker, yes I bet he is, devout Catholic, certainly sounds like it, and I am shouting at the keyboard right now, do you honestly think that we, us westerners are blameless in the 9/11 tragedy, we played no part in pushing human beings to that sort of, what!! pushed minds to the point of that human disaster, fuck me, there should be warning with such links.

Gonnagle.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Susan,

Agreed. I've just looked her up on wikipedia. If there is a citation which states her atheism, I would like to see it. Seems to me she wriggles out of being clear on that.

Now that I have calmed down, on various books by Armstrong, on the inside front cover, she admits to once being an atheist, that is allowed, or is it once a atheist always a atheist.

Gonnagle.

[ekim]

Karen Armstrong is a fellow of the Westar Institute and they class them as critical scholars.  I believe that the Institute has upset many Christian traditionalists especially when they embarked upon  the Jesus Seminar.

[Udayana]

I do not recall having so far in 'sapiens' heard the idea that billions will be useless!! As it's an audio book, it is difficult to track back and find particular paragraphs etc, but from now on I will pay attention for that. His slightly abrasive, a bit chip-on-shoulder style continues but the content is well worth listening to.
As far as KA is concerned, I gave up reading her work after two or three books, because her, presumably, conscious effort to remain impartial, even neutral, on the subject of her own belief was irritating to say the least. In a way, her determination not to get off the fence was a tad patronising. I certainly would not bother to have any of her work as a talking book nowadays.

Harari has a section on Frankenstein scenarios near the end of his book. Also Bionic and cyborg life and the subsequent "singularity" - "when all the concepts that give meaning to our world - me, you, men, women, love, and hate - will become irrelevant".

I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Obviously the current human form will become extinct over the next century, probably due to parents too frightened of being seen naked by their children. Humans will merge into a new hybrid form of life with machines - that don't need sex to reproduce but build specialized offspring for particular roles.

There still won't be any answer to the "truth question".

 

[Shaker]

I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Obviously the current human form will become extinct over the next century, probably due to parents too frightened of being seen naked by their children.

Give that man a peanut 

[SusanDoris]

Dear Susan,

Now that I have calmed down, on various books by Armstrong, on the inside front cover, she admits to once being an atheist, that is allowed, or is it once a atheist always a atheist.

Gonnagle.

In that case, she wasn't a real atheist - you know, the actual, proper kind of true atheist! That is because, once one has realised that there is no god of any sort, never has been never will be, you simply cannot return to believing there is.

I'm on chapter 12 of 'sapiens' at the moment. I listened to 10 and 11today, but have to admit that I found myself dozing off here and there, so I might have missed something important!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In that case, she wasn't a real atheist - you know, the actual, proper kind of true atheist! That is because, once one has realised that there is no god of any sort, never has been never will be, you simply cannot return to believing there is.

I'm on chapter 12 of 'sapiens' at the moment. I listened to 10 and 11today, but have to admit that I found myself dozing off here and there, so I might have missed something important!

Ah, the No True Atheist argument......A no true Christian argument runs into problems but a No true atheist argument is atheist and therefore automatically valid.

Regarding Harare. He has talked about Useless billions in articles he has given to the press (Guardian, Korean Press) and may not have put it in Sapiens which I now understand is a history book.

That said I don't know if Harare thinks of the billions of people as being useless (That wouldn't fit with his background of being a member of two oppressed communities) but the indicators of human uselessness he uses are secular indicators meaning, I would have thought, materialist anti or irreligionists will have to come to a new understanding of human meaning and value.

[Shaker]

Regarding Harare. He has talked about Useless billions in articles he has given to the press (Guardian, Korean Press) and may not have put it in Sapiens which I now understand is a history book.

... although you said that these alleged "useless billions" were in his book (#169).

I don't know if Harare thinks of the billions of people as being useless

And yet it's an opinion you decided to ascribe to him anyway (#167). I see.

That's so much backpedalling in one post it's a wonder you're not travelling back in time, Vlad 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

... although you said that these alleged "useless billions" were in his book (#169).
And yet it's an opinion you decided to ascribe to him anyway (#167). I see.

That's so much backpedalling in one one post it's a wonder you're not travelling back in time, Vlad 

Apparently they are just in his interviews to the press. (The guardian, Koreapress). And yes he talks about Useless billions.......Them being Useless in terms of secular indicators.

[torridon]

I think you are misrepresenting what you believe about Muslim with what Christ actually says:

There is no connection and it cannot be deemed the same thing.

Christ says " If you obey my commandments and keep my words you will know the truth and if the words he speaks comes from himself or God. In fact God will with Christ reveal themselves to the individual.
Islam makes NO SUCH PROMISE.

So you are deliberately misrepresenting something else to mean the same as Christ and God revealing themselves.
NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL. So you cannot use what you have said as any kind of comparison.

At some level it comes down to the same thing, or so it seems to me.  The scriptures might not be identical, the cultures vary, for sure, but the underlying formula is similar - Jews respect the Torah, Christians look to the teachings of Christ Jesus, Muslims observe the pillars of Islam to come to know the mind of God; all are recipes to deliver spiritual enlightenment of some sort or other within a particular cultural context for those so inclined.   Any talk of 'my truth' or 'your truth' implies a subjective context at play.

[Hope]

At some level it comes down to the same thing, or so it seems to me.  The scriptures might not be identical, the cultures vary, for sure, but the underlying formula is similar - Jews respect the Torah, Christians look to the teachings of Christ Jesus, Muslims observe the pillars of Islam to come to know the mind of God; all are recipes to deliver spiritual enlightenment of some sort or other within a particular cultural context for those so inclined.   Any talk of 'my truth' or 'your truth' implies a subjective context at play.

The problem with this argument is that both Islam and Judaism were originally aimed at a specific cultural and even ethinic grouping.  This was never the case with Christianity.  It was cross-cultural and non-ethnic specific from the very start.

[torridon]

The problem with this argument is that both Islam and Judaism were originally aimed at a specific cultural and even ethinic grouping.  This was never the case with Christianity.  It was cross-cultural and non-ethnic specific from the very start.

I'm not sure about 'from the very start', in that Jesus had his Jewish audience in mind and was more a reformer of Judaism than an instigator of a new religion.  It was others coming later, notably Paul and John, who broadened the project out to gentiles and Romans. 

Islam contains analagous sentiments suggesting universal ethnic-independent applicability - 'all people are muslims' for instance, just that most people don't know it, having been misled by false teachings.  Thus we find muslims in all parts of the world now, not just Arabia

[jeremyp]

she admits to once being an atheist, that is allowed, or is it once a atheist always a atheist.

No true atheist would lapse back to theism.

[jeremyp]

This was never the case with Christianity.  It was cross-cultural and non-ethnic specific from the very start.

What a load of bollocks.

Jesus never left his homeland. His idea of cross-culturalism was to claim that the Samaritans weren't all that bad.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Jeremyp,

No true atheist would lapse back to theism.

Nah!! Sorry not buying that, last time I looked atheists are human, no really they are

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What a load of bollocks.

Jesus never left his homeland. His idea of cross-culturalism was to claim that the Samaritans weren't all that bad.

Yeh, but it was pretty cosmopolitan around there at that time...and under Roman Occupation.