Bigotry as practice

[SkepticThinker]

No, just this:
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.
How do you know that there are bad people?

Another poster explained it quite thoroughly in post #291 which I agree with wholeheartedly.

 

[firedragon]

You asked a question in reference to a quote someone else provided, and I gave you 9 examples.

What is the back up research behind those 9 examples to support the quote?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

How do you know you like truth? Maybe you like dogma and confuse it for truth and unaware of it. How would you know differently unless you know what truth is and isnt?

Well, truth is:
Verified truth/evidence.
Falsifiable truth/evidence.
Correspondence.
Coherence.
Pragmatic.
Tarski’s theory.
Deflationary versions.
Truth and realism versus antirealism.
Logic and math.

I have properly left out a few. In general I can understand all of them and use them all in different contexts.
Now since I am a global skeptic I also understand at least some of their limits and how they relate to science and philosophy.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Another poster explained it quite thoroughly in post #291 which I agree with wholeheartedly.

Yeah, it was subjective. Just like all other humans including me.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What is the back up research behind those 9 examples to support the quote?

Try actually addressing them.

 

[firedragon]

Try actually addressing them.

Cannot address preaching with no research or any substance. Hope you try your hardest to understand.

Smiley face.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Cannot address preaching with no research or any substance. Hope you try your hardest to understand.

Smiley face.

Whatever you have to tell yourself to avoid addressing direct answers to your questions and instead whining for several pages.
Wave emoticon.

 

[firedragon]

Whatever you have to tell yourself to avoid addressing direct answers to your questions and instead whining for several pages.
Wave emoticon.

Thanks. Ciao.

 

[PruePhillip]

No. The Biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah has not been verified at all.
There is an hypothesis that an airburst meteor may have been responsible for destroying a city in ancient Palestine.
Even if that turned out to be accurate (which we do not know), it still leaves the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as mere myth. It's like saying because there is some evidence that there was a King Herod, then all the Biblical stories around him must therefore be true. It is a non sequitur of massive proportions.

Also bear in mind that if the Bible story did turn out to be merely an account of a natural event rather than god's magic, then it further disproves Christianity and its god.
Is that really what you want?

I have a friend who, to this day, believes 'they' found Sodom and Gomorrah somewhere
else, and a natural formation is 'Lot's wife, turned to a pillar of salt.' Only it's not salt.
But I am fine with them finding there was an air burst over the Jordan Valley - where
else do you see bones pulverized to fine, needle sized bits - and kiln-fired pottery melted.
The blast wave is evident.

But... the skeptics must now retreat from the 'There's no evidence of....' and find a new
line - the one you mentioned. Another tactic, already, is to say the 1650BC dates are out.
The date for Abraham was about 2200 BC, but in the same breath - there was no Abraham.

Abraham was 100 years old the year of the blast, according to Genesis. Taking on board
the ages of his son and grandson, and the four hundred years in Egypt - this gives us,
roughly, the putative Hebrew Exodus occuring right smack in the middle of the Bronze
Age Collapse when mass migrations and societal collapse were happening everywhere.
Interesting.

 

[PruePhillip]

Your claims are not evidence for a God. .

Various authors of the Old Testament spoke of the end of the Jewish nation
and their return 'a second time' which we take to be today. Book after book
warned of the wrath to come for Israel - their destruction, exile, slavery and
persecution (but not extinction like the nations around them.)
When it happened it wasn't a cometary air burst or the finger of God - it was
the Romans. The main witness to this event was Josephus, a Pharisee who
felt God had abandoned his people - before it really began.

So did God destroy Israel? I believe so.
The bible isn't just inspirational verses, it makes a claim to history. We are
not going to excavate lodging of the gods on Mount Olympus, but many of
the kingdoms, cities, villages, monarchs and historic claims of the bible have
been found to be genuine.

 

[KWED]

Your government targets innocents all the time. Put yourself on the terrorist list first.

I unequivocally condemn anyone who deliberately targets innocent civilians, regardless of who they are or who their victims are.
Shame you can't do the same.

 

[KWED]

Bigotry as practice

Still lost me.

 

[KWED]

Evidence for the bold one, please.

The targets were civilian, not military. It was meant to terrorise the public, not reduce military capacity.

 

[KWED]

1. 15 million people killed by Joseph Stalin. Atheist.
2. 20 Million people killed by Mao. Atheist.
3. 50 million people killed by war. 2nd world war. Secular.
4. 93% of all wars ever fought in the history of the known world, recorded were secular.
5. Democide in Romania 1948-89. Atheist.
6. 60-65k murdered by terrorists in Sri Lanka since 1983 - 2009. Leninist. Secular. Atheist.
7. Peru’s Shining Path - 60,000 dead. Atheist.
8. Bulgarian democide 48-53. 30-50 thousand killed. Atheist.
9. Polish Democide - 30000 killed.
10. Sino vietnam war. 30000 killed. Since, atheist.
11. Check democide. 13k to 60k killed. Atheist.

Oh dear, not this tired old trope again?
Almost everything you list there was driven by irrational ideology and personality cult - pretty much like religion.
You really aren't very good at this, are you?

 

[KWED]

I have a friend who, to this day, believes 'they' found Sodom and Gomorrah somewhere
else, and a natural formation is 'Lot's wife, turned to a pillar of salt.' Only it's not salt.
But I am fine with them finding there was an air burst over the Jordan Valley - where
else do you see bones pulverized to fine, needle sized bits - and kiln-fired pottery melted.
The blast wave is evident.

Not sure what your point is here.

But... the skeptics must now retreat from the 'There's no evidence of....' and find a new
line - the one you mentioned.

Erm, with all due respect, the reasonable position is always "there is no evidence for x" until evidence for x is found. Then we look at the evidence and change pour position on x accordingly. That's what rational people do.
However, if you think that finding evidence of an airburst meteor in Palestine would somehow show a Bible story to be true, they you are sadly mistaken. If such a thing is verified, it is yet another nail in the coffin of Christianity.

Another tactic, already, is to say the 1650BC dates are out.
The date for Abraham was about 2200 BC, but in the same breath - there was no Abraham.

There are no fixed "dates" for the Biblical characters. They are only inferrals and interpretations.
And yes, there is no evidence that the historical character of Abraham ever existed.

Abraham was 100 years old the year of the blast, according to Genesis. Taking on board
the ages of his son and grandson, and the four hundred years in Egypt - this gives us,
roughly, the putative Hebrew Exodus occuring right smack in the middle of the Bronze
Age Collapse when mass migrations and societal collapse were happening everywhere.
Interesting.

So yet another Biblical legend could be based on actual, non-magical events. Very possible.
As I have said before, many ancient myths legends from around the world have some basis in real world people, places and events. Not sure how that is supposed to support Christianity's magical element. It actually weakens it.

 

[KWED]

Various authors of the Old Testament spoke of the end of the Jewish nation
and their return 'a second time' which we take to be today. Book after book
warned of the wrath to come for Israel - their destruction, exile, slavery and
persecution (but not extinction like the nations around them.)
When it happened it wasn't a cometary air burst or the finger of God - it was
the Romans. The main witness to this event was Josephus, a Pharisee who
felt God had abandoned his people - before it really began.

So did God destroy Israel? I believe so.

But you just explained how ancient Israel's demise was the Roman Empire, which did the same to many other states all around Israel, and much further afield.
How does a completely natural, predictable and expected event suddenly become the work of god?

The bible isn't just inspirational verses, it makes a claim to history. We are
not going to excavate lodging of the gods on Mount Olympus, but many ofthe kingdoms, cities, villages, monarchs and historic claims of the bible have
been found to be genuine.

Just like towns and cities in Greek myth and legend. You know that Troy was thought to be legendary until it was discovered. Do you take that as evidence for the existence of the Greek pantheon?
You do realise that you are refuting your own argument?

 

[PruePhillip]

But you just explained how ancient Israel's demise was the Roman Empire, which did the same to many other states all around Israel, and much further afield.
How does a completely natural, predictable and expected event suddenly become the work of god?

Just like towns and cities in Greek myth and legend. You know that Troy was thought to be legendary until it was discovered. Do you take that as evidence for the existence of the Greek pantheon?
You do realise that you are refuting your own argument?

Daniel spoke of the enemy coming in 'like a flood' and destroying the
temple, Jerusalem and the Messiah himself. Jacob said there would
be a Hebrew nation but it would end with the Messiah - and he would
be believed upon of the Gentiles. Isaiah and Ezekiel spoke of a second
return to Israel, at a time when the Jews were in captivity the first time.
The Jews would come out of nations that were their 'graves' and take
back Israel 'with the sword' and rebuild the wasted land. And yet to come,
an attack on Israel by the nations of the Middle East, northern Africa and
what is today Russia (Magod) - but supported by an ally the bible couldn't
name, 'across the sea' who would send fire upon Magog 'from the north'
despite Magog being to the 'uttermost north.'

These things were written in the late Bronze, early Iron Age.

 

[F1fan]

Okay. No, I do like truth. But that is not rational as it is a feeling. Are you irrational and like truth?

People can like truth as a feeling. But the core of it is that truth is useful. That we might like useful things is irrelevant to why they are useful to us to achieve goals.

Let's note that religious dogma can be completely irrational and false, but also useful in some capacity., like social control. beheading an infidel is useful to those in religious power and want to instill fear.

But truth has a utility that helps all and helps people without dogma being a necessity. Discovering electricity and utilizing it is an example. The truth of germ theory helped people survive illness. Truth is that which is consistent with facts and reality.

Now there are many nuances and fuzzy realities about truth, and those issues have to be addressed individually.

 

[Truthseeker]

Spiritual susceptibility must mean what I would call disabling the critical thinking apparatus. Yes, I know. There is no way to get to the conclusion that a deity exists except by faith, and faith simply isn't a path to truth. By faith, I can declare whatever I like and call it the truth, including the exact opposite of what you believe. I'm an atheist based on reason, but I could be one based on faith as well. Unexamined thought can go wherever the imagination takes it and be believed if one has "spiritual susceptibility." Not a virtue doing that..

You know nothing about what critical thinking I have used to support my original spiritual susceptibility. You have no idea of the doubts I had when I seemed to find contradictions. I went out of my way to examine if this faith was true, if there was a contradiction, then I seemed to find a few. But after 50 years I conclude that the evidence is overwhelming. In conclusion, spiritual susceptibility and critical thinking were both used in my case. This is how it should be, in my opinion. Critical thinking and spiritual susceptibility are not in opposition.

 

[Truthseeker]

Then the truth is: we can't attain the truth. So reject religion since it isn't truth.

That's not I said or meant. Science and religion can't tell us all the truth. Our life journey can be thought of as getting closer and closer to the truth but never getting there.