| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Dave" |
| Date: |
19 Aug 2006 08:20:14 PM |
| Object: |
Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM
.
|
|
| User: "Malcolm" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
20 Aug 2006 01:54:13 PM |
|
|
"Dave" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM
What does "being intolerant of it" mean?
Do you mean we should go round killing believers?
Secondly, what do you mean by an "intellectually untenable" belief. Can you
give a few examples of ideas which you personally disbelieve in, yet find
intellectually tenable?
--
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SongBookz" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
20 Aug 2006 08:53:59 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:54:13 +0100, "Malcolm"
<regniztar@btinternet.com> wrote:
"Dave" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM
What does "being intolerant of it" mean?
Do you mean we should go round killing believers?
Secondly, what do you mean by an "intellectually untenable" belief. Can you
"Belief," by it's nature is "intellectually untenable," (but pssst,
don't tell Funnymentalists) once it becomes tenable, it's no longer
belief.
What many fail to take into account is that religion is not intended
to answer the questions of the left brain, that is for science, etc.,
it answers the questions posed by the right brain which doesn't want
or require answers, it just wants to wonder and ask the unanswerable.
Terrell D Lewis
http://www.epigramz.com
Fighting the Reich Wing Conspiracy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
21 Aug 2006 12:41:37 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 01:53:59 GMT, SongBookz <shalom@nospam.net> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:54:13 +0100, "Malcolm"
<regniztar@btinternet.com> wrote:
"Dave" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote in message
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM
What does "being intolerant of it" mean?
Do you mean we should go round killing believers?
Secondly, what do you mean by an "intellectually untenable" belief. Can you
"Belief," by it's nature is "intellectually untenable," (but pssst,
don't tell Funnymentalists) once it becomes tenable, it's no longer
belief.
What many fail to take into account is that religion is not intended
to answer the questions of the left brain, that is for science, etc.,
it answers the questions posed by the right brain which doesn't want
or require answers, it just wants to wonder and ask the unanswerable.
Terrell D Lewis
http://www.epigramz.com
Fighting the Reich Wing Conspiracy
Terrell,
To a Mystic, a secular progressive, an atheist, an agnostic, or a
skeptic ""Belief," by its nature is "intellectually untenable,"" But
for normal people it is not.
By normal people I am referring to those who have confessed Jesus as
Lord and who have believed that God raised Jesus from the dead - the
saved.
In the video, slick Sam speaks about the role that religion plays in
promoting human conflict. Wrong religion does play a role in
promoting human conflict. But Slick Sam not knowing the difference
between right and wrong religion clumped both into one. He begins
speaking about "Belief, specifically the problem of religious belief."
Okay, so he may not a true intellectual and he may be just another
whiney God hater who hates people from all religions - but, he's my
source so I have to quote what he says.
He is talking about religious belief. Now watch how he sneaks in a
new definition for "belief." After saying the words quoted above he
goes into his sales pitch to sell the people on why they should listen
to him. Then he says "Before I launch into my heresy" then some other
stuff and then he says that "beliefs are representations of the
world." He tosses in that word untenable and uses a bunch of fundy
preacher tricks including fear motivation; but we are talking about
what "belief" and should concentrate on that.
You would have me to believe that belief is some mystical thing and he
would have me belief is some untenable representation of the world.
Us normal people would define it as an acknowledgement of truth.
The Bible says that to be saved we confess Jesus as Lord. The act of
confessing Jesus as Lord is belief. The Bible says that to be saved
we must believe that God raised Jesus from the dead. Acknowleding
that truth is belief. Blind "faith"? No. The whole thing was
explained in detail in earlier books and the chapters preceding the
verses. God does not tell us to have blind faith. We are told to
believe truth.
So, the Muslims think their Bible is truth and Jews think their Bible
is truth and Christians think their Bible is truth and all of those
books contain some or much truth. Us normal people think the Bible
contains truth and we believe that because of the evidence presented
as truth in the Bible. Belief can also apply to false truth. One can
believe false truth; wrongly divided Scripture, the doctrines of men,
or lies. So belief can also mean the acceptance of lies as truth.
Belief is intellectual honesty. Blind faith is stupidity. What the
God haters and religious leaders want us to believe is that blind
faith is what God requires of us so that they can manipulate us. The
God hater will tell his audience that only stupid people believe in
blind faith and will prove it using logic. The preacher who wants to
fleece his flock will say that the congrevation has to fork over bucks
to get something from God and that the giving of the bucks is a
manifestation of faith.
Belief is tenable because it is simply acknowledging what is true.
......
BB
http://www.biblebob.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
21 Aug 2006 12:10:32 AM |
|
|
On 19 Aug 2006 18:20:14 -0700, "Dave" <horndw@gmail.com> wrote:
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3YOIImOoYM
Don't you mean poison for thought?
Well, that was revealing. Are those the guys that have manipulated
you into behaving the way you do? Yep, I watched the whole thing all
the way through. The following is what the "nut bar" (his words)
introducing the speaker said. I think I pretty much got every word
correct; but the punctuation and capitalization may not be right. I
don't know "Nut Bar's" real name.
"In a progressively more secularized world it sometimes seems that the
only religious people out there are fanatics. And frankly I'm fed up
with them. We look into any over the top wanton atrocity in the world
today and chances are you'll find some scripture spouting nut bar,
judging and condemning and punishing and happily killing the innocent
while cloaked in the garb of faith. They preach love but they
practice exclusion. And they display a toxic intolerance to different
views. I don't know about you but for me the very definition of
arrogance is someone who presumes to know God's will and to speak in
her name."
That guy sounds like you. Is he your trainer? Do you parrot what he
preaches or do you just steal his material?
Before you start whining about ad hominem. The first sentence in the
above paragraph is a statement based on opinion. The next two
sentences have little squiggly things behind them to tell you that
they are questions.
Based on my observation of his language and deportment; I'd guess that
the guy is one of the teachers of hate that the secular progressive
world pays to hate religious people.
Before you whine about ad hominem; notice the word "guess" in the
first sentence. If he can use the words "seem" and "chances," then I
can use the word "guess." In my opinion (notice the word opinion - it
means opinion) Nut Bar is one of the guys the main speaker (Sam
Harris) was talking about in his twenty plus minute speech. But then
in my opinion Sam Harris was one of the guys that Sam Harris was
talking about.
I don't have the time or energy to quote verbatim what Sam Harris said
because it was hard enough trying to stop and start the player to
quote Nut Bar. But, in a nutshell Sam Harris took some truth and then
twisted it, he twisted the meaning of words and of course he twisted
and wrongly divided the Scriptures.
Based on his twisted version of truth; you need to make a decision.
Should we kill all Muslims in order to save the United States?
According to him, it is probable that Christians and Muslims will go
to war against each other. Shouldn't we kill them all before they
have a chance to kill us? After all, you know them mean ole Muslims
are going to kill atheists, agnostics, and skeptics right along with
Christians and Jews.
Based on his twisted definition of words shouldn't you believe that
you have a refridgerator full of diamonds in your back yard so that
you can help the poor or something.
His vain philosophy was not much more than that until he got to the
part where he began referencing Scriptures. Of course that is what
always breaks the back of false teachers who in their puffed up state
of mind think they can interpret Scripture. Let's just see how
accurate Sam Harris was when he said words tos the effect that Jesus
told peopole to "slay" those that did not beleive in him. He cited
Luke 19 as his source.
I know you hate it whenh I prove one of your gods wrong so I will keep
this short; but must quote the whole parable so that you will know
that I am not a dishonest teacher like Sam Harris. Notice that Jesus
is talking to Zacchaeus who asked him about giving of his goods to the
poor. Verse ten begins with the word "For" pointing to the reason for
what was said in verse nine. It says that Jesus came to seek and
save. Sam Harris tried to fool the mob before him by saying that
Jesus said to slay those that did not believe in him. Jesus said he
came to seek and save and Sam said Jesus ordered death.
Luke 19:8-27 KJV
8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half
of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any
man by false accusation, I restore [him] fourfold.
9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house,
forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was
lost.
11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable,
because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the
kingdom of God should immediately appear.
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to
receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and
said unto them, Occupy till I come.
14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying,
We will not have this [man] to reign over us.
15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received
the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him,
to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man
had gained by trading.
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten
pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast
been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five
pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.
20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, [here is] thy pound, which
I have kept laid up in a napkin:
21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up
that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.
22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee,
[thou] wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking
up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:
23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my
coming I might have required mine own with usury?
24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and
give [it] to him that hath ten pounds.
25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given;
and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from
him.
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over
them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me.
Look at verse 25. It is in parenthesis. Therefore, verse 26
continues and points to the reason for what was said in verse 24. And
verse 27 begins with "but" and introduces an antithesis. Therefore,
the enemies spoken of were the enemies (the citizens that hated him
from verse 14) of the nobleman; not the enemies of Jesus. It was the
nobleman in the Parable that said to slay his enemies. Jesus did tell
people to slay his enemies.
I wish I had a transcript of what Sam Harris said so that I could help
you see the truth and lies spoken by Sam Harris so that the poisoned
thinking he promotes will not destroy your brain.
Terrell, if you are reading this. I hope you noticed that the Parable
does not indicate that Jesus suffered from the Robin Hood mentality
that you claim he did:) Compare what Zac said to what Jesus said.
......
BB
http://www.biblebob.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Thuleen" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
21 Aug 2006 02:50:33 PM |
|
|
In article <9rbie216s56tt7up9aiiu8hp0q0sdkmaf9@4ax.com>, Bible Bob
<biblebob@saintly.com> wrote:
I wish I had a transcript of what Sam Harris said
Here's a link to something similar
http://www.cfinyc.org/transcripts_html/sam_harris.html
It's a transcript of a longer, fuller version of his talk. The
reference to Luke 19 does not appear in this talk, however.
--
-------------
Dave Thuleen
Escondido, California
Click here to listen to this audio link:
http://longnow.chubbo.net/salt-0200512-harris/salt-0200512-harris.mp3
http://www.samharris.org/
"We do not respect people's beliefs; we evaluate their reasons. If my reasons
are good enough, you will helplessly believe what I believe. That is what it
is to be a rational human being. Reasons are contagious."
"Faith is the license that religious people give one another to keep believing
when reasons fail."
-- Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
21 Aug 2006 03:49:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:50:33 -0700, David Thuleen <dthuleen@cts.com>
wrote:
In article <9rbie216s56tt7up9aiiu8hp0q0sdkmaf9@4ax.com>, Bible Bob
<biblebob@saintly.com> wrote:
I wish I had a transcript of what Sam Harris said
Here's a link to something similar
http://www.cfinyc.org/transcripts_html/sam_harris.html
It's a transcript of a longer, fuller version of his talk. The
reference to Luke 19 does not appear in this talk, however.
Got it.
Thank you.
......
BB
http://www.biblebob.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "marika" |
|
| Title: Re: Tolerance of religion - a short speech |
21 Aug 2006 08:40:53 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 21:20:14 -0400, Dave <horndw@gmail.com> wrote:
Food for thought and consideration - should we be tolerant of religion=
and belief, even if it is intellectually untenable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DJ3YOIImOoYM
food for thought
http://www.mycookbook.net/Recipe_Print.asp?RecipeID=3D653
At that link is a picture of my latest, exciting
score!!!
A yuppie sort of shop has come gwew.
They often have steamed snow peas available, and
OhMyGod is THAT a new obsession. I've always loved
snow peas, especially thanks to my dad planting them, and I could go pic=
k =
and eat at will in the
summers.
Anyway, on my last snow pea jihad, I discovered
something new and oh TOO exciting in the produce area
(why do they always put the odd vegetarian/tofu style
items in the produce aisle? even if it's soy
cheese??)
Anyway (2), I found, for the first time ever, those
rice wrappers they use to make those un fried spring
rolls. I FELL IN DESPERATE LOVE WITH THESE THINGS IN
GREENSBORO, when I discovered this cool asian
restaurant that featured like Chinese/Japanes/Thai or
something. I was in love the first time I had one . .
.. it was so yummy . . . like a buck, but to me it was
worth it. The non-fried thing, full of noodles and a
shrimp and a leaf of mint and I was quite happy.
Now, I have to travel far and go to not cheap
restaurants when I want one.
EXCEPT!!! Now I can begin the journey to make my own!
I started yesterday, and I think I had a rice flour
overload! But I'm doing well, and , now I
am back to Big Lick, I'll make some. They're SO
good. and I can't believe I can achieve something
that seems so exotic. I don't know if you'd ever
had one. Now, I just got to figure out the flavors
and the sauces. I've never had fish sauce before, and
I think I need to learn about it. Due the amount of
work involved, at least I understand the restaurant
charge now!
In an aside, I bought more brussels sprouts. I put
these in ramen, and THAT totally rocked. Cook them in
a little water and butter for about ten minutes, then
dump them into your ramen after it's done. You'll
like it.--- Cut them into half or quarters first!
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
