Zone1 Why do you need gods?

[Blues Man]

They call that being an agnostic.


Well of course everything man does or is involved in from another person's POV appears to be man's doing because man is making the observation.


Probably very true but also not germane to the conversation.


Super. Though not Buddhist, I've studied it a bit especially Zen Buddhism. I like their concept of nothingness.


If you don't want it to be anyone else's fucking business, you shouldn't bring it up on social media!


No, but any ideas adhered to are as good as a God. Again, it all comes back to the impersonal vs. the personal.

The thread asks the question why do you need to believe in gods. There was nothing about religions in the title. So those insisting on speaking of different religions are actually off topic here

 

[Meriweather]

Rationality is provable without faith

No question about it.

 

[ding]

I honestly wish you were smarter or more educated or had more experience discussing topics like religion.

Over estimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is called the dunning effect and is a sign of low intelligence.

 

[Meriweather]

Over estimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is called the dunning effect and is a sign of low intelligence.

The greater issue has been one of not being able to move beyond seeing God as anything other than a genocidal maniac due to a specific verse. There is no question that the author portrayed the Jews as following a command from God.

The more interesting question is why a priest and that many soldiers believed it it was a command from God? Was it a command before the fact, or did someone conclude years after the fact, that such a command must have come from God because normally Jewish soldiers did not behave in such a fashion? Or, was Samuel more politician than priest? There are a lot of questions with possible solutions, but there are no definite answers.

There has been no answering interest in what the people of the time were thinking, the perspectives of a much different culture, and given what they had previously presented about God, how they came to present something quite unlike God. They do this on several occasions, (Esau and Jacob being one) to justify their own, or their ancestors, bad behavior.

Rather, the discussion in return has centered on the justifiable reason for people in the present to lose faith/belief in God and why God is a genocidal maniac. I mistakenly thought he wanted to speak of this, but when I agreeably moved the discussion in that direction...shrug...apparently I was seen as picking on him and being a hypocrite.

Oh, well--there have been other things going on in this thread that keep it interesting.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Over estimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is called the dunning effect and is a sign of low intelligence.

As is calling "Dunning Kruger" "Dunning effect"

 

[ding]

As is calling "Dunning Kruger" "Dunning effect"

Not exactly. That's just a literary convenience designed to make you chase a red herring. Over estimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is the dunning effect and it is a sign of low intelligence.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

The greater issue has been one of not being able to move beyond seeing God as anything other than a genocidal maniac due to a specific verse. There is no question that the author portrayed the Jews as following a command from God.

Which, to be quite fair to me, is EXACTLY what the Bible portrayed.

The fact that YOU like to pare out bits from the Bible based on your feelings is admirable but tennis without the net.

The more interesting question is why a priest and that many soldiers believed it it was a command from God?

Maybe because it came from the mouth of God's prophet. And if you read the rest of the account, when Saul FAILS to kill every living thing God turns away from Saul.


Now, you are perfectly in line to say it was a different society, but be aware that you are personally choosing which aspects of the Bible are true and which are lies.

I simply don't know how you do that.

Was it a command before the fact, or did someone conclude years after the fact, that such a command must have come from God because normally Jewish soldiers did not behave in such a fashion? Or, was Samuel more politician than priest? There are a lot of questions with possible solutions, but there are no definite answers.

There Is a definite answer though. IF it happened, then Samuel, the prophet, was just making it up. Which makes Samuel, the prophet of God, a monster.

My personal choice is that it didn't happen as advertised since I hold no NEED for ANYTHING in the Bible to be true.

the perspectives of a much different culture,

Can you explain to me how cultural differences can account for a call for GENOCIDE?????

I'm serious. All you ever do is suggest 'culture and language'

and given what they had previously presented about God, how they came to present something quite unlike God.

It is NOT AT ALL UNLIKE THE GOD THEY KNEW! Do you ever read the bible???

If you read Joshua you see PLENTY OF EXAMPLES OF A VICIOUS BLOODTHIRSTY GOD.

I honestly wonder if you've read the bible.

Rather, the discussion in return has centered on the justifiable reason for people in the present to lose faith/belief in God and why God is a genocidal maniac.

BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS HE IS. That's it. You are the one making up stuff to make the Bible say that which it clearly DOES NOT.

Oh, well--there have been other things going on in this thread that keep it interesting.

I see you don't like anyone challenging anything you say or think and when they do you simply run away.

It appears to be in keeping with your view of God: those bits you don't like in the Bible you simply walk away from or wave your hands and say "culture and language" and call it a day.

I have grown accustomed to talking about religion with people who are less scared of discussing it in technical detail.

My apologies if I went too far and you were threatened.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Not exactly. That's just a literary convenience

LOL. Sure.

designed to make you chase a red herring.

There you go! Go tell God you pissed someone else off! He LOVES hearing that!

Over estimating your intelligence

No, overestimating YOURS.

and under estimating the intelligence of others is the dunning effect and it is a sign of low intelligence.

NOt really. You need to look up the definition.

You really are about the least well read human I've met who can type.

 

[ding]

Which, to be quite fair to me, is EXACTLY what the Bible portrayed.

It's hard to reconcile your image of a genocidal God with Psalms.

 

[ding]

LOL. Sure.

100%. I've been doing that since the very beginning. You aren't the first person to take exception with my shortening the Dunning-Kruger effect to the dunning effect. And you probably won't be the last.

I think the important thing for you to learn is that overestimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is according to Dunning and Kruger a sign of low intelligence.

 

[ding]

There you go! Go tell God you pissed someone else off! He LOVES hearing that!

There's a time and place for everything under the sun

 

[ding]

No, overestimating YOURS.

That makes zero sense. You really shouldn't parse a sentence fragment.

 

[ding]

NOt really. You need to look up the definition.

You really are about the least well read human I've met who can type.

I have. That's how I know that overestimating your intelligence and under estimating the intelligence of others is according to Dunning and Kruger a sign of low intelligence.

 

[ding]

You really are about the least well read human I've met who can type.

Textbook dunning effect.

But putting that aside how can you say that when I just taught you about the dunning effect?

 

[ding]

The fact that YOU like to pare out bits from the Bible based on your feelings is admirable but tennis without the net.

I'm surprised you didn't implode from the irony of your statement. You are the one reading passages in a vacuum.

 

[ding]

I have grown accustomed to talking about religion with people who are less scared of discussing it in technical detail.

My apologies if I went too far and you were threatened.

Also a textbook example of the dunning effect.

Anytime you underestimate the abilities of others and overestimate your abilities according to Dunning and Kruger it is a sign of low intelligence.

 

[Meriweather]

My apologies if I went too far and you were threatened.

Neither offended nor threatened. Bored. I wanted to talk about a Bible story and how it came to be. You decided to talk about everything you have concluded must be wrong with who you assume I am. It is like you were gossiping about your invisible friend.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Neither offended nor threatened. Bored.

I can understand how you'd be bored given that you didn't actually SHOW any of your "workings". You didn't actually tell me anything about the explicit words you claim make a difference, or how the culture allowed for a genocide etc.

You did, however, suggest, hint, imply, that maybe the authors of the book of Joshua and 1 Samuel just made stuff up. I'm actually OK with that! Only problem is: there's a LOT of made up stuff about the vicious bloodthirsty god of Abraham and I think it quite rational to assume that if all of THAT were made up and since I don't "feel God's presence in any way", why would I NOT assume that the whole thing (God) is completely made up?

(I hope that has been clear from the beginning but I sense it hasn't)

I wanted to talk about a Bible story and how it came to be.

And that's fine. You are making stuff up and adding it to the BIble (even though God strictly commands AGAINST that very thing). I'm actually A-OK with that. ALL religion is made up. You are just doing what people have done since the dawn of time.

You decided to talk about everything you have concluded must be wrong with who you assume I am. It is like you were gossiping about your invisible friend.

Nope. Here's how it works: I wanted to talk about a verse in the Bible that is extremely theologically difficult. YOU said "language and culture" but didn't provide any examples from the writing to let me know how you arrived at a conclusion that this particular part of the Bible is to be ignored.

I sense you don't necessarily approach these topics philosophically. Unfortunately I do. One of my closest friends from youth is now a philosophy professor.

That's fine! Seriously. Few people do that. And when they are faced with someone whose ideas you don't even BEGIN to understand you simply make assumptions. You assume you understood my point all along.

You clearly didn't really understand it. You are, like so many people, unprepared for a critical discussion of religion.

And that's PERFECTLY UNDERSTANDABLE. Religion works hard to defy critical discussion.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Also a textbook example of the dunning effect.

Unlike you I don't have to go copying wholesale someone else's words to support my point.

Anytime you underestimate the abilities of others and overestimate your abilities according to Dunning and Kruger it is a sign of low intelligence.

LOL. Not really.

You don't even know the definition of D-K.

As per usual you talk loudly and extremely ignorantly.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I'm surprised you didn't implode from the irony of your statement. You are the one reading passages in a vacuum.

I find it fascinating to see how little actual education you have. In educated circles we OFTEN discuss topics based on the rules of the topic.

I can discuss God based on the theological concepts put out. EVEN IF I DON'T PERSONALLY BELIEVE IN GOD!

Why does this confuse you?

I can talk about Stephen King novels too! I don't believe they are TRUE. I can talk about a wide variety of novels. None of which are TRUE. But we can still talk about them based on what is in the novels.