Not to stir an already stirred pot

[BikerDude]

A Christian Manifesto. Not sure how Dudeism plays into the 2 sides as described.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qdXEVRKls

[cckeiser]

A Christian Manifesto. Not sure how Dudeism plays into the 2 sides as described.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qdXEVRKls

Sorry BikerDude.....I just cannot bring myself to watch that frickin' stuff....my mind just says "Fuck No" and runs!
Can you give a synopsis?
Is it really worth the time and bother?
Is it going to provide us with any information that we  don't pretty much already know?

And.....are you sure you are not just trying to stir up just more shit.

So just how many more times can we whip this horse back from the dead?

[Red Back Dragon Dude]

A Christian Manifesto. Not sure how Dudeism plays into the 2 sides as described.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qdXEVRKls

Sorry BikerDude.....I just cannot bring myself to watch that frickin' stuff....my mind just says "Fuck No" and runs!
Can you give a synopsis?
Is it really worth the time and bother?
Is it going to provide us with any information that we  don't pretty much already know?

And.....are you sure you are not just trying to stir up just more shit.

So just how many more times can we whip this horse back from the dead?

my interpretation of it would be "lets go back a few hundred years into the dark age again , times was better then"

[BikerDude]

A Christian Manifesto. Not sure how Dudeism plays into the 2 sides as described.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qdXEVRKls

Sorry BikerDude.....I just cannot bring myself to watch that frickin' stuff....my mind just says "Fuck No" and runs!
Can you give a synopsis?
Is it really worth the time and bother?
Is it going to provide us with any information that we  don't pretty much already know?

And.....are you sure you are not just trying to stir up just more shit.

So just how many more times can we whip this horse back from the dead?

my interpretation of it would be "lets go back a few hundred years into the dark age again , times was better then"

That about sums her all up.

[Rev.Stu]

Wholly-crap! This video contains sophistry and leaps of faith/reason. The commentary re: Humanism from the 5:15 mark to the 8:00 min. mark is absurd. The "founding fathers" rhetoric is sad/hilarious. There is reference to "true spirituality" LOL. In the end at the 31:00 mark, Rev. Frank denounces the authority of the federal government, Caesar and God Dudes, Caesar and God. His view at this point is close to mine, only 359 degrees apart. I don't think the federal government has ever held the high moral ground.
Wow.
The pot has been smoked, not stirred.
Don't get me started, get me stated, your call. I don't usually get thrown out of places but we'll see. 

[Caesar dude]

Don't take my name in vain Dude!

[Hominid]

I read his book "A Christian Manifesto", back in the 80s when I was a fundie.  I thought he did a good job of justifying Christianity - see, that's the thing.  Once your mind has been made up about the whole religion thing, any noise you hear opposing your view is immediately discredited - that's why formal debates are mostly a waste of time.  But I still argue because it sharpens my resolve.

I will say this: Anyone who's initial premise is the existence of God, and embraces religion were either imprinted with that at an early age, or had a life-changing emotional experience that changed their way of thinking.   Neither having anything to do with critical thinking... 

[BikerDude]

I read his book "A Christian Manifesto", back in the 80s when I was a fundie.  I thought he did a good job of justifying Christianity - see, that's the thing.  Once your mind has been made up about the whole religion thing, any noise you hear opposing your view is immediately discredited - that's why formal debates are mostly a waste of time.  But I still argue because it sharpens my resolve.

I will say this: Anyone who's initial premise is the existence of God, and embraces religion were either imprinted with that at an early age, or had a life-changing emotional experience that changed their way of thinking.   Neither having anything to do with critical thinking... 

Yeah. There is nothing really wrong with much of what he says.
I just don't understand why it is that so many Christian seem to be so dissatisfied  being a Christian. If a person want to be a Christian then do it. Say Jesus is the son of god, he died for our sins, he is the light and the way and if people say that is intolerant or close minded why would they care? But to just pull this move where they defend the term Christian and insist on removing from it any hint of a finite set of beliefs is just so defensive.
It's like in the video the 4 horsemen when Daniel Dennett expresses amazement at how insulted religious people get when you criticize their beliefs. It's as if you called them ugly or something deeply personal. It really has a insecure kind of clinging aspect to it and to me it is not a long way off from people who feel it is completely reasonable to suggest killing a person who draws a cartoon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7IHU28aR2E

I really better leave this stuff alone. They will be storming the gates soon.

[BikerDude]

Wholly-crap! This video contains sophistry and leaps of faith/reason. The commentary re: Humanism from the 5:15 mark to the 8:00 min. mark is absurd. The "founding fathers" rhetoric is sad/hilarious. There is reference to "true spirituality" LOL. In the end at the 31:00 mark, Rev. Frank denounces the authority of the federal government, Caesar and God Dudes, Caesar and God. His view at this point is close to mine, only 359 degrees apart. I don't think the federal government has ever held the high moral ground.
Wow.
The pot has been smoked, not stirred.
Don't get me started, get me stated, your call. I don't usually get thrown out of places but we'll see. 

The entire viewpoint is double talk.
The point is that people/governments CAN take away our rights. That is clear when anyone looks around the world. So inevitably the defense of our "inalienable" rights comes down to our higher principles. If one bolsters their commitment to those higher principles by pretending that there is a sky man who "gave them to us" is irrelevant.
If someone punches you in the nose then it's clear that God is not going to do a damn thing about it. The police , courts etc will and that is the simple reality. We have our rights and freedoms because of people's commitment to higher principles.
The theist will insist that there is something in the "rightness" that comes from a higher authority. I'd suggest that it comes from something deeply human. We are born with innate perceptions that make our survival more likely. The reality is that we, humans as a species have survived through cooperation. That is an innate part of our psychology. I think that category of experience is what we call morals. What is moral is what produces the best result for the "group" and the way that we "feel" the morality in actions is so innate that it is not a "front brain" things. It's reflexive. Knee jerk. Feels like capital T truth.

[Hominid]

What is moral is what produces the best result for the "group" and the way that we "feel" the morality in actions is so innate that it is not a "front brain" things. It's reflexive. Knee jerk. Feels like capital T truth.

Sam Harris and others would agree with you; even going to the point of saying that morality has a quantifiable and scientific basis.   As a species we never really needed to grow fangs and claws to survive like other mammals - cooperation has been our darwinian advantage.

[Rev. Gary (revgms)]

Yep, with Sam Harris and Hominid here, there can be an empirical morality, it just matters how you frame the question. It is a hyper reality no matter how you slice though, morality only matters to thinking beings, so if it only matters to thinking beings then any effect on a thinking being has to be factored into any theory of morality.

It is far deeper and inter-connected than we can even imagine, it is genetic on many levels, all of it, we are programmed to believe in gods, it is a bio-electric/chemical thang. They have a helmet you can put on and see god, or just drop acid, up to you.

it is also genetic that we have empathy, and from what i am hearing out of cognitive science and artificial intelligence, is that empathy may be a requirement for the development of higher intelligence. It may even be what higher intelligence actually is a deep empathy. It takes a theory of mind to recognize another mind, that's empathy, it takes recognizing another mind to realize you have one too that's the intelligence. They cannot be separated, you need empathy to be a higher intelligence, otherwise you're just a fancy calculator.

[Hominid]

It is a hyper reality no matter how you slice though, morality only matters to thinking beings, so if it only matters to thinking beings then any effect on a thinking being has to be factored into any theory of morality.

Absolutely - rocks don't give a shit about other rocks.  Biological beings have a prime directive (...well, because they're biological) of survival.  That mutual survival is aided by cooperation.  Hence empathy.

Haven't seen ya in a while revgms, nice to see you back.

[Rev.Stu]

It is good to read thoughtful discourse. It seems clear that the people posting here actually think about the things they think about. I have not yet run across anything too toxic yet - people here seem to be stand-up Dudes.

[BikerDude]

Yep, with Sam Harris and Hominid here, there can be an empirical morality, it just matters how you frame the question. It is a hyper reality no matter how you slice though, morality only matters to thinking beings, so if it only matters to thinking beings then any effect on a thinking being has to be factored into any theory of morality.

It is far deeper and inter-connected than we can even imagine, it is genetic on many levels, all of it, we are programmed to believe in gods, it is a bio-electric/chemical thang. They have a helmet you can put on and see god, or just drop acid, up to you.

it is also genetic that we have empathy, and from what i am hearing out of cognitive science and artificial intelligence, is that empathy may be a requirement for the development of higher intelligence. It may even be what higher intelligence actually is a deep empathy. It takes a theory of mind to recognize another mind, that's empathy, it takes recognizing another mind to realize you have one too that's the intelligence. They cannot be separated, you need empathy to be a higher intelligence, otherwise you're just a fancy calculator.

Yup. What he said.
Also studies have shown differences in the brains of Psychopaths.
The part of the brain that is responsible for empathy is damaged or sort of turned off.
They simply have no moral compass. It's like color blindness for right and wrong.
They just don't even know it is. Like explaining red to a person blind from birth.

Here's a good article about a lot of what you said...
http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/brain-religion2.htm