Christianity

[Immanuel Can]

I didn't tell you WHAT you believe. I pointed out to you the fact THAT you believe.

Didn't get it. Or pretended not to. Who knows which?

Yep, not worth the effort, I see. Either the intellect or the honesty to respond coherently is beyond present powers, it seems.

[iambiguous]

This is what he is reduced down to. Instead of bringing his "theoretical racism" down out of the scholastic clouds and noting what is to be done to stem the "demographic crisis" in America, he makes it all about me instead.

I need to "calm down", go up into the intellectual contraption stratosphere with him and exchange definitions and deductions...to communicate in a proper display of pedantry.

And, again, as I noted to phyllo:

And, what, in no way should black, brown and red folks feel attacked by him when he argues that the Northern European white stock is scientifically superior to them in intelligence? Because it's all just "theoretical"? What I am curious about is whether he avoids bringing his intellectual contraptions down to Earth because he has never given that part much thought, or if he does, we'll find out that he is a lot closer to the Nazi narrative than some here figured.

I'm not arguing that he is only that he won't clear up just what he does think ought to be done politically and legislatively to stem the "demographic crisis" in America

You seem to me to operate through a ‘neurosis’ similar to Seeds: all is ‘intellectual contraption’ as for Seeds it is an exalted but also fairytale-like fantasy about ‘souls’.

You imply that I am not engaged with the real world because I prefer to think through contentious issues, or clarify what I am talking about, rather than jumping into specific actions. But you want only to push me in a direction that would confirm your own biases and prejudices.

Exchange of ideas require definitions of terms. You certainly would have to calm down so to be better positioned to understand the issues being raised (by either Bowden or Camus as examples).

Both you and Seeds block the possibility of conversation, and better understanding, through imposed zealotry.

Let me know when you actually are willing and able to come down out of the "definitional logic" clouds. In the interim however not to worry. There are still plenty of folks here who will sustain intellectual contraption skyhook exchanges with you. Dueling definitions and deductions.

Serious philosophy, right?

[Alexis Jacobi]

How much suffering would have to be delivered to Stalin for it to be equivalent to the suffering he was responsible for? You might say that only God knows that, but I would say he can't know, because it is a question to which there is no answer.

As many lived-lives where he lives out the result and consequence of his former actions and until at a soul-level he has learned his lesson.

That would be ‘justice’ and true conversion and salvation of a ‘sinner’.

[Alexis Jacobi]

And he was saying, “Jesus, remember me when You come into Your kingdom!” And He said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

Thus an unjust act by god himself.

That cannot be what justice is.

[iambiguous]

How much suffering would have to be delivered to Stalin for it to be equivalent to the suffering he was responsible for? You might say that only God knows that, but I would say he can't know, because it is a question to which there is no answer.

As many lived-lives where he lives out the result and consequence of his former actions and until at a soul-level he has learned his lesson.

That would be ‘justice’ and true conversion and salvation of a ‘sinner’.

Next up: How much suffering would have to be delivered to Hitler for it to be equivalent to the suffering he was responsible for?

And given this...

...an endless procession of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and tornadoes and hurricanes and great floods and great droughts and great fires and deadly viral and bacterial plagues and miscarriages and hundreds and hundreds of medical and mental afflictions and extinction events...making life on Earth a living hell for countless millions of men, women and children down through the ages..."

...how much suffering would have to be delivered to the Christian God for it to be equivalent to the suffering He was responsible for?

[Harbal]

As many lived-lives where he lives out the result and consequence of his former actions and until at a soul-level he has learned his lesson.

I wonder what is the point of teaching a lesson to someone (some soul?) who will never be in a position to put it into practice.

[Lacewing]

I've repeatedly asked you 'what belief'?

Immanuel is lodged within a predicate dilemma: If one says ‘there is no truth’ one is making a truth-declaration. Those who declare ‘no truth’ cannot make any statement at all. They undermine themselves right at the start.

I think it's important to distinguish between saying 'there is no truth' and saying 'there is no single truth'. I think the latter.

Immanuel is ‘locked’ into specific truth declarations that he is certain are absolutely true. There are no truth allusions or general truth-ish propositions.

Yes. He can believe whatever he wants -- I'm just asking him to be accountable (right here, right now) for what he claims, projects, and distorts in service to that.

His absolute certainty operates within an absurd ‘child’s story’.

The way he distorts to serve whatever momentary agenda he has is what he (not his god) is responsible for. Further, his claims are not only frequently at odds with Christian values... they demonstrate contradictions with his own claims (as you have spent much time trying to point out to him). The 'child's story' is being used in a very dark way.

But if there is a soul and if there is a divine aspect or dimension to existence: with that assertion (phantasy or truth) whole other dimensions of possibility necessarily open up.

Agreed. I think we are 'more than this'. And I think there are countless 'realities' being experienced by human beings. I think it only makes sense that there's vast potential we have no clue of from our currently limited human states. And why would such diverse potential ever suddenly be narrowed down to a single reality for all? That idea only seems suited to serve and comfort man.

[Alexis Jacobi]

...how much suffering would have to be delivered to the Christian God for it to be equivalent to the suffering He was responsible for?

Take that question to the AI! Surely it must have the answer!

[Belinda]

As many lived-lives where he lives out the result and consequence of his former actions and until at a soul-level he has learned his lesson.

I wonder what is the point of teaching a lesson to someone (some soul?) who will never be in a position to put it into practice.

Alexis does not explain what he thinks souls are such that souls have, or experience, levels.
One does not even know whether or not he is a substance dualist, and he does seem to think that souls are differentiated humanoid subjects of experience.

[promethean75]

.... and going and going and...

[Alexis Jacobi]

Alexis does not explain what he thinks souls are such that souls have, or experience, levels.

One does not even know whether or not he is a substance dualist, and he does seem to think that souls are differentiated humanoid subjects of experience.

I’m taking questions between 11:00 and 3:00 tomorrow. Give me a list!

[phyllo]

And he was saying, “Jesus, remember me when You come into Your kingdom!” And He said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

Thus an unjust act by god himself.

That cannot be what justice is.

That is mercy.

[iambiguous]

I thought you didn't "believe" anything.

I don't.

Well, since every human being believes things, it's pretty funny you think you believe you don't.

You've lost track of the conversation once again through your willful detours.

We were talking about an afterlife. I don't believe anything about an afterlife.

Are you getting dementia? I've wondered if you were pathologically dishonest or simply stupid. But maybe it's some sort of righteous dementia.

Indeed.

Look, Immanuel Can distinguishes himself from Christians who worship God through a leap of faith. Faith for some involves doubt. It is "to believe in something or someone based on faith rather than evidence".

And some delve into this in a deeply sincere and introspective manner: https://www.rethinknow.org/faith_and_do ... th%20faith.

Think, for example, of the character Father Ralph de Bricassart in The Thorn Birds. Struggling with his faith in God throughout his life.

Nothing like that ever comes through with IC, however. At least not for me.

No, instead, he has flat out told me that in fact the Christian God does reside in Heaven. And when I asked him for the evidence he quoted from the Christian Bible and linked me to a bunch of videos.

Now, he claims that watching the videos will provide someone with all the proof that he or she needs to, in turn, know that the Christian God resides in Heaven. Only he won't note the clip in the videos that sealed the deal for him.

Though, sure, maybe he will for you.

But, really, if saving your soul is important to you, IC claims that his God does in fact exist and that in accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior you will be granted immortality and salvation in the next life. So, come on, press him to prove that it's his God and only his God.

[Lacewing]

I didn't tell you WHAT you believe. I pointed out to you the fact THAT you believe.

Didn't get it. Or pretended not to. Who knows which?

Yep, not worth the effort, I see. Either the intellect or the honesty to respond coherently is beyond present powers, it seems.

You're so freakin' ridiculous and dishonest. Seriously... how do you ignore and excuse that in yourself? It doesn't matter that so many people notice and call you on it, does it? As long as you're impressed with yourself.

[iambiguous]

...how much suffering would have to be delivered to the Christian God for it to be equivalent to the suffering He was responsible for?

Take that question to the AI! Surely it must have the answer!

How about we take this question...

"How much suffering would have to be delivered to Hitler for it to be equivalent to the suffering He was responsible for?"

...to you first.

He was of Northern European stock if I'm not mistaken.

And, by the way, skin color aside, what is your take on Jews? Is there any "crisis" involving them that you have delved into theoretically?