Free Will

[RCSaunders]

I know you lump together everyone who has not fallen pray to some superstition as, "atheists,"

That's a very silly...and dishonest...thing to say, RC. I thought you were above such misrepresenting.

I'm only going by what you have written in the past. If there is even one individual who rejects all superstitions (intuition, faith, inspiration, a priori knowledge, revelation, etc.) you do not regard as an atheist, I'll take back what I said.

...in the past those superstitions were predominantly religious, today they are becoming predominantly philosophical and ideological.

I don't disagree with that, at least so far as the West is concerned.

Many who pride themselves as "not religious" today are actually fools for some secular ideology...Progressivism, CRT, Socialism, Globalism, Consumerism...or some other "ism." But I've noticed that being irreligious has not only not helped them be more careful, but has actually opened up an existential vacuum in their souls that makes this far worse than in past.

As one secular sociologist so poignantly put it, "Lost souls make good customers."

Just so!

[Immanuel Can]

Who can say what it means to be a real "Christian" but Christ? What other frame of reference would one appeal to?

Christ never used the word, "Christian," according to your Bible.

No, of course not. It first appeared at Antioch, shortly after the Resurrection and Ascension. Up to that time, the followers of Jesus were just known as followers of "the Way." The term "Christians" was given by others, and simply meant, "followers of Christ."

We can revert to that word, as just ask if people who now claim to be "Christians" are following "the way of Christ." If they are not, then there's simply no sense in which that word applies.

[Immanuel Can]

If there is even one individual who rejects all superstitions (intuition, faith, inspiration, a priori knowledge, revelation, etc.) you do not regard as an atheist, I'll take back what I said.

Atheism IS a superstition. What else can you call it? It's a totally non-evidentiary belief. That pretty much qualifies it.

So there's no truth in the boast that Atheists "reject superstition": they're some of the most obvious practitioners of it. And if you ask them for evidence to warrant what they believe, they'll flatly tell you they have none and think they need none. That's pretty "superstitious," I would say.

Agnostics might have a case for being skeptical of superstition. Atheists don't.

[Belinda]

"Tradition" is pointless. It's a human accretion added to real Christianity. These alleged "less traditional" types may have their own tradition, or they may make up a new one: it's pointless too. All "tradition" is a waste of time in deciding this question, because "traditions" have nothing to do with Christ.

It is Christ who alone defines what it is to be a "Christian." And that's really definitional. Who can say what it means to be a real "Christian" but Christ? What other frame of reference would one appeal to?

To the extent that any "less traditional" person recognizes that, he is right; to the extent he fails to, he is wrong. It's actually very simple.

Christianity has undergone changes since it was a Jewish sect.

Like?

Politicising by Paul, and Constantine.
Variations pertaining to Irenaeus and Valentinus.
The Council of Nicea who decided which doctrines were to be heresies.
The Reformation.
Post-enlightenment efforts to conserve Xianity e.g. the Nonconformists.
Reactionary movements towards Biblical literalism especially in West Africa and the US.

[Belinda]

Who can say what it means to be a real "Christian" but Christ? What other frame of reference would one appeal to?

Christ never used the word, "Christian," according to your Bible.

No, of course not. It first appeared at Antioch, shortly after the Resurrection and Ascension. Up to that time, the followers of Jesus were just known as followers of "the Way." The term "Christians" was given by others, and simply meant, "followers of Christ."

We can revert to that word, as just ask if people who now claim to be "Christians" are following "the way of Christ." If they are not, then there's simply no sense in which that word applies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/thepassion/article ... _jew.shtml

'Christ' is the Greek for 'messiah'. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah.

The belief that Jesus was God is an impossibility for Jewish thought. But not so the belief that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. Several Jews have in the course of 2000 years, claimed to be the Messiah - sent by God to inaugurate God's kingdom on earth. Simon Bar Kochba in 132 CE and Shabbetai Zvi in 1665 CE are two examples among many. But the association of Messiah with terms like Son of Man and Son of God, which developed a profusion of meanings, soon led to exalted claims for Jesus that few Jews felt able to follow. Even within the New Testament this is so; by the time of the full-blown Trinitarianism of the 4th century creeds this gap was unbridgeably wide.

[RCSaunders]

If there is even one individual who rejects all superstitions (intuition, faith, inspiration, a priori knowledge, revelation, etc.) you do not regard as an atheist, I'll take back what I said.

Atheism IS a superstition. What else can you call it? It's a totally non-evidentiary belief. That pretty much qualifies it.

So there's no truth in the boast that Atheists "reject superstition": they're some of the most obvious practitioners of it. And if you ask them for evidence to warrant what they believe, they'll flatly tell you they have none and think they need none. That's pretty "superstitious," I would say.

Agnostics might have a case for being skeptical of superstition. Atheists don't.

Nice song and dance, but you evaded the question.

You accused me being, "silly...and dishonest," because I said, "you lump together everyone who has not fallen pray to some superstition as, 'atheists." All I asked was for you to name even one person who was not superstitious you do not regard as an atheist.

[Immanuel Can]

'Christ' is the Greek for 'messiah'. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah.

Correct.

You didn't know that? It's a thing most Jews today don't even know. But yes, it means the "anointed one," in Greek, the "Messiah" in Hebrew.

The belief that Jesus was God is an impossibility for Jewish thought.

Not "an impossibility," and really, not even surprising, given the Torah. But it was out of step with the Pharisees, the Sadducees and other authority figures in Israel, and it was something that the Jewish tradition would refuse to accept. But you're absolutely right that Jesus claimed to be Messiah.

[Immanuel Can]

All I asked was for you to name even one person who was not superstitious you do not regard as an atheist.

Oh, that's easy: a Christian. They're not superstitious -- they're realists.

[RCSaunders]

All I asked was for you to name even one person who was not superstitious you do not regard as an atheist.

Oh, that's easy: a Christian. They're not superstitious -- they're realists.

Well, that is your own private meaning of superstition.

What I mean by superstition is any belief or supposed knowledge based on any of the following: "intuition," "inspiration," "revelation," "instinct," "mystic insight," "a priori," "hunches," "divination," "faith," "gut feelings, or, "credulity in some supposed authority." No matter what name it is given, the meaning is always the same: something one knows by some means that does not require demonstrable evidence available to anyone, or derived by reasoning about that evidence. Christians are certainly among the most superstitious in that sense.

So, to evade the disagreement of what superstition means, I ask the question this way: can you name one person who does not believe anything based on, "intuition," "inspiration," "revelation," "instinct," "mystic insight," "a priori," "hunches," "divination," "gut feelings," "credulity in some supposed authority," or "any other supposed source of knowledge not based on demonstrable evidence," you do not regard as an atheist?

[Immanuel Can]

All I asked was for you to name even one person who was not superstitious you do not regard as an atheist.

Oh, that's easy: a Christian. They're not superstitious -- they're realists.

Well, that is your own private meaning of superstition.

So was yours. You just assumed that believing in any metaphysics is "superstitious." You didn't prove it, you just assumed it. You don't think I'm going to just give you a pass on that, do you?

But Atheism is superstititous by definition. At least Theists propose to provide evidence, even if Atheists arbitrarily reject that evidence -- Atheists deny even the possibility of evidence. They believe something for which THEY will tell you "no evidence can be offered."

That's about as "superstitious" as anybody can make their belief.

[Belinda]

'Christ' is the Greek for 'messiah'. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah.

Correct.

You didn't know that? It's a thing most Jews today don't even know. But yes, it means the "anointed one," in Greek, the "Messiah" in Hebrew.

The belief that Jesus was God is an impossibility for Jewish thought.

Not "an impossibility," and really, not even surprising, given the Torah. But it was out of step with the Pharisees, the Sadducees and other authority figures in Israel, and it was something that the Jewish tradition would refuse to accept. But you're absolutely right that Jesus claimed to be Messiah.

What makes you think that messiah/ christ means that the individual is the same being as God? Trinitarianism was not invented until long after Jesus was dead.

[Immanuel Can]

What makes you think that messiah/ christ means that the individual is the same being as God?

The Messiah does: John 10:30.

The Trinity has always existed. "Trinitarianism" is a discovery of that truth.

[RCSaunders]

Oh, that's easy: a Christian. They're not superstitious -- they're realists.

Well, that is your own private meaning of superstition.

So was yours. You just assumed that believing in any metaphysics is "superstitious." You didn't prove it, you just assumed it.

Prove what? I only explained what I mean by superstition. I mean any form of mystic belief.

While most of what goes by the name, "metaphysics," is nonsense, that does not mean I have no view of metaphysics. Mine just excludes all mysticism.

But Atheism is superstititous by definition.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I have said nothing about what atheism is or is not. It is totally irrelevant to what I said. I only said you regard anyone who does not embrace any form "unlearned," or mystic knowledge an atheist, whatever you might mean by that term.

[By, "mysticism," I mean anything not based of demonstrable evidence, or any kind of supposed knowledge one, "just has," without having to learn it, like intuition or conscience.]

What atheists or theists do or do not accept as evidence is irrelevant to my statement that you regard anyone who does not embrace any form of mysticism as an atheist. If I'm mistaken, name a non-mystic you would not regard as an atheist.

mysticism
1. a. Belief in direct experience of transcendent reality or God, especially by means of contemplation and asceticism instead of rational thought.
b. Such experience had by an individual.
2. Belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are directly accessible by subjective experience.
3. Belief that is not based on evidence or subjected to criticism.

[Belinda]

What makes you think that messiah/ christ means that the individual is the same being as God?

The Messiah does: John 10:30.

The Trinity has always existed. "Trinitarianism" is a discovery of that truth.

Everything exists in the eternal now.

Regarding John 10.30 I guess Jesus claimed to be one in spirit with his God. All faithful theists would claim to be one in spirit with their God. Trinitarianism is arguably not so much theistic as it is polytheistic.

[Immanuel Can]

...superstition. I mean any form of mystic belief.

Then you have to include Atheism. What else can you do with a belief that's premised on nothing but imagination?

By, "mysticism," I mean anything not based of demonstrable evidence, or any kind of supposed knowledge one, "just has," without having to learn it, like intuition or conscience.

Atheism fits that definition perfectly. So you'll have to change your definition, or change your mind, I guess.