Can one follow Christ and not be a "Christian"?

[BetteTheRed]

No-one here that I know is asking for "quiet respect". There are some atheists, and Pavlos appears to be one of them, who don't mock "God" as much as they mock the caricature of Divinity that they imagine someone else believes in.

GeoFee has some interesting ideas and concepts, and is very willing to discuss them. Pavlos appears not to wish to engage, at all, in conversation, but to fly in, dismiss, fly out.

 

[GeoFee]

Hi,

Religion is scared of people laughing at it, because that strips religion of its power over others.

Guess that’s why I play the fool in the public square. I admire and encourage persons who are critically engaged in pursuit of truthfulness. I resist any who profess possession of the truth.

Your critical eye has assisted me shift my perspective.

George

 

[chansen]

I resist any who profess possession of the truth.

That's what religion spends most of it's time doing when it's proselytizing - convincing others that it has knowledge about a God that people desperately need. Even in the UCCan, there is a semi-ongoing review of a minister's fitness to lead for merely rejecting evidence-free ideas. Indeed, much of Christianity rejects that which is based in evidence, and embraces beliefs that are not. That's kind of its thing.

 

[chansen]

GeoFee has some interesting ideas and concepts, and is very willing to discuss them. Pavlos appears not to wish to engage, at all, in conversation, but to fly in, dismiss, fly out.

I wish Pavlos would have more fun with it. It's not a serious subject. And blackbelt is God's gift to wannabe comedians: A walking setup machine. If you can't crush those softballs, you have no right being on the Internet.

 

[chansen]

Religion is scared of people laughing at it, because that strips religion of its power over others. It is difficult to convince someone that your God is disappointed in them and will punish them for their disbelief when that person is cracking up at the concept of a God that spends an inordinate amount of His time watching what people are doing with their penises today.

Musing about this a little more, it may be helpful to differentiate the penis-watching God from the non-penis-watching God.

In honour of Linds, who hasn't been here in a while that I'm aware, I suggest the acronyms G.O.D. (Genitals-Obsessed Deity) and n.G.O.D. (non-Genitals-Obsessed Deity)

For most of the UCCan, they believe in nGOD (the "n" is silent). Others are totally on board with GOD, and are happy to have their genitals invigilated like a porn star's.

 

[Graeme Decarie]

well, Christians largely accepted George Bush as a Christian - though he was a mass murderer. The Christians who crusade against abortion are generally accepted as Christian though they have no trouble with the idea of starving the children of Yemen to death. All those Bible Belt Christians who admire Trump are generally seen as Christians.
And all those people who go to church devoutly but rarely do anything Christian (besides being confident they'll go to heaven) are called Christians.

I'm not sure I'd get all in a tizzy about deciding who deserves the label.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

No-one here that I know is asking for "quiet respect". There are some atheists, and Pavlos appears to be one of them, who don't mock "God" as much as they mock the caricature of Divinity that they imagine someone else believes in.

There would be no point mocking a god, it is an imaginary concept. It would be like mocking winnie the pooh or chupacabra. And you know as I do, there are people out there that believe all sorts of things, So you mock the belief. After all the invisible and the non-existent are exactly the same.

GeoFee has some interesting ideas and concepts, and is very willing to discuss them. Pavlos appears not to wish to engage, at all, in conversation, but to fly in, dismiss, fly out.

Would you think it prudent to discuss a belief in fairies, only to end the conversation as you started. No further forward.

Hence why it is pointless to discuss anything that only comes from a subjective basis.
Subjective beliefs in a discussion always cause disparagement. Especially so when reason and critical thought are discarded.
Geofee, doesn't think disparagement should not be part of a discussion, whereas I know mockery works.
It cause it's recipients to think about their beliefs.

Case in point Santa. We nearly all at one time believed in Santa, till one kid or an old sibling told us he wasn't real. at first we denied it. Then if we still believed in Santa we were ridiculed. "You still believe in Santa?" And what sort of effect did this ridicule and mockery have? It prompted us to re-evaluate Santa for ourselves, to ask hard questions, to think critically. Which lead us make changes in our beliefs. Ridicule and mockery were by no means the only way kids came to realize the truth about Santa, but they were one undeniably effective way. and we probably did the very same think to a smaller sibling or child.

This is why you cant have a reasoned discourse with someone who believes in a thing without any evidence.

It isn't simply fly in dismiss and fly out, I more often than not written quite a bits in my posts. Most of my posts aren't small. I most certainly converse.

But as I said to Inannawhimsey How do we get past a set of beliefs, where the subject itself is pure conjecture. It is extremely hard to find common ground. There is no middle ground, when one party is coming purely from the imagination and the other from reality. It's either, or.
It's that simple. So a completely pointless endeavour.

Try discussing a flat earth, or alien abduction, chem trails. the Illuminati etc etc etc. With anyone of those people that believe in them.

 

[Luce NDs]

well, Christians largely accepted George Bush as a Christian - though he was a mass murderer. The Christians who crusade against abortion are generally accepted as Christian though they have no trouble with the idea of starving the children of Yemen to death. All those Bible Belt Christians who admire Trump are generally seen as Christians.
And all those people who go to church devoutly but rarely do anything Christian (besides being confident they'll go to heaven) are called Christians.

I'm not sure I'd get all in a tizzy about deciding who deserves the label.

The deserving are a sacred pact ... like heiro gamma ... tis obscured in the blackening of the myth as encrypted! However there is nothing to say there are no lyres there ... they must be rooted up ... thus the lucky pigs! Truffles ... yes I suppose ...

 

[Luce NDs]

There would be no point mocking a god, it is an imaginary concept. It would be like mocking winnie the pooh or chupacabra. And you know as I do, there are people out there that believe all sorts of things, So you mock the belief. After all the invisible and the non-existent are exactly the same.
Would you think it prudent to discuss a belief in fairies, only to end the conversation as you started. No further forward.

Hence why it is pointless to discuss anything that only comes from a subjective basis.
Subjective beliefs in a discussion always cause disparagement. Especially so when reason and critical thought are discarded.
Geofee, doesn't think disparagement should not be part of a discussion, whereas I know mockery works.
It cause it's recipients to think about their beliefs.

Case in point Santa. We nearly all at one time believed in Santa, till one kid or an old sibling told us he wasn't real. at first we denied it. Then if we still believed in Santa we were ridiculed. "You still believe in Santa?" And what sort of effect did this ridicule and mockery have? It prompted us to re-evaluate Santa for ourselves, to ask hard questions, to think critically. Which lead us make changes in our beliefs. Ridicule and mockery were by no means the only way kids came to realize the truth about Santa, but they were one undeniably effective way. and we probably did the very same think to a smaller sibling or child.

This is why you cant have a reasoned discourse with someone who believes in a thing without any evidence.

It isn't simply fly in dismiss and fly out, I more often than not written quite a bits in my posts. Most of my posts aren't small. I most certainly converse.

But as I said to Inannawhimsey How do we get past a set of beliefs, where the subject itself is pure conjecture. It is extremely hard to find common ground. There is no middle ground, when one party is coming purely from the imagination and the other from reality. It's either, or.
It's that simple. So a completely pointless endeavour.

Try discussing a flat earth, or alien abduction, chem trails. the Illuminati etc etc etc. With anyone of those people that believe in them.

Yet some will even be mean about the medium .. and thus it is not on the agenda for any polity ... extreme denial ... something to set a trio dancing in the moonlight when they see what obscured there ... all the rest ... left-over or AD ... that happening after the Roman torching of the archetypes ... primal icons?

Some people believe there is nothing underlying that set down lower that flighty visions ... sub-conscience ... less desire to get out more? These things hide in the shadow of stories ... more profound that some would say can exist ... thus complex non-existence ... imaginary entanglements!

Tis something really out there ...

 

[Luce NDs]

If one could silently marry soul and spirit ... would something of virtue come of the strange thing if balanced ... a rare psyche or just a dream on flight Eire ... sometimes called ephemeral ...

Could this be looked up and down well observed as a gift of beauty compared to normal average ugliness ... as average doesn't cut it ... for those searching avarice ... tis easily caught! Almost communicable ... easier said than wise! That'd be the denied Sophia ... pistis well ...

Tis a deep rut ... leaving the God in runes and ready for dreamland ... God rest dispirited and ready for darker thoughts ... adept?

Exceptional escapism ... even art hurian ... creatively evolving? Te story must go on ... tis mental!

 

[unsafe]

Pavlos Maros said: --------- There is no middle ground, when one party is coming purely from the imagination and the other from reality. It's either, or. It's that simple.


unsafe asks ----Question ---is one person's perception their reality ??????-------

if a person believes there is no God then for them that is their reality -----If a person believes there is a God then for them that is their reality ---no proof on either side is needed because their perception creates their own reality for them ------


unsafe says -----So your statement here is true in my view -------Pavlos Maros said ----. So a completely pointless endeavour.

unsafe says ----
It is pointless because the perception that one has created is their belief or view becomes for them their true reality unless true facts that can be seen and understood can be presented to change the perception ---which in the Supernatural unseen realm is impossible for both sides -----for the skeptic it is about seeing a physical God ---and for the believer it is about knowing God personally without seeing ------so common ground can never be reached -----


A couple of short videos that are interesting on how we perceive becomes our reality ----- one 7min video

Does This Photo Prove Fairies Exist?
Fairies are the things of myths and 'fairy tales' right? Well not everyone, including Sherlock Holmes author Arthur Conan Doyle dismisses them as such. Could fairies actually exist?

unsafe posted ----second video 6 min ....

What does ‘perception is reality’ mean? By Eleanor Shakiba
Have you ever wondered "What does 'perception is reality' mean?" If so, this video is for you. Find out how the statement ‘perception is reality’ relates to ideas about perceptual filtering and subjectivity. See what perceptual filters are and how they impact on the success of your communication. Find out how to prevent miscommunication by being aware of perceptual filters and how they impact the people involved in a conversation. Discover how to shift what you notice,

unsafe Posted link for those interested to read ----This is an interesting article as well -----

Top 8 Bible Verses About Perception
Top 8 Bible Verses About Perception


unsafe says
Here is the thing --Pavlos Maros ----I can't prove to others there is a place that unbelievers go after death ---But I can tell others there is in the Bible which says it is truth a description of where unbelievers go after dead and they can read it for themselves -----they may not believe it but they can see the words and know the words exist on the paper they are written on ------but you can't prove to others there isn't a place that unbelievers will go after death ----and what source is there that is written that says there is no place that exists for unbelievers after death that you could present to others to read the words on paper ------


unsafe says and posted from Google below --------According to the Guinness World Records --- The Bible is the most popular Book ever sold ------I wonder why that is?????

Is the Bible the bestselling book of all time?
"Best selling" refers to the estimated number of copies sold of each book, rather than the number of books printed or currently owned. ... According to Guinness World Records, the Bible is the best-selling book of all time with over 5 billion copies sold and distributed.


unsafe says ----according to this above The Bible has stood the test of time so far ------What and Where is your source to refute that ?------


unsafe says ---here is an interesting thing------ Pavlos Maros -----when a fetus is in the womb it receives oxygen from it's Mother so the Baby does not breath on it's own until it is out of the womb -----God breathed air into Adams nostrils and he became a living being -----Can you say for sure that God doesn't breath His Breath into the Baby who then becomes a living being ----

And here is the end ----- when we die we breath that first breath out that gave us life and we no longer are a living being we are asleep -------- our end has come and we then find out the real truth about where believers and unbelievers go or not go ------

Good luck to all of us in our end ----

 

[Luce NDs]

Can definitive perceptions be chaotic to folks captivated by an unsure world do to excessive desires by a tyrannical few wishing to control everything ... including the uncertainty of god's unconscious parts?

We just simply don't know as it is too complex for ordinary words ... thus ambiguity in the tomes ... some can't see it any differently ...

One way streets folks ... well bricked up ... no room for expansion ... and thus it blows (the winds of God ... thus they were gone like the tomatoes at whistle stop station ... just green ... ready for the Pan)!

 

[Mendalla]

Does This Photo Prove Fairies Exist?
Fairies are the things of myths and 'fairy tales' right? Well not everyone, including Sherlock Holmes author Arthur Conan Doyle dismisses them as such. Could fairies actually exist?

Those photos were debunked decades ago, unsafe. Conan Doyle, smart a man as he was, was deceived. He may have created Holmes, but he definitely didn't crack this case. The girls who did it even confessed in the 1980s.

Cottingley Fairies - Wikipedia

 

[Luce NDs]

Those photos were debunked decades ago, unsafe. Conan Doyle, smart a man as he was, was deceived. He may have created Holmes, but he definitely didn't crack this case. The girls who did it even confessed in the 1980s.

Cottingley Fairies - Wikipedia

Didn't I suggest some cooking was going on ... some pork 'in was also involved but even the visiting sheriff didn't see it as a Black Man and thus great consumption ... an Eire in what was ribbing?

 

[Ritafee]

"Looking for consciousness in the brain is like looking inside a radio for the announcer." - Nassim Haramein

 

[unsafe]

Mendalla ---your quote ------Those photos were debunked decades ago, unsafe. -----

Mandalla -----your missing the point ----it is not about the photos ---it is about one's perception of what one sees in the photos and for some their perception is that fairies did exist in their reality -----


Read this Mendalla -----from live science ----Perception is reality for some even today ----

Are Fairies Real?

While some dismissed the photos as obvious fakes, many others were not so sure. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, believed that the fairies were real, and wrote a book titled "The Coming of the Fairies," in which he discussed the fairies and his conviction that their existence had been proven beyond any doubt. Many were taken in, and the reality of fairies was the subject of debate among some adults for decades. Finally, in 1983, Frances Griffiths, then 75 years old, confessed that the "fairies" were cut-out drawings from a book,

Though belief in fairies exists to the present day in some places — especially in Ireland, Iceland, Norway, and Scotland — modern fairies have been sanitized for today's children and (luckily) lost their murderous ways.

 

[Pavlos Maros]

There is no middle ground, when one party is coming purely from the imagination and the other from reality. It's either, or. It's that simple.

Question ---is one person's perception their reality ??????

There is only one reality, what a person perceives is pure subjective and as such isn't reality

if a person believes there is no God then for them that is their reality

I don't know of anybody who believes that. (But for the sack of argument.) if they did actually believe that then, that would be a claim and as such their belief. Not reality

If a person believes there is a God then for them that is their reality.

No that would be their belief. Not reality

no proof on either side is needed because their perception creates their own reality for them

No wrong. There is only one objective reality, that which can be demonstrated! There is no personal objective reality, and the fact that you think there is. Is a great demonstration of why you believe what you believe. If your beliefs are not changed by facts, your beliefs are not based on reality.

Here is the thing --Pavlos Maros ----I can't prove to others there is a place that unbelievers go after death ---But I can tell others there is in the Bible which says it is truth a description of where unbelievers go after dead and they can read it for themselves

Lol, unbelievers don't give a damn about a hell, so would laugh if you tried. Lol and using the bible to justify itself is circular logic.

they may not believe it but they can see the words and know the words exist on the paper they are written on.

And what relevance would that have to them. it is just a book. You can see the words in the quran. Are they relevant to you.

but you can't prove to others there isn't a place that unbelievers will go after death

Why would I need too. We don't believe in hell.

and what source is there that is written that says there is no place that exists for unbelievers after death that you could present to others to read the words on paper

No idea and don't care and neither does any other non-believer. The clue is in the term Non-believer. Or don't you get that. None of us believe in a hell it isn't relevant to us. We have no fear of it Wow! How dumb can you be.

According to the Guinness World Records --- The Bible is the most popular Book ever sold ------I wonder why that is?????

Lol. Argument from popularity fallacy. Lol. perhaps because Gideon were giving them away free. lol. You do realize that isn't relevant. No clearly not by the fact you mentioned it. It just shows the level of intellect you have. It is really pointless talking to you. because of the sheer stupidity. Sorry bye. You're no married to blackbelt by any chance are you.

 

[unsafe]

Pavlos Maros -----

have a great weekend

 

[Ritafee]

PS. Not singling you out, @monk . You just happened to provide me with an inspiring example. In fact, I quite like your attitude and approach when it comes to religion.

I am not very comfortable defending religion or christianity ... because I have no allegiance to either. There is a 'longing' in me that nothing seems to satisfy ... judging by all the speculation of what 'it' is I am not the only one ... 'Christ' consciousness?
I don't know but I want to ...

 

[BetteTheRed]

And you know as I do, there are people out there that believe all sorts of things, So you mock the belief. After all the invisible and the non-existent are exactly the same.

So, love, which is invisible, is exactly the same as love, which is....non-existent? There's no logic behind love, either, really; humans are attracted to others by a wide range of variables.

What I find strange is that, for some reason, you dismiss all people with any level of "theistic" beliefs, yet accept as capable of rational conversation plenty of people like mendalla and inanna, who both appear to have beliefs ABOUT the potential of Divinity which might be described as "non-theist". And is religion the problem? If not, then Buddhism is okay (non-theist), while Hinduism is not (polytheistic)? And where do the hugely important human activities of story and myth fit in with your world view?

I'm not defending all of the beliefs of some of the more literal Christians here, but to dismiss every opinion held by a person just because they have a specific belief that YOU have decided is irrational is a strange way to "converse" or manage conversations. You may be madly in love with your dog, a chihuahua. I might wonder why on earth you'd choose to spend time with such a vile creature (having been convinced, for life, that there is no good chihuahua). Which of us is "right"? Who can be dismissed on principle on some part of their BS that they choose to make visible? I can disagree with PG on issues of theology, and find him absolutely right in terms of barbecue... I'm not entirely sure how GeoFee specifically defines "Divinity"; I know him as a person deeply rooted in active care for those among us who are most vulnerable, from the homeless to the sex worker to the child. Ask him about the danger of sugar- and caffeine-laden "empty calorie" drinks on child development, or the best way to 'spread' pastoral care in a neighbourhood, how to offer respectful help to downtown sex workers, you'll get some interesting responses. Those are his reality responses to whatever his divine beliefs are. I'm sure whatever similar improvements you've made to your environment during your lifetime have been in response to some ethic installed in you by your early environment.