Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

[YoursTrue]

I don’t recall hearing him mention agnosticism.

He does mention some sort of “Land Grab” where others try to claim him for their cause (I’ve definitely seen a lot of that, so I’m not surprised.)

But I don’t really pay much attention to him, since the Cosmos that I saw was the original series by Carl Sagan.

But listening to him talk, he strikes me as pretty much an atheist, even if he doesn’t like to use the label before he gets a chance to actually interact with them.

His atheism doesn’t have the sense of victimization that Dawkin’s atheism has.

In that respect, he’s kind if like me, in that his experience as an atheist has not been one of oppression and victimization, or anything he ever felt he had to hide, so he seems to have difficulty relating to that.

He seems more interested in science for its own sake, whereas, according to Dawkins, science is mainly a tool for evangelizing for the atheist cause, if IB understand what he is saying correctly.



There’s a town that celebrates Christmas in February.

The New York Times had a story about, but there’s a lot more information in Paloma Munoz’s dissertation.

February, hmm? Vewy, vewy intewesting...thanks.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

February, hmm? Vewy, vewy intewesting...thanks.

I’ll see if I can find it.

I should be able to post a gift link. I get 10 a month, but hardly use them.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

February, hmm? Vewy, vewy intewesting...thanks.

Why This Town Has Celebrated Christmas in February for Nearly 200 Years (Published 2023)

The Afro-Colombian residents of Quinamayó have followed a unique tradition: celebrating Christmas 40 days after the traditional date, a custom begun under the subjugation of slavery.

www.nytimes.com

 

[YoursTrue]

paarsurrey said:
All Paulines are only the Cultural Christian people, on the one side and or on the flip side they are Western Atheism people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

When they have nothing written/spoken/dictated by (Jesus)Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, of his teachings as well as of his deeds, what else they could be called, please, right?

Regards

Thank you for your question. Paul, of course, did not write every book in the Bible in reference to Jesus. There were other writers, like James and John, the writer of Revelation. And of course, Jesus did say in vision that Saul would be a chosen vessel to the nations. (Meaning the non-Jews, or Gentiles.) Acts chapter 9 explains more about this.

(Acts 9:20) --
***"Saul promptly began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, declaring, “He is the Son of God.”**

See, I believe from the holy scriptures that Saul began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying that Jesus is the Son of God. That was quite different from what he had been doing before that, right?

(Acts 9:21) --
***"All who heard him were astounded and asked, “Isn’t this the man who wreaked havoc in Jerusalem on those who call on this name? And hasn’t he come here to take them as prisoners to the chief priests?” But Saul was empowered all the more, and he confounded the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Christ."***

Quite a change in Saul's attitude.

 

[Massimo2002]

All propositional attitudes are personal choices for personal reasons, not sure why that's worth noting when it applies across the board. What is more interesting is, what are the best possible reasons? What is the steelman case for either? And there is an evident dissymmetry here, since while atheism can (and often does) admit of epistemically justifiable reasons, theism cannot, even on the best case scenario (say, personal revelation via mystical experience since this is after all a sort of empiricism?)

But you've said this bit about falsifiability before, and it still isn't true. Theism absolutely is falsifiable. Theism is the position that a transcendent creator-intervener exists. Divine intervention is falsifiable. Divine creation excludes the truth of naturalistic cosmology, and so is falsifiable. The non-existence of gratuitous suffering/evil and of non-resistent non-believers are both logical consequences of theism, and so falsifiable. We could go on. This is just a form of anti-intellectualism based on false equivalence: neither is provable (supposedly, but not actually), so who cares either way? Not a good attitude, let alone an accurate one.

And since we're all here debating religion, our intelligence is all equally impeached. But that comment was based on a false premise in any case.

Why do you hate William Lane Craig ?

 

[YoursTrue]

I’ll see if I can find it.

I should be able to post a gift link. I get 10 a month, but hardly use them.

hmm, what's a gift link? But anyway I did glance at it although it does seem rather brazen in many respects. I realize they are kind of celebrating release from slavery. (Cultural Christians?) I did not come from a "Christian" background, but one day decided to join the office party for Christmas. I remember they had hard liquor, I'm not a big drinker in any case, and after the little party, I felt like puking all the way home from that party. (Never did that again...) And then another time I was looking for God (couldn't find Him though at that point) and went into a big church in NYC at Christmastime. And I was sitting right next to a man who puked in the aisle. I guess he drank too much at that time of the year when they were celebrating. Ah, memories...

 

[YoursTrue]

paarsurrey said:
All Paulines are only the Cultural Christian people, on the one side and or on the flip side they are Western Atheism people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

When they have nothing written/spoken/dictated by (Jesus)Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, of his teachings as well as of his deeds, what else they could be called, please, right?

Regards

Don't get me started. Please. At least Paul could read and write, and we know from the scriptures that Jesus could read because he read in the synagogue. As far as something being "dictated" by Jesus, perhaps we can go into that later... but thanks for your question. (please, ok?)

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

hmm, what's a gift link? But anyway I did glance at it although it does seem rather brazen in many respects. I realize they are kind of celebrating release from slavery. (Cultural Christians?) I did not come from a "Christian" background, but one day decided to join the office party for Christmas. I remember they had hard liquor, I'm not a big drinker in any case, and after the little party, I felt like puking all the way home from that party. (Never did that again...) And then another time I was looking for God (couldn't find Him though at that point) and went into a big church in NYC at Christmastime. And I was sitting right next to a man who puked in the aisle. I guess he drank too much at that time of the year when they were celebrating. Ah, memories...

Brazen now, but under slavery the entire celebration was a secret.

There’s a lot of info missing, since it’s just a newspaper story.

The masters left for Popayan after Christmas, the Christ child and other Christmas stuff for the celebration was stolen from their masters, and when white folks started showing up with ashes on their foreheads, the slaves knew that it was time to put everything away, since their masters would be returning, soon.

The slaves were devoutly Catholic, while their masters were Idolaters who treated their slaves horribly, in violation of the laws regarding the treatment of the slaves in the Holy Bible, and later revisions.

The wars of independence were holy wars, in which the slaves were allied with the Holy Catholic Church and the Spanish Monarchy, while their masters were allied with Bolivar’s insurrectionists.

These were wars for the very soul of Catholicism, and shaped the attitudes of the Catholic Church towards Welcoming the Stranger and to the highest level today.

Today, virtually nobody in their right mind would consider slavery to be consistent with True Catholicism.

Virtually nobody in their right mind would consider the Spanish Inquisition to be consistent with True Catholicism.

And virtually nobody in their right mind would consider not welcoming the stranger to be consistent with True Catholicism.

And that is because today, we all stand on the shoulders of giants, and we can see a long, long way, much further than many of our ancestors could.

 

[YoursTrue]

Brazen now, but under slavery the entire celebration was a secret.

There’s a lot of info missing, since it’s just a newspaper story.

The masters left for Popayan after Christmas, the Christ child and other Christmas stuff for the celebration was stolen from their masters, and when white folks started showing up with ashes on their foreheads, the slaves knew that it was time to put everything away, since their masters would be returning, soon.

The slaves were devoutly Catholic, while their masters were Idolaters who treated their slaves horribly, in violation of the laws regarding the treatment of the slaves in the Holy Bible, and later revisions.

The wars of independence were holy wars, in which the slaves were allied with the Holy Catholic Church and the Spanish Monarchy, while their masters were allied with Bolivar’s insurrectionists.

These were wars for the very soul of Catholicism, and shaped the attitudes of the Catholic Church towards Welcoming the Stranger and to the highest level today.

Today, virtually nobody in their right mind would consider slavery to be consistent with True Catholicism.

Virtually nobody in their right mind would consider the Spanish Inquisition to be consistent with True Catholicism.

And virtually nobody in their right mind would consider not welcoming the stranger to be consistent with True Catholicism.

And that is because today, we all stand on the shoulders of giants, and we can see a long, long way, much further than many of our ancestors could.

Even when I was in high school I was horrified as I learned of history. A lot of this talk reminds me of a schoolmate my mother wished I had never met. He was, as some might say, off his rocker, but I liked him. I won't go into detail but he was a jazz musician and into drugs. Yes, my mother hated him. Even at the time I did not understand him but we became good friends. Anyway, he died young. But he taught me to hate this world. I really did not know what he was saying at the time because I was young. Now here is the moral--I hope to see him in the resurrection, where he will hopefully want to enjoy life as I believe the Bible promises it will be. == wonderful and peaceful...I often think of him these many years later -- and appreciate what he did for me --
My regards to you, I enjoy your comments.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Even when I was in high school I was horrified as I learned of history. A lot of this talk reminds me of a schoolmate my mother wished I had never met. He was, as some might say, off his rocker, but I liked him. I won't go into detail but he was a jazz musician and into drugs. Yes, my mother hated him. Even at the time I did not understand him but we became good friends. Anyway, he died young. But he taught me to hate this world. I really did not know what he was saying at the time because I was young. Now here is the moral--I hope to see him in the resurrection, where he will hopefully want to enjoy life as I believe the Bible promises it will be. == wonderful and peaceful...I often think of him these many years later -- and appreciate what he did for me --
My regards to you, I enjoy your comments.

Well that might explain a lot.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don’t recall hearing him mention agnosticism.

He does mention some sort of “Land Grab” where others try to claim him for their cause (I’ve definitely seen a lot of that, so I’m not surprised.)

But I don’t really pay much attention to him, since the Cosmos that I saw was the original series by Carl Sagan.

But listening to him talk, he strikes me as pretty much an atheist, even if he doesn’t like to use the label before he gets a chance to actually interact with them.

His atheism doesn’t have the sense of victimization that Dawkin’s atheism has.

In that respect, he’s kind if like me, in that his experience as an atheist has not been one of oppression and victimization, or anything he ever felt he had to hide, so he seems to have difficulty relating to that.

He seems more interested in science for its own sake, whereas, according to Dawkins, science is mainly a tool for evangelizing for the atheist cause, if I understand what he is saying correctly.



There’s a town that celebrates Christmas in February.

The New York Times had a story about, but there’s a lot more information in Paloma Munoz’s dissertation.

He’s a scientist before he’s anything, so we can safely assume that scientific materialism informs his world view. But he has been explicit about his agnosticism, as distinct from agnostic atheism (whatever that even is).

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

He’s a scientist before he’s anything, so we can safely assume that scientific materialism informs his world view. But he has been explicit about his agnosticism, as distinct from agnostic atheism (whatever that even is).

View attachment 92348

I'd call that agnosticism, myself, but the Landgrab Atheists would no doubt call it agnostic atheism.

For a time, I used to call myself an atheist atheist, just to distinguish myself from the agnostic atheists in the newfangled terminology, because folks kept claiming that atheists didn't believe in the non-existence of God.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I'd call that agnosticism, myself, but the Landgrab Atheists would no doubt call it agnostic atheism.

For a time, I used to call myself an atheist atheist, just to distinguish myself from the agnostic atheists in the newfangled terminology, because folks kept claiming that atheists didn't believe in the non-existence of God.

Yeah, it all gets a bit bewildering. People love their labels, but insist on their interpretation being correct and all others being wrong.

 

[PureX]

All Paulines are only the Cultural Christian people, on the one side and or on the flip side they are Western Atheism people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

Regards

To the religious, Christianity is only a religion. But culturally speaking, it has been a set of ethical principals that have been adopted despite the religiosity.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Yeah, it all gets a bit bewildering. People love their labels, but insist on their interpretation being correct and all others being wrong.

I tend to go back to Bertrand Russell.

He called himself an atheist when speaking to general lay audiences, and agnostic when speaking to academic philosophical audiences.

But then along came something that I called "internet atheism".

Many of them at the time called themselves 9/11 atheists, and it appeared that they were all born again on the same day.

This was shortly after the bombing of the Catholic church in Bojayá in 2002.

To the religious, Christianity is only a religion. But culturally speaking, it has been a set of ethical principals that have been adopted despite the religiosity.

Catholicism is a part of racial identity.

Judaism has some similarities to Catholicism in this respect.

So it’s not surprising that the same folks who hate the Catholics also hate the Jews.

 

[YoursTrue]

All Paulines are only the Cultural Christian people, on the one side and or on the flip side they are Western Atheism people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

Regards

It would be nice sometimes to know what you mean. (Yes?)

 

[YoursTrue]

I tend to go back to Bertrand Russell.

He called himself an atheist when speaking to general lay audiences, and agnostic when speaking to academic philosophical audiences.

But then along came something that I called "internet atheism".

Many of them at the time called themselves 9/11 atheists, and it appeared that they were all born again on the same day.

This was shortly after the bombing of the Catholic church in Bojayá in 2002.



Catholicism is a part of racial identity.

Judaism has some similarities to Catholicism in this respect.

So it’s not surprising that the same folks who hate the Catholics also hate the Jews.

Ah, speaking of Bertrand Russell, I used to enjoy reading his writings. Not that I learned anything from him, but his writings were pretty clear and understandable. That was back then. But! things have changed.

 

[YoursTrue]

paarsurrey said:
All Paulines are only the Cultural Christian people, on the one side and or on the flip side they are Western Atheism people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

When they have nothing written/spoken/dictated by (Jesus)Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, of his teachings as well as of his deeds, what else they could be called, please, right?

Regards

Actually, since you inquire, there are things in the Bible that show Jesus speaking. Also the book of Revelation. There's more but I'll leave it there right now. (OK, I won't say yes please...in order not to offend some...) Now on the other hand, there was at least one major personage who could not read or write. (Right? ok, I won't say right please. ok?)

 

[paarsurrey]

Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

Western Atheism (and the likes) people are in a way a denomination and or a bye-product of the Deviant Pauline Christianity as Saul/Paul made the religion of (Jesus)Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, a mythical Christ of Hellenism which generated Western Atheism as they denied the mythical (dying, rising, atoning, and ascending deity) Christ of Hellenism, right , please?
The truthful Israelites can never even think of following such a religion denying truthfulness of G-d's covenants with Abraham, I understand, please, right?
Richard Dawkins therefore declaring himself as Cultural Christian, one must say, is not a reasonable person, he is the flip side of the same coin (Christianity), one gets to know ,please, right?

It is therefore a point to note that all Paulines are only a Cultural Christian people, on the one side, and or on the flip side, they are Western Atheists people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

Regards

 

[YoursTrue]

Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

Western Atheism (and the likes) people are in a way a denomination and or a bye-product of the Deviant Pauline Christianity as Saul/Paul made the religion of (Jesus)Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, a mythical Christ of Hellenism which generated Western Atheism as they denied the mythical (dying, rising, atoning, and ascending deity) Christ of Hellenism, right , please?
The truthful Israelites can never even think of following such a religion denying truthfulness of G-d's covenants with Abraham, I understand, please, right?
Richard Dawkins therefore declaring himself as Cultural Christian, one must say, is not a reasonable person, he is the flip side of the same coin (Christianity), one gets to know ,please, right?

It is therefore a point to note that all Paulines are only a Cultural Christian people, on the one side, and or on the flip side, they are Western Atheists people, both of them have got nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?

Regards

Wrong in many ways. I am quite certain there are many cultural Islamists. I don't even need to ask you. But my question is: what does your god tell you to do? What principles are there for you to follow? Many who are called Christians believe in love and peace among other things. How about you?