Is a skeptic missing the compassionate part of their being, while only focusing on logic?

[Amittai]

I one can turn their enemies into a friend you can love them as you would any friend and have one less enemy.

If you can’t turn them into your friend, I agree there is no reason to love them.

But why is loving your enemy, while he is your enemy a good thing (apart from simply obeying)?

It might help to know, there are two kinds of enemy, one is the utterly nihilistic destroyer, the other is the opposite party in a bitter debate or conflict. (Occasionally the latter claim to turn themselves into the former.)

Indeed one turns such adversaries into friends (albeit non-gushing ones) precisely by exerting that compassion that is contained in the big version of logic and rationality. Treating someone rationally naturally tends to invite response in kind precisely because it's so respectful. Love = respect = reason. I was never the kind of christian that says it comes easy. Much of my unease was due to my own lack of thinking proficiency anyway, which made me defensive.

 

[Amittai]

...

When a Theist says there is a God (regardless of whether that Theist is Christian or not) I am open to the possibility that there is actually an entity out there that they call God, and I’m open to hear what this entity is all about. This doesn't mean I will believe everything they say concerning this entity, (hence my skepticism/atheism) but I am open to hearing what they believe about it.

...

Where there is proof or even circumstantial evidence there is no need for faith, where there is no proof or circumstantial evidence, faith is required to keep belief alive IMO

Ref your last remark that is so perceptive. It meshes with Newman's "assent to degrees of inference". Locke's "degrees of assent" confuses. The assent has to come after the degrees not before, whether the inference turns up a lot or a little. Most of the "evidence" comes from intuition, perhaps fuelled indirectly by prior relationships. I don't believe I am personally an evangeliser, hence I am not "under law" to "witness" as we used to call it.

Technically you are just about an "atheistic agnostic" but many such find it impolite to be called that.

It's easy to see there are myriad "gods" for some people, however little they may boil down to and however little meaning they may have!

The word "God" by the way is a sort of job title. Like the way old fashioned households would call the cook "Cook"

 

[Amittai]

... But for myself. I follow the commands out of fear. But only initially speaking. Eventually you get used to following rules and regulations and you start to love and enjoy it. I believe it is the later state of the christian walk that truly shows a selfless behavior. As they truly grow to love God not for what He does for them, but love God for WHO HE IS. That is the critical point of the relationship. God loves us and waits for us to come to the point where we don't follow Him for blessings or eternal life, but for Him. And that time does come in the life of the christian, and the sooner they achieve that state, and strive to maintain that intimacy the better their life will be, and the more satisfying their christian walk will be. But for people who only do obedience out of fear. That is just the beginning. True wisdom is realizing why He commands certain things and the wisdom behind it, and His retroactive wisdom to know the best course of action from eternity past, and for every situation.

...

I know you are sincere with your response, and I tried to be as sincere as I could in my answer. I hope you find them convincing, if not....ask some more questions about my view, and I will try to answer them the best I can. If I can.

I'll take you up on your invitation myself. Your church have taken advantage of you. You also have a lot of other work to do each day so pace your own thread. Ken is saying some ultra useful things. Your church have propagandized you about "Who He Is" and not about what Christians can do to help each other mature (which is what He is really about). The fear comes out of your writings in big globs! What they told you is just like what I belonged to for 28 years, and like several of the oriental religions.

What do you think of how to apply the practical suggestions I made, to the points Ken highlights?

When Ken and the others mention two different types of atheist, and three different types of skeptic, and the several issues in relationships, that is our chance to divide, in our mind's eye, the "buckets" or cubby holes we hold our concepts in, i.e we will have two atheist buckets side by side, three skeptic buckets, etc.

Walls make terrific storage space. Do you have high shelving? Go up the walls to save going up the wall! I learned this the very hard way and had to relearn it when I moved.

It's good that your thread is in ethics & morals because we do ourselves a tremendous good turn when we are kindly to our thinking and to all knowledge. This I think was your inkling (intuition) in doing so.

When I've got time I'll share with you my take on the early universe, Genesis chapter 1, and the like - a few things I came across fairly recently.

 

[Ken-1122]

I don't have time tonight to reply to your posts with bullets. But I am questioning if I should continue this discussion with you at all.

Why?

I worked through lunch tonight at work, and I barely had time to get something to drink.

Do yourself a favor; don’t allow these online discussions to dictate your life. I respond only when I have time; that’s why I will often disappear for a few days because sometimes life gets in the way. Also when I have time to think about a response, it usually comes out better than immediate responses. Just pace yourself my friend!

But I can't help but feel you are offended by me, and my views, and your words come across as heated and bitter. Those types of replies often causes fights on the forums.

Rather than blanket my entire post as bitter and heated, how about if you point out exactly what I said that you found bitter and heated, because I can assure that was not my intent. However; if this is just your way of ending the conversation…..I understand.

Peace
Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

Excellent! Thank you for flying the flag for integrity which is having all our ducks (our faculties) in a row.

Thank-you!

For me I love being in harmony with the universe which is a deep form of common sense open to all human beings of whatever "belief system" to take a lifetime to learn. (Some people surreptitiously attempt to attach baggage to skew what underlies their prapaganda so I have to trust my method for discovering and know how to appreciate others'.)

I love your approach; excellent point.

 

[Ken-1122]

Ref your last remark that is so perceptive. It meshes with Newman's "assent to degrees of inference". Locke's "degrees of assent" confuses. The assent has to come after the degrees not before, whether the inference turns up a lot or a little. Most of the "evidence" comes from intuition, perhaps fuelled indirectly by prior relationships. I don't believe I am personally an evangeliser, hence I am not "under law" to "witness" as we used to call it.

Technically you are just about an "atheistic agnostic" but many such find it impolite to be called that.

The only time I refer to myself as Atheist is when on these forums, and that’s because people give me that label because I don’t worship a God. How people define atheist seems to almost vary from person to person; I don’t have interest in debating definitions.
Skeptic is what I usually refer to myself as, however the way “createdtoworship” was describing skeptic, perhaps that’s something that will vary from person to person as well! Who would have known? (LOL)

It's easy to see there are myriad "gods" for some people, however little they may boil down to and however little meaning they may have!
The word "God" by the way is a sort of job title. Like the way old fashioned households would call the cook "Cook"

I agree! Many people seem to define God as creator of the Universe, Alpha and Omega, IOW the way the Abrahamic God is defined by followers, but there are plenty of people who worship Gods that aren’t defined that way. There are people who worship nature, the Sun, even people as real as you and I. There are Rastafarians who deify Haile Selassie, Hindu’s who worship Kumara (Haile died in the 1970’s but Kumara; or at least someone believed to be incarnate of Kumara is still live today) That’s why when asked about the existence of God, I ask them to define God then I can determine if I believe it exists or not; because as I said before, many versions of God do exist, I just don’t call them God.

 

[createdtoworship]

I'll take you up on your invitation myself. Your church have taken advantage of you. You also have a lot of other work to do each day so pace your own thread. Ken is saying some ultra useful things. Your church have propagandized you about "Who He Is" and not about what Christians can do to help each other mature (which is what He is really about). The fear comes out of your writings in big globs! What they told you is just like what I belonged to for 28 years, and like several of the oriental religions.

What do you think of how to apply the practical suggestions I made, to the points Ken highlights?

When Ken and the others mention two different types of atheist, and three different types of skeptic, and the several issues in relationships, that is our chance to divide, in our mind's eye, the "buckets" or cubby holes we hold our concepts in, i.e we will have two atheist buckets side by side, three skeptic buckets, etc.

Walls make terrific storage space. Do you have high shelving? Go up the walls to save going up the wall! I learned this the very hard way and had to relearn it when I moved.

It's good that your thread is in ethics & morals because we do ourselves a tremendous good turn when we are kindly to our thinking and to all knowledge. This I think was your inkling (intuition) in doing so.

When I've got time I'll share with you my take on the early universe, Genesis chapter 1, and the like - a few things I came across fairly recently.

I see both nice aspects of your posts, and confusingly misconstrued aspects. It's like on the one hand you enjoy the topic I present, but then on the other hand you don't like my take on my personal religion itself.

this is the part that alarmed me:

Your church have taken advantage of you. You also have a lot of other work to do each day so pace your own thread. Ken is saying some ultra useful things. Your church have propagandized you about "Who He Is" and not about what Christians can do to help each other mature (which is what He is really about).

I must admit, I didn't know what love was until I went into an old reformed church, I was taught calvinism in high school and it taught me grace, a grace I would forever use in my life. Then later I was turned on to a mildly pentacostal church called calvary chapel. I was working a christian coffee shop that had musicians from local bands come and play every friday night. I met christians from all the churches in the area. And this one guy with purple hair, nose rings and tatoos was so unique to me.....he had a zeal and a fire for Jesus that non of the other's had. So we became best friends. I realized he was not the only one that had that. My hair was down to my shoulders, and I had a pony tail and most churches back then sort of looked down on men with long hair. But when I went to calvary chapel the pastor had longer hair than me, and the lead guitarist and many of the ushers and elders all had long hair. I realized that in the early seventies this church movement opened up to the hippies on the beaches of southern california, and instead of judging them on appearance, allowed them to come to church with no shoes on, in shorts and tank tops. This started a genuine heart fealt relationship, where God is concerned with our heart not our appearance. This started the latest revival we had in america, (the Jesus people movement). So I can say it's safe to say that the Jesus I encountered was more loving and more accepting than even my own father. My heavenly father loved me and accepted me while I could not say the same for my own father. My mother ended up becoming a christian a few years after I did in high school. Not only that but God has opened up so many opportunities to share the miracles of my life with others. On here and on other platforms. I wish I could explain how much I love Jesus, but it is hard to verbalize fully without going into intense detail. I do not feel taken advantage of by my religion. I feel set free from addictive sins, in which I am forever grateful. Honestly when I think of Jesus, tears of love come to my eyes. I am tearing up just writing this.

 

[Amittai]

I see both nice aspects of your posts, and confusingly misconstrued aspects. It's like on the one hand you enjoy the topic I present, but then on the other hand you don't like my take on my personal religion itself.

this is the part that alarmed me:

I must admit, I didn't know what love was until I went into an old reformed church, I was taught calvinism in high school and it taught me grace, a grace I would forever use in my life. Then later I was turned on to a mildly pentacostal church called calvary chapel. I was working a christian coffee shop that had musicians from local bands come and play every friday night. I met christians from all the churches in the area. ... This started a genuine heart fealt relationship, where God is concerned with our heart not our appearance. This started the latest revival we had in america, (the Jesus people movement). So I can say it's safe to say that the Jesus I encountered was more loving and more accepting than even my own father. My heavenly father loved me and accepted me while I could not say the same for my own father. My mother ended up becoming a christian a few years after I did in high school. Not only that but God has opened up so many opportunities to share the miracles of my life with others. On here and on other platforms. I wish I could explain how much I love Jesus, but it is hard to verbalize fully without going into intense detail. I do not feel taken advantage of by my religion. I feel set free from addictive sins, in which I am forever grateful. Honestly when I think of Jesus, tears of love come to my eyes. I am tearing up just writing this.

- I'm in recovery also
- Your journey has been powerful!
- I was on the fringe of phenomena you were in the heart of
- I've often joined strange movements, each stranger than another
- I'm beginning to realise that in almost no church do officers or members see how to help each other be fruitful without legalism
- Fruitfulness of the church includes the quality of our upbuilding our fellows to maturity as well as "witnessing" to numbers of people
- I've had to compare the basis of different beliefs on a wide scale

Do "Soft Dispensationalists" differ a lot from the Jesus Movement? I've probably come across both but some of it is getting hazy.

Our minute-by-image of what we must be doing, is something we mustn't overload with denominational expectations.

My own instinct with both God and the church always has been, to "underpromise and not disappoint"!

God & me had something going since my infancy but NO-ONE would EVER tell me what comes next.

From age 17 onwards people told me wacky things. Some continued to tell me nothing.

Obviously you're not one of those snooty triumphal types.

What is individual - conscience, new birth (to the pattern).

What is joint and common - fruitfulness of all kinds & levels, of which God imputes us our unique share.

Not a worldly "economy" at all.

(Beware people that talk about the "corporate" BTW.)

 

[createdtoworship]

- I'm in recovery also

wow god bless you brother

- Your journey has been powerful!

Praise the Lord

- I've often joined strange movements, each stranger than another

I have been very blessed to be part of the later church movement the Lord brought me too. As I talk to others I see how blessed I was to have a loving intelligent church on doctrine, but not in a proud way. Love the most important.

- I'm beginning to realise that in almost no church do officers or members see how to help each other be fruitful without legalism

the circles I run with are not about religion but about a relationship with Jesus.

- Fruitfulness of the church includes the quality of our upbuilding our fellows to maturity as well as "witnessing" to numbers of people

yes I actually taught evangelism at our church for four years.

- I've had to compare the basis of different beliefs on a wide scale

during my teaching of evangelism I also debated christian and non christian cults, and world religions. That was hard work. People can be very convinced of their particular dogma.

Do "Soft Dispensationalists" differ a lot from the Jesus Movement? I've probably come across both but some of it is getting hazy.

our church (the church that started the JEsus movement), started teaching through the Bible every few years. Dispensationalism is the closest viewpoint, but hyper dispensationalism makes some errors, so I speak of soft dispensationalism.

Our minute-by-image of what we must be doing, is something we mustn't overload with denominational expectations.

My own instinct with both God and the church always has been, to "underpromise and not disappoint"!

Well God loves us and always encourages us to strive harder, but when we fail, God lifts us up and gives grace.

God & me had something going since my infancy but NO-ONE would EVER tell me what comes next.

thats good!

From age 17 onwards people told me wacky things. Some continued to tell me nothing.

yeah their are a lot of views.

Obviously you're not one of those snooty triumphal types.

we are soft pentacostal, not hyper pentacostal or word faith, but we do believe in the gifts of the spirit.

What is individual - conscience, new birth (to the pattern).

not sure what you are asking, can you reword it?

What is joint and common - fruitfulness of all kinds & levels, of which God imputes us our unique share.

if you highlight the text you wish to quote, and if you select the (+) icon on the top it will automatically quote it for you, I am unsure what part you are quoting here.

 

[createdtoworship]

Rather than blanket my entire post as bitter and heated, how about if you point out exactly what I said that you found bitter and heated, because I can assure that was not my intent.

I can quote it, but are you trying to be nice? Or are you trying to win the argument at whatever cost? There is a difference.

 

[Amittai]

I can quote it, but are you trying to be nice? Or are you trying to win the argument at whatever cost? There is a difference.

My guess (rudely presuming to speak for Ken) is that he is trying to be non-pretend nice (i.e a bit of a cool customer like me), not "nice nice", and also that he doesn't feel the need to "win" any more arguments. These are in fact THREE things! Ken is 3 out of 3, not 1 out of 2.

It was after all you that asked us to help you.

In any case discussions about truth aren't zero sum anyway. They are always win-win-win. You go away with more prizes than you had before, as well as us.

 

[Amittai]

...

not sure what you are asking, can you reword it?

if you highlight the text you wish to quote, and if you select the (+) icon on the top it will automatically quote it for you, I am unsure what part you are quoting here.

Those weren't questions - sorry - brief jottings.

Thanks for the tip by the way!

 

[Ken-1122]

I can quote it, but are you trying to be nice? Or are you trying to win the argument at whatever cost? There is a difference.

I’ve never seen our discussions as an “argument”, or something to be won or lost, I’ve seen the as an opportunity to learn from those who see differently than I do.

As a general rule, I like having my beliefs challenged; that’s the only way I believe you can learn and grow. Not just religious beliefs, but political, Philosophical, moral, whatever it is that I believe I like discussing with those who disagree with me. For a political conservative person to only look at conservative news sources and refuse to look at progressive sources, he is doing himself a disservice. For the Progressive person to only consider progressive news sources and refuse to look at conservative sources, he is doing himself a disservice. To “coddle” yourself by surrounding yourself with those who agree with you will prevent you from learning and growing so when you get into the real world away from your coddling friends, the minute your beliefs are challenged you will be ill prepared and your argument will fall apart like a house of cards because the only thing you will know about your opponent is what your coddling friends tell you; which will probably be far from what is true about them.

The problem with online discussions is when you respond they can’t see your body language, tone of voice, or facial expressions that that express your attitude during a reply, so often words that lack emotion can sound offensive, when there was no intent.

As I said before, I was enjoying our discussion, often when I discuss with Christians, when they see I am not interested in converting, they become hostile and belligerent; you appeared to be an exception and I welcomed that. Apparently you became offended by something I said; I have no idea what it was, but if you tell me, perhaps I will know to phrase my questions and replies differently so as not to offend you.

 

[createdtoworship]

My guess (rudely presuming to speak for Ken) is that he is trying to be non-pretend nice (i.e a bit of a cool customer like me), not "nice nice", and also that he doesn't feel the need to "win" any more arguments. These are in fact THREE things! Ken is 3 out of 3, not 1 out of 2.

It was after all you that asked us to help you.

In any case discussions about truth aren't zero sum anyway. They are always win-win-win. You go away with more prizes than you had before, as well as us.

Yes I asked for help, but that is because I have a skeptical side to me. The skeptical side is typically the rude side, because it removes emotion from debate, emotion is what keeps us compassionate.

 

[Yttrium]

My compassion is often the source of my skepticism. Hence, I'm highly skeptical of the OP's position.

 

[Amittai]

Yes I asked for help, but that is because I have a skeptical side to me.

That's a VERY good trait in all of us as Yttrium also points out! It drives us all to this forum time & again on all matters!

The skeptical side is typically the rude side, because it removes emotion from debate, emotion is what keeps us compassionate.

No, because we are never without emotion and what you call (in yourself) rudeness is also emotional. Rudeness is sometimes merely like an old-fashioned car that doesn't quite get into gear on the odd occasion! If you look hard, most people on most forums are (faintly) blunt at times - it doesn't do real harm 999 times out of 1,000.

If your feelings feel "plain" while you debate, that is OK, you are at heart just as cool a customer as me!

Earlier in the discussion we established that the other party is often taken aback if you jump the gun, and responds with a bit of (harmless) cheek.

Maybe they were just content with the level of information they had gained up to that point and didn't want more till further notice. After all you don't need to "clinch a sale" which is usually a bad sign in actual salespeople as well!

 

[createdtoworship]

That's a VERY good trait in all of us as Yttrium also points out! It drives us all to this forum time & again on all matters!



No, because we are never without emotion and what you call (in yourself) rudeness is also emotional. Rudeness is sometimes merely like an old-fashioned car that doesn't quite get into gear on the odd occasion! If you look hard, most people on most forums are (faintly) blunt at times - it doesn't do real harm 999 times out of 1,000.

If your feelings feel "plain" while you debate, that is OK, you are at heart just as cool a customer as me!

Earlier in the discussion we established that the other party is often taken aback if you jump the gun, and responds with a bit of (harmless) cheek.

Maybe they were just content with the level of information they had gained up to that point and didn't want more till further notice. After all you don't need to "clinch a sale" which is usually a bad sign in actual salespeople as well!

I disagree entirely on this post, but I love you and embrace your freedom to express a view contrary to mY own. See that was not a statement of debate. If I was to debate you on your post, the dryness of the debate due to focusing on logic over feelings makes our dissagreements heated very often. For myself like the OP says if we open our hearts we feel compassion for one another but become very hurt when a flame or goading post occurs. Skeptics do that alot, so fRom my side (the side being mocked.) It appears that to debate means removing oneself from the emotion of being hurt, and at that point can become more.rude ourselves due to closing our heart down from hurtful comments. Such as "he who believes the Bible.is no different than he who believes in the tooth fairy or other mythology." To a skeptic that my feel like a perfectly logical and accurate post. But to me it's very hurtful. I don't want my Jesus to be on partner with the tooth fairy, I love Jesus with all my heart and it hurts me that His name.is drug through the mud. And myself as a christian along with it. So I hope this illustration reveals how skeptics can post logically but not compassionately.

 

[Yttrium]

Such as "he who believes the Bible.is no different than he who believes in the tooth fairy or other mythology."

I agree that this is hurtful. It is also very counterproductive. Saying something like that only serves to galvanize others against you. That kind of talk really annoys me.

It's not really a statement of skepticism, though. Skepticism is doubt, not denial.

 

[createdtoworship]

I agree that this is hurtful. It is also very counterproductive. Saying something like that only serves to galvanize others against you. That kind of talk really annoys me.

It's not really a statement of skepticism, though. Skepticism is doubt, not denial.

I know. But from my perspective, the skepticism is against or biased against me, and because there is no mandate from above to love others, they have really no motive for playing nice. So comments like the above, are very standard. I don't think that you yourself are like that. But I think skepticism plays a role. Because in doubting that we are created for a purpose, we have a life that is void of meaning and worth. It's just survival of the fittest. Abortion becomes ok, other types of evils become ok, the more we are skeptical. Because how can you prove it's a human? You can't so therefore it's ok to squash it like a bug. So you see how a skeptic is morally depraved in such manners. I have lots of other examples, for example I can prove that hitler's motives were because of evolutionary thought. Survival of the fittest.

 

[Ken-1122]

I disagree entirely on this post, but I love you and embrace your freedom to express a view contrary to mY own. See that was not a statement of debate. If I was to debate you on your post, the dryness of the debate due to focusing on logic over feelings makes our dissagreements heated very often. For myself like the OP says if we open our hearts we feel compassion for one another but become very hurt when a flame or goading post occurs. Skeptics do that alot, so fRom my side (the side being mocked.) It appears that to debate means removing oneself from the emotion of being hurt, and at that point can become more.rude ourselves due to closing our heart down from hurtful comments. Such as "he who believes the Bible.is no different than he who believes in the tooth fairy or other mythology." To a skeptic that my feel like a perfectly logical and accurate post. But to me it's very hurtful. I don't want my Jesus to be on partner with the tooth fairy, I love Jesus with all my heart and it hurts me that His name.is drug through the mud. And myself as a christian along with it. So I hope this illustration reveals how skeptics can post logically but not compassionately.

If it's hurtful for a skeptic to put believing in the Bible as equal to the tooth fairy, don't you understand it's just as hurtful when you claim skeptics cannot be compassionate, or have no motive to be nice?