Greatest I Am's anti-religion thread

[birch]

Time and again, GIA has shown that he isn't here for discussion - he is looking to preach and proselytize. In his mind, demonstrated by what he has claimed before, anyone who dares question him is the worst kind of subhuman filth this universe has ever seen

that's exaggeration.

 

[Kittamaru]

that's exaggeration.

Unfortunately, it's observation.

Maybe I'm wrong and his intentions are pure and wholesome, and it's just his delivery that is flawed... But every time I've seen him engaged with someone with a differing opinion or facts that don't align with his ideals... It gets ugly quickly.

Take the origin of this thread, and his pride at being an Islamophobe as just one example.

 

[NotEinstein]

evidently he means disagreement (negative) with the unethical or questionable religious teachings of fundamental Christianity. It's also in the religious texts/books. Same with islam. The gnostics took it a step further to conceptualize that a creator responsible for a predatorial universal system is not a loving or moral god/creator and therefore believed that there was more than one god or entities or in a hierarchy.

I'm pretty sure that isn't a good description of Gnosticism in general.

How does ISIS or extremist muslim organizations have to do with gnostic Christians when it was the Christians who slaughtered the gnostics for their different take on religion? that is just pot and kettle.

I was just pointing out that his statement only works if you're already a Christian, which significantly reduces its impact.

the tolerance or turning a blind eye to the unethical does not equate to better or superior morality because it's viewed with positivity or spun as such. It's even worse. figure it out.

I fully agree, and would like to add that what goes as "unethical" seems to be quite subjective, especially if you compare the more fundamental and/or extremist branches of the various religions.

 

[NotEinstein]

Unfortunately, it's observation.

Maybe I'm wrong and his intentions are pure and wholesome, and it's just his delivery that is flawed... But every time I've seen him engaged with someone with a differing opinion or facts that don't align with his ideals... It gets ugly quickly.

Take the origin of this thread, and his pride at being an Islamophobe as just one example.

Building on my last post: I'm quite sure in his own mind he is indeed being "pure and wholesome", and this goes for most fundamentalists. It's just that "we" aren't using the same definition/versions of those words.

 

[birch]

I'm pretty sure that isn't a good description of Gnosticism in general.

then evidently you don't know what Gnosticism is. you even equated it to extremist islamists.

I fully agree, and would like to add that what goes as "unethical" seems to be quite subjective

yes it is. as per the op describes the various tenants in the koran they disagree with ethically such as slavery, misogyny, rape etc which are all condoned in the texts. it is the group-think that decides what is ethical or practiced; that's why there are different gov'ts and cultures where some of this is considered okay. it's just that some people think it's wrong period and are less tolerant of such things.

just like there are rules here and some are in disagreement and there are laws in western cultures which differ from the middle-east etc. why does it surprise anyone that some people are islamiphobes even? just like some people are against pornography, abortion, drugs, same-sex marriage, homosexuals/transgenders, pedophilia, human trafficking/slavery, ad infinitum.

people decide for themselves what they will tolerate and what they do not agree with. I'm sure those who practice anything justify what they do based on their own subjective definition of ethics or rights.

I mean, honestly, are many people scrambling and eager to live in the middle-east? Pakistan, anyone? Iraq or iran? it seems he's got a point, however in-pc it may be. it's crappy for the average man, and it's downright dangerous for a woman.

 

[NotEinstein]

then evidently you don't know what Gnosticism is. you even equated it to extremist islamists.

Erm, not really, I just pointed out that Greatest I Am's statement when taken at face value does exactly that.

yes it is. as per the op describes the various tenants in the koran they disagree with ethically such as slavery, misogyny, rape etc which are all condoned in the texts. it is the group-think that decides what is ethical or practiced; that's why there are different gov'ts and cultures where some of this is considered okay. it's just that some people think it's wrong period and are less tolerant of such things.

just like there are rules here and some are in disagreement and there are laws in western cultures which differ from the middle-east etc. why does it surprise anyone that some people are islamiphobes even? just like some people are against pornography, abortion, drugs, same-sex marriage, homosexuals/transgenders, pedophilia, human trafficking/slavery, ad infinitum.

people decide for themselves what they will tolerate and what they do not agree with. I'm sure those who practice anything justify what they do based on their own subjective definition of ethics or rights.

I mean, honestly, are many people scrambling and eager to live in the middle-east? Pakistan, anyone? Iraq or iran? it seems he's got a point, however in-pc it may be. it's crappy for the average man, and it's downright dangerous for a woman.

I would have used different words here and there, but I agree with your statements. I'd just like to make one comment. You said: "people decide for themselves what they will tolerate and what they do not agree with" I'd add that unfortunately, in many places in the world you (as an individual) don't get that freedom. Maybe in private, but certainly not in public. Follow what the ruler(s) say(s) is right, or else.

What a depressing world we live in.

 

[Kittamaru]

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of said speech... As a Nazi / White Supremecist found out the other day when he was knocked out cold for his bigotry and attacks against everyone not like himself. I don't generally condone violence... however, historically, rational discussion and kindness have done little to stymie such hatred and simply allows it to spread unopposed, which is even more unacceptable, given the simple truth of what they are calling for.

 

[Greatest I am]

So the members of IS (and many other extremist Muslim organizations) are (close to) gnostic Christians? That's... special.

Only to those too stupid to read the whole post.

Thanks for showing your intelligence.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Makes sense, if GIA is anything like most gnostic Christians.

Only the uneducated or will fully stupid will not know that Yahweh and Allah are the same God.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

evidently he means disagreement (negative) with the unethical or questionable religious teachings of fundamental Christianity. It's also in the religious texts/books. Same with islam. The gnostics took it a step further to conceptualize that a creator responsible for a predatorial universal system is not a loving or moral god/creator and therefore believed that there was more than one god or entities or in a hierarchy.

How does ISIS or extremist muslim organizations have to do with gnostic Christians when it was the Christians who slaughtered the gnostics for their different take on religion? that is just pot and kettle.

the tolerance or turning a blind eye to the unethical does not equate to better or superior morality because it's viewed with positivity or spun as such. It's even worse. figure it out.

Thank you for trying to teach the ignorant.

I agree with all you put but this.

"believed that there was more than one god or entities or in a hierarchy."

We do not hold any supernatural beliefs.

We do use supernatural language in our myths but those myths were written to put against the Christian myths when all knew that the Gods were all mythical. That was before Christianity became an idol worshiping religion and began to kill for their vile and immoral God.

This first link speaks to those days and the second gives a bit on when Christianity stopped seeking God and became idol worshipers.

http://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Its oK birch... its lookin like GIA is gone so its a grate time to freely dump on him.!!!

An as far as best contributors... this is Sciforums... we dont need no best contributors in the religion subforum who will actualy discuss his beleifs wit-out obfuscation.!!!

I will finish this thread and then likely disappear.

I do thank those who see what I put as worthy for the board and hope to find you in a more worthy forum.

There seems to be less and less of those as Christianity slowly dies in the West. It cannot live where intelligent people live as they will refuse to go into intellectual and moral dissonance.

Regards
DL

 

[NotEinstein]

Only to those too stupid to read the whole post.

Let's look at that!

If you have ever had negative thoughts about Yahweh, you are close to a Gnostic Christian.

There's the quote...

You have shown that you can think freely and have a decent moral sense as compared to Christians and their less than moral sense that allows them to adore a genocidal God.

This appears to be responding to somebody else, although nobody is quoted. No matter, it's irrelevant here.

John Lennon, “It seems to me that the only true Christians were the Gnostics,”

Also irrelevant.

In fact, many think that the best Christians are Gnostic Christians. Even if you are an atheist, you are likely a better Christian than most Christians as their morals have been corrupted by their beliefs enough to have them adore a vile genocidal God that Gnostic Christians call demiurge. In a sense, not that she exists, but demiurge is equivalent to Satan.

Also irrelevant.

Please remember that Gnostic Christians so not hold any supernatural beliefs and religiously speaking, create much more peaceful people than Christians. The Cathars were a good example of this truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ptNcSYo7k4

http://thegodabovegod.com/difference-gnostic-christian/

http://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic/

Similarly irrelevant.

Are you close to a Gnostic Christian in how you can think freely and morally?

Again responding to somebody else.

Regards
DL

And that was your entire post. So the parts that I didn't quote weren't actually relevant.

Your only out appears to be admitting you forgot to quote whoever you were responding to. But even in that case, the rest of your post does nothing to help your case.

It seems you are having trouble understanding what you wrote in your own posts!

Thanks for showing your intelligence.

Glad to be of service, and the same to you.

 

[Greatest I am]

There is daring to question, and then there is refusing to acknowledge evidence or facts. There is questioning the status quo, and then there is stirring the shit pot just to get a reaction.

Time and again, GIA has shown that he isn't here for discussion - he is looking to preach and proselytize. In his mind, demonstrated by what he has claimed before, anyone who dares question him is the worst kind of subhuman filth this universe has ever seen.

B.S.

Facts based on the supernatural is garbage facts so you might check your definition of facts.

Faith based facts are assumptions that cannot be proven in any way and are not facts at all.

Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.

Faith is a way to quit using, "God given" power of Reason and Logic, and cause the faithful to embrace doctrines that moral people reject.

The God of the OT says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” [Isaiah 1:18]

How can literalists reason on God when they must ignore reason and logic and discard them when turning into literalist?

Those who are literalists can only reply somewhat in the fashion that Martin Luther did.
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”

This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes their mind as it is pure idol worship.

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths. We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

There's the quote...

Yes. But you ignored that in Islam, Yahweh is Allah.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I fully agree, and would like to add that what goes as "unethical" seems to be quite subjective, especially if you compare the more fundamental and/or extremist branches of the various religions.

All who fly the cross must buy into substitutionary atonement and the notion that Jesus is their savior.

Here is what a moral Bishop has to say to that part of the Christian ideology.

Bishop John Shelby Spong: Why Atonement Theology will Kill Christianity

Tell us, would you knowingly punishes or accept and try to profit from the punishment of an innocent man instead of the guilty one?

You have to if you are a scapegoat using Christian.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I mean, honestly, are many people scrambling and eager to live in the middle-east? Pakistan, anyone? Iraq or iran? it seems he's got a point, however in-pc it may be. it's crappy for the average man, and it's downright dangerous for a woman.

You make some good points.

Let me ask you and our interlocutors.

Which of the two groups, Christians and Gnostic Christians shown in this link acting more like Muslim Jihadists and which group just want to be left in peace to practice their freedom of religion?

Regards
DL

 

[NotEinstein]

Yes. But you ignored that in Islam, Yahweh is Allah.

I don't see how that would change my statement. If Allah is Yahweh (and presumably also the same as the Christian god), how does that make Muslims that think negatively about Allah gnostic Christians?

All who fly the cross must buy into substitutionary atonement and the notion that Jesus is their savior.

I don't know how that's relevant to what I said.

Here is what a moral Bishop has to say to that part of the Christian ideology.

Bishop John Shelby Spong: Why Atonement Theology will Kill Christianity

Can you please give me a time index of the relevant part?

Tell us, would you knowingly punishes or accept and try to profit from the punishment of an innocent man instead of the guilty one?

I don't know how that's relevant to what I said.

You have to if you are a scapegoat using Christian.

I don't know how that's relevant to what I said.

...Have you accidentally put the wrong quote your post?

 

[Greatest I am]

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of said speech....

True, but if you note the lie you put as the title of this thread, saying I am anti-religious, when I am in a religionist myself, you see that I am victimised and denigrated by your lie.

Rescind that title your S O B or be seen for the liar you are.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

If Allah is Yahweh (and presumably also the same as the Christian god), how does that make Muslims that think negatively about Allah gnostic Christians?

It shows that they are free thinkers enough to call a vile God a vile God.

Can you please give me a time index of the relevant part?

Let me just cut to the pertinent moral tenet that shows the immorality of the tenet if you do not wish to take the time to educate yourself.

This describes the fundamental of substitutionary atonement or punishment and my view.

Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.

Do you agree?

If not, please show how it is morally and legally good to punish the innocent instead of the guilty, bearing in mind that all legal systems think that punishing the guilty is what is justice.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

...Have you accidentally put the wrong quote your post?

No, but like most Christians, I see that you do not want to show your moral thinking, or lack of it.

Regards
DL