The offended God theory

[Xyzzy]

"Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."

.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by jasong

I feel that a reasonably intelligent person will agree that he IS, in fact, talking about hypnosis.

Originally Posted by Webster's Third New International Dictionary

hypnosis
...
1 : a state that resembles normal sleep but differs in being induced by the suggestions and operations of the hypnotizer with whom the hypnotized subject remains in rapport and responsive to his suggestions which may induce anesthesia, blindness, hallucination, and paralysis while suggestions of curative value may also be accepted -- compare POSTHYPNOTIC
...
2 : any of various conditions that resemble sleep -- compare CATAPLEXY

Hypnosis, in the sense I think you mean (definition 1, not 2), involves participation by another party, the hypnotizer (but self-hypnosis is also possible), who is partially guiding the subject. I never said or suggested that there was a hypnotizer, that the text one reads is the hypnotizer, or that there was self-hypnosis involved.

Perhaps in actuality you use self-hypnosis when you read the Bible (or other text), but that's not the usual practice in reading, I didn't get that meaning from what you wrote, and I made no reference to self-hypnosis.

I don't contend that what I wrote was perfect and non-misunderstandable, but it is not reasonable to insist that I was writing about hypnosis. I made no reference to a hypnotizer, to a state resembling sleep, to suggestions or operations of a hypnotic nature, or to rapport and responsiveness to hypnotic suggestions. You are mistaken in your contention.

For the record, I do offer an apology for my anger

... and I will accept it as long as it's understood that what needed to be apologized for was your action of posting unjustified words based on that anger, not your feeling of anger itself, to which anyone is entitled.

[jasong]

I apologize again. I realized what the nature of the misunderstanding was when I was at work today.

When I referred to hypnosis being referenced to by your post, I was specifically referring to the concept of reinforcing a belief, true or not, through repetition, similar to the Positive Affirmation movement, or listeneing to tapes to help you stop smoking.

[Zeta-Flux]

Marilynne Robinson on Dawkins' "The God Delusion"

http://darwiniana.com/2006/10/23/mar...on-on-dawkins/

[kuratkull]

atheist speaking.

Discussions like this, are just pointless. They won't prove anything and they will certainly not convert someone over.I just want to say this to Christians:
What if your biological mother would have abandoned you, and you would have become an orphan and someone from New Guinea or China adopted you?
Would you still be a Christian? Problably not. You would believe in Nature(trees, rocks, mud and stuff) or Buddha or something else, and you would think that it's the ONLY TRUE way to live. Isn't that strange? If god has such a grand plan for all of you, why would he let a true would-be believer like you to slip away. This can be adjusted to about any religion in the world: your religion depends from the region you are born/raised.
This can be escaped with the "gods ways are mysterious" excuse, but... I hope you understand what I want to say.

I sometimes see(not often, I live in Estonia, which is a rather atheistic country) that Christians like to quote the Bible when they see it fit to some situation. So here are some quotes from the bible which give me the creeps:
http://home.earthlink.net/~owl233/biblequotes.htm

Why do you quote other parts of the bible and not these? All parts of the bible should be equal, right?

And if anyone's interested, here are 1,230,000 Google links to "contradictions in the bible". http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...le&btnG=Search

OK, this post is a bit messed up, but...

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by kuratkull

Discussions like this, are just pointless. They won't prove anything

This thread wasn't intended to prove anything.

jasong stated in post #1 that he wanted "input" (not proof) about the theory that:

"... God is not observed in scientific tests [because] he does not reveal himself to people who are offended by him. The suggestion is that the scientist doesn't want to believe in God, so God stays away and refuses to be involved in the test. Alternately, people who do believe in God are accused of being biased or unscientific when they get what they perceive are positive results."

That's about as well-defined and well-delimited a topic statement as Soap Box threads have. Christianity or religion in general, or belief in God, is on-topic only insofar as it relates to that theory.

(It's true that jasong and I just exchanged several posts about "proof", but that was only because I responded to jasong's use of "proof" in his post #55 with several paragraphs which themselves were responded-to. It seems to me that this sub-topic is over now.)

and they will certainly not convert someone over.

This thread doesn't intend to convert anyone.

I just want to say this to Christians:

< snip >

The remainder of your posting is not related to this thread's topic.

I recommend (with helpful, not hostile, intent) that you start a new thread in this Soap Box subforum, copying the remainder of your post here, or revising it, to form the topic in the first post there.

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by kuratkull

Discussions like this, are just pointless. They won't prove anything and they will certainly not convert someone over.

So much irony. On so many levels.

Just to let you know, I have learned quite a few things, and have changed my mind about a few of them, due to discussions with others.

I just want to say this to Christians:
What if your biological mother would have abandoned you, and you would have become an orphan and someone from New Guinea or China adopted you?
Would you still be a Christian? Problably not. You would believe in Nature(trees, rocks, mud and stuff) or Buddha or something else, and you would think that it's the ONLY TRUE way to live. Isn't that strange? If god has such a grand plan for all of you, why would he let a true would-be believer like you to slip away. This can be adjusted to about any religion in the world: your religion depends from the region you are born/raised.

Do you not know of anyone who changes religion? I would agree with you if you were only talking to those who stick with their parents religion due to tradition. But you aren't.

I sometimes see(not often, I live in Estonia, which is a rather atheistic country) that Christians like to quote the Bible when they see it fit to some situation. So here are some quotes from the bible which give me the creeps:
http://home.earthlink.net/~owl233/biblequotes.htm

I would say most of those quotations are taken out of their historical and theological context.

Why do you quote other parts of the bible and not these? All parts of the bible should be equal, right?

I don't believe this.

And if anyone's interested, here are 1,230,000 Google links to "contradictions in the bible".

Do you believe that intelligent Christian people have no responses to these?

Cheers,
Zeta-Flux

[brunoparga]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Do you not know of anyone who changes religion? I would agree with you if you were only talking to those who stick with their parents religion due to tradition. But you aren't.

Even though not everyone sticks with their parents' religion, I'd say the prevalence of the major world religions in their respective traditional geographic areas, along with emigrant communities therefrom, doesn't contribute too much to the religious claim of truth. Why is it that choosing a religion isn't like choosing a profession or a political option, questions which show much larger variation across different cultural areas? What's specific about religion, that makes it less "elastic" than other cultural traits?

Bruno