You have to seek God with your heart!

[phands]

Again, for those having a hard time keeping up... we are only fixated on the RELENTLESS sales pitch by religionists. We push back. It;s nonsensical and stupid. And always ends up with their claim “but you have to seek with your heart!” Which is patently stupid, and they keep saying it.

Sigh.
Just like Lion.

Prertending it says something other than it clearly says. Because that’s easier for him to ignore than actulally addressing the real issue of Christians claiming that putting aside logic is all you need to believe in gawd.

Cute try, Lion. You know you’re just blowing smoke, though.

Not to mention the utter, shameless intransigence of religitards when they make a claim such as "I'm not aware of a bible verse shere it says you have to seek god with your heart", and then have it immedilately refuted with copious evidence only to ignore it and carry on with the lies and distraction attempts. To then accuse evidence-based reasonable people of histrionics is hypocrisy at its most egregious.
I'm never surprised nowadays when religitards lie, beause religion itself is based on lies and obfuscation.

 

[Rhea]

Not to mention the utter, shameless intransigence when they make a claim such as "I'm not aware of a bible verse shere it says you have to seek god with your heart", and then have it immedilately refuted with copious evidence only to ignore it and carry on with the lies and distraction attempts. To then accuse evidence-based reasonable people of histrionics is hypocrisy at its most egregious.

Very typical of the mindset that does not heed logic, isn’t it. They just make no sense at all.

I'm never surprised nowadays when religitards lie, beause religion itself is based on lies and obfuscation.

Request: can you consider calling them “religiturds,” instead? People who have intellectual disabilities and their families have it hard enough without being lumped in with religious assholes. Just a courtesy request to end the use of “retard” as a synonym for “ignorant asshole.”

 

[Lion IRC]

I'm never surprised nowadays when religitards lie, beause religion itself is based on lies and obfuscation.

Request: can you consider calling them “religiturds,” instead? People who have intellectual disabilities and their families have it hard enough without being lumped in with religious assholes. Just a courtesy request to end the use of “retard” as a synonym for “ignorant asshole.”

Since you asked him so politely I'm sure our well-mannered phands will take more care in future.
Heaven forbid that he might accidentally spit on the wrong type of person.

 

[Lion IRC]

...People who have intellectual disabilities and their families have it hard enough without being lumped in with religious assholes. Just a courtesy request to end the use of “retard” as a synonym for “ignorant asshole.”

Would it be ok for phands to insult religious people by saying religion IS an intellectual disability?

 

[bilby]

Don't like abortion? Don't have one.
Don't like gay marriage? Don't have one.

Don't like religion? Complain about how unfair it is to have to seek the Lord. And whine about the method. And bitch about the anectdotal anonymous Christians whose monologues bother you.

I am fairly certain that you are not as stupid as you are pretending to be here; Which leaves me wondering what you are trying to accomplish by saying such obviously stupid things.

I guess it could be a poor attempt at humour, but it's just not that funny to pretend to misunderstand a simple English sentence. you need more buy-in from the audience if you want to perpetuate an in-joke. Some kind of clearly humorous lead-in is needed, and by skipping that step, your joke falls flat.

 

[phands]

Don't like abortion? Don't have one.
Don't like gay marriage? Don't have one.

Don't like religion? Complain about how unfair it is to have to seek the Lord. And whine about the method. And bitch about the anectdotal anonymous Christians whose monologues bother you.

I am fairly certain that you are not as stupid as you are pretending to be here; Which leaves me wondering what you are trying to accomplish by saying such obviously stupid things.

I guess it could be a poor attempt at humour, but it's just not that funny to pretend to misunderstand a simple English sentence. you need more buy-in from the audience if you want to perpetuate an in-joke. Some kind of clearly humorous lead-in is needed, and by skipping that step, your joke falls flat.

Yet again, the apologist for appalling awfulness quietly forgets that his co-turds in the religious camp are trying to have abortion banned, even if people do want one. Ditto LGBTQ++ marriage. At the same time, they want to make disbelief a crime, and force people to conform with their hideous mythology.

 

[Lion IRC]

*sigh*
You can't FORCE people to believe in something against their will.
I'm surprised phands thinks that's possible.

 

[abaddon]

Lion IRC,

Suppose someone wanted to seek God.

What would be a good way to go about it?

Read the Bible?
Attend church?
Read theological arguments and think through the logic?
Contemplatively open up one's heart to a feeling of Presence that can be communed with?

 

[Lion IRC]

What a hypocrite to negative rep me then pretend you want civil discussion.
Go chat with a smart person. You said I'm "too stupid to be real".

 

[abaddon]

And that^^^ post is too stupid to be real too. It's wrong and whiny and yet another evasion. If you want your posts respected then don't piss it away with the great many refusals to give more forthright answers.

 

[Learner]

Yet again, the apologist for appalling awfulness quietly forgets that his co-turds in the religious camp are trying to have abortion banned, even if people do want one. Ditto LGBTQ++ marriage. At the same time, they want to make disbelief a crime, and force people to conform with their hideous mythology.

Perhaps I'm seeing it wrong but .... from the looks of some of your posts like those to Lion, it certainly seems you'd really rather not discuss / debate with theists. I suppose you're one of those, who has had a really bad personal religious experience.

 

[phands]

You are seeing it wrong, because LIRC is an unreconstructed apologist for idiocy. I have him on ignore because of over 10 years of his
intransigence, including at other forums,

As regards bad experiences, no ..I just grew up.

 

[Learner]

Ah ok , so you have a history with Lion, something more personal to you. As an old rival of sorts.

 

[Lion IRC]

no - phands just told you he has me on ignore.
That's not rivalry.
I just can't work out why he keeps mentioning me.

 

[Rhea]

...People who have intellectual disabilities and their families have it hard enough without being lumped in with religious assholes. Just a courtesy request to end the use of “retard” as a synonym for “ignorant asshole.”

Would it be ok for phands to insult religious people by saying religion IS an intellectual disability?

First, don’t bother posting video for me, I can’t download video unless I drive 6 miles to the library, and no videos are worth that to me.

Second - does it insult people with ADHD to say it’s a disability? No. Does it insult people with Autism to say that it’s an intellectual disability? No. But it does insult them to say it’s the same as being an arrogant asshole. Does it insult religious people to say that religiosity is an intellectual disability? They believe things that aren’t true, after all.

I don’t call it an intellectual disability, but I can see how it would be classified as such when it prevents people from understanding _how_ to know things. Is that insulting? I dunno, the religionists seem pretty happy with their disability.

 

[phands]

...People who have intellectual disabilities and their families have it hard enough without being lumped in with religious assholes. Just a courtesy request to end the use of “retard” as a synonym for “ignorant asshole.”

Would it be ok for phands to insult religious people by saying religion IS an intellectual disability?

First, don’t bother posting video for me, I can’t download video unless I drive 6 miles to the library, and no videos are worth that to me.

Second - does it insult people with ADHD to say it’s a disability? No. Does it insult people with Autism to say that it’s an intellectual disability? No. But it does insult them to say it’s the same as being an arrogant asshole. Does it insult religious people to say that religiosity is an intellectual disability? They believe things that aren’t true, after all.

I don’t call it an intellectual disability, but I can see how it would be classified as such when it prevents people from understanding _how_ to know things. Is that insulting? I dunno, the religionists seem pretty happy with their disability.

As I posted in another thread, there is a large and growing body of evidence that religion IS brain damage...structurally distinct. And that religious people are more easily conned by lies...like their religion, but in other areas, like 419 scams.

 

[steve_bank]

Putting your heart into something is a common saying for most any efforts.

 

[abaddon]

The heart as home of the soul or self goes back to pre-dissection days, when people knew less about physiology.

But the ancient physiological notions remain in our metaphors. "Putting your heart into something" means something very different than feeling a truth in one's heart.

There are many heart metaphors:

Wear your heart on your sleeve.
Heart of stone.
Heart of gold.
A heart to heart talk.
Heartfelt emotion.
A sinking heart.
Heavy hearted
Light hearted.
Cold hearted.
Tender hearted.
Empty hearted.
The heart of a lion.

And others.

It's not without basis as there are in fact heartfelt and gut-sensed truths. But with these we leave behind talk about objective "out there" entities, and instead are talking about the embodied "felt sense".

That's knowledge of inner states and feelings. It'd take a better argument than anything presented in this thread for how that'd work to determine EoG.

 

[phands]

First, don’t bother posting video for me, I can’t download video unless I drive 6 miles to the library, and no videos are worth that to me.

Second - does it insult people with ADHD to say it’s a disability? No. Does it insult people with Autism to say that it’s an intellectual disability? No. But it does insult them to say it’s the same as being an arrogant asshole. Does it insult religious people to say that religiosity is an intellectual disability? They believe things that aren’t true, after all.

I don’t call it an intellectual disability, but I can see how it would be classified as such when it prevents people from understanding _how_ to know things. Is that insulting? I dunno, the religionists seem pretty happy with their disability.

As I posted in another thread, there is a large and growing body of evidence that religion IS brain damage...structurally distinct. And that religious people are more easily conned by lies...like their religion, but in other areas, like 419 scams.

Here's a short clip from one report...

A study published in the journal Neuropsychologia has shown that religious fundamentalism is, in part, the result of a functional impairment in a brain region known as the prefrontal cortex. The findings suggest that damage to particular areas of the prefrontal cortex indirectly promotes religious fundamentalism by diminishing cognitive flexibility and openness—a psychology term that describes a personality trait which involves dimensions like curiosity, creativity, and open-mindedness.

Religious beliefs can be thought of as socially transmitted mental representations that consist of supernatural events and entities assumed to be real. Religious beliefs differ from empirical beliefs, which are based on how the world appears to be and are updated as new evidence accumulates or when new theories with better predictive power emerge. On the other hand, religious beliefs are not usually updated in response to new evidence or scientific explanations, and are therefore strongly associated with conservatism. They are fixed and rigid, which helps promote predictability and coherence to the rules of society among individuals within the group.

Unlike religionists, I try to back up what I say with evidence.

 

[Learner]

Just readi a little of the link , a little premature for this response ,would need to read the rest.

But Interestingly; Do former "fundmentalists" who've been persuaded to changed their ways, to instantly change their minds. Would they have that part of the "damage" brain rapidly repair?