tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post1868116169112878409..comments2023-11-22T09:00:59.909-08:00Comments on Atheistwatch: Atheist Propagadna and Religious ExperienceJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)http://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-7472028014166338382013-07-31T04:09:44.380-07:002013-07-31T04:09:44.380-07:00It's all not all gravy you know.It's all not all gravy you know.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-85804822488090491122013-07-30T12:57:37.438-07:002013-07-30T12:57:37.438-07:00Well, see, what you added in your comment is going...Well, see, what you added in your comment is going to make a much different impression than just your post where someone might think it sounds like a Stage 1-3 faith perspective (per James Fowler). At least for those interested in nuance between different ways of thinking about and discussing religion and spirituality. <br /><br />Assuming you can find such people.tinythinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17137637122776756669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-54834556246733799752013-07-30T12:36:39.177-07:002013-07-30T12:36:39.177-07:00Good points Dave. I will take them one at a time:
...Good points Dave. I will take them one at a time:<br /><br />false postiive, good point!<br /><br />God made people: too anthro, or big guy in the sky. Yes but I just speak of it that way in assuming all religoius language is analogical. We formulate a more sophisticated sounding argument. Get over a similar idea.<br /><br />I do assume God is conscious and has will and volition. That's more more anthropomorphic than assuming he's impersonal is Diesticmorphic.<br /><br /><br />plays into stereotypes, dont' worry I know better than to give you the old "it's all gravy you know side step." ;-)<br /><br />I don't think position that a will is necessarily patterning God after humans. At least we have to call it will to be able to discuss in terms we can understand. It's all about us understanding what we are doing. otherwise God can remain wholly other we never have to talk about him.<br /><br />The problem arises because I use that to explain how it is that these emotional icons such as father, plain for you life, evoke a "false conversion (or even a true one--on the premise that they are all false). I don't think that's an unreasonable defense of conversion to say we have these emotional buttons that can be punched by people other than God, but they are the buttons God would punch.<br /><br />While her conversion was false that doesn't make them all false. We can express it in more sophisticated terms I suppose. I probalby could have when I was in seminary but that would sound pompous to me now.<br /><br />What I'm trying to say is we can't help express it in terms of "these are the buttons God would push." that doesn't mean God is actually a big man pushing buttons.<br />Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6538255877506581515.post-63443585502383843952013-07-30T11:58:10.938-07:002013-07-30T11:58:10.938-07:00This kind of thing does raise the question of how ...This kind of thing does raise the question of how many people who say they believe in God are doing so for reasons other than a presumed genuine encounter with the divine. Wouldn't this be a potential example of something that could be considered a "false positive"? <br /><br />Also, doesn't the whole "God made people for a personal relationship" seem too anthropomorphic and creationist? Even if one presumes there is a larger Presence out there, the whole idea of social relationships seems to be a human construction and conceit. <br /><br />While it may be understandable that humans might tend to frame their encounter with divinity in such a way, but it reeks of human existential exceptionalism. It plays into the very stereotypes that are part and parcel of the program you are criticizing.tinythinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17137637122776756669noreply@blogger.com