You're the guy who mocks thinking and says it's a bad idea.
And you're the guy who rejects what Christ said.
Phat writes:
The Holy Spirit is not your relativistic hippie spirit that you had in the sixties.
In the sixties I was pretty religious. By stereotyping me, you're just making a fool of yourself.
Phat writes:
... you and AZPaul3 smoked too much weed and let your rational brains take over once you stopped. We will come by in a truck and pick you up from your acid trip by the pyramid once you come down
Really, stop being an idiot.
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
After staring at the screen for a while all I can come up with is something about blasphemy and heresy tho I can't remember why?
and let your rational brains take over once you stopped.
Thank the heavens that never happened. The stopping part, that is. Sounds quite rational to me.
Oh, I remember. Phat speaks as a blasphemous heretic attempting to push forward his blasphemous heretical tenet that there is such a thing as "too much weed." Heretic!
The Holy Spirit is not your relativistic hippie spirit that you had in the sixties. You may have been on the pathg, but you and AZPaul3 smoked too much weed and let your rational brains take over once you stopped. We will come by in a truck and pick you up from your acid trip by the pyramid once you come down.
This is why I can't quit EVC. All the sound positions backed by both inductive and deductive logical evidence as opposed to name-calling and stereotyping.
Just say Yo - Jerry Garcia reimagined Socorro style.
The problem with knowing everything is learning nothing.
If you don't know what you're doing, find someone who does, and do what they do.
Anglagard, since you are here it will discipline me to get back to my topic. Have you ever heard of this book and how would you rate it if you have?
I really need to resume critiquing and explaining my take on this long book if I may. I have been listening to it extensively on audible but I keep falling asleep and need to ask Alexa to back it up an hour or two each day.
I'm slogging through it, however. I believe I am down to the 1066 split, though I really need to review some of it and read it via hard-copy once that arrives in the mail. Audible is great, but it makes me lazy.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ***
far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.- Dr.John Lennox
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe. - Criss Jami, Killo
The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him. Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).
Of course it does. External stimuli can influence the transformation but only the mind itself can "control" the transformation.
Do you think the mind can be programmed? Parents. teachers. etc. can provide information but they can't control what the mind does with it. That's why we have rational people and the idiots who voted for Trump coming out of the same schools.
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
At an early age? Oh, you bet the human mind can be programmed. Just ask the Jesuits.
Later in life? With effort you can program and re-program the collective mind of an entire society. Just ask Joseph Goebbels.
Parents. teachers. etc. can provide information but they can't control what the mind does with it.
We have seen brainwashing. We know it is real. We know how it works.
Given the skill of the practitioners the process can be as if they have taken your brain, set it on a table and uploaded their own modules without you being aware of any of it.
Jesus Camp is an extreme though representative example. Cultural brainwashing is not limited to neither right-wing nor religion, however.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ***
far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.- Dr.John Lennox
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe. - Criss Jami, Killo
The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him. Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).
Cultural brainwashing is not limited to neither right-wing nor religion, however.
That may be true but both the right and religion, which might as well be the same as far as intellectual ability is concerned, are where the phenomenon is most often in use. Understandably, each seems to also have a deep need for the practice within their official rituals.
Later in life? With effort you can program and re-program the collective mind of an entire society. Just ask Joseph Goebbels.
Another source is the 2015 documentary, The Brainwashing of My Dad. I just searched for it on my Roku. You can view it for free on the Roku Channel, tubi, and pluto, through subscription on another channel (Gravitas, I think), or by renting it on a few other services. Search for it on your own streaming device.
From that Wikipedia link provided above:
quote:Synopsis As Jen Senko tries to understand the transformation of her father from a nonpolitical Democrat to an angry Republican fanatic, she uncovers the forces behind the media that changed him completely: a plan by Roger Ailes under President Richard Nixon for a media takeover by the Republicans, the 1971 Powell Memo urging business leaders to influence institutions of public opinion (especially the media, universities, and courts), the 1987 dismantling of the Fairness Doctrine under President Ronald Reagan, and the signing of the 1996 Telecommunications Act under President Bill Clinton. The documentary aims to show how the media and the nation changed, which leads to questions about who owns the airwaves, what rights listeners and watchers have, and what responsibility the government has to keep the airwaves fair, accurate, and accountable.
Content Senko's father, Frank, was stated by her as originally being a "nonpolitical Kennedy Democrat" who began changing into a far-right Republican in the 1980s. On her father's lengthy commute to his place of employment, he listened to conservative talk radio, which Senko believes started the change in her father's personality. In particular, he listened to Rush Limbaugh and watched Fox News. Towards the end of his life, Frank's views mostly changed back to being somewhere in the middle due to his wife exposing him to liberal media. He died in January 2016 at the age of 93.
One of the people in the documentary who had also been brainwashed was a truck driver who had nothing else to listen to the long hauls than talk radio. His recovery started when he discovered NPR.
Part of the effectiveness of that brainwashing derives from isolating the victim from other perspectives and/or reality, AKA "placing them in a bubble". FOX and talk radio do that in part by not even mentioning facts that the rest of the world see unfolding in real time, or else by discrediting other sources in the minds of their victims. Basically, how cults work their brainwashing magic on their followers.
The creation of those bubbles is made worse by social media, which uses AI to profile users in order to filter and push specific content to individuals. That is covered in the Netflix documentary, The Social Dilemma.
Also refer (yet again) to now-retired psychology professor Bob Altemeyer's 2006 book, The Authoritarians. A characteristic of right-wing authoritarians (high RWAs -- everybody is on his RWA scale but rate differently) is that they classify the world into their own in-group and the out-group of all others, isolating themselves from other groups taking on a them-vs-us mentality that can verge on xenophobia. They tend to feel threatened by "the others", leading them to react with almost constant fear and hatred. Their brains even tend to be physically different from those of low RWAs with larger (and hence more active) amygdalas, which process emotional responses of fear, anxiety, and aggression. High RWAs have a high tendency to follow any authoritarian leader whom they might see as protecting them from their constantly perceived threats from "others". Thus high RWAs are particularly vulnerable to getting locked inside a right-wing conspiracy-theory bubble. Also to extreme religious groups.
Altemeyer's studies in right-wing authoritarianism spanned decades. He would test all his incoming freshman students as well as their parents (voluntarily) and then conduct follow-on studies on them for several years. Being isolated from individuals from the "outside group" allows them to accept the stereotypes promoted by their own in-group and thus to fear them. But as they meet and get to know members of the "outside group" (such as happens when you leave your small home town and go to college), encountering diversity normally lowers their RWA rating.
We have seen brainwashing. We know it is real. We know how it works.
How sadly true. For example, the majority of one political party, the GOP, has been brainwashed to support a leadership intent on establishing autocratic rule even if it destroys America.
A truly great and significant book relating to both Christian Church history but more importantly to the Hebrew genesis of the stories that became the Old Testament under Christianity is Asimov's Guide o the Bible. Imminently readable it outlines the societal, political and economic forces that drove the creation of the Judaic faiths; Judaism, Islam and Christianity.
Bruce Shelly's excellent book, which you so handily and ignorantly denounce, taught me about this man, character, and subsequent movement: Waldo Sought a Truer Faith Reflecting on the many years spent arguing with you and jar, I am struck by the massive ignorance which both of you seem to have regarding the possibility that a living God interacts with humanity. Critical thinking limits you and shoehorns you into a way of thought that never considers un-evidenced events.
jar writes:
A truly great and significant book relating to both Christian Church history but more importantly to the Hebrew genesis of the stories that became the Old Testament under Christianity is Asimov's Guide o the Bible. Imminently readable it outlines the societal, political and economic forces that drove the creation of the Judaic faiths; Judaism, Islam and Christianity.
Do you honestly think and believe that an atheist/humanist could even understand the Bible? I could care less what Asimov's credentials are...he is speaking on a subject with which he has no familiarity. He does not have the Holy Spirit nor do you. From Wiki:
He was president of the American Humanist Association.[
From that organizations definition:
quote:The American Humanist Association (AHA) is a non-profit organization in the United States that advances secular humanism, a philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms the ability and responsibility of human beings to lead personal lives of ethical fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.
This is too funny, but the lot of you would wholeheartedly agree that there is none more qualified to explain a book about God and religion than the president of the Humanists!
Wiki writes:
Asimov was an atheist, a humanist, and a rationalist.[113] He did not oppose religious conviction in others, but he frequently railed against superstitious and pseudoscientific beliefs that tried to pass themselves off as genuine science. During his childhood, his father and mother observed the traditions of Orthodox Judaism, though not as stringently as they had in Petrovichi; they did not, however, force their beliefs upon young Isaac. Thus, he grew up without strong religious influences, coming to believe that the Torah represented Hebrew mythology in the same way that the Iliad recorded Greek mythology.[240] When he was 13, he chose not to have a bar mitzvah.
I am not in any way saying that I dont respect Asimovs overall intellectual capability. He was a very good science fiction writer. I am simply stating that I in no way would bother reading his synopsis of the Bible as it would corrupt my thinking. Shelley, the guy whom I'm reading, is well respected among Christians and secularists alike. His book is required reading in many a college classroom. More on Asimov, from Wiki:
Asmovs quote writes:
I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.
He does have a wry sense of humor that you guys would appreciate. I do also.
If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ***
far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.- Dr.John Lennox
The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe. - Criss Jami, Killo
The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him. Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).
You still seem to be unaware of the basics, of reality, of honesty, of evidence, of how to think.
The so called Bible is little different than any other piece of literature; it is the product of human imagination influenced by the culture of the author and reflecting the political, religious, social and mythos of the author's era and area.
Those factors, the political, religious, social and mythos of the author's era and area, are what can be studied but anyone and everyone regardless of the silly nonsense you post. There is no need for any "Holy Spirit" and in fact any such outside influence when examining evidence can only lead to a wrong conclusion.
And neither I or any other posters have suggested that Asimov's credentials might have any relevance. That is you continued error of thinking that SOURCE is of relevance over content. The content of Asimov's Guide to the Bible is what is significant and it is based on reality and evidence that can be independently verified regardless of the persons belief or some imaginary "Holy Spirit" (a trait that is singularly missing from ALL the apologists).
At an early age? Oh, you bet the human mind can be programmed. Just ask the Jesuits.
But it doesn't work. Catholic kids are more likely than most to operate outside their "programming".
AZPaul3 writes:
With effort you can program and re-program the collective mind of an entire society. Just ask Joseph Goebbels.
You can influence what people will do, just like you can convince people to wear masks by telling them the science is behind it.
My point with Phat was that the mind does change itself as a response to the stimuli that it receives, which is what you are saying.
The Catholic kids also receive stimuli from non-Catholic friends, from books that they're "not allowed to read", etc. They can not be programmed; they can only be influenced.
The German people quickly became disillusioned with Nazi propaganda and needed the Gestapo to keep them in line. Your computer needs no Gestapo to police its programming.
And the mind does not need an external entity like a holy spook to change it.
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
Bruce Shelly's excellent book, which you so handily and ignorantly denounce....
Where did I do that?
Phat writes:
I am struck by the massive ignorance which both of you seem to have regarding the possibility that a living God interacts with humanity.
When have i ever rejected the possibility of a God interacting with humanity?
For God's sake, when you reply to me, reply to me, not to the crap that you make up in your head.
Phat writes:
Critical thinking limits you and shoehorns you into a way of thought that never considers un-evidenced events.
Critical thinking doesn't limit anybody. Jumping to the conclusions that you have been spoon-fed limits you.
And again, again, again... I have considered unevidenced events. They go into the unevidenced pile. No evidence for a "living God" goes into the same pile as no evidence for leprechauns. You also have an unevidenced pile. You're just not consistent about what you put in it.
Phat writes:
Do you honestly think and believe that an atheist/humanist could even understand the Bible?
Of course. Do you honestly believe that somebody who doesn't believe Frodo is real can understand The Lord of the Rings? Why don't you ever address that point?
Phat writes:
I could care less what Asimov's credentials are...
I didn't say a word about Asimov.
Phat writes:
...he is speaking on a subject with which he has no familiarity.
You have no clue about what he was familiar with.
Phat writes:
He does not have the Holy Spirit nor do you.
Nor do you. By their fruits ye shall know them.
Phat writes:
This is too funny, but the lot of you would wholeheartedly agree that there is none more qualified to explain a book about God and religion than the president of the Humanists!
And yet some Christians think that Christians are qualified to explain the Qur'an.
Phat writes:
I am simply stating that I in no way would bother reading his synopsis of the Bible as it would corrupt my thinking.
Exactly. You are admitting that what you've been taught is nothing but propaganda. It can't stand on its own. It has to be protected from outside influences. That's pretty weak for "absolute truth".
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
™ Version 4.2
(1)
