Nature of freethinking [split from Easter Challenge Solution]

[Wxspin02]

Hmmmm, how did I land on this little nugget of gold? I wonder, I have heard such wonderful things about the "free thinking society". Free seems to be a term where enlightened individuals are allowed to think freely. How do we define this freedom? Is it that we can post items and make fun of others thereby exercising our freedom? Is it that we feel free to call others bigots? Are we being bigots by making fun of these people who exercise Christianity? Am I a bigot if I should question them on their beliefs? Are they bigots for believing and defending their way of life?

Wow, now I can't quite grasp freedom as it pertains to this "free thinking society". It seems that there are those with no faith, some with faith in the mother ship, some with faith in Jesus Christ. All are free to some degree. Well, so long as your feeble minds are allowed to be free do you exercise your free will. Am I saying that God gives us free will? Nope, I am saying for some medically impossible to ascertain reason, you all have free thoughts. This is not to say that you actually use your freedom in a manner that would be considered appropriate; you know with all that politically correct jargain GLBT societies mandate us as society use. Oh, there I went again, I mean the politically correct, appropriate language one must use when referencing all things not God.

Here is my response to your challenge. 1. You will all bow and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and it is not my problem that you cannot accept this... 2. The gospel is all but trash when arguments arise because now it is the human mind trying to convince others of their right beliefs. 3. As a Christian I care about you all but that will not change your "free thinking ways". 4. If you deny something, shouldn't you ask yourself why you feel the need to deny it? I don't accept that Christianity is forced on you as the answer. It is not, you simply need a reason to not be governed or feel as if your moral behaviors are governed by something beyond yourselves. Ergo you must provoke and deny the one's who might actually love you as you are....

I would counter that you all are quite arrogant to believe you are the pinnacle of societal woes. You alone hold the answer, or maybe you argue that we all hold the answer within ourselves.

I defer to one argument so as not to belittle my Father in heaven. It is an argument known for quite some time that seems appropriate enough for such a prize as a goat. Pascal's Wager!

Good luck filling that void you can't see in your very own heart. Chase after more money, new philosophies, run the race to denying God.... In the end, EVERY KNEE WILL BOW and EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS JESUS CHRIST IS LORD TO THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER! I would recommend you all pick up a copy of a book called Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Lee Strobel. Your biases will prevent this from happening, however I still make the recommendation. Shalom

[Dardedar]

Is that all you've got? Okay, I guess we're not being punked. I'll bite.

I have heard such wonderful things about the "free thinking society".

We're not a "society." I think there is a freethought society in Little Rock.

Free seems to be a term where enlightened individuals are allowed to think freely.

Before you speak about such things and reveal you have no understanding of the word, perhaps it would be appropriate to begin by familiarizing yourself with the simple dictionary definition of the word.

free-think-er n. A person who forms opinions about religion on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief. -- Webster's New World Dictionary -- Third College Edition

And note, it's one word, not two.

Is it that we can post items and make fun of others thereby exercising our freedom?

That's one way, yes. As Thomas Jefferson once said:
“I rarely waste time in reading on theological subjects… Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. If it could be understood it would not answer their purpose.” –Thomas Jefferson

Is it that we feel free to call others bigots?

When they are bigots, absolutely.

Are we being bigots by making fun of these people who exercise Christianity?

Apparently not. We have regular church attenders who also regularly attend our meetings. The absurdities in fundamentalist Christianity provide a very large target.

Am I a bigot if I should question them on their beliefs?

Probably not.

Are they bigots for believing and defending their way of life?

If it involves hating a group of people because of what they happen to be (gay for instance), then yes.

I can't quite grasp freedom as it pertains to this "free thinking society".

That was clear by your second sentence.

Well, so long as your feeble minds are allowed to be free do you exercise your free will.

Uh oh, some one is trying to hide their anger and not doing a very good job.

Here is my response to your challenge. 1. You will all bow and confess that Jesus Christ is... [blah blah blah]

Oh boy, that 2,000 year old threat. When are you guys going to get over the fact that all of your "Jesus is coming soon" prophecies failed, the leader of your group died, and he isn't going to come back again? Move on.

2. The gospel is all but trash when arguments arise because now it is the human mind trying to convince others of their right beliefs.

The problem with your gospels is that you can't provide good reasons for anyone to think the claims made in them are true.

3. As a Christian I care about you all but that will not change your "free thinking ways".

You could if you had good arguments and reasons for your beliefs. But you know you don't have those. If you did, you wouldn't call it "faith." Oh, and "freethinking" is one word. If you want to appear that you know what you are talking about on this matter, you will want to remember that.

4. If you deny something, shouldn't you ask yourself why you feel the need to deny it?

I deny things when they aren't true. And I have very well established reasons for knowing why your orthodox Christian claims aren't true.

...you simply need a reason to not be governed or feel as if your moral behaviors are governed by something beyond yourselves.

No, I would need a good reason to think my moral behaviors *are* governed by something beyond myself. Do you have any good reasons for why anyone should believe that? If so, do share.

Ergo you must provoke and deny the one's who might actually love you as you are....

Your evangelical brand of Christianity is not exactly known for that feature. As one fellow put it:

"The theory that you should always treat
the religious convictions of other people
with respect finds no support in the Gospels."
--Arnold Lunn (1888-1974)

You alone hold the answer,...

No, but we do at least understand the questions.

I defer to one argument so as not to belittle my Father in heaven... Pascal's Wager!

That stinker comes up a lot. So we have a nice tract on it. You should read it, you'll learn lots (smart Christians don't use it).

Good luck filling that void you can't see in your very own heart.

Hearts are pumps, they don't have voids. Our meetings are filled with folks who used to be religious. They, having experienced both sides, don't look back on the experience fondly. In fact, we just started a local Recovering from Religion group and will start conducting regular local meetings. There are a lot of people recovering from the damage religion has done to them.

In the end, EVERY KNEE WILL BOW and EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS JESUS CHRIST IS...

I think that was a good idea to go with the ALL CAPS on the second run of this slogan. Very effective. (Just kidding, we've seen the all caps before and it's not very effective).

I would recommend you all pick up a copy of a book called Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Lee Strobel. Your biases will prevent this from happening,...

If you were a little sharper on your details you would at least know that the farcical book with that title was written by Josh McDowell, not Strobel. We like to call it: "Evidence that would be thrown out of court," or "Evidence that wouldn't make it past the hearing" or "Evidence that Demands a Refund." Apparently you didn't read past the title? Course if you were a detail person, you wouldn't fall for such silly books in the first place.

Regarding Strobel (who is just as much of a simpleton as McDowell), let me point out that he is a journalist with no training in scholarship and no expertise in critical thinking. He writes pop evangelical books that tickle the ears of fundamentalists and give them the illusion that there is substance underneath their faith based beliefs. There is none. He goes around doing interviews with fundies that agree with him and he feeds them softball questions that shouldn't fool a grade schooler.

If you have an example of some of Strobel's evidence that impresses you, post it. There have been several careful and exhaustive examinations of Strobel's material. Here is one:

http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/

This fellow wrote a book rebutting Strobel specifically:

http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/CTVExcerptsIntro.htm

I have a copy of his book but never did get around to reading it. Can't get that interested in a light weight like Strobel. Regarding McDowell, there is a free online book devoted to ripping his classic to shreds (the new one isn't any better). You can read it here: The Jury Is In: The Ruling on McDowell's "Evidence." That is, if you are like us brave freethinkers and have the courage to consider whether your beliefs are true and can stand up to critical examination.

If you have any arguments by McDowell or Strobel that you are impressed with, please, pass them along and we'll be glad to give their claims careful consideration. Don't get your hopes up.

Thanks for stopping by.