Comments on: A Few Thoughts and Explanations http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/ Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:31:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: zetetic http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-40729 zetetic Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:52:25 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-40729 I was never impressed when he was the RavingAtheist. I recall he used to blog on this or that and let everyone else debate the issue while we never heard mum from him. I won't miss him. I was never impressed when he was the RavingAtheist. I recall he used to blog on this or that and let everyone else debate the issue while we never heard mum from him.

I won’t miss him.

]]> By: nkb http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-37228 nkb Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:13:32 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-37228 <em>I realize Wiki isn’t credible, but it is unbiased. </em><em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_14_dating_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_14_dating_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin</a> </em> What? Where did you get the idea that Wikipedia is unbiased? That is possibly the worst-written, most-poorly referenced article I've seen on Wiki, and that is saying a lot. <em>All I claimed was that the blood came up AB positive, the same as it does in the Eucharistic Miracles. Never claimed there were any miracles involved with the Shroud. Fake or real, it has no bearing. I did not use the Shroud as Evidence of the Supernatural, which is what the conversation was about.</em> The only reason I said anything about the Shroud is because you mentioned it as a credential for one of the scientists who tested the blood in the "wafer". As far as the blood type, I don't understand how that is relevant. Can you elaborate on that? <em>Yeah Padre Pio died a rich man. Lived in a mansion, had servants and flew in a private jet. And all because he poured acid on his hands for 40 years.</em> Your sarcasm is misplaced. The Catholic Church itself was the source of most of these accusations (<a href="http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word1228.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word1228.htm</a>). <em>In one breath you make fun of the church for suspecting fraud in the Pio case, and in the next you doubt their skepticism. Whatever.</em> Where did I make fun of the church's skepticism? I was taking a dig at you, for stating "someone" was making accusations, when it is quite relevant that his own church wasn't buying it. <em>No, believers did not NEED the miracles of Pio. They may have loved him, but they were believers independent of him. My point was that his stigmata had nothing to do with whether or not people believed the churches teaching. </em> I never said the believers needed this miracle. Why do you keep making strawman arguments? There are many rich people who don't need more money, yet they cheat and steal in order to amass more.  Neither one of these points is relevant. The point was that Padre Pio became famous. I have no idea what kind of a person he was, but fame can be intoxicating to many people, and clergy are not exempt. <em>Having reading numerous books on the man, in my judgment he was as sane and rational as any man. You have the right to think otherwise. When the church forbid him from hearing confessions and saying mass, he obeyed. Does that sound like an egomaniac to you?</em> Another non-sequitur, and a strawman to boot. <em>Why does this matter to you anyway? How does my belief in miracles affect you? Unless of course, the possibility that they are true, rocks your world view?</em> I wish I had a buck for every armchair Christian psychologist that tried this inane argument on me. I'd be as rich as Padre Pio. ;) Your belief in "miracles" doesn't affect me at all. How does it affect you whether or not someone believes your "miracles"? I realize Wiki isn’t credible, but it is unbiased.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_14_dating_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin

What? Where did you get the idea that Wikipedia is unbiased? That is possibly the worst-written, most-poorly referenced article I’ve seen on Wiki, and that is saying a lot.
All I claimed was that the blood came up AB positive, the same as it does in the Eucharistic Miracles. Never claimed there were any miracles involved with the Shroud. Fake or real, it has no bearing. I did not use the Shroud as Evidence of the Supernatural, which is what the conversation was about.
The only reason I said anything about the Shroud is because you mentioned it as a credential for one of the scientists who tested the blood in the “wafer”. As far as the blood type, I don’t understand how that is relevant. Can you elaborate on that?
Yeah Padre Pio died a rich man. Lived in a mansion, had servants and flew in a private jet. And all because he poured acid on his hands for 40 years.
Your sarcasm is misplaced. The Catholic Church itself was the source of most of these accusations (http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word1228.htm).
In one breath you make fun of the church for suspecting fraud in the Pio case, and in the next you doubt their skepticism. Whatever.
Where did I make fun of the church’s skepticism? I was taking a dig at you, for stating “someone” was making accusations, when it is quite relevant that his own church wasn’t buying it.
No, believers did not NEED the miracles of Pio. They may have loved him, but they were believers independent of him. My point was that his stigmata had nothing to do with whether or not people believed the churches teaching.
I never said the believers needed this miracle. Why do you keep making strawman arguments? There are many rich people who don’t need more money, yet they cheat and steal in order to amass more.  Neither one of these points is relevant.
The point was that Padre Pio became famous. I have no idea what kind of a person he was, but fame can be intoxicating to many people, and clergy are not exempt.
Having reading numerous books on the man, in my judgment he was as sane and rational as any man. You have the right to think otherwise. When the church forbid him from hearing confessions and saying mass, he obeyed. Does that sound like an egomaniac to you?
Another non-sequitur, and a strawman to boot.
Why does this matter to you anyway? How does my belief in miracles affect you? Unless of course, the possibility that they are true, rocks your world view?
I wish I had a buck for every armchair Christian psychologist that tried this inane argument on me. I’d be as rich as Padre Pio. ;)
Your belief in “miracles” doesn’t affect me at all. How does it affect you whether or not someone believes your “miracles”?

]]> By: jeney http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-37055 jeney Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:59:57 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-37055 I wanted to say this. I had never read your blog before I clicked on the link to read your Super Cool News.  But after reading  just one post for you, I did something that I absolutely abhor.  I made a decision about your news, without as much as a cursory  attempt to read another line aboutyou or from you. When I said in an email that I wasn't sure if this was all a prank, I said this without giving you the benefit of the doubt.  I just read it, thought - "Oh that's great!" and then 30 minutes later thought, "Gosh, I think it's a joke".  Later, I read more of you. I read what people who have been reading you for ages had to say about you.  And I realized I had been judgmental and had not given you the benefit of the doubt.  And anyone who knows me, knows how I've been hurt by others treating me the same as I treated you. I'm sure my tiny statement in my email didn't give you pause, but it has been bothering me that I behaved that way.  And I just wanted to err on the side of caution and say that I'm sorry I was such a turd. I wanted to say this.

I had never read your blog before I clicked on the link to read your Super Cool News. 

But after reading  just one post for you, I did something that I absolutely abhor.  I made a decision about your news, without as much as a cursory  attempt to read another line aboutyou or from you.

When I said in an email that I wasn’t sure if this was all a prank, I said this without giving you the benefit of the doubt.  I just read it, thought – “Oh that’s great!” and then 30 minutes later thought, “Gosh, I think it’s a joke”. 

Later, I read more of you. I read what people who have been reading you for ages had to say about you.  And I realized I had been judgmental and had not given you the benefit of the doubt.  And anyone who knows me, knows how I’ve been hurt by others treating me the same as I treated you.

I’m sure my tiny statement in my email didn’t give you pause, but it has been bothering me that I behaved that way.  And I just wanted to err on the side of caution and say that I’m sorry I was such a turd.

]]> By: “Thoughts and Explanations” | Kenneth Hynek http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-37042 “Thoughts and Explanations” | Kenneth Hynek Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:20:56 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-37042 [...] Raving Theist confirms that it’s for real — his unexpectedly high-profile conversion to Christianity (to Catholicism, specifically, [...] [...] Raving Theist confirms that it’s for real — his unexpectedly high-profile conversion to Christianity (to Catholicism, specifically, [...]

]]> By: E.P. Hale http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36937 E.P. Hale Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:52:54 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36937 I am just really, really happy for you.  And I hope you do keep blogging, and I hope you don't get out of your 'old' loop...I can't wait to see where God takes you and what He has for you. I am just really, really happy for you.  And I hope you do keep blogging, and I hope you don’t get out of your ‘old’ loop…I can’t wait to see where God takes you and what He has for you.

]]> By: mk http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36925 mk Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:43:16 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36925 Exactly Irreligious, And I honestly don't believe I attacked  who VJ is or what she believes.  Heck, I only attacked her attacks! Enough said on the subject.  She very well might be funny, and I'm certainly willing to give it another go.    Not having been here very long, it's possible you have a better sense of her humor than I do.  I could get away with a lot more at Jill's because everyone there knew me, and knew that I was trustworthy.  I'm new here and realize I can come across in ways that I don't mean.  The internet.  It's a blessing (can I say that :) and a curse!   I think both sides feel very vulnerable on these in these discussions, as we are talking about our very essences.  We tend to come out fighting, before we are even sure what the heck we're fighting about.  Makes us all defensive.  I'll try to be better.  I promise. Exactly Irreligious,

And I honestly don’t believe I attacked  who VJ is or what she believes.  Heck, I only attacked her attacks!

Enough said on the subject.  She very well might be funny, and I’m certainly willing to give it another go.    Not having been here very long, it’s possible you have a better sense of her humor than I do.  I could get away with a lot more at Jill’s because everyone there knew me, and knew that I was trustworthy.  I’m new here and realize I can come across in ways that I don’t mean.  The internet.  It’s a blessing (can I say that :) and a curse!  

I think both sides feel very vulnerable on these in these discussions, as we are talking about our very essences.  We tend to come out fighting, before we are even sure what the heck we’re fighting about.  Makes us all defensive. 

I’ll try to be better.  I promise.

]]> By: Irreligious http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36924 Irreligious Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:32:31 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36924 MK wrote: <strong><em>"You are right.  When emotions run high, it becomes easier and easier to resort to mud slinging.  But tell me honestly, do you not see a difference between a little sarcasm and out and out insulting someone’s intelligence?</em></strong> <strong><em>Sometimes, humor, even if it’s cutting can open doors.  Outright insults, usually close them." </em></strong> I agree. Sometimes humor can lighten the load.  But just as often subtle digs wrapped up in humor can be just as effective as outright insults  in shutting down communication. Indeed, sarcasm can be even more effective because the target of it often infers that his or her intelligence is being mocked. I think you're stitch, MK. But I also think UnpseakablyViolentJane is funny as hell, too.   The funny thing about humor is that we don't all share the same sense of humor and certainly not about the same things. Humor only works if the intended target perceives it as funny and not at insult directed at him or her or what he or she values. MK wrote:
“You are right.  When emotions run high, it becomes easier and easier to resort to mud slinging.  But tell me honestly, do you not see a difference between a little sarcasm and out and out insulting someone’s intelligence?
Sometimes, humor, even if it’s cutting can open doors.  Outright insults, usually close them.”

I agree. Sometimes humor can lighten the load.  But just as often subtle digs wrapped up in humor can be just as effective as outright insults  in shutting down communication. Indeed, sarcasm can be even more effective because the target of it often infers that his or her intelligence is being mocked.

I think you’re stitch, MK. But I also think UnpseakablyViolentJane is funny as hell, too.  

The funny thing about humor is that we don’t all share the same sense of humor and certainly not about the same things. Humor only works if the intended target perceives it as funny and not at insult directed at him or her or what he or she values.

]]> By: mk http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36921 mk Sun, 04 Jan 2009 18:35:23 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36921 Irreligious, You are right.  When emotions run high, it becomes easier and easier to resort to mud slinging.  But tell me honestly, do you not see a difference between a little sarcasm and out and out insulting someone's intelligence? Sometimes, humor, even if it's cutting can open doors.  Outright insults, usually close them. I have answered every question put forth to me, honestly, and in doing so have made myself vulnerable. I said outright that I choose not to devote my time to debate for debate sake, and I am ridiculed for waxing poetic.  I try to explain that I really do have an intense life and have no time for idle arguing, and I'm accused of using emotional tactics.  I mean seriously, where I have outright insulted anyone?  You and I had our moment, and we both managed to find a common ground.  I'm not asking that we all sing kumbya, but isn't there a way to speak civilly with one another?    Am I too understand that in order to have a conversation with an Atheist I must be ready to take abuse because this comes with the territory?  I have debated with those on the other side of the abortion issue for years, and have become fast friends with many of them, some travelling to my homestate and staying in my home...despite our differences over something so fundamental as "life".  This only happened because we each respected each others persons if not their beliefs.   I have been debating an atheist for over two years now, and I can honestly say that we have a strong friendship, because of and in spite of it.  While I can hold my own in the sarcasm department, I have yet to stoop to name calling.   Good Heavens, we wonder why Israel and Palestine can't get along.  We can't even manage a simple conversation about our different belief systems!... I'll just keep my responses for those that I think are sincere and try to ignore all others from this point on.    Not only don't I have time for debate for debate's sake, I also don't have time to swap insults.  I've played Monkey's  Island, thank you very much, and have learned all I can from Captain Rottingham! Irreligious,

You are right.  When emotions run high, it becomes easier and easier to resort to mud slinging.  But tell me honestly, do you not see a difference between a little sarcasm and out and out insulting someone’s intelligence?

Sometimes, humor, even if it’s cutting can open doors.  Outright insults, usually close them.

I have answered every question put forth to me, honestly, and in doing so have made myself vulnerable.

I said outright that I choose not to devote my time to debate for debate sake, and I am ridiculed for waxing poetic.  I try to explain that I really do have an intense life and have no time for idle arguing, and I’m accused of using emotional tactics.  I mean seriously, where I have outright insulted anyone?  You and I had our moment, and we both managed to find a common ground.  I’m not asking that we all sing kumbya, but isn’t there a way to speak civilly with one another?   

Am I too understand that in order to have a conversation with an Atheist I must be ready to take abuse because this comes with the territory?  I have debated with those on the other side of the abortion issue for years, and have become fast friends with many of them, some travelling to my homestate and staying in my home…despite our differences over something so fundamental as “life”.  This only happened because we each respected each others persons if not their beliefs.   I have been debating an atheist for over two years now, and I can honestly say that we have a strong friendship, because of and in spite of it. 

While I can hold my own in the sarcasm department, I have yet to stoop to name calling.   Good Heavens, we wonder why Israel and Palestine can’t get along.  We can’t even manage a simple conversation about our different belief systems!…

I’ll just keep my responses for those that I think are sincere and try to ignore all others from this point on.    Not only don’t I have time for debate for debate’s sake, I also don’t have time to swap insults.  I’ve played Monkey’s  Island, thank you very much, and have learned all I can from Captain Rottingham!

]]> By: Irreligious http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36916 Irreligious Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:37:18 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36916 Far more often than not in these discussions, there is a point after which civility is no longer attainable. If you really value civility, that's when you bow out. There are walls we just can't penetrate from our respective vantage points and it is frustrating for those on both sides. I see as many snarky Christians here as I do atheist. Atheist tend to be more profane, in-your-face and irreverent (perhaps, because they're not trying to get to heaven),  but Christians can be just as condescending and rude, even without the vulgar language.  It's surprisingly esay to offend when you're being honest. Not right, necessarily, but <em>honest</em>. Far more often than not in these discussions, there is a point after which civility is no longer attainable. If you really value civility, that’s when you bow out.

There are walls we just can’t penetrate from our respective vantage points and it is frustrating for those on both sides.

I see as many snarky Christians here as I do atheist. Atheist tend to be more profane, in-your-face and irreverent (perhaps, because they’re not trying to get to heaven),  but Christians can be just as condescending and rude, even without the vulgar language. 

It’s surprisingly esay to offend when you’re being honest. Not right, necessarily, but honest.

]]> By: :Lily http://ravingatheist.com/2008/12/a-few-thoughts-and-explanations/comment-page-9/#comment-36912 :Lily Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:06:59 +0000 http://ravingatheist.com/?p=2341#comment-36912 UVJ: You have got to be kidding, right? Civility is the lubricant that makes any kind of discourse possible. Otherwise we are just shouting past each other.  And what is telling people to shut their browsers other than telling them to shut up? What can you possibly mean by this:  <em>From my perspective, your objective is silencing skeptical discussion evidenced by the fact that you want courtesy from atheists that you do not youself extend ... </em> MK's conduct here has been exemplary in its courtesy. She has gone out of her way to be conciliatory towards people who little deserve such forbearance.  There are some here, and I include myself among them, who would do well to imitate her.  UVJ: You have got to be kidding, right? Civility is the lubricant that makes any kind of discourse possible. Otherwise we are just shouting past each other.  And what is telling people to shut their browsers other than telling them to shut up?

What can you possibly mean by this:  From my perspective, your objective is silencing skeptical discussion evidenced by the fact that you want courtesy from atheists that you do not youself extend …

MK’s conduct here has been exemplary in its courtesy. She has gone out of her way to be conciliatory towards people who little deserve such forbearance.  There are some here, and I include myself among them, who would do well to imitate her. 

]]>