Russell's Criticisms of Christianity & Jesus

[cjab]

No it is not. See the OP where I summarized his arguments.

It was you saying you'd discuss this without ad hominems. But it turns out you had no intention of refraining from ad hominems.

As I said, one ad hominem warrants another:

Proverbs 26:4 "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes."

An absurd list of strawmen. It is not an ad hominem attack on Christians to criticize Christianity. If you can't handle a critique then you shouldn't have asked for one.

Where? Quote him calling you cruel.

The word "cruel" or "cruelty" as alleged against Christians appear no less than 4 times in your own summary. Obviously you're into ad hominen just as much as he himself was.

He said "logically anterior" which has nothing to do with time.

Try looking it up in the dictionary.

 

[Tetsugaku]

As I said, one ad hominem warrants another

You said you'd do this without ad hominems. You lied.

The word "cruel" or "cruelty" as alleged against Christians appear no less than 4 times in your own summary. Obviously you're into ad hominen just as much as he himself was.

Quote where he calls you cruel.

Try looking it up in the dictionary.

Try reading for comprehension.

 

[cjab]

You said you'd do this without ad hominems. You lied.

You took this as an opportunity to lauch an all-out ad hominem attack on Christians. And then, to cap it all, you appear to by denying that I am one.

Prove to me anything I said about Russell is unjustiable from what is known of him.

 

[Tetsugaku]

You took this as an opportunity to lauch an all-out ad hominem attack on Christians.

No I did not.

And then, to cap it all, you appear to by denying that I am one.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Prove to me anything I said about Russell is unjustiable from what is known of him.

No. I'm here to discuss Russell's ideas. I thought you were to. I'm sorry to have discovered otherwise.

 

[Furion]

What We Must Do
Russell concludes on a positive note:

lol

A boatload of bitter whining is followed up with "the world has beauty!"

Don't you feel uplifted?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

So it turns out this whole thread was a massive waste of time, as you lied to me about being able to do this without ad hominems.

How can a dead man receive an insult?

 

[Whateverman]

You took this as an opportunity to lauch an all-out ad hominem attack on Christians.

You're ignorant of what "ad hominem" means. It is not merely an insult.

Definition of AD HOMINEM

appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect; marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[stiggy wiggy]

You're ignorant of what "ad hominem" means. It is not merely an insult.

Not "merely?" So it is an insult?

 

[Furion]

It is not merely an insult.

Does it come with a leather glove slap to the face too? Always wanted to do that..

 

[5wize]

The thing that's always seemed somewhat off to me about Russell's case here is that it seems to assume the listener/reader is going through a two-step process:
1) Can I establish, through reasoned argument, that God exists?
2) If I can, which of God's supposed prophets/messengers/avatars seems to teach or embody the best moral qualities?

Now this may be the process Russell went through, but of course hardly anybody else approaches religion that way. Which might be irrelevant if all Russell is doing is explaining "why I am not a Christian." But if he's trying in part to imply, "and that's why you shouldn't be a Christian either," then I think he would need to address other, more common reasons for being a Christian: because people were brought up to be Christian and it's worked for them, or because they think they've had some kind of personal, revelatory experience.

This is actually a really good point. If we are asking Christians to argue out of where we are at as atheists in order to bridge us from there to belief, we should do the same. Why are you Christian? National or familial culture? Logic? Faith? Disenchantment with the world? Disenchantment with the self? Fear of Hell? Desire for heaven? Gratitude? What?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Why are you Christian? National or familial culture? Logic? Faith? Disenchantment with the world? Disenchantment with the self? Fear of Hell? Desire for heaven? Gratitude? What?

Revelation

 

[5wize]

Revelation

Directly to you or introduced as someone else's (ie... scriptural)?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Yours or someone else's?

Neither. The Lord's, and not the Hawaii Five O guy.

 

[5wize]

Neither. The Lord's, and not the Hawaii Five O guy.

I meant to whom was the revelation made, you directly or is this belief by proxy in the revelation made to those in the bible narratives?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

I meant to whom was the revelation made, you directly or is this belief by proxy in the revelation made to those in the bible narratives?

The former, via the latter.

 

[5wize]

The former, via the latter.

O.K. You read the narratives and they affected you. What is your definition of "revelation" that applies to how the reading affected you?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

O.K. You read the narratives and they affected you.

Profounly.

What is your definition of "revelation" that applies to how the reading affected you?

An unveiling.

 

[5wize]

Profounly.

Why did you think what you read was profound?

An unveiling.

What did it unveil?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Why did you think what you read was profound?

It touched my soul, not just my intellect.

What did it unveil?

Jesus Christ, a Who, not a what.

 

[Tetsugaku]

why would a plato lover be the decider of what is christianity.… lol

nwrt