Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Craig v. Carroll Craig v. Carroll

07-18-2013 , 06:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doggg
Lol. You are really too much. Everything is always asserted to be "obvious" by you, but yet you won't just come out and specifically say what you mean beforehand. Instead you are gathering information with hen-pecks, and every bit of information you gather is somehow used to justify your obvious conclusion, which has already been determined, because it is obvious.
Glad you see it now. I think I said exactly what I meant some time back, that I think you have come to believe what you have been told and that you haven't arrived there quite as independently as you think.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Doggg
You should be concerned with the strength of my arguments, and not where they come from, or who "taught them to me."
I would except that's what we're talking about, where your beliefs came from and specifically why you believe that god created the universe. I've also pushed you a little on your certianty but you've just been ignoring that question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doggg

Let me just say that my own opinions, independently formed on a number of issues, just so happen to be confirmed by the scriptures.
A stunning co-incidence, particularly for someone growing up in a culture hugely influenced by those scriptures and regularly exposed to them (you may not think so but unless you grew up in a box, you will have regularly been exposed to Christian ideas, in the media, in your community, in films and TV programs, in literature etc etc). It's not as stunning, it has to be said, as someone who grew up in a Muslim or Hindu country or somewhere where no one had ever heard of Christianity...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doggg
I've often talked about the day I realized that if I had not turned away from the moral program outlined by Christ, I would not have made such egregious errors and missteps in my life. The revelation I received was that the scriptures were written for our own benefit.

Christ said it this way: Man was not made for the sabbath, but the sabbath was made for man.
If only religion had nothing but positive effects, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-18-2013 , 08:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
I don't think you have to be an atheist to find the persecution thing goofy

In speaking about the inevitability of persecution, I can't quite convince myself that Jesus intended his followers to wear it like a passive aggressive badge of honor
What do you expect when Christian children fear being arrested for bringing their Bibles to school or for praying in public. Didn't you hear about the Christian Teacher who was arrested because he had a Bible on his desk? Or the Infidel Teacher who forced a Christian Student to stamp on the image of Jesus, and the student was arrested when he refused? Plus it's basically impossible to enter political office as a Christian.

etc.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, some people are beaten or killed (arrested goes without saying) in less civilised parts of the world if they hold the wrong religious views. Yes, this includes being Christian. Also, being atheist.

Christians in the USA that cry about persecution don't know how good they have it, and the only changes that are happening now (which are few, and not quick or far reaching enough) are attempts to create a level playing field for people of all faiths, or none. Boo hoo.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-18-2013 , 08:38 PM
Doggg, didn't you say you used to be a 'hard core' atheist at some point? Are you talking about before you were 14-15 (according to your testimony ITT)?
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-18-2013 , 09:38 PM
Ya he frequently refers to his experiences as a atheist to support his very negative characterizations of atheists. Didn't realize this experience was when he was a tween living in a troubled house, but if I was to use my experience as an atheist at that age as a judge of atheism I would probably think it was pretty stupid too.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 12:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish
Doggg, didn't you say you used to be a 'hard core' atheist at some point? Are you talking about before you were 14-15 (according to your testimony ITT)?
I don't know what I was when I was 15. It's possible that I was a deist, but I never prayed that I could remember. I remember only thinking about God and having a very simplistic and crude view of creation that somehow proved that God existed because "something cannot come from nothing."

I became born again when I was 15, though, or 16. I was on fire for God for a few years and then got mixed up with a girl who almost got me killed. Then I got mixed up in everything: I did drugs, drank heavily, got into fights, got arrested, traveled the country, dated various girls and did the best dionysian pose I could.

I always carried a book bag on me, and if you opened it up, there would always be a bottle of vodka, a pack of marlboro regular, two composition notebooks (filled with very bad poetry, short stories and metaphysical flapdoodle), a small paperback copy of Cosmos by Carl Sagan, Sagan's Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors (his best book), maybe Henry Miller's Tropic Of Cancer, Desolation Angels, Dawkin's Selfish Gene, A Gould text, a pocket knife, a Darkness On The Edge Of Town cd, two or three bandannas, and plenty of spare change.

That just about sums up 15+ years of my life, when I was not only an atheist, but pretty active in the ICC religion forum (channel 103), where I would aggressively attack Christianity. I'm still semi-famous there, but they have got to be kidding with their membership prices now.

I left that forum because I got mixed up with a woman poster irl, and things went really bad. It was just time to leave that behind me.

I'm pretty sure I posted my 'atheist testimony' here in RGT already.

<searching.....>

I found it:
Quote:
Greatest TL-DR EVER!

My mother and biological father were both agnostics. I don't remember thinking about God too much when I was little. My childhood wasn't a happy period, and there was divorce, violence and abuse. I don't think I had actually ever held a Bible in my hand until I was 11, and it was the Hebrew Scriptures.

My Aunt was a JW, and sometimes she put Watchtower literature into my hands. I don't remember my reaction to the literature. I only remember wanting to understand why it seemed so important to her, but not being able to. My dad took me to a catholic church two times, where we lit a candle for my grandfather who had just passed, though he claims now that he can't remember it.

My mother remarried. My stepfather was Jewish, and my mother converted for marriage. I don't think she ever took it seriously. After my stepfather's father died, he stopped going to the synagogue, claiming that they priced him out. Anyway, I attended Hebrew School for two years. I even had a Bar Mitzvah.

Oddly enough, I now know more about Judaism than I did when I was 14. I memorized the prayers. I did the homework assignments. But nothing penetrated. Hebrew School was an extension of what my stepfather wanted, and I despised the man's presence in my life. The day after my bar mitzvah, I probably couldn't tell you what the 10 commandments were, but I could recite hebrew prayers by heart. It's amazing what kind of pretzels you can tie yourself up into with a little prodding by resentment.

But my first love was science. I was at a seder dinner at my stepfather's mother's house in bayonne, and they had noticed that I spent most of my time in the basement where the library was. I would read all of the texts on astronomy and space and dinosaurs for hours. Understanding very little of the technical scientific jargon, but feeling awed by the visual descriptions of the universe, quasars, supernovae. They told me one night to take what I wanted. I did, procuring as many science texts as I could. I knew there was great knowledge waiting to be revealed to me in those texts. But I did not possess the key to unlocking it. My education was interrupted by moving from jersey city to bayonne, back to jersey city, then to bayonne, then to asbury park. I missed a lot of school and was way behind my classmates.

When I was in high school, a fellow student began to talk to me about Jesus Christ. He told me about hell, and everlasting punishment. He showed me the scriptures concerning these punishments. He showed me prophecies that Jesus had fulfilled. He showed me the prophecy of the 70 weeks. He told me that miracles were common in his church. It was all very convincing, and I went to church with him and his older brother on one stormy thursday night.

I got saved in the youth tent. I was given a bible. We went into the church lobby where the adult service had just ended. "Doggg here, just got saved." Some tall, sweaty black man hugged me, tightly, and didn't let go. "Welcome to the kingdom of God my young brother," he said. Then another man and another hug. And another. And another.

I was told I was born again. My spirit was brand new, recreated. But I didn't feel different. I never fell under the power like I'd seen others in my church do, though I wanted to. I struggled with pet sins the same as before, and felt more sinful than ever, but forged ahead by faith, through fear.

But it seems like I was embraced and hugged all night in that lobby. The people were happy, smiling, glowing. Strange. I had never met a truly happy person before. Not like this. My life was cold, and detached from any good things. My stepfather was abusive. My mom worked two jobs. My father awol. My brother had ran away. And all of these people had a story I could relate to. I was told over and over how God had changed their lives, and taken them out of the cold, and into His warmth. That is what I wanted.

In the next two years, I devoted myself to study of the bible and attending church. I threw out all of my "worldy" music. I prayed for my stepfather, my missing father, my missing brother. I preached hellfire, miracles and fulfilled prophecy, just as it was preached to me the first time. Some of my friends got saved. But I became even more persecuted at home. This was a jewish-agnostic household. I didn't mind. At least now I had a cause, a legitimate reason for persecutions, besides having the wrong last name.

I'll never forget when I showed up for a birthday party at a friend's house. I stood outside with my bible in hand. Someone was going to get saved tonight. Kids stood outside drinking fruit punch and chatting. And then she walked over and said Hi. She was skinny, with long blonde hair, and blue eyes. Hi? Me? Well... hi.

I loved going to church. I loved studying the Bible. But nothing made me feel the way I felt when I was with her. Her life was more a wreck than mine was. Her father was an abusive drunk. Her mother a fundamentalist christian who had tourette's, which made for hilarious ranting about the house.

She would run away after taking a beating, and she'd show up at my door, I would leave with her. We would stay up all night on a stranger's couch or lakeside in my car smoking and drinking beer and making out. How could this be wrong? I had saved her again, and again. How could this be sin?

My christian mentor told me that she was no good. Pray for her, he said. My mother warned me off of her. I didn't listen.

But she started to do hard drugs. She would vanish into newark for days. She spiraled, and was out of control.

All in all, I dated her on and off for years, but it finally ended when she called me one day to come over, apparantly now dating me and another man, and I walked into her house and a life-and-death struggle took place between me and the other guy, who went for a loaded gun in a drawer. The next night my mother's back door was kicked in at 1am in the morning. Some nut, whose own father had killed his own mother, was driving around town armed with a side-arm, looking for me.

She brought big trouble into my life, and in the end, my mentor and my mother was right. I was wrong. That wasn't goodness. She was damaged, and needed something more than any man could give her. I was not God, and couldn't save anybody.

When the dust settled, I was on my own path. I re-read dozens of texts on evolutionary biology. Dawkins. Gould. Ridley. Sagan. My first love was science. I ate up the books, and comprehended them. All of those links that I couldn't connect as a child suddenly locked into place. These books were explaining what I saw in the world around me. They weren't trying to change it, but simply explain and illuminate. I was illuminated.

Around that time, I discovered the internet and aol. I discovered atheism, and agnosticism. I had no idea there were people who rejected theism outright on grounds of reason and logic. In church, we were given little chick tracts, where evolution was attacked as lies. Alternative science was taught. Creationism. 7 literal days. After searching through those texts again, I could see that those chick texts were distorting, misquoting, and boldly misinforming. I could not in good faith align myself with beliefs that called for these tactics.

I always liked to play chess, and found the ICC. They had a religion chat area. I remember arguing after work with the theists. I argued with creationists nightly. And that is my story (although there is much more, including a relationship with one of the channel's activist-atheist female members, but it is already tl-dr, I know). Life was short, brutal, red-in-tooth-and-claw, and nasty. And evolution was blind and indifferent to human suffering and human concerns. And those happy christians had no idea what life was really like outside of their sanctuary, where people generally acted in bizarre and injurious fashion, without rhyme or reason. The world sucked. God didn't exist. Faith was a pacifier. Literal creationism was erroneous. And I was an outspoken, self-proclaimed atheist.
PS: Btw, I recently came upon a rather epic poem I wrote that sums up my 20's and early 30's. There's some atheist thought in it, and some lines I may never be forgiven for, but I think it's pretty good (even publishable). If anyone wants to see it, shoot me an im.

edit: The answer to the question is that I was an atheist for 17 years or so, from about 17 to 35.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 01:49 AM
Ah okay that makes much more sense. Couldn't figure out why you kept talking about your atheist period if you had found god by 15, and the answer is that this was only brief and you reclaimed atheism for a long time after that.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 02:14 AM
Lol Icc. That's where I got first introduced to bonus whoring which led me straight to online poker.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 03:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish
Doggg, didn't you say you used to be a 'hard core' atheist at some point? Are you talking about before you were 14-15 (according to your testimony ITT)?
A child can't be a hard core atheist.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 05:26 AM
Eh, depends on the child really.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 05:47 AM
That was why I brought it up, although I agree with AIF, it might not be false, just uncommon.

Doggg, so you weren't really a Christian at the age you said you were 'saved', but became one later on? You thought you were, but a real Christian would not have temporarily been an atheist? I hear a phrase like "Christ is lord of your reasoning", or something along those lines, which I presume means that you cannot reason away from Christianity once you are a Real Christian? Or is that too fundamental to what you believe.

btw, that post of yours was nicely written, it's a bit frustrating to know you can be interesting and engaged...sometimes, but a real **** the rest of the time. Perhaps I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
Eh, depends on the child really.
Can a child be a hard core Communist? What's the difference.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 10:16 AM
Well, firstly, yes, imo, they sure can, even if it's rare (and I mean sophisticated political views generally, not just Communism).

Secondly, Communism is an entire political and economic philosophy. Atheism is just an attitude towards the existence of deities.

"Hard core" atheist presumably entails some set of beliefs ancillary to regular atheism. Don't see any barrier to a child holding any I can think of.

What we need is some kind of time machine so I can bring my 14-yo self into the present and resolve the dispute handily.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
What we need is some kind of time machine so I can bring my 14-yo self into the present and resolve the dispute handily.
Heavens forbid. Then we'd have a pimple-sprouting know-it-all who'd inform us in every discussion that he thinks that he's disposed of his opponent's arguments in rather short order. And while he's tempted to fill the remainder of his post with a little light verse, perhaps a song or two, he believes it's more useful to articulate a more specific evidence...

Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 10:49 AM
True, true.

At least the pimples are gone. Small blessings and all that.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 11:04 AM
as we say in POG, no discussing ongoing games :P
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
Well, firstly, yes, imo, they sure can, even if it's rare (and I mean sophisticated political views generally, not just Communism).

Secondly, Communism is an entire political and economic philosophy. Atheism is just an attitude towards the existence of deities.

"Hard core" atheist presumably entails some set of beliefs ancillary to regular atheism. Don't see any barrier to a child holding any I can think of.

What we need is some kind of time machine so I can bring my 14-yo self into the present and resolve the dispute handily.
Since he's the most public exponent of the opinion I'm about to reiterate, I'll mention Dawkins... who isn't my role model. He said, and I completely agree, that there is no such thing as an atheist, or christian child, there are only children with atheist or christian parents (or some other adult 'source' for what the child thinks it believes).
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 11:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyboosh
Since he's the most public exponent of the opinion I'm about to reiterate, I'll mention Dawkins... who isn't my role model. He said, and I completely agree, that there is no such thing as an atheist, or christian child, there are only children with atheist or christian parents (or some other adult 'source' for what the child thinks it believes).
I don't know what authority you imagine Dawkins to have on the question, but as far as I'm concerned, it's none. I Was A Teenage Atheist would be a crappy MOTW, but maybe that's what's needed here.

Are you saying that a child's attitude to these issues is likely subject to change? So's that of anyone who thinks about and regularly discusses the issue.

But I think it's more likely that you're simply rolling "Can't be a/theist" into the definition of 'child'. Which isn't terribly persuasive.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 11:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
I don't know what authority you imagine Dawkins to have on the question, but as far as I'm concerned, it's none. I Was A Teenage Atheist would be a crappy MOTW, but maybe that's what's needed here.
IIRC (which I almost certainly do) Dawkins is referring to babies, toddlers and preschoolers, not so much teenagers. His point is that we would find it weird if someone said "that is a Republican baby" because her parents are Republican and that we ought find it just as weird to call the child of Buddhists a "Buddhist baby". Or IOW, religious views should be something one comes to through informed choice rather than being a culturally-inherited designator.

Regardless of whether that is a good argument, you and boosh are probably arguing past each other if you (AIF) are talking about school-age and teenage children and boosh is talking about babies. (Or maybe MB thinks that teenagers can't have political or religious views, in which case have at it)
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zumby
IIRC (which I almost certainly do) Dawkins is referring to babies, toddlers and preschoolers, not so much teenagers. His point is that we would find it weird if someone said "that is a Republican baby" because her parents are Republican and that we ought find it just as weird to call the child of Buddhists a "Buddhist baby". Or IOW, religious views should be something one comes to through informed choice rather than being a culturally-inherited designator.

Regardless of whether that is a good argument, you and boosh are probably arguing past each other if you (AIF) are talking about school-age and teenage children and boosh is talking about babies. (Or maybe MB thinks that teenagers can't have political or religious views, in which case have at it)
Somewhere in between. I'm definitely applying this to very young children but I also don't think that a teenager, particularly in their early teens, can have come to an informed decision or necessarily has the cognitive capacity to make rational intellectual judgements. I'm not a child psychologist and can't comment knowledgeably on the development of the teenage mind but I can offer up in support of my position that in the UK (at least) children aren't considered legally responsible until the age of 18. I take from this that the judgement of children isn't considered sound until the age (albeit fairly arbitrarily for the sake of needing to choose an age) of 18 and that it also affords the children some protection from those who would take advantage of, and impose on, their developing world views.

If I thought children (including teenagers) were being educated in a completely fair and unbiased manner on all religions (and secular choices) I might be more inclined to be charitable about what they then 'choose' to believe, I'd have no reason to suspect that the choice was anything but theirs. I still wouldn't take it very seriously, but I wouldn't assume that they've simply been encouraged to believe a particular line. Unfortunately the latter is more commonly what occurs.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyboosh
If I thought children (including teenagers) were being educated in a completely fair and unbiased manner on all religions (and secular choices) I might be more inclined to be charitable about what they then 'choose' to believe, I'd have no reason to suspect that the choice was anything but theirs. I still wouldn't take it very seriously, but I wouldn't assume that they've simply been encouraged to believe a particular line. Unfortunately the latter is more commonly what occurs.
See, I just don't see where that conflicts at all with 'It depends on the child'.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyboosh
Somewhere in between. I'm definitely applying this to very young children but I also don't think that a teenager, particularly in their early teens, can have come to an informed decision or necessarily has the cognitive capacity to make rational intellectual judgements. I'm not a child psychologist and can't comment knowledgeably on the development of the teenage mind but I can offer up in support of my position that in the UK (at least) children aren't considered legally responsible until the age of 18. I take from this that the judgement of children isn't considered sound until the age (albeit fairly arbitrarily for the sake of needing to choose an age) of 18 and that it also affords the children some protection from those who would take advantage of, and impose on, their developing world views.

If I thought children (including teenagers) were being educated in a completely fair and unbiased manner on all religions (and secular choices) I might be more inclined to be charitable about what they then 'choose' to believe, I'd have no reason to suspect that the choice was anything but theirs. I still wouldn't take it very seriously, but I wouldn't assume that they've simply been encouraged to believe a particular line. Unfortunately the latter is more commonly what occurs.
This is fishy. You have said many times that you present your children with the facts about all religions and tell them to "make up their own minds". Now you are saying they (cognitively) cannot make up their minds until they hit their late teenage years.

If a 10 year old can't 'know' that God doesn't exist, can she 'know' that Santa doesn't exist?
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish
That was why I brought it up, although I agree with AIF, it might not be false, just uncommon.

Doggg, so you weren't really a Christian at the age you said you were 'saved', but became one later on? You thought you were, but a real Christian would not have temporarily been an atheist? I hear a phrase like "Christ is lord of your reasoning", or something along those lines, which I presume means that you cannot reason away from Christianity once you are a Real Christian? Or is that too fundamental to what you believe.

I don't want to appear to be making personal attacks on others, so I hesitate to bring this up, but reading the "atheist testimony" thread where I posted my testimony was extremely instructive for me. There is a meme about the atheist that goes: "he talks about evolution and atheism and nothing else." That's pretty fair to the point, I think. When I was 15 and on fire for God I attended church as much as I could, and studied the bible to the point of it affecting my grades. It's like being in love and walking around with butterflies in the belly. You are almost obsessed.

When I read that thread I couldn't help but notice a common theme, which was that at some point the op began to devour atheist literature, free-thought literature, Dawkins and Gould, philosophy texts and so on-- to the exclusion of any theological material in the pro-theism mode. You see it in there over and over. You will not find testimony in there where op says: "I read Why I Am Not A Christian by Bertrand Russel, followed by WCG's Reasonable Faith." No. A conscious shift may have already taken place. You could make a case that a decision had already been made. A program of justification had begun, and the snowball was rolling down the hill and accumulating girth as it went.

I am not saying that everyone left the faith in this way. I'm just pointing out that this seemed to be a common story.

And it was my story, too!

Jesus was fond of saying "he who has ears to hear, let him hear" to close out a discourse. I think I understand this now after many years of just seeing it as a poetic device of some type. I think that faith comes from hearing. And what we hear consistently is going to impact us in a meaningful way. I think that Jesus was saying-- "do you have ears that want to hear and understand this?" Are you truly open to this?

If I stopped attending church tomorrow, and stopped praying and reading the bible, and began a program of doing nothing but thoughtfully ingesting atheist and humanist literature for the next two months, I don't see how my faith would come out unscathed on the other side of this experiment. I'd be exposed to the top of opp's range in every hand dealt, so to say. It wouldn't be a fair fight. I'd be choosing to experience a faith-downswing.

Do you think this is an unfair criticism?

Maybe I could handle Bertrand Russel one-on-one, but I think I might need help.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 01:33 PM
That's a meme? Sounds more like projecting.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
That's a meme? Sounds more like projecting.
I think Doggg's main points here are fair. In addition he qualifies his statements by acknowledging "not everyone" leaves the faith in this fashion.
Craig v. Carroll Quote
07-19-2013 , 01:47 PM
I don't disagree with his point, but the meme is silly and...well...not a meme. The idea that atheists only talk about atheism is ridiculous.
Craig v. Carroll Quote

      
m