-Removed-I haven't referred to theists as deluded. Indeed, I have been on the receiving end of being called deluded for not believing in God and for believing we evolved as a species. (Step forward Kelly, Sonship etc). I have said some Christians believe in fairy tales, which I guess questions their ability to assess things rationally.
3 edits
@fmf saidSorry, I can't hear you from back there.
Why would I need to be backtracking?
Edit: In firing 'delusional' at Suzianne you have inadvertently taken down Dive in the crossfire (who has revealed he also believes in the existence of angels). - "I'm not hurt, I'm not hurt," says Dive, hobbling on one leg.
Like I said, a bad day at the office.
@ghost-of-a-duke saiddivegeester hasn't made any delusional claims equivalent to Suzianne's CPR story, or her Jack Reacher story, or her talking-to-angels story. So I haven't "taken down" divegeester at all. There are levels of delusion.
In firing 'delusional' at Suzianne you have inadvertently taken down Dive in the crossfire (who has revealed he also believes in the existence of angels).
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI don't see what's "bad". I am entirely happy with the accuracy and candour of every perspective that I have shared.
Like I said, a bad day at the office.
1 edit
@fmf saidBoth Dive and Suzianne believe angels exist. It therefore follows that both believe an encounter with angels is possible and not a product of delusions.
divegeester hasn't made any delusional claims equivalent to Suzianne's CPR story, or her Jack Reacher story, or her talking-to-angels story. So I haven't "taken down" divegeester at all. There are levels of delusion.
Is your back tracking now the claim that both Suzianne and Dive are delusional, but Dive less so?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIn my dialogues with theists about their faith, I haven't referred to them as "deluded" because I don't see how it would be of any benefit to the debate.
I haven't referred to theists as deluded.
@fmf saidBut you have left Dive sitting on the curb saying, "I'm not hurt, I'm not hurt."
I don't see what's "bad". I am entirely happy with the accuracy and candour of every perspective that I have shared.
@fmf saidI agree with this.
In my dialogues with theists about their faith, I haven't referred to them as "deluded" because I don't see how it would be of any benefit to the debate.
How is it of any benefit to label individuals like Suzianne or Dive as deluded for believing in angels?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIf either of them tell me they have met angels then they will, in my view, be telling me a delusional story.
Both Dive and Suzianne believe angels exist. It therefore follows that both believe an encounter with angels is possible and not a product of delusions.
both believe an encounter with angels is possible and not a product of delusions.
Neither would think they were being deluded if they thought they'd met angels? is that what you are saying?
What does that have to do with my perspective?
@fmf saidIt destroys your theory of varying levels of delusion.
If either of them tell me they have met angels then they will, in my view, be telling me a delusional story.
both believe an encounter with angels is possible and not a product of delusions.
Neither would think they were being deluded if they thought they'd met angels? is that what you are saying?
What does that have to do with my perspective?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidYou asked me if I thought belief in angels was a delusion, so I answered yes. I think it is a case of believing in something that isn't true.
How is it of any benefit to label individuals like Suzianne or Dive as deluded for believing in angels?
As for self-aggrandizing tall tales about saving so many lives that they are literally innumerable, what's the downside of calling it out as a delusion?
What's the downside of calling out the accusation that I have had hundreds of subscribers banned from the website for disagreeing with me as a delusional accusation?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNo, it doesn't. Not at all.
It destroys your theory of varying levels of delusion.
That there are varying levels of delusion is self-evident. It can hardly be described as "a theory".
@FMF
Dive believes in angels. I think he is wrong about this but not deluded.
If he recounted a story of meeting an angel in human form, I would not automatically judge him delusional. I would ask follow up questions looking for an alternative explanation.
If Dive recounted meeting a flying angel with wings I would probably think something else was going on and advise him to speak to somebody about it.
1 edit
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThe 'cataclysm', or the "transfiguration" for those with ears to hear, is interior -- that is how I interpret this most mystical of all of the Jewish prophets.
I just see the tactic often deployed by religious folk to say something cataclysmic is going to happen in the lifetime of the listener. We've seen it more recently with JWs and other cults/sects who give hard dates for the end of the world (which obviously come and go). This tactic is more effective at attracting followers than vague premonitions with no time stamp.
Whereas Paul, prophet to the gentiles, on the other hand, interprets everything in the crudest, most materialistic, least spiritual sense ... but that is another story.
People who assign a date to the end of the world have all been wrong, so far, but some day, one of them will be right. He won't live to see it though, and he won't have understood Jesus's message, even if he gets the date right.