Rumi and the Vision of the Qur'an

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

Mevlana says:

The peerless God has made all the six directions a theater
for the display of His signs to the clear-seeing,
so that, whatever animal or plant they look upon,
they may feed on the meadows of divine Beauty.
And so He said to the mystic companions,
“Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.”

To read more:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/livingtradition/2018/07/1036/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Muslim&utm_content=49

And this is also what I say when anyone asks, where is the proof of the Creator?

Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.

Faith, of course, is the seeing.

[Karadeniz]

1. I don't entirely agree. The God System...Christian version...consists of different levels,

e.g. Paul knew someone who had been to the fourth(?) level and back. Light is used in Christianity to describe the spiritual reality of soul and god, a "material" not visible in the purely physical level. In my experience, everything was light/energy/frequency and Mind, and to return to earth and gravity and weight and solidity was mortifying...but I understood I wasn't good enough for that world at my stage then. Still, I do appreciate acts of kindness (soul) and generosity and beauty found on earth. Such things reflect the governing principle.

I appreciate so much your interest in unseen reality. Don't listen to nay sayers. The people here have tons of soul and it doesn't matter what their brains recognize. If they don't know they're operating at soul level, it's unimportant. In fact, if I didn't see the underlying message of christianity, I'd flush it, too.

[guillaumeb]

2. I admit to reading a bit of Rumi.

I feel his insights speak to so many of us. And I do respond in that way when people ask for proof.

What you described I see as similar to what the Buddha talked about. A spiritual evolution leading to another plane.

[Bretton Garcia]

3. But? 1) There are many things that FEEL or SEEM good, that are not good for you, or others.

Like drugs, or too much sugar.

To be sure, 2) helping others is probably good. But anyone can do that, without religion, per se.

[guillaumeb]

6. Unwarranted self-confidence in one's ability to analyze things

also feels good. But it leads to error.

[Bretton Garcia]

12. Careful analysis, logic, have lead to science

And technology. Which have been fantastically successful.

Or "fruitful," as the Bible itself might say.

In contrast, 1) religious promises of physical miracles, "all" we ask for (John 14.13), were false, delusions.

And 2) the "higher" "sprits" religion offered next? Often seem to be "false spirits. "

The feeling that God speaks to you, being possibly the spirit of ... Vanity.

[guillaumeb]

29. Analysis and logic still depend on the ability of the analyst or the logician.

And self awareness is necessary as to the limitations of both.

[Bretton Garcia]

49. Variations in logic are corrected

By:

1) Peer review.

And:

2) When logical inquiries imply things that would be visible in the material world, we can check our logic against what we see with our eyes and scientific instruments.

Many problems in self awareness are also thereby corrected.

[Voltaire2]

4. The pantheistic view is not incompatible with atheism.

If you choose to view “god” and “everything” as synonymous, that is fine. The universe is awesome!

It is the claims of divine sentience and souls and other planes of existence that are bullshit.

[Major Nikon]

5. Some people are afraid of the dark

They need to believe in the metaphysical out of fear of their impending expiration date. Each of us only get so many trips around the sun. The most mature approach is to deal with that reality rather than wrapping your delusions up with a bow regardless of how poetic it is.

[guillaumeb]

8. True intellectual maturity is recognizing the limitations of human intelligence.

But some prefer to substitute MAN for God, and claim some sort of victory over the darkness of what they frame as ignorance.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. It does help to turn on the light.

It amuses me to think you are using your meat-based brain to, with no evidence whatsoever, suggest/claim that human intelligence is too limited to grok the supernatural (that you claim, with your meat-brain exists).

You claim insight/knowledge into a thing that is just too darn complex or mysterious for us primitive ape-men to figure out.

How curious.

[guillaumeb]

30. I claim faith. eom

[AtheistCrusader]

32. No, you ALSO claim I am limited.

With no evidence, no justification, no facts, no nothing.

You can prove NOTHING about your faith, yet you are arrogant enough to declare humans too feeble to discover the truth directly.

Say you don't know, but you have faith if you must, but when you claim you have faith and it's beyond humanity's ability to discover, you're using fighting words.


Pretend or believe whatever you want, but you aren't the arbiter of anyone else's limitations.

[guillaumeb]

33. This is what I claim:

And this is also what I say when anyone asks, where is the proof of the Creator?

Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.

Faith, of course, is the seeing.

I claim that faith is necessary.

I am not certain what you are responding to, but I understand your view even if you do not understand mine.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. I'm responding to what you said.

"True intellectual maturity is recognizing the limitations of human intelligence."

You do not get to define any such limitations. Our intelligence literally may not be limited, even by physical form, given our ability to create technology that does so much more than we can. We can't see ionizing radiation. People died from it before we figured it out. It is not a thing we can directly perceive (granted it is a physical property of the universe regardless) yet we conceive of ways to observe, identify, and harness it. Still can't see it with our eyeballs directly, and it doesn't matter. Our intelligence can master it quite handily.

You have no grounds to make that claim, let alone suggest there IS a limit. The only known 'limit' on human intelligence is what we have discovered so far.

And what we have discovered so far, already smaller than the current aggregate human intelligence prior to my typing that sentence. In fact, it grew in the time it took you to READ that sentence.

"Faith, of course, is the seeing."

Says you. I 'see' things with my human intellect all the time, that no human eye has ever seen. It's not even my job, or my field, I build sensors and systems for information gathering for fun.

"Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."
Meaningless platitude. If your god exists, either it will eventually be directly detected by our intellect by way of our technology, or the tool-marks of a god upon a universe that could not exist without it, will be detected. You could maybe avoid the former, but you cannot avoid the latter. Cosmology has been doing it for a long time now. If you are right, at the very least physicists/astronomers/cosmologists will prove the existence of things that simply could not exist without a supernatural creator. (Assuming our species survives long enough)

A supernatural creator might be able to hide, but if it made 'everything you turn to', it cannot hide that 'everything' WAS MADE.

[guillaumeb]

7. You started reasonably.

But then, you reverted to the simplistic view that equates atheism with some sort of truth.

[Voltaire2]

9. Er um no I didn't do that.

Atheism makes no truth claims. It is simply the absence of belief in the existence of any gods. But you know that.

Anyway if it makes you feel better about yourself by putting down every atheist on this forum every time they post, you’re welcome.

[guillaumeb]

10. Yes, you did.

As to your last claim, anyone reading here can see the constant series of posts from atheists about theist being delusional, or divorced from reality. So your projection is noted.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. Poster called it 'bullshit'.

Bullshit comes in many forms, and bamboozles many people without assuming 'delusional, or divorced from reality'.

This is a political site. Remember? Politics are rife with bullshit without delusion or divorce from reality.
You should apologize to that poster for accusing them of projection. At the least, it's a broad brush attack.

[Voltaire2]

23. Sure, if you just go substitute other words than the ones I wrote, then you are correct.

Those words would then at least be relevant to your attack.

At least you have shifted to strawman fallacies instead of your usual tu quoque whataboutisms.

[Major Nikon]

11. Some need to create imagined arguments they can then refute

It makes it far easier to win. As long as one has no reservation about employing duplicitous behavior it works reasonably well and the imaginary fanclub never seems to notice the intellectual bankruptcy of obvious fallacies.

[trotsky]

15. I mean look at his OP for Koresh's sake.

Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.

Faith, of course, is the seeing.

He seethes over atheists questioning religious beliefs, but then feels free to say that everyone who can't see his god is blind. Respect is strictly a one-way street with guillaumeb, and he just can't figure out why people don't like him. What a mystery.

[Major Nikon]

18. Then he loses his shit if someone uses the word "delusion"

Faith, by definition, is the belief in things without proof. But we are now told the "proof" is the faith itself, which is obviously a fallacy. By definition, delusion is believing in something that is false. So without realizing it, he has created a logical proof of his delusion, but we must not use that word because of well, reasons.

[trotsky]

19. And the reason is religious privilege, of course.

Believers like guillaumeb wield that like the weapon it is.

[guillaumeb]

31. Once again, you misinterpret what I said.

And you misquoted to make it seem as if both lines were mine.

Somewhat sloppy.

[trotsky]

35. You repeated it. You therefore made it your own sentiment as well.

You whine and moan about people misinterpreting you, yet you never ever clarify and explain what it is you meant.

Sloppy indeed.

[guillaumeb]

36. You misattributed to me words that are not mine.

That is, at best, sloppy work.

[trotsky]

37. You didn't put the words in quotes.

You didn't use the excerpt tags.

You used them as your own.

Everyone sees your pathetic game for what it is.

If you didn't intend to repeat them as your own words, then go back and edit the post accordingly. Use one of the formatting options I mentioned above.

Quit acting so spiteful and nasty. Try acting like Jesus would want you to. Love your enemies. Why do you do the opposite of what he said, when you claim to admire him?

[guillaumeb]

38. An exceptionally weak response. Here is the actual original post:

Mevlana says:

The peerless God has made all the six directions a theater
for the display of His signs to the clear-seeing,
so that, whatever animal or plant they look upon,
they may feed on the meadows of divine Beauty.
And so He said to the mystic companions,
“Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.”

To read more:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/livingtradition/2018/07/1036/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Muslim&utm_content=49

And this is also what I say when anyone asks, where is the proof of the Creator?

Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.

Faith, of course, is the seeing.


Note that the Rumi quote is excerpted, and my thoughts appear below the link. It should be obvious, and it was to the other responders, what my words were.

And, I did use the excerpt feature, which is why that portion is shaded as it is whenever anyone at DU uses that feature.

[trotsky]

39. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Are those YOUR words or not?

If they are not, then put quotes around them.

Otherwise you are repeating them as your own.

Knock it the fuck off already.

[guillaumeb]

44. Keep building your narrative.

Few seem inclined to agree with it.

[trotsky]

45. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Are those your words or not?

Funny how you won't answer that simple yes/no question. Your anger and hatred are so great, you can't even admit a simple formatting mistake.

[guillaumeb]

48. Keep building that narrative.

As I observed, few are inclined to accept it.

[trotsky]

50. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

63. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

You still haven't answered.

[trotsky]

70. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Are those your words or not?

Still waiting for an answer.

[trotsky]

71. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

STILL waiting.

[trotsky]

72. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

You still haven't responded.

Why won't you simply admit your mistake and apologize to me? I'll forgive you, just like Jesus would want me to.

Ball's in your court. Show me how you think Jesus wants you to act.

[trotsky]

73. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

74. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

75. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Feel free to admit you made a simple mistake. You'll find I'm very forgiving if you simply try. How would Jesus want you to respond?

[trotsky]

77. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

You are writing the narrative, g. You are revealing the kind of person you are.

[trotsky]

78. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

I still have faith that someday you will take responsibility for your error and apologize.

[trotsky]

79. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

80. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not? Still waiting for you to answer.

[trotsky]

81. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

You build the narrative yourself, g. I simply point it out.

Step up and show what Jesus would want you to do.

[trotsky]

84. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

A simple admission of error and an apology is all it takes, g. I'll never kick this again.

Why won't you do that?

[trotsky]

85. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

It's so revealing that you won't address this.

[trotsky]

86. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

STILL waiting.

[trotsky]

87. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

I'll keep kicking this thread, exposing the kind of person you are, for as long as necessary.

You could admit error, apologize, and end it though.

Your call.

[trotsky]

88. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

It's nice when you build the narrative for me.

Be honest.

Admit those aren't your words.

[trotsky]

89. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

You could end this so easily. All you have to do is admit error and apologize. Why is that so difficult? Isn't that what Jesus would want you to do?

[MineralMan]

90. What? Still no response?

Why am I not surprised?

[trotsky]

92. Yeah, weird, huh?

It's almost like he isn't here to engage in good faith dialog, despite his insistence that he is.

[MineralMan]

94. Weird, indeed.

[edhopper]

91. I completely accept his narrative

it is self evident in this thread.

[trotsky]

93. Crazy how he could have just admitted his error from the get-go,

and eliminated this whole embarrassment.

But he's just like Trump in that he simply cannot back down and admit error. Which is strange for someone who CLAIMS to admire the so-called "Prince of Peace," the dude who allegedly said one should "turn the other cheek" and love one's enemies. Oh wait, that was metaphorical Jesus, right?

[trotsky]

95. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting to find out if those are your words or not.

Any day now.

[trotsky]

96. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not, guillaumeb? Why won't you answer?

[trotsky]

97. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Words that haunt you, apparently. If only you would just be honest, you could be rid of them.

[trotsky]

98. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

One simple correction and an apology could end this. Why won't you admit error and apologize?

[trotsky]

99. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

100. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

102. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

103. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

Why won't you admit your error and apologize? It would be so easy.

[trotsky]

104. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

105. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

106. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not, guillaumeb? Telling the truth is a good thing.

[trotsky]

107. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

108. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

You build your own narrative, g, by refusing to admit a simple mistake and apologize to those you attacked for pointing it out.

Do the right thing. Admit error and apologize.

Or don't, and let your personal narrative get worse and worse.

Your choice.

[trotsky]

109. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Are those your words or not?

[trotsky]

110. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not?

[trotsky]

111. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Why can't you just say whether those are your words or not?

Doesn't it get more humiliating the longer you drag this out?

[trotsky]

112. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

You've written the narrative for yourself, g.

Admit error and apologize if you want to change it.

[trotsky]

113. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your words or not, g? Just a simple answer and an apology is all I ask.

[trotsky]

114. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting, g. The narrative for you keeps looking worse and worse.

[trotsky]

116. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

117. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

STILL waiting.

[trotsky]

118. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting for you to do the decent thing.

[trotsky]

119. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting.

[trotsky]

120. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

STILL waiting. When will you simply apologize? Jesus would want you to do that, wouldn't he?

[trotsky]

121. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting for you to do the right thing.

[edhopper]

122. "GUIL!!!!!!"

[trotsky]

123. LOL!

From hell's heart he stabs at me!

[trotsky]

124. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Those are not your words. You should do the right thing, be honest, and apologize.

It is very telling that you will not.

[trotsky]

125. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Your narrative is thus written.

You claim the words of others as your own. And you can't even be decent enough to own up to it and apologize.

[trotsky]

126. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Just apologize and retract, g. Very simple. And I'll stop pointing out your rotten behavior.

[trotsky]

127. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

I am still waiting for you to do what Jesus would want you to do.

Apologize for claiming the words of someone else as your own.

It's one of your holiest days soon. Perhaps that might make you pause and consider. Have you been the best person you can? Would Jesus be proud of your behavior?

A simple apology and I'll never mention this again.

Do the right thing, guillaumeb.

[trotsky]

128. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

It's too bad the spirit of Christmas couldn't lead you to an apology for stealing the words of others.

More evidence your god doesn't exist, I guess.

[trotsky]

129. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

New year would be a great time to make amends, g.

Apologize for misrepresenting someone else's words as your own.

Show everyone how your religion helps make you a better person.

[trotsky]

130. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Apologize for claiming someone else's words as you own, and then your narrative can be written more favorably for you.

Your steadfast silence has written the current one that you dislike so much.

[trotsky]

131. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Claiming the words of someone else as your own is what defines your narrative, g.

Apologizing would really help put that narrative back on a positive path.

But you steadfastly refuse to admit error.

[trotsky]

132. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting for you to apologize for stealing the words of others.

[AtheistCrusader]

133. Came here to find out why the fuck this thread is still kicking along.

Carry on.

[trotsky]

134. Crazy, huh?

He uses the words of someone else as his own, and refuses to acknowledge it. I figure this is a great thread to keep kicked as a warning to others who might try to interact with him.

[trotsky]

135. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Were those your words or not, g? When will you simply admit your error and apologize? Or are you too perfect?

[trotsky]

136. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

The "narrative" is established fact now. You steal the words of others as your own, and you see absolutely no problem with it.

[trotsky]

137. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

When will you apologize for stealing the words of someone else?

[edhopper]

138. Imagine if an Uihgur in China

stole somebody else's words.

[trotsky]

139. Surely a sign of how horrible those evil Chinese atheists are.

Meanwhile, what's a little plagiarism when you're fighting the good fight against criticism of religion? Lyin' for the Lord has a very long and notable history.

[trotsky]

140. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

Still waiting for you to admit you stole the words of someone else.

This thread remains kicked for people to be reminded of your behavior, until you retract and apologize.

[trotsky]

141. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

I haven't forgotten, no matter how much you'd like to hope this shameful behavior of yours drops off the radar.

[edhopper]

13. If you look

you can see faces and animals in the clouds and patterns in the stars.

Funny thing about seein God everywhere, the Universe looks the same not seeing any God anywhere.

[Major Nikon]

26. A turd that floats on one end looks like an alligator

But no amount of wishing it is an alligator is going to make it an alligator.

[MineralMan]

46. And one that sinks to the bottom looks like a Baby Ruth bar.

I'm not eating that one, either.

[NeoGreen]

47. That version of 'god' is merely a function of Pareidolia...

... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

Pareidolia
(/pærɪˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-DOH-lee-ə ) is the tendency to interpret a vague stimulus as something known to the observer, such as seeing shapes in clouds, seeing faces in inanimate objects or abstract patterns, or hearing hidden messages in music.

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptions_of_religious_imagery_in_natural_phenomena

[trotsky]

14. "Wherever you turn, there is the face of God."

So the people who don't see your god are just blind? Are we willfully so? Is there something defective with us? Please explain.

[edhopper]

16. They don't see it either

but they have "Faith" that it is there.

[trotsky]

17. Oh yeah, and don't forget...

that means they get to say we have "faith" that it isn't. Because reasons.

[Major Nikon]

27. It gets even better

Faith #1
A) I know a supreme being exists and I will name him "God"
B) Assuming A is true, I know God created everything
C) Assuming A and B are true, I know what God likes and doesn't like from his creations
D) Assuming A, B, and C are true, I know how God will reward or punish me for eternity based on C

Faith #2
Bullshit.

Ergo Faith #1 = Faith #2.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. 'When all you have is a hammer'

[hurl]

24. God Goggles

Put these on and you'll see god everywhere you look. Now you're in the "clear-seeing" club! Divine beauty is more beautiful than ordinary beauty!, isn't it?

[Voltaire2]

25. Are they like beer goggles?

Do you wake up in the morning horrified at who is in the bed with you?

[Major Nikon]

28. ...

[trotsky]

40. https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218316503

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218316503

[MineralMan]

41. +100

[trotsky]

42. I thought maybe he might have missed the other thread.

Just helping out.

[MineralMan]

43. I'm sure the help will be appreciated.

I once translated a Russian exile's book of poetry. I worked directly with the author. My Russian was aided by his explanations of his poems and stories that explained idioms in his writing. As a sometimes poet myself who has been published in various journals, I also talked with him about the form and language of his poetry.

There were decisions to make constantly. His poetry had both rhyme and a solid meter. Russian lends itself easily to rhyme, due to its complex declensions and conjugations which naturally rhyme. Russian poetic meter is somewhat different from that of English. And then there are colloquial meanings, connotations, and associations that words possess in Russian that are not part of English in the same way.

The Russian poet wanted to preserve rhyming and meter in the translation, even it it wasn't identical. He also wanted idioms to make sense to the English reader. His command of English was not as good as my poor command of Russian. Working together was fascinating. He would explain the connections of his words with concepts and associations. I would find English equivalents for those associations.

Working from a literal translation of each poem, I turned each into a poem in English that included rhyme and steady meter. Both English and Russian lend themselves to an iambic rhythm, so the meter was not too difficult. Finding equivalent idioms that make the words sing to an English ear was more difficult and the rhymes required an extensive English vocabulary to find appropriate wording that included the rhymes.

Eventually we managed, working together, to translate his chapbook into English in a way that pleased both him and readers.

Sadly, the bilingual book was published by a long-defunct press and the poet, himself, died almost 30 years ago, but I learned a great deal by working directly with him on the project. Not only about his poetry, but about the process of translation. It was a rewarding year.

Creating a "translation" of Rumi's writings based on other translations but without knowing the original language seems to me to be a fraudulent thing to do. How strange the process must have been on the part of the translator, I would think.

Whoever reads such a translation has no idea what the original work said. It is too far removed.

[Brainstormy]

52. that was very interesting!

I did something similar, although not nearly so complex, for a Russian many years ago. Your post reminded me that I never got paid.

[MineralMan]

53. I wasn't charging anything for the opportunity.

I finally gave up the idea of doing technical translation for a living. Too much competition from native speakers with experience in the various fields.

[DetlefK]

51. "Nature is beautiful. Therefore God." - The plague would like to have a word with you.

[AtheistCrusader]

54. "His signs to the clear-seeing"

I continue to see this refrain where those who do NOT have faith, are somehow deficient in 'seeing' and other euphemisms.

It's really just calling someone 'delusional' with extra steps. Something you normally decry. So, we should just say 'delusion' ….nicer?

[trotsky]

55. C'mon.

If you don't know that guillaumeb has different rules for himself than he does for everyone else, you haven't been paying attention.

[guillaumeb]

56. Seeing with faith.

So clearly a metaphorical use of the word seeing.

[trotsky]

57. So are those of us without religious faith defective? n/t

[guillaumeb]

58. What would lead you to even suggest that? eom

[AtheistCrusader]

59. What is the opposite of 'clear-seeing'?

[guillaumeb]

60. Never assume anything.

As the following link make clear, there are some at DU who feel that theists are lacking in comprehension.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=316073

But this post is not a response to that, or other similar ones. It is simply speaking about seeing through the eyes of faith.

[AtheistCrusader]

61. You are dodging.

How is it materially different to refer to one group as 'clear-seeing', directly implying the other group is NOT, versus referring to one group as 'willfully ignorant' or similar, and the other group is NOT.

It's like, good for you, you've taken the high road of stating the positive, leaving the negative implicit, but it's not materially different than the people you call out for stating a negative.


And your link is bullshit as far as supporting your point. The entire point of that post is to de-escalate tensions and treat each other respectfully, while working through this metaphysical debate/difference in worldview.

[NeoGreen]

64. You have mis-stated my post...

...I clearly stated in my ANALOGY (emphasis added in case the point that it is an ANALOGY was missed):

"The non-faithful should fully acknowledge that a person expressing ‘faith’, who may be willfully ignorant (by definition) as a symptom, is not necessarily otherwise cognitively challenged."

Nowhere in my OP do I write 'lacking comprehension'.

To be 'willfully ignorant' is to comprehend but still choose to ignore.

I willfully ignore the concept of 'god(s)'.
It is a meaningless and vacuous concept, one that does not warrant any serious consideration.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.

[trotsky]

62. You.

So answer the question. Are we defective?

[guillaumeb]

65. I understand. This is part of your narrative building attempt.

Good luck. You will need it.

[trotsky]

66. Fuck your narrative bullshit. I'm asking you a question.

Are non-believers defective because we are unable to see with faith?

[NeoGreen]

67. 'faith'...

...

"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."

― Richard Dawkins


Somehow, some people twist this into a 'virtue'.

[guillaumeb]

68. No, your narrative building simply took the form of a question.

Good luck with the building. Do not run out of straw.

[trotsky]

69. It's you who are building the narrative by refusing to answer that very simple question.

And it's not a very flattering one for you, either. I think you realize that, and it's why you are now making false accusations against me. Such Christian behavior. You go, g. Show everyone how you think an admirer of Jesus should behave.

[pangaia]

76. No FAITH is NOT seeing...

you still miss everything.....

[guillaumeb]

82. Faith is seeing throught the eyes of faith. eom

[Act_of_Reparation]

83. Pump your brakes, Dr. Chopra.

Bullshit is talking through the mouth of bullshit.

[thewhollytoast]

101. Jesus H. Christ Willy!

Don't you have anything better to do with your time?

Toast

[mia]

115. Wherever I turn on this thread there is the face of God.

Thank you.