Forum Life Lessons: Questioning the TOL Experience
- Thread starter Town Heretic
- Start date
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
And yet it wasn't.lain:
Okay, let me try it this way. Here's your 8 and 9:
Here's what I'm trying to get at:
Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of religion? [system]
Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheism? [system]
and/or:
Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of Christians? [person]
Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheists? [person]
You said you made the distinction because "religion is much more of a piece than atheism," but that doesn't explain why you asked about impressions of atheists but not of Christians, or religion but not atheism - not to mention that "religion" could be seen as amorphous, while "atheist" is very specific.
(Using Christianity for this instance because it's the predominant forum religion both by mission statement and by membership.)
Of course they don't ... the better question is why it brings such an emotional response (via unsubstantiated accusation) towards someone who doesn't believe as they do. I am confident enough in my own beliefs to the degree that it is not necessary for me to convert others to depart from their own.
Simply put,I do not see someone else believing in a deity (God) as a personal insult because it is about them and their beliefs. Just as my non-beliefs is my own and should not be viewed as a personal slight towards the religious beliefs of others.
Because atheism isn't a united system of belief. I don't think there's much value in approaching it that way. But I am curious about how most people here, who are religious and largely Christian, view atheists.
It's a bit like my old favorite Faulkner approach to racism, with the Southern racist's love of the individual and hatred of the race and the northern racist's love of the race and hatred of the individual. I know from statistical polling, that atheists as a group are among the least liked and trusted by religious people. It's a given, poll after poll. But, I suspect (and the question is aimed at this) that when we get to individuals that sort of generalized bias can break down. So the sub rosa inquiry is about how intimacy has influenced opinion.
With religion I'm interested in two potential responses, contextually. The first is the lens of self-examination and the second a judgment of the other. Or, I'm wondering if someone will critique their own particular understanding or approach that other by that lens and pass judgement.
As to the atheist and religion, I suppose that my expectation is a negative, because so much of what happens here can support the most negative, stereotypical impressions of Christians when you look in from the outside.
Gills Commentary on a bit of Paul's writing in scripture may help here. On Romans 8:7
"Because the carnal mind is enmity against God..."
"These words contain a reason why the issue of carnal mindedness is death; because the carnal mind, the wisdom of the flesh, is not only an enemy, but enmity itself against God: against his being; it reasons against it; it wishes he was not; it forms unworthy notions of him; thinks him such an one as itself; and endeavours to bury him in forgetfulness, and erase out of its mind all memorials of him: it is at enmity against his perfections; either denying his omniscience; or arraigning his justice and faithfulness; or despising his goodness, and abusing his grace and mercy: it finds fault with, and abhors his decrees and purposes; quarrels with his providences; it is implacable against his word and Gospel; especially the particular doctrines of grace, the Father's grace in election, the Son's in redemption, and the Spirit's in regeneration; and has in the utmost contempt the ordinances and people of Christ. This enmity is universal, it is in all men in unregeneracy, either direct or indirect, hidden or more open; it is undeserved; it is natural and deeply rooted in the mind, and irreconcilable without the power and grace of God. It shows itself in an estrangedness from God; in holding friendship with the world, in harbouring the professed enemies of God, in living under the government of sin and Satan; in hating what God loves, and in loving what God hates; in omitting what God commands, and committing what he forbids; it manifests itself in their language, and throughout the whole of their conversations."
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well, this is one guy's commentary and again, it still doesn't speak to or explain how atheists or agnostics are "hating God with each breath they take" on any logical level TH. Frankly, it smacks of pious judgement on behalf of the writer. Did you consider yourself to be actively "hating God" when you were an atheist?
Gills is just one of the major commentaries that are fairly united on the point. I thought it did as good a job of explaining the Biblical context set out in Paul's writing.
On the other point, I'd say that it doesn't matter what I considered myself to be. All sorts of people believe themselves to be things they aren't or don't believe themselves to be what they are, as with people who will make a racist statement while declaring, "Now, I'm not a racist, but..." Sometimes the denial is evidence of at least a subconscious recognition that the declaration is hollow. At best, assuming we act contrary to the truth, we're simply declaring from a perspective that is by its nature ignorant of that truth. The question then becomes is our ignorance willful or not? Within the context of Biblical truth the answer is that we are responsible, willfully disobedient. And the why of that is fairly complicated, but where a lot of the argument within Christendom really begins.
The Biblical standard doesn't give anyone a pass for being conflicted, or indifferent, or undecided. There are two masters to serve and everyone will and does serve one or the other. To serve one is to oppose the other and what we oppose, as a matter of moral truth, we hate, at least in the righteous sense, not in the pettier and self-serving sense of, "I hate you or it because it diminishes me or mine."
This is starting to feel like another thread. :think: If we're going to continue this one it should probably be in the Religion section and under a title that encompasses the point.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
From what seemed like a rather Calvinistic perspective.
I'd say it's integral. Did you ever consider yourself to be wilfully hating a God that you didn't believe existed? This isn't about 'ignorance' or 'disobedience' but whether you were consciously "shaking your fists" (as some term it) at a God that you believed in and yet denied?
You're sounding like a fundamentalist preacher at this point. This rhetoric about "serving one master or the other" means what exactly? If you're not a "born again believer" you're serving "Satan" or something?
As it happens I'd already started one right there so we can continue there if you wish...
Gill was actually a Baptist theologian, but his soteriology was definitely Calvinistic.
I'd say I answered this point in distinguishing between the subjective personal context/moral pretext and the Biblical doctrine.
Depends on what you mean by fundamentalist. I don't eschew the label in the sense the movement arose, rejecting theological modernism.
Every moral act, each choice serves one of two. Gills fleshed that out well enough, particularizing my point.
I might take you up on it. :cheers:
In the mid to late 90's I cut my internet debate teeth "debating" against The Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism... old-style via to-and-fro emails.
Later, I discovered the forum form e.g. Political Crossfire, Online Infidels and one other Theism forum I can't remember its name. (all now defunct) before discovering ToL.
I wouldn't call it an exaggeration, rather ToL allows an emergence of aspects to my personality that I rarely indulge within my personal, one-on-one interactions. ToL allows me to be more direct, blunt, confrontational..etc. upon controversial subject matters to a degree I rarely take with family and friends. I (generally) don't care if I bruise egos or hurt feelings here (as opposed to family)...as I view this as a public arena; it's par for the course thus, "all's fair....." as they say.
I originally came here to for deep philosophical/spiritual debate...98.6% of which, is not!
Not really. I've always enjoyed the ToL Christian bias. I've viewed it as a challenge and I ,quite frankly, enjoy forums where the primary philosophy differs from mine. Who the hell wants to spend time on a forum that agrees with everything you say?! :devil:
Yes and yes, indirectly. At first post I had an anti-Christian attitude which was to be employed in demonstrating how wrong every Christian was!
Nowadays, I believe that everyone develops their particular spirituality by different means and timeframes. I'd likewise expect the same consideration...yet, realize some use this forum as an echo chamber to embolden their own fragile, spiritual ego. Dramatic by way of slight, intermittent awareness.
Supra (As you would utter.
)Spiritual exploration.
Both. It can bring to boil aspects of the personality that are in cathartic need of exploration...mayhap dwelling within the shadow side of the soul.
Same critical impression; different personal reaction.
Same critical impression; different personal reaction.
More...regarding monotheism writ large; Less, regarding the the divisiveness, close-mindedness and bigotry it occasionally cultivates.[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
Selaphiel
Well-known member
1. When you first arrived how much experience did you have with internet forums and were you surprised by what you encountered?
Some experience with forums, but smaller and more varied communities. I do recall being shocked by the complete unwillingness to even consider other points of views from some of the posters in here.
2. Is the person you appear to be an exaggeration of who you actually are, who you actually are, or is it unlike who you are in the real world?
Exaggerated in discussions. I tend to have a bit more of a humorous approach to discussions. I'm more laid back I guess.
Although, I rarely encounter such blatantly irrational views as I do here. I dont see much room for humor when it comes to issues like racism, homophobia, misogyny or blatans denial of reality like creationism or climate change denial.
3. If you could change one thing about the way things are here what would it be?
I don't really have a dog in this fight anymore. There are some people that I quite like, so if I guess if there was one thing: More even sided member pool.
4. Is there a rule you'd like to add to the TOL list?
Nope
5. Have you changed ideologically or personally since you first arrived and if so did TOL play a role in that change?
Ideologically? I've changed theologically. But that is what real theology is, as far as Im concerned, to reinterpret, rethink and mature in my faith in light of new experiences, thinking and learning. TOL has probably been a factor, but my studies and real life more so.
Personally? Guess I'm a bit done with the arguing on the internet phase. I've learned that you can lead a horse to water, but that is that.
6. What was your primary reason for deciding to stick around here for a while?
I'm rarely posting anymore. The reason I stuck around was some of the people here. My last period here I mostly spent my time here talking with them.
7. Do you believe that anonymity has an overall liberating and/or negative effect on posters and posts here?
Guess it can be both.
8. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of religion?
Less. It has made me acutely aware of how toxic religion (or really ideology in general) can be. It can turn to poison if it is motivated by hatred.
9. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheists?
Neither. I've learned some from some of the good ones. I have a less favorable impression of rabid anti-theists though, they really just strike me as the other side of the coin the most vehement religious fundamentalism.
10. Are you more or less emphatic in your beliefs of in any particular belief you came to TOL with as a direct result of your time here?
Yes. Critical thinking is worth defending. Ignorant bigotry and denial of basic scientific facts corrupts minds, and bad thinking is damaging this world. When such nonsense runs rampant it makes demagogues like Trump president.
Some experience with forums, but smaller and more varied communities. I do recall being shocked by the complete unwillingness to even consider other points of views from some of the posters in here.
2. Is the person you appear to be an exaggeration of who you actually are, who you actually are, or is it unlike who you are in the real world?
Exaggerated in discussions. I tend to have a bit more of a humorous approach to discussions. I'm more laid back I guess.
Although, I rarely encounter such blatantly irrational views as I do here. I dont see much room for humor when it comes to issues like racism, homophobia, misogyny or blatans denial of reality like creationism or climate change denial.
3. If you could change one thing about the way things are here what would it be?
I don't really have a dog in this fight anymore. There are some people that I quite like, so if I guess if there was one thing: More even sided member pool.
4. Is there a rule you'd like to add to the TOL list?
Nope
5. Have you changed ideologically or personally since you first arrived and if so did TOL play a role in that change?
Ideologically? I've changed theologically. But that is what real theology is, as far as Im concerned, to reinterpret, rethink and mature in my faith in light of new experiences, thinking and learning. TOL has probably been a factor, but my studies and real life more so.
Personally? Guess I'm a bit done with the arguing on the internet phase. I've learned that you can lead a horse to water, but that is that.
6. What was your primary reason for deciding to stick around here for a while?
I'm rarely posting anymore. The reason I stuck around was some of the people here. My last period here I mostly spent my time here talking with them.
7. Do you believe that anonymity has an overall liberating and/or negative effect on posters and posts here?
Guess it can be both.
8. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of religion?
Less. It has made me acutely aware of how toxic religion (or really ideology in general) can be. It can turn to poison if it is motivated by hatred.
9. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheists?
Neither. I've learned some from some of the good ones. I have a less favorable impression of rabid anti-theists though, they really just strike me as the other side of the coin the most vehement religious fundamentalism.
10. Are you more or less emphatic in your beliefs of in any particular belief you came to TOL with as a direct result of your time here?
Yes. Critical thinking is worth defending. Ignorant bigotry and denial of basic scientific facts corrupts minds, and bad thinking is damaging this world. When such nonsense runs rampant it makes demagogues like Trump president.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This is an informative thread. I hope management is reviewing the content herein. There is much to think about.
AMR
AMR
Lon
Well-known member
I don't think agreeing or disagreeing as important as the discussion of the distinction. For whatever reason, and I suspect it because of the polarizing extreme, I find it has its place in these questions (my two cents, likely worth little more than). I do find contrast helpful. For instance, both you and those who followed who might not self-identify as Christian, it has become a polarization, however, it does indeed reflect upon your particular views and to me, it seems TOL has indeed helped you soften toward the atheists' general direction - not a 'bad' thing, we can all use a little empathy, even toward enemies, the bible calls for some careful sense of it 'gentle as doves, wise as serpents' etc.I don't agree, for the reason I gave. What you're saying here reads somewhat like a retroactive rationalization for an inadvertent apples-to-oranges comparison, because the two questions are identical except for the last word.
It's a good thread idea, though. I've enjoyed reading the various responses.
I think both 'religion' and 'atheism' from TH's pen, are more broad in stroke as well. I'd say I have no difference in my views between religion and atheism, though I certainly am more aware of legalism/religion than I'd been. I may tackle these questions, but need to be more thoughtful then provoking when I answer else it is just more that may be forgettable and unnecessary. A lot of these answers are representative that I don't feel a need to add repetition. :e4e:
Lon
Well-known member
A definition of 'hate' is important here. I'd suggest you two understand it differently. Example: Indifference is also hate in my book (and others') etc. :e4e:
Lon
Well-known member
This one is a great idea. Maybe let paying members have 2 or 3
Needs a couple "@mods" :up:
musterion
Well-known member
To leftists, anyone who disagrees with them is guilty of hate and therefore deserving of hatred.
Let me modify that: that statement is often true but I'm not sure every leftist on TOL is that far gone. However, a few of them are...a few of them CANNOT discuss most issues calmly, rationally and on the basis of facts alone. They're too emotionally invested. With hate.
musterion
Well-known member
1. When you first arrived how much experience did you have with internet forums and were you surprised by what you encountered?
Not surprised at all. I'd seen it before elsewhere, worse than it is here. What did surprise me is what I saw inexplicably tolerated (but this is improving).
2. Is the person you appear to be an exaggeration of who you actually are, who you actually are, or is it unlike who you are in the real world?
WYSIWYG.
3. If you could change one thing about the way things are here what would it be?
Simplified house rules covering patterns of dishonest discussion (which amounts to a history of trolling) coupled with summary banishment for life and a publicly posted explanation why. Some say this would be too draconian and would quash discussion. I say that's nonsense; true discussion would flourish because only those who would hamper honest discussion and debate would inevitably be removed, for the good of everyone else. Examples: Patrick Jane and The Barbarian, both dishonest and TOL is better off without them.
4. Is there a rule you'd like to add to the TOL list?
See #3.
5. Have you changed ideologically or personally since you first arrived?
Not really. Some doctrinal clarifications and readjustments but that's about it.
Also an increased loathing of trolls, which was already considerable.
6. What was your primary reason for deciding to stick around here for a while?
Mutual encouragement and edification with like-minded brethren. However, there are trolls who seek to disrupt exactly that community and they are the sole reason I regret coming to TOL some days.
7. Do you believe that anonymity has an overall liberating and/or negative effect on posters and posts here?
Of course it does, both. That's just human nature. But probably manifests itself more with some than others.
8. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of religion?
There is nothing favorable about mere religion, which is rife on TOL.
9. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheists?
It continues to substantiate what I already knew.
10. Are you more or less emphatic in your beliefs of in any particular belief you came to TOL with as a direct result of your time here?
No change. There are some things I think I understand more clearly but those are really just matters of detail.
Not surprised at all. I'd seen it before elsewhere, worse than it is here. What did surprise me is what I saw inexplicably tolerated (but this is improving).
2. Is the person you appear to be an exaggeration of who you actually are, who you actually are, or is it unlike who you are in the real world?
WYSIWYG.
3. If you could change one thing about the way things are here what would it be?
Simplified house rules covering patterns of dishonest discussion (which amounts to a history of trolling) coupled with summary banishment for life and a publicly posted explanation why. Some say this would be too draconian and would quash discussion. I say that's nonsense; true discussion would flourish because only those who would hamper honest discussion and debate would inevitably be removed, for the good of everyone else. Examples: Patrick Jane and The Barbarian, both dishonest and TOL is better off without them.
4. Is there a rule you'd like to add to the TOL list?
See #3.
5. Have you changed ideologically or personally since you first arrived?
Not really. Some doctrinal clarifications and readjustments but that's about it.
Also an increased loathing of trolls, which was already considerable.
6. What was your primary reason for deciding to stick around here for a while?
Mutual encouragement and edification with like-minded brethren. However, there are trolls who seek to disrupt exactly that community and they are the sole reason I regret coming to TOL some days.
7. Do you believe that anonymity has an overall liberating and/or negative effect on posters and posts here?
Of course it does, both. That's just human nature. But probably manifests itself more with some than others.
8. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of religion?
There is nothing favorable about mere religion, which is rife on TOL.
9. Has your exposure to the views found here contributed to your having a more/less favorable impression of atheists?
It continues to substantiate what I already knew.
10. Are you more or less emphatic in your beliefs of in any particular belief you came to TOL with as a direct result of your time here?
No change. There are some things I think I understand more clearly but those are really just matters of detail.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I'm not sure how this bears on the disagreement between TH and me regarding the comparison between belief system and person when one is theistic and one is atheistic. I explained that earlier, and the disagreement remains a disagreement.
Also I consider myself a mostly non-practicing Catholic at the moment, so I chose "other" as a more timely label. That doesn't make me not a Christian, it's just that I don't identify with any another Christian label, and unfortunately the software forces a choice from a preset list. Again though, I don't see how this bears on the conversation between myself and TH.
Quite a lot. Been admin on some, banned from others. Never both at one.
"Surprised" wouldn't describe my reaction to TOL.
This is the real world.
How I act on TOL is pretty much how I'd act on any Internet forum.
A couple of forum features need tweaking, otherwise, not much.
No.
Yes. Dramatic.
I didn't get banned permanently.
No.
Less favourable.
Less favourable.
More.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
I8