Off-Topic Place

Dragi forumisti

S-a simţit nevoia unui spaţiu dedicat, unde discuţiile off-topic, destul de numeroase în ultima perioadă, să îşi găsească un loc al lor.

Datorită faptului că forumurile emisiunilor tindeau să fie deturnate de la tema principală de discuţie, devenind un fel de chat greu de urmărit, unele comentarii vor fi mutate pe acest forum, astfel incat aceia care dispun de timp liber/teme de discutie/inspiratie sa isi poata manifesta talentul pe indelete şi, în acelaşi timp, să se ofere posibilitatea de discutii şi dezbateri pentru cei interesaţi de prezentarile video.

Postarile off-topic (se pot include aici, după cum ne-au obişnuit unii: preferinţele muzicale, declaraţiile de dragoste, deversările de emoticoane, informările cu privire la dieta sau somnul personal, creaţiile artistice, repetările obsesive de idei, cererile de „rugaciune” etc… ) sunt aşadar binevenite în spaţiul pe care tocmai îl inaugurăm.

Evident, mesajele ce conţin înjurături, obscenităţi, dezvăluiri de identitate…vor fi şterse.

Mulţumesc 🙂

2.316 Responses to Off-Topic Place

  1. Avatarul lui Edmond Constantinescu eddieconst says:

    Richi & Anubis:

    Si eu cred ca nominalismul este samanta medievala a modernismului. A fost primul semn de intrebare asupra metafizicii care a generat un efect domino: umanism, luteranism, cartesianism etc., pana la logico-pozitivism. Stiinta s-a dezvoltat numai dupa caderea metafizicii si nu se putea altfel. Lucrul care nu se discuta insa in biserici este ca toata dogmatica crestina se bazeaza in ultima instanta pe o conceptie realista, ex trinitatea sau cristologia – homousia etc.

  2. Avatarul lui leli leli says:

    @Richard

    e vorba de morcov, caroten, vit. A 🙂

  3. Avatarul lui Richard Richard says:

    ha buna Edi, ce surpriza ! Dogmatismul medival se baza pe metafizica. Metafizica era intretinuta (si inca este) pt a valida dogmatismul. ORICE dogmatism are la baza o metafizica, un discurs ontologic, ai observat Edi? Am observat ca avem viziuni asemanatoare in ceea ce priveste teoria limbajului. O zii buna Edi ! 🙂

  4. Avatarul lui leo leo says:

    Va mai aduceti aminte de Ronin?
    Mintile mai fasnetze sa-i ignore site-ul.http://ordinulnegru.blogspot.com/

  5. Avatarul lui Danut Tanase Danut Tanase says:

    Salutare tuturor!
    Sa mai smulgem niste masti de pe fata tradatorului, ipocritului si falsului disident si reformator IUDA-Edi Constantinescu, tradatorul fratilor lui in multe feluri si chipuri.
    Am aflat din ceea ce a scris cu manuta lui ca desi era „prigonit” de sistem si oamenii lui, colabora si facea strategii impreuna cu prigonitorii lui ca sa loveasca EXACT in oamenii care se bateau si il aparau, adica in MINE, pentru ca nu vreau sa vorbesc aici in numele nimanui altcuiva. Am mai aflat tot din ceea ce a scris Edi ca si el este de acord cu datul mitei in numele lui Dumnezeu si de aceea a ramas un simpatizant al lui P.A. si un dusman al meu care faceam trolling ca sa nu mai dam mita in Numele lui Dumnezeu. Dar nu am inteles cine m-a folosit atunci pe mine pentru ca TOTI erau cu P.A. Pe mine cine ma mai manipula IUDA-EDI? Cred ca rusii, americanii, mosadul si Mi5. Asa s-a si rupt Dynamisul la acea vreme, TOTI cei care au crezut ca mita este buna si au acceptat aceasta practica au plecat cu P.A. in sala Bratianu si au creat comunitatea „Speranta”, iar cei care au fost impotriva darii de mita au ramas la Dynamis. Asta ca sa stie toata lumea adventista adevarul curat, ca sa nu mai fiti aburiti. Atunci EU si alti cativa am infruntat toata floarea de popime adventista de la Uniune si Conferinta. Toate numele mari ale adventismului din Romania au fost impotirva mea si a catorva frati. Nu mi-e rusine si nu o sa-mi fie niciodata rusine cu ceea ce am facut atunci, cu acea ocazie. Edi se vede treaba ca si atunci era tot omul sistemului ticalosit, deorece are aceeasi pozitie cu el. Cand sistemul i-a tras un sut in cur lui P.A., eu, Danut Tanase, am protestat public in Dynamis. Cand a venit vestea ca P.A. a fost dat afara asa cum a fost dat, EU am spus public in adunare: „Daca cele relatate sunt adevarate, PROTESTEZ PUBLIC fata de modul cum Uniunea s-a comportat fata de P.A.!”
    Intre noi fie vorba, P.A. a fost un prost ca si Edi Constantinescu care o sa pateasca acelasi lucru. El a crezut ca daca va face cateva compromisuri cu sistemul, acesta ii va accepta orice. Greska! Ia spune mai dizidentule IUDA-Edi, TU ai protestat ma cand prietenul tau P.A. a fost usuit sau ai tacut ca lasul?
    Si in timp ce eu ma bateam pentru IUDA-Edi Constantinescu cu toti gretosii, toti ipocritii si mincinosii de la Conferinta si Uniune, IUDA-Edi Constantinescu imi infigea cutite in spate, pentru ca citise el intr-o carte nu stiu ce dracovenie. Cat de prost e asta ba nene! Da, ia spune IUDA-EDi, Elena nu ti-a bagat si ea putina otrava in urechi? Se vedea ca suferea de cate ori tu nu mai erai nr.1. Era invidioasa cand mai predicam si eu si George Natsis si altii. Cred ca si ea are o parte de vina in prosteala ta.
    Tin minte ca odata venisera la Dynamis, dupa plecarea lui IUDA-Edi, fete „luminate” de la Conferinta ca sa ne aduca pe calea cea buna si sa ne mai abureasca putin. Stiti, din aia care scot un cuvant la fiecare 20 de secunde, care se cred foarte importanti si unsi de Dumnezeu, care cred ca fiecare cuvant al lor este aur curat si se transforma pe data in piatra pretioasa. I-am ascultat eu ce i-am ascultat si apo le-am spus textual: „sa mai lase fetele alea de sfinti impotenti” si sa discutam normal, ca oamenii, fara fite sfinte care pe mine nu ma impresioneaza. Cornel Rusu, pastor bagator de seama pe vremea aia, care este acum in America, care era mai nou la Dynamis pe vreme aceea, a ramas efectiv cu gura cascata cand a auzit ce le-am spus alora. Nu o sa-i uit niciodata figura pe care a facut-o atunci. Nu mai spun ca intreaga asistenta a ramas muta. Nu suport ipocrizia, minciuna si falsitatea si le-am spus in fata asta. Era celebra replica a lui Toma Caragiu catre legionari, din filmul „Actorul si salbaticii”. Eu, IUDA-EDi, am demnitate, curaj, sunt pe fata, nu fals si tradator ca tine. Aproape toti de la Conferinta si Uniunea romana evitau sa aiba de-a face cu mine sau sa dea ochii cu mine, ca sa nu le mai spun ceea ce cred despre ei, pentru ca eu le spuneam exact ceea ce gandeam. Asa am facut toata viata mea si fac si acum. Si eu ca prostu’ ma luptam pentru ala care ma lucra pe la spate, adica EDI-IUDA!
    Hai sa-ti mai demontez aberatiile care sunt in mintea ta bolnava.

    IUDA-Edi Constantinescu: „Eu cred ca Dan Capitan a fost in mod indemnat direct de stim noi cine sa te scoata din pepeni cu acea discutie online despre sanctuar, pentru ca asa cum fusesem avertizat, eul tau hipertrofiat urma sa fie arma “lor” de preferinta. Asa ca Danut draga, ma simt vinovat fata de Dynamis pentru ca nu am ascultat sfatul de a te neutraliza din timp.”

    Si chiar daca a fost asa, ce mare scofala? Nu m-a scos din niciun pepene. Eu STIU CE CRED SI AM SI ARGUMENTE. Puteti sa veniti si 100.000 ca nu ma dovediti. Ce inseamna ma prostule „eu hipertrofiat”? Ce vrei sa spui cu asta? Ca te-am depasit pe TINE? Eu mai barzoi eu ca al tau n-am vazut. Dupa mintea ta aia proasta si Isus avea un eu hipetrofiat. Stii de ce? Pentru ca a spus: EU sunt calea, adevarul si viata, EU sunt painea vietii, EU sunt usa, EU sunt invierea si viata, EU sunt cel ce sunt, EU sut apa vietii, EU sunt mielul lui Dumnezeu…. Cat de prosti pot sa fie oamenii cand slujesc pe Dracu’!

    IUDA-Edi Constantinescu: „In ce priveste plecarea mea in US, tu insuti ai amintit ca veneau uneori persoane ‘speciale” si tu nu stii ce dsicutau ei cum mine si cu altii (pentru ca in tine nu aveau incredere) dar am fost avertizat sa nu plec din Bucuresti pentru ca in provincie voi fi fara protectie. Asa ca am ales nu Buzaul ci un sat de langa Sibiu unde eram prieten si fost coleg cu sefi de la politie sau administratie.”

    Aici recunosti ca prostu’ ca tu erai omul sistemului. Oamenii sistemului CU MINE NU DISCUTAU ca nu aveau incredere, corect, si asta DOVEDESTE ca nu eram omul lor dobitocule, dar discutau cu TINE si cu ALTII, adica cu OAMENII LOR, prostule care te dai singur de gol. Si atunci mai logicianul nepereche al adventismului mondial, care o sa ne spui tu la Andrews de ce au crapat dinozaurii, ia raspunde tu la intrebarea: Eu OMUL CUI MAI ERAM? ba prostule care esti tu prost, ca pana acum ai latrat si ai spus ca EU eram omul alora care…. TU SPUI: nu voiau sa vorbeasca cu mine!!!!!!! Esti chiar idiot? Nu vezi ca ai cazut in plasa propriilor minciuni?! Cine te urmarea atunci pe tine mai disidentule? Aia care nu voiau sa vorbeasca cu mine si vorbeau doar cu tine? AIA voiau sa-ti faca rau? Ba, ma crezi retardat? Prostete-i pe retardatii care te pupa pe tine in cur si-ti cred minciunile si gogomaniile nu pe mine ma baiatule. Sunt mult, mult mai destept ca tine. Scoala de serpi si vulpi eu am absolvit-o cu brio in timp ce tu ai ramas repetent. Esti chiar penibil, penibil.

    IUDA-Edi Constantinescu: „In privnta botezurilor, mi-e sila de goana dupa afirmare prin botezuri a pastorilor, dar ma voi multumii sa iti amintesc ca noi nu primeam ca mebrii decat prin botez (cu unele exceptii) si aveam cel mai mare numar de vizitatori seculari din capitala. Acest subiect este insa incomod pentru mine, deoarece m-am desprins de obsesia de a-i face pe altii adventsti. Pe atunci credeam insa in mod sincer ca trebuie sa-i conving pe toti sa creada ca mine, si cred ca am incercat onest sa fac azs-ismul sa para relevant pentru minile moderne, pentru a fi dezamagiti mai tarziu de realitatea din biserici.”

    Aici ai spus adevarul. Asa este. Aici te cred. Eu sunt onest si recunosc si meritele „adversarului”.

    IUDA-Edi Constantinescu: „Asa ca Danut draga, adevarul este ca tu ai fost studiat ca o insecta sub microscop, ti s-a recunoscut potentialul de trolling, si ai fost folosit fara sa stii. Mea culpa.”

    Aici Edi draga, iti dau EU o lectie de viata. TU ai fost si inca mai ESTI insecta de sub microscopul celor cu mult mai destepti ca tine. Tu si in rautate esti prost, asa cum ai dovedit cu postul tau. Baietii care te-au facut si te fac pe tine in continuare, au vazut fantosele din mintea ta si le-au speculat. Ce si-au zis: Ba, care-i cel mai aprig, mai incoruptibil si omul caruia nu-i putem face mare lucru, care este cu Edi si ceea ce face si reprzinta el? Raspuns: Danut Tanase. Are limbarita, are vorbele cu el, nu e prost, are pozitie sociala buna, nu putem sa-l atragem de partea noastra, atunci ce facem? Ii bagam in cap lu’ prostu’ de Constantinescu ca D.T. vrea sa-i ia locul, ca este dusmanul lui, ca il sapa pe el ca sa-i ia amvonul, si alte din astea. Edi o sa-l suspicioneze continuu pe asta, ii bagam in cap ceva de psihologie care ii place lui Edi si gata. Asta a fost jocul baietilor prostule care esti. Ce idiotenie asta! Numai un cretin imbecil ca Samson, care are in cap numai muci si sperma poate sa creada asa ceva, ca te sapam eu pe tine. EU te-am aparat TOT TIMPUL. Te-am suspectat de tradare, ipocrizie si minciuna foarte tarziu, apoi la „Oameni si Perspective” ti-am inteles jocul marsav de a-i aburii inca o data pe oameni, iar acum pun punct. Am spus si scris pe bogul meu inca de acum 2 ani ca esti doar in impostor. Un fals disident, un om al sistemului ticalosit. Pentru mine esti definitiv un om-gunoi pe care nu-l doresc in preajma mea. Un tradator si un mincinos, un om al sistemului bolnav pe care tu nu ai anvergura nici macar sa-l citici. Tu ai fost si esti doar un sobolan profitor si nimic mai mult. O IUDA! TU nu m-ai invatat NIMIC pe mine. Cand ti-am spus la comitet cum m-a calauzit Dumnezeu personal in crednta crestina pe mine si pe sotia mea, ai ramas cu gura cascata. Nu-ti datorez NIMIC. Pentru mine ai importanta doar prin faptul ca Dumnezeul meu a murit si pentru o iuda ca tine. Atat si nimic mai mult. Vremea ta a trecut. Esti istorie. Adevarurile care vor zgudui in curand umanitatea, tu nu le detii. Esti doar o calauza oarba. Site-ul asta al tau o sa moara repede. Cine se mai uita in gura ta. Nu mai ai nimic relevant de spus. Esti PA! Zii merci ca ti-am mai facut eu niste trafic pe aici.
    IUDA-Edi Constantinescu: „Nu ti-asi fi spus niciodata aceste lucruri daca nu asi suspecta ca esti iar pe post zombi in misiune. Esti sincer si simpatic in paranoia ta justitiara, si asta i-a facut pe multi sa-ti dea credit. Cu alte cuvinte, esti instrumentul perfect pentru altii mai calculati si mai pragmatici care se folosesc de unii ca tine sa le “deschida ochii” si apoi restul vine de la sine. Nu ma indoiesc ca cineva ti-a deschis ochii cu privire lamine in ultima vreme.”

    Mintea ta bolnava este fara leac. Daca tu crezi ceea ce ai scris aici, esti chiar dobitocul dobitocilor si prostul prostilor. PARANOIA ORIGINALA! Nici nu-mi pierd timpul sa comentez aberatiile astea. Ti-am demonstrat mai sus ca nu am fost NICIODATA OMUL SISTEMULUI, lucru confirmat si scris cu manuta ta de tine insuti, de prost ce esti. TU esti cel manipulat si cel prostit. Vei pieri pe propria ta prostie.
    La ultimele alegeri de la Uniune, la Cernica, unde am participat ca delegat al Dynamisului, le-am spus alora ca sunt exact ca si comunistii. Fac doar o rotire de cadre si nimic mai mult. I-am spus in fata lui LC ca este UN MINCINOS, de fata cu Bocaneanu si TOT comitetul de alegeri. Eu am verticalitate, onoare, cuvant, demnitate si ceva intre picioare. Tu nu ai nimic din astea. Si cand m-a intrebat de ce-l fac asa, i-am raspuns pentru tot ceea ce a facut el cu noi, comunitatea, si cu TINE, la Dynamis.

    Adventismul din Romania este dominat de cateva gasti si cateva familii. Atat si nimic mai mult. TU nu ai fost NICIODATA in pericol asa cum insinuezi. Asta este doar vrajeala pentru prostii care te mai cred. Impotriva ta a fost doar o invidie profesionala ca oriunde in lume, nimic mai mult. Nu esti nici reformator, nici disident, nici detinatorul unor adevaruri esentiale. ESTI OMUL SISTERMULUI, un las, un ipocrit si o iuda. Asa cum fiecare soldat al lui Napoleon visa ca intr-o zi sa aiba in ranita bastonul de maresal, asa si tu ca toti pastorii adventisti, ai visat sa ajungi in America si ai ajuns Ai calcat peste cadavre pentru asta si ti-ai tradat oamenii care te-au sprijinit.
    Am anticipat in cateva articole de pe blogul meu exact ceea ce ai patit si tu si Marius Stanescu. Nu ma voi insela nici acum. Ai lunile numarate.
    Mi-e sila!

  6. Avatarul lui Ianis ianis says:

    Tanase
    Ia-ti medicamentele si fii fericit. Accesele de martiraj iti vor trece garantat.

  7. Avatarul lui Danut Tanase Danut Tanase says:

    P.S. Ca sa inteleaga poporul cititor, „oamenii speciali” care veneau la Dynamis si despre care se face vorbire aici erau salariatii/ pastorii Conferintei si ai Uniunii din Romania, nu altcineva. Sa nu credeti ca veneau ingerii din cer.

  8. Avatarul lui Richard Richard says:

    danut tanase, uite ca ai dreptate domnule ! te tot citesc si cand ai dreptate ai… Uite, despre denuntarea lui edi, subeictul nu ma intereseaza, nu va stii nimeni ce a fost acolo la dynamis in afara de voi doi, de aceea nu ma bag. Nu imi plac excesele tale de zel, nici limbajul tau fetid, insa ai dreptate cand spui ca si Edi si Marius Stanescu au crezut ca fac mare branza in cadrul sistemului (lucru de neconceput) si uite ca sistemul din care fac parte i-a anihilat. Da, edi va fii anihilat pe linie pastorala, asta este evident, este o chestiune de timp. Si Marius si edi daca mai vor sa faca emisiuni ar trebui sa lase sistemul in pace si sa faca altceva pe cont propriu.

    Pacat ca te exprimi ca un mojic. Daca nu ai avea aceasta obsesie ai fii un interlocutor interesant, insa… amplitudinea limbajului tau te impiedica sa te exprimi pe alte subiecte interesante pe forum. Am citit blogul tau. Scopul tau este sa distrugi acest forum, insa nu vei reusi cum edi nu a reusit sa aduca nici un prejudiciu sistemului !!!! Din contra l-a intarit… Tu ar trebui sa iti alegi clientela ta, iar edi sa faca ce vrea el pe oxigen pe cont propriu. Pe noi nu ne intereseaza aici dizidenta ta sau a lui edi, ci numai ideile colportate. Daca fac sens, atunci este de luat in considerare. Inceteaza sa te mai imbeti cu apa rece ca aici toti suntem pupincuristi cum ne tot caracterizezi, stiu de mult ca edi nu este perfect, am spus numai ca noi doi am colaborat bine la inceputul anilor 90 si culmea, pe vremea aceea stia sa colaboreze chiar cu tinerii. ne lasa libera initiativa nu era controlant, bineinteles informatica a fost de mica proportii nu o biserica mare ca dynamisul.

    Am inteles toti ce ii reprosezi lui edi, acum putem discuta si altceva decat sa faci denuntari morale ?! Dimensiunea morala a lui edi, personal nu ma intereseaza, ma interesaza numai ideile colportate in postingurile sale.

    Edi daca are inteligenta pe care sper eu s-o aibe, va gasi solutii pt oxigen ! Sa stii ca am cunostinte multe are sunt sau au fost azs si vin sa se uite la emisiuni, insa nu le palce galceava de aici si nu posteaza nimic. Stiu sa faca diferenta intre ideile propuse de edi si cacialmaua inerenta forumurilor de discutie in care se inura, se denunta, se baga organele genitale in tot si se scuipa reciproc. Asemenea mizerii nu isi au sensul intr-o discutie onorabila.

    Demonstreaza ca poti sa discuti altfel si mai ales altceva daca te intereseaza subiectele propuse de edi. Chiar daca nu esti de acord !

    o zii buna si ti-am scris fara suparare in ciuda faptului ca ma faci cel mai mare prost de pe forum :):):):) chiar ma distreaza chestia asta acum, cuvintele tale au ramas fara semnificatie date fiind postingurile noastre 😉

  9. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    „There’s real problems that come back to the personality disorders, if you like, of those who are obsessed with self. Either if I see a YouTube film or read a blog, my eyes go below to the bottom of the screen because I get so fantastically upset by people who write comments… I don’t even know anybody who writes comments! I think that’s the point! The kind of people who put comments are themselves so weird and unhappy and alone and strange – it’s called ‘trolling‘, you know, vicious comments about things I mean, really weird. Either politically weird or religiously weird or just so intolerant or so desperate to be heard! So offensive! Just pleading: „Please listen to meee!” – they’re saying all the time. „Listen to me!
    And of course you don’t want to, and if you do, it just gets upset – you might even be tricked into replying with an aggressive reply to some idiot, and with vile opinions about things. which they will use on a complete… it might be a puppy running around… some random youtube thing, and it somehow manages to get a thread of nastiness into it. And they just want to be heard, and they are so resentful, and so annoyed, especially due to other people’s blogs the fact that somebody’s reading someone else’s blog and not theirs – is madly enough! And they may be like someone they hate and this even happens in technology – if you write „Oh, I saw my friend the other day” [?] like, two pages of anti-Apple madness – talk about ‘get a life’!
    But that all comes down to the same problem – these are self-obsessed people.
    And because they are self-obsessed, they just build up these poisons, build up inside them, they have to get out. Maybe it’s better that they get out in the common pages of the Internet, than in violence on the streets, but it’s still distressing for us all to see.”

    ________________________________________

    God’s Emotions: Why the Biblical God is So Human
    http://www.youtube.com/user/TrustingDoubt

    Madman or Something Worse [about Jesus]
    http://jehovacide.com/blog/2011/06/26/268/

    Carl Sagan Speaks Zeitgeist [with romanian subtitle]
    http://dotsub.com/view/ab9956dd-3190-4406-ba4b-569ed3f79da0

    QualiaSoup – ‘there are no gods’ (part 2)

    BBC documentary – Lost Horizons: The Big Bang

  10. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    differences between views on society and politics by the Right (liberals/progressives) and Left (conservatives/traditionals) Wings
    http://todayilearned.co.uk/2011/06/28/difference-between-left-and-right-sociopolitical-views/
    check out the beliefs section. 😛

    Interesting Thought Provoking Blasphemous Pictures 😀
    http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2011/06/24/interesting-thought-provoking-blasphemous-pictures/

  11. Avatarul lui maria maria says:

    @# 27

    Iesirea din zidul constrangerilor religioase, din zidul prejudecatilor este expresia libertatii .

    „Principala necesitate a unei fiinte umane este libertatea…..Religia trage fiintele umane inapoi, se manifesta impotriva stiintei si progresivitatii. Religia ii inabusa pe oameni cu o teama de supranatural, le interzice oamenilor sa rada si nu le permite niciodata sa-si exercite alegerea.”
    ( Taslima Nasreen)

  12. Avatarul lui Ianis ianis says:

    Maria, am o rugaminte, ca stiu ca faci parte din club: ai vreo carte a lui Basarab Nicolescu in format pdf?

    multumesc

  13. Avatarul lui maria maria says:

    Ianis,
    Nu.
    Dar vad ca este pe internet ceva despre Gurdjieff scris de Nicolescu.
    Eu am cumparat carti. In orice caz e fascinat de jakob bohme si ca o revelatie asupra existentei defineste moartea ca o treapta spre o noua existenta a tuturor fiintelor vii.
    E mistic, asa cum sunt multi fizicieni.
    Si crede in teoria totului bazat pe mai multe niveluri de realitate.
    Teosofie, alchimie, hermeneutica, fizica , gnoza, traditie imbinate ( din punctul meu de vedere) destul de atractiv.

  14. Avatarul lui Richard Richard says:

    Teosofie, alchimie, hermeneutica, fizica , gnoza, traditie imbinate ( din punctul meu de vedere) destul de atractiv… astea ne urmaresc ca vantul, nu are importanta epoca intotdeauna sunt unii fascinati de ocultism si mistica. Si pe mine m-a incercat fascinatia asta …

  15. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:

    oarecum neasteptat pentru mine: conform rezultatelor unui studiu realizat pe un esantion de 2295 de subiecti, majoritatea americanilor sustin cercetarea pe celule stem. In ciuda acestui fapt, inca mai exista ingradiri guvernamentale.

    “In a democratic society, deferring to objections from a small (mainly religious) minority and limiting research that has so much therapeutic promise may well be unethical,” the authors write.

  16. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    multumesc pentru citat, maria!
    „le interzice oamenilor sa rada” … oh, cat adevar!

    “Religia trage fiintele umane inapoi, se manifesta impotriva stiintei si progresivitatii. Religia ii inabusa pe oameni cu o teama de supranatural, le interzice oamenilor sa rada si nu le permite niciodata sa-si exercite alegerea.”

    Probabil de aceea il iubesc/iubim pe Edi (spiritul sau liber). Este exact contrariul.

  17. Avatarul lui maria maria says:

    Richard,

    Tocmai de aceea am spus ‘atractiva”, adica ceva de suprafata care nu ne implica decat ca o fascinatie. Realitatea care ne implica cu adevarat este mult mai complexa, nu chiar atractiva sau nu numai atractiva.

  18. Avatarul lui Richard Richard says:

    Pai cam da maria….

  19. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:

    Cateva „dialoguri” de mai sus mi-au adus aminte ca unii nu si-au luat „fierul” „in serios” LOL

  20. Avatarul lui Christian Christian says:

    Acum cateva saptamani am cunsocut o persoana care vrea sa implementeze un proiect.
    Am vb cu el si se pare ca eu sunt persoana cea mai potrivita din cate a gasit el care sa-l ajute.
    Poriectul este curat din punct de vedere moral si social. Insa, am aflat ca tipul are bani din afaceri mai putin curate. Afaceri murdare in lumea interlopa la nivel inalt.
    Eu vreau sa ma implic in acest proiect pt. ca vreau sa castig.
    Insa, am un simtamant de vinovatie. I-am ceut o suma mare de bani si el a zis ok, insa a mai zis: perioada aceasta voi dezvolta cutare afaceri ca sa imi aduca si mai multi bani…, iar eu m-am intristat stiind ca aceste afaceri nu sunt ok.
    Nu am dat detalii pt ca nu este onest.
    Am vrut doar sa transmit persoanelor de pe forum cu care am interactionat ca am nevoie de sfatul lor.

  21. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:

    Domnul te-a avertizat prin constiinta ca e pacat!

  22. Avatarul lui Christian Christian says:

    Constiintei mele ii este frica. Dumnezeului meu ii este frica. Constiinta este un set de norme/standarde. Daca ele nu au nici o legatura cu viata reala? Constiinta intervine insa eu ii interpretez influenta. Daca Domnul alege sa imi vorbeasca prin constiinta s-ar putea ca mesajul lui sa nu ajunga corect la mine. In primul rand pt. ca constiinta mea este un filtru. In al doilea rand pt. ca eu vad raspunsul constiintei ca pe un mecanism de aparare.

  23. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:

    Salut Christian. Sincer, habar nu am ce sfat sa-ti dau! Cauta niste adventisti, ei le stiu pe toate. Ai postit? Daca esti credincios, Domnul se va indura si-ti va vorbi direct. Am vazut ca asa se intampla in biblie. Daca nu, inseamna ca ai pacate ascunse.
    Nu am vrut sa fac bascalie, asa mi s-a spus si mie acum vreo 5 ani cand eram in fata unei dileme. In alta ordine de idei, ca sa fii sigur ca banii cuiva pentru care vrei sa lucrezi sunt 100% curati, nu ai decat sa-ti faci singur o afacere, respectand toate legile. Din punctul meu de vedere, cea mai profitabila afacere ar fi sa-ti faci o biserica. Sau sa faci afaceri cu biserica. Sau cu Richard, el mai garanteaza profituri sigure.
    Daca accepti oferta de care vorbersti si ai nevoie de colaboratori, eu caut de lucru!

  24. Avatarul lui Christian Christian says:

    Eu fac proiect curat. Insa, este inevitabil sa nu apara certuri. De aici apar fricile mele. Eu fac proiect pentru o persoana extrem de influenta in lumea interlopa. Aceasta lume are regulile ei. Eu abia acum o pricep. Imi este frica de ea. As fi naiv sa cred ca eu fac treaba si ma retrag. este clar ca intru oarecum in jocul lor. O sa apara certuri inevitabile. Si cu oameni de acest gen nu e prea bine sa te certi.

    Vinovatia, teama, presiunea, ma apasa. Intelegi? Am vb atat de mult de frica si am crezut ca o inteleg. Acum o simt si vad cat este de puternica.

    Multumesc pt. raspunsuri, am spuns de la bun inceput ca le apreciez si am nevoie de ele.

  25. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:

    Daca ti-e frica de cearta cu ei, n-o face, dar e posibil sa te certi cu tine apoi, sa te gandesti mereu ”dar daca iesea bine?”. Care-i mai rea?

  26. Avatarul lui Christian Christian says:

    Ediorgule, da-mi te rog un semn pe mail
    cristisian@yahoo.com

  27. Avatarul lui leo leo says:

    Christian,

    D. lucreaza si cu vase de acara! Asa mi-a spus un diacon dupa ce i-am facut rost de munca la firma la care lucram. Al dracu compliment!
    Barbate, tu uita-te numai la tine in farfurie. Ce te intereseaza de unde vin banii?
    Cred ca ast-ai si parerea lui D.

  28. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:

    Bre, Christian, nu lua de bun ce zic eu! Eu sunt ca biblia, nu-ti rezolv dilemele, ti le complic si mai mult…
    @Leo – am lucrat si eu la domnul D. A fost frumos, nu zic, dar nu prea plateste bine daca nu ai un anumit statut care sa te faca in stare sa-i cunosti parerile si sa le imparti autorizat.

  29. Avatarul lui maria maria says:

    Christian,

    Dumnezeul din tine e constiinta ta ! Daca ea-ti spune ca ceva nu este in regula cred ca e mai bine sa-ti asculti constiinta.
    Viata e scurta iar constiinta nu o poti cumpara cu bani.
    Banii se duc , se risipesc cateodata pe lucruri inutile, insa ceea ce este in inima ta conteaza.
    Parerea mea !
    ” Daca Domnul alege sa imi vorbeasca prin constiinta s-ar putea ca mesajul lui sa nu ajunga corect la mine”.
    Pai, cine-l deformeaza ? Constiinta ?
    Nu-i bine sa te legi la cap daca nu te doare, cu interlopii nu-i de glumit .Nu vezi cate se-ntampla ?
    Sigur gasesti si alte surse de a face bani .
    Eu ti-am spus ce cred, tu urmeaza-ti constiinta !
    Cand constiinta vorbeste, dumnezeu tace. Dumnezeu vorbeste numai oamenilor cu constiinta blocata.

  30. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:

    Nu Edi nu ai inteles, un semn divin voia sa zica! Bwahahahahaahaaa :zombiekiller:

  31. Avatarul lui leo leo says:

    Ediorgu,

    Sunt convins ca se lucreaza bine la D. Unde mai pui ca-ti ramane timp berechet si pentru actv. extra…Daca ai terminat si Andrews-ul poti imparti mai autorizat orice parere!
    Daia-i zic fimii ca nu ajunge „trad&interpret. si sa incerce la Andrews sau Collonges…

  32. Avatarul lui leo leo says:

    si ptr sabatul care-i pe terminate.

  33. Avatarul lui electroserv electroserv says:

    #46 :yes:

  34. Avatarul lui Christian Christian says:

    Nu va dati seama cat de importante sunt cuvintele pentru cineva care are nevoie de ele.

    Chris Medina – What Are Words

    Ce sunt cuvintele cand nu au un suport?

    Ne-am obisnuit sa vb pe subiecte neimportante.

    Dar cuvintele au alt rol.

    Ne dam mari. Suntem defapt slabi.

    Fiinta umana cand simte misros de sange reactioneaaz. Cand cineva isi recunoaste slabiciunea ceilalti il vad la pamant si il lovesc.

    Mintea umana tinde sa se elibereze de toate determinarile:
    1. instinctele ex. securitatea
    2. emotile ex. frica
    3. sentimentele ex. vinovatia
    4. indemnurile constiintei ex. morala
    5. vointa proprie ex. intentile persoanale
    6. influentele interioare ex. sfaturile, valul

    Viata este nondeterminare pura!

    Aleg viata!

  35. Avatarul lui danny danny says:

    O noua provocare pentru adventistii din samoa :
    http://www.reporterntv.ro/stire/afacerile-cele-mai-importante-samoa-da-timpul-inainte-cu-o-zi

    Asta inseamna ca ei vor merge la inchinare in Sabat (Luni) pe 02 ian 2012, iar catolicul Duminica pe data de 01 ian 2012.

    Cum vedeti voi situatia ?

  36. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:

    New York Adventist Key to Marriage Equality Victory via Spectrum & The Capitol:

    Assemblyman Nelson Castro was one of three religious Democrats who changed their position last week as the Assembly passed a gay marriage bill 80-63 and sent it to the Senate, where it remains one vote shy of approval.

    […]

    Castro, who represents a western Bronx district, is the only Seventh-Day Adventist in the state’s legislature. Raised Catholic in the Dominican Republic, Castro voted “no” on a same-sex marriage bill in 2009 for religious reasons, but talks with gay activists, constituents and his pastor changed his mind this year, he said.

    With his pastor, Castro “spoke about the fact that I thought it was the right thing to do. But religiously I was definitely torn. He said to me, ‘Look, civically, you have a responsibility to represent your community. That has nothing to do with God.’”

    The bill’s language makes some exemptions for religious institutions – they aren’t required to officiate the vows of same-sex couples. Those exemptions allowed two other former Assembly “no” votes, Karim Camara and Nick Perry, to vote for the bill, Castro said.

  37. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:

    „Cum vedeti voi situatia ?”

    Religia este o mare prostie. Oamenii religiosi sunt dispusi sa mearga pana in panzele albe pentru niste simple tampenii copilaresti. Uite-te la Beni si la viziunea lui despre lumea in care traieste ca sa intelegi ca religia, indiferent de forma ei, azs, catolica…e.t.c. transforma oameni normali in niste mimoze defecte care turuie intruna despre lucruri si personaje inexistente.

  38. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    ‘And then- I have it!’ said Bagheera, leaping up. ‘Go thou down quickly to the men’s huts in the valley, and take some of the Red Flower which they grow there, so that when the time comes thou mayest have even a stronger friend than I or Baloo or those of the Pack that love thee. Get the Red Flower.’

    By the Red Flower Bagheera meant fire, only no creature in the jungle will call fire by its proper name. Every beast lives in deadly fear of it.

  39. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    the newest Symphony of Science

    @ediorgu… yeap, Alice Roberts, baby! 😎
    ___________________________________________________

    Theology and Falsification
    Intelligent Design – de ce nu poate fi luat în serios?
    Cum e cu apelul la autoritate?

    ___________________________________________________

    How Fundamentalist Religion Is Destroying the World

    The deluded religious belief that any people or nation or church is a „chosen” people is the root of almost all our troubles.
    The earth bursts with life. Far right exclusionary religion bursts with death. If there is a creator of life He/She/It must hate fundamentalist religion.
    The twentieth century began with wars rooted in religion and nationalism and ended as the century of wars rooted in ideological atheism led by the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Mao. Now the twenty first century seems to be shaping up to be the age of renewed wars of religion led by fundamentalist fanatics on all sides who believe in the divine destinies of their nations and/or religions.
    These fanatics – they are all of the far right – have ranged from the Ayatollah Khomeinito George W Bush, from the far right leaders of the state of Israel to far right American fundamentalist like Michelle Bachmann who – if she and her fellow travelers have their way – would replace the Constitution and Bill of Rights with the Bible and turn America into a (Reconstructionist) theocracy.
    The deluded religious belief that any people or nation or church is a „chosen” people is the root of almost all our troubles. So is the lunacy of believing in „Truth” revealed through one special prophet to one special peoples and/or tribe, be they Jews, Muslims or American Evangelical Christians, or conservative Roman Catholics who believe in the special primacy of their popes.
    Eliminate willful self-serving tribal religious delusion from the globe and there might be hope for the survival of the human race. Combine tribalism and religious conviction with nukes and the „right” to exploit the earth and disaster looms.
    […] The „holy books” all the religious cultures mentioned here follow are compendiums of Bronze Age tribal self-serving myths, adopted and updated by ignorant tribes in order to try to make sense of their places in the universe pre-science. Today they are the source of war and the rape of the earth.
    It’s time to stop being polite about the religions that are motivating the self-deluding right wing Israelis, the self-deluding right wing Saudis and the self-deluding right wing Iranians, Americans and popes. They may all hate each other, but below the surface they all share one dreadful and silly conviction: the unfounded belief that they and they alone (and their tribes) are morally right and that the rest of us are the „other” to be suppressed, converted or sometimes killed. And they all say God is on their side.
    If there is a God – I happen to believe there is, but I could be wrong – a creator, a force responsible for the magnificent diversity of nature and human aspiration, then that actual God, by definition, must despise exclusive-type religion and tribalism and the black and white world of „in” or „out” and „saved” and „lost.”
    Guessing what God might actually be like by what we see around us, He, She or It is big, generous, non-ideological, wonderful and all encompassing. Just open your eyes to the earth below and heavens above and try to reconcile what you see, hear and feel with petty popes, Ayatollahs and preachers or the books they call „holy”!
    If there is no creator (and who can say there is or isn’t?) then nature’s diversity and adaptability is a silent and powerful rebuke to exclusivity. Put it this way; the Rockies don’t know they’re part of an „exceptional” country and the Negev desert doesn’t know it was „given” to anyone! Nor do the sands of Medina know that they’re „holy” much less does the dust of Iran’s „holy city” of Qom know it’s „sacred,” or the plaster under the paint in the Sistine Chapel know it’s „owned” by the Vatican and the „one true church!”
    The religions and tribalism of those who threaten the world the most – Iran, the state of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the Vatican and the USA – is small, inward looking and backward. It’s time to tell the truth and say that maybe it is possible to love God – if there is such an entity – but it’s not possible to love God and love the sort of tribal exclusionary religions that are taking us all down.

  40. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:

  41. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    one of the greatest assets of science is how it is prepared to face up to the burden of proving their arguments. Very few communities are willing and able to do this effectively, and its difficulty should inspire in us great respect. Even if the truth value of a proposition cannot be known, we can come close to knowing the probability of its truth. The probability that a proposition is true increases in accuracy with the more information we collect. If we have all the information regarding a proposition, and if we could know that we have all the information, we could be certain of the truth value. Until then, we must be content with continually acquiring more information, or the “pursuit of truth”.

    “The Search for Better Explanation” – Revisiting “The Search for Truth”

    The Sagan Series (part 6) – End of an Era: The Final Shuttle Launch
    BBC documentary – Planet of the Apemen: Battle for Earth (2011) episode 1 – Homo Erectus and Neanderthal (or you can download it from here)
    Science Channel documentary – Through the Wormhole – Season 1, Episode 1: Is There a Creator? (2010) || (more recent) Through the Wormhole – Season 2, Episode 5: Is There a Sixth Sense? (2011)

    Stephen Hawking, Ray Kurzweil, Michio Kaku: Whose Idea Will Most Impact Our World – You Decide!
    1. Biotechnology Will Stop Aging
    2. Adapting to Climate Change
    3. The Future Brain: Computers Will Read Our Thoughts
    4. Energy From Fusion in 20 Years
    5. Abandon Earth for Another Planet

    How the Northen Lights Are Created (Aurora Borealis)

    Atheist: One for whom supernatural entities are unnecessary explanatory concepts. [Re-Defining Atheism – Triangulations blog]

    Why does the Universe exist?” There is no ‘why’ the Universe exists (unless you want to go down a highly philosophical route), only ‘how’. [read more]

    And this remains a beautiful song. 😉

  42. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    Sorry for the broken link above. Here it is:
    BBC – Planet of the Apemen: Battle for Earth (2011) – Homo Erectus

    BBC – Planet of the Apemen: Battle for Earth (2011) – Neanderthal

    useful link – http://science-documentaries.com/
    ____________________________________________

    I found this clip’s ideas interesting…
    Do you believe in God?
    „Does God physically exists… or He’s metaphysical only?
    Belief in belief… My own view is that God does exist but only in a form of a concept within the brains of some people.”

    ______________________

    5 Faulty Arguments Religious People Use Against Atheists (Debunked) – Do atheists misunderstand religion? Or do believers still misunderstand atheists?

    By the some author – Greta Christina:
    The Top Ten Reasons I Don’t Believe In Godpart 1 & part 2

    1. The consistent replacement of supernatural explanations of the world with natural ones. – Natural explanations of things have been replacing supernatural explanations of them. As we understood the world better, and learned to observe it more carefully, the religious explanations were replaced by physical cause and effect. Consistently.
    2. The inconsistency of world religions. – If God (or any other metaphysical being or beings) were real, and people were really perceiving him/ her/ it/ them, why do those perceptions differ so wildly? Even among people who do believe in God, there is no agreement whatsoever as to what God is, what God does, what God wants from us, how he acts or does not act upon the world.
    3. The weakness of religious arguments, explanations, and apologetics. – The argument from authority, the argument from personal experience, the argument that religion shouldn’t have to logically defend its claims, or the redefining of God into an abstract principle – so abstract that it can’t be argued against, but also so abstract that it scarcely deserves the name God.
    4. The increasing diminishment of God. – As our understanding of the natural, physical world has increased – and our ability to test theories and claims has improved – the domain of God’s miracles (or other purported supernatural/ metaphysical phenomena) has consistently shifted, away from the phenomena that are now understood as physical cause and effect, and onto the increasingly shrinking area of phenomena that we still don’t understand.
    5. The fact that religion runs in families. – Overwhelmingly, people believe whatever religion they were taught as children.
    6. The physical causes of everything we think of as the soul. – The science of neuropsychology is still very much in its infancy. But there are a few things that we know about it. And one of the things we know is that everything we think of as the soul – consciousness, identity, character, free will – all of that is powerfully affected by physical changes to the brain and body.
    7. The complete failure of any sort of supernatural phenomenon to stand up to rigorous testing. – Whether it’s the power of prayer, or faith healing, or astrology, or life after death: the same pattern is consistently seen. Whenever religious and supernatural beliefs have made testable claims, and those claims have been tested – not half-assedly tested, but really tested, using careful, rigorous, double-blind, placebo- controlled, replicated, etc. etc. etc. testing methods – the claims have consistently fallen apart.
    8. The slipperiness of religious and spiritual beliefs. – If things go the believer’s way, it’s a sign of God’s grace and intervention; if they don’t, then, well, God moves in mysterious ways, and maybe he has a lesson to teach that we don’t understand, and it’s not up to us to question his will. That sort of thing. No matter what happens, it can be twisted around to prove that the belief is right.
    9. The failure of religion to improve or clarify over time. – Over the years and decades and centuries, our understanding of the physical world has grown and clarified by a ridiculous amount. We came up with the scientific method: a self-correcting method for understanding the physical world, which – over time, and with the many fits and starts and setbacks that accompany any human endeavor – has done, and continues to do, an astonishingly good job of helping us perceive and understand the world, predict it and shape it, in ways we could not have possibly imagined a thousand, or a hundred, or even ten years ago. But our understanding of the metaphysical world is exactly in the place it’s always been: hundreds and indeed thousands of sects, squabbling over which sacred text and which set of spiritual intuitions is the right one.
    10. The complete and utter lack of solid evidence for God's existence. – There’s just no evidence for it.
    No good evidence, anyway. No evidence that doesn’t just amount to opinion and tradition and confirmation bias and all the other stuff I’ve been talking about for the last two days.
    It is not up to atheists to prove that God does not exist. It is up to theists to prove that he does.

    And this is very funny. 😀 Take a look.

  43. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    De la Mind control, am ajuns la http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_religious_movements#Charismatic_movements
    Does this ring a bell? 😛
    _____________________________
    Three Evidences for God’s existence from the Created world
    Hmmm… excuse me, do you understand what EVIDENCE means? :loser:

    I KNOW God Exists! :yes:

    Can a Sabbath-Keeper Believe in Evolution?
    Yup, blame it on the Devil, you willful ignorant superstitious old man! :doh:

    http://unreasonablefaith.com/2011/07/11/reading-list
    http://humanfacesofgod.com

    http://chartporn.org/ – an addictive collection of beautiful charts, graphs, maps, and interactive data visualization

    Dear human… (scroll down to the end)

  44. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:

    Off-topic, dar important:

    O colectie de ponturi excelente despre cum sa faceti rost de articole stiintifice complete

  45. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    Is Religious Faith a Psychological Defense Mechanism?

    God is in The Neurons

    DebateAnAtheist => Atheists, What is your personal opinion/take on Jesus?

    Dawkins: why science isn’t a religion

    Staying in the dark [„The Dragon In My Garage”]
    “Religion. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.”

    a few resources about Evolution

    Greta Christina recently wrote a wonderful review of the book Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me) :yes: , an analysis of the unconscious defense mechanisms people use to rationalize their bad decisions. She’s absolutely right that this is a book everyone ought to read (I need to find a copy myself), and her review makes some points that I think are important enough to justify shining a spotlight on.
    I’m no anthropologist or psychologist, but I like to think of myself as at least an amateur observer of human nature. And one of the facts of human nature which looms the largest is our incredible moral duality. Human beings, as a species, present an astonishing paradox. On the one hand, human beings are capable of tremendous compassion, altruism and generosity. There are countless people who selflessly give their effort, their resources, even their lives to bring about the good of others, asking no repayment except the knowledge that they’ve worked for a worthy cause. It would be unnecessary for me to cite examples; we all know people who are like this.
    On the other hand, human beings are also capable of incredible cruelty, depravity and viciousness. We wage wars, inquisitions, pogroms, witch hunts. We are all too easily led by malignant demagogues, all too easily whipped up into frenzies of savagery and hate, and all too easily persuaded to treat strangers and outsiders as subhuman and to visit the most horrific atrocities on them. Again, I trust there’s no need to cite examples; anyone versed in history can come up with far too many.
    It seems unbelievable that two such contradictory impulses could exist within the same human nature, but this is undeniably the case. Our selflessness, our lovingkindness, our sense of justice is deeply rooted in mind and instinct. So is our hatred, our chaos and our evil.
    Both these impulses, no doubt, come from the evolutionary process that created us.
    […]It’s fully understandable why we have this defense mechanism.
    [Light and Dark]

  46. Avatarul lui C.J. C.J. says:

    @polihronu

    La multi ani, Poli! Jungla te saluta. :highfive:

  47. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:

    Intalnesc adesea credinciosi care se lauda cu ateismul tineretii lor, ca si cum asta ar fi o dovada in favoarea validitatii actualei lor pozitii. Cred ca unora li se potriveste analiza pe care Eric MacDonald i-o face lui Alister McGrath, care spunea in video-ul lui Ryan Pettey despre “evolutionary creation”:

    Alister McGrath: And when I stopped being an atheist and became a Christian instead, actually I found that that conversion really brought a new intellectual and spiritual depth to my scientific research. I studied the philosophy of science and began to realize that proof in science was much more complex than I had realized, and above all, I began to realize that the scientific narrative actually pointed to a deeper narrative, which is that of God himself.

    Eric MacDonald: First of all there’s his “when I was an atheist” schtick. It lasted from when to when? Well, he converted at 18, the moment he came to Oxford in 1971, so one really has to ask how serious his atheism really was, or whether it was simply a bit of teen-age rebellion. Certainly, the way that he trades on his “atheism”, as though it were a seriously held intellectual position, is simply laughable. For most of us the teen-age years are full of angst and rebellion, and our convictions, such as they are, are generally very labile, quickly exchanged for others — as, indeed, McGrath’s history seems to testify. I consider his oft-repeated claim to have been an atheist, repeated so often, a piece of palpable disingenuousness. When I hear him say it, I am embarrassed for him. Does he not recognise that anyone who hears him, and knows his story, knows that teen-age atheism, like teen-age faith, is (speaking generally) callow, and woefully uninformed by the fires of life. To have been attracted to unbelief in the Northern Ireland of his youth is unsurprising, but to claim to have been an atheist, when his unbelief was so lightly set aside upon his arrival in Oxford, where religion is (or at least was) highly aestheticised and intellectualised, is simply to overrate both the depth and the steadiness of his thought on these things.

    Mi s-a mai parut relevant si acest fragment din aceeasi postare, mai ales pentru ca are mare relevanta pentru temele de discutie care se tot vehiculeaza pe aici:

    Both Hart and McGrath think that atheism should acknowledge how much has been lost with the overthrow of religious belief. Atheists, therefore, like Nietzsche, should be ridden with angst as a result of the enormity of what they have done. For, by overturning religion they have, as Nietzsche put it, swallowed the sea. Surely atheists should be simply paralysed by so stupendous an act of treachery?

    However, twenty-first century atheism does not want to replace religion, which it justly sees as harmful and irresponsible, simply because it presumes too much and is based on so litle, but simply to exclude it in favour of a richer mosaic of shifting social consensus and autonomous and creative living.

    Va recomand intreaga postare, inclusiv critica pe care MacDonald o face retoricii care, exaltand un „deeper narrative”, uita ca structura de convingeri adiacente, inerente acestei naratiuni mai profunde nu tine apa:

    ”Deeper narrative” bespeaks a postmodernist understanding of theology. Instead of seeing theology as an intellectual structure of beliefs and their explanation and analysis, theology is seen as exploring the “deeper” structure of a traditional way of life conceived of as a narrative stream. The suggestion seems to be that living within the narrative does not consist so much in the affirmation of beliefs — so, it seems, refuting beliefs doesn’t really address the function of beliefs within the narrative tradition — as in the entertainment of beliefs within the narrative which forms the cultural underpinnings of particular ways of life. So, when the atheist raises questions about the beliefs inherent in the narrative, the believer slips away by saying that it is the whole context of belief, not the particular beliefs themselves, which constitute the believer’s response to reality. Singling out a specific belief, say, the belief in a supernatural or transcendent personal being who sustains the universe in being by his power, and is, in that sense, the creative force behind the universe and life within it, is to mangle the believer’s understanding of how universe and God are related. It also allows the kind of vague gesturing that is exemplified by McGrath’s opaque remarks about the “deeper narrative” about God.

Lasă un răspuns:

Acest site folosește Akismet pentru a reduce spamul. Află cum sunt procesate datele comentariilor tale.