• rdri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I see. You’re only generally accepting that there may be crazy justifications for anything. But this very aspect switches the topic of discussion to “we’ll never know bruh”, thus silencing the discussion. I’ve also talked to some people who told me about their god. My impression is that their logic is mostly the same as the above. Arguing with them is mostly useless, but it doesn’t remove my desire to argue. “Leave them alone” is basically what your logic says, and I disagree that I shouldn’t express myself in discussion.

    • Tartas1995
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      No, that is not my point at all.

      My point is that if like OP intended, you want to criticize the religion’s contradictions, do it well. In the case of the creation story, a lot of christians do not believe it to be a literal story and have a bunch of different Interpretation. I have my own issues with that approach but those Interpretation might or might not be contradictory without looking into the precis interpretation, it is impossible to tell. As the goal of op was to highlight the contradictory nature of the christian beliefs and didn’t provide any precis interpretation of the text, I looked at the specific text that op provided and considered some interpretation and figured that op did an embarrassing job to show the contradictory nature of their belief. as with the provided text even if read literally, there is an non contradictory way to understand the text. While maybe odd or unlikely, totally possible and therefore non contradictory.

      Your question about the motivation of god to be that way as you thinks it doesn’t make sense, is utterly valid from the perspective of a person trying to figure out how credible they perceive the religion in question but that was and isn’t what this discussion was about and what I am arguing. I am arguing about whether or not it is contradictory and not that pointing out contradictions is bad, or that you can’t criticize it, or that god’s actions would make sense to me.

      If you think it makes no sense that god created the sun after the light cycles, I disagree with you but I don’t say that you shouldn’t argue your perspective. I am saying that you joined a different discussion and my reaction was based in that discussion. And I think if you want to have the other discussion about whether or not it makes sense, you are welcome to but maybe don’t inject it in another discussion and be surprised if the other person thinks that your injection is intended to be on topic. That creates confusion.

      Tldr: topic is “is it contradictory?” And your injection was about “does it make sense?”. Different topics. Different discussion. Not the point of the discussion that I had, therefore I dismissed it as not relevant to the discussion. Have the other discussion if you want, just don’t be mad that anyone misunderstood your intentions with the injection.

      • rdri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It doesn’t seem like you can contribute to any religion based discussion if you’re willing to accept that many possibilities (interpretations) of basic concepts or events. This also reminds me of how flat-earthers justify stuff.

        • Tartas1995
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          So you think it is smart to engage in a discussion with e.g. a Christian about Christianity while dismissing their actual beliefs and instead force your own Interpretation onto them? Do you think you can change Minds like that?

          Of course, I am willing to accept any given sincerely hold belief for the sake of the conversation when my aim is to point out contradictions or issues in their belief. Otherwise I am not really talking about their belief and the issues with it.

          And again the goal of op was to point out contradictions. That is the conversation that we are having.

          If you have an issue with how general and open the discussion in regards to the Interpretation of the text is, blame op for keeping it vague.

          Also why are you ignoring in your response anything about the fact that your injection was seemingly off-topic and the consequences of the misunderstanding that it seemingly caused? No objections or no acception? No questions? No thoughts?

          Why do you continue to be hostile? I understand that you might felt like I dismissed your point and that you thought I was trolling but it seems to me as if I made clear that I wasn’t doing either. So what is up with that?

          • rdri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            blame op for keeping it vague.

            I have more reasons to blame the book for being vague.

            Also why are you ignoring in your response anything about the fact that your injection was seemingly off-topic and the consequences of the misunderstanding that it seemingly caused?

            I don’t see it like that.

            • Tartas1995
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              So just that I understand:

              Do you think that op and me weren’t specifically talking about it being contradictory?

              Do you think that your question about “how it wouldn’t make sense for God to create the sun after the light cycles” is about the bible being contradictory?

              Do you think that “does it make sense?” Isn’t off-topic in a discussion about contradictions?

              Basically what do you disagree with specifically?

              • rdri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Do you think that op and me weren’t specifically talking about it being contradictory?

                I wouldn’t call it contradictory, because the original material has to many other problems. It’s like calling coal dirty. The original post is a meme and it works fine for me.

                Other questions: ok yes even though I don’t think it matters, no, with the whole premise of injecting possibility of nonsense into the discussion in order to avoid contradictions (in a boring unfunny way).

                • Tartas1995
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Then I see our disagreement.

                  I think and you are welcome to disagree, even if the intent is to call coal dirty and you provide an example, you would give an actual example of it being dirty.

                  If I don’t want to argue the obvious and just want to call the coal dirty. I wouldn’t provide an example because that is the whole point of “calling the coal dirty”, it doesn’t need to be explained.

                  If I would choose to provide an example, I would provide an actual example.

                  If we assume his intent was to call coal dirty and he choose to provided an example of the bible being contradictory, I expect the example is actually contradictory. That was what I was arguing.

                  And I think his example fails, as even in a literal reading, there are interpretations that work just fine without creating contradictions, e.g. a day is ~24hr; and god needed x hrs, or y days. All of us might doubt that it is the intended meaning of the word by the author. But that is our doubts and not a contradictions.

                  My nonsense was strictly to highlight my point that whether or not, we think it makes sense for someone to act a way, is irrelevant when talking about contradictions.

                  I hope this helps to understand my intentions. I would be happy to hear your thoughts.