Penn & Teller barbecue the Bible

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Correct. One can.

And that is a sin.

Yes, but telling us to love our neighbor doesn't tell us that. In otherwords two propositions are not enough.

It should be obvious.

Quote:
Matthew 19:17-21

I don't understand your point?

"If you wish to be perfect", when you see someone with a small burger and you have a nice New York cut, you go trade.

Quote:
Yup. And vice versa, too.

Cool, so let's not pretend we love our neighbors as ourselves.

But I try. That's the goal.

I'm not "perfect", although I buy a lot of folks lunch. Even steak.

Quote:
Close. The needs of my wife and children come first. That's part of God's will being up front. I believe that's why he put me and keeps me here.

Again, cool. I have no argument with your priorities at all. I think that's wonderful. I just think we shouldn't pretend to love someone as much as ourselves when we don't.

Ever consider the possibility that the range or degree with which we are successful in loving our neighbor as much as ourselves corresponds to the degree of "perfect" we are? Mother Teresa is "gooder" than the Huntster, and the Huntster is "gooder" than Charlie Manson?

And that we might be judged by that?

Quote:
I don't do for strangers as much as myself. Few do. Even someone like Mother Teresa can "earn" your distain.

I'm not sure she did much but proselytize. Since I'm an atheist I don't see the value in that.

Well then. That's your opinion.

Quote:
But I can be considered a downright "neighborly" kind of guy, and my community obviously feels that way.

Good, my hats off to you. But being "neighborly" isn't loving someone else as yourself.

It's all the extremes with you, isn't it?

Is it all the time, or just with religion?

 

[RandFan]

It should be obvious.

Which bring us back to our original point. I don't need to be told to love my neighbor to know what is moral and what isn't. Again, that which is obvious is that which we already know. You make my argument.

"If you wish to be perfect", when you see someone with a small burger and you have a nice New York cut, you go trade.

I don't understand, are you saying that you can't love your neighbor as yourself because you are not perfect?

But I try. That's the goal.

I believe that you are an honest and decent person who cares for others and I would venture a guess you would even give of your time and money to help those less fortunate than yourself because you sincerely care. I don't think it is possible for the vast majority of us to love our neighbor as ourselves. I don't even think it is a good idea. I don't even know how someone would go about doing that.

I'm not "perfect", although I buy a lot of folks lunch. Even steak.

I honestly don't doubt that.

Ever consider the possibility that the range or degree with which we are successful in loving our neighbor as much as ourselves corresponds to the degree of "perfect" we are? Mother Teresa is "gooder" than the Huntster, and the Huntster is "gooder" than Charlie Manson?

I honestly don't know you and I can't look into the heart of MT. Based on what I do know I would put you above MT.

Well then. That's your opinion.

Yep.

It's all the extremes with you, isn't it?

No, not at all. I just realize the unrealistic nature of such a command.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
It should be obvious.

Which bring us back to our original point. I don't need to be told to love my neighbor to know what is moral and what isn't. Again, that which is obvious is that which we already know. You make my argument.

The problem is that I'm not sure if you can grasp the obvious.

Quote:
"If you wish to be perfect", when you see someone with a small burger and you have a nice New York cut, you go trade.

I don't understand, are you saying that you can't love your neighbor as yourself because you are not perfect?

Are you avoiding the point:

I can love my neighbor as myself. I can love him even more than myself by regularly giving up steak for hamburger. I can go further.

I can give up my very life for another. Not in a specific circumstance, either. I can do it on a macro basis.

That's what Christ is recognized as doing.

I can love my neighbor as myself as best I can, and I can pray for the grace to do even better.

Quote:
But I try. That's the goal.

I believe that you are an honest and decent person who cares for others and I would venture a guess you would even give of your time and money to help those less fortunate than yourself because you sincerely care. I don't think it is possible for the vast majority of us to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Again, I don't think you're getting it.

I don't even think it is a good idea. I don't even know how someone would go about doing that.

It may not be a good "idea", but it is the ultimate in spiritual life.

I know how to do it. I've seen it done. To the utmost extreme.

Quote:
Ever consider the possibility that the range or degree with which we are successful in loving our neighbor as much as ourselves corresponds to the degree of "perfect" we are? Mother Teresa is "gooder" than the Huntster, and the Huntster is "gooder" than Charlie Manson?

I honestly don't know you and I can't look into the heart of MT. Based on what I do know I would put you above MT.

Clearly, you just don't get it.

Quote:
It's all the extremes with you, isn't it?

No, not at all. I just realize the unrealistic nature of such a command.

It's not "unrealistic", it's not impossible, and there are degrees of success.

I'm sure there's a grade for "cooperation", too.

 

[RandFan]

The problem is that I'm not sure if you can grasp the obvious.

This is just rhetoric. It doesn't advance your argument nor does it rebut mine.

It's not "unrealistic", it's not impossible, and there are degrees of success.

I didn't say it was impossible, I said it was simply "unrealistic". People need to prioritize. We can't solve the needs of the world. We have our own needs, wants and desires. To work hard to make a better life for our families is a good thing. Going to the movies or the park is a good thing. But that is not possible if we love our neighbors as ourselves. We could never have anything better because we would never have more than enough to see that all of our neighbors had the same as we had. We have our families who have their needs. A person who truly loved his neighbor as himself could never have a luxury. No movies, no trips to the mall, no vacations, nothing but existence and giving all of your excess to those who have less than you. Anything else is NOT loving your neighbor as yourself. You say it's not impossible. I agree. How many people do you know that forgo ALL luxuries? And trading luxuries to help the poor for fame and fortune hardly count either.

Matthew 6:2

Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

MT was famous, I suspect that she had her reward.

I'm sure there's a grade for "cooperation", too.

I'm all for that. But let's not pretend we love our neighbor as ourselves when we go to the mall for clothes and many people in the world wear rags. Let's not pretend that we love our neighbor when we go to a fancy restaurant and many people in the world will go to bed to night hungry (in America) and many throughout the world will starve to death.

Charity, compassion, good will, these are good things and I'm convinced you are possessed of them as are most Christians and indeed most people. But very, very few forgo ALL luxuries to see to it that as many neighbors as possible have the same.

You show me someone who does that and I'll show you a person who loves his neighbor as himself. Otherwise, it's just being a good person.

 

[Huntster]

...... How many people do you know that forgo ALL luxuries?...

Again, your focus on the extreme does not overrule or diminish the commandment.

Quote:
I'm sure there's a grade for "cooperation", too.

I'm all for that. But let's not pretend we love our neighbor as ourselves when we go to the mall for clothes and many people in the world wear rags. Let's not pretend that we love our neighbor when we go to a fancy restaurant and many people in the world will go to bed to night hungry (in America) and many throughout the world will starve to death.

So, who's doing that pretending?

Charity, compassion, good will, these are good things and I'm convinced you are possessed of them as are most Christians and indeed most people. But very, very few forgo ALL luxuries to see to it that as many neighbors as possible have the same.

That is true. So what?

You show me someone who does that and I'll show you a person who loves his neighbor as himself. Otherwise, it's just being a good person.

If your point is to demonstrate that few are perfect, you again miss reality:

He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good.

Translation: Nobody is perfect.

Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

Translation: If you wish to be perfect...............

Good luck.

 

[RandFan]

Again, your focus on the extreme does not overrule or diminish the commandment.

The commandment IS extreme. That's the problem.

So, who's doing that pretending?

Anyone who accepts that loving your neighbor as yourself is either desirable or possible for the vast majority of humans. It's a pipe dream.

That is true. So what?

So, let's pick a better maxim. I like the golden rule. Treat others how you would like to be treated. I want my neighbor to enjoy the fruits of his labor and not feel guilty because I have less than him. I want him to extend a hand when I need it. That's all.

If your point is to demonstrate that few are perfect, you again miss reality:

He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good.

Translation: Nobody is perfect.

On the contrary, that is my point! So let's stop pretending that we do or even can love our neighbor as ourselves. It's as silly as saying flap your arms and fly like a bird. We can all pretend that someday we will flap our arms and fly like a bird but it's not really feasible. And the notion that we should love our neighbor as ourselves is not healthy. Parents need to focus on their families first and neighbors second.

Translation: If you wish to be perfect...............

This directly contradicts my point. In fact it makes my point! I know we can't be perfect. I accept that we can't. So since we can't be perfect let's stop trying to pretend that we can fulfill a commandment that requires perfection. Let's live in reality and accept reality.

Just love your neighbor and treat your neighbor the way you would like your neighbor to love and treat you. That's a pretty good philosophy. It's possible and would make a pretty damn good society with out guilt for enjoying our the fruits of our labor.

I don't want my neighbor to feel guilty because he can go to the movies and I can't. I want my neighbor to offer to help when I need a hand. To be kind and thoughtful to me. I just want my neighbor to live the golden rule.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Again, your focus on the extreme does not overrule or diminish the commandment.

The commandment IS extreme. That's the problem.

It's a problem if you take it to the extreme. And it's only a problem for you, and only here/now.

According to Christ, after a mortal life of taking it to the extreme (what?; some 75 years?) you graduate to a higher spiritual life.

Quote:
So, who's doing that pretending?

Anyone who accepts that loving your neighbor as yourself is either desirable or possible for the vast majority of humans. It's a pipe dream.

It's a pipe dream if you expect perfection of yourself. It's a goal if you have a realistic outlook.

Quote:
That is true. So what?

So, let's pick a better maxim. I like the golden rule.

Treat others how you would like to be treated

Love your neighbor as yourself.

Treat others how you would like to be treated.

Please, what is the difference?

I want my neighbor to enjoy the fruits of his labor and not feel guilty because I have less than him. I want him to extend a hand when I need it. That's all.

How about you extending your hand when he/she needs it?

Quote:
If your point is to demonstrate that few are perfect, you again miss reality:

He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good.

Translation: Nobody is perfect.

On the contrary, that is my point! So let's stop pretending that we do or even can love our neighbor as ourselves. It's as silly as saying flap your arms and fly like a bird. We can all pretend that someday we will flap our arms and fly like a bird but it's not really feasible. And the notion that we should love our neighbor as ourselves is not healthy. Parents need to focus on their families first and neighbors second.

Again, love your neighbor as yourself; Treat others how you would like to be treated.

Please, what is the difference?

Quote:
Translation: If you wish to be perfect...............

This directly contradicts my point. In fact it makes my point!

It both contradicts and makes your point.

Yeah.

Please read that again. Doi it a few times. Then, try to understand why I've been having a difficult time discussing things with you.

I know we can't be perfect. I accept that we can't. So since we can't be perfect let's stop trying to pretend that we can fulfill a commandment that requires perfection. Let's live in reality and accept reality.

Look, if treat others how you would like to be treated works for you, it works for me.

 

[RandFan]

It's a problem if you take it to the extreme. And it's only a problem for you, and only here/now.

No, I'm explaining to you why it is A.) Not realistic and B.) Not a good idea.

It's a pipe dream if you expect perfection of yourself. It's a goal if you have a realistic outlook.

It's not realistic at all. And it is a bad idea for the reasons I've stated. People should feel good about their accomplishments and enjoy the fruits of their labor. Loving your neighbor as yourself doesn't allow for that.

Please, what is the difference?

A clear one. One does not allow any luxuries or self indulgence. The other does.

Please read that again. Doi it a few times. Then, try to understand why I've been having a difficult time discussing things with you.

It contradicts my point because I'm not telling anyone to be perfect. It makes my point because we can't be perfect. Read that a few times.

Look, if treat others how you would like to be treated works for you, it works for me.

I think it would work for most. It's possible and doesn't create the moral ambiguities and moral dilemmas that telling people to love thy neighbor as thyself does. That's a silly and stupid philosophy that is A.) Not realistic and B.) Not a good idea.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
It's a problem if you take it to the extreme. And it's only a problem for you, and only here/now.

No, I'm explaining to you why it is A.) Not realistic and B.) Not a good idea.

Amazing.

Quote:
It's a pipe dream if you expect perfection of yourself. It's a goal if you have a realistic outlook.

It's not realistic at all. And it is a bad idea for the reasons I've stated. People should feel good about their accomplishments and enjoy the fruits of their labor. Loving your neighbor as yourself doesn't allow for that.

Amazing.

Quote:
Please, what is the difference?

A clear one. One does not allow any luxuries or self indulgence. The other does.

Amazing.

Quote:
Please read that again. Doi it a few times. Then, try to understand why I've been having a difficult time discussing things with you.

It contradicts my point because I'm not telling anyone to be perfect. It makes my point because we can't be perfect. Read that a few times.

No, thanks. Just once is dizzying enough.

Quote:
Look, if treat others how you would like to be treated works for you, it works for me.

I think it would work for most. It's possible and doesn't create the moral ambiguities and moral dilemmas that telling people to love thy neighbor as thyself does. That's a silly and stupid philosophy that is A.) Not realistic and B.) Not a good idea.

How profound.

Maybe you ought to start a religion. You're a real sage.

 

[RandFan]

Amazing.

And true.

Amazing.

And true.

Amazing.

And true.

No, thanks. Just once is dizzying enough.

Probably a comprehension issue on your part. A premise can satisfy contradictory propositions for different reasons.

How profound.

I wish I could take credit for it.

Maybe you ought to start a religion.

That would be counter to reason.

 

[Huntster]

Quote:
No, thanks. Just once is dizzying enough.

Probably a comprehension issue on your part.

Must be. I have a difficult time comprehending your..........messages.

A premise can satisfy contradictory propositions for different reasons.

In some minds, yes.

Quote:
Maybe you ought to start a religion.

That would be counter to reason.

That shouldn't be a problem for you.

 

[RandFan]

Must be. I have a difficult time comprehending your..........messages.

Understood. Logic and reason can fail some.

In some minds, yes.

It is demonstrable to those who comprehend logic and reason.

That shouldn't be a problem for you.

Actually it would. If it wouldn't I wouldn't have so stated. You are now just engaging in rhetoric and contradiction.

At the end of the day I have clearly demonstrated why "loving your neighbor as yourself" is A.) Not realistic, B.) Not a good idea to even try and C.) Why the golden rule (while not perfect) is a far more coherent philosophy.

You have not advanced a single argument to rebut my points. So you are left with sophistry. Your ego will not allow an admission of the facts or for you to simply bow out of the discussion so you persist in the only thing you can to mollify your ego, contradiction and rhetoric.

 

[qayak]

At the end of the day I have clearly demonstrated why "loving your neighbor as yourself" is A.) Not realistic, B.) Not a good idea to even try and C.) Why the golden rule (while not perfect) is a far more coherent philosophy.

The Tit-for-Tat rule is much more reliable than the Golden Rule. The problem with the Golden Rule is that there is no penalty for those who violate it. In fact, once violated the Golden Rule allows for continued abuse.

The Tit-for-Tat Rule has a mechanism for clear and swift punishment for violators.

 

[RandFan]

The Tit-for-Tat rule is much more reliable than the Golden Rule. The problem with the Golden Rule is that there is no penalty for those who violate it. In fact, once violated the Golden Rule allows for continued abuse.

The Tit-for-Tat Rule has a mechanism for clear and swift punishment for violators.

That's all well and good but it seems to me that I always get more tat than... well, in any event, I see nothing mutually exclusive of the two. When I needed a car to keep my job JREF folks helped me get one and I was able to continue to work at my Tit-for-Tat job, feed my family and keep a roof over my head. They (the folks at JREF) treated me in a time of need the way I wanted to be treated in a time of need. I will do likewise for others.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Must be. I have a difficult time comprehending your..........messages.

Understood. Logic and reason can fail some.

Especially your version of "logic" and "reason."

Quote:
In some minds, yes.

It is demonstrable to those who comprehend logic and reason.

Especially your version of "logic" and "reason."

At the end of the day I have clearly demonstrated why "loving your neighbor as yourself" is A.) Not realistic, B.) Not a good idea to even try and C.) Why the golden rule (while not perfect) is a far more coherent philosophy.

You have not advanced a single argument to rebut my points.

You're playing semantic games. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is synonomous with "Treat others as you wish to be treated."

The reason for the game is that you insist on degrading the Bible.

You call it "logic" and "reason." I call it stupid.

 

[RandFan]

Especially your version of "logic" and "reason."

There is no "version".

You're playing semantic games. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is synonomous with "Treat others as you wish to be treated."

No it is not. One is not conducive to the raising of a family and enjoying the fruits of your labor. The other is. It's a very important distinction.

...you insist on degrading the Bible.

No, I insist on basing my philosophy on logic and reason and not the other way around.

You call it "logic" and "reason." I call it stupid.

Without any basis you do so.

And you still have not rebutted my argument that loving thy neighbor as yourself is A.) Not feasible, B.) Not a good idea and C.) The golden rule is a better philosophy that does not lead to ambiguity or moral dilemma.

 

[qayak]

That's all well and good but it seems to me that I always get more tat than... well, in any event, I see nothing mutually exclusive of the two. When I needed a car to keep my job JREF folks helped me get one and I was able to continue to work at my Tit-for-Tat job, feed my family and keep a roof over my head. They (the folks at JREF) treated me in a time of need the way I wanted to be treated in a time of need. I will do likewise for others.

Of course! Everything is always peachy when everyone follows the rule but what happens when someone doesn't?

Say there was one JREF character who saw your problem, made it impossible for you to buy a new car and then moved in to take over the job you could no longer fulfill?

That is how we decide if the Golden Rule works. The Tit-for-Tat rule would deal with this guy very well.

 

[Huntster]

Quote:
You're playing semantic games. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is synonomous with "Treat others as you wish to be treated."

No it is not. One is not conducive to the raising of a family and enjoying the fruits of your labor. The other is. It's a very important distinction.

Bullspit.

And you still have not rebutted my argument that loving thy neighbor as yourself is A.) Not feasible, B.) Not a good idea and C.) The golden rule is a better philosophy that does not lead to ambiguity or moral dilemma.

"Love thy neighbor as thyself" and "treat others as you wish to be treated" are synonomous. You have no argument, except in your own head.

 

[RandFan]

Bullspit.

No, it's demonstrable.

1.) If I love my neighbor as myself I cannot enjoy luxuries while my neighbor has less than myself. It is logically not possible.

2.) If I live the golden rule then I can live happily with my neighbor having less than myself so long as I give my neighbor a hand when he or she is in need because that is what I would want.

Loving thy neighbor as thyself is NOT flexible. The golden rule is.

"Love thy neighbor as thyself" and "treat others as you wish to be treated" are synonomous. You have no argument, except in your own head.

They clearly and demonstrably are not synonymous. One allows for inequities between individuals the other doesn't.

If you truly and honestly loved your neighbor as yourself you would not consume any more of your resources than is absolutely necessary for survival so long as there existed neighbors who had less.

The golden rule has no such requirement. It is a superior philosophy in that it doesn't breed guilt or resentment by a person who seeks to work hard for that person and that persons family. It only requires that the person treat others as the person would like to be treated.

You still are simply engaging in rhetoric and contradiction.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Bullspit.

No, it's demonstrable.

1.) If I love my neighbor as myself I cannot enjoy luxuries while my neighbor has less than myself. It is logically not possible.

If you "treat others as you wish to be treated" you cannot enjoy luxuries while your neighbor has less than yourself.

2.) If I live the golden rule then I can live happily with my neighbor having less than myself so long as I give my neighbor a hand when he or she is in need because that is what I would want.

Loving thy neighbor as thyself is NOT flexible. The golden rule is.

What a bunch of crap. Loving thy neighbor as thyself is every bit as flexible as treating others as you wish to be treated is.

Do the games never end with you?

Quote:
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" and "treat others as you wish to be treated" are synonomous. You have no argument, except in your own head.

They clearly and demonstrably are not synonymous.

One allows for inequities between individuals the other doesn't.

If you truly and honestly loved your neighbor as yourself you would not consume any more of your resources than is absolutely necessary for survival so long as there existed neighbors who had less.

The golden rule has no such requirement. It is a superior philosophy in that it doesn't breed guilt or resentment by a person who seeks to work hard for that person and that persons family. It only requires that the person treat others as the person would like to be treated.

You still are simply engaging in rhetoric and contradiction.

Unbelievable.

You personify why I left Southern California so long ago. The place is truly out of this world; disconnected; headed in a "different" direction. Up is down, right is wrong, wrong is right, and any and every bizarre thing can be explained with a straight face, because you actually believe that line of BS.