Results 209 to 221 of 490
Thread: In God We Trust
January 18th, 2012 #209
"So how could one handle say an 18 year old who still believes in Santa Claus?...I was a fundamentalists Christian for a good 18 years of my life."
Connie nailed you:
No shit really??
"It's all silly and it is cherry picking. Dump one part then dump them all and think for yourself."
Cherry picking is thinking for yourself. Fortunately most religious people are not the simpletons you paint them to be and are able to sift out the useful wisdom from the far-fetched mythology, and dont dump the baby out with the bathwater as you clearly did when you were 18 and found out Santa wasnt coming.
"What are the fundamentals of atheism? How can one be fundamentalist with regard to atheism? Do you know the difference between fundamentalism and intensity/passion?"
Fervent atheists and fervent evangelicals have a lot in common, particularly the absence of doubt. They are both absolutely certain they are right.
“It’s odd…how sharing a sense of doubt can bring men together perhaps even more than sharing a faith. The believer will fight another believer over a shade of difference: the doubter fights only with himself.” from Monsignor Quixote by Graham Greene, author, cynic, serial philanderer, catholic convert.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; January 18th, 2012 at 11:20 AM.
Hide this ad by registering as a member
The Following User Says Thank You to Velocity Kendall For This Useful Post:
January 18th, 2012 #210
January 18th, 2012 #211
post #190 of this thread. There is no middle ground of rationality to come "up" or "back" to when you dealing with religion. Just because you see no problem with religion then that must be the best position for someone like me to come to someday. It's like telling an ex-racists who was raised by racists parents who now voices loudly against racism that "Oh you're just overzealous and lashing out because you were a racist for 18 years of your life. Too bad but maybe you'll look at it more rationally one day."
What's laughable is what would be the excuse if I was not an ex-Christian (which she also stated)? Let me guess...Oh well you don't have to knowledge to really understand religion. You're just lashing out because of ignorance. What a fucking joke.
There is nothing wrong with religious fundamentalists...the problem is the fundamentals of religion.
Last edited by Jason Ross; January 18th, 2012 at 02:06 PM.
January 18th, 2012 #212
"It's like telling an ex-racists who was raised by racists parents who now voices loudly against racism that "Oh you're just overzealous"
no, its nothing like that. at least not for most people. were you parents really that bad? ie equivalent to nasty racists?
"There is nothing wrong with religious fundamentalists...the problem is the fundamentals of religion."
Strange, I dont see anything in the fundamentals of islam about blowing oneself up. i doubt mohammad or jesus or buddha would be in favour of it...?
"go tell a cherry picking modern Christian that and watch him/her try to convince you that when Jesus died on the cross for your sins the graves opened up and the dead walked the streets."
Stranger.. Ive spoken to plenty of christians and none of them have ever tried to convince me of anything so bizarre.
Sounds like you had a pretty bad time of religion. I agree that kids shouldnt be exposed to it anymore than they should be given free access to drugs or alcohol. I was a moderate christian till i was 9 or 10 when I decided I wasnt. Care to share?
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; January 18th, 2012 at 02:10 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Velocity Kendall For This Useful Post:
January 18th, 2012 #213
January 18th, 2012 #214
But you seem to be confusing as if I view it all as some great truth
that this is scientific, this happened then this happened this man provided a miracle. That's not how I view things when it comes to religion. For me this is not science, I'd view it closer to people trying to answer questions brought up by philosophy than anything and this is where it comes to the gritty of someone saying this was lie that everyone in a religion is so irrational that they base their entire lives on fairytales.
Then once again viewing it as everyone in religion take it literally. When some just view aspects as life lessons, maybe some philosophy, then obviously most religions when it comes down to it goes into some view on death or what comes after with various interpretations the act of explaining. Then others go into a greater being or god which many personalize while others don't. But lumping them all together is fine, it's like saying anyone is an idiot because they believe in anything after death, it's not scientifically rational to believe so but I don't know many people who think that the conscious mind disappears and just ceases to exist.
Well anyways lets see, would I lie to someone to tell them how they should live their lives:
Once again the pretense that all religions demand a set behavior which they don't, usually also inferring that it has some form of punishment to coax them into it and then ignoring the interpretation as just an interpretation of lies either way.
Do you think it's better for people to base their lives on fairy tales:
Once again the assumption that those in religion base their entire lives on fairy tales rather than just drawing a moral interpretation from it, which science doesn't deal in morals and one has to draw it from somewhere it isn't internalized. You can base it on the world around you or use some reference or reading. Most do both in their life. When one just draws on it from the world around them that's often how bigotry and prejudice is passed down. Because the morals presented aren't necessarily good or bad depending on the culture.
Do you think it's ok for someone to keep lying when presented with facts:
If you present someone with evidence that is infallible on something like Jonah in the whale I do expect someone to not believe it. I don't view Jonah as literal or truth, or that he even existed at all. But once again assuming everyone blindly does, that in a religion your turned into a zombie void of thought.
How okay are we with believing religious texts purely because they regurgitate intuitive and instinctive pinnacles of human morality?
These principles aren't intuitive, and not instinctive at all, they're ingrained in the culture over time. Imagine a culture where there is no thoughts whatsoever on the afterlife, consciousness, or anything of the like. Killing someone holds no repercussions. Is it then intuitive and instinctive that killing is bad.
I remember a study that was shown when someone is presented with someone that's in pain, when someone has control of them electrically being shocked, and people are told to ignore it and crank up the juice, that it's part of the study that a surprising amount don't even blink an eye or hesitate they just did it. Morality is culturally relative the same as whipping slaves back in the day was viewed no differently than scolding your dog.
When a religion asks you to place your life in the hands of something that doesn't exist, how can you be okay with believing some of what it says but not everything?
Some religions do ask you to place your life in the hands of something, I have yet to say that is a good thing, I have said that there are people that don't take it as literal as that, or there are those that think their 'personal god' doesn't guide their fate, even scientists go into intelligent design that there's a guiding force behind something like evolution, many scientists view it as some form of god, some don't. Though not every religion believes in a personal god.
Main point is still stereotyping everyone generally and their beliefs/them as irrational fools just because it doesn't fit your views on the universe.
Last edited by JFierce; January 18th, 2012 at 02:37 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to JFierce For This Useful Post:
January 18th, 2012 #215
A time may come when you will be required to sacrifice your life for the sake of Allah. To so lay down your life is the highest act of doing shahadah; you then deserve to be called shahid. Life is your most precious possession. To sacrifice it means you have to sacrifice everything which life gives or makes possible, all concrete and abstract things that have been mentioned earlier.
You can indeed become eager to die in the way of Allah as soon as you realize that your life does not belong to you but to Him, and you must render to Him what is His due. You should also remember that death you can never escape or avoid, that it will always come at the appointed hour and place, in the appointed manner (al-Imran 3:185, 144-5, 154-6 ; al-Nisaa 4:78). You should also know that those who die in the way of Allah attain a life, for themselves and their community and their mission, which transcends their death: "And say not of those slain in God's way, "They are dead"; Nay, they are alive but you perceive it not."(al-Baqarah 2:154)
Let there be no love of this world, let there be no fear death.
Only then can you attain the strength necessary to sacrifice your life. Only by being ready to die can you overwhelm hostile forces. Only then the door of success shall open. By dying you attain life, both for yourself and for the community. Unless you are prepared to die you forfeit the right to live especially as a community.
Not that everyone of us will be called upon to give away his life. But the yearning to do so must burn in every heart. "One who does not fight or even thinks of fighting in the way of Allah will die the death of a hypocrite", said the Prophet, blessings and peace be on him (Muslim). He also said: "By Him in whose hands is my life, I love that I die in the way of Allah and made alive, that I die again and again given life, I again die and once again given life, only to die again in the way of Allah." (Bukhari, Muslim)
The Following User Says Thank You to Jason Ross For This Useful Post:
January 18th, 2012 #216
I wish people could just respect that people have different views and beliefs*, and that they believe* in any way they want :/ Is that really too much to ask for in this world?
* I'm speaking religion when I say believe. A person shouldn't believe they are the king of unicorns and rub themselves in peanut butter so that the pixies will come. You might see it just as bonkers to believe in some deity, but as long as they just shut up you can't really tell
January 18th, 2012 #217
"History isn't dictated by a list of pros and cons"
"SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU CAN'T EVALUATE SOMETHING WITH PROS AND CONS? HMMM SOUNDS SILLY TO ME"
That's fucking annoying. Like a gnat at a barbecue. I was initially making a remark about how everything a Christian does isn't dictated by religion. If a monk invents chords, it's doesn't have to be because his faith compells him to. He's a monk. Sitting around all day in some monastery gets boring. I don't doubt for a second they had libraries and had hobbies like classical literature and math. Anyone who sits in a room and studies really hard for years are bound to do some great stuff regardless of their beliefs. So I didn't really see the point in giving a tally mark to God because some bored people invented stuff.
Which brings me back to the whole pros and cons thing that you continue to (willfully?) not understand. If we sat down right now and made a chart with religion and non-religion on opposite sides and decided that we all come up with something good each side did in history and that would once-and-for-all prove who's more beneficial to humanity, that wouldn't be a very objective way of solving anything. Why you ask? Is it because I'm stupid for not thinking that making a pros/cons list is a great way to decide who I'm going to take to the Winter Ball? No. Because the "winner" would be decided on who gets the most tallies. And tallies would come from someone who know's more trivia about history. And that's it. Research. Whoever can do more wins. Doesn't matter who's actually right or what actually happened. If someone can name one more "victory" for a side, then they "win." Now please don't be afraid to take this talking of winning and losing out of context.
haha yeah ok storm off without actually answering any of my questions.
Which questions? Well, the one where I asked you if political correctness being responsible for legally enforce workplace equality wasnt a good thing for one.
its like your arguing against yourself.
Ho ho and remember that time you outright lied and said I called you a fascist? That was terrible Muriel!
"Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."
January 18th, 2012 #218Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Thanked 490 Times in 312 Posts
They are a royal PITA no mater what denomination, or lack thereof.
Where we differ is that you insist that religions are all horrible, and there are no redeeming qualities to them whatsoever. I think that's a rather ignorant, extremist, emotionally immature and emotionally charged and position you have taken on religion.
I'm mot going to go point by point with you. I have no need to convince you of anything, and I've seen enough to make up my mind about your position. It's been .... interesting.
Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is active opposition to theism.
"Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist"
they're so flippin' knowledgeable (just ask them, they have to declare their credentials, because reading through their stuff, you can't tell), they don't even know where they belong.
Last edited by Conniekat8; January 18th, 2012 at 10:58 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Conniekat8 For This Useful Post:
January 18th, 2012 #219
I have noticed over the years that both fervent atheists and fervent evangelicals are like this not only about their religion or its absence. They have this absolute certainty about everything. They will cling, for example, to their political ideologies with the same fanaticism, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their ideas won't work.
This is partly why the "war on drugs" is still going on, decades after it has become clear that it achieves the exact opposite of what it was intended to achieve, and why extreme versions of libertarianism keep on flourishing.
January 18th, 2012 #220
Therefore, with at least some of this stuff, the church must get the credit. Especially considering the barbarism of the secular governments of the Middle Ages.
Must religion in general get the credit? Clearly not - some religions may well be very fanatically anti-knowledge. But it also illustrates that religion is in itself actually kind of irrelevant. Some people are nice. Some are not. Irrespective of whether they are religious or not.
January 18th, 2012 #221
"Everything I say you put in your own words and then ask rhetorical questions. "
Er no I used your own words. You said "And no, [talking about chalking up the pros and cons] it's not a good way of analyzing history."
And then later, complaining you felt the conversation was off topic: "It's more about the social aspect ...than the actual merits of religion."
Merits, pros, call em what you like bro.
"You know what I meant by political correctness."
Ohhh I seeee, so Im expected to interpret you sometimes, but not others? Man this is confusing! See I thought by political correctness you meant the modern legal basis that forces all workplaces to operate equal opportunities employment regardless of sex, sexuality, race or age. Which to me sounds like a good thing.
But I see now, what you really meant was a derogatory Daily Mail shorthand for what you see as the intrusive meddling of big government! You shouldve been more clear in your lazy mischaracterisation.
"I just have to let those people express their silly ideas and then I get to make silly long-winded posts. "
Well Im not sure you have to...
"The people I enjoy arguing with don't post much anymore. "
do you find that happens a lot?
"Stop framing the conversation and then replying to it....
Is it because I'm stupid for not thinking that making a pros/cons list is a great way to decide who I'm going to take to the Winter Ball? No.
Because the "winner" would be decided on who gets the most tallies. And tallies would come from someone who know's more trivia about history."
Ha ha ha no your stupid because you cant stick to your own rules or construct a metaphor that makes any sense silly! (here's a hint; your list of pros should be limited to whoever'll say yes.)
"Anyone who sits in a room and studies really hard for years are bound to do some great stuff regardless of their beliefs."
Wow you should start your own religion with this stuff man, its like deep and stuff.
"The fervent have a low tolerance for any uncertainty. "
In a quantum world, that kind of thing will never do. Or will it? All I know for certain is I cant be sure.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; January 18th, 2012 at 11:57 PM.