- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/19/17 at 2:53 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Understood, but because you do not believe positively that God exists, you are on equal ground with the atheist who also does not believe positively that God exists. The difference between you and the atheist is the reasoning you provide for your unbelief.
The other difference is that they believe that there is no god(believe negatively).
This post was edited on 9/19/17 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 9/19/17 at 2:55 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
you and the atheist
Remember when you tried to say you'd never heard of William Lane Craig? Such a liar.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 2:56 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:I really don't know the big deal about this one.
The biggest concern is when religion makes special claims of authority,
Everyone uses their belief systems to make specific claims of authority. From the farthest left to the farthest right. It's like the go-to mode of attack.
As an atheist, I see no substantial difference between one appealing to their religious morality as an excuse to impose upon their fellow citizens and those who appeal to their egalitarian morality to impose upon their fellow citizens.
I mean hell. The "Social Contract" is as amorphous as anything anyone can come up with yet, it's often cited as some sort of "authority".
I really don't care WHY people think a thing. I simply evaluate the thing.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:02 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
If you'd like to point out any fallacies, I'll be happy to listen.
Like I said, this ain't my first rodeo and no you won't be receptive to your bullshite logic being bullshite. It's the way your brain works since you've elevated things like "faith" and "conviction of belief" over things like knowledge, facts, substantiation, rationality, reason, etc. You yourself have clearly and openly expressed and acknowledged this. Atheists are superior to agnostics, you said, because while flatly rejecting your notion of God, at least they've demonstrated your proclaimed virtue of closing your mind to doubt. "Conviction" you called it.
Let's start with this below. You profess all this to be unequivocally true with zero substantiation that would pass any semblance of scientific muster (which of course you attempt to thwart through terms like "special revelation"). You then expect discussion to hinge on this premise. It's pointless to engage someone using this method of discussion.
quote:
God made Adam and Eve with perfect bodies and when they sinned, corruption entered the world. It's why cancer exists, why our eyesight degrades over time, and why we get feeble in old age. It's why some children are born with terrible diseases and short lives, and ultimately why our bodies give out and we all die.
On judgment day, the dead will be raised and given new, perfect bodies to experience the afterlife, either in Heaven or Hell.
You repeat this kind of thing over, and over, and over in long-winded, babbling, pretentious diatribes. You clearly see no issue with the absurdity of the above being presented as some factual truth.
You make statements like agnostics don't believe because of "intellectual laziness" (direct quote) and that when it comes to the evidence or rational information regarding the existence or non-existence of a God, "the agnostic doesn't want to engage in that discussion and takes the easy way out by saying that there just isn't enough information to know for sure when the topic, itself, is one of faith." This, of course, does not at all support your argument that the agnostic doesn't engage in rational discussion of evidence. In fact, this entire statement is beyond fricking absurd into the realm of laughable.
ETA:
Also, who is to say that the agnostic is "taking the easy way out?" Another false premise. I would argue that the easy way out, if any (and I don't use this term because it's quite presumptive and insulting to suggest that someone is being insincere in their beliefs to begin with), would be the one's subscribing to the more pleasant notion of eternal life in paradise. Trust me, agnosticism doesn't offer one great peace of mind that rewards skirting hard truths. Yet another of your absurd and logically invalid suggestions.
This post was edited on 9/19/17 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:05 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I really don't know the big deal about this one.
For starters, I'm a fan of keeping religion and politics as separate as possible.
quote:
Everyone uses their belief systems to make specific claims of authority.
I don't.
quote:
As an atheist, I see no substantial difference between one appealing to their religious morality as an excuse to impose upon their fellow citizens and those who appeal to their egalitarian morality to impose upon their fellow citizens.
Volume and human history don't align to that view. Either way, one being true doesn't absolve the other of anything.
Comparing religious views to equalitarianism is also just a bit silly.
quote:
I mean hell. The "Social Contract" is as amorphous as anything anyone can come up with yet, it's often cited as some sort of "authority".
Not by me.
quote:
I really don't care WHY people think a thing.
Maybe not. Most of the board does.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:11 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Me too. I just assign no special significance to it because it's not that different from other mythical "authorities".
For starters, I'm a fan of keeping religion and politics as separate as possible.
quote:Yeah. OK.
I don't.
quote:It was an example. The point being, people often say we "should do A because of B concept". I don't give a frick about B concept. Whether it's religion or anything else. I only care about A. I evaluate A.
Volume and human history don't align to that view. Either way, one being true doesn't absolve the other of anything. Comparing religious views to equalitarianism is also just a bit silly.
quote:Me either. The point is simply that it is used. I wasn't arguing against you. I was merely pointing out that religion isn't particularly unusual in terms of people using THEIR authority to validate their ideas.
Not by me.
quote:
I really don't care WHY people think a thing. Maybe not. Most of the board does.
Most people do. And, it is a significant failing.
For example. If you hold a view that I agree with and you push for an idea I agree with, I really don't give a flying frick if HOW you arrived at the conclusion is different than mine.
We spend WAY too much time in America trying to assess motivations which is dumb because it's a fool's errand and, it really doesn't matter.
Is the idea good or bad? I really don't care if someone has "good" reasons for a shitty idea or "bad" reasons for a great idea.
I care about the idea.
If I could wave a wand over America and do ONE thing, it would be to get people to stop the bull shite of trying to see into people's heads and assign motives.
EVALUATE IDEAS!
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:15 pm to ChewyDante
quote:Not at all. No one's soul is worth saving based on what they do. Belief is the necessary mechanism to receive the salvation offered by God in spite of what we've done. But yes, if you do believe and trust that Jesus' sacrificial death atoned for your sins, you will receive forgiveness from God.
Right, because if I simply BELIEVE then the all powerful entity will suddenly view my soul as worth saving. Makes sense.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:17 pm to CommoDawg
Do you wear a fedora?
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:32 pm to EA6B
quote:
Explain why intelligent design of the eye ball would result in so many people being born with poor eyesight.
The design of the eyeball is fine, but like anything else, defects do occur. A defect does not have to mean the design is flawed, only that material required to assemble is lacking in some capacity.
This post was edited on 9/19/17 at 3:48 pm
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:40 pm to CommoDawg
quote:
logic and reason
So I'll sit back and listen to your 'logic and reason' as to how energy transformed into it's various states without a catalyst. Let's just start with the simple stuff... energy transforming to matter without a catalyst.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 3:56 pm to AUbused
quote:Yes but in terms of theism vs. atheism, the key difference is a belief in God's existence vs. a lack of belief in God's existence. Based on that criteria, agnosticism is in line with atheism.
The other difference is that they believe that there is no god(believe negatively)
When talking about positive disbelief (atheism) or neutral disbelief (agnosticism), the difference is about how strong or weak your lack of belief in God is. Agnosticism is just adding an "I don't know" to your atheism or theism. "I believe God exists but I don't know for sure", or "I don't believe God exists but I don't know for sure". Those are just theism and atheism with less certainty.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 4:12 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
That's fine. No one is telling anyone not to stick to their fairy tales. The biggest concern is when religion makes special claims of authority, and uses this imagined authority to legislate the lives of others, regardless of belief or lack of the same. That's my biggest issue anyway. Your analogy isn't particularly useful because of that.
Are we in the same Historical Paradigm, DB? As I comprehend the history of our Religious/Political experience (Michelle's desire to "change" it nws
)...I perceive it to have been a Religious-based Principle which most abhors/limits the idea of "authority to legislate the lives of other...". Are there any of the historically-professed God-given Rights of the which you find undesirable or unjust? Do you believe that Justice is/can be determined by a simple Majority (I.e., "mob rule")? Is it not rational to believe that the Principle of "all people are created equal" (when obviously such is an Empirically-ludicrous assertion) can only be true....IF...such is viewed in the context that what we witness re people's (obvious) inequality can only be relative to the God Paradigm belief that they are on an eternal journey which enables them to one day BECOME equal. By means of an educated and free-willed choice.
If there is no God...if individuals are no more or less valuable (and are mostly detrimental to the health of Nature)...then does not rational common sense, practicality and refined appreciation for the Process demand they (problematic, negative value people) simply be removed? Like a cancer.
Just WHO determines what is or is not THE Authority that can will rule as a Societal instrument for civility, peace, "the pursuit of happiness" and survival and prosperity...absent an Absolute? Me? You? The Majority? Elites? Sounds like a recipe for 'wailing and gnashing of teeth' to me.
My greatest concern is for when there is no belief in Absolute Authority. There are few Ideas that are powerful enough to unite an unequal and envious people; the hope that there is more lives than this one (Religion) for all to become 'equal'...is the only one that holds such power. And that power only exist to the degree that the People believe; otherwise...the 'vacuum'...and the consequences therein. Herding cats.
Time will tell. Kinda like Trump's assertion per Socialism and Venezuela, I suspect. Sounds good...feels good...just don't pan out.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 4:20 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Me too. I just assign no special significance to it because it's not that different from other mythical "authorities".
It's quite different. Regardless, there's no reason to allow one over another.
quote:
Yeah. OK.
I don't require your affirmation.
quote:
It was an example
It wasn't a very good example.
quote:
I was merely pointing out that religion isn't particularly unusual in terms of people using THEIR authority to validate their ideas.
The outcome is different, and that's the issue.
quote:
trying to see into people's heads and assign motives
Many in this thread eagerly admit that there's a somewhat popular text that maps out their motives. I don't really care about their motives. My goal is to eliminate influence derived from their motives. Outcomes are my concern.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 4:28 pm to chickenpotpie
quote:
The avowed communist is also an atheist? What a shocker.
Atheists are just people who want to do whatever they want without suffering consequences. I like to equate them to teenagers rebelling against their parents for no reason other than to rebel.
Atheism is just a losing position. If you're right, who cares? If you're wrong, you suffer in some way or another.
I don't follow any religion but if you don't think there is a "higher power" or a source, as I like to say, then you are ignorant. Do more research. There is plenty of evidence that there is something greater than ourselves.
This is one of the dumbest posts I've ever read on this site.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 4:32 pm to RCDfan1950
quote:
Are we in the same Historical Paradigm, DB? As I comprehend the history of our Religious/Political experience (Michelle's desire to "change" it nws )...I perceive it to have been a Religious-based Principle which most abhors/limits the idea of "authority to legislate the lives of other...".
I don't know. I'm here in reality. You with me?
quote:
Are there any of the historically-professed God-given Rights of the which you find undesirable or unjust?
Those were around long before the Christian god and will remain when that mythology fades.
quote:
Do you believe that Justice is/can be determined by a simple Majority (I.e., "mob rule")?
I stay away from "believing" things. I'd say that it can absolutely be a determination by the majority. The point of contention is how favorable is that and to what extent.
quote:
Is it not rational to believe that the Principle of "all people are created equal" (when obviously such is an Empirically-ludicrous assertion) can only be true....IF...such is viewed in the context that what we witness re people's (obvious) inequality can only be relative to the God Paradigm belief that they are on an eternal journey which enables them to one day BECOME equal. By means of an educated and free-willed choice.
No. That's irrational. All people are not created equal.
quote:
If there is no God...if individuals are no more or less valuable (and are mostly detrimental to the health of Nature)...then does not rational common sense, practicality and refined appreciation for the Process demand they (problematic, negative value people) simply be removed? Like a cancer.
No.
quote:
Just WHO determines what is or is not THE Authority that can will rule as a Societal instrument for civility, peace, "the pursuit of happiness" and survival and prosperity...absent an Absolute? Me? You? The Majority? Elites? Sounds like a recipe for 'wailing and gnashing of teeth' to me.
If you found out your god did not exist, would you instantly become a murderer? A fascist? A pedophile? It's silly to argue that the existence of a god is a requirement based on imaginary authority.
quote:
My greatest concern is for when there is no belief in Absolute Authority. There are few Ideas that are powerful enough to unite an unequal and envious people; the hope that there is more lives than this one (Religion) for all to become 'equal'...is the only one that holds such power. And that power only exist to the degree that the People believe; otherwise...the 'vacuum'...and the consequences therein. Herding cats.
My greatest hope is that we will eventually become a society that has advanced past the point of needing such authority.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 4:37 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
If you found out your god did not exist, would you instantly become a murderer? A fascist? A pedophile? It's silly to argue that the existence of a god is a requirement based on imaginary authority.
It's concerning how many people would be out raping and killing if an instruction guide hadn't told them not to.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 5:01 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
It's concerning how many people would be out raping and killing if an instruction guide hadn't told them not to.
"Murderer"? Who decides what criteria designates one as such; the same that determines 'one man's terrorists is another's freedom fighter'?
The one thing that my Faith truly enables, is a potential to love my fellow beings - ESPEICALLY the 'irredeemably' bad ones; incurable and dangerous sociopaths for the duration - solely resting on my CHOSEN belief that they/their current experience...may indeed CHANGE their belief/action in the hereafter. Outside of that belief/possibility...just what should determine my reaction to these folk? Given the limitation and therein value/commodity of 'time'...it would be ludicrous and wasteful to even consider tolerance of such people...love for them, altogether out of the question.
Bottom line. No prosperity outside of God Paradigm, IMO. If we take the Belief of both the potential for future prosperity out of the psychological equation - given obvious and profound inequality - WHAT do we replace it with, as a motivating power toward maintaining civil society? Egalitarian Ideology and Authoritarian Socialism promises...which in effect punishes moral/productive achievers and rewards the opposite, therein? Good luck with beating down those moral/productive 'achievers' into submission and rewarding what is essentially suicidal impracticality, immorality, if not evil. Herding the ignorant is easy...herding the smart and strong...another animal altogether. Won't happen for long; Antifa and BLM are NOT the strong and productive. Mother Nature will kick it back to default.
Interesting.
Posted on 9/19/17 at 5:06 pm to RCDfan1950
quote:
"Murderer"?
Who are you quoting?
Posted on 9/19/17 at 5:12 pm to CommoDawg
quote:
utter buffoon
quote:
childishly insults his opponents
Hmmmm
Page 8 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News