Netami's Religion Thread

[Caswin]

Yeah, yeah.  But why are you assuming that he does?

Suffice it to say: I believe it does. I've seen it happen. *shrug* Certainly for negative effects. I try to focus on the positive ones, though...

...wait, what?

[superluser]

That statement runs on the assumption that those two freedoms are exclusive, but in order to get the maximum yield from either of them you must use them both in unison.

You fail at trolling.

The point that Kierkegaard is making is that men demand freedom of speech, but they're not even using their freedom to think.

I could well be misunderstanding the thrust of your argument, of course. It just seems to me... well, according to the statistics dept of the US of A, there are fewer Atheists in jail, per head of Atheist population, than there are religious sorts. I believe ~10% of the population is Atheist, and ~2% of the jail population is Atheist - stats are passed to me via an Atheist's blog, but, since he linked, and links, to the stats at every opportunity, I presume the numbers are reasonably provable...

There's also the problem that the US uses prison to keep certain people oppressed.  One in 20 US citizens will spend over a year in state or federal prison (not jail) at some point in his or her life.

For black males, it's one in three.

So these numbers may not be indicative of the actual moral quality of those incarcerated.

[Darkmoon]

Well then I'm just screwed. Never been baptized, never going to be baptized, and I don't really see the point in it anyway. If I'm wrong, eh, I'm wrong. I personally don't see how a omnipresent, omnipotent being can just go "well, hell there, you followed the logical path for you and did what you felt was right, so I'm gonna cast you down into the fiery pits because you didn't believe."

I'll be honest: if God really is going to do that, then I will take Hell gladly. I'd rather that than believe in a shitty god like that.

I'm not going to try to change your mind, since I don't think you're interested at this point in your life, so all I can say is that I hope that God shows His mercy to all of us.

See that's the attitude that gets me, though. It really comes across as a holier than thou attitude. Maybe you didn't mean it as such, but it just sounds like "I know I'm right, I know you're wrong, and I hope you come to see the light, as otherwise, you're really screwed."

I don't know that I'm right, I just simply know that your "right way" isn't the right way for me, and I'm pretty darn certain at this point never will be either. I don't feel that "click" when I read about Christianity. People have told me that when you feel it, and when the religion really gets you and you really get it, you can feel the spirit of God fill you. I've gone to church on a few occasions. You know what I felt? Bored. I go in with an open mind, because I feel it's right to do so, but I just get bored.

It's no my answer, and likely never will be.

[superluser]

See that's the attitude that gets me, though. It really comes across as a holier than thou attitude. Maybe you didn't mean it as such, but it just sounds like "I know I'm right, I know you're wrong, and I hope you come to see the light, as otherwise, you're really screwed."

What's the alternative?  Should I simply say, ``It's not a problem for me that you're not religious, because I'm not the one going to Hell,'' like in that Seinfeld episode?

I'm trying to say that I want everybody to get to Heaven, and that at some level, I do want the best for you.  I understand and respect your decision to believe in what you want to believe, and I really don't want to try to change your mind, since I know that religion is a deeply personal matter, and one that should not be entered into lightly.

And I don't know that I'm right, either.  None of us will know for sure until we die.  I just have a firm belief.

[Knight]

For crying out loud... it really isn't complicated.  I've seen a lot of people making the error in this thread that it's up to the Atheist to prove there's no God.  It's been said before... to prove there is no God, one would have to look in all the places God might be, and show that he's not there.  Because we can't do that, it still doesn't mean God exists.

However, the assumption of a God to begin with can be traced back to unreliable, ancient, unverifiable, and altogether biased sources.  Being reasonable people, we could conclude that they are BS without further concrete evidence.  (As much as we don't, which just goes to say something about human stubborness)  The more extraordinary the claim (and there really isn't a claim more extraordinary), the more extraordinary the evidence must be.  If I went back 2000 years in time and did a few "card magic" tricks and said I was the son of someone's God, or God him/her self, they'd probably believe me too, and you would have grown up worshipping me.  Especially if I claimed I would lead you to victory against your enemies.  That doesn't mean it's true.  Nor does it mean there's a Philosopher's Stone, Holy Grail, etc, just because someone two millienia ago REALLY REALLY "knew" there was.  In short, I don't have to disprove a thing that was pulled out of someone's ass.  Arguing over wordplay and inane points like "BUT... this is a text based forum/you used the wrong word/used the word in the wrong way" etc just proves you don't have anything to offer to the conversation. 

To put it on the easiest level, consider your workplace.  If a coworker ran up to you and proclaimed "I am not a God!", would you have any reason to doubt them?  If one ran up to you and proclaimed himself God, you'd probably raise an eyebrow without seeing some SERIOUS proof.  Sadly, people long ago were much more gullible, and you know, it's not cool to question shit that everyone else believes and has believed for generations.  Basic psychology will tell you that no one will thank you for showing them that their worldview is incorrect.  That's why it was considered heresy to believe the Earth was not flat regardless of no proof that it indeed was.  Cause you know... you couldn't prove that it WASN'T.  (eyeroll)

That lingering "but there are some things that can't be explained" should have a yet on the end of it.  To succeed in critical thinking, you must accept the uncertain until you know.  We have no reason and no excuse to be uncertain that there is NOT a godman/whatever in the sky in this day and age, watching over us, and you know, being generally unhelpful.

It's a reasonable stance.  But you know, keep accepting religion as a social necessity when it legitimates flying planes into towers for Allah and excommunicating lesbians if that's what makes you guys happy.  If your religion is a personal thing and helps you live life, great.  But that's not what most religion revolves around, which is why I work against it.  I've seen so many lives and personalities destroyed or damaged by religion, both through reading about it and seeing it firsthand.  It's just sad.

Addressing the "if there was no religion, no one would be good" argument... what, if you weren't religious, you'd risk jail, or an act that would make you an outcast?  Maybe you just like people, and want to help because it makes YOU feel good?  Isn't that more noble than "God told me to do it"?

It's like forcing starving people to learn Christianity before helping them... if that's good, our perspective is fucked.

Really there is no "good", and "evil", when it comes down to it.  There's what socially acceptable and what's not.  Society would not quit functioning without religion.  In fact, I think it would thrive, if handled right.  Atheism does not necessarily equal nihilism.  And I certainly can't see any self respecting Atheist using it as an excuse for war and mass murder like a religious leader might.

[superluser]

I've seen a lot of people making the error in this thread that it's up to the Atheist to prove there's no God.

Name one.

However, the assumption of a God to begin with can be traced back to unreliable, ancient, unverifiable, and altogether biased sources.  Being reasonable people, we could conclude that they are BS without further concrete evidence.

I can name a lot of other unreliable, ancient, unverifiable, and altogether biased sources.  Take, for example, Caesar's Gallic Wars or Cicero's Orations against Catiline.  Many of them are accepted as historical with very little criticism.  Why should we reject some for that reason, but not others?

The more extraordinary the claim (and there really isn't a claim more extraordinary), the more extraordinary the evidence must be.

...must be *for what*?  You left out the predicate.

just proves you don't have anything to offer to the conversation.

I didn't know that I was expected to do something.  I'm sorry.  Tell me what I'm expected to do, and then I'll see about doing it.

That's why it was considered heresy to believe the Earth was not flat regardless of no proof that it indeed was.  Cause you know... you couldn't prove that it WASN'T.  (eyeroll)

Er...they *did* prove that it wasn't.  Around 200 BC, Eratosthenes proved that it was round.  And I'm not familiar with any religion since 1 AD that has made a flat earth part of its teachings.

But that's not what most religion revolves around, which is why I work against it.

OK.  What does most religion revolve around?

[Knight]

 

I've said all that needs to be said, really.  Use your imagination if you can't figure these things out, or you know, don't.  It's obvious you can't be convinced, so why bother to continue trying?

[superluser]

I've said all that needs to be said, really.  Use your imagination if you can't figure these things out, or you know, don't.  It's obvious you can't be convinced, so why bother to continue trying?

All right.  I just have one final request.

I've seen a lot of people making the error in this thread that it's up to the Atheist to prove there's no God.

Name one.

[Knight]

No.

[Aridas]

I think you need to be banned from this forum. You know, for being a complete asshole who complains when someone finds something out of place in your theory, and who refuses to back up even the simplest of claims. Or maybe, just get out of the goddamn thread instead. You're pissing me, and no doubt others, off.

[Knight]

Go Forum Police.  Jesus, lighten up, guy.  I never made a single personal attack against you.  So much anger over shit you don't even have to care about.  If you don't like my opinion, or whatever, don't adopt it.  But try to learn to treat others with at least a little respect, mmkay?

As far as "refusing to back things up", I already mentioned that I said what I wanted to say.  Throw out EVERYthing I've said if I made a mistake (which is possible, I'm not a God ), if that's the way you do things.  Even I get tired of going back and forth.  Or, should we just have 8 pages over semantics and get all pissed off, like you?

[RJ]

It's a good thing my religion promotes tolerance and patience

[Caswin]

Or, should we just have 8 pages over semantics and get all pissed off, like you?

Uh... question.  How is asking for one instance out of "A lot of people" quibbling over semantics?

[Aridas]

try to learn to treat others with at least a little respect, mmkay?

You first bucko.

I've said all that needs to be said, really.  Use your imagination if you can't figure these things out, or you know, don't.  It's obvious you can't be convinced, so why bother to continue trying?

[Darkmoon]

Good bye, Aridas. Go enjoy your week to consider yourself.

BTW, at this point the thread has devolved into attacks and ignorance, so I'm closing it.

[Damaris]

awww.  You guys always kill the good threads just as they're getting interesting. 

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

That was what I was thinking. Other than Aridas, most everyone else was being polite. :-(

[bill]

That was what I was thinking. Other than Aridas, most everyone else was being polite. :-(

I am inclined to disagree, seeing as you're posting here.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

I -did- say "everyone else" - that excludes me, because I'm the one talking.

Or, at least, that's what I thought...

[Darkmoon]

If you wanna reopen it, you are more than welcome to.

[Damaris]

whee!  *moves back to Off Topic*

I'm leaving the converstation the way it is, so that people remember to stay nice.

[Darkmoon]

That's why it was considered heresy to believe the Earth was not flat regardless of no proof that it indeed was.  Cause you know... you couldn't prove that it WASN'T.  (eyeroll)

Er...they *did* prove that it wasn't.  Around 200 BC, Eratosthenes proved that it was round.  And I'm not familiar with any religion since 1 AD that has made a flat earth part of its teachings.

Did you miss that whole part in your history lessons where the church made Galileo into a heretic for trying to prove the Earth was round. Just because the Greeks did it once didn't mean anyone botherd to listen to them years down the line...

[Knight]

That was kinda what I meant, yeah... 

That is, the period of history before it was -accepted- that the Earth was not indeed flat, you could get burned for saying otherwise because you couldn't prove that it wasn't.

At least, you know, generally accepted the Earth wasn't flat.  I'll bet you a nickel right now there's someone out there that believes it is.  :p

[bill]

Oh god, another forum I'm on, someone honestly believes the earth is flat. They also believe, along with 25% of the board, that 9/11 was faked.

[Knight]

You sir, owe me a nickel!   (or at least had you bet me you would) 

That's hilarious mang.   

[Darkmoon]

Seriously? They think the world is flat?

I guess that's no worse than the people that honestly believe that the dinosaur bones were planted by the devil to make people believe the world really isn't 6,000 years old... all evidence to the contrary on all points there...

[bill]

One of their argument for the world being flat, and I shit you not, was that if the world was round, all the water would flow to the bottom side. 

[Knight]

Seriously? They think the world is flat?

I guess that's no worse than the people that honestly believe that the dinosaur bones were planted by the devil to make people believe the world really isn't 6,000 years old... all evidence to the contrary on all points there...

No sir!  It's due to the Flying Spaghetti Monster altering the measurement instruments with his noodly appendages!

One of their argument for the world being flat, and I shit you not, was that if the world was round, all the water would flow to the bottom side.

Haha!  I wonder what they'd say if you told them it kept spinning because of a gigantic invisible Harlem Globetrotter.

[Darkmoon]

lmfao, I like that, ER.

[Reese Tora]

One of their argument for the world being flat, and I shit you not, was that if the world was round, all the water would flow to the bottom side. 

I'd ask them where the center and edges are, then point out something (a flight route or train or ferry) that is physically impossible without a spheroidal earth, and ask how it's accomplished.

I realize that someone like that will tell me it's fake, but I'd wanna see if they'd squirm before they come up with that "answer."

also, just as an off hand comment, there's an entire flat earth society that supposedly beleives the earth is flat.