The God Delusion /Religion

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure, Saturos, why you would want to abandon one of the things which the internet does so well.

That is: to provide anonymity and fulfil Oscar Wilde's maxim - I forget the wording - that people should not be preoccupied with who made a statement that they do not do justice to what the statement said.
Why bother with a search engine on a 56k connection when I can just coerce someone else to post a link? ;)

*well ok, persuade nicely*
 
Mr. Dodds. When the woman did claim to have been part of the group raising the dead, she was very clearly lying about it, which made the whole thing so much worse. I wondered if she was just trying to have her moment, or if she'd been pressured into giving the testimony. It was very sad really.

I can recall staying at a country house that is a sort of Christian retreat. They have meetings. In one of these meetings there was talk about how one should be careful around corpses, because there's a serious chance that you may become the new vessel to whatever demon killed the previous owner, so to speak. People actually believe this sort of thing. And this was just outside of Lancaster, in the north of England.
Your an English teacher? :rolling:
Well, your the first English teacher I haven't been able to get along with if your even telling the truth.

English and creative writing were my favorite subjects. Nothing but A's in those courses. Too bad these courses are useless in the real world.
I guess I just don't know how to apply the knowledge I gained from these subjects.

Nothing but As and you still consistently write your instead of you're.
I teach English as a foreign language as well as a general English course, covering literature and creative writing.

These courses are far from useless. Perhaps some uses are less direct, but certainly if you want a career in journalism or anything which inbolbes writing, then they're going to be a boon to you.
 
While browsing the book store, I came across a book called the Philosophy of Atheism.

I briefly read the back, and I was a little bothered. Since when does Atheism have... or need a philosophy? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?

I don't think the explanation as to why god doesn't exist makes it a philosophy.

Has anyone actually read it?
 
It's probably a general primer on the philosophy behind atheism. Scientific evidential approaches, the problem of evil, etc.

I doubt the title is intended to mean "The Single Unified Dictums of the Coherent Philosophy of 'Atheism'". Rather, think of it like 'the philosophy of science' or 'the politics of the kitchen'.
 
I wonder what you actually mean by worship though? How does one inadvertently worship something? I thought the point was that you were doing it on purpose, to show some sort of dedication.
 
Mr. Dodds. When the woman did claim to have been part of the group raising the dead, she was very clearly lying about it, which made the whole thing so much worse. I wondered if she was just trying to have her moment, or if she'd been pressured into giving the testimony. It was very sad really.

I can recall staying at a country house that is a sort of Christian retreat. They have meetings. In one of these meetings ther was talk about how one should be careful around corpses, because there's a serious chance that you may become the new vessel to whatever demon killed the previous owner, so to speak. People actually believe this sort of thing. And this was just outside of Lancaster, in the north of England.

Nothing but As and you still consistently write your instead of you're.
I teach English as a foreign language as well as a general English course, covering literature and creative writing.

These courses are far from useless. Perhaps some uses are less direct, but certainly if you want a career in journalism or anything which inbolbes writing, then they're going to be a boon to you.
I always screw up the contraction you're and the possessive your. I've got to stop doing that so you'll have even less to troll me about. :p

I've always wanted to look into journalism though. Seems more and more like a pipe dream though. Especially video game journalism.

Maybe that's why I'm such a sourpatch.

I have no choice. Not even monies will help.
 
I can recall staying at a country house that is a sort of Christian retreat. They have meetings. In one of these meetings there was talk about how one should be careful around corpses, because there's a serious chance that you may become the new vessel to whatever demon killed the previous owner, so to speak. People actually believe this sort of thing. And this was just outside of Lancaster, in the north of England.
I completely missed all this but have little to say except to express my surprise. That shit be ****ed up. Veggie Tales don't have nothing on it.
 
Actually, it strikes me that there could be a Philosophy of Atheism, atheism applied universally; we can be atheists about so much more than God. There are many other areas in which one can still reject centre and metanarrative, in which one can still refuse the indignity of worship and the fallacy of the sacred. It's possible, however, that I just made all that up and will refuse to elaborate lest I reveal its lack of substance.
 
Has anyone ever thought of just believing in Agnosticism?

It's pretty fair, remaining in shades of gray.
 
Has anyone ever thought of just believing in Agnosticism?

It's pretty fair, remaining in shades of gray.
Which is, believing in no particular doctrine, but still believe in intelligent design?

To me, this is more feasible than pure atheism.

I just can't fathom that the universe "just happened".
 
Has anyone ever thought of just believing in Agnosticism?

It's pretty fair, remaining in shades of gray.
I doubt a God whose metaphysics demand ultimate and utmost presence would appreciate the distinction between not believing in God and believing there is no God. You'd still go to hell.
 
Which is, believing in no particular doctrine, but still believe in intelligent design?

I think Agnostic believes any thing that can never be truly proven, like the afterlife, should remain as an unknown. Not taking sides. They believe in anything that can be scientifically proven and made into a fact, not just some supernatural cause.

Being in shades of gray is nice. Afterall, people are willing to die for belief, but not a fact.

Edit:

I doubt a God whose metaphysics demand ultimate and utmost presence would appreciate the distinction between not believing in God and believing there is no God. You'd still go to hell.

That's uncool.

The least God can do is understand people who are agnostic. Afterall, is it fair to make people believe in something that has yet to be proven so far? To devote their life, their time and energy on something that isn't proven? I think it's fair if you remain in the shades of gray.
 
I think Agnostic believes any thing that can never be truly proven, like the afterlife, should remain as an unknown. Not taking sides. They believe in anything that can be scientifically proven and made into a fact, not just some supernatural cause.

Being in shades of gray is nice. Afterall, people are willing to die for belief, but not a fact.

That isn't what agnosticism is. Agnosticism is simply a statement of a lack of knowledge in a deity. Strong agnosticism is the belief that nothing can be known about a deity.

What you are describing is in fact weak atheism. Someone can be an agnostic and atheist at the same time. Most atheists in fact are agnostic atheists, lacking both a belief and knowledge of God.

The least God can do is understand people who are agnostic. Afterall, is it fair to make people believe in something that has yet to be proven so far? To devote their life, their time and energy on something that isn't proven? I think it's fair if you remain in the shades of gray.
Indeed. Imagine if a theist picked the WRONG god. Wouldn't the RIGHT one, if he existed, dislike them more than the atheist, who at least took a reasoned view of things?
 
That isn't what agnosticism is. Agnosticism is simply a statement of a lack of knowledge in a deity. Strong agnosticism is the belief that nothing can be known about a deity.

What you are describing is in fact weak atheism. Someone can be an agnostic and atheist at the same time. Most atheists in fact are agnostic atheists, lacking both a belief and knowledge of God.

What he said is what I believe, and I always thought it was agnosticism.. Guess I'm a weak atheist?
 
I wonder what you actually mean by worship though? How does one inadvertently worship something? I thought the point was that you were doing it on purpose, to show some sort of dedication.

The term "worship" is actually a lot more broad than what most people think. Let's take the model I'm sure we are all familiar with: Christian worship. What is it? It is giving glory, honor, and praise to God.

This definition can apply to most anything, just fill in the blank: "Worship is giving glory, honor, and praise to _________."

That said, giving glory to something/someone comes in many shapes.

A great example is pop culture. Just go to any grocery store and you'll see an endless line of tabloids, gossip magazines, and popular journalism. Certainly not all, but a great handful of people follow these stories, dare I say, religiously. The more and more people delve themselves into it, the more and more they become it. This is part of the reason why people are always self-conscious about their looks. People start basing their satisfaction with how good-looking they are on what they are used to seeing in these magazines. They form themselves an icon to model themselves after: "Popular Woman Z looks sexy, and I want to look just like that." Nobody will ever bluntly say that to themselves, out of denial perhaps, but what they are doing is glorifying these celebrities to "prime example of humanity" status, and they don't even know it.

With respect to your exact question, that worship is purposeful and demonstrates dedication:

Back to my example: Everyone who delves into pop magazines will truthfully say (theoretically) that they recognize they are purchasing these magazines, and they dedicate themselves to following up with the most recent celebrity gossip stories. Some would say it is simply a hobby, and for some it legitimately is just that: a hobby. But I think we can all relate to the people who -- in terms of fashion, speech, or social mannerisms -- model themselves on people like Paris Hilton, or Brad Pitt. Ellen DeGeneres, or Oprah. Victoria's Secret models. The list goes on.
 
That isn't what agnosticism is. Agnosticism is simply a statement of a lack of knowledge in a deity. Strong agnosticism is the belief that nothing can be known about a deity.

What you are describing is in fact weak atheism. Someone can be an agnostic and atheist at the same time. Most atheists in fact are agnostic atheists, lacking both a belief and knowledge of God.

Really? I thought an Agnostic person is a person in shades of gray, not believing and not not believing in God. I got this right out of the S.A.T wordsmart book.
 
Metaphysics? I like that word, because there's still too much about "physics" humans can't comprehend to totally dismiss the idea of some type of intelligent design. We really don't even know a fraction of what's out there. Dark matter for example. No scientist is sure of what it really is other than it might just be the "fabric of the universe".

Many evolutionists believe the Big Bang, but what I don't get is, where did the "big ball of burning gas" come from in the first place and why do atheists believe the void itself existed indefinitely?

Could it be possible that the universe was created to evolve?

Example: Spore is a game universe about evolution, but it was still created.


Then again, this would contradict the doctrine many christians believe that man was created in his image.

THEN AGAIN, how do christians know Adam and Eve even looked like modern humans in the first place?

Oh, how this smites most of the attempts at insulting. Ha ha ha.
idiot > stupid as far as insults go imo.

It just sounds far more demoralizing.
 
That's uncool.

The least God can do is understand people who are agnostic. Afterall, is it fair to make people believe in something that has yet to be proven so far? To devote their life, their time and energy on something that isn't proven? I think it's fair if you remain in the shades of gray.
Few gods have ever demonstrated themselves to be truly fair. But my real point is this: it is an integral part of the monotheistic faiths that their Gods possess the ultimate presence. When Hopkins wrote that "immortal diamond / is immortal diamond", when a modern believer cites the doctrine of faith, or when a creationist uses circular logic, all of them are expressing their profound belief that their God is the ultimate is: nothing is as strongly as God is, because God is the total reality, the perfect reality, the foundation of everything.

To such a god it's an absolute insult to raise your hands and shrug apologetically and say "hey, whoah, I don't DISbelieve."

That's how God works. It's all or nothing. EDIT: I really should add 'bitch' to the end of that last sentence.
 
Really? I thought an Agnostic person is a person in shades of gray, not believing and not not believing in God. I got this right out of the S.A.T wordsmart book.

The definition is highly contested. But literally, an agnostic is someone who claims to have no knowledge of god, or that knowing whether or not a god exists is impossible. An agnostic may believe in god, or not believe in god, he can just never know for sure.
 
Few gods have ever demonstrated themselves to be truly fair. But my real point is this: it is an integral part of the monotheistic faiths that their Gods possess the ultimate presence. When Hopkins wrote that "immortal diamond / is immortal diamond", when a modern believer cites the doctrine of faith, or when a creationist uses circular logic, all of them are expressing their profound belief that their God is the ultimate is: nothing is as strongly as God is, because God is the total reality, the perfect reality, the foundation of everything.

To such a god it's an absolute insult to raise your hands and shrug apologetically and say "hey, whoah, I don't DISbelieve."

That's how God works. It's all or nothing. EDIT: I really should add 'bitch' to the end of that last sentence.

Then what about the bible? The claim that God loves everyone, and that God is an understanding God? If God truly is an understanding God, then he should understand the reason people believe and don't believe is because they are scared. Scared for many many reasons.

Religious people are scared of God's punishments, people in shades of gray are scared of believing in a false reality and spending time on something that will most likely never be proven, and complete atheists are scared of the consequences in the "current" reality if they devote all their time in God.

Edit: I don't want to get in too deep with this topic. It's too controversial for me.
 
my girlfriend's father has a D.Min. from Princeton Seminary and masters degrees from Columbia Seminary, Emory University, and Yale Divinity. He was a pastor for 15 years and he doesn't believe in god, he just believes in the power of religion. It's just weird, I couldn't imagine studying something I didn't believe in for most of my life, and then 'teaching' it to people for so many years; but I guess he just believes in a different way than most people.
 
my girlfriend's father has a D.Min. from Princeton Seminary and masters degrees from Columbia Seminary, Emory University, and Yale Divinity. He was a pastor for 15 years and he doesn't believe in god, he just believes in the power of religion. It's just weird, I couldn't imagine studying something I didn't believe in for most of my life, and then 'teaching' it to people for so many years; but I guess he just believes in a different way than most people.
Sounds like he was more into the political leverage religion can bring tbh, just like in the dark ages.

This is why I'm christian, but dislike religion in general. If that makes any sense.
 
my girlfriend's father has a D.Min. from Princeton Seminary and masters degrees from Columbia Seminary, Emory University, and Yale Divinity. He was a pastor for 15 years and he doesn't believe in god, he just believes in the power of religion. It's just weird, I couldn't imagine studying something I didn't believe in for most of my life, and then 'teaching' it to people for so many years; but I guess he just believes in a different way than most people.

Well, it seems pretty clear to me that the more I studied religion, the less it made sense. I know people generally say this of science, but that is a different sort of thing. With science, the more you study it, the harder concepts you have to grasp, which lead to even harder concepts. With religion, you are presented with the synopsis of the whole thing from the start--and then the rest is trying to justify the contradictions and absurdities of it. After enough study, you realize the whole thing is just a scam.

I could imagine a lot of pastors have quite a bit of cognitive dissonance.
 
Then what about the bible? The claim that God loves everyone, and that God is an understanding God? If God truly is an understanding God, then he should understand the reason people believe and don't believe is because they are scared. Scared for many many reasons.

The Bible does say that God unconditionally loves all.

But he doesn't like "lukewarm" one bit. The Bible says that it is better to be hot or cold than somewhere-in-the-middle.
 
This is what I was referring to.
and ur a douche. Thank u 4 listening k thnx bye. lol, lmao, rofl, brb

You see, on the internets, everyone can type like a f**king idiot and get away with it just because it's the internets. I'm sure you type like this when you text a friend ammirite? It's f**king annoying, but appeals to little teenagers though.

On topic: Does anyone have any answers for my questions on the last page?
 
The Bible does say that God unconditionally loves all.

But he doesn't like "lukewarm" one bit. The Bible says that it is better to be hot or cold than somewhere-in-the-middle.

Right, I remember the passage. It was a very powerful one.
 
The Bible does say that God unconditionally loves all.

But he doesn't like "lukewarm" one bit. The Bible says that it is better to be hot or cold than somewhere-in-the-middle.

That's also the reason why people say the Bible is full of contradictions, no offense to anyone out there.
 
That's also the reason why people say the Bible is full of contradictions, no offense to anyone out there.

You don't have to worry about offending anyone here.

Also, I don't see it as a contradiction. Bible is very clear about the difference between unconditional love and conditional salvation.
 
God does love everyone unconditionally, just because you love someone doesn't mean you have to love the things they do.

Being lukewarm, hot or cold are referring to actions and feelings. So it's not necessarily a contradiction.

Also the original Bible is written in Greek, Hebrew and Arabic. What might seem like a contradiction in English, probably isn't in it's original context. Translations aren't always going to be 100 percent correct. It's like the word ciao in Italian. Ciao means hello and goodbye, there's not a English word that perfectly fits the true meaning of ciao.
 
and ur a douche. Thank u 4 listening k thnx bye. lol, lmao, rofl, brb

You see, on the internets, everyone can type like a f**king idiot and get away with it just because it's the internets. I'm sure you type like this when you text a friend ammirite?

Um. No, I am actually one of my friends who uses correct grammar while texting. Don't try 'explaining' the internet to me. Your arguments are pathetic.
 
Saturos never fails to make me hate him in these threads. How can one person be so ignorant on so, so many things?

Also, yes, opinions CAN be wrong. And a large quantity of your opinions are indeed wrong. Everything you have said in this thread for example, is wrong.

Also also, I like how you make fun of Farrow's spelling while your own posts are riddled with spelling/grammatical errors and typos.
 
Um. No, I am actually one of my friends who uses correct grammar while texting. Don't try 'explaining' the internet to me. Your arguments are pathetic.
Ooooh, I LOVE that word. I feel so BROKEN inside now. I think I'll just go into some dark corner and cry.

On topic: Could someone please explain to me about the Big Bang Theory and the origins of the universe I described on the previous page?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top