"If I am right, I go to heaven, if you are right, you die anyway."

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by garbonzo, Apr 6, 2012.

  1. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Dude, Really? So, specifically the "Abrahmaic God" can be disproven. I mean, that IS what you're saying, right? Yet, in the same post, you say that there is no definitive proof either way. You do realize that's total nonsense, right?

    You couldn't prove that the worship of an invisible three headed pig with wings who lives just outside of Alpha Centauri surrounded by incorporeal ex-playboy playmates is incorrect. Don't say you can disprove something you simply can't. You can infer to the end of the world, if you like, and claim reason and that a book is a hypocrite and whatever new and fun varieties of BS you have for why such a being,"Can't exist".

    You know me, Christian, but not super-fundy crazy or anything. If I'm willing to admit that the "abrahmic god" as described by most speakers for any religion involving it is wildly different from one describer to the next, why can't you simply admit that maybe there is such a being, poorly represented by many of it's followers, who either is quietly working things out as it wants, or who is sitting back and letting it all go on, perhaps to step in later?

    No, don't admit such a being must exist, because that's foolishness. Might exist. That's honest and fair.



    As for the pic, spidergoat: I know, terrifying that you thought me beheaded, yet still I live.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 1, 2012
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    One more thing on this. Something was said about the fact that discussions needed to be had, and abandoning the existence discussion was bad. I disagree. The existence discussion is merely something to hide behind. The comparative morality of atheists and theists is pretty close, so what's the problem? Stalin? Hitler?(He wasn't atheist, BTW, but some point to him as why atheism is bad, go figure.) Ever heard of Richard the Lionhearted? Saladin? Monsters dressed with people's thoughts of what is "right" and "good" pop up every so often.

    No, the existence discussion, really should die. What does it really matter? Please, tell me what effect that proof of existence of God would have in your world? More to the point, if both sides know they won't budge, isn't it really just a reason to point at someone and say how much better you are for being "enlightened"?

    I'm sorry, but most enlightened people, the ones who explain how they are enlightened(and how poor off others are from not being enlightened), are unmitigated bigots and douchebags.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    So you admit that theists do that?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    (psssst. figure of speech is right there in your quote. Therefore you want him to admit that there are Theists that have figuratively(and thus intellectually) kicked you in the teeth. Just thought you should know.)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Literally or figuratively: Why would anyone want to kick anyone in the teeth or feel justified in doing so?
     
  9. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    The strawman you've constructed is nonsense, yes. I'ts a good thing I never said I could disprove the Abrahamic God. What I actually said was that it could be shown beyond reasonable doubt to be a fabrication.

    Again, never said I could. In fact, I said the opposite. I know you're eager to get back in the fray after all this time off, but certainly you can spare the extra moment or two it takes to actually read the posts you're responding to.

    The point was, as you'd know if you were paying attention, that definitive proof is not necessary to debunk religion as revealed truth. There are mounds of evidence against such claims, and more than enough to satisfy any doubts. Same goes for the three-headed pig with wings "just outside of Alpha Centauri" (presumably on a planet somewhere?) surrounded by incorporeal former Playmates. No, I may not be able to show you definitively that such a thing does not exist, but I could point out the fact that Playboy has not been around long enough for one of its Playmates to reach Alpha Centauri using our most advanced propulsion systems. I could also say that the odds of something that could be called a pig evolving elsewhere in the universe are slim, as are the odds of something evolving with three heads. And wings, to boot?

    I shouldn't have to provide proof against such a scenario for you to be reasonably certain that such a scenario does not exist.

    You're not really admitting to anything there, are you? It's an observable fact that the god figure the Abrahamic faiths espouse comes in various, often contradictory, forms. What are exactly are you conceding here? That it's the same god? That's no concession at all, it's a claim made by Christianity and Islam.

    Such a being as described by your religion? Because it's parochial, misogynistic, and bears too striking a resemblance to a warlord. In other words, it is clearly of man, and not just of any man, but a particular sort of man. The kind that treats its women like chattel, and outsiders like fodder.

    This same reasoning could be used by you, and applied to Greek and Roman mythology, or Native American mythology if you like. Or any other mythology. Without the shroud of faith, the low birth of these systems are clear.

    I don't entirely discount the concept of a creator, or a prime mover, or whatever. But mythology exists without it, as you would readily admit, and so there's no reason to assume that one particular mythology is correct simply because one likes its message, or, more probably, because one was born into it.

    A god might exist, yes. But certainly not the one in your holy book. To allow for such a possibility is the height of dishonesty.
     
  10. spidergoat Venued Serial Memberlist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,785
    The infant genital mutilation community is almost entirely religious. In Chechnya, the Muslims took over, and now women are regularly beaten for smoking, violating dress codes and various other bronze age standards of behavior. If a young women engages in any pre-marital relations, she is likely to be killed. Yes, it makes a difference if people believe this crap.
     
  11. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    As Spidergoat pointed out, genital mutilation is entirely religious, and I would add that the current movement against evolution are exclusively religious (almost exclusively Christian, at least in the US) as well. And let's not forget the murders and assaults being committed against book publishers and movie directors for the "crime" of criticizing Islam. Was it a secular humanist behind the axe attack on cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, or was it a Muslim?

    To not have the discussion is to allow ignorance and bigotry to go unchecked. If no one will challenge religion's authority, eventually the sciences will no longer be taught, advances in technology and medicine will no longer be made. Quality of life will decline, as will life expectancy. Religion comes from man's infancy, and as such seeks a return to those ideals. To grant it dominion over logic and reason is to expedite such a return.

    We only have modern society because we divorced ourselves from dogma. Empowering women, seeking knowledge, questioning authority--these things are exclusively secular. Or, if they can also be found in some eastern religions, they certain are blasphemous to the Abrahamic faiths.

    Oh, but one side most certainly has budged. Religion's grasp upon society has diminished greatly. What do you think the evangelical movements are reactions to?

    I'm sorry if that's been your personal experience, but enlightenment is not something meant to be worn as a bauble. It's a condition of society, and the reason you're able to have this wonderful conversation with me. It's also the reason your mother was able to choose her mate, and have a career rather than remain bound to animalistic mating patterns. You take it for granted every day.
     
  12. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    So in otherwords you haven't encountered anything that would rock your faith, so you are more than willing to abide by the authority of certain (non-empirical) claims.
     
  13. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Sorry, do I need to include all of my previous statements next time, too? If I need to, I will. It's just kind of been a while. If you would rather me put my comments to what you say on their own line, I will, just let me know what is easiest for you. I want to make it easy on you so you'll read what I say, too. Q used to make me nuts by reading only half of what I said, or misrepresenting it. I don't want to do that to you, either.

    The debate is ok, as long as it's a rational point to point debate. Once it turns into pugnacious name calling and general misrepresentation and disrespect of what others' views are, it becomes unpleasant, and that's when it has not only no real point, but no enjoyment to be had at the simple thought exercise involved.
     
  14. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    I would think it's obvious. It's a part of human nature to want to be "better than the next". If you're really concerned about physically, it would definitely give someone pause in a fight. Let's face it, despite rumors to the contrary, most physical fights only rules are survival.

    So. What's your position on the topic, again? Or would you like to discuss how angry you are such a thing would be said some more?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. spidergoat Venued Serial Memberlist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,785
    Not sure about the word authority, but I am willing to make certain tentative assumptions, yes. I contend that this is something different than faith.
     
  16. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    you're willing to assume that your (so-called) parents are correct on the matter

    well its certainly not empirical, is it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. spidergoat Venued Serial Memberlist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,785
    I'm willing to assume that my parents aren't lying, and that my birth certificate isn't forged, but I wouldn't be so accepting if they told me I was the child of a space alien. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    I admit that I don't run my entire life on an empirical basis because with most issues, I'm not as concerned about being correct.
     
  18. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    So much like like any position one supports on the authority of another, there are parameters (as opposed to simply accepting anything an everything on a subject that is unassailable to one ... ie the popular strawman offered by atheists)

    Its not so much that you choose not to run your life in such a matter but it is completely impossible for you to do so since a vast majority of "truths" one runs one's life from are beyond one's capacity to verify.

    The only real question is why atheists insist otherwise on a question of god (apart from the obvious of sidelining a claim to a convenient non-important/dysfunctional category in order to strengthen or resolve competing values)
     
  19. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    It isn't that this kind of reply is hard to read, it's that it's hard to
     
  20. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058



    I already explained that, several times, and yet you continue to avoid replying:


    Most things that we ordinarily claim certainty of are either not that relevant to our lives, or there is room for us to change our mind about them, or there is already a socially accepted belief and practice in the case that something we had believed to be true turns out to be false.

    For example: most scientific theories; whether one's spouse is faithful; fraud in the workplace.

    Issues of existence of God, however, are categorically different. The epistemological and other practices that we employ in uncertainty about ordinary things do not apply when it comes to uncertainty about "God."

    One can recover after being betrayed by one's spouse, one can seek a new employment, one can sue, one can broaden one's horizons about scientific theories.

    But what is one supposed to do when one's doubts about what one has been taught on the topic of "God" reach a critical mass?
     
  21. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    So your solution is to degenerate religion into yet another item in the long line of items in the struggle for survival?
     
  22. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    then one leaves the mantle to any one of a number of atheistic values.
    What else?
    :shrug:
     
  23. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    You really bewilder me.


    Your reply basically comes down to "And if you find that you don't have faith in God, then you're an atheist. That's just how it is."


    I would think that the whole point of theistic preaching is to get people to realize theistic truths, not to maintain the status quo.


    Do you really find it so absolutely outlandish that someone feels a need to believe in God, but doesn't know how to believe in God?
     

Share This Page