Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
My views on religious people waver from mild to extreme. On the one hand if they do not impede human progress then so be it, they are just stupid, but at least not harming anyone. On the other hand, if they do impede human progress then there should be no pity taken on them and dealt with in a way that will prevent their impediment of human achievement.
Really now, Nou.
Apr-22-2011 08:31
EddieZilker
This is the dance.
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Marijuana Sex Camp
Re: Re: Re: God
quote:
Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
Isn't that Public Relations 101?
In that regard, there are a whole slew of corporations whose PR posture is God-like.
Originally posted by Spam
What's scary is that I don't think they actually are trolling. It sounds like the exact same garbage I was taught weekly for the first 22 years of my life.
Just goes to show, a sufficently good parody of religion cannot be distinguished from the real thing. The simple fact that we cant tell if the man is a troll or not, goes to show how fucked up religion is in the first place.
___________________
Apr-22-2011 14:16
Domesticated
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
quote:
Originally posted by mr.bison
Religious people live longer and with less diseases, and this is scientifically proven and verified.
So it doesn't matter whether the individual believer has a "correct " picture of life after death, or a correct conception of "God" and it is also irrelevant whether there is no life after death.
The reason why it is better to believe than not to believe, is that it provides a healthier and longer life.
Then you can call it "placebo effect", fantasy or naivety or unsubstantiated "Claims of God" but the effect of living in faith, is demonstrated by plenty of sufficient reason, by scientific means.
I'd rather die young than live to a ripe old age as a gullible fuckwit.
Originally posted by Domesticated
...gullible fuckwit.
And what would it take for you to think otherwise; that there is a God and that you're not a fool for believing in him/her/it/et al, even though there was no way for you to prove God's existence to others? It seems a great deal of atheists have a pejorative regard for people who don't see the world as they do. Like a lot of religious people who do the same, there is scant intellectual integrity in such propositions which are ironically reliant on a presumption of having said intellectual integrity.
I never stated a position of athiesm. I'm just opposed to the whole "big man in the sky who will smite you if you eat meat on Fridays" thing. I don't deny that a god could exist; only that mankind's fictional interpretation is ridiculous.
Originally posted by Domesticated
I never stated a position of athiesm. I'm just opposed to the whole "big man in the sky who will smite you if you eat meat on Fridays" thing. I don't deny that a god could exist; only that mankind's fictional interpretation is ridiculous.
That makes sense and I agree, by and large, that man-kind has an abysmal track-record, where God is concerned.
Originally posted by mr.bison
Religious people live longer and with less diseases, and this is scientifically proven and verified.
So it doesn't matter whether the individual believer has a "correct " picture of life after death, or a correct conception of "God" and it is also irrelevant whether there is no life after death.
The reason why it is better to believe than not to believe, is that it provides a healthier and longer life.
Then you can call it "placebo effect", fantasy or naivety or unsubstantiated "Claims of God" but the effect of living in faith, is demonstrated by plenty of sufficient reason, by scientific means.
I could spend time trying to explain to you how completely absurd it is to choose faith by average life expectancy and how coexistence is not the same as correlation, but instead I'll just ask you a question:
If a study showed that Muslims lived longer than other people, would you convert to Islam?
If not, you've just revealed that you don't believe in your own argument.
Apr-22-2011 15:18
woscar
Starstuff
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Guatemala, Guatemala
Re: Re: God
quote:
Originally posted by J.L.
Well, first of all, by no means I mean to convince anyone or argue someone into believing what I believe. As a Christian, this is simply what I believe.
1) God is all good and perfect
Most people tend to look at good from a subjective viewpoint. Ie. "God is only good if He does specific things that I want." Our understanding of what is "good" simply lies from our moral lens from the way we view the world. We are all relative people, viewing things from our own perspective, but God is absolute and constant.
2) God is completely fair in His judgement
God does not hold any obligation to us, to do anything, because we simply do not deserve it since we have sinned against who He is. If you are a good person, and someone deliberately hurts you, you have no obligation to help them.
3) God is completely unfair in His mercy and love.
God chooses to whom He has mercy on and whom He doesn't. It doesn't matter if you are a "good" person, because in perspective we are all completely unworthy of God. It doesn't matter if you care for the sick and poor like Mother Theresa or Marylin Manson (to us they seem like 2 extremes)
Now back to the question, why would God let the 17 year old boy die?
Because He deserves it, and it doesn't matter how good of a person he was. However, He constantly shows mercy and love to many others as He chooses, because why? He is God, and He can do whatever He wants.
As Moongoose pointed out, the fact that it's virtually impossible to tell a parody of religion apart from religion itself is already a testament of how fucked up it is.
Furthermore, your statements are a testament of how a person's moral and logical principles can be twisted by religious beliefs. I don't really feel like writing a long explanation of why you're wrong, but here's a video that should make it quite clear:
Originally posted by J.L.
Now back to the question, why would God let the 17 year old boy die?
Because He deserves it, and it doesn't matter how good of a person he was.
Did the kittens deserve it?
Apr-22-2011 15:58
Domesticated
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
Why do you stoic atheists continue to crusade around trying to make theists see the error of their ways? Woscar, Capitalizt?
If someone is too fucking thick to have worked out that religion is a furphy under their own steam, the chances are slim to none that they will be swayed by your well constructed, logical arguments.
In the same vein, I sometimes wonder what purpose Dawkins et al serve. While I enjoyed The God Delusion somewhat, I spent the whole duration of the novel wondering whom it might be of use to. Besides the small proportion of the population he mentions at the beginning--who don't realise it's okay to disbelieve--that is.
