| Author |
Message |
pharmer4
Metallica Fanatic
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1960
Location: Deniliquin, Australia
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:44 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Xtreme wrote: | | Quote: | | Firstly, An athiest is not saying that god CAN'T exist. they are saying that god DOESN'T exist. there is a difference. The first is a philosophical argument, the second is a practical argument. |
Philosophy would tell us that if God can exist, then he does. Also certain scientific ideas suggest the same thing. If an omnipotent God CAN exist, then He does. You can extrapolate vast amounts of theology from this concept.
To say with certainty that God doesn't exist while admitting that he can is simply foolish. |
Well that is hilarious. I guess Necromis' pink unicorns do exist, since philosophy says that if something can exist, then it does.
Or are you saying this can only be applied to your god? If so, don't you think that's a little biased?
What's really interesting is that that statement means that Allah exists, as does Buddah, vishna, and best of all, zetans (since you seem to have an issue with scientology, i thought that was the best one). So which is it, they all exist, or none of them do.
And as i have said already, I don't say that God CAN'T exist, i say that she DOES NOT exist. it is a fact that she does not exist, so why would I say she could exist?
| Xtreme wrote: | | Quote: | | Can you in any way state (not prove), why Chrsitianity is any more realistic than scientology? you obviously can't, otherwise you would not have dodged the statement that necromis has made. |
If you are honestly claiming that scientology is as logical as ANYTHING ELSE, then I have to question your powers of reason. To compare it to Christianity is simply ludicrous, and I would have assumed it unecessary to even discuss something like this. The most overarching statement I can make is that Christianity develops theology with faith and reason, with revelation and observation. It is calling to live selflessly - putting God and others before oneself - and for the greater glory of God following Christ's example and living in His sacrifice. Many of its primary values are respectable even to the most stubborn atheist. Scientology is a bad joke.
| Quote: | | you do well to not try and prove theology |
Theology is the study of God and our relationship and to Him. There is nothing to "prove," it is a field of study.
I said I would not attempt to defend the validity of apparently invalid "religions." And went on to demonstrate that their invalidity says nothing about the truth of a valid religion. |
yeah, that's why i said you can't prove it, and should not try. Proof is all about facts, and since religion is about non-facts, you can't prove it . . . .
As for defending christianity against scientology, it is very interesting that you won't even attempt to do this.
There is nothing that you can say about Christianity that can't also be said for scientology. neither of them have any basis in reality, so you can't deride one's basis without deriding the other's basis.
Who cares if Scientology is a crack-pot theology invented by a deviant. Christianity is also a crack-pot theology invented by deviants. the only difference between the two (other than the cast of their imaginary histories), is that christianity has been around for a slightly longer period of time. no other differences there.
| Xtreme wrote: | | Quote: | | The existence of God has no bearing on out existince one iota. not even slightly. |
Come now. If God exists, the implications are unlimited. If pink unicorns exist, there are no further implications. That is all I'm saying. This is why such a comparison of the two is useless. |
Wrong dude, because here is something to consider - people already think god exists, and the world goes on as it does. If she somehow showed herself to everyone, then everyone would go on as they do.
Now, no one actually thinks pink unicorns exist, when not one single person actually believes in their existence (except perhaps my daughter), and then it was proven that they do, well wouldn't that cause some interesting scenes.
| Xtreme wrote: | | Quote: | Here is a being that is supposed to be omnipitent. so powerful she can stop all creation at a whim, and create it again exactly as it was, if she so felt.
Why then can't she do whatever she wants? Why could she not, on a whim, change lucifer's mind so that he didn't rebel? Because lucifer is an invention to keep people in line, do the right thing.
Why can't she accept anyone into heaven, even if they did not accept her as being real during the life? because she is an invention to keep people in line, do the right thing.
Why can't she just dispense with physical existence all together and just have people live in heaven to begin with? it would certainly dispense with all the crap people go through in their lives, bowing and scraping to an ungrateful god that is so spiteful she would kick you out of her house forever and ever if you didn't believe in her. Why, because she is not real, she is just an invention that was created by primitive humans as a way to comfort themselves in their pitiful lives when everything in nature made it hard for them to live, after which time it was utilised by those in power as a way of suppressing freedom (physical and intellectual), of keeping their power at all costs. |
Valiant effort. Almost. Empiricism would tell you that comfort for a "pitiful life" or the desire for physical or intellectual freedom were without any value anyway, but I'll leave that up to you to figure out. |
Dude, I've already said I don't care about empiricism. You seem to think that the opposite of believing in god is believing in empiricism. Little bit one dimensional.
As I have said, but you seem incapable of processing I have no faith in anything.
| Xtreme wrote: | | You have simply - and rather clearly - not studied theology or Christianity. Christians study science, but empiricists do not seem to study theology. You have part of a picture, while we theists have studied - and continue to study - a more complete version of it. |
I have studied theology dude. make your assumptions but you are wrong. I am actually well versed in Christianity, especially catholocism, and have read extensively on the jewish faith, islam, taoism, scientology, sikhism, hundu, and a little on the history of witch doctors and voodoo. The religion that came closest to the reality of the world is, in fact, satanism, although I find their philosophies selfish, especially since I actually have quite a lot of empathy for people.
| Xtreme wrote: | | The questions you are asking are valid questions, but you have simply assumed that there is no answer to them and left it at that. This sophomoric approach is understandable, but incomplete. You ask them in such away that betrays instantly certain shortcomings. In fact, Catholicism answers all of these questions successfully, effectively, and logically - and has for centuries. |
I have not assumed that there is no answer, I have just asked you to answer them. This is the nature of a discussion. I have studied extensively in catholicism (that would be, by the way, at a seminary), and I know the factual basis of these "answers" is based on nothing. They start with a simple assumption, call it an unfallible truth, and then build the rest of their theology and philosophies upon that. It's all very weak, like a dam with a cracked keystone - it only takes a little prodding to make the whole thing come down.
| Xtreme wrote: | | I do not have time at the moment to address each of these issues, and I daresay this may not be the place, but I will attempt to do so if you really want to. On the other hand, this is precisely the "topic-hopping" that I warned against near the beginning of the thread. |
I do really want you to. Hence i asked. I am not in the habit of asking questions just to here my own voice (or in this case, to see my own words).
As for the topic hopping, I can only say that all of my responses have been following the flow of where you and LD have taken the conversation.
Remember my original question does not actually ask any of the questions you have addressed - it only asks, why shouls someone who's life is not defined by religion, where religion's only impact is annoying opinions from bigoted sheep, be defined an "athiest" when this is a negative relation to religion? I don't have a negative relation to religion, i have none, becuase i don't have dealings with lies and fiction designed to control people's lives.
_________________
For Metal and Rock interviews and reviews, go to www.heavymetalnation.com - You can Contribute too if you want!
http://deniliquin.myminicity.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
linuxdoctor
Infallible Persona
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 1307
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pharmer4 wrote: | As I have said, but you seem incapable of processing I have no faith in anything.
|
Then would you say that you are are a Nihilist?
| clpo13 wrote: | | This is roughly my position. God might exist, or he might not. I don't really care because my daily life is not affected by God's existence. Even if God himself appeared to everyone and gave them incontrovertible proof that he existed, my life would not change at all. So why worry about God's existence? |
Because knowing a thing changes the person who knows. If you had proof that God exists, or even began to have concern in the area, your life would change. What you know colours how you look at the world around you and how you react to it. Suppose one day you discover that your best friend is gay. How would you react? Would your relationship be the same? Hardly. All because you discovered something different about your friend. It is the same with what you know, or learn about, God.
The more you learn about God, the world, anything at all, the more you will change also. As the saying goes, knowledge is power. It is the knowledge to change and to be changed by it.
_________________
Misanthrope: someone who realizes that humans really are as stupid as they appear.
If you think I'm 'politically' incorrect you have the wrong politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Rashy
Lifeless Person
Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 731
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knowledge is power, and thus responsibility, but ignorance is bliss 
_________________
Rashy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
linuxdoctor
Infallible Persona
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 1307
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From Oscar Wilde's play, The Importance of Being Earnest; Act 1, Part 2.
| Lady Bracknell wrote: | | I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any rate, education produces no effect whatsoever. |
_________________
Misanthrope: someone who realizes that humans really are as stupid as they appear.
If you think I'm 'politically' incorrect you have the wrong politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
clpo13
Zarkin' frood
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Posts: 1210
Location: Washington
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| linuxdoctor wrote: | | If you had proof that God exists, or even began to have concern in the area, your life would change. |
Well, of course, that's obvious. Everything is changing every day. I suppose I should have said that my life wouldn't change in any appreciable way. The same would apply if I found out my best friend was gay. Sure, things would change, but not to any great extent. We'd still be friends, I'd still treat him the same way. The only noticeable change would be my lack of surprise if he started dating another guy.
So yes, if I had undeniable proof that God existed, things would be different. Instead of not knowing God exists, I would now know he does. But that wouldn't change my day-to-day life. For a more real-life example, look at the news. Yesterday I didn't know that there are 1 million ants to every person on the planet. Today I do know that. Things are different because I have new knowledge, but other than that, my life isn't different. Hopefully that's cleared up.
_________________
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." --Thomas Jefferson
[img:cd1c8454aa]http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/clpo13/anothersig1.jpg[/img:cd1c8454aa] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
linuxdoctor
Infallible Persona
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 1307
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
The degree to which your life changes depends on the importance (to you) of the new thing(s) that you learn. Knowing that the proportion of ants to humans is 1,000,000:1 is hardly if any significance. Suppose for a moment that there were an army of giant mutant radioactive man-eating ants created by <insert favourite conspiracy theory here> headed your way.
I know that such a scenario is improbable although I would not discount the possibility considering the great evil which <insert favourite conspiracy theory here> clearly represents.
In any case, I'd say that if you knew that God exists your life wouldn't change is highly doubtful. Very few can say how their life would change if any given thing happened to them. Thanks to our decadent and hedonistic 'democratic' society (if you live in the West) very few people know much about themselves and generally have no strength of character. As a result, they can't know how they would react to such things.
Knowing the proportion of ants to humans is one thing, knowing for certain the existence of God is another. For one thing if you knew God existed you'd start learning Latin and convert to (traditional) Catholicism because only Traditional Catholic get to heaven. 
_________________
Misanthrope: someone who realizes that humans really are as stupid as they appear.
If you think I'm 'politically' incorrect you have the wrong politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Necromis
Lifeless on my Boat
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 815
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
LD, not true. As all teaching has God doing nothing any more on earth. God is used as a moral compass for those that believe. God is honestly the ultimate *boogy man* for both kids and adults. People are told that if they don't live by his rules then you won't go to heaven and you will go to hell and burn in fires for eternity. Yet even those closest to the heart of the religion must not believe this for they break the rules repeatedly and in ways that are far worse then most. The Catholic Priests and little boys just to mention one such group.
You see I don't need a mythical being such as God to be ethical. I do that because it is the right thing to do. I honestly feel sad for those that do the right thing because of "God" rather than because it is right. After all they have fear guiding them, not strong moral values.
Also, going back a bit to something you stated LD. Atheist is not a negative belief. Regardless of what you think. The meaning of the word has been twisted by Theists. I actually think it was probably coined by Theists in the first place. I mean there are no other words like this for any other persons that do not believe in mythical beings. You don't have the term Apagonist to describe persons that do not believe in mythical gods like Zeus and Aries. Additionally not believing in them is not a negative belief either. All in all an Atheist, as I have stated before, does not believe what evidence has been supplied to prove the existance of God. They don't believe there can not be one. to an Atheist the existance of God can be taken as an unproven theory. It is believed by a part of the community but the evidence does not support the conclusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
linuxdoctor
Infallible Persona
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 1307
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Necromis wrote: | | LD, not true. As all teaching has God doing nothing any more on earth. |
Tell that to the millions of people who claim miracles and who say that God has answered their prayers. For them God certainly intervenes in the world.
| Necromis wrote: | | God is used as a moral compass for those that believe. God is honestly the ultimate *boogy man* for both kids and adults. People are told that if they don't live by his rules then you won't go to heaven and you will go to hell and burn in fires for eternity. Yet even those closest to the heart of the religion must not believe this for they break the rules repeatedly and in ways that are far worse then most. The Catholic Priests and little boys just to mention one such group. |
This is a hard one to counter and it is a point well taken. Do these men who constantly violate the prescripts of their own religion truly believe? I would not presume to say but, to quote Jesus, "by their works you shall know them." At the same time, is it legitimate to extrapolate here? Just because some of the clergy behave badly and possibly do not believe is it valid to say that the religion itself is not true? Hardly. Even if such a generalisation were true, can we say that the ultimate object of that religion's belief is not true? Same answer; hardly.
| Necromis wrote: | | You see I don't need a mythical being such as God to be ethical. |
According to you.
| Necromis wrote: | | I do that because it is the right thing to do. I honestly feel sad for those that do the right thing because of "God" rather than because it is right. After all they have fear guiding them, not strong moral values. |
This begs the question, and creates a huge problem for you, how can you know what is right? Perhaps one of the most moral governments ever to exist on the planet was Nazi Germany. Everything they did was governed by a moral code comprised of racial purity, honesty and loyalty. Their morality led them to overrun neighbouring countries and enslave the non-Aryan population, imprison the poor, and exterminate the sick, the weak, social misfits and the criminal races (gypsies and jews).
In the face of the rapid expansion of the Third Reich's moral imperative of lebensraum, whose population was the Master Race, other countries, notably the immoral British and the decadent French and later the perverse Russians under the yolk of Stalinist Communism and bourgeois capitalist United States (all of which were controlled by the Jews, naturally) decided to stamp out that great moral government, by then known as Großdeutschland, and their great Führer Adolf Hitler. It is perhaps the greatest tragedy for morality and for mankind that the Third Reich succumbed to the onslaught of such immorality.
Yeah, right.
| Necromis wrote: |
Also, going back a bit to something you stated LD. Atheist is not a negative belief. Regardless of what you think. The meaning of the word has been twisted by Theists. I actually think it was probably coined by Theists in the first place. I mean there are no other words like this for any other persons that do not believe in mythical beings. |
The English word 'atheist' derives from the French athée which means "one who denies the existence of God" and is no older than the 16th century. The assertion that 'atheist' derives from the greek αθεοι which means 'godless' holds not water.
Atheism is a negative belief in that it denies a proposition.
| Necromis wrote: | | You don't have the term Apagonist to describe persons that do not believe in mythical gods like Zeus and Aries. |
That's a word I do not know nor does my dictionary. Perhaps you mean 'apagogist?" It means, one who reduces arguments to absurdity.
In any case Well, you'll just have to prove that the God is just as mythical as Zeus and Aries. While you're at it, you might as well prove that Zeus and Aries are indeed mythical.
| Necromis wrote: | | Additionally not believing in them is not a negative belief either. |
You're right, it isn't, but atheism isn't a non-belief is God; it is the disbelief in God.
| Necromis wrote: | | All in all an Atheist, as I have stated before, does not believe what evidence has been supplied to prove the existance of God. They don't believe there can not be one. to an Atheist the existance (sic) of God can be taken as an unproven theory. It is believed by a part of the community but the evidence does not support the conclusion. |
And here you confirm my definition of 'atheist' and contradict yours. Incredulity (disbelief) is not the same as skepticism (non-belief).
_________________
Misanthrope: someone who realizes that humans really are as stupid as they appear.
If you think I'm 'politically' incorrect you have the wrong politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Necromis
Lifeless on my Boat
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 815
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
LD, the term was made up. I took the Pagon lable for those believing in pagon gods such as Zeus...and added the A to it like Theiest and Atheist. Additionally I have not contradicted myself. Nothing in my statement says that Atheists believe there can be no God. I have stated all along that is not the belief of Atheists. Atheists simply don't believe the evidence supplied by Theists as proof. Atheist, as a term, has been warped from the start by Theists so that it can be pushed down. Just like the term Nigger was coined from Negro to insult African-Americans/Blacks. The definition does not equal what a true Atheist believes. I will grant you that there are those within the Atheist group that do believe that God cannot exist. However, as a majority that is not the case.
Nazi Germany is a perfect example of taking something that is good to an extreme. They took Moral right and made it a holy war of sorts. This is the same mentality that is shown in the extremists within the Islamic religion who are killing people to have them worship Allah.
The problem with your arguement on my extrapolation is that the heart of that deceit goes all the way up to the Pope within the Catholic faith. I could agree that it is a minority, and a small faction of believers, IF the Pope would have come out and said here are the bad apples within our church, we have expelled them and they do not represent our beliefs. Yes they could have still supplied legal council and support, and help for their rehabilitation, but removed them from their positions of power. Instead the Catholic Church and the Pope try to cover it up, and turn it around on the victems. Either religion is false, or it is full of corruption to the top including the Pope, and considering the amount of power and money controled by the church I am thinking the later is true. Though that part of topic does splinter off from our topic a bit. I did want to address it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
clpo13
Zarkin' frood
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Posts: 1210
Location: Washington
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| linuxdoctor wrote: | | For one thing if you knew God existed you'd start learning Latin and convert to (traditional) Catholicism because only Traditional Catholic get to heaven. |
I'll take that as a half-joke, but it still assumes I want to get into heaven. At any rate, as you said, the degree to which my life changes depends on what importance I put on the things I learn. As I don't find belief in God very important, I think it's safe to say that I wouldn't be that much different if God revealed himself to everyone. Perhaps I'm wrong, but the only way to know for certain how I'd react is if there really was undeniable proof of God's existence. And we all know there's simply no such thing. Even if you believe that there is a huge amount of proof in God, you have to admit it's clearly deniable, else there wouldn't be any atheists.
It's really all about your priorities. My priorities involve improving the human condition, and I don't believe that requires belief in a deity. If a person's priorities include getting into heaven, then they would put a higher importance on God's existence.
_________________
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." --Thomas Jefferson
[img:cd1c8454aa]http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/clpo13/anothersig1.jpg[/img:cd1c8454aa] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
drath
D
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 1708
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm definately not reading through all that especially since it's half linuxdoctor's retorts, which are shown to be... hmmm... provocational I guess. However, I was once among that people that refered to themself as an atheist; although I actually could be called one by definition:
I don't believe in any God or Gods.
I reject theism.
However, like I was saying, even though I am one by definition, I like to use a new word and particular ideal I have come apon recently. Hylotheist or Hylotheism is the closest thing I have come by to accurately describe my beliefs:
The doctrine of belief that matter is God, or that there is no God except matter and the universe.
I mean, to a certain extent I think it's still BS, but I like saying it more so than atheist when people ask me. There is also quite a lot of metaphysical or philosophical background behind this term, which also leads into pantheism; which is similar, but a more structured belief, which I am fairly against by definition anyway. Even though I still promote myself as not believing in a God or Gods, I would rather much belief in the idea of an abstract God; one of the matter and the the universe.
_________________
The Gamer's Journal | Online Portfolio | Half-Life Library |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
pharmer4
Metallica Fanatic
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1960
Location: Deniliquin, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| linuxdoctor wrote: | | pharmer4 wrote: | As I have said, but you seem incapable of processing I have no faith in anything.
|
Then would you say that you are are a Nihilist? |
I suppose that comes closer than anything to describing my position on the philosophical spectrum, but it is still not an accurate way to describe me. I just take everything at face value, have no belief in anything other than as I perceive it (and by this, I am not referring just to sensory perception, but also cognition and reason), I don't pretend that my life has any particular significance, neither does any other person life. The only significance is to yourself and those who know you (whether they like you or not), and since that is all fleeting, there is no intrinsic value in it.
_________________
For Metal and Rock interviews and reviews, go to www.heavymetalnation.com - You can Contribute too if you want!
http://deniliquin.myminicity.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
linuxdoctor
Infallible Persona
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 1307
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are a number of different perspectives on Nihilism. Yours appears fairly consistent a general description of it. There are also hints of Empiricism in your thought which often leads people into Nihilism for better or worse.
Some authors you may consider reading are Nietzsche and Heidegger especially the latter's Sein und Zeit.
_________________
Misanthrope: someone who realizes that humans really are as stupid as they appear.
If you think I'm 'politically' incorrect you have the wrong politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
pharmer4
Metallica Fanatic
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1960
Location: Deniliquin, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| linuxdoctor wrote: | There are a number of different perspectives on Nihilism. Yours appears fairly consistent a general description of it. There are also hints of Empiricism in your thought which often leads people into Nihilism for better or worse.
Some authors you may consider reading are Nietzsche and Heidegger especially the latter's Sein und Zeit. |
No, I won't be reading them again. Especially Nietzsche - he's a bigger crackpot that Freud, and that's saying something.
_________________
For Metal and Rock interviews and reviews, go to www.heavymetalnation.com - You can Contribute too if you want!
http://deniliquin.myminicity.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
|
|
Forum FAQs 
Knowledge Base 
Memberlist 
Usergroups 
Hosting
Register
Donate 
Profile 
Log in 
