patrick.net

marcus says

Here:

You are right. If we take the fact that we can not know whether there is a God as an axiom,

Then the statement God exists is false.

My point:

The statement God does not exist is equally false.

PersainCAT says

The only "logic" that u can hold hard fast to and apply to god are things like Pascal's Wager. Everything else is faith.

You would be hard pressed to find me trying to use logic to prove God's existence or non existence.

My truth is that I don't know.

To the extent that I lean a little toward the belief side of agnosticism is really about my personal subjective beliefs, that I have no interest in arguing for.

All I have argued here (and evidently not very well), is against the idea that believing there is no God can be backed logically.

That is in this thread, I have only wanted to address something very very very specific.

And that was an assertion I have heard (multiple times) that essentially said, that since by definition we don't know whether there is a God, the statement God exists is false.

But the statement God does not exist is just as false (at least if we are truly using anything close to formal logic).

That's it. That's really the context in which I brought up the term "simple logic."

And again, my truth is that I don't know. Call me wishy washy wimpy relativist. But at least I am on extremely solid ground when I assert that I don't know.

I have problems with fundamentalists who think that others should have beliefs like theirs, and when they judge others. But it is somewhat understandable, or at least not surprising

But when an atheist takes the extreme position that they can prove that there is no God, and that any type of spiritual belief is bad, and that others need to be like them to improve the world, and they assert that it is their intelligence and logic that brought them to their beliefs rather than mostly ego, I figure they must be kidding (or trolling).

(which makes me a fool to respond,...right ?)

It just doesn't seem possible to me that any half way sensible person could be that arrogant.

marcus says

But when an atheist takes the extreme position that they can prove that there is no God, and that any type of spiritual belief is bad, and that others need to be like them to improve the world, and they assert that it is their intelligence and logic that brought them to their beliefs rather than mostly ego, I figure they must be kidding (or trolling).

1. The position that you can disprove a ridiculous hypothesis is not extreme.

2. Any type of spiritual belief is bad. Spiritual belief is just a euphemism for superstitious belief. And we have explained in detail why superstitious beliefs are bad. To remind you, they are bad because they promote irrationality, xenophobia, and bad decision-making. This is especially bad when we need rational behavior to prevent WWIII and to make sure we don’t destroy our planet’s ecosystem.

3. Atheists have never, ever claimed that others must be like us. It is a nonsensical claim since all atheists have in common is disbelief. There is as much variety in the population of atheists as there is in theists. What we have claimed is that the world would be a much more secure, safe, and free place if people stopped believing in Bronze Age myths and started thinking critically. And we have repeatedly proven this as well. For example, Bush said, “god told me to invade Iraq.” The result: about a million dead Iraqis including women and children.

4. It is reasoning that causes someone to become an atheist. And no matter how many times you hypocritically accuse atheists of being arrogant, you Marcus, are clearly the arrogant one.

Arrogant: The idea that man is made in the image of god.
Arrogant: The refusal to accept that man is descendant from monkeys, rodents, fish, etc.
Arrogant: The idea that your so important that your consciousness must continue to exist after you die even though there are no other animals on this planet that get that privilege. Hell, I say puppies are far more worthy!
Arrogant: The idea that a supreme that created the universe would take the time to listen to your petty little wants when you pray.
Arrogant: That there is anything at all special about your existence or the existence of mankind. The refusal to admit that even a tiny change in history a few million years ago, say a rodent getting eaten by a dinosaur 70 mya, would have prevented our species from even existing.
Arrogant: The refusal to listen to logic no matter how clearly it is explained.
Arrogant: The refusal to accept hard evidence including fossils, DNA, and carbon dating.
Arrogant: The presumption that your belief in some crazy shit should some how be respected more than someone’s belief in other crazy shit like aliens landing in Roswell or the Lock Neck Monster.
Arrogant: The presumption that religious people are more moral than atheists even though the religious are good out of fear of punishment and desire for a reward.
Arrogant: The belief that you could ever do anything to earn eternal bliss.
Arrogant: The belief that anyone else could ever do anything so terrible as to earn eternal torture.
Arrogant: The belief that your god is the one and only god.
Arrogant: Trying to convert others to worship your god instead of theirs when you have no evidence or reasoning that your god is better.
Arrogant: Claiming to have an absolute truth without a shred of evidence.
Arrogant: Claiming to have the power to forgive sins.
Arrogant: Claiming to speak on behalf of the alleged supreme being.
Arrogant: Subjecting children to brainwashing and abusing their natural trust of adults.
Arrogant: Creating dogma.
Arrogant: To use the Bible to justify slavery.
Arrogant: To look at the Milky Way galaxy, composed of some 400 billion stars, and the trillions upon trillions of other galaxies in a universe that is 13.8 billion years old and an estimated 90 billion light years in size, and conclude that all of this was created for man, the one beloved creature of god. How self-centered in the most literal sense.

No, Marcus, it is you and your brethren who are arrogant. Atheism is the humble philosophy that all of existence doesn’t revolve are you, and that you should be grateful for the tiny flickering of consciousness you get in a much larger time scale in which you don’t exist. For you to call us arrogant is the most ludicrous example of hypocrisy mankind has ever seen.

Even Dan has a

Dan8267 says

tiny flickering

Dan8267 says

you should be grateful

Wow. Interesting. Well said. I guess he's grateful to the universe. "Thank universe, I exist."

He's still an idiot though. And by the way, Dan, I agree that many atheists are humble (unlike you). But those many don't go beyond asserting what they believe, or actually, only what they don't believe.

Dan8267 says

you and your brethren

What is my position Dan ?

I'm just the objective agnostic, observing the ridiculously religious atheist you are.

Dan8267 says

There is as much variety in the population of atheists as there is in theists.

True, and you are to athiests what a islamic fundamentalist (or extreme Christian fundamentalist) is to the theists.

Dan8267 says

Any type of spiritual belief is bad.

Dan8267 says

your so important that your consciousness must continue to exist after you die even though there are no other animals on this planet that get that privilege.

I don't believe this, and I guarantee that many adult Christians either outright don't believe it, or they at least seriously doubt it.

Here's the biggest flaw in your "logic."

On the one hand, not only do you not believe in God ( the true humble atheist position), you take it further, asserting there is no God, and that you magically know that the bad done by religion is greater than the good. Apparently, your argument here is that there is bad, therefore it is greater than the good.

On the other hand, since you don't believe, you don't really know what an adult belief in God would be. You haven't experienced it. You haven't tried it on for size. Or if you did it was a silly childish view of heaven, and of sky Daddy etc.

Well congratulations if you can reject that. I'll give you this. You understand the flaw here, so you assert that any kind of belief other than the sky Daddy belief is no belief at all.

But if you read the writings of famous Catholic, Protestant or Jewish mystics you will find that their belief is nothing like a belief in a sky Daddy. They are mostly blown away by the *mystery and they believe there is something (besides the universe itself - although you might think of it that way) that we don't have words for, that is both external to them and internal, which is where they direct their gratitude.

Where is your gratitude directed Dan ?

(note: my use of the word mystery is not meant to imply a substitute for uderstanding or seeking scientific knowledge - but what kind of fool thinks that humans could get to a place where there is no mystery to our universe and our own existence ?)

Dan8267 says

This is especially bad when we need rational behavior to prevent WWIII and to make sure we don’t destroy our planet’s ecosystem.

If you had any common sense at all, and a little less ego, then you would be arguing only against the most ignorant fundamentalist point of view.

I'm guessing you have no clue how many mainstream Christians would agree with you.

Instead you want to alienate them, supposedly in your quest to positively influence the world ?

marcus says

Dan8267 says

your so important that your consciousness must continue to exist after you die even though there are no other animals on this planet that get that privilege.

I don't believe this, and I guarantee that many adult Christians either outright don't believe it, or they at least seriously doubt it.

Wow, you don't even understand the position you are defending. Well, I can't say I'm completely surprised.

Yes, adult Christians do believe in the soul and heaven. That's the whole draw of religion. To deny this is just plain silly. It's like claiming that Christians don't really believe that Jesus Christ is god. If they don't, they aren't really Christians. Of course, I suspect that quite a few so-called Christians are simply atheists who don't have the will or desire to rock the boat in their community.

Dan8267 says

we need rational behavior to prevent WWIII and to make sure we don’t destroy our planet’s ecosystem.

Dan,

If all life is just an accident with no real purpose, than why shouldn't we destroy our planet's ecosystem? It's all ultimately meaningless. Isn't it arrogant to say that life is better than non-life? If everything you assert on this forum is true, why value anything at all?

For most of us, life is a miserable and bitter struggle. And its ultimately all for naught, since we just die anyway. Why delay the inevitable? Why shouldn't we all just commit suicide?

If you belive that your life is ultimately insiginificant (and that it's arrogant to think otherwise), than why not just kill yourself now? Especially since religions make your life so miserable...

wthrfrk80 says

If all life is just an accident with no real purpose, than why shouldn't we destroy our planet's ecosystem? It's all ultimately meaningless.

Life is an emergent property of the universe. The fact that life exists on Earth rather than Mars or Venus is due to blind luck. If you want to call that an accident then fine. It’s not an accident like a car wreck, but an accident like winning the lottery.

Just because life isn’t planned by some higher being doesn’t make it meaningless. How many babies are the result of unplanned pregnancies? Does that make their lives meaningless?

If your grandfather decided to piss in a restaurant instead of holding it, he would have taken a different cab to work, and would have arrived later, and would have never run into your mother on the elevator. That is a very chaotic and random series of events, and had not every one played out exactly as they did, your grandparents would have married other people and you would not exist. So, yes, your very existence is due to random and completely unimportant shit happening in the past. Does that make your life meaningless?

The fact is that the difference between existence and non-existence is due to a lot of random and inconsequential things happening. This is true on the level of the individual as well as entire species and even entire worlds. Had our solar system formed slightly differently, we wouldn’t be here because the Earth wouldn’t be here.

wthrfrk80 says

Isn't it arrogant to say that life is better than non-life?

No. Why would it be? And why would it be at all arrogant to have a preference for sentience over non-sentience?

wthrfrk80 says

For most of us, life is a miserable and bitter struggle. And its ultimately all for naught, since we just die anyway. Why delay the inevitable? Why shouldn't we all just commit suicide?

If life were nothing but pain and misery, then suicide would make sense. I’m all for euthanasia and the rights of people to decide whether or not they continue living.

However, life is full of joyful experience. Have you ever rolled around with puppies? Try being miserable while doing that. It’s impossible.

wthrfrk80 says

If you belive that your life is ultimately insiginificant

Why the fuck would I think my life is insignificant? Does life have to be eternal to have meaning? Where’s the logic in that?

Hell, if there were an afterlife and innocent babies went to heaven when they died, we’d have a moral obligation to kill those babies before they could risk their immortal souls and eternal damnation.

The acceptance of the Christian afterlife and a conscience logically dictates the mass murder of babies to ensure their everlasting life in pure bliss. If I’m wrong and you’re right, then morality demands we kill babies. But if I’m right and your wrong, murdering babies is a terrible, terrible thing. The fact that you find the idea of the mass killings of babies to be repugnant, proves that instinctively, you know I’m right and there is no afterlife.

wthrfrk80 says

Especially since religions make your life so miserable...

Religion does not make my life miserable, although the religious evidently do try their best. But religion does make the world a far more dangerous place. Do you want Iran to get the bomb? I fear the irrationality of your religion for the exact same reason you fear the irrationality of Iran’s.

Furthermore, religion has hampered scientific, technological, social, and political advancement that would save countless lives and improve the living conditions of all people. If it hadn’t been for Christianity holding science back for a thousand years, we’d already have the cure for all cancers.

Good points all around.

I get what you're saying about "chaos" and sensitivity to "initial conditions." I'm both a meteorologist and mechanical engineer by training (I majored in both). If I remember right, "chaos theory" doesn't imply randomness, just determinism that is extremely sensitive to the initial state. Did you ever see that halloween episode of The Simpsons where Homer builds a time machine out of a toaster? Home keeps messing up the "present time" by stepping on bugs millions of years ago.

Dan8267 says

Hell, if there were an afterlife and innocent babies went to heaven when they died, we’d have a moral obligation to kill those babies before they could risk their immortal souls and eternal damnation.
The acceptance of the Christian afterlife and a conscience logically dictates the mass murder of babies to ensure their everlasting life in pure bliss. If I’m wrong and you’re right, then morality demands we kill babies. But if I’m right and your wrong, murdering babies is a terrible, terrible thing. The fact that you find the idea of the mass killings of babies to be repugnant, proves that instinctively, you know I’m right and there is no afterlife.

If I remember right, historic Christianity does NOT hold that babies are innocent. Christianity (rightly or wrongly) has the doctrine of "original sin". That's why, until the 1500s, all Christians "baptized" infants, believing that baptism actually worked salvation. It wasn't until the radical Anabaptist movement (google it for more info) that some Christians denied infant baptism.

I can tell you have a better understanding of Christianity than many "Christians!" Your quote above is a very strong refutation of every Christian denomination that denies infant baptism...I had never thought of it that way before!

I really do respect people who understand historic Christianity, even if they reject it themselves. I really have a hard time respecting someone who says "I'm a Christian, but I don't believe all that stuff about Jesus being God, sin, salvation, substitutionary atonement, hell (which Jesus taught), etc.

Yes, Christianity is a radical religion. It's too radical for most people, especially in a country like America. Jesus taught many radical things. As one person said "If Christ came today, the first thing we'd do is kill him again".

The mixing of Christianity and politics is a very toxic thing, I agree. When Constantine converted to Christianity and made it the official religion of the Roman Empire, Christianity went downhill fast. I believe politics to be an inherently satanic game (no matter who is doing it) and it's best to keep politics as far from Christianity as possible.

I really don't understand why so many "conservative" Christains seem to want an American Christian Theocracy. Christianity already tried Theocracy in Europe, and it resulted in a "church" that did all of those nasty things you describe. Like you pointed out in one of your other posts, Christianity has continued to fragment, with each power-hungrly "leader" trying to get his slice of the "pie." Will we humans ever stop trying to conquer Christ's church? How many denominations are there now?

wthrfrk80 says

If I remember right, historic Christianity does NOT hold that babies are innocent. Christianity (rightly or wrongly) has the doctrine of "original sin".

Whether or not the baptizing of the babies before they are murdered washes away original sin is irrelevant. No Christian sect is going to say that unbaptized babies, especially the unborn, are going to rot in hell for all eternally. To make such a claim would be to ensure that no one follows your sect.

As such all Christian sects believe that babies, baptized or not, will eventually go to heaven and have no risk of going to hell. The may differ on the details and the existence of limbo, but that's a minor point when considering all of eternity.

So my point stands. If the Christian afterlife hypothesis is correct, then it is a moral obligation to kill all babies. If the hypothesis is wrong, then it is a moral obligation to not kill all babies. Which conclusions are you willing to entertain? If only the later is acceptable morality to you, then you must deep down realize that there is no heaven.

wthrfrk80 says

I can tell you have a better understanding of Christianity than many "Christians!"

I grow up Catholic being taught by nuns and Christian brothers and had to take extremely boring classes like Church history. I know the teachings and the history of the Christian Church and all of its splits.

wthrfrk80 says

Yes, Christianity is a radical religion. It's too radical for most people, especially in a country like America. Jesus taught many radical things. As one person said "If Christ came today, the first thing we'd do is kill him again".

Christianity was a radical religion when it was started. That's why Christ was crucified. He was a threat to the establishment. After he died, like all rebels, he was cartoonified and incorporated into the state by Constantine, who found Christ useful for manipulating the peasantry of the Roman empire. Had that not happened, Christianity would not even exist. But when that happened, Christianity ceased being a radical religion and started towing the state line.

And yes, most Christians would reject Jesus today, particularly the fundamentalist. Jesus was a commie true and true. He demanded that you give all your possessions up to follow his way, and the only time he ever got pissed off was at the bankers or money changers as they were called. Christian philosophy is incompatible with capitalism. Yet, the religious right mistakes Gordon Gecko for Jesus. So, what little good Jesus's philosophies have, is lost on most Christians.

wthrfrk80 says

When Constantine converted to Christianity and made it the official religion of the Roman Empire, Christianity went downhill fast.

Make no mistake. Constantine's conversion was pure politics. He remained a pagan his entire life.

wthrfrk80 says

I really don't understand why so many "conservative" Christains seem to want an American Christian Theocracy.

Christian fundamentalists believe in the false premise that if they are extremely religious and evangelical and literally interpret the Bible, then their daughters won't become sluts. The fundamentalist movement came about in response to the sexual revolution. The Bible thumpers thought that cramming down religion would keep their girls from fucking. It didn't work. Rent any Girls Gone Wild video and listen to the accents. All the sluts come from the Bible Belt and the Heartland. You never see someone from an East Coast liberal college in Girls Gone Wild.

You see, it turns out, that making women dumb by using religion or other means turns them into sluts. Whereas, educating women with things like math, science, history, etc. makes them more capable of running their lives, starting careers, and avoiding the stripper pole. That's why you never see engineering majors from MIT or Princeton or even U. of Penn. on Girls Gone Wild. But the fundamentalists are too stupid to realize that teaching evolution rather than denying it would keep their daughters from exposing their pussies on Girls Gone Wild. I suppose that I should thank religion for that, as it's the only contribution to society it has ever made.

wthrfrk80 says

How many denominations are there now?

It is the nature of all religions to grow and fragment as selfish priests fight engage in power struggles for control of the dumb masses. Notice that this never happens in science. Science doesn't have denominations. The physics studied in America is the same that's studied in Russia, Australia, and everywhere else. Science unites, religion divides.

PersainCAT says

Your argument is moot to this point becasue
Technically if u follow the CONCEPTS taught in the bible (protestant) and the catholic church all unbelievers infants or not would go to hell. While most "sects" as u refer to them agree babies go to heaven as the bible doesn't strictly DEFINE one way or the other its not wrong(just unpopular) to have the opinion that babies would go to hell. Just look at St. Augustin, so your claim that ALL denominations agree is wrong.

- Technically if u follow the CONCEPTS taught in the bible (protestant) and the catholic church all unbelievers infants or not would go to hell.

If you go into any church and ask any priest on the record practically all, except for a few crackpots, will say unborn babies who die don't go to hell, nor do babies that die before baptism. Think about it. If a church actually preach that nonsense, it would upset parents who would join a different church the first time they lose a pregnancy, a common event especially before the 20th century.

Thus no church preaches that babies go to hell.

In fact such an absurdity would be ammunition to atheists who would point out what an evil fuck that god must be to do such a thing.

PersainCAT says

Just look at St. Augustin, so your claim that ALL denominations agree is wrong.

Show me the church advertising that shit.

Nonetheless, if babies go to hell, god is evil. If god is evil, he's not god since god has to be "all good".

If babies don't go to hell, my original point stands that the existence of the Christian afterlife would mean that killing babies is a moral imperative. Either way, you're mythology is fucked. That's the problem with contradicting the logical conclusion of your myths.

PersainCAT says

You forget that there's a commandment to NOT kill, even if it would send one soul to heaven. If you truly believe then the moral obligations is to follow gods orders. That trumps a notion that you are sending people to heaven.

Hardly. The morality of saving the souls of countless babies is far outweighs the morality of obeying a god's order. Furthermore, any non-evil god would be morally bound to not cast any such self-less person into hell. To risk ones own soul to save another's is the most moral act a person could possibly make -- that is, it would if the soul actually existed.

Ergo, either once again you accept the wholesale slaughter of babies or you reject the possibility of heaven.

There is no logical loophole you can exploit. The premise of heaven leads to the inescapable conclusion that it is far better for babies to die than live and risk their souls. And therefore, anyone who looks after the best interest of the babies must kill them since 100 years of life on Earth is nothing compare to all of eternity in heaven or hell. And that is why the concept of the afterlife is just plain retarded. And the fact that you are not accepting the logical conclusion means that you disbelieve in the afterlife and thus god as much as I do. And no amount of bullshiting is going to change that.

PersainCAT says

HAHA, keep thinking that science has many "schools of thought" which is effectively a scientific denomination.

Um, no.

Science is universal. It transcends all national, racial, regional, gender, political, social, and economic boundaries. Religion historically has promoted xenophobia and no amount of whitewashing can change that.

PersainCAT says

Economics are a good example Austrian v Keynesian comes to the top of my mind.

Economics is not a science. It should be, but it isn't. Not by a long shot.

PersainCAT says

As for physics as that's my specialty

Yeah, no physicist is going to quote Wikipedia when there are far better resources on the Internet. And your previous posts make me believe that you are a physicist as much as I'm the pope pretending to be an atheist just to mess with people.

That's a quote from you that I was refuting! Geeze, if you are going to contradict yourself, why should we believe you?

liv4ever says

the fact that men have distorted God's word does not make God a liar.

The fact is that men are the voices behind all god puppets. There is no supreme being that speaks for what is morally right. If there were, it wouldn't let "men" treat it like an ass puppet and feed it words.

liv4ever says

“in his image,” that is, the ability and capacity to love.

Meerkats have the capacity to love. Love, like all emotions, was created by evolution.

liv4ever says

Charles Darwin's nephew was the first one to use the term "eugenics".

Oh yes, Charles Darwin was a Nazi and he burned millions of Jews in ovens. Please, make that argument.

liv4ever says

Animals ARE souls- "And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind." Genesis 1:21

So PETA is right? Meat is murder?

Dan8267 says

After he died, like all rebels, he was cartoonified and incorporated into the state by Constantine, who found Christ useful for manipulating the peasantry of the Roman empire

That's a very interesting claim. Can you prove that?

Dan8267 says

And yes, most Christians would reject Jesus today, particularly the fundamentalist. Jesus was a commie true and true. He demanded that you give all your possessions up to follow his way, and the only time he ever got pissed off was at the bankers or money changers as they were called. Christian philosophy is incompatible with capitalism.

I don't think anyone is out there making the case that Christianity = Capitalism.

As for "Fundamentalist", I don't know what you mean by that. I don't think I've ever met a "fundamentalist." I've met lots of Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, etc.

Dan8267 says

Christian fundamentalists believe in the false premise that if they are extremely religious and evangelical and literally interpret the Bible, then their daughters won't become sluts. The fundamentalist movement came about in response to the sexual revolution. The Bible thumpers thought that cramming down religion would keep their girls from fucking

That's quite a claim. Can you back that up? I think your term "Bible thumpers" says more about you than it says about the "fundamentalist" people you don't like.

liv4ever says

it's not what you and I think that counts, it's what God thinks

That presumes the existence of god, which I and others have thoroughly discredited. And even if you were to take one of those bullshit "impossible to define god" stances, then you couldn't know what such a b.s. god thinks.

More importantly, what man thinks affects his behavior including the behavior of waging wars, using nuclear and biological weapons, protecting or destroying the environment, establishing social justice or totalitarian regimes. So, what man thinks matters.

liv4ever says

Dan8267 says

Arrogant: The belief that your god is the one and only god.

1. most important, what does God believe ?
2.You are guilty of this too aren't you. You essentially say your belief system is the best, because you have thought it over. What is wrong with that thinking and optimizing etc. ?

I would never say that one of my conclusions is best because I thought it over. That is antithetical to my world view. The messenger is irrelevant and the person who cranks out the math is irrelevant. What's important is the argument itself, not who makes it.

liv4ever says

however there is the danger of becoming dogmatic, if that is what you mean. But that goes for atheists as well.

I have yet to meet a single person who was irrationally atheistic. In theory that's possible, but it sure ain't the norm. Now irrational about faith, that's quite common. Why just this morning I was listening to NPR while driving my Volvo to work (yes, I'm a cliché), and on the radio a caller told the story below. I'll have to paraphrase from memory, but I'll get it as close as I can.

I was a little girl and during school one day I made a painting. I was so proud of it I excitedly ran up to the teacher and say, "Look what I created!" The teacher snapped at me, "Only god creates!"

Yep, that's someone I'd like teaching my kids.

wthrfrk80 says

Dan8267 says

After he died, like all rebels, he was cartoonified and incorporated into the state by Constantine, who found Christ useful for manipulating the peasantry of the Roman empire

That's a very interesting claim. Can you prove that?

What would constitute proof to you that Jesus was cartoonified?

wthrfrk80 says

I don't think anyone is out there making the case that Christianity = Capitalism.

Obviously, you haven't been listening to the Republicans for the past 30 years.

wthrfrk80 says

That's quite a claim. Can you back that up?

Yes

Watch the entire episode. It explains where, when, and why fundamentalism started.

wthrfrk80 says

I think your term "Bible thumpers" says more about you than it says about the "fundamentalist" people you don't like.

It says that I, like most people in the world, have no respect for people who behave badly and use religion as a justification for their actions. I reserve the right to pass judgment on assholes, especially assholes who poison the minds of children, bash gays and foreigners, and promote unjust wars.

Dan8267 says

It says that I, like most people in the world, have no respect for people who behave badly and use religion as a justification for their actions. I reserve the right to pass judgment on assholes, especially assholes who poison the minds of children, bash gays and foreigners, and promote unjust wars.

Dan,

Who are you to decide what is bad behavior? Prove it, scientifically. Otherwise, I asume you are just spouting your opinions which are no better than anyone else's. Who are you to judge?

It seems that your secular utopia will be just as "intolerant" and "judgemental" as the Bible thumper utopia.

Who are you to say what's right and wrong? Who made you judge?

Dan8267 says

Obviously, you haven't been listening to the Republicans for the past 30 years.

Right, I haven't been. All politics is bullshit, it's just cynical power games.

Dan8267 says

What would constitute proof to you that Jesus was cartoonified?

Anything. I'm still waiting for something specific. Like a claim that the written accounts of Jesus' life were somehow altered or "cartoonified".

Zlxr says

I don't pretend to define god for anyone other than what I believe - but it has struck me that in order to disbelieve in something - you have to have an idea of what you think it is in the first place

Well said. Exactly.

For example let's say you have some nuanced beliefs that you have cultivated over your entire life, and these are personal beliefs that you can't even describe. And let's also say that tangential to these beliefs, is your membership to a community, that has some traditions and rituals, that I sort of do understand, but I take them literally, and I have rejected these traditions (for myself). But because of my particular emotional and ego makeup, it's not enough for me to reject them just for myself. Like Richard Dawson I come along and say that even though I have almost no clue what it is you believe (I can not relate to these beliefs in the slightest), I am going to tell you that your beliefs are not only wrong, but that all people that have any of an entire class of beliefs of which you beliefs fit, are wrong and are irrational. Furthermore, mankind would be better off if nobody had beliefs like yours.

If I made such claims, as Richard Dawkins and other extremist religious atheists do, I would have to be inconceivably arrogant, or emotionally unhinged (or both), or possibly as Einstein put it, simply still hung up on the process of tearing myself away from religious dogma of my youth.

"The fanatical atheists," Einstein said in correspondence, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'—cannot hear the music of the spheres."

Although Einstein did not believe in a personal God, he indicated that he would never seek to combat such belief because

such a belief seems to me preferable to the lack of any transcendental outlook

(Jammer, Max (2002). Einstein and Religion: physics and theology. Princeton: Princeton University Press)

wthrfrk80 says

Who are you to say what's right and wrong? Who made you judge?

What are you bitching about now? Are you complaining that I think it is wrong to rape and murder? OK, you go out and do those things and then tell a judge who he is to say what's right and wrong.

Wtf does any of that have to do with this thread and Marcus's incorrect argument that the Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment means that there is a god?

In any case, this thread has certainly shown how nasty and mean Christians are. And that's the best argument against your religion one could make.

Try to talk objectively about the existence of god with the faithful and they bring out the pitch forks. And that alone is sufficient reason to not spread the virus of religion to the next generation.

wthrfrk80 says

Dan8267 says

What would constitute proof to you that Jesus was cartoonified?

Anything. I'm still waiting for something specific. Like a claim that the written accounts of Jesus' life were somehow altered or "cartoonified".

Page 1 of the Google image search for "Jesus".

Why the hell is an ancient Middle Eastern man being rendered as a white guy with blue eyes? He's literally fucken cartoonified!

I guess the south wouldn't be as apt to worship the guy if they knew he was a dark brown skin man.

As for Jesus's life events being altered. Well, he didn't have 12 apostles, walk on water, raise Lazarus from the dead, was born of a virgin, or rise from the dead himself. That all was ripped of from the older myth of Horus.

But gay marriage is out of question!

Um, it was the Bible belt that attempted to succeed from the Union and started the Civil War.

Atheists, winning since 300 B.C.E.

Dan8267 says

Marcus's incorrect argument that the Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment means that there is a god?

The funny thing, is that after all the times I clarified, I honestly believe that's his inference of what my point was.

And he wonders why he didn't hear more arguments from me.

Cool Shrekian troll moves dude.

You moderates out there, and right wingers too, please don't think that all liberals are assholes like Dan. I think he wants you to think that.

marcus says

You moderates out there, and right wingers too, please don't think that all liberals are assholes like Dan. I think he wants you to think that.

Wow, I'm the first liberal that wants to see Romney beat Obama in the upcoming election. I'm so far left.

Dan8267 says

It makes no sense for me to argue against your imaginary and paranoid delusions of what you think I believe. I will just say this. I am like a mirror. I reflect the inner image of the person talking to me, only inverted. Right-wing nuts see me as an elite liberal socialist. Left-wing nuts see me as a heartless conservative fascist/capitalist. In both cases, it is the one looking into the mirror that casts the image.

I am orthogonal to the batshit crazy left-right line you and your ultracon counterparts draw. The truth, and my beliefs, does not lie between dumb ass Tea Baggers and dumb ass hippies. No, it lies on the other side of the smart-dumb axis, which evidently runs at a right angle to the left-right axis. So maybe you should stop talking out of your ass about what other people must be thinking, and instead listen and ask questions when you are uncertain.

Yet, I keep having to repeat that. So polarized has our society become.

Dan8267 says

Why the hell is an ancient Middle Eastern man being rendered as a white guy with blue eyes? He's literally fucken cartoonified!
I guess the south wouldn't be as apt to worship the guy if they knew he was a dark brown skin man.

Yes, the presentation of Jesus with blue eyes and blonde hair is pretty ridiculous. In African countries, Jesus is portrayed as someone from Africa. I suppose it's just human nature to think that all humans look like the locals. But that's a whole different topic.

But you claimed that Constantine, specifically, cartoonified him and essentially made up everything about his life, and you have yet to offer any specific evidence for that claim.

The following Pauline Epistles were written between 50 and 60 AD and record the same beliefs of Christians today: First Thesselonians, Phillipians, Philemon, First & Second Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. If there's evidence that Constantine did some "shuck and jive" with those documents, then let's hear it.

Dan,

Believe it or not, I completely agree with you that "God personally told me to do X, Y, and Z" is very dangerous. During the protestant reformation, that kind of thinking was called "enthusiasm" or literally, "god-within-ism".

The following article is by a conservative Christian and is very critical of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry:

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2011/08/19/the-politics-of-enthusiasm/&sa=U&ei=PiAgT6zEPMagsQKxvrScDg&ved=0CBAQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHLhNg7LzlCFajEa-WtrFEEfuFKqw

Not all Christians are Pentecostal wackos.