Your thoughts on God

[Retro Rob]

Please understand that most atheists are 'frothing from the ears and mouth' not because they can't accept that people are different then them but because they have been treated so badly by so many theists that it becomes a conditioned response.

It is not that they can't accept that people are different. It is that they are bitter about the fact that others can't accept that they are different.

I hear that, and can see what you mean. Thanks for the clarity.

 

[Agent11]

Even though I am an atheist I really don't like to see atheists tearing at peoples faith like a pack of wolves. Not very classy.

I've been there though, you just have to realize that it isn't very attractive and it doesn't accomplish anything good.

 

[JD50]

Even though I am an atheist I really don't like to see atheists tearing at peoples faith like a pack of wolves. Not very classy.

I've been there though, you just have to realize that it isn't very attractive and it doesn't accomplish anything good.

I would never randomly question someones faith. However, this is the Discussion Club and the thread is about people's thoughts on god. If they don't want their beliefs questioned, they should probably stay away from the thread. I agree people should stay classy about it, but it gets incredibly tiring seeing the same ridiculous arguments from the same people over and over again.

 

[dank69]

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

-Epicurus (341 BC – 270 BC)

God disappeared in a puff of logic hundreds of years before Christ walked the earth.

I thought I rebutted that in post 2.

 

[Retro Rob]

I would never randomly question someones faith. However, this is the Discussion Club and the thread is about people's thoughts on god. If they don't want their beliefs questioned, they should probably stay away from the thread. I agree people should stay classy about it, but it gets incredibly tiring seeing the same ridiculous arguments from the same people over and over again.

I don't mind having my faith scrutinized, but there is a difference between doing that can calling someone stupid for believing.

 

[ThinClient]

I don't mind having my faith scrutinized, but there is a difference between doing that can calling someone stupid for believing.

There's no difference in calling someone stupid for believing (because they are ignorant, really, until truth is presented to them in which case they can better themselves by taking heed or reserve themselves to stupidity by rejecting a logically and reasonably superior argument) and your insults that you throw in threads like this, like you have thrown at me. You're a hypocrite and it's glaringly obvious. You are willingly ignorant on the issues and you're close-minded about the responses you get. You don't really want to discuss this topic, you just want to tell other people how they're wrong and tear down their argument against your religion without being receptive to the superior rationale they bring to the table.

 

[JD50]

I don't mind having my faith scrutinized, but there is a difference between doing that can calling someone stupid for believing.

People aren't stupid for believing, they're just ignorant. By that I mean they're ignoring logic and evidence when it's presented to them.

A good example of what I'm talking about is how in almost every thread regarding religion people have to explain the basics of evolution to you. You usually end the conversation with a very polite "thank you for explaining this to me." Which is great. But then another thread pops up and you act like no one has ever explained evolution to you.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I was joking around with Poofyhairyguy, we've had plenty of pleasant conversations in the past.

Yeah JD50 is good people.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

the superior rationale they bring to the table.

Forum has failed. It was a good idea, but you can stick your dick in someone elses soup in the old forum just as well. I think we should close/merge this one and P&N.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I agree that people definitely do want to believe, but that is in no way shape or form proof of the existence of a god.

Agreed. There is no proof on an existence of God or Zeus or whoever.

But I do see proof that not all faith in a higher power is destructive. It helps some people get past alcoholism, donate to a charity, get through the death of a loved one, keep their family together, etc.

In particular I like one tradition most religions have which is humility before one's deity. I feel like humility is the most lacking trait in the modern era. We are all kings of our private islands.

So my "faith" is based on recognition that being right and knowing the so-called truth isn't everything. It is a calling for me to be a better person.

 

[poofyhairguy]

This is called tolerance.

No. It goes further than tolerance. Reverence maybe, respect certainly.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Forum has failed. It was a good idea, but you can stick your dick in someone elses soup in the old forum just as well. I think we should close/merge this one and P&N.

This forum has not failed, moderation might have gotten a little lax, but if so it is because our discussions have been going so well that it seemed prudent to allow some extra leeway. it is still bounds better then what goes on in P&N or even OT.

But perhaps we should spin this into a new thread. Maybe Moderation has become too lax and we need to tighten it up again? It is something we can discuss.

 

[ThinClient]

No. It goes further than tolerance. Reverence maybe, respect certainly.

I have a festering disdain for religion. I do not respect religion or anyone who subscribes to them (unless the religious person is willing to engage in these kinds of debates and is open-minded enough to consider changing their conclusion based on evidence provided that they may not have thought of or seen before). In fact, I think those who subscribe to religion are deserving of ridicule if they aren't willing to be open-minded on the subject. If they're not willing to change their point of view based on mountains of evidence of evolution (as an example, for the young-earth creationists) or lack of evidence of supernatural, they deserve every vile comment they have coming.

Reverence? Are you joking? The three great monotheistic religions of the world are morally and ethically corrupt and have far too much power in today's society. They are positively RUINING the planet and are far more destructive than any other force on the planet today because they breed close-minded bronze age myth believing brains that are more likely to murder their child (or other adults on a bus or a plane or abortion doctors, etc.) because they think that god told them to. They are stupid enough to justify any morally or ethically corrupt action as long as they believe that their deity is commanding them to do it.

Religion breeds a mentality that does not question, that does not reason, that does not think for themselves. Religion breeds an attitude that nothing matters because I can get my sins forgiven and not be responsible for my actions anymore. Religion breeds ignorance. It is a vile blight on the face of the progress of our species.

 

[Retro Rob]

People aren't stupid for believing, they're just ignorant. By that I mean they're ignoring logic and evidence when it's presented to them.

A good example of what I'm talking about is how in almost every thread regarding religion people have to explain the basics of evolution to you. You usually end the conversation with a very polite "thank you for explaining this to me." Which is great. But then another thread pops up and you act like no one has ever explained evolution to you.

I ask so I can understand why you (generic you) believe in it. Sometimes, people say "evidence", but when talking to them, it's because they're dissatisfied with religious explanations...on these boards, more pointedly.

So that begs the question: "is it really due to evidence, or because you're simply picking a more accepted explanation?". To me, that's not sound reasoning.

In these threads, its the latter question. I think there is a difference between accepting something on its own merits, and accepting it because someone else didn't give you the answer you wanted initially.

I actually am more interested in people's reasons for accepting than actually what it is so that way I can understand them better.

For the record, I think a lot of assumptions are made in evolutionary theory regarding how we actually came to our current form, how we may have lived, communicated, etc, starting from when we first got here, to somewhere around 10,000 years ago up until now.

When were we first able to write? From what I've read, there is no record of fully developed languages dating back no further than about 5,000 years ago.

I think between the mutation of our common ancestor and 5,000 years ago, we simply guess and assume.

I could be wrong, though, as this is only my opinion.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This forum has not failed, moderation might have gotten a little lax, but if so it is because our discussions have been going so well that it seemed prudent to allow some extra leeway. it is still bounds better then what goes on in P&N or even OT.

But perhaps we should spin this into a new thread. Maybe Moderation has become too lax and we need to tighten it up again? It is something we can discuss.

Or perhaps keep religion threads in P&N.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I have a festering disdain for religion. I do not respect religion or anyone who subscribes to them

Yeah, let's keep this crap in P&N. The purpose of this subforum wasn't so you could show your festering. Since religious threads devolve into this kind of crap let's toss them under the bus and back to P&N so they can blight the land somewhere, but not here.

 

[child of wonder]

Everything regarding god has seemed to succinctly biol down to the following exclusive possibilities for me:

1. No god exists. There is no point in subscribing to any religion. Be a good person and enjoy life because it's all you get.

2. God exists and does not care (god with personality) or will take no action against you if you do not worship him (apathetic god with personality or non-corporeal god that exists as energy). There is no point in subscribing to any religion since god is not going to punish you. Be a good person and enjoy life.

3. God exists and will punish you if you do not worship him. God is an asshole and I would choose not to worship an egotistical, vindictive entity that would punish people forever simply for choosing the incorrect religion or not choosing one at all when no compelling evidence exists to support any religion. Be a good person and enjoy life.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I have a festering disdain for religion. I do not respect religion or anyone who subscribes to them (unless the religious person is willing to engage in these kinds of debates and is open-minded enough to consider changing their conclusion based on evidence provided that they may not have thought of or seen before). In fact, I think those who subscribe to religion are deserving of ridicule if they aren't willing to be open-minded on the subject. If they're not willing to change their point of view based on mountains of evidence of evolution (as an example, for the young-earth creationists) or lack of evidence of supernatural, they deserve every vile comment they have coming.

Reverence? Are you joking? The three great monotheistic religions of the world are morally and ethically corrupt and have far too much power in today's society. They are positively RUINING the planet and are far more destructive than any other force on the planet today because they breed close-minded bronze age myth believing brains that are more likely to murder their child (or other adults on a bus or a plane or abortion doctors, etc.) because they think that god told them to. They are stupid enough to justify any morally or ethically corrupt action as long as they believe that their deity is commanding them to do it.

Religion breeds a mentality that does not question, that does not reason, that does not think for themselves. Religion breeds an attitude that nothing matters because I can get my sins forgiven and not be responsible for my actions anymore. Religion breeds ignorance. It is a vile blight on the face of the progress of our species.

I guess I see it as a chicken and egg thing. I think if the three current major Religions didn't exist three or more others would. I think all the worst things you blame on religion- closes mindedness, violence, corruption, ignorance- are not the fault of religion. They are simply the worst parts of the animal we call a human being. All of those things just happened to be expressed in and out of religion because we make religion an important part of our lives.

Just as I don't think we could live without conflict and pain, winners and losers, I also don't think we could live without religion. Even if you pulled a Bill and Ted and communicated your message to every person in the world and they believed you, their children or their children's children would revert back. Some people want to be told what to do, what to believe.

And even in an atheist society you have worship. Worship of the "truth" which can be elusive, worship of the dollar, worship of ones self. It is baked in to the human experience.

So instead pretending we can pull a buffet line on humanity and just pick the parts we like, I chose go focus on the positives of religion. Just like they are an expression of the worst of humanity they are also an expression of the best of humanity. Without religion some people would be less involved helping others, less involved in their communities, less involved with their families. That is a fact and is what I respect, even if it comes with the bad you have a disdain for.

 

[sandorski]

I guess I see it as a chicken and egg thing. I think if the three current major Religions didn't exist three or more others would. I think all the worst things you blame on religion- closes mindedness, violence, corruption, ignorance- are not the fault of religion. They are simply the worst parts of the animal we call a human being. All of those things just happened to be expressed in and out of religion because we make religion an important part of our lives.

Just as I don't think we could live without conflict and pain, winners and losers, I also don't think we could live without religion. Even if you pulled a Bill and Ted and communicated your message to every person in the world and they believed you, their children or their children's children would revert back. Some people want to be told what to do, what to believe.

And even in an atheist society you have worship. Worship of the "truth" which can be elusive, worship of the dollar, worship of ones self. It is baked in to the human experience.

So instead pretending we can pull a buffet line on humanity and just pick the parts we like, I chose go focus on the positives of religion. Just like they are an expression of the worst of humanity they are also an expression of the best of humanity. Without religion some people would be less involved helping others, less involved in their communities, less involved with their families. That is a fact and is what I respect, even if it comes with the bad you have a disdain for.

How would this be manifested? Singing songs to it? Praying to it? Having a Personal Relationship with it?

 

[poofyhairguy]

How would this be manifested? Singing songs to it? Praying to it? Having a Personal Relationship with it?

No, it is manifested when people run around like smug son of a bitches and look for an opportunity to shove it down the throats of ignorant non-believers.

For example, I believe the evolution debate would have simmered down years ago if the atheist and scientist community could stomach some sort of "yeah yeah God did everything THROUGH evolution" compromise. But no, many in that community feel evolution is the "truth" that disproves God and religion so they refuse to compromise. So then evolution got entrenched as the "anti-god" position and we have stupid people in 2013 thinking man walked with dinosaurs because to believe otherwise means God isn't real. If the atheists were truly a new form of enlightened man they would look at the big picture and realize 90% of the truth is better than 0%.

 

[sandorski]

No, it is manifested when people run around like smug son of a bitches and look for an opportunity to shove it down the throats of ignorant non-believers.

For example, I believe the evolution debate would have simmered down years ago if the atheist and scientist community could stomach some sort of "yeah yeah God did everything THROUGH evolution" compromise. But no, many in that community feel evolution is the "truth" that disproves God and religion so they refuse to compromise. So then evolution got entrenched as the "anti-god" position and we have stupid people in 2013 thinking man walked with dinosaurs because to believe otherwise means God isn't real. If the atheists were truly a new form of enlightened man they would look at the big picture and realize 90% of the truth is better than 0%.

How could such a compromise be Scientific?

Scientifically speaking, one side has been repeatedly wrong on such matters. Why compromise with a side that has no verifiable facts pertaining to an issue?

Sorry, there's no room for compromise here. What's true is true, hell, even a Believer will agree with that statement. That's the point we can agree on and the only point, if need be. Accepting a compromise that stifles the search for truth merely dooms us to ignorance.

No thanks.

 

[poofyhairguy]

How could such a compromise be Scientific?

The whole thing? It couldn't be. But the whole thing doesn't have to be endorsed by all scientists, just not rejected with a passion. Say a "yeah yeah that is possible maybe." Move on.

Work it right and eventually only the scientific part ends up in the textbook and overall you have less ignorant people.

As you pointed out in your post, if you stick to "they are wrong and I am right" you are no better than the Christian evangelists. At the end of the day what matters is net positive benefit.

What would you rather- people having a kindergarten appreciation of evolution but still accepting it or people teaching their kids the people walked with the dinosaurs in 2053?

 

[ThinClient]

No, it is manifested when people run around like smug son of a bitches and look for an opportunity to shove it down the throats of ignorant non-believers.

For example, I believe the evolution debate would have simmered down years ago if the atheist and scientist community could stomach some sort of "yeah yeah God did everything THROUGH evolution" compromise. But no, many in that community feel evolution is the "truth" that disproves God and religion so they refuse to compromise. So then evolution got entrenched as the "anti-god" position and we have stupid people in 2013 thinking man walked with dinosaurs because to believe otherwise means God isn't real. If the atheists were truly a new form of enlightened man they would look at the big picture and realize 90% of the truth is better than 0%.

Why would a scientific mind accept "god did it through evolution" when there's no evidence that god did anything through any method?

Positive claims require evidence provided by those making the positive claim. Don't got evidence? Okay, let's work on why you have a hypothesis in the first place. Are you just crazy? Are you just making stuff up? Are you delusional? Most of the time, the religious fall under the last category.

You can claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster touched his noodly appendage to the surface of the earth to start evolution but that doesn't mean that the claim is true -or even worthy of being believed. It's deserving of ridicule because it's ridiculous.

 

[ThinClient]

How could such a compromise be Scientific?

Scientifically speaking, one side has been repeatedly wrong on such matters. Why compromise with a side that has no verifiable facts pertaining to an issue?

Sorry, there's no room for compromise here. What's true is true, hell, even a Believer will agree with that statement. That's the point we can agree on and the only point, if need be. Accepting a compromise that stifles the search for truth merely dooms us to ignorance.

No thanks.

Why compromise with a side that not only has no verifiable facts pertaining to the issue, but is habitually wrong on every single issue where it has tried to assert itself in the past?

 

[railer]

I'm a fence-sitting agnostic so I accept the possibility of some kind of creator for mankind or even this particular universe.

But I've yet to see anything beyond faith to support the truth of any particular religion, and I certainly would not bow to a creator that torments you eternally for eating bacon. Mmmm, bacon

I'm with Dave. I kind of went along with the Christianity idea until I was in my mid-20's, when I took some world history courses, and started looking at different religions of the world. When you start to realize that roughly 80% of the population of the Earth are non-Christian, and think about all the billions and billions of people who have been on this earth over the past thousands of years who not only were not Christian, but had never even heard of Christianity, then the whole notion of heaven and hell and a Christian God becomes quite absurd. I realize that many of these other religions have their own version of God....but it isn't the same god, it's a different, made up God. It's pretty clear to me now that they're all made up gods...and our Christian god is no different....no more real than the Easter bunny or Santa or Zeus or Thor.