Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

o0shotty0o wrote:From my experiance people who dont belive in something e.g god , allah or whaterver , are a shell of a person with no confidence.I feel sorry for people who dont at least belive in something.

This is the whole reason Athiest and religous folk dont mix sly digs when ever they can. Me im an Agnost.

htj wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:

htj wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:From my experiance people who dont belive in something e.g god , allah or whaterver , are a shell of a person with no confidence.I feel sorry for people who dont at least belive in something.

Just wanted this post to come up again. Made me dead happy.

Can almost feel his next ban coming up can't you?

Being an empty shell of a person, I feel nothing.

I rest my case.

I believe something called the Anthropic Principle explains your stance rather well.

Exactly, everyone would do well to at least consider that the more we understand through science, historicaly it would seem, the less God is needed in terms of explanation. It is one thing for someone to have faith in a higher power, but if that person cannot accept that it is plausable that God does not 'need' to exist, then they are willfully ignorant and thus discredited.

I personlly like the idea of some higher power, some sort of collective consiousness or elevated state of conciousness (although I do reject most so called religious dogmas so i guess i hover somewhere between agnostic and athiest), however, given what we know about about our human condition and the universe around us, there is at least a 50% chance that we are simply consiousness experiencing itself and there is nothing more.

In other words, when there is lack of empiracal evidence in which all can test and reach the same conclusion then once must accept there is an equal probability that any scenario is as likely as the other.

I tend to lean toward the idea that in this case the adsence of evidence is indeed the evidence of absence (at least in the sense of the a monotheisitic being), but i recognize there are others who feel they have empirical evidence based on personal experience that their God is real, so I will leave that debate alone

I think i am trying to say i dont trust anyone who says anything is for certain.

Nietzsche didn't actually believe god was literally dead (far as I know he never even believed there was a god). His statement was more an examination about the collapse of Europe's traditional moral system which revolved around god and that was falling apart because the scientific revolution and shifts in human morality and thought were figuratively 'killing god' in the human imagination.

This I think is figuratively true. God is not as relevant anymore as a cultural idea as he used to be especially not in the exploration of morality which has shifted to being less theocratic and more scientific. This however I think is a mainly Western trend confined to Europe and the US (and some other places). Not all religions have a God divined morality system and plenty of places in the world still define morality heavily within a religious context (Middle East anyone?).

biccat wrote:I'm not aware of any religious traditions that personify evil as a woman, and Satan is used as a masculine noun in Hebrew.

There is a European cultural tradition in the middle ages that the whole Eden thing was Eve's fault but I don't think idea holds much sway anymore and am unsure how much it held to begin with. Lilth, though always more of a backstage presence, is also only notable female commonly thought of as 'demonic' in the Christian tradition that I know of.

The evolution of 'evil' in the Christian tradition though is quite the fascinating subject

I tend to lean toward the idea that in this case the adsence of evidence is indeed the evidence of absence

Normally I like that episode of the Boondocks because its completely hilarious, but I hate how that line has perpetuated and been misused especially as 'evidence' of something that is completely unverifiable in the first place.

o0shotty0o wrote:From my experiance people who dont belive in something e.g god , allah or whaterver , are a shell of a person with no confidence.I feel sorry for people who dont at least belive in something.

As you grow up and mature you will find this to not necessarily be true. It goes both ways.

This is coming from someone who does believe in God.

o0shotty0o wrote:

htj wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:

htj wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:From my experiance people who dont belive in something e.g god , allah or whaterver , are a shell of a person with no confidence.I feel sorry for people who dont at least belive in something.

Just wanted this post to come up again. Made me dead happy.

Can almost feel his next ban coming up can't you?

Being an empty shell of a person, I feel nothing.

I rest my case.

Yeah, you'd best do that. We'll let the jury decide on the verdict, 'kay?

htj wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:

htj wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:

htj wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:From my experiance people who dont belive in something e.g god , allah or whaterver , are a shell of a person with no confidence.I feel sorry for people who dont at least belive in something.

Just wanted this post to come up again. Made me dead happy.

Can almost feel his next ban coming up can't you?

Being an empty shell of a person, I feel nothing.

I rest my case.

Yeah, you'd best do that. We'll let the jury decide on the verdict, 'kay?

Incase you did not see , i already did ...

Somebody said, earlier in the thread that religious discussion never ends well.
It is possible but it does depend on how mature you both approach the subject and also the participents level of respect for one another. But I would definitely recommend that you stay well away from anyone who has an insecurity issue pertaining to their belief system and who's belief's are something that they grew up with. They can and often do kick off when they realise that they are talking to someone who knows, intimately, how to hold thier own in a debate. Also I would just like to say how pleasantly surprised I am of how mature you lot have spoken on this thread. It just goes to show that a debate such as this one is possible after all when handled in an intelligent way by people who are secure in their own belief's.

Normally I like that episode of the Boondocks because its completely hilarious, but I hate how that line has perpetuated and been misused especially as 'evidence' of something that is completely unverifiable in the first place.

Yeah, I was giving a nod to the boondocks, as i recently watched that episode but of course the concept has been around for a while and i think that exact phase was coined by donald rumsfeld or someone in bush administration during the whole iraq war/ 9/11 fiasco.

A relevant and apropos quoting, Muhr. I'm not going to get further involved in this nonsense.

htj wrote:A relevant and apropos quoting, Muhr. I'm not going to get further involved in this nonsense.

Good , because you were makeing alot of nonsense

thedude wrote:

Normally I like that episode of the Boondocks because its completely hilarious, but I hate how that line has perpetuated and been misused especially as 'evidence' of something that is completely unverifiable in the first place.

I was giving a nod to the boondocks, as i recently watched that episode but of course the concept has been around for a while and i think that exact phase was coined but donald rumsfeld or someone in bush administration during the whole iraq war/ 9/11 fiasco.

It's definitely be around a while. I think I'm like most people and first became acquainted with it because of the Boondocks which brought the idea into popular culture. Oddly by introducing the idea in the reverse... Which has its own complications... And by mocking W Bush Jr. in a way that was actually clever

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote: Who actually says that in a sensible conversation?

Any thread involving Dawkins is not, cannot, and will never be "sensible."

Why?

I think he is a sensible bloke. He wouldn't have been made professor of the public understanding of science in a world top 5 university if he wasn't would he?

Sure you can criticize him all you like, and I can fully understand why Religious people hate him, but really they just say silly things about him, call him stupid and ignorant, when he is clearly neither.

With his track record, you cant possibly call him "stupid" or "illogical" with any credibility surely? I'm willing to wager he has a higher IQ then 99% of the people that call him names.

mattyrm wrote:

KingCracker wrote:I do see God fading slowly in America, specially outside the Bible Belt as its called. It really depends on where your at in the States, to show you how faithful people are. I personally believe something had a hand in creating what is on this planet, but what that was Ive no idea. Im open to ideas and such, but I just cant shake that feeling that we werent accidents

Damn straight.

My missus, all of her family and all of her friends (California) get almost as pissed off with the BB as I do.

As far as she can tell, the US really should be split into two separate countries. My missus would be more than happy to see the bible belt bugger off and make its own country, she feels like they have absolutely nothing in common and there isn't any point in pretending otherwise and frankly so would I.

Ask yourself this, who do centre left leaning democrat voting Americans have more in common with? Europeans/British people or their fellow countrymen?

None of my missus Dem voting family are anti social medicine, pro-gun, anti-abortion, creationists who like teaching supposed controversys, Humvees and shooting bears with chain-guns, and funny thing nobody I ever met in France is either.

And far be it from me to stick up for a Frenchie!

Don't worry, the mouthbreathing Bible belt would be happy for you guys to leave. Just take your nanny state with you when you go.

We already left mate, she moved here.

Ironically we hit and killed a whale when we were driving our electric car across the Ocean.

mattyrm wrote:I think he is a sensible bloke. He wouldn't have been made professor of the public understanding of science in a world top 5 university if he wasn't would he?

I'm not sure that there's any correlation between his sensibility and position. He's obviously intelligent (at least in his field) and a good author and marketer, but I think he's abrasive and demeaning, at least when it comes to religion.

mattyrm wrote:Sure you can criticize him all you like, and I can fully understand why Religious people hate him, but really they just say silly things about him, call him stupid and ignorant, when he is clearly neither.

With his track record, you cant possibly call him "stupid" or "illogical" with any credibility surely? I'm willing to wager he has a higher IQ then 99% of the people that call him names.

I'm not sure if you misread my post, are inferring something from it, or are making a separate point.

First, I didn't say Dawkins is stupid or illogical, those are characteristics he attributes to religious beliefs and believers. Second, I don't think that non-believers are stupid or irrational. I believe that intelligent rational people can disagree on a number of things, not the least of which is religion. A lot of people, Dawkins especially, disagrees with this position.

Finally, I don't care if you believe the same things as I do. Whether you are Christian, Hindu, Jewish, or Buddhist, most religions impose some sort of divine retribution if you do not accept their teachings. The heart of evangelicalism is a desire to "save" the non-believers from a sense of altruism. I simply don't care enough about other people to want to save them from their own mistakes.

biccat wrote:[qI simply don't care enough about other people to want to save them from their own mistakes.

Well, we can heartily agree on something there old chap!

o0shotty0o wrote:

htj wrote:A relevant and apropos quoting, Muhr. I'm not going to get further involved in this nonsense.

Good , because you were makeing alot of nonsense

I smell troll.

I'm fething glad I don't believe in anything, I don't want religion in my life. I like to live my life to my rules, and the governments rules are enough to live to. Religious rules are just plain unnecessary. Look at all those religious wars...

Before the inevitable flaming starts, I didn't say this to upset religious people. It's just my point of view.

biccat wrote:I simply don't care enough about other people

Very Christian of you....

The problem is the lack of liberal christianity - that's dying. Fundy Freevangelicals are proliferating. They don't have birthcontrol, reject evolution and THERES MORE OF THEM!

Like catholicsm in theroy with reproduction, but actually in practice!

Nope, I'm still alive and kickin.

Phototoxin wrote:Like catholicsm in theroy with reproduction, but actually in practice!

I LOL'd. My wife (raised catholic) would appreciate this. But you forget, once Catholics get married they make up for the use of contriceptions during college and atone by having kid after kid after kid after kid....

so AS an active Christian. lemme throw my $.02 in here.

you are all correct. all of you. faith is a personal gig. faith in nothing, and faith in something, is still faith.

the fallacy that exists in the western logic of christianity is wrong. VERY wrong.

our purpose, is not to convert people. ours is to follow Christ's example, and if someone searches for that, and desires that, we are encouraged to help guide them as best we can.

that being said, yes, I serve in an outreach ministry. my readings on the teachings and ministry of Christ are, go to the people, and be you.

so everyone who says you hate christians, I completely concur with that. I have a sever distaste for the vast majority of hate spewing ignorant so called christians. I do not consider myself to be one of them.

so, in the words of my great master: Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

Phototoxin wrote:The problem is the lack of liberal christianity - that's dying. Fundy Freevangelicals are proliferating. They don't have birthcontrol, reject evolution and THERES MORE OF THEM!

Like catholicsm in theroy with reproduction, but actually in practice!

I don't know if that really sums it up. The rising fundamentalism of many American Christians at least is in part a smaller piece of the large conservative political backlash occurring over the past 30 years. Ironically, people like Dawkins running around saying "There is no god. We've proven him wrong" does not foster in Christianity a generous outlook towards the world and only makes them delve deeper into fundamentalism. I haven't researched it much, but Europe actually seems to be having a problem with rising Christian militant movements. My mother is utterly convinced that everyone is out to get Christians and that we're heading towards a Christian holocaust and many of the people at her church are the same.

The idea that if religion disappears all these problems cease is a pipe dream because religion exists in a larger cultural context, not a void or bubble. Rather than being upset at these groups as why they are doing what they do. The answers to that question extend outside of religious belief into a broader political/cultural context.

Crazy people are crazy and only the crazy think they aren't crazy (hyperbole). In this case, yhe question isn't why are there crazy people in the world but why people are acting crazy

I can't say as I've heard of these rising Christian militant movements in Europe, LordofHats. Could you cite some sources on that?

To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

Gods don't live, they are.

biccat wrote:I'm not aware of any religious traditions that personify evil as a woman, and Satan is used as a masculine noun in Hebrew.

Lilith, Kali and Tiamat spring immediately to mind. I mean, Tiamat is the only one that "personifies" evil, or chaos, but the other two are at least synonymous with negative things.

htj wrote:I can't say as I've heard of these rising Christian militant movements in Europe, LordofHats. Could you cite some sources on that?

The guy who just pulled all that crazy crap in Norway is what got my attention. He acted as an individual, but has caused a stir about certain fringe Christian groups in Western Europe who have some... extreme ideas. Like I said I haven't had time to read much into it. Right now, from what I understand, it is very very fringe but has been gaining more notice and attention slowly over the past decade (as I understand it).

LordofHats wrote:

Phototoxin wrote:The problem is the lack of liberal christianity - that's dying. Fundy Freevangelicals are proliferating. They don't have birthcontrol, reject evolution and THERES MORE OF THEM!

Like catholicsm in theroy with reproduction, but actually in practice!

I don't know if that really sums it up. The rising fundamentalism of many American Christians at least is in part a smaller piece of the large conservative political backlash occurring over the past 30 years. Ironically, people like Dawkins running around saying "There is no god. We've proven him wrong" does not foster in Christianity a generous outlook towards the world and only makes them delve deeper into fundamentalism. I haven't researched it much, but Europe actually seems to be having a problem with rising Christian militant movements. My mother is utterly convinced that everyone is out to get Christians and that we're heading towards a Christian holocaust and many of the people at her church are the same.

The idea that if religion disappears all these problems cease is a pipe dream because religion exists in a larger cultural context, not a void or bubble. Rather than being upset at these groups as why they are doing what they do. The answers to that question extend outside of religious belief into a broader political/cultural context.

Crazy people are crazy and only the crazy think they aren't crazy (hyperbole). In this case, yhe question isn't why are there crazy people in the world but why people are acting crazy

thge bolded comment is not limited to your mother. its actually founded in scripture. Christsians were told we would be pursecuted and eventually would be hunted down. thats actually there.

here is the interesting thought though, she is right.

think about it, this entire thread (not its actual intent but the summary) is the discussion really on whether or not Christianity is dead. try telling the Muslim's Allah is dead. see what happens.

Christianity is most certainly under attack..... but mostly from its own people. this unblessed ignorance is breeding the idea of hatred towards the christian community. remember when christians were thought of as mellow friendly people? now look at what these morons are doing. blowing up a childrens day camp in the name of Christ? REALLY!?! Christ said "blessed are the children".... not "thou shalt commit genocide wrongly"

we most certainly are under attack, but we kind of deserve it. its time for a christian revolution. people need to get off their high horses, and on their knee's.

Soladrin wrote:To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

Gods don't live, they are.

That is not dead which can eternal lie
And with strange aeons even death may die