Those who compare God to the tooth fairy are douchebags. I’m sorry but that is truly how I feel. Without even an ounce of shame they ridicule some of the best and brightest thinkers who take up a problem serious and came to serious conclusion. Kierkegaard, Hegel, Kant, Buber, Kripke, Plantinga, Newton, Leibnitz, Putman, and Godel are/were theists. That list doesn’t even include theologians, like David Bentley Hart, or physicists, like, Francis Collins or Max Planck. All brilliant.

Maybe you don’t realize this but it is possible to be an atheist without acting like an infantile little snark. It’s astonishing to me how such ass-wipes will disrespect the legacies of truly great men and women like Dr. King, Bonhoeffer, and Catherine Booth (founder of the Salvation Army) by pretending that their religious convictions did nothing to motivate and inspire them to change the world.

How can anyone seriously believe that the motivating force to build the very first hospitals is in any way comparable to believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus? Here in Chicago we have Mount Siani, Rush Presbyterian, Illinois Masonic, Loyola, Mercy, Saints Mary and Elizabeth, Saint Anthony...that’s just a start. They came to be because of religious convictions for which you have no respect.

Okay, they're douchebags, but are they wrong? Namedropping doesn;t speak to that, imagining that the people you namedrop are super smart doesn't speak to that. Smart people have dumb ideas. Smart people with dumb ideas still manage to accomplish great things (even dumb people with dumb ideas occasionally hit on something by accident). It's good that we do, frankly, or we'd be in pretty bad shape.

If someones religious beliefs motivate them to do great things, good for them, good for us? That doesn't change the status of their religious beliefs. Attributing the existence of hospitals to religious beliefs, however, is a step too far. Hospitals are and have been built by people who don't share those beliefs, and by people who have no beliefs. No ones religious beliefs ever hammered a single nail.

Respect? Jesus christ you're a privileged lot. Why don't you get some respectable beliefs, rather than trying to siphon respect from respectable people and respectable buildings? Too much to ask?

As I said on a different thread, one of the double standards I see among some people here (not all) is that they are quick to attribute a person's bad actions to their religious beliefs. But when a person does something good after being inspired/influenced by their religious beliefs to do so, all of the sudden religion has nothing to do with that person's actions.

I see you as inherently nice despite your religious views, so it would be tough to give you an attaboy based on your fealty to an imaginary deity.

I think you're a douchebag for believing primitive bullshit.  Now we're even.... except you still think your fucking god is real.

(January 12, 2017 at 11:16 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Those who compare God to the tooth fairy are douchebags.

True that, at least the Tooth Fairy gives you something in return for your belief and sacrifical offerings. When was the last time god ever did anything for anyone?

Oh and you're right on Catherine Booth using her religous convictions in her life. Her convictions told her to set up an organisation using minimal charity work to proselytise a deeply homophobic, migoynist, racist and anti-catholic brand of christianity, so she did.

---

Oh and the fallacy that one's greatness is dependant on their religiosity was definitively put to bed by Msgr. Georges Lemâitre when putting down his pope's insistence that the big bang proved god. I don't have the exact quote to hand but Lemâitre definitively stated that his physics work had no relation to nor any influence from his religious beliefs. No scientist has formulated theory because their religious beliefs gave them inspiration. And, having done actual charity work with a group of nuns, I can be confident that the same is true in the sphere of philantrophy as well.

I think we broke him.

Ever see the nuttiness of Swedenborgism?

http://www.swedenborg.org/Beliefs.aspx

Quote:

• God is infinitely loving and at the center of every life.
  
• Truth is love in action. Actions performed out of love are genuine expressions in a physical form of what love means.
  
• There is one God whose essence is Divine Love and Wisdom. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all aspects of God just as body, mind, and soul are all aspects of one person.
  
• The Bible is the inspired Word of God that provides inspiration and help to lead better and more fulfilling lives. The literal sense of Scripture tells the story of the people of God, and contains a deeper meaning that illumines the journey of the human soul.
  
• People are essentially spirits clothed with material bodies. At death, the material body is laid aside and the person continues to live on in the world of spirit choosing a heavenly life or a hellish one, based on the quality of life choices made here.
  
• God gives everyone the freedom to choose their beliefs and live their lives accordingly. Salvation is available for people of all religions.
  
• The Second Coming has taken place—and in fact still is taking place. It is not an actual physical appearance of the Lord, but rather his return in spirit and truth that is being effected as a present reality.
  
• God is infinitely loving and at the center of every life.
  

What a bunch of schmucks.

I've had a friend join the Alexian Brothers, a Catholic religious order that cares for the sick, and I have no problem with his joining them. It was a good fit for his skills and where he was in life.

I'm reasonably sure he could cite an experience where I was present as a 'calling' to in fact go to the Alexians and serve. The experience didn't have that kind of impact on me in regards to the existence of a deity (in fact, it was actually more the other way) but I would never argue with him about it.

He helped the afflicted and their families to the best of his abilities, he might have also opened some eyes in regards to some other church doctrines that are increasingly archaic these days too.

I also note, as divorced and non-remarried, he was not prohibited from serving in the order, which beats being pressed under stones.

And I also see him as an inherently nice person and that would be regardless of any other religious or non-religious upbringing he might have had in other time lines. Also, were the MCC denomination large enough to have a similar group on their Org Chart as the Catholics do with the Alexians, he most likely would have served with them.

On behalf of infantile little snarks everywhere, I hope Jesus leaves you money the next time you lose a tooth.

Boru