(July 29, 2017 at 12:44 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:(July 28, 2017 at 8:51 am)Drich Wrote:
uh,no. this line
says you on some level has accepted the personage of God and see Him apart from the construct of God as you first person singularly identified God and his crimes against your sensibilities. This means You blame a deity. If you fully accepted that their was no deity then the blame would shift to the indivisuals who keep this deity going. Which you try to do in the 2nd half of the sentence, but throughout your work when you mention god you mean God not the construct of evil people. for example:
Here "Sky daddy" is the evil monster who wars and genocide you hate, which is separate from the mundane christian who maybe smart enough not to try and convert you. Now if 'Sky Daddy" was a construct of man then in your story His evil would have to be transferred to the believers. After all if 'sky daddy' is evil and not real then it is those who worship that are evil. But you have seperated the evil and awarded it to God. Which means again on some level you acknowledge God
But again if you are going to argue those beliefs then why not actually argue what is believed rather that the BS you use to prop each other up?
I found the oppsite to be true... Maybe that is why I am where I am.
If a deity showed up and prooved himself to you then wouldn't make you the supreme being? If God bends to your will then are you not superior to God? Now if God claims to be the alpha and omega, then by his very nature He will not do that, but rather tell you how to meet up with Him. That He has done. I have followed those directions and I found God as promised.
Say . . . whut? You think because I just claimed that Darth Vader is evil and obsessed with power, I believe Darth Vader is REAL? You think because I claim Voldemort is a narcissistic sociopathic megalomaniac, I believe that Voldemort is REAL? The only difference is that most people don't want to spend their time trying to convince me that these fictional characters are real, and think that they are superior because they believe and I don't.
If a deity showed up and proved it's existence, this would only mean that a being with superior abilities to human kind showed up. Nothing more. And any deity capable of creating billions of galaxies is capable of proving that it exists. Particularly IF it, for some weird reason, wants a bunch of sentient apes to worship it all the time.
You found god? Do you want a medal? Do you want applause? Do you think you're supposed to preach this to the poor ignorant idiots who don't believe he exists? (What a disrespectful asshole.) No real deity needs a human to speak for it. You found god? Bring him to a TV station and have him prove it. Until you can do that, you're wasting your time and ours.
[/quote]
Here's an interesting way to settle this; apparently in brain scans, theists's brain activity is detected in the part of their brain that identifies as 'self' when they talk about their gods. I didn't hear anything about what happens in an atheist's brain when they talk about others' gods but I'd be willing to bet it doesn't trigger the same part of the brain, any more than if we were talking about Darth Vader or Cheech Marin.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.