Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 4:10 pm
(October 1, 2009 at 4:22 am)Godless Wrote: Solarwave, I've just spotted this quote at the end of your replies....
“Humanism or atheism is a wonderful philosophy of life as long as you are big, strong, and between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five”
Let me tell you that from personal experience over many years that your line is nonesense.
As an Atheist who is not big (barely 10 stone), nor very strong and is well, well, well past your
age limits, I still find Atheism as attractive to me now as it ever was.
As I approach my end now I know that if I am wrong in my lack of belief then I will
eventually know.....stoking the fires maybe? :-)
The believer on the other hand will die in blissful ignorance if he is wrong.
I find the former condition far more intellectually satisfying to know one's errors than to remain in ignorance of them.
Albert.
The quote doesn't say that all are in that age gap. If that works for you fine, I may change the quote soon anyway. To be honest if I became an atheist I think it would only last till 35 since I believe my motivation for atheism will be gone by then. But thats another topic 
Well to be honest if there is no God and we die and turn to mere dust then what does it matter if it is 'intellectually satisfying', truth would have no absolute value anyway. I very much down that if you go to hell you will be thinking, well at least im intellectually satisfied. Reverse it and if Im right then I am intellectually satisfied and you are ignorant of whether you were right or not. I really dont like promoting religion on fear of death though.
(October 1, 2009 at 8:19 am)Eilonnwy Wrote: I pick these two books because one deals with the scientific aspect of believing in God and how science shows there most certainly is not a God with respect to the Abrahamic God. The second book deals with religion and society and how harmful it is. Two very important aspects to the religion debate.
Science proves there is no God, I would like to hear that. As for the second book I bet he doesn't take into account the good by religion as well.
Quote:First, the magnitude of religions that claim they got it just right and if you don't subscribe to their brand of religion you're damned, and we're talking even withing different Christian denominations.
How does that prove there isn't a God. For me I dont think it is so clear cut as if your a christian or not.
Quote:Then there's the fact that millions of people suffer daily, some Christian, some not, and it's obvious their so called "prayers" go unanswered when their children die of hunger in front of them. I can't believe an omni-benevolent God exists and just watches, meanwhile basketball players will thank God for taking them to the championship game. To me, this simple problem shows me the world works just as you expect it would work without a God.
Is that not just the nature of man and the physical world? Suffering comes as part of living in a physical world and if God stopped every bad thing happening wouldn't it bring the world into chaos? If we didn't know if whether God would stop us everytime we act because it could have a bad consequence. The problem of evil is quite a big one and not one I can answer at the moment. So are you saying that there is no possible reason that a loving God could have from holding back, that you KNOW there is no reason, or are you saying it is just unlikely. Something being unlikely has never stopped it being true.
Quote:The Bible, look closely and it's full of holes and contradictions. Once I started to see all the problems with the Bible and learned how messed up the Gospels of Jesus are, that house of cards fell.
I havn't seen any unexplainable ones.
Quote:Free will versus "everything happens for a reason". This idea that you're in control, but not. All the good things in life are God, all the bad things are your own failings or God is "testing" you.
Can you expand upon this? Im not sure exactly what your saying. Thanks.
Quote:Afterlife, there's no evidence for it. Everything that makes us "us" is attributed to the brain. The science on this is astounding, and I've only skimmed the surface myself. There's absolutely no evidence for a soul.
What possible evidence could there be for a world beyond our own? Near Death Experiences: I dont mean the ones with fuzzy feelings, I mean the ones where someone is brain dead yet when they wake up know things that happened in the room when dead, or other things unknowable while dead.
The soul could be a mirror of the brain. A copy in spiritual form. Or the soul could be the soul be the explaination of consciousness or free will, but this depends upon whetherits possible for science to explain consciousness in the future. The soul isn't even necessary for life after death. God could recreate the body in spiritual form after death, which i acctuallly think makes sense with the christian idea of resurrection.
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm
(This post was last modified: October 1, 2009 at 4:50 pm by Violet.)
(October 1, 2009 at 4:02 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: Sorry, allergy is certainly wrong, as it specifically mentions hypersensitivity, and dying from being stabbed is not from being more sensitive than others.
I'd certainly say that one is hypersensitive to being stabbed 
I don't now about you... but I sure would be excessively sensitive to being stabbed
(October 1, 2009 at 4:07 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Ok, I'm wrong. I'm allergic to knives! Congratulations! you single-handedly redefined the word "allergic" by your narrow understanding of how to define a word.
Thanks for that, I'm going to get a doctor's note so I don't have to go to work because there are sharp things there.
And /facepalm!
Rhizo
Actually, I have redefined nothing here... and if you call my 'narrow' understanding so... I would wonder just how skinny your own toothpick understanding is? I do not appreciate the theist escape rope you threw... I usually respond negatively to statements like "I'm not listening! I can't hear you! Smell you later!"... and this time my response is no different. Simply: if you are not listening: don't respond.
If you would just be careful with knives, you would have no need for a doctor's note stating: "Incredibly clumsy, do not let near sharp objects." Don't flaunt your allergy to bee stings: be prepared in the event of a problem you think might occur. I would not expect one to flaunt their allergy to knives by stabbing themselves...
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Granted I will stop responding to your posts!
Rhizo
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 5:08 pm
(October 1, 2009 at 4:39 pm)Saerules Wrote: (October 1, 2009 at 4:02 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: Sorry, allergy is certainly wrong, as it specifically mentions hypersensitivity, and dying from being stabbed is not from being more sensitive than others.
I'd certainly say that one is hypersensitive to being stabbed
I don't now about you... but I sure would be excessively sensitive to being stabbed
No you are just as sensitive at being stabbed as anyone else, so it is not abnormally or excessively.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Ugh, I feel like the bloody dictionary...
I would say that I am
to being stabbed... as I am far more sensitive to being stabbed than I am to many many other things... and notable: it is a very abnormal experience in everyday life for me... and I react to it way more than one would need to react (therefore I react excessively)... sometimes causing additional damage from said reaction (which was unnecessary and certainly not desired). I could get into how everyone is different... but I think you were speaking metaphorically when you said 'as anyone else'.
Instead I ask this: say all humans are allergic to pollen... do they all disbecome hypersensitive to that pollen, simply because most of them are extremely sensitive to it? If I usually watch 5 hours of television a day... is it not abnormal when I watch 3 or 8? Others don't have to do something for it to be normal.
Please understand that a
is just a list of words given a meaning by the dictionary's
s, who may or may not have perfectly defined every one of the many words in their dictionary for everyone in every instance.
Simply: all of language is inconclusive and pointless to argue about. That I try to write the best laws for every case does not mean that I have a: managed to, nor b: thought of everything. I do not believe my definitions are inherently wrong simply because I am an author to them, and have thus far seen no reason to change the opinion of my probably being right. Do I think I've done perfectly with every definition? Of course not. Does that mean I can't try my best? Of course not.
But so long as language is inconclusive: these issues of differing definitions will continue to crop up. At the very least... I question the rules and meanings that seem unfair or incomplete.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:26 pm
No you do not deviate from the norm because everyone is equally sensitive to being stabbed. So you are not abnormally sensitive to being stabbed or excessively sensitive to being stabbed. You dont compare being stabbed with other things that may touch your body, but you compare the effect of stabbing of your body with that effect on the bodies of other people.
As for your question, if everyone is allergic for pollen then it is no longer abnormal and no longer hypersensitive.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:38 pm
(This post was last modified: October 1, 2009 at 7:40 pm by Violet.)
So the definition of allergy is meaningless when many people are individually allergic to a substance? Are you suggesting that sensitivity has anything to do with how many people are affected?
You will notice that an allergy is in particular to the body. To which it (the body) has become hypersensitive. The norm of the body has nothing to do with the norm of everyone...
You are suggesting that someone with a pollen allergy will not be extremely sensitive to breathing in pollen, as apposed to breathing normal air?
You are basing your definition on societal norm... which I have not noticed the word 'society' in any one of these definitions... let alone a societal norm. A room full of people with broken legs, does not treat their broken legs. A room full of people poisoned, does not treat their poisons. A room of blue-hatted people, does not make the hats any less blue. A room of people hypersensitive to a substance, does not make them any less hypersensitive to said substance.
Sure, many people are similarly affected to being stabbed... but many people with pollen allergies are similarly affected to pollen. That I am hypersensitive to being stabbed (and in it's being an abnormal occurrence for me) does not make anyone else not hypersensitive to being stabbed... nor does it make my being stabbed any less abnormal an occurrence.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:50 pm
No No No No
Quote:You are suggesting that someone with a pollen allergy will not be extremely sensitive to breathing in pollen, as apposed to breathing normal air?
Everyone is sensitive to breathing pollen, allergic people are MORE sensitive, HYPERsensitive.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:52 pm
And if everyone was allergic to breathing pollen, then we become less sensitive?
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: Faith?
October 1, 2009 at 7:53 pm
No, then pollen is no longer classified as an allergic reaction, but a toxic reaction.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
|
