Why disbelievers believe? They believe in so called “God of the gaps”.

[bennyboy]

-bump-

[TheRealJoeFish]

See: the Christian God is needed to stop the violence and terrorism. The Christian God teaches to love your personal enemy. The fact, what the killing can be allowed, does not take away the fact, that killing is unwanted: the Christian God does not like the killings.

Oh ffs.

Poe and the Herp Derps: A Play in One Act by TheRealJoeFish

(Enter Poe, Herp and Derp into Christian Echo Chamber)

Poe: We need the Christian God! There is so much killing in the world, that only He, who has commanded us to love one another, can stop it! No more killing!

Herp: Yeah! No more killing!

Derp: Yeah! Except the gays!

Poe: Yeah, umm... What?

Derp: Well, obviously the bible says gays shall be put to death. He who lies with another man and whatnot.

Herp: Dude that's effed up.

Derp: Gay sex? I know, right. That's why we should kill 'em, like God wants us to.

Herp: No, what you're saying.

Poe: God doesn't want us to kill gays.

Derp: Dear Lord, have you guys even read the bible?

(Derp quotes bible verses about killing people for 45 minutes while the audience attempts suicide)

Herp: That's not what any of that means! Get out of here!

(Derp exits and proceeds directly to Mississipi)

Poe: Thank God that's over.

Herp: It's amazing how people can be so utterly confused about what God does and doesn't want us to do, just from misreading the same Bible we have, which, luckily, we have both read perfectly and agree upon!

Poe: Yeah! So, where were we?

Herp: No more killing!

Poe: No more killing!

Herp: Except abortion doctors!

Poe: Oh dear.

(Curtain falls. Audience demands money back.)

[Foxaèr]

theborg is just a synonym for sheeple theism.

[Arkilogue]

There are 2 major types of navigation on this planet: 1 facts and thought, 2 stories and emotion.  What do you think most of the world operates by?

Dude, you gotta stop enumerating bullshit points and acting as though you've said something meaningful.  What you listed are NOT major types of navigation.  (1) is a vague pairing of a specific philosophical idea with human cognition in general; (2) is a vague pairing of a literary form with human feelings.

Maybe your 13 year-old girlfriends or whatever think that this deepity shit is actually deep.  But unless you can get them to join this forum, please stop doing this.

Then the universe is a pro-creation with determinable pattern from the self expression of a living being and it is still inside that living being.

. . . and again.  Dude, if I wrote a program to pick random word parts and put them together with a period at the end, I think I could pass the Turing Test-- because I can prove that at least one real person in the world does this.  Any guess who I'm talking about?

Must everything be triplicate by the book and foot noted for you? Simply put enough for a child to understand is that some choose to think things through and make decisions rationally based on facts, they are more mentally oriented. Others are more emotionally oriented and react to situations based on the cultural stories they've been told (things they believe). Have you never experienced this in human interactions? Or do you just play asshole on the internet for fun?

Human pregnancy must be a complete mystery to you.


You're appeal to ridicule is a dime a dozen. If I was looking for that, I hit up the fundamentalist religion forums.
Do at least try and show a little more interactive intelligence. Would hate to think you represent the norm around here.

---

I wonder if Bernays thought most people were rational vs emotional?

[bennyboy]

Dude, you gotta stop enumerating bullshit points and acting as though you've said something meaningful.  What you listed are NOT major types of navigation.  (1) is a vague pairing of a specific philosophical idea with human cognition in general; (2) is a vague pairing of a literary form with human feelings.

Maybe your 13 year-old girlfriends or whatever think that this deepity shit is actually deep.  But unless you can get them to join this forum, please stop doing this.




. . . and again.  Dude, if I wrote a program to pick random word parts and put them together with a period at the end, I think I could pass the Turing Test-- because I can prove that at least one real person in the world does this.  Any guess who I'm talking about?

Must everything be triplicate by the book and foot noted for you?

Nope. It must simply be worded effectively and supported with facts or ta least coherent ideas.

Simply put enough for a child to understand is that some choose to think things through and make decisions rationally based on facts, they are more mentally oriented. Others are more emotionally oriented and react to situations based on the cultural stories they've been told (things they believe). Have you never experienced this in human interactions? Or do you just play asshole on the internet for fun?

Don't get mad at me. Use words better.

Human pregnancy must be a complete mystery to you.

eh?

You're appeal to ridicule is a dime a dozen.  If I was looking for that, I hit up the fundamentalist religion forums.
Do at least try and show a little more interactive intelligence.  Would hate to think you represent the norm around here.

---

I wonder if Bernays thought most people were rational vs emotional?

1) You spell "your" wrongly. If you want to speak condescendingly to me, then you can do so more effectively if you avoid grade-school grammar mistakes.
2) Adding "appeal to" before things does not automatically make them fallacies. I ridicule your goofy ideas because they are incoherent, and based not at all on fact or logic. Making fun of incoherent ideas is not an appeal to anything, nor is it a logical fallacy.

You have repeatedly enumerated things you want to be accepted as "truths," including your numerology-like world view, but you have not linked your collections of ideas to anything in reality. If you want to keep saying ridiculous stuff, then I reserve the right to keep ridiculing you. If you want to make sensible points, related to ideas or observations beyond your own imagination, and supported with facts and logic, then I will applaud you rather than mock you.

[Iroscato]

I love how I got a shitload of kudos just by being the first one to reply, and with a pithy remark xD

[LastPoet]

I love how I got a shitload of kudos just by being the first one to reply, and with a pithy remark xD

Brevity is the soul if wit or some shit like that.

[Cyberman]

Ok, I'll bite. What if?

Now your turn - what if not?

Then the universe is a pro-creation with determinable pattern from the self expression of a living being and it is still inside that living being.
The universe is not "intelligently designed" by some super duper smart, inevitably male, "scientist" God who thunk it all up and *poofed* it into existence over there somewhere.

If not, it's still a much better story than 99% of the religious paradigms out there. What do you think the world would be like if the major religions regarded all of creation and especially this earth as sacred and a self expression of the Living God?


There are 2 major types of navigation on this planet: 1 facts and thought, 2 stories and emotion.  What do you think most of the world operates by?

My point is that saying "what if" is a great way to begin an investigation, but it's not the end of one. Nor is it an argument from ignorance-style challenge to one's interlocutors to come up with a counter-proposal; the case is yours to make, not others to disprove. Whether it makes for a better story than some other in no way increases its truth value. If it did, I'd much rather operate by Discworld rules.

[Whateverist]

Is the attempt at assimilation over? Did we win? Go away Locutus, we're not your type.

[bennyboy]

I love how I got a shitload of kudos just by being the first one to reply, and with a pithy remark xD

Brevity is the soul if wit or some shit like that.

No.