How do Christians play Pathfinder without compromising their faith?


Gamer Life General Discussion

501 to 520 of 520 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven T. Helt wrote:
How is atheism NOT a religion?

That's not how this works. You need to demonstrate that atheism is a religion if you want to convince us of anything.

religion
n.

The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

You will fail.

Quote:
It's not a fallacy just because you don't think of it the same way as I do. Atheism is a belief regarding God and religion, specifically that there's no such thing as God.

No, atheism is simply the lack of belief that some unobservable, unexplainable god exists.

For an illustration of how stupid this sounds coming from you, imagine that I told you there's an invisible unicorn on your shoulder. You'll deny it, of course - how could there be an invisible unicorn on your shoulder, after all? But then I'd just tell you that it takes just as much faith to believe that there isn't a unicorn as to believe that there is one.

See how dumb that is? Now stop trying to pull that crap on us.

Quote:
But it requires as much blind faith as any other religion.

No, it doesn't. Atheism literally prescribes no beliefs. Every major religion prescribes hundreds.

Quote:
If you reject the whole conversation about how the Bible makes accurate predictions or natural science evidences an act of creation, we are still stuck perpetually at "can't prove there is a god, can't prove there isn't".

PROOF DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

"You can't prove X doesn't exist," should never come out of your mouth. If it does, you've lost. I don't care what you're arguing about. When you say it, it is the end of your argument.

"You can't prove faeries don't exist, therefore your belief is as valid as mine!"

"You can't prove Santa Claus doesn't exist, therefore your belief is as valid as mine!"

"You can't prove I'm not the reincarnation of Poseidon, therefore your belief is as valid as mine!"

This is basic stuff. How have you possibly been under the impression that this was acceptable?

Quote:
You're defending your belief there is no God.

We're just attacking the belief that the specific God that you worship exists. Attacking that belief does not require that we believe in no god. For instance, I believe in a god, and I can assail your belief in your specific god to my heart's content.

Quote:
But you probably take a lot on faith, unless you have advanced degrees in anthropology/geology/microbiology/astrophysics

More intelligent men than you or I have those degrees, and those men overwhelmingly came to the conclusion that the literal Biblical view of creation did not happen. At all. Ever.

So do I have faith? Yes, but not religious faith. I have the eminently reasonable faith that the consensus of the world's most learned men is overwhelmingly more reliable than a thousands-of-years-old book cobbled together from bits and pieces of stories.

I have the same sort of faith that you put in the automotive and safety engineers who designed your car. I have the same sort of faith that you put in the architects and structural engineers who built your house and place of work.

The only difference between you placing your faith in the latter people and not placing your faith in the former is that the former have come to conclusions that make you uncomfortable.

Quote:
AND have conclusively defeated the questions of irreducable complexity

Minus 10 points from Gryffindor. Please, tell us about how the eye is irreducably complex. While you're at it, tell us how the banana is intelligently designed to be eaten by humans! Oooh, or tell us about how the "behemoth" mentioned in the Bible is actually a dinosaur!

The only people who haven't figured out the answers to these questions are Christian fundamentalists.

Quote:
and similar questions, AND have a time machine AND saw the creation of the universe

YES, BECAUSE WE CAN'T KNOW ANYTHING RELIABLY UNLESS WE LITERALLY WITNESSED IT WITH OUR OWN EYES.

For instance, for all I know you were never born. I sure didn't see it happen. I guess we'll never know!

Where's that "make my enemies ridiculous" quotation when I need it?

You know what the worst part of all of this is?

You've been lied to.

And you let it happen.

Arrogantly ignorant men, or men who knew better and didn't care anyway - they lied to you. They wrote things, or said things, or showed you things that weren't true, and you believed them. Probably because you wanted to believe them.

How do I know this?

Because you're a grab bag of fundamentalist talking points.

"Irreducible complexity"? That's straight out of Intelligent Design.

"Atheism is a religion, too!"

"Christian scientists believe the flood happened!" (Of course they do - they're Christians first, scientists second; if their findings conflict with their faith, their findings are wrong. Here's a hint: if the flood actually happened, it would be accepted by more than just the Christian scientists.)

You didn't come up with these on your own. You were indoctrinated into them over a protracted period, each of them reinforcing your beliefs in turn. You turned what was (according to you) a healthy, skeptical mind into a PRATT-filled mess. But, honestly, I don't think your mind was ever skeptical. You don't even have a basic understanding of what the word "proof" means.

So you were lied to, and that's sad, and the people who did it are awful.

But you let it happen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoeCargo wrote:
All I know is that humans are creatures of faith. Its takes just as much faith to not believe in god as it does to believe in god.

No, it doesn't. To believe in a particular god, you must believe in a plethora of unexplainable or mysterious or mythical events tied to the history of that religion. To believe in no god, you must believe in nothing.

To put it another way:

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

- Stephen F. Roberts

I'm not an atheist, but claiming that it takes faith to believe in no god is an appallingly transparent attempt by the religious to invalidate the obvious differences between someone of religious faith and someone without it.


Why is this thread talking about atheism? A Christian ask fellow Christians how they reconcile their faith with some of the more risky content found in RPGs.

Oh and atheism is as much a religion as not-golfing is a sport. But I don't see too many not-golfer clubs, forums, and self identifiers. Nor is there strong and weak not-golfers. They also don't tell golfers that they are what is wrong with society or preach about how golfing is destroying modern civilization.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven T. Helt wrote:
So...a couple of things, then if the responses are civil discourse when I return, great. If we get more of the same long posts containing insults and moving footballs, then I'll bounce. I think that's more than fair.

No one is insulting you, and no one is "moving footballs" (the term you're looking for is "goal posts", and no, that isn't happening either).

What is happening is that we're generally having a good time taking a close, hard look at how you've constructed your personal belief system, and we're criticizing it. We're criticizing it something fierce. Because it really, really needs it.

But you put your beliefs in a public forum thread discussing religion. If you didn't want those beliefs duly criticized, you should have left well enough alone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Why is this thread talking about atheism?

I'm wondering that myself. I keep getting accused of being an atheist, despite the fact that I'm only arguing with very specific sets of religious beliefs. It's almost as if Christian fundamentalists have a nasty habit of assuming that anyone who finds flaw with their beliefs must be a god-hating atheist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven T. Helt wrote:

How is atheism NOT a religion? It's not a fallacy just because you don't think of it the same way as I do. Atheism is a belief regarding God and religion, specifically that there's no such thing as God. But it requires as much blind faith as any other religion. If you reject the whole conversation about how the Bible makes accurate predictions or natural science evidences an act of creation, we are still stuck perpetually at "can't prove there is a god, can't prove there isn't". You're defending your belief there is no God. You have a theology. You reject the terminology because you want to classify your faith as superior in reasoning and evidence. But you probably take a lot on faith, unless you have advanced degrees in anthropology/geology/microbiology/astrophysics AND have conclusively defeated the questions of irreducable complexity and similar questions, AND have a time machine AND saw the creation of the universe as well as that lucky lightning strike that correctly zapped the correct combination of chemicals with the right salinity on the back of the perfect crystal.

So who/what exactly do we atheists apparently worship if atheism is a religion? Atheism is not a belief in the sense that belief in a god or gods is a belief. I am an atheist because I see no proof (or need for that matter) of the existence of god(s) and no one has ever presented an argument for god's existence that makes sense or cannot easily be disproved.

What exactly do we "take on faith"? I don't have a medical degree but when my doctor tells me something about my health I'll believe him. That's not taking the doctor's word "on faith". Likewise if a physicist says something is true and their claims have been tested, peer reviewed, questioned and challenged, then why would I not believe them.

I don't need a degree in astrophysics to accept that the age of the universe is 13 billion years plus or minus. The same scientific research/processes/methods that were used to determine the age of the universe are the ones used to demonstrate why aeroplanes can fly or why an electric light goes on when you flick the switch. You can't pick and choose which science you want to accept and ignore that which goes against your religious beliefs.

If you believe the bible "makes accurate predictions" then give some examples that can be demonstrated to be true. You are the ones who claim god exists yet can give no reliable evidence to support your position. And please don't say "because it is in the bible" - it is a document written by humans who purport to have written down the words of god.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

TOZ wrote:
JoeCargo wrote:
All I know is that humans are creatures of faith. Its takes just as much faith to not believe in god as it does to believe in god. With that I am out. Why people talk about religion on these boards I don't know. Its akin to the edition flame wars. YEESH!! Have a good weekend everybody. PEACE!!
You mean it takes no faith at all to believe in god? That's interesting.

Hehe. Hebrews 11:6 - Without faith, it is impossible to please God. :b

Now, having written that, I think I understand where Joe Cargo is coming from. We must have faith that God is in control even when things are tough, because God wants our eyes on him. Because our character and hearts are more important to him than almost anything else. But we were designed to offer worship. Sports teams, super models, musicians, a fantastic author, a great speaker or noble stateman. We offer worship as a function of our existence. SO I think he's saying it's easy to believe and worship something. I don't think he's saying it takes no faith to believe in God.

Or anything else for that matter. I have a friend who is a lifelong Bengals fan. I mean...that's faith.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

Scott: I am struggling in this discussion with you. A great example: I tell you I think atheism is a religion. I tell you exactly WHY I think it is a religion (it is a belief about God, it requires faith to maintain the belief, you proselytize your faith/nonfaith). And then you tell me I have to offer reasons for my conclusion. But...I did.

Secondly, you are telling me about how you think "Proof" works. I didn't realize anyone was trying to prove anything to anyone. Are you committed to the process of "Proving" to me that my faith is bogus and has been objectively debunked? Because my goal is to get you to see that believers (not Beliebers) are reasonable, well-intentioned people who are not insane because they disagree with you. Your choice of faith/not faith requires as much faith in the things you believe as mine. I contend even more. It's a religion, because it's a held belief about spirituality. You and I don't share exactly the same beliefs, fine. Please don't misrepresent my beliefs, and please don't tell me my beliefs are unreasonable, not factual, etc.

If you want to say "I've read a dozen articles that say the flood never happened, what's your take?", that is fine. I have those conversations every day. If your conversation is "See, people, this is how insane Christians are, they have manuals that tell them to lie to you to get you to believe something," or "your God is a fictional psycho barbarian", then why bother?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Steven T. Helt wrote:
Or anything else for that matter. I have a friend who is a lifelong Bengals fan. I mean...that's faith.

Sure, if you mean trust or confidence in them. Religious worship, I'm not so sure about.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

I'm gonna try this once more. The whole proof thing is a weird direction. My point about proof is that your belief (or since you prefer, lack of belief) requires a level of belief. I didn't say I was going to prove God exists to you. God's done everything he needs to to prove himself to you. I can move that issue no matter what I say. My point is that if you have also no proof, we are both operating on faith. Now, maybe you don't like to think of it that way...

Spoiler:
And I get you acknowledged not being an atheist, so I am speaking about lack of belief or about atheism and not specifically about you since that time

...but that doesn't change it.

Now, don't use phrases like "stop trying to pull that crap on us. I'm not trying to pull anything on anyone. And the issue of an invisible unicorn on my shoulder is a little silly for grown men, yes? Concerning God, we can talk about physics and history and prophecy and spirituality. We might find some commonality or we might not. But the conversation is worth having. Trying to reduce belief and atheism to invisible unicorns is not the standard of argument we should aspire to. Yes?

Okay...back to the house after picking up the kids. Back to adventure writing. G'night.


Steven T. Helt wrote:
I tell you exactly WHY I think it is a religion (it is a belief about God, it requires faith to maintain the belief, you proselytize your faith/nonfaith).

It is not a belief about God.

It requires no faith whatsoever.

Proselytizing (read: talking about) atheism is not a requirement of being an atheist. Nor is it encouraged by the official atheist handbook. Which doesn't exist.

Quote:
And then you tell me I have to offer reasons for my conclusion. But...I did.

No, you have to show that it satisfies the definition of "religion". Which I gave you. Which you will never be able to do. Because it's not a religion.

You want atheism to be a religion, because that makes it just as easy to delegitimize as every other religion you choose not to believe in. It's not. Deal with it.

Quote:
Secondly, you are telling me about how you think "Proof" works.

No, I'm telling you how it actually works.

Quote:
I didn't realize anyone was trying to prove anything to anyone.

You literally just said "we are still stuck perpetually at 'can't prove there is a god, can't prove there isn't'."

Those words were actually typed. By you. Like, three posts ago.

Quote:
Are you committed to the process of "Proving" to me that my faith is bogus and has been objectively debunked?

No. You're way too far gone. You let yourself get roped into your particular faith, which was bad enough, but then you became entrenched.

I'm just picking it apart, because there might be someone reading who is on the fence about this stuff.

Quote:
Because my goal is to get you to see that believers (not Beliebers) are reasonable, well-intentioned people who are not insane because they disagree with you.

I already know that, because I'm a believer.

What you are not doing (and spectacularly, at that) is convincing anyone that your particular set of beliefs is anything other than deeply-ingrained craziness.

Quote:
Your choice of faith/not faith requires as much faith in the things you believe as mine. I contend even more.

Nope.

Quote:
It's a religion, because it's a held belief about spirituality.

That's not the definition of religion, and it wouldn't apply even if it were. It's not a belief. It is a lack of belief.

You seem unable to comprehend this.

That's like me telling you that you hold a belief on the existence of Ittypickopoos. You have no idea what that is, of course (because it doesn't exist), but surely you must have a belief about it because I do and therefore everyone must!

Again, this is stupid reasoning that you're trying to push because you really want to bring atheism down to the level of religion.

Quote:
You and I don't share exactly the same beliefs, fine. Please don't misrepresent my beliefs, and please don't tell me my beliefs are unreasonable, not factual, etc.

I'll tell you that they're unreasonable and not factual if they are not supported by reason or facts.

Your beliefs are not supported by reason. They are not supported by facts. Indeed, they are directly contradicted by both reason and facts.

Your beliefs are not reasonable. They are not factual.

Quote:
If you want to say "I've read a dozen articles that say the flood never happened, what's your take?", that is fine.

I don't care what your take is.

Quote:
I have those conversations every day. If your conversation is "See, people, this is how insane Christians are, they have manuals that tell them to lie to you to get you to believe something," or "your God is a fictional psycho barbarian", then why bother?

You shouldn't. You should run from this conversation, because your beliefs are being questioned. They are fragile things, these beliefs. Rather than tempering your beliefs in the face of criticism and using that criticism to develop a more coherent, consistent, and factually grounded set of beliefs, you should hide your beliefs away.


Steven T. Helt wrote:
And the issue of an invisible unicorn on my shoulder is a little silly for grown men, yes?

I should think so, and yet attempts at reaching whatever reasonably skeptical part of your mind existed prior to your reconversion using higher forms of discourse have failed. Repeatedly.

So make-believe unicorns it is!

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

Okay...one last time. You should focus on things people said, and not a misrepresentation of what people said, or a hyperbolic re-interpretation. A great example is earlier, when you leaped all the way to "God murders people who don't grovel before him." No one said grovel, that's your word, which God does not require or even want from us.

More germane, I didn't say you had to proselytize or suggest any kind of handbook. I pointed out that you are arguing about the merits of [non]faith just as I'm talking about the merits of having faith. You have no more evidence than I about the lack of existence of the God of the Bible. Ergo, it requires faith for you to maintain that belief. You don't know it is true, you simply believe it is true. So...we can't prove it to one another. So we're both taking it in faith in the principles we invest in.

When I say, like, a few posts ago (and I am begging you to develop some charity in your tone) that we are at the place where you can't prove 'a', and I can't prove 'b'......when I make that comment, I say saying "even if we don't agree on any of the things I think prove God exists and the Bible is true", we are at no better a place, meaning we each require no less faith than "I can't prove it but I believe it".

I am trying to make that very clear. I didn't say I was trying to prove anything to you or vice versa. I am ONLY saying, at the very best case for atheism, there is no proof either way. Which means an atheist is guided by the belief that there is no God. Now, does he have his faith invested in anything positively? Maybe humanity. Maybe himself. Maybe nothing. Maybe a loosely defined idea about destiny and subjective morality. But...when it comes to choosing to believe there is no god, that person is acting on faith. They do not know, but they choose to believe there is no faith worth having. That is a belief.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:

What is happening is that we're generally having a good time taking a close, hard look at how you've constructed your personal belief system, and we're criticizing it. We're criticizing it something fierce. Because it really, really needs it.

But you put your beliefs in a public forum thread discussing religion. If you didn't want those beliefs duly criticized, you should have left well enough alone.

No, you are just being a jerk and trying to ruin this thread. You are not being helpful, and trying to dominate the thread away from it's point. It might be fun for you, not so much for everyone else.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

Oh. I read your last post and realized I'm just feeding a troll. I hoped for better. But at the part where you tell the guy passionately defending his beliefs how fragile his beliefs are, it finally becomes clear you are in this for the fight. I hope your sense of self-importance has been appeased today. I don't understand people who choose to be obtuse and hostile, but you've made it clear, and I acknowledge I am a little dense sometimes about this, that you never wanted an intelligent conversation between well-meaning people who believe different things. That's sad, but I can't control it. I'm silly to let you're choice to be rude to people continue to affect my night.

I am certainly available to discuss historicity, agnosticism or any other issue with folk who intend to share ideas and get to know each other.


Steven T. Helt wrote:
Okay...one last time. You should focus on things people said, and not a misrepresentation of what people said, or a hyperbolic re-interpretation. A great example is earlier, when you leaped all the way to "God murders people who don't grovel before him." No one said grovel, that's your word, which God does not require or even want from us.

Replace "grovel before" with "worship". Or replace "worship" with "acknowledge". Or replace "acknowledge" with "at least avoid directly insulting". Or - heck! - remove all of that entirely! "God murders people," is still accurate, and still sociopathic!

Keep poking at hyperbole. I'm happy to break it down to the essentials. You worship a murderous god.

Quote:
More germane, I didn't say you had to proselytize or suggest any kind of handbook. I pointed out that you are arguing about the merits of [non]faith just as I'm talking about the merits of having faith.

I'm not arguing the merits of non-faith. That would be silly, as a Catholic. I'm arguing the merits of avoiding your particular set of beliefs at any cost. They are toxic, awful beliefs.

Quote:
You have no more evidence than I about the lack of existence of the God of the Bible.

I'm not trying to prove that god doesn't exist (which would be impossible). You're trying to prove that he does - and, more than that, you're trying to show that your particular flavor of god exists. The burden of proof is on you so hard I'm surprised you can breathe.

Quote:
Ergo, it requires faith for you to maintain that belief. You don't know it is true, you simply believe it is true. So...we can't prove it to one another. So we're both taking it in faith in the principles we invest in.

Still no.

Quote:
When I say, like, a few posts ago (and I am begging you to develop some charity in your tone)

I'm begging you to stop believing that I am a fundamentally evil person, along with every person I look up to. Looks like we'll just have to deal.

Quote:
that we are at the place where you can't prove 'a', and I can't prove 'b'......when I make that comment, I say saying "even if we don't agree on any of the things I think prove God exists and the Bible is true", we are at no better a place, meaning we each require no less faith than "I can't prove it but I believe it".

If I say "Broccoli can be green-colored!" that is something that I can prove. It is an affirmative claim. All I have to do is show you a green piece of broccoli.

If I say, "Broccoli cannot be green-colored!" that is something that cannot be proved. No matter how many red, orange, or purple pieces of broccoli I show you, I am always one green piece of broccoli away from being proven wrong.

Quote:
I am trying to make that very clear. I didn't say I was trying to prove anything to you or vice versa. I am ONLY saying, at the very best case for atheism, there is no proof either way.

Atheism does not need proof. You need proof. Heck, I need proof. Atheists don't need anything, just like you don't need to do anything about our Ittypickopoos problem.

Quote:
Which means an atheist is guided by the belief that there is no God.

No, an atheist is guided by a lack of belief in a god - and "guided" is pretty meaningless here. An atheist does not possess the positive conviction that there is no god. He merely lacks evidence supporting one's existence, and accordingly does not believe in any god.

Quote:
Now, does he have his faith invested in anything positively? Maybe humanity. Maybe himself. Maybe nothing. Maybe a loosely defined idea about destiny and subjective morality. But...when it comes to choosing to believe there is no god, that person is acting on faith. They do not know, but they choose to believe there is no faith worth having. That is a belief.

Still nope.


Steven T. Helt wrote:
Oh. I read your last post and realized I'm just feeding a troll.

Well it's about damned time! Most religious fundamentalists would have called the person challenging their beliefs a "troll" far earlier!

Quote:
I hoped for better.

Oh, I think that goes for all of us.

Quote:
But at the part where you tell the guy passionately defending his beliefs how fragile his beliefs are, it finally becomes clear you are in this for the fight. I hope your sense of self-importance has been appeased today.

Boy has it ever!

Quote:
I don't understand people who choose to be obtuse and hostile, but you've made it clear, and I acknowledge I am a little dense sometimes about this, that you never wanted an intelligent conversation between well-meaning people who believe different things. That's sad, but I can't control it. I'm silly to let you're choice to be rude to people continue to affect my night.

That's the point where you decide you're being silly?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

News flash: Religion can't be tested. If it could, then it wouldn't be religion, it would be science. Arguing about it is pointless (although I'm frequently guilty of doing so myself, right now it just seems obviously futile).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
No, you are just being a jerk and trying to ruin this thread.

Nah, I think you probably just don't like how it's going.

Project Manager

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Since this thread has strayed far from the original topic, and we have people calling each other stupid and trolls, I'm locking it.

501 to 520 of 520 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / How do Christians play Pathfinder without compromising their faith? All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion