IMHO using the word "observer" to describe that type of situation was one of the dumbest choices of words ever made by physicists. It leads to a lot of misunderstanding.
Does some reading.
Wow, thanks for clearing that up.
Seriously.
On that we fully agree, and that's exactly why I advocate not trying to take anyone's beliefs away from him or her.
I don't have that power. Neither does anybody else. Well maybe if some really precise brain damage was inflicted, but I don't advocate that.
There is no point to antagonizing anyone in that manner, and indeed it is counterproductive for everyone. Cooperation and co-existence work fine for me; I see no need for an engineered conflict.
I'd like to agree with you (well a little bit, I don't much mind there being a very serious conflict indeed as long as the knives and Inquisitions are kept put away), but the conflict isn't really engineered. Religions have, and continue, to make claims about the universe which fall into the ambit of science. Both are in the explaining the universe business. Those claims turn out to be wrong about 100% of the time. That's as true of a six thousand year old world as it is for thinking people are as old as coal.
You can massage religion to avoid that, but it's not quite the same thing to say that no such conflict exists. I think you'd be insulting the intelligence of a literal believer in Genesis to tell him that there's no conflict between his view of the development of life on Earth and the facts of science. Likewise the God of the Gaps can always keep shrinking, but that's not the same as saying that he never shrunk at all. Science advances and religion retreats to a smaller and smaller place.
Ultimately, this can't be avoided. There will always be another area of advancing science that steps on what the religious consider faith's turf. If it's not geology, it'll be biology. If it's not biology, it'll be human sexuality. I speak from experience.
I think you'd be insulting the intelligence of a literal believer in Genesis to tell him that there's no conflict between his view of the development of life on Earth and the facts of science.
I wouldn't tell him that, only point out that maybe he should see the physical evidence and learn about it firsthand, and then maybe study Genesis in that light, before making judgement one way or the other.
I wouldn't tell him that, only point out that maybe he should see the physical evidence and learn about it firsthand, and then maybe study Genesis in that light, before making judgement one way or the other.
But that amounts to the same thing. You're just not using the specific words "science says you're wrong". I understand that one might want to treat a skittish animal much larger than oneself that way (and an elephant isn't going to understand the words anyway), or a guy with a gun pointed at your head, but to me assuming that of the religious does a disservice to them.
I know from experience that I'm mostly alone on this one, though.
|
That's quantum mechanics, not string theory. And the "observer" can be anything the ball interacts with, like the atoms in the floor for instance. It does not have to be a conscious "observer." IMHO using the word "observer" to describe that type of situation was one of the dumbest choices of words ever made by physicists. It leads to a lot of misunderstanding.
That.
You guys don't read a lot of yellowdingo's posts, do you.
Don't forget that String Theory (the old name, by the way) is a unifying theory of quantum mechanics. M-theory and SUSY-SUGR have the old problem of watching=changing.
You and I might not need that dragon, but many, many, many more people do believe in a dragon than don't. Many of those people control much of the funding that goes into the research. They will NOT stop believing in that dragon no matter what arguments you put forth, but they do become increasingly hostile as you argue against it, and eventually they pull that funding, or try to replace your ball research with nonsense "magic dragon gravity," because you refuse to allow them to think that real gravity is a tool of the dragon. You can let them hold onto that belief, or you can force them to view you as a direct threat to them, and cause them to lock us down into the dark ages. Is that what you're after? Let them keep the dragon, I say, but show them how your discoveries can ALWAYS be fit around it, because an incorporeal dragon takes up no space and can be fit into anything.
The problem with this approach is that when you do allow them to continue to believe in the dragon unattended, they start to make assertions about the dragons opinions on all sorts of things, without being able the prove that that dragon feels that way.
And because some stories describe dragons as wrathful, they start to believe that the dragons personal sexual mores, which they are unable to prove, should be applied not only to themselves but everyone else, because the invisible dragon might burn down their town or the Australian outback* if they don't. Moreover, since they are a majority, they try to enforce that on others.
And when you say 'but hang about, can you prove this invisible dragon told me my best female friend and her girl friend shouldn't be allowed to receive the same benefits to their partnership as a straight couple.' They get all pissy and call you intolerant of their dragon hypothesis.
*a fairly famous preacher really did call the recent Australian outback fires a punishment from god.
I'm not part of some atheist Communist brainwashing anti-Christian cult.Damn. I needed target practice...
Seriously, though, I wonder how the people that DO seem to be part of that cult reconcile the fact that now a few scientists are comfortable being Christian. Science and religion can live together, as long as they don't keep stepping on each others' toes.
We call it compartmentalisation.
And in fairness, a great many christians have far more vitriolic things to say about such a christian than most atheists do.
For a complete non-sequitor, I'd like to share a couple recent events. I'm living in Korea currently, where about half the population is Christian.
1. Last week I was talking to my adult students about politics and hotbutton issues, and found out that abortion is apparently a non-issue in Korea. One of my students is Christian and he told me "Abortion is legal because sometimes an unmarried woman gets pregnant. She can't support the child, so it can't be born." And he was totally matter-of-fact about it, like the thought of sinful or illegal abortions had never crossed his mind. I have to say, Koreans are nothing if not responsible. In America, we bomb clinics for giving abortions to rape victims and single mothers and call ourselves devout.
2. Last night I saw Angels and Demons. With four Christian Koreans. Who had also seen the DaVinci Code, so they knew what was coming. I don't expect Christians to categorically hate Dan Brown, but it's nice to know it's possible to separate belief from fiction.
/non-sequitor
1. Last week I was talking to my adult students about politics and hotbutton issues, and found out that abortion is apparently a non-issue in Korea. One of my students is Christian and he told me "Abortion is legal because sometimes an unmarried woman gets pregnant. She can't support the child, so it can't be born." And he was totally matter-of-fact about it, like the thought of sinful or illegal abortions had never crossed his mind. I have to say, Koreans are nothing if not responsible. In America, we bomb clinics for giving abortions to rape victims and single mothers and call ourselves devout.
My friends and I, non-believers the lot, have more or less the same opinion for different reasons. If a woman doesn't think she's ready for a child or able to handle the pregnancy, Planned Parenthood's a positive good. It's not a moral issue (at least not in the sense that something awful is being done is must be stopped) to us at all.
|
|
You know what else Planned Parenthood does? They give out or seriously discount birth control pills, condoms, Nuva rings, the "morning after pill", etc.
I'm pro choice, but I'm also pro responsibility. Maybe, if a woman isn't ready to have kids, she should, um, think about doing something to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
Sorry, but if someone is "adult" enough to decide to have sex (obviously I'm not discussing rape victims here), they should be "adult" enough to know how to do so responsibly...
You know what else Planned Parenthood does? They give out or seriously discount birth control pills, condoms, Nuva rings, the "morning after pill", etc.
I'm pro choice, but I'm also pro responsibility. Maybe, if a woman isn't ready to have kids, she should, um, think about doing something to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
Sorry, but if someone is "adult" enough to decide to have sex (obviously I'm not discussing rape victims here), they should be "adult" enough to know how to do so responsibly...
I am not sure grasp how common rape actually is. Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 7 woman experience rape or a rape attempt by most statistics.
And when religion does its utmost to push for abstinanse only sex education, you are left with a state where people make decisions based on faulty infomation. Their is a reason that tenaged pregnacy rates are at their highest amongst fundimentalist christians in the states.
|
|
You know what else Planned Parenthood does? They give out or seriously discount birth control pills, condoms, Nuva rings, the "morning after pill", etc.
I'm pro choice, but I'm also pro responsibility. Maybe, if a woman isn't ready to have kids, she should, um, think about doing something to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
Sorry, but if someone is "adult" enough to decide to have sex (obviously I'm not discussing rape victims here), they should be "adult" enough to know how to do so responsibly...
I am not sure grasp how common rape actually is. Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 7 woman experience rape or a rape attempt by most statistics.
And when religion does its utmost to push for abstinanse only sex education, you are left with a state where people make decisions based on faulty infomation. Their is a reason that tenaged pregnacy rates are at their highest amongst fundimentalist christians in the states.
Um, actually, they're highest amongst blacks in the U.S., not fundamentalist Christians. But don't let facts get in the way of Christian bashing, by any means...
Um, actually, they're highest amongst blacks in the U.S., not fundamentalist Christians. But don't let facts get in the way of Christian bashing, by any means...You know what else Planned Parenthood does? They give out or seriously discount birth control pills, condoms, Nuva rings, the "morning after pill", etc.
I'm pro choice, but I'm also pro responsibility. Maybe, if a woman isn't ready to have kids, she should, um, think about doing something to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
Sorry, but if someone is "adult" enough to decide to have sex (obviously I'm not discussing rape victims here), they should be "adult" enough to know how to do so responsibly...
I am not sure grasp how common rape actually is. Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 7 woman experience rape or a rape attempt by most statistics.
And when religion does its utmost to push for abstinanse only sex education, you are left with a state where people make decisions based on faulty infomation. Their is a reason that tenaged pregnacy rates are at their highest amongst fundimentalist christians in the states.
Sorry, correction.
That is why it is higher amongst fundimentalist christians that atheists.
|
|
Um, actually, they're highest amongst blacks in the U.S., not fundamentalist Christians. But don't let facts get in the way of Christian bashing, by any means...You know what else Planned Parenthood does? They give out or seriously discount birth control pills, condoms, Nuva rings, the "morning after pill", etc.
I'm pro choice, but I'm also pro responsibility. Maybe, if a woman isn't ready to have kids, she should, um, think about doing something to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
Sorry, but if someone is "adult" enough to decide to have sex (obviously I'm not discussing rape victims here), they should be "adult" enough to know how to do so responsibly...
I am not sure grasp how common rape actually is. Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 7 woman experience rape or a rape attempt by most statistics.
And when religion does its utmost to push for abstinanse only sex education, you are left with a state where people make decisions based on faulty infomation. Their is a reason that tenaged pregnacy rates are at their highest amongst fundimentalist christians in the states.
Sorry, correction.
That is why it is higher amongst fundimentalist christians that atheists.
Considering that atheists account for less than .5% of the U.S. population, and many do not have children at all, that isn't surprising.
Would anyone be offended if I observed that this discussion is going in a pointless direction?
|
|
Dunno why I wanted to share my own thoughts on this but I guess I just wanted to.
When I was younger we went to church as a family. This stopped at around age 10 or 11 I'd guess because my parents didn't want to go anymore. Too young to really question or care why, all I knew was I got my Sundays back (rock on).
Now my best friends (who happened to live close enough to call my neighbors) were all religious. One house of my friends were Christian and later, the other, Mormon (which is also Christian just with a different take). We all played outside together, did D&D together, and etc etc etc. Religion never got brought up as we grew older and even into our teens.
About 16 I started going to church again on my own with my christian friend and got into it for awhile. Lasted about 2 and a half years when I was 18 in my first quarter of college.
During all this time though I always had questions but kept them to myself. I didn't think it was OK to ask questions. Heck every church I visited (and I did visit quite a few) always taught that doubt was put there by the devil.
At 18 though I really started to ask the questions though, and they were no no questions. Why is it so wrong for two men or two women to be together? Even during my time as a Christian I didn't see anything wrong with it ... all I knew is that it was evil or some such nonsense.
Anyway I stopped going to church and started looking around and deciding things for myself. Heck I even found my future wife who primarily is non religious herself and even dabbled in as a wiccan for a bit.
I saw life a little differently and I started coming to my own conclusions of what I thought was right and what was wrong. In the end, I can't say I'm a christian but I'm also not an atheist.
I don't know what the hell happens after I die but I do believe deep down it's more than just dirt or ashes. But I just can't claim it's one thing or another because I don't know. I know that's what faith is supposed to be for but I've experienced many things and if something is supposed to be etched onto my heart, then I suppose it reads like this; "I want to love and be happy in life."
Some might claim it's natural law or some higher power but I'm not going to claim to know. I'm just going to live my life and try and have a good one with my wife and daughter. I'll also continue to be friends and supportive of relatives/friends who have different views on things so long as they don't try and force their opinions on others who don't want it.
I guess long rant short; I'll find out when I die. If it costs me my soul for not "picking one" then so be it. At least I did what I thought was right.
I do have to say any religion killing in the NAME of religion ... well that just pisses me off. It's the worse kind of extremism (and not just terrorists but those who also bomb abortion clinics in the name of some higher b!~&~#%# moral they claim to have).
Word.
Peace, brother.
|
When I was younger we went to church as a family.
I'm sorry to hear you had such bad experiences with the various churches you attended...
And I think that people being hit over the head with the Gospel, is what turns a lot of people away from Christ and Christianity in general...
It has been my experience however, that it's okay to ask questions, and that no question was "off limits" (though it's probable that one will not always like the answers given)...
I was also taught that doubt, is not a sin, the sin, and truly the only "unforgivable" sin, is that of non-belief (or outright rejection). Everything else can be forgiven, if forgiveness is what the person seeks...
Not trying to convert anyone, just stating the things taught to me when I gave my life over to Christ...
YMMV
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
When I was younger we went to church as a family.I'm sorry to hear you had such bad experiences with the various churches you attended...
It has been my experience, that it's okay to ask questions, and that no question was "off limits" (though it's probable that one will not always like the answers given)...
I was also taught that doubt, is not a sin, the sin, and truly the only "unforgivable" sin, is that of non-belief. Everything else can be forgiven, if forgiveness is what the person seeks...
Not trying to convert anyone, just stating the things taught to me when I gave my life over to Christ...
YMMV
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradice and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confermed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.
And it would some how end up being me who was being 'rude' if i spelled out exactly what i thought of the gross immorality of that stand point.
Would anyone be offended if I observed that this discussion is going in a pointless direction?
Nope.
Seconded, but the posts about 'allowing' people to have beliefs strikes a negative chord. I realize the posters are trying to look at this from clinical level, but am wondering if they are really succeeding.
|
|
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradice and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confermed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.
His gift of everlasting life has the "cost" if you will, of accepting Christ as your Lord and Savior...
For some, that is a hard pill to swallow...
But for me, like I said upthread, if I'm wrong (and my faith assures me that I am not), I have lost nothing...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
And I think that people being hit over the head with the Gospel, is what turns a lot of people away from Christ and Christianity in general..
I know you're replying to Misery, but he didn't really describe being hit over the head with the gospel as far as I can tell and I don't know how you get that so I wanted to mention it.
What I got from his post was that he's a curious guy who felt unwelcome asking questions, and that I can relate to, hence my mentioning.
A defensive closed mindedness pervades many churches, in my experience, and the moment you start really talking about things in your heart a wave of panic passes through them and suddenly you're just not so welcome any more. They're afraid it's gonna catch, I suppose.
Even funnier, when you talk about this defensiveness later to other church goers they sometimes say stuff like "we're not all like that" but then they seem to feel pretty well the same about the burning questions.
Whatever, I say - I'm out.
Nobody can beat me over the head with scriptures because I took the time to book up. And really, they're not that bad. And if you have any interest in textual history, spirituality, wisdom teaching, or anything like that, they're absolutely fascinating. I first got attracted tot he scriptures in English literature, especially while studying Milton and Blake. Then I hit up the Catholic college associated with my University for some Theology, and then the Protestant college likewise associated. And in those places, interestingly, the questions were no problem.
I'm still in touch with my theology profs today, but man I just can't take most of the churches I've been in.
Of course, what you said (that I quoted above) is absolutely true, sometimes Christians are their own worst enemies. As my Protestant theology prof used to say, sometimes the worst thing about Christianity is all the Christians.
His gift of everlasting life has the "cost" if you will, of accepting Christ as your Lord and Savior...
Technically speaking, would you not concede that burning in hell for all eternity is also everlasting life?
But for me, like I said upthread, if I'm wrong (and my faith assures me that I am not), I have lost nothing...
Funny. To me is sounds like you are making more of a calculation of benefit and loss than expressing an enlightened awareness. "I believe it because it gets me what I want" rather than "I believe it because having carefully considered it, it seems true."
But maybe it's just me. We don't always read posts the way they are intended, do we.
|
|
I know you're replying to Misery, but he didn't really describe being hit over the head with the gospel as far as I can tell and I don't know how you get that so I wanted to mention it.
Just tossed that in there, because I know others besides the person I was directly responding to would obviously be reading my post and might, like him, not be going to church. But their reason, might be because of some hard-hitting bible thumper...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
|
|
But maybe it's just me. We don't always read posts the way they are intended, do we.
Quite true...
I know in my heart, that I am not wrong, but in an effort to contribute something meaningful to the discussion, I add that last part, that if I am wrong...
I mean, I am 100% positive of where I will be going when I pass on...
As to your other comment about "is not an eternity in Hell, everlasting life?"...
Yeah, while burning in Hell for all eternity would technically be considered "everlasting life", this is not the gift of everlasting life He spoke of... ;-)
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradice and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confermed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.His gift of everlasting life has the "cost" if you will, of accepting Christ as your Lord and Savior...
For some, that is a hard pill to swallow...
But for me, like I said upthread, if I'm wrong (and my faith assures me that I am not), I have lost nothing...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
So the costs of getting eternal life are...
1. Giving up your ability to tell the difference between what is real and what is not.
2. Blindly accepting what your told by an authority figure, who is entirely beyond your ability to make accountable.
3. Turning a blind eye to blatantly immoral actions by that authority.
4. Bahaving like a beaten spouse towards an entity that thinks it is a mark of pride to refer to itself as wrathful and jealous.
Is it any wonder that hitchens describes heaven as the celestial dictarorship.
|
|
When I was younger we went to church as a family.I'm sorry to hear you had such bad experiences with the various churches you attended...
And I think that people being hit over the head with the Gospel, is what turns a lot of people away from Christ and Christianity in general...
It has been my experience however, that it's okay to ask questions, and that no question was "off limits" (though it's probable that one will not always like the answers given)...
I was also taught that doubt, is not a sin, the sin, and truly the only "unforgivable" sin, is that of non-belief (or outright rejection). Everything else can be forgiven, if forgiveness is what the person seeks...
Not trying to convert anyone, just stating the things taught to me when I gave my life over to Christ...
YMMV
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
There were a lot of problems I had I suppose.
If you don't believe that Jesus died for you, ticket to hell.
If you don't believe in our God, ticket to hell.
Doesn't matter how wonderful or good of a person you might have been in life, you're boned.
Now I know this particular way of thinking doesn't include all Christians but where I live in the south, it certainly is the majority of them. I suppose it just feels like a fear cop out to me.
"You should convert to save your soul. If you don't you'll burn forever." It's a good pitch in saying you have everything to gain by believing and nothing to lose but then I have to wonder how many Christians are Christians because they know deep down in their heart it's what is right or because they want to not become deep friend chicken.
And to be honest, if it turns out that the only way into a pleasant after life is to believe in God or that Christ died for my sins ... I'm sorry but I'd have to say I'm happy to burn. Because to me, it doesn't sound either wise or fair but childish.
Now, a note I want to make is I'm not saying that God doesn't exist or that Christ DIDN'T die for my sins and that he's the son of God. All I'm saying is I don't know and because I don't know ANYTHING with certainty, I just can't claim to know, even with faith.
So I'll wait and see. I might have everything to lose in the way I'm handling this, but I'd also lose my SELF for dealing with it differently. For once ... I just feel at peace with my own beliefs and that's not something I would ever want to give up.
So the costs of getting eternal life are...
Do you really think so little of Christians?
I mean, if someone was to believe in the things you list, one would have to be insane or totally incapable of independent thought right?
Well, I try to treat people as individuals. I know many individual christians whom i respect a great deal.
That does not mean that i have to respect christianity or its centeral figure.
In my second year of university i was walking to the library when i came across a man kicking his girl friend, who was laying on pavement.
I stepped in and let him attack me instead of her. I didn't fight back, i didn't hurt him, i just took his blows rather than let her. He got scared and a little freaked out and walked off after a minite of so.
Later, in the hospital, the woman asked me no to press charges against him.
In many ways, i see monothesis in the same way i see that woman. I respect her as an individual. I am willing to do what i can to protect them. To put asside the fact that things that happen cause me pain, to understand why they make he decisions they do make and empathise with them for the pain they go through. But i am afraid i will also tell it like i see it.
Just like that woman, many christians accept the 'love' of someone who looks like a monster from where i sit. If I can provide you a way out of that by showing you that the universe does not need a god to explain it, or that some of the actions which you claim your good undertook are mind bendingly abhorrant then i will do that, because frankly, i respect you enough to believe that your better than that.
Some christians can see these things and have a form of faith that allows them to access the infomation. Who see the bible as a text written by bigitted bronze aged nomads who's moral compose was a little iffy, but that it does hold a spark of gods grace and important lesson. I'd disagree, but i don't have to stand up and say 'look, your crippling your self and hurting others, with your ties to an evil idea.'
We keep hearing a lot from the Christians. Are there any other faiths represented here? It might be interesting to hear their take on these topics we've been discussing. Any Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, whatever lurking out there? I thought there was a Bhuddist here a while ago.
A defensive closed mindedness pervades many churches, in my experience, and the moment you start really talking about things in your heart a wave of panic passes through them and suddenly you're just not so welcome any more. They're afraid it's gonna catch, I suppose.
I think that many religious believers, maybe even most, believe the tenets of their religion and their particular denomination simply because that's what they've been told all their lives. They've never really thought about any of it, and don't even know why their religion believes such and such as opposed to something else. So they are carrying an intellectual house of cards around in their heads, and any challenge to any part of it threatens to bring the whole thing crashing down. Hence the panic.
We keep hearing a lot from the Christians. Are there any other faiths represented here? It might be interesting to hear their take on these topics we've been discussing. Any Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, whatever lurking out there? I thought there was a Bhuddist here a while ago.
I am strictly an atheist, but for any major live events i will probably choose to have Neo-paganic ceremonies based loosely on the greek, norse or celtic pantheons.
Just because i don't believe gods are real, doesn't mean i don't appreciate the power and importants of ritual. If i get a legal marrage in the future, it will be accompanied by a handfastening ritual, unless my other half happens to have strong beliefs of her own, in which case i'll go along wih what they want. But likely, anyone who's able to put up will be atheist.
|
We keep hearing a lot from the Christians. Are there any other faiths represented here? It might be interesting to hear their take on these topics we've been discussing. Any Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, whatever lurking out there? I thought there was a Bhuddist here a while ago.
You guys need to slow down...
I don't know that there have been any Hindus who have posted. Not sure why that is. I believe that there is at least one Muslim on the boards. There are a couple that practice Judaism. Kirth is a Buddhist as is DoveArrow. I don't know that I've seen any Wiccans (and that kind of surprises me). There are a few Catholics and Mormons (which some Christians would like to be separate from). But I really think that the vast majority of people on these boards feel that they are atheist rather than Christian.
I don't know that there have been any Hindus who have posted. Not sure why that is. I believe that there is at least one Muslim on the boards. There are a couple that practice Judaism. Kirth is a Buddhist as is DoveArrow. I don't know that I've seen any Wiccans (and that kind of surprises me). There are a few Catholics and Mormons (which some Christians would like to be separate from). But I really think that the vast majority of people on these boards feel that they are atheist rather than Christian.
The skewed-high-towards-atheists demographic might be because gamers tend to be an overly-intellectual lot, but I suspect it's mostly due to the fundamentalist anti-gaming crusades -- anyone who won't let you read "Harry Potter" for sure won't let you play D&D! Luckily, most Christians are above that, but unfortunately many people who attend church regularly don't ask -- they just assume that D&D is a sin of some kind.
Yes, I'm Zen Buddhist. But since its inception, this thread has been predominantly about Christian and Atheist views, mostly because 99% of the U.S. population hears "religious" and immediately assumes it means "Christian." I started this other thread for non-Christian religious views, but it quickly sputtered out due to lack of critical mass of posters.
I started this other thread for non-Christian religious views, but it quickly sputtered out due to lack of critical mass of posters.
That's too bad. I really enjoyed reading that thread. It was very educational. I just didn't really have anything to contribute to the discussion.
I'm not sure that I buy into the skewed numbers. Not all people will willingly participate in a thread that can get heated, despite attempts to keep it mellow. I suspect most gamers are middle-of-the-road on the topic of religion.
|
|
The skewed-high-towards-atheists demographic might be because gamers tend to be an overly-intellectual lot, but I suspect it's mostly due to the fundamentalist anti-gaming crusades -- anyone who won't let you read "Harry Potter" for sure won't let you play D&D!
That reminded me of a site where a person (Christian) was trying to show how "real" Harry Potter and D&D was --> Here. I thought it was kind of funny.
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradice and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confermed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.
It's even worse than that. The Christians say you're going to hell if your not a Christian, but the fundies say you're going to hell if you're not a fundie, and especially if you're a Catholic or a Mormon, the conservative Catholics say you're going to hell if you're not a conservative Catholic, the Muslims say you're going to hell if you're not a Muslim, the Jews say the Christians are going to hell because they worship a false god, and I don't know what the Buddhists and Hindus say but it probably has something to do with the other religion's members being reincarnated as cockroaches or something.
To make matters worse, I don't think it counts to believe just to prevent yourself from going to hell.
You're literally damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Is it any wonder that hitchens describes heaven as the celestial dictarorship.
It's a wonder that he describes it so mildly, really.
|
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradice and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confermed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.
I always found it remarkably reminiscent of King Lear. He casts out the virtuous daughter because she is unwilling to praise and flatter him...
I started this other thread for non-Christian religious views, but it quickly sputtered out due to lack of critical mass of posters.
I disagree with your interpretation of a sputtering, quick death.
Throws up hands in exasperation and smurfs...
Wanders off to bash head against wall.
|
|
I'm kind of annoyed. It's like it has devolved into "maybe if I point out as much wrong as possible or show how 'bad' Christians are, then I'll show how 'right' atheists are." I mean, does no one else see this? houstonderek did...
But don't let facts get in the way of Christian bashing, by any means...
I mean what is your point? Maybe if you point out how illogical or stupid Christians are, that will make your point for you. Maybe you think that showing how irrational Christians are, that you will somehow "prove" that atheists are "right".
For example:
There is a reason that teenage pregnacy rates are at their highest amongst fundimentalist christians in the states.
Even if this were true, why even bring it up? What is your point? To show just how "wrong" Christians are? Maybe this somehow "proves" that Christians bring up their children poorly? This is obvious "proof" that atheists are just far more moral than us pathetic Christians. Or maybe something else?
Then we go on...
And hence you get the wonderfully moral position where a mass murderer who finds god and repents goes to a perfect eternal paradise and the virtual saint who uses his brain, thinks rationally and chooses to believe the evidence rather than a book with no confirmed providence, going to hell for ever and ever and ever, for tortures undreamed off by mortal man.
It obviously wouldn't help at this point to disagree with you. This is wrong and not what I believe. But apparently YOU know so much more about what I truly believe than I do myself. And, again, what is the point? Is your point that the idea of repentance simply cannot happen? Is your point that the person who lived a moral life and chose the way he did shouldn't be responsible for his choices? Or is your point just to prove how foolish Christians are by believing this way -- even though it isn't correct.
And it would some how end up being me who was being 'rude' if i spelled out exactly what i thought of the gross immorality of that stand point.
You've done this. And more. But what I don't get is why you still do it. Why continue bashing Christians and their beliefs? Perhaps through your eloquence I will magically see the error of my ways and "repent" of believing in a God that doesn't exist. And I will find salvation through your words.
So the costs of getting eternal life are...
1. Giving up your ability to tell the difference between what is real and what is not.
2. Blindly accepting what your told by an authority figure, who is entirely beyond your ability to make accountable.
3. Turning a blind eye to blatantly immoral actions by that authority.
4. Behaving like a beaten spouse toward an entity that thinks it is a mark of pride to refer to itself as wrathful and jealous.
Once again you are telling me what I believe. This is so wrong that I don't even know where to begin. Not only that, but even if I did, it wouldn't change your feelings in the least. This is presented as "fact". It's not even close. If you want to believe that, fine. But do not imply that this is how I or other Christians think or believe. And once again I am finding that I don't know why you are posting this stuff. It is rude (at best) and without a point other than to fulfil some kind of superiority complex. I am not learning anything from your posts -- other than you don't have a clue what I believe.
Then you post the following...
Who see the bible as a text written by bigotted bronze aged nomads whose moral compose was a little iffy,...
Using words like "bigot" are not generally a good way for people to listen to your point. Even assuming that it is true. Maybe name calling will make your point for you. But then that point is still elusive. Did you remember your pitchfork?
Then there's the following...
It's even worse than that. The Christians say you're going to hell if your not a Christian, but the fundies say you're going to hell if you're not a fundie, and especially if you're a Catholic or a Mormon, the conservative Catholics say you're going to hell if you're not a conservative Catholic, the Muslims say you're going to hell if you're not a Muslim, the Jews say the Christians are going to hell because they worship a false god, and I don't know what the Buddhists and Hindus say but it probably has something to do with the other religion's members being reincarnated as cockroaches or something.
Did you miss anyone to misrepresent? Let's take a rather complicated concept that isn't really documented well in any text and make false assumptions. That'll show how wrong religion is.
To make matters worse, I don't think it counts to believe just to prevent yourself from going to hell.
Neither do I.
You're literally damned if you do and damned if you don't.
And therefore the only true path is the path of the atheist.
What I don't get is that for the most part, atheists believe that there is no "point". That there is no "god". That there is no afterlife. That once you die, that's it. But that isn't really good enough. There are some that seem to feel that they must push all others into this happy line of thinking -- even though, in the end it truly doesn't matter.
I am not trying to convince you of the error of your ways. I am not trying to tell you what will happen to you. (Assuming that God exists, I'll let him sort it out.) I would like the same courtesy from the atheists.
If you want to tell me what you believe about atheism, great -- tell us. But please don't tell what Christians are about or believe -- because you are getting it wrong.
|
|
Personally, I don't know if I would go to the length of some of Zombieneighbor's metaphors, because they do seem to be designed for shock value more than anything else.
However, one of the biggest sticking points I have with Christianity in general is the need to have faith in order to be saved. That point is hammered home throughout the New Testament, but it's hard for me to reconcile with the concept of a loving or forgiving God, especially given that many people may never be exposed to Christian teaching. (I stand by my Lear analogy, because to me this position sounds vain, rather than merciful.)
Moff, if that, in particular, is not your belief, how do you reconcile that with scripture? Or, if it's a more nuanced position, I, for one, would be interested in elaboration.
More generally, to the argument at hand, one of the biggest issues that one has to deal with when having a discussion of "religion" is the division between communal belief and personal belief. When someone says "Christians believe this", you can always find a Christian who says "I don't believe that." In order to talk about a religion as a whole, it's necessary to talk in generalities, because there is no single detail that all members of a religion will agree upon. Hopefully, by keeping this civil, we can get a better understanding of those more nuanced positions, and the variety of viewpoints within any given faith.
|
|
More generally, to the argument at hand, one of the biggest issues that one has to deal with when having a discussion of "religion" is the division between communal belief and personal belief. When someone says "Christians believe this", you can always find a Christian who says "I don't believe that." In order to talk about a religion as a whole, it's necessary to talk in generalities, because there is no single detail that all members of a religion will agree upon. Hopefully, by keeping this civil, we can get a better understanding of those more nuanced positions, and the variety of viewpoints within any given faith.
I'll talk about the other question in a moment. Wanted to address this first...
I'm fine with that. In fact, Wicht, Erian_7, myself and others will freely admit that there are areas in which we may believe the minority or where beliefs are different. However, when an atheist (or someone else -- it really doesn't matter) talks about our beliefs with the sole purpose to bash our religion, it doesn't typically come across "well".
Believe me, I know that there are VERY poor "examples" of Christians. Pointing this out does little to promote the "civil" discussion.